John 20:2. Then she runneth—to Simon Peter,— See the note on Luke 24:5. The reader of the following annotations on this and the next chapter, will be pleased to refer to the notes on the parallel places.

John 20:3. Peter therefore went forth,— Peter and John only are mentioned in this relation; but the circumstances taken notice of by the other evangelists shew, that the apostles lodged all together in one house, as they used to do while their Master was alive: if so, it is reasonable to believe, that they all heard Mary Magdalene's report, and were anxious to know the truth of it. But in their present situation, they would judge it imprudentto go out in a body to examine the matter, and would rather depute two of their number for that purpose. Accordingly we suppose that Peter and John went to the sepulchre by the advice and appointment of the rest. Instead of came to the sepulchre, the Greek should rather be rendered went. The fact mentioned by St. Luke (Luke 24:12.) has been commonly taken to be the same with this related by St. John; from which, however, Mr. West observes, it differs, among other things, in this material circumstance, viz. that whereas St. John expresslysays, that Peter went into the sepulchre, while he [John], who got thither first, contented himself with barely stooping down and looking into it, St. Luke tells us, that Peter stooping down and looking in, beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed. The original word παρακυψας, stooping down and looking in, used by both evangelists, and in the latter applied only to St. Peter, in the former only to St. John, is in St. John's gospel plainly distinguished from the word εισηλθεν, entered in, and set in direct opposition to it; and that not bythe force of etymology and construction only, but by some particulars resulting from the actions signified by those two words, which prove them to be distinct and different from each other. He who went into the sepulchre, saw more than he who, standing without, only stooped down and looked in. Thus Peter and John, when they entered into the sepulchre, saw not only the linen clothes lie, but the napkin that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself: but when they only stooped down and looked in, they could see only the linen clothes, as is evident from the words of St. John, John 20:3-8. Now these two actions being by these marks as clearly distinguished from each other in St. John, as the different places where they were performed can be by the terms entrance and inside of the sepulchre, and, as so distinguished, having been separately performed by that apostle, they must also necessarily be taken for separate and distinct actions, when related of St. Peter. And if it be reasonable to conclude from St. John's account, that Peter, when he came with him to the sepulchre, did not stop at the entrance, stoop down and look in, but that he entered into it; it is no less reasonable to conclude from St. Luke's narration, that when he came at the time mentioned by him, he did not enter in, but stooping down, beheld the linen clothes and departed; especially if the force of the Greek word μονα (rendered by themselves) be considered, and the whole passage rendered, as it ought to have been, "Beheld the linen clothes only lying." From all which it appears, that the fact related of St. Peter by St. Luke, and that here related by St. John, are separate and distinct facts, and not one and the same, as has been imagined. And as the facts were different, so did they take their rise from two different occasions; or in other words, as it is evident from all that has been just now said, that Peter went twice to the sepulchre, so there are two distinct reasons for his so doing, assigned in the gospels of Luke and John, viz. the report of Mary Magdalene, and that of Joanna and the other women. By the former having been told that the body of Jesus was taken out of the sepulchre, he ran in great haste to examine into the truth of that account; and in pursuance of this intent entered into the sepulchre, that hemight receive a thorough satisfaction upon that point. In the latter were two additional circumstances of importance, sufficient toawaken the curiosity of a less zealous disciple than St. Peter, whose affection for his Lord was like his natural temper, fervent and impetuous. When he heard therefore from Joanna and the other women of a vision of angels, who had appeared to them at the sepulchre, and informed them that Christ was risen, can we wonder at his running thither a second time, in hopes of receiving some confirmation of the truth of that report, which, though treated by the rest as an idle tale, he certainly then gave credit to, as the whole tenor of this passage implies? We say a second time, because had he gone for the first time upon the report of Joanna, he could have had no inducement to have gone to the sepulchre a second time from any thing he could learn from the first report made by Mary Magdalene, whose account contained nothing but what was implied in that given by Joanna and the other women. His behaviour also upon this occasion, when he only stooped down and looked into the sepulchre, so different from the former, when he entered into it, is very consonant with the purpose of this second visit, which was, to see if the angels who had appeared to the women at the sepulchre, were still there: this could as well be discovered by looking, as