Select Commentary| Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible| 太| Chapter 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
Total 66 verses in Chapter 27: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 |
46大约三点钟,耶稣大声呼叫:“以利,以利,拉马撒巴各大尼?”意思是“我的 神,我的 神,你为什么离弃我?”
46And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
46 Verse 46. My God! My God! why hast thou forsaken me!] These

words are quoted by our Lord from ; they are of very great

importance, and should be carefully considered.

Some suppose "that the divinity had now departed from Christ,

and that his human nature was left unsupported to bear the

punishment due to men for their sins." But this is by no means to

be admitted, as it would deprive his sacrifice of its infinite

merit, and consequently leave the sin of the world without an

atonement. Take deity away from any redeeming act of Christ, and

redemption is ruined. Others imagine that our Lord spoke these

words to the Jews only, to prove to them that he was the Messiah.

"The Jews," say they, "believed this psalm to speak of the

Messiah: they quoted the eighth verse of it against Christ-He

trusted in God that he would deliver him; let him deliver him,

seeing he delighted in him. (See .) To which our Lord

immediately answers, My God! my God! &c, thus showing that he was

the person of whom the psalmist prophesied." I have doubts

concerning the propriety of this interpretation.

It has been asked, What language is it that our Lord spoke?

Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani. Some say it is Hebrew-others Syriac.

I say, as the evangelists quote it, it is neither. St. Matthew

comes nearest the Hebrew, Eli, Eli, lamah

azabthani, in the words, ηλιηλιλαμασαβαχτανι, Eli, Eli, lama


And St. Mark comes nearest the Syriac, , [Syriac]

Alohi, Alohi, l'mono shebachtheni, in the words ελωιελωιλαμμα

σαβαχθανι, Eloi, Eloi, lamma sabachthani. It is worthy of note,

that a Hebrew MS. of the twelfth century, instead of

azabthani, forsaken me, reads shechachthani, FORGOTTEN

me. This word makes a very good sense, and comes nearer to the

sabachthani of the evangelists. It may be observed also, that the

words, Why hast thou FORGOTTEN me? are often used by David and

others, in times of oppression and distress. See .

Some have taken occasion from these words to depreciate the

character of our blessed Lord. "They are unworthy," say they, "of

a man who suffers, conscious of his innocence, and argue

imbecility, impatience, and despair." This is by no means fairly

deducible from the passage. However, some think that the words,

as they stand in the Hebrew and Syriac, are capable of a

translation which destroys all objections, and obviates every

difficulty. The particle lamah, may be translated, to what-to

whom-to what kind or sort-to what purpose or profit: ;

; ; ; ;

and the verb azab signifies to leave-to deposit-to commit to

the care of.

See ; ; , and .

The words, taken in this way, might be thus translated: My God! my

God! to what sort of persons hast thou left me? The words thus

understood are rather to be referred to the wicked Jews than to

our Lord, and are an exclamation indicative of the obstinate

wickedness of his crucifiers, who steeled their hearts against

every operation of the Spirit and power of God. See Ling. Brit.

Reform. by B. Martin, p. 36.

Through the whole of the Sacred Writings, God is represented as

doing those things which, in the course of his providence, he only

permits to be done; therefore, the words, to whom hast thou left

or given me up, are only a form of expression for, "How

astonishing is the wickedness of those persons into whose hands I

am fallen!" If this interpretation be admitted, it will free this

celebrated passage from much embarrassment, and make it speak a

sense consistent with itself, and with the dignity of the Son of


The words of St. Mark, , agree pretty nearly with this

translation of the Hebrew: ειςτιμεεγκατιλεπες; To what [sort

of persons, understood] hast thou left me? A literal translation

of the passage in the Syriac Testament gives a similar sense: Ad

quid dereliquisti me? "To what hast thou abandoned me?" And an

ancient copy of the old Itala version, a Latin translation before

the time of St. Jerome, renders the words thus: Quare me in

opprobrium dedisti? "Why hast thou abandoned me to reproach?"

It may he objected, that this can never agree with the ινατι,

why, of Matthew. To this it is answered, that ινατι must have

here the same meaning as ειςτι-as the translation of lama;

and that, if the meaning be at all different, we must follow that

evangelist who expresses most literally the meaning of the

original: and let it be observed, that the Septuagint often

translate by ινατι instead of ειςτι, which evidently proves

that it often had the same meaning. Of this criticism I say,

Valet quod valet, Let it pass for no more than it is worth: the

subject is difficult. But whatever may be thought of the above

mode of interpretation, one thing is certain, viz. That the words

could not be used by our Lord in the sense in which they are

generally understood. This is sufficiently evident; for he well

knew why he was come unto that hour; nor could he be forsaken

of God, in whom dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. The

Deity, however, might restrain so much of its consolatory support

as to leave the human nature fully sensible of all its sufferings,

so that the consolations might not take off any part of the keen

edge of his passion; and this was necessary to make his sufferings

meritorious. And it is probable that this is all that is intended

by our Lord's quotation from the twenty-second Psalm. Taken in

this view, the words convey an unexceptionable sense, even in the

common translation.