Problem Solving with C++ 9th Edition

Savitch Test Bank

Go to download the full and correct content document:
https://testbankfan.com/product/problem-solving-with-c-9th-edition-savitch-test-bank/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Problem Solving with C++ 9th Edition Savitch Solutions

Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/problem-solving-with-c-9th-
edition-savitch-solutions-manual/

Problem Solving with C++ 10th Edition Savitch Test Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/problem-solving-with-c-10th-
edition-savitch-test-bank/

Problem Solving with C++ 10th Edition Savitch Solutions

Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/problem-solving-with-c-10th-
edition-savitch-solutions-manual/

Engineering Problem Solving With C++ 4th Edition Etter

Test Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/engineering-problem-solving-
with-c-4th-edition-etter-test-bank/
Engineering Problem Solving With C++ 4th Edition Etter
Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/engineering-problem-solving-
with-c-4th-edition-etter-solutions-manual/

Data Abstraction And Problem Solving With C++ Walls And

Mirrors 6th Edition Carrano Test Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/data-abstraction-and-problem-
solving-with-c-walls-and-mirrors-6th-edition-carrano-test-bank/

Data Abstraction and Problem Solving with C++ Walls and

Mirrors 7th Edition Carrano Test Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/data-abstraction-and-problem-
solving-with-c-walls-and-mirrors-7th-edition-carrano-test-bank/

Data Abstraction And Problem Solving With C++ Walls And

Mirrors 6th Edition Carrano Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/data-abstraction-and-problem-
solving-with-c-walls-and-mirrors-6th-edition-carrano-solutions-
manual/

Data Abstraction and Problem Solving with C++ Walls and

Mirrors 7th Edition Carrano Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/data-abstraction-and-problem-
solving-with-c-walls-and-mirrors-7th-edition-carrano-solutions-
manual/
Test Bank for Problem Solving with C++: The Object of Programming, 9/e
Chapter 7 Arrays

TRUE/FALSE
1. The indexed variables (members) of an array must be integers.
ANSWER: FALSE
2. The locations of the various indexed variables in an array can be spread out all
over the memory.
ANSWER: FALSE
3. The following array declaration is legal
double scores[]={0.1,0.2,0.3};
ANSWER: true
4. Arrays can be passed to functions.
ANSWER: TRUE
5. Arrays can be returned from a function.
ANSWER: FALSE
6. If a function is expecting a pass by reference parameter, you can pass an index
variable from an array of the same base type to that function.
ANSWER: TRUE
7. When you have a function that expects an array, it should also expect the size of
the array or the number of indexed variables with valid data.
ANSWER: TRUE
8. The following function declaration guarantees the values in the array argument
are not changed.

void function1(int array[], int numElements);

ANSWER: FALSE
9. The following function will work with any size integer array.

void function1(int array[], int numElements);

ANSWER: TRUE
10. If you use the const modifier in a function declaration, you do not include it in the
function definition.
ANSWER: FALSE
Short Answer
1. Write the code to declare a two dimension array of integers with 10 rows and 20
columns.
ANSWER: int array[10][20];
2. Write the code to declare an array of 10 doubles named list;
ANSWER: double list[10];
3. The modifier that guarantees that an array argument will not be changed is called
______.
ANSWER: const
4. How many indexed variables does the following array have?
int myArray[]={1,2,3,6,5,4,7,1,2};
ANSWER: 9
Test Bank for Problem Solving with C++: The Object of Programming, 9/e
Chapter 7 Arrays

5. How many indexed variables does the following array have?

int myArray[12]={1,2,3,6,5,4,7,1,2};
ANSWER: 12
6. Write the declaration for a function named funct1 that expects an array of floats,
the number of elements in the array and does not return any value.
ANSWER: void funct1(float myArray[], int numElements);
7. If you put a value in the square brackets of a one-dimension array parameter, this
value is _________ by the compiler.
ANSWER: ignored
8. If your index used to access the indexed variables of the array has the value of a
non-existent index, this is called _________
ANSWER: Index out of range, Index out of bounds, or illegal.
9. The computer remembers the address of which indexed variable(s) in an array?
______
ANSWER: the first
10. A computer's memory consists of numbered locations called __________.
ANSWER: bytes
11. In the expression
double score[10];
double is called the ___________ of the array
ANSWER: base type
12. In the expression
cout << score[i] << endl;
i is called the
ANSWER: index or subscript
13. An _______ is used to process a collection of data all of which is the same type
ANSWER: array
14. The individual variables that comprise an array are called __________
ANSWER: indexed variables, subscripted variables, or elements.
15. Indexes are numbered starting at _________
ANSWER: 0
Multiple Choice
1. What are the valid indexes for the array shown below?
int myArray[25];
a. 0-25
b. 0-24
c. 1-25
d. 1-24
ANSWER: B
2. What is wrong with the following code?
float scores[10], total;
a. Cannot declare regular and array variables together.
b. Arrays must be integers
c. The 10 should be replaced with a variable name, whose value is input
from the user
Test Bank for Problem Solving with C++: The Object of Programming, 9/e
Chapter 7 Arrays

d. Nothing.
ANSWER: D
3. Given an array named scores with 25 elements, what is the correct way to access
the 25th element?
a. scores+25
b. scores[24]
c. scores[25]
d. scores[last]
ANSWER: B
4. Why should you use a named constant for the size of an array?
a. Readability of code
b. Makes changes to the program easier
c. Helps reduce logic errors
d. All of the above
ANSWER: D
5. Given an array of integers of size 5, how does the computer know where the 3rd
indexed variable is located?
a. It adds 3 to the base address of the array
b. It adds space for 3 integers to the base address of the array
c. It remembers where all the indexed variables of the array are located.
d. None of the above
ANSWER: B
6. What is wrong with the following code fragment?
const int SIZE =5;
float scores[SIZE];
for(int i=0; i<=SIZE;i++)
{
cout << "Enter a score\n";
cin >> scores[i];
}
a. Array indexes start at 1 not 0
b. Arrays must be integers
c. Array indexes must be less than the size of the array
d. Should be cin >> scores[0];
ANSWER: C
7. Which of the following declare an array of 5 characters, and initializes them to
some known values?
a. char array[5]={'a','b','c','d','e'};
b. char array[4]={'a','b','c','d','e'};
c. char array[5]={''};
d. char array[]={'a','b','d','e'};
e. A and C
f. B and D
g. all of the above
ANSWER: E
Test Bank for Problem Solving with C++: The Object of Programming, 9/e
Chapter 7 Arrays