by going into the sepulchre, as is plain from the account given by Mary Magdalene, who, stooping down and looking in, saw two angels sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. Having now proved that the visit of St. Peter to the sepulchre, mentioned by St. Luke, must have been his second visit, this passage is cleared from two objections which lay against it; one, that it did not agree with the relation given by St. John; and the other, that it disturbed and confounded the whole order of St. Luke's narration. This point being settled, the reader will permit a few inferences in order to explain some passages in the preceding part of that chapter of St. Luke's gospel. First then, it is plain from Joh 20:9 that St. Peter, after he had been with St. John and Mary Magdalene at the sepulchre, was now got among the other apostles and disciples, whom, in all probability, he and John had assembled upon the occasion of Mary Magdalene's report. Peter, we say, and John had, in all probability, assembled the other apostles and disciples, to inform them of what they had heard from Mary Magdalene, and of their having been themselves at the sepulchre to examine into the truth of her report. For it is not to be imagined, that these apostles would not have immediately communicated to the rest an event of so much consequence to them all, as that of the Lord's body being missing from the sepulchre. And as we now find them gathered together, and Peter with them, it is no unnatural supposition, that they had been summoned thither by Peter and John; at least their meeting together so early in the morning, is this way accounted for. Here then we see the reason of St. Luke's naming Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary, among those who told these things to the apostles, John 20:10. For although these two women were with Joanna and her party, and, consequently, could not have joined them in relating to the apostles the vision of the two angels, &c. yet, as the account of their having found the stone rolled away, and the body of Jesus missing, had been reported from them by Peter and John to the other apostles before the return of Joanna from the sepulchre, St. Luke thought fit to set them down as evidences of some of the facts related by him; and indeed it was proper to produce the testimony of the two Mary's concerning these facts, because they first went to the sepulchre, and first gave an account of those two particulars to the apostles. Secondly, It may hence be inferred, that the reports of the women were made separately and at different times. For if St. Peter went twice to the sepulchre, there must have been two distinct reasons for his so doing, the distinct reports of Mary Magdalene and of Joanna: and as there was a considerable interval between his first and second visit, a proportionable space must have intervened between the two reports. After Mary Magdalene's report, he had been at the sepulchre, had returned thence to his own home, and was now got with the other apostles and disciples, whom, as we have said, he and St. John had in all probability called together, before Joanna, and the women with her, came to make theirs. Thirdly, as the reports were made at different times, and by different women; as the facts reported were different, and said to have happened all in the same place, viz. at the sepulchre, and as these facts must of consequence have happened at different times; it follows, that the women who reported those facts as happening in their presence, must have been at the sepulchre at different times. For had they been all present at each of these events, no reason can be assigned for their differing so widely in their relations; and pretty difficult will it be to account for their varying so much as to the time of their making their reports. Here then is a strong argument in favour of the women's coming at different times to the sepulchre. Their different motives for going, some intending only to view the sepulchre, and others to embalm the body, is still another argument; and as this gave occasion to two appearances of Christ, and as many of the angels, it consequently multiplied the proofs and witnesses of the resurrection, and established this important truth upon stronger evidence.

John 20:8. And believed.— The plain interpretation of this passage seems to be, that John entering into the sepulchre, saw every thing as above related, and consequently believed, not that Christ was risen, but that the body was taken away, as Mary Magdalene had informed them: for the apology which he immediately subjoins, evidently proves that a belief in the resurrection could not be meant; because St. John declares that they knew not, they had not the least idea of those scriptures which foretold his resurrection from the dead. See the note on Luke 24:11.

John 20:10. Then the disciples went away— The disciples; that is, Peter and John: to their own home, is in the original, προς εαυτους, which seems evidently to signify "to their companions." Accordingly, soon after this, the women found the eleven and the rest together. Luke 24:9. It probably appeared prudent to Peter and John to retire immediately, lest they should have been questioned by the rulers, if found near the sepulchre; and it was certainly necessary for them to acquaint the rest of the disciples with this important circumstance as soon as possible, and to collect their sentiments upon it. