70. THE INSCRIPTIONS ON THE CROSS

It is universally assumed that there was only one inscription: and, some interpreters account for the differences by a further supposition that the full and complete version was—

"THIS IS JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS," the four consisting of certain words which formed a part of that whole.

It has been suggested by one¹ that these four, respectively, are in harmony with the special object and scope of the Gospel in which it is found. This is ingenious and would be worthy of Divine revelation if it could be substantiated.

Others suggest that as the inscription was originally in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, they are the translations of these respectively.

But this involves another assumption, viz., that these three were not only not the same, but were so different as to allow of such various renderings. It also accounts for only three out of the four; and does not explain how the Greek form could be a translation of the Greek!

In all these cases of difficulty it is well to "open the book" and see exactly what is said, and whether there is any ground for the original assumption that there was only one inscription, which is the foundation of the difficulty and the cause of its explanations.

Let us begin with Mark xv. 26:

(1) "The King of the Jews." Here we have not a word about a "title" (יְהוָה, titles, John xix. 19) being on the Cross at all, or which any one had seen. It is a question of "his accusation." It is the bill of his indictment, or the ground or cause of his condemnation, which was His claim to be "the King of the Jews."

(2) John xix. 19. This was written by Pilate, and put upon the cross before it left Pilate's presence. For no one suggests that Pilate went to the scene of the execution and wrote anything there. It was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. The Latin put last as Pilate's language.

This title was read after the cross was set up; and became a source of argument between the chief priests

¹ The late Rev. James Kelly.

and Pilate (John xix. 21, 22), before the parting of the garments (vv. 23, 24).

What the final result of this argument was, does not appear from John's Gospel; but it appears from

(3) Matt. xxvii. 37, that it must have resulted in that one being taken down, and another "set up over his head" after they had "parted his garments among them" and after they had set down to watch him there (vv. 35, 36).

(4) Luke xxiii. 38. This appears to have been a different one again. For we are not told all that took place. It is evident from John that the feelings of those concerned were deeply stirred.

The inscription mentioned by Luke was evidently much later, and was seen close upon the sixth hour (v. 44), when the darkness fell. It was put upon or "over him" (v. 38, ἐπ' αὐτῷ, ep'autō), and in this order: "Greek, Latin and Hebrew," and after the revilings of the people. (Compare vv. 35-37 with v. 38.) Matthew's (No. 2) was before the revilings. (Compare Matt. xxvii. 37 with v. 39).

If we accurately notice what is written we conclude:

(a) That Mark's was only his indictment.

(b) That John's was the first, written by Pilate and put on the Cross before it left his presence.

(c) That Matthew's was substituted for it and placed "over his head" after the dividing of the garments and after the soldiers had set down to watch; but before the revilings.

(d) That Luke's was the last, put upon or "over him" after the revilings, and seen near the sixth hour.

12. The offering of drink at the Cross.—A great difficulty has been created by a want of accuracy in discriminating the three different occasions on which drink was offered to the Lord when on the Cross: the assumption being that it was offered only once.

The words of God have to be rightly divided in more senses than one.

There are great differences between the three accounts. If these are identified and treated as being different versions of one event, instead of complementary accounts,