8. If you declare and initialize an integer array of size 10, but only list 5 values, what
values are stored in the remaining 5 indexed variables?
a. 0
b. garbage
c. 0.0
d. '0'
ANSWER: A
9. Arrays are always passed to a function using
a. pass by value
b. pass by reference
c. pass by array
d. you cannot pass arrays to a function
ANSWER: C
10. Give the following declarations, which of the following is a legal call to this
function?
int myFunction(int myValue);

int myArray[1000];
a. cout << myFunction(myArray);
b. cout << myFunction(myArray[0]);
c. myArray = myFunction(myArray);
d. myArray[1] = myFunction(myArray[0]);
e. A and B
f. A and C
g. B and D
ANSWER: G
11. Which of the following function declarations correctly expect an array as the first
argument?
a. void f1(int array, int size);
b. void f1(int& array, int size);
c. void f1(int array[100], int size);
d. void f1(float array[], int size);
e. All of the above
f. C and D
g. A and B
ANSWER: F
12. Which of the following function declarations correctly guarantee that the function
will not change any values in the array argument?
a. void f1(int array[], int size) const;
b. void f1(int array[], int size);
c. void f1(int &array, int size);
d. void f1(const int array[], int size);
e. void f1(int array[], const int size);
ANSWER: D
13. The following function definition has an error in it. What line is this error on?
Test Bank for Problem Solving with C++: The Object of Programming, 9/e
Chapter 7 Arrays

0. void f1(const double array[], int size)

1. {
2. int i=0;
3. while(i< size)
4. {
5. array[i] += 2;
6. cout <<array[i];
7. i++;
8. }
9. }
a. 0
b. 2
c. 5
d. 6
e. 2
ANSWER: C
14. Which of the following function declarations could be used to input data from the
keyboard into the array?
a. void input(int array[], int &numElements, int MAX_SIZE);
b. void input(int array[], int numElements, int MAX_SIZE);
c. void input(int &array[], int numElements, int MAX_SIZE);
d. int array[] input(int array[], int &numElements, int MAX_SIZE);
ANSWER: A
15. If we want a search function to search an array for some value and return either
the index where the value was found, or -1 if not found, which of the following
prototypes would be appropriate?
a. void search(const int array, int target, int numElements);
b. void search(const int array, int target);
c. int search(const int array[], int numElements);
d. int search(const int array[], int target, int numElements);
ANSWER: D
16. Given the following function definition for a search function, and the following
variable declarations, which of the following are appropriate function
invocations?

const int SIZE=1000;

int search(const int array[], int target, int numElements);

int array[SIZE], target, numberOfElements;

a. search(array[0], target, numberOfElements);
b. result=search(array[0], target, numberOfElements);
c. result=search(array, target, numberOfElements);
d. result=search(array, target, SIZE);
ANSWER: C
Test Bank for Problem Solving with C++: The Object of Programming, 9/e
Chapter 7 Arrays

17. Given the following function definition, will repeated calls to the search function
for the same target find all occurrences of that target in the array?
int search(const int array[], int target, int numElements)
{
int index=0;
bool found=false;

while((!found) && (index < numElements))

{
if(array[index] == target)
found=true;
else
index++;
}
if(found==true)
return index;
else
return -1;
}
a. Yes
b. No
c. Impossible to tell without looking at the values of the array
d. It depends on the value of target.
ANSWER: B
18. Given the following function definition, what modifications need to be made to
the search function so that it finds all occurrences of target in the array?
int search(const int array[], int target, int numElements)
{
int index=0;
bool found=false;

while((!found) && (index < numElements))

{
if(array[index] == target)
found=true;
else
index++;
}
if(found==true)
return index;
else
return -1;
}
a. Add another parameter to indicate where to stop searching
b. Add another parameter to indicate where to start searching
Test Bank for Problem Solving with C++: The Object of Programming, 9/e
Chapter 7 Arrays

c. This already can find all occurrences of a given target

d. Have the function return the whole array
ANSWER: B
19. Which sort algorithm does the following outline define?
for i between 0 and number_used-1 inclusive
put the ith smallest element at array[i]
a. sequential
b. selection
c. bubble
d. swap
ANSWER:B
20. Which of the following array declarations are legal?
a. int array[10];
b. int size;
cin >> size;
int array[size];
c. int array[]={0,0,0};
d. const int size=9;
int array[size];
e. All of the above
f. All but C
g. All but B
ANSWER: G
21. Which of the following function declarations will accept the following two-
dimension array?
int pages[10][30];
a. void f1(int pages[][], int size);
b. void f1(int pages[][30], int size);
c. void f1(int pages[10][], int size);
d. void f1(int& pages, int size);
ANSWER: B
22. If you need a function that will handle multi-dimensional arrays, you must specify
the following sizes inside the square brackets.
a. All the sizes
b. All sizes except the last dimension
c. All sizes except the first dimension
d. None of the sizes
ANSWER: C
23. What is the output of the following code fragment?
int array[4][4], index1, index2;
for(index1=0;index1<4;index1++)
for(index2=0;index2<4;index2++)
array[index1][index2]=index1 + index2;
for(index1=0;index1<4;index1++)
{
Test Bank for Problem Solving with C++: The Object of Programming, 9/e
Chapter 7 Arrays

for(index2=0;index2<4;index2++)
cout << array[index1][index2] << " ";
cout << endl;
}
a. 0 1 2 3
1234
2345
3456
b. 0 1 2 3
0123
0123
0123
c. 0 0 0 0
1111
2222
3333
d. 0 0 0 0
0123
0246
0369
ANSWER: A
24. Which of the following correctly declare an array that can hold up to 3 rows of 5
columns of doubles?
a. int array[3],[5];
b. int array[3][5];
c. float array[3][5];
d. float array[3,5];
ANSWER: C
25. Which of the following function declarations can be passed the following array?
char myArray[6][8];
a. void f1(char a[][], int sizeOfFirst);
b. void f1(char a[][8], int sizeOfFirst);
c. void f1(char& a, int sizeOfFirst);
d. void f1(char a[6][8], int sizeOfFirst);
e. B and D
f. A and D
ANSWER: E
26. A two dimension array can also be thought of as
a. a table
b. an array of arrays
c. a file
d. none of the above
e. A and C
f. A and B
ANSWER: F
Test Bank for Problem Solving with C++: The Object of Programming, 9/e
Chapter 7 Arrays

27. Which of the following will correctly assign all the values in one array to the
other array? (Assume both arrays are of the same type and have SIZE elements)
a. array1=array2;
b. array1[]=array2;
c. for(i=0;i<SIZE;i++)
array1[i]=array2[i];
d. for(i=0;i<SIZE;i++)
array1[]=array2[];
ANSWER: C
28. Which of the following will read values from the keyboard into the array?
(Assume the size of the array is SIZE).
a. cin >> array;
b. cin >> array[];
c. cin >> array[SIZE];
d. for(i=0;i<SIZE;i++)
cin >> array[i];
ANSWER: D
29. Which of the following correctly uses C++11’s range-based for statement to
iterate through every element of the array variable arr?
a. for (auto x : arr)
b. foreach (x in arr)
c. for (auto x; x < arr.length; x++)
d. for x in arr
ANSWER: A
30. What is the output of this code?
int arr[] = { 1, 2, 3};
for (int &element : arr)
element+=10;
for (int element : arr)
cout << element << endl;
a. 1 2 3
b. 11 12 13
ANSWER: B
31. What is the output of this code?
int arr[] = { 1, 2, 3};
for (int element : arr)
element+=10;
for (int element : arr)
cout << element << endl;
a. 1 2 3
b. 11 12 13
ANSWER: A
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
the western side, within the precincts of the castle, are ruins of many private habitations. At
both the western corners, runs a succession of dark, strongly built, low apartments, like
cells, vaulted, and with small narrow loop holes, as if for musquetry. On this side also, is a
well more than twenty feet square, walled in, with a vaulted roof at least twenty-five feet
high; the well was, even in this dry season, full of water: there are three others in the castle.
There are many apartments and recesses in the castle, which could only be exactly
described by a plan of the whole building. It seems to have been erected during the period
of the crusades, and must certainly have been a very strong hold to those who possessed
it. I could discover no traces of a road or paved way leading up the mountain to it. In winter
time, the shepherds of the Felahs of the Heish, who encamp upon the mountains, pass the
night in the castle with their cattle.

“Banias is situated at the foot of the Heish, in the plain, which in the immediate vicinity of
Banias is not called Ard Houle, but Ard Banias. It contains about one hundred and fifty
houses, inhabited mostly by Turks: there are also Greeks, Druses, and Enzairie. It belongs
to Hasbeya, whose Emir nominates the Sheikh. On the north-east side of the village, is the
source of the river of Banias, which empties itself into the Jordan at the distance of an hour
and a half, in the plain below. Over the source is a perpendicular rock, in which several
niches have been cut to receive statues. The largest niche is above a spacious cavern,
under which the river rises. This niche is six feet broad and as much in depth, and has a
smaller niche in the bottom of it. Immediately above it, in the perpendicular face of the rock,
is another niche, adorned with pilasters, supporting a shell ornament.

“Round the source of the river are a number of hewn stones. The stream flows on the
north side of the village, where is a well built bridge, and some remains of the ancient town,
the principal part of which seems, however, to have been on the opposite side of the river,
where the ruins extend for a quarter of an hour from the bridge. No walls remain, but great
quantities of stones and architectural fragments are scattered about.

“I went to see the ruins of the ancient city of Bostra, of which the people spoke much.
Bostra must not be confounded with Boszra, in the Haouran; both places are mentioned in
the Books of Moses. The way to the ruins lies for an hour and a half in the road by which I
came from Rasheyat-el-Fukhar, it then ascends for three quarters of an hour a steep
mountain to the right, on the top of which is the city; it is divided into two parts, the largest
being upon the very summit, the smaller at ten minutes walk lower down, and resembling a
suburb to the upper part. Traces are still visible of a paved way that had connected the two
divisions. There is scarcely any thing in the ruins worth notice; they consist of the
foundations of private habitations, built of moderate sized square stones. The lower city is
about twelve minutes walk in circumference; a part of the four walls of one building only
remains entire; in the midst of the ruins was a well, at this time dried up. The circuit of the
upper city may be about twenty minutes; in it are the remains of several buildings. In the
highest part is a heap of wrought stones, of larger dimensions than the rest, which seem to
indicate that some public building had once stood on the spot. There are several columns of
one foot, and of one foot and a half in diameter. In two different places, a short column was
standing in the centre of a round paved area of about ten feet in diameter. There is likewise
a deep well, walled in, but now dry.

“The country around these ruins is very capable of cultivation. Near the lower city are
groups of olive trees.
 “I descended the mountain in the direction towards the source of the Jordan, and
passed, at the foot of it, the miserable village of Kerwaya. Behind the mountain of Bostra is
another, still higher, called Djebel Meroura Djoubba.” [Burckhardt’s Syria, pp. 37‒42.]

From Conder’s Modern Traveler I also draw a sketch of other travelers’ observations on
the place and the surrounding country.

“Burckhardt, in coming from Damascus, pursued the more direct route taken by the
caravans, which crosses the Jordan at Jacob’s Bridge. Captains Irby and Mangles left this
road at Khan Sasa, and passed to the westward for Panias, thus striking between the road
to Acre, and that by Raschia and Hasbeya. The first part of the road from Sasa, led through
a fine plain, watered by a pretty, winding rivulet, with numerous tributary streams, and many
old ruined mills. It then ascended over a very rugged and rocky soil, quite destitute of
vegetation, having in some places traces of an ancient paved way, ‘probably the Roman
road from Damascus to Caesarea Philippi.’ The higher part of Djebel Sheikh was seen on
the right. The road became less stony, and the shrubs increased in number, size and
beauty, as they descended into a rich little plain, at the immediate foot of the mountain.
‘From this plain,’ continues captain M., ‘we ascended, and, after passing a very small
village, saw on our left, close to us, a very picturesque lake, apparently perfectly circular, of
little more than a mile in circumference, surrounded on all sides by sloping hills, richly
wooded. On quitting Phiala, at but a short distance from it, we crossed a stream which
discharges into the larger one which we first saw: the latter we followed for a considerable
distance; and then, mounting a hill to the south-west, had in view the great Saracenic
castle, near Panias, the town of that name, and the plain of the Jordan, as far as the Lake
Houle, with the mountains on the other side of the plain, forming altogether a fine coup
d’œil. As we descended towards Panias, we found the country extremely beautiful. Great
quantities of wild flowers, and a variety of shrubs, just budding, together with the richness of
the verdure, grass, corn and beans, showed us, all at once, the beauties of spring,
(February 24,) and conducted us into a climate quite different from Damascus. In the
evening we entered Panias, crossing a causeway constructed over the rivulet, which flows
from the foot of Djebel Sheikh. The river here rushes over great rocks in a very picturesque
manner, its banks being covered with shrubs and the ruins of ancient walls.’

“Panias, afterwards called Caesarea Philippi, has resumed its ancient name. The
present town of Banias is small. Seetzen describes it as a little hamlet of about twenty
miserable huts, inhabited by Mahomedans. The ‘Castle of Banias’ is situated on the summit
of a lofty mountain: it was built, Seetzen says, without giving his authority, in the time of the
caliphs.” [Modern Traveler Vol. I. pp. 353‒6.]

The distance, in time, from Mount Tabor to Caesarea Philippi, may be conceived from
the account given by Ebn Haukal, an Arabian geographer and traveler of the tenth century.
He says “from Tibertheh (Tiberias, which is near Tabor) to Sur, (Tyre,) is one day’s journey;
and from that to Banias, (Paneas,) is two day’s easy journey.” [Sir W. Ouseley’s translation
of Ebn Haukal’s Geography, pp. 48, 49.]

This was an occasion on which Christ did not choose to display

his glories to the eyes of the ignorant and impertinent mobs that
usually thronged his path, drawn together as they were, by idle
curiosity, by selfish wishes for relief from various diseases, or by the
determination to profit by the mischief, which almost always results
from such a promiscuous assemblage. It may be fairly considered a
moral impossibility, for such disorderly and spontaneous assemblies
to meet, without more evils resulting, than can possibly be
counterbalanced by the good done to the assembly as a whole,
whatever it may be to individuals. So, at least, Jesus Christ seems
always to have thought, for he never encouraged such gatherings,
and took every desirable opportunity of getting rid of them, without
injury to themselves, or of withdrawing himself quietly from them, as
the easiest way of dispersing them; knowing how utterly hopeless
must be the attempt to do any great good among such a set of idlers,
compared with what he might do by private and special intercourse
with individuals. It is worthy of note, that Matthew and all whose calls
are described, were about their business. Thus, on an occasion
already mentioned, when Jesus was walking by the sea of Galilee,
with the simple object of doing most good, he did not seek among
the multitude that was following him, for the devoted laborers whom
he might call to the great work of drawing in men to the knowledge of
the truth as revealed in him. No: he turned from all the zealous
loungers who had left their business, if they had any, to drag about
after the wonderful man who had attracted general attention by his
great and good deeds. He dispatched them as fast as possible with
a few words of instruction and exhortation; for though he did not
seek these undesirable occasions, yet he would have been as much
wanting in benevolence as in wisdom, if, when all the evils of such a
throng had occurred by the meeting, he had not hastened to offer the
speediest antidote to the mischief, and the best compensation for the
loss of time to the company, by giving them such words of counsel,
reproof, correction or encouragement, as, even when cast like bread
upon the waters, or seed by the way side, might yet perchance, or by
grace, “be found after many days,” returning to the hands of the
giver, in gratitude, by springing up and bearing some fruit to the
praise and glory of God. Having thus sent off the throng, he
addressed himself to the honest men whom he had found quietly
following their daily employments, and immediately performed with
them there, and, as is evident, mainly for their benefit, a most
remarkable miracle; and when they had been thus impressed with
his power and wisdom, summoned them to his aid in converting the
world; sagely and truly judging, that those who had been faithful in
few things, would be the best rulers over many things,――that they
who had steadily and faithfully worked at their proper business, had
the best talent and disposition for laboring in a cause which needed
so much patient industry and steady application in its devotees.
These were the men whom he hoped to make by his instructions, the
successful founders of the Christian faith; and these were the very
men whom, out of thousands who longed for the honors of his
notice, he now chose as the objects of his special instruction and
commission, and called them apart to view the display of the most
wonderful mystery of his life.

Among these three favored ones, we see Peter included, and his
name, as usual, first of all. By this it appears, that, however great his
late unfortunate misapprehension of the character and office of
Christ, and however he may have deserved the harsh rebuff with
which his forward but well meant remonstrance was met; still he was
so far from having lost his Master’s favor on this account, that he yet
held the highest place in the favor of Jesus, who had been moved by
the exposure of his favorite’s ignorance, only to new efforts to give
him a just and clear view of the important truths in which he was
most deficient; for after all, there was nothing very surprising in
Peter’s mistake. In pursuance of this design, he took these three,
Peter, James and John, with him, up into the high mountain peaks of
Hermon, from which their eyes might glance far south over the land
of Israel――the land of their fathers for ages on ages, stretching
away before them for a vast distance, and fancy could easily extend
the view. In this land, so holy in the recollections of the past, so sad
to the contemplation of the present, were to begin their mighty
labors. Here, too, bright and early, one of the three was to end his;
while his brother and friend were to spread their common Master’s
dominion over thousands and millions who had never yet heard of
that land, or its ancient faith. Jesus Christ always sought the lonely
tops of mountains, with a peculiar zest, in his seasons of retirement,
as well as for the most impressive displays of his eloquence, or his
miraculous power. The obvious reasons were the advantages of
perfect solitude and security against sudden intrusion;――the free,
pure air of the near heaven, and the broad light of the immense
prospect, were powerful means of lifting the soul to a state of moral
sublimity, equal to the impressions of physical grandeur, made by the
objects around. Their most holy historical associations, moreover,
were connected with the tops of high mountains, removed from
which, the most awful scenes of ancient miracle would, to the fancy
of the dweller of mountainous Palestine, have seemed stripped of
their most imposing aids. Sinai, Horeb, Moriah, Zion, Ebal, Gerizim
and Tabor, were the classic ground of Hebrew history, and to the
fiery mind of the imaginative Israelite, their high tops seemed to
tower in a religious ♦ sublimity, as striking and as lasting as their
physical elevation. From these lofty peaks, so much nearer to the
dwelling place of God, his soul took a higher flight than did ever the
fancy of the Greek, from the classic tops of Parnassus, Pelion, Ida,
or the skyish head of blue Olympus; and the three humble gazers,
who now stood waiting there with their divine Master, felt, no doubt,
their devotion proportionally exalted with their situation, by such
associations. It was the same spirit, that, throughout the ancient
world, led the earliest religionists to avail themselves of these
physical advantages, as they did in their mountain worship, and with
a success just in proportion as the purity and sincerity of their
worship, and the high character of its object, corresponded with the
lofty grandeur of the place.

♦ “snblimity” replaced with “sublimity”

 “Not vainly did the early Persian make

His altar the high places, and the peak

Of earth-o’er-gazing mountains, there to seek

The spirit, in whose honor shrines are weak,

Upreared of human hands. Come and compare

Columns and idol-dwellings, Goth or Greek,

With nature’s realms of worship, earth and air;

Nor fix on fond abodes to circumscribe thy prayer.”

In such a scene, and inspired by such sympathies, were the

chosen three, on this occasion. The bare details, as given in the
three gospels, make it evident that the scene took place in the night,
as will be shown in the course of the narrative; and this was in
accordance also with Christ’s usual custom of choosing the night, as
the season of solitary meditation and prayer. (Matthew xiv. 23.)
Having reached the top, he engaged himself and them in prayer.
How solemn――how awful the scene! The Savior of all, afar from
the abodes of men, from the sound and sight of human cares and
sins, alone with his chosen three, on the vast mountains, with the
world as far beneath their eyes as its thoughts were below their
minds;――in the silence of the night, with the lights of the city and
villages faintly gleaming in the distance on the lower hills and the
plain,――with no sound near them but the murmuring of the night
wind about the rocks,――with the dark canopy of gathering clouds
above them,――Jesus prayed. His voice went up from this high altar
of earth’s wide temple to the throne of his Father, to whom he
commended in words of supplication, those who were to labor for
him when his earthly work should cease. We may well suppose that
the substance of his prayer was, that their thoughts, before so
groveling, and now so devotedly clinging to visions of earthly
dominion and personal aggrandizement, might “leave all meaner
things, to low ambition and the pride of kings,” and might rise, as on
that high peak, from earth towards heaven, to the just sense of the
far higher efforts and honors to which they were destined. With their
thoughts and feelings thus kindled with the holy associations of the
hour, the place and the person, their souls must have risen with his
in that solemn and earnest supplication, and their prayers for new
devotion and exaltation of spirit must have been almost equally
ardent. Probably some hours were passed in this employment,
varied perhaps by the eloquent and pointed instructions given by
Jesus, to prepare these chiefs of the apostolic band, for the full
understanding of the nature of his mission and theirs. How vastly
important to their success in their labors, and to their everlasting
happiness, must these prayers and instructions have been! The
three hearers, we may presume, gave for a long time the most
devoted attention which a scene so impressive could awaken; but
yet they were men, and weary ones too, for they had come a
considerable distance up a very steep way, and it was now late at
night,――no doubt long past their bed-time. The exercise which their
journey to the spot had given them, was of a kind for which their
previous habits of life had quite unfitted them. They were all
fishermen, and had dwelt all their lives in the low flat country on the
shores of lake Tiberias and the valley of the Jordan, where they had
nothing to do with climbing hills. And though their constant habits of
hard labor must have made them stout men in their vocation, yet we
all know that the muscles called into action by the management of
the boat and net, are very different from those which support and
advance a man in ascending acclivities. Every one that has noticed
the sturdy arms and slender legs of most sailors, has had the
practical proof, that a man may work all his life at pulling the seine
and drag-net, hauling the ropes of a vessel, and tugging at the oar,
without being thereby, in the slightest degree, fitted for labors of a
different character. The work of toiling up a very high, steep
mountain, then, was such as all their previous habits of life had
wholly unfitted them for, and their over-stretched limbs and bodies
must have been both sore and weary, so that when they came to a
resting place, they very naturally were disposed to repose, and must
have felt drowsy. In short, they fell asleep; and that too, as it would
appear, in the midst of the prayers and counsels of their adorable
Lord. And yet who, that considers all the reasons above given, can
wonder? for it is very possible for a man to feel the highest interest in
a subject offered to his consideration,――an interest, too, which may
for a long time enable a zealous mind to triumph over bodily
incapacity,――yet there is a point beyond which the most intense
energy of mind cannot drag the sinking body, when fatigue has
drained its strength, which nothing but sleep can renew. Men, when
thus worn down, will sleep in the midst of a storm, or on the eve of
certain death. In such a state were the bodies of the companions of
Jesus, and thus wearied, they slept long, in spite of the storm which
is supposed by many to have arisen, and to have been the
immediate cause of some of the striking appearances which
followed. It is said by many standard commentators, that the fairest
account of such of the incidents as are connected with natural
objects, is, that a tremendous thunder-storm came down upon the
mountain while they were asleep, and that a loud peal bursting from
this, was the immediate cause of their awaking. All the details that
are given, certainly justify the supposition. They are described as
suddenly starting from their sleep, in such a manner as would
naturally follow only from a loud noise violently arousing the
slumbering senses. Awakened thus by a peal of thunder, the first
sight that struck their amazed eyes, was their Master, resplendent
through the darkness of night and storm, with a brilliant light, that so
shone upon him and covered him, as to change his whole aspect to
a degree of glory indescribable. To add to their amazement and
dread, they saw that he was not alone, but two mysterious and
spiritual personages, announced to them as Moses and Elijah, were
now his companions, having found means to join him, though high
on the mighty rock, alone and in darkness, so inaccessible to human
approach. These two ancient servants of God now appeared by his
beloved Son, whose labors, and doctrines and triumphs were so far
to transcend theirs, and in the hearing of the three apostles, uttered
solemn words of prophecy about his approaching death, and triumph
over death. The two sons of Zebedee were so startled as to be
speechless, but the boldness and the talkativeness of Peter, always
so pre-eminent, enabled him, even here, to speak his deep awe and
reverence. Yet confused with half-awakened sleep, and stunned by
the bursting thunder, he spoke as a man thus suddenly awaked
naturally speaks, scarcely separating the thoughts of his dream, from
the objects that met his opening eye. He said “Lord, it is good for us
to be here; and if thou wilt, let us make three tabernacles, (or resting
places;) one for thee, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.” These
things he said before his confused thoughts could fully arrange
themselves into words proper to express his feelings of awe, and he,
half dreaming still, hardly knew what he said. But as he uttered these
words, the dark cloud above them suddenly descended upon the
mountain’s head, inwrapping and overshadowing them, and amid the
flash of lightnings and the roar of thunders, given out in the
concussion, they distinguished, in no human voice, these awful
words, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye
him.” Who can wonder that a phenomenon so tremendous, both
morally and physically, overwhelmed their senses, and, that alarmed
beyond measure, they fell again on their faces to the earth, so
astonished that they did not dare to rise or look up, until Jesus came
to them and reassured them with his friendly touch, saying “Arise
and be not afraid.” And lifting up their eyes, they saw no man any
more, save Jesus only with themselves. The whole object of their
retirement to this solitude being now accomplished, they prepared to
return to those whom they had left to wonder at their strange
absence. It was now probably about morning; the storm was
passed,――the clouds had vanished,――the thunder was hushed,
and the cheerful sun now shone on mountain and plain, illuminating
their downward path towards the city, and inspiring their hearts with
the joyous emotions suited to their enlarged views of their Lord’s
kingdom, and their own duties. As they went down, Jesus charged
them to tell no man what things they had seen, till he, the son of
man, rose from the dead. And they kept it close, and told no man in
those days any of those things which they had seen. But they
questioned much with one another what the rising from the dead
should mean. So that it appears, that after all the repeated
assurances Jesus had given them of the certainty of this event, they
had never put any clear and definite meaning upon his words, and
were still totally in the dark as to their essential import. This proof of
their continued ignorance serves to confirm the view already taken of
the way in which they understood, or rather misunderstood, the
previous warning of the same event, in connection with his charge
and rebuke of Peter. In connection also with what they had seen on
the mountain, and the injunction of secrecy, another question arose,
why they could not be allowed to speak freely on the subject. “For if
they had now distinctly seen the prophet Elijah returned from the
other world, as it appeared, why could they not properly announce
publicly, so important and desirable an event? Else, why did the
Jewish teachers say that Elijah must first come before the Messiah?
And why, then, should they not freely offer their testimony of his
presence with Jesus on this occasion, as the most satisfactory proof
of his Messiahship?” The answer of Jesus very clearly informed
them that they were not to consider this vision as having any direct
connection with the prophecy respecting Elijah’s re-appearance, to
precede and aid the true Messiah in the establishment of the ancient
Jewish dominion; but that all that was intended in that prophecy had
been fully brought to pass in the coming of John the Baptist, who, in
the spirit and power of Elijah, had already run his bright but brief
course as the Messiah’s precursor. With such interesting
conversation they continued their course in returning towards the
city. The way in which Luke here expresses the circumstances of the
time of their return, is the last and most satisfactory proof to be
offered of the fact, that their visit to the mountain had been in the
night. His words are, “And it came to pass that on the next day, when
they came down from the mountain, a large multitude met them,” &c.
This shows that they did not go and return the same day, between
sunrise and sunset; and the only reasonable supposition left to agree
with the other circumstances, is, that they went at evening, and
returned early in the morning of the next day. After their descent,
they found that the remaining disciples had been making an
unsuccessful attempt to relieve a lunatic person, who was relieved,
however, at a word, as soon as brought to Jesus himself. They
continued no very long time in this part of Galilee, after these events,
but journeyed slowly southwards, towards the part which Jesus had
formerly made his home. This journey was made by him with
particular care to avoid public notice, and it is particularly expressed
by Mark that he went on this homeward journey through by-ways or
less public roads than usual. For as he went, he renewed the sad
warning, that he was in constant danger of being given up into the
hands of the wicked men, who feeling reproved and annoyed by his
life and doctrine, earnestly desired his death; and that soon their
malice would be for a time successful, but that after they had done
their worst, he should at last triumph over them. Still this assurance,
obvious as its meaning may now seem to us, was not understood by
them, and though they puzzled themselves extremely about it, they
evidently considered their ignorance as of a somewhat justly
blamable nature, for they dared not ask for a new explanation. This
passage still farther shows, how far they must have been from rightly
appreciating his first declaration on this subject. Having followed the
less direct routes, for these reasons, he came, (doing much good on
the journey, no doubt, in a quiet and unnoticed way, as we know he
always did,) to Capernaum, which he still regarded as his home; and
here again, as formerly, went directly to the house of Simon Peter,
which he is represented as entering on his first arrival in the city, in
such a way as to show that there was his dwelling, and a welcome
entertainment. Indeed we know of no other friend whom he had in
Capernaum, with whom he was on such terms of intimacy, and we
cannot suppose that he kept house by himself,――for his relations
had never yet removed from Nazareth.

Of the scenes of the transfiguration, so great a variety of opinions have been

entertained, that it would be impossible for me to discuss the various views within my
narrow limits. The old speculations on the subject are very fully given in Poole’s Synopsis,
and the modern ones by Kuinoel, who mentions a vast number of German writers, of whom
few of us have ever seen even the names elsewhere.

The view which I have taken is not peculiar to me, but is supported by many high
authorities, and is in accordance with what seemed to me the simplest and fairest
construction which could be put upon the facts, after a very full and minute consideration of
the various circumstances, chronologically, topographically and grammatically. It should be
noticed that my arrangement of the facts in reference to the time of day, is this. Jesus and
the three disciples ascended the mountain in the evening, about sunset, remained there all
night during a thunder-storm, and returned the next morning.

the tribute money.

On the occasion of his return and entrance into Peter’s house, a

new instance occurred both of his wisdom and his special regard for
this apostle. Some of those who went about legally authorized to
collect the tax due from all conforming Jews, to defray the expenses
of the temple-worship at Jerusalem, appear to have been waiting for
Christ’s return from this journey, to call on him for his share, if he
were willing to pay it as a good Jew. They seem to have had some
doubts, however, as to the manner in which so eminent a teacher
would receive a call to pay those taxes, from which he might perhaps
deem himself exempted by his religious rank, more especially as he
had frequently denounced, in the most unmeasured terms, all those
concerned in the administration of the religious affairs of the Jewish
nation. As soon as he had returned, therefore, they took the
precaution to make the inquiry of Peter, as the well-known intimate of
Jesus, “Doth not your Master pay tribute?” Peter, knowing well the
steady, open reverence which Jesus always manifested for all the
established usages of his country, readily and unhesitatingly
answered “Yes.” And when he was come into the house, and was
upon the point of proposing the matter to him, Jesus anticipated him,
saying, “How thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the
earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of the children
of others?” Peter says, “From others’ children.” Jesus says again to
him, “Then are the children free.” That is: “If, when the kings and
rulers of the nations gather their taxes, for the support of their royal
state and authority, they pass over their own children untaxed, as a
thing of course, then I, the son of that God who is the eternal king of
Israel, am fairly exempt from the payment of the sum due from other
Jews, for the support of the ceremonials of my Father’s temple in
Jerusalem.” Still he did not choose to avail himself of this honorable
pretext, but went on to tell Simon, “Nevertheless, lest we should give
needless occasion for offense, we will pay what they exact; and for
this purpose, go thou to the sea, and take up the fish that comes up
first; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of
money; take that and give it them for me and thee.”

Anticipated him.――This word I substitute in the place of “prevented” which is the

expression used in our common English Bible, and which in the changes of modern usage
has entirely lost the signification which it had when the translators applied it to this passage.
The Greek word here is προεφθασεν, (proephthasen,) and literally means “forespake” or
“spake before” him. This was the idea which the English translators wished to express by
the word “prevented,” whose true original meaning is “anticipated,” or “was beforehand with
him,” being in Latin compounded of the words prae, “before,” and venio, “come.” Among the
numerous conveniences of Webster’s improved edition of the Bible, for popular use, is the
fact that in this and similar passages he has altered the obsolete expression, and changed it
for a modern one, which is just and faithful to the original idea. In this passage I find he has
very properly given the word above suggested, without my knowledge of the coincidence.

Of the children of others.――This expression too is a variation from the common English
translation, which here expresses itself so vaguely, that a common reader can get no just
idea whatever of the passage, and is utterly unable to find the point of the allusion. The
Greek word is αλλοτριων, (allotrion,) which is simply the genitive plural of an adjective, which
means “of, or belonging to others,” and is secondarily applied also to “strangers, foreigners,”
&c., as persons “belonging to other lands;” but the primary meaning is absolutely necessary
to be given here, in order to do justice to the sense, since the idea is not that they take
tribute money of foreigners rather than of their own subjects; but of their subjects rather
than of their own children, who are to enjoy the benefit of the taxation.

A piece of money.――The term thus vaguely rendered, is in Greek στατηρ, (stater,)

which was a coin of definite value, being worth among the Jews about four attic drachms,
and exactly equivalent to their shekel, a little more than half a dollar of federal money. The
tax here paid was the half-shekel tax, due from every Jew for the service of the temple, so
that the “piece of money,” being one shekel, was just sufficient to pay for both Jesus and
Peter. The word translated “the tribute money” (in verse 24) is equally definite in the
Greek,――διδραχμον, (didrachmon,) equivalent to the Jewish half-shekel, and being itself
worth half a stater. The stater, however, as a name for Attic and Byzantine gold coins, was
equivalent to twenty or thirty times the value of the shekel. (See Stephens’s Thesaurus,
Donnegan’s, Jones’s and Pickering’s Lexicons.) On this passage see Hammond’s
Annotations, which are here quite full on values. See too, Lightfoot’s Horae Hebraica on
Matthew xvii. 25. Macknight’s Paraphrase, Poole and Kuinoel, for a very full account of the
matter. Also my note on page 32.

There have been two different accounts of this little circumstance among commentators,
some considering the tribute money to have been a Roman tax, and others taking the
ground which I do, that it was the Jewish tax for the expenses of the temple-worship. The
reasons may be found at great length, in some of the authorities just quoted; and it may be
remarked that the point of the allusion in Jesus’s question to Peter, is all lost on the
supposition of a Roman tax; for how could Jesus claim exemption as a son of the Roman
emperor, as he justly could from the Jewish tax for the service of the heavenly king, his
Father? The correspondence of values too, with the half-shekel tax, is another reason for
adopting that view; nor is there any objection to it, except the circumstance, that the time at
which this tax is supposed to have been demanded, does not agree with that to which the
collection of the temple-tax was limited. (Exodus xxx. 13, and Lightfoot on Matthew xvii. 24.)

the question of superiority.

Soon after the last mentioned event, there arose a discussion

among the apostles, as to who should have the highest rank in the
administration of the government of the Messiah’s kingdom, when it
should be finally triumphantly established. The question shows how
pitiably deficient they still were, in a proper understanding of the
nature of the cause to which they were devoted; but the details of
this circumstance may be deferred to a more appropriate place,
under the lives of the persons, who, by their claims, afterwards
originated a similar discussion, in connection with which this may be
most properly mentioned. However, it cannot be amiss to remark
here, that the very fact of such a discussion having arisen, shows,
that no one supposed that, from the peculiar distinctions already
conferred on Peter, he was entitled to the assumption of anything
like power over the rest of the twelve, or that anything else than a
peculiar regard of Christ for him, and a confidence in his zeal and
ability to advance the great cause, was expressed in his late
honorable and affectionate declaration to him. The occurrence of this
discussion is also a high and satisfactory proof of Peter’s modest
and unassuming disposition; for had he maintained among the
apostles the authority and rank which his Master’s decided
preference might seem to warrant, these high pretensions of the
sons of Zebedee would not have been thus put forward against one
so secure in Christ’s favor by high talents, and long habits of close
intimacy.

the rule of brotherly forbearance.

The next occasion on which the name of Peter is mentioned in the

gospels, is his asking Jesus, “how many times he should forgive an
offending brother? If the brother should repeat the offense seven
times, should he each time accord him the forgiveness asked?” This
question was suggested to Peter’s mind, by the rules which Christ
had just been giving his disciples, for the preservation of harmony,
and for the redress of mutual grievances among them. His charge to
them on this subject, injoined the repeated exercise of forbearance
towards a brother who had trespassed, and urged the surrender of
every imagined right of private redress, to the authority and sanction
of the common assembly of the apostles. The absolute necessity of
some such rule, for the very existence of the apostles’ union, was
plain enough. They were men, with all the passions and frailties of
common, uneducated men, and with all the peculiar, fervid energy,
which characterizes the physiology of the races of south-western
Asia. From the constant attrition of such materials, no doubt
individually discordant in temperament and constitution, how could it
be hoped, that in the common course of things, there would not arise
frequent bursts of human passion, to mar or hinder the divine work
which brought them together? With a most wise providence for these
liabilities to disagreement, Jesus had just arranged a principle of
reference and quiet decision, in all cases of dispute in which the
bond of Christian fellowship would be strained or broken. His charge
to them, all and each, was this: “If thy brother shall trespass against
thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone. If he shall
hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother; but if he will not hear thee,
take with thee on thy second call, one or two more, that, according to
the standard forms of the Mosaic law, by the mouth of two or three
witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall refuse to
hear them, tell it at last to the common assembly of the apostles; and
after they have given their decision in favor of the justice of the
complaint and demand, if he still maintain his enmity and wrong
against thee, thou art no longer held by the apostolic pledge to treat
him with brotherly regard; but having slighted all friendly advice, and
the common sentiment of the brethren, he has lost the privilege of
their fellowship, and must be to thee as one of the low world around
him――a heathen and an outcast Jew.” On this occasion, also, he
renewed to them all, the commission to bind and loose, which he
had before particularly delivered only to Peter. As he had, in
speaking of the treatment, made abundant requisitions for the
exercise of forbearance, without mentioning the proper limit to these
acts of forgiveness, Peter now put his question: “If my brother sin
against me seven times, and as often make the reparation which I
may honestly ask, shall I continue to forgive him?” That is, “Shall I
not seem, by these repeated acts of forbearance, at last to be
offering him inducements to offend against one so placable? And if
these transgressions are thus enormously multiplied, will it not be
right that I should withhold the kind consideration which is made of
so little account?” The answer of Jesus is, “I say to thee, not merely
till seven times, but till seventy times seven.” That is, “To your
forbearance towards an erring and returning Christian brother, there
should be no limit but his own obstinate adhesion to his error. In
coming out from the world to follow me, you have given up your
natural rights to avenge, either legally or personally, those injuries
which pass the bounds of common forbearance. The preservation of
perfect harmony in the new community to which you have joined
yourself, is of so much importance to the triumphant advancement of
our cause, as to require justly all these sacrifices of personal ill-will.”
With his usual readiness in securing an abiding remembrance of his
great leading rules of action, Jesus, on this occasion, concluded the
subject with illustrating the principle, by a beautiful parable or story; a
mode of instruction, far more impressive to the glowing imagination
of the oriental, than of the more calculating genius of colder races.

This inquiry may have been suggested to Peter by a remark made by Christ, which is
not given by Matthew as by Luke, (xvii. 4.) “If he sin against thee seven times in a day, and
seven times turn again, &c. thou shalt forgive him.” So Maldorat suggests, but it is certainly
very hard to bring these two accounts to a minute harmony, and I should much prefer to
consider Luke as having given a general statement of Christ’s doctrine, without referring to
the occasion or circumstances, while Matthew has given a more distinct account of the
whole matter. The discrepancy between the two accounts has seemed so great, that the
French harmonists, Newcome, LeClerc, Macknight, Thirlwall, and Bloomfield, consider them
as referring to totally different occasions,――that in Matthew occurring in Capernaum, but
that in Luke, after his journey to Jerusalem to the feast of the tabernacles. But the utter
absence of all chronological order in the greater part of Luke’s gospel, is enough to make us
suspect, that the event he alludes to may coincide with that of Matthew’s story, since the
amount of the precept, and the general form of expression, is the same in both cases. This
is the view taken by Rosenmueller, Kuinoel, Vater, Clarke, Paulus, and which seems to be
further justified by the consideration, that the repetition of the precept must have been
entirely unnecessary, after having been so clearly laid down, and so fully re-examined in
answer to Peter’s inquiry, as given by Matthew.
 Seven times.――This number was a general expression among the Hebrews for a
frequent repetition, and was perfectly vague and indefinite as to the number of repetitions,
as is shown in many instances in the Bible where it occurs. Seventy times seven, was
another expression of the recurrences carried to a superlative number, and is also a
standard Hebraism, (as in Genesis iv. 24.) See Poole, Lightfoot, Clarke, Scott, and other
commentators, for Rabbinical illustrations of these phrases.

A heathen and an outcast.――This latter expression I have chosen, as giving best the
full force of the name publican, which designated a class of men among the Jews, who
were considered by all around them as having renounced national pride, honor and religion,
for the base purpose of worldly gain; serving under the Roman government as tax-
gatherers, that is, hiring the taxes of a district, which they took by paying the government a
definite sum, calculating to make a rich profit on the bargain by systematic extortion and
oppression. The name, therefore, was nearly synonymous with the modern word
renegade,――one who, for base motives, has renounced the creed and customs of his
fathers.

the journey to jerusalem.

The occurrence which occasioned this discussion, took place at

Capernaum, where Jesus seems to have resided with his apostles
for some time after his northern tour to Caesarea Philippi, giving
them, as opportunity suggested, a great number and variety of
practical instructions. At length he started with them, on his last
journey to Jerusalem, the only one which is recorded by the first
three evangelists, although John gives us accounts of three previous
visits to the Jewish capital. On this journey, while he was passing on
to Jerusalem, by a somewhat circuitous course, through that portion
of Judea which lies east of the Jordan, he had taken occasion to
remark, (in connection with the disappointment of the rich young
man, who could not give up his wealth for the sake of the gospel,)
how hard it was for those that had riches, and put their trust in them,
to join heartily in the promotion of the cause of Christ, or share in the
honors of its success. Peter, then, speaking for himself and the
faithful few who had followed Jesus thus far through many trials, to
the risk and loss of much worldly profit, reminded Jesus of what they
had given up for his sake. “Behold, we have forsaken all, and
followed thee. What shall we have therefore?” The solemn and
generous assurance of Jesus, in reply, was, that those who had
followed him thus, should, in the final establishment of his kingdom,
when he should receive the glories of his triumph, share in the
highest gifts which he, conqueror of all, could bestow. Then, those
who had forsaken kindred and lands for his sake, should find all
these sacrifices made up to them, in the enjoyment of rewards
incalculably beyond those earthly comforts in value.

This conversation took place, just about as they were passing the
Jordan, into the western section of Judea, near the spot where
Joshua and the Israelitish host of old passed over to the conquest of
Canaan. A little before they reached Jericho, Jesus took a private
opportunity to renew to the twelve his oft repeated warning of the
awful events, now soon to happen after his entry into Jerusalem.
“Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of Man shall be
betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes, and they shall
condemn him to death. And they shall deliver him to the heathen, to
mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him; and the third day, he shall
rise again.” Yet, distinct as was this declaration, and full as the
prediction was in these shocking particulars, Luke assures us, that
“they understood none of these things; and this saying was hid from
them; neither knew they the things which were spoken.” Now, we
cannot easily suppose that they believed that he, to whom they had
so heartily and confidently devoted their lives and fortunes, was
trying their feelings by an unnecessary fiction, so painful in its
details. The only just supposition which we can make, then, is that
they explained all these predictions to themselves, in a way best
accordant with their own notions of the kingdom which the Messiah
was to found, and on the hope of whose success they had staked all.
The account of his betrayal, ill-treatment, and disgraceful death, they
could not literally interpret, as the real doom which awaited their
glorious and mighty Lord; it could only mean, to them, that for a brief
space, the foes of the Son of God were to gain a seeming triumph
over the hosts that were to march against Jerusalem, to seat him on
the throne of David. The traitorous heads of the Jewish faith, the
members of the great Sanhedrim, the hypocritical Pharisees, and the
lying, avaricious lawyers, would, through cowardice, selfishness,
envy, jealousy, or some other meanness, basely conspire to support
their compound tyranny, by attempting to crush the head of the new
faith, with the help of their Roman masters, whom they would
summon to the aid of their falling power. This unpatriotic and
treacherous effort would for a time seem to be perfectly successful,
but only long enough for the traitors to fill up the measure of their
iniquities. Then, vain would be the combined efforts of priest and
soldier,――of Jewish and of Roman power. Rising upon them, like
life from the dead, the Son of God should burst forth in the might of
his Father,――he should be revealed from heaven with ten thousand
angels, and recalling his scattered friends, who might have been for
a moment borne down before the iron hosts of Rome, he should
sweep every foreign master, and every domestic religious tyrant,
from Israel’s heritage, setting up a throne, whose sway should
spread to the uttermost parts of the earth, displacing even the deep-
rooted hold of Roman power. What then, would be the fate of the
faithful Galileans, who, though few and feeble, had stood by him
through evil and good report, risking all on his success? When the
grinding tyranny of the old Sanhedrim had been overthrown, and
chief priests, scribes, Pharisees, lawyers, and all, displaced from the
administration, the chosen ones of his own early adoption, his
countrymen, and intimate companions for years, would be rewarded,
sitting on twelve thrones, judging the ransomed and victorious twelve
tribes of Israel. Could they doubt their Lord’s ability for this glorious,
this miraculous ♦achievement? Had they not seen him maintain his
claim for authority over the elements, over diseases, over the dark
agencies of the demoniac powers, and over the mighty bonds of
death itself? And could not the same power achieve the still less
wonderful victory over the opposition of these unworthy foes? It was
natural, then, that, with the long cherished hopes of these dazzling
triumphs in their minds, the twelve apostles, though so often and so
fully warned of approaching evils, should thus unsuspectingly persist
in their mistake, giving every terrible word of Jesus such a turn as
would best confirm their baseless hopes. Even Peter, already sternly
rebuked for his forward effort to exalt the ambition of Jesus, above
even the temporary disgrace which he seemed to foreordain for
himself,――and so favored with the private instructions and
counsels of his master, thus erred,――even James and John, also
sharers in the high confidence and favor of Jesus, though thus
favored and taught, were immediately after brought under his
deserved censure for their presumptuous claims for the ascendency,
which so moved the wrath of the jealous apostles, who were all alike
involved in this monstrous and palpable misconception. Nor yet can
we justly wonder at the infatuation to which they were thus blindly
given up, knowing as we do, that, in countless instances, similar
error has been committed on similar subjects, by men similarly
influenced. What Biblical commentary, interpretation, introduction,
harmony, or criticism, from the earliest Christian or Rabbinic fathers,
to the theological schemer of the latest octavo, does not bear sad
witness on its pages, to the wonderful infatuation which can force
upon the plainest and clearest declaration, a version elaborately
figurative or painfully literal, just as may most comfortably cherish
and confirm a doctrine, or notion, or prejudice, which the writer would
fain “add to the things which are written in the book?” Can it be
reasonably hoped, then, that this untaught effort to draw out the
historical truth of the gospel, will be an exception to this harshly true
judgment on the good, the learned, and the critical of past ages?

♦ “achievment” replaced with “achievement”

the entry into the city.

With these fruitless admonitions to his followers, Jesus passed on

through Jericho to Bethphage, on the verge of the holy city. Here, the
enthusiastic and triumphant rejoicings, which the presence of their
Master called forth, from the multitudes who were then swarming to
Jerusalem from all parts of Palestine, must have lifted up the hearts
of the apostles, with high assurance of the nearness of the honors
for which they had so long looked and waited. Their irrepressible joy
and exultation burst out in songs of triumph, as Jesus, after the
manner of the ancient judges of Israel, rode into the royal seat of his
fathers. And as he went down the descent of the Mount of Olives, to
go into the city, the whole train of the disciples began to rejoice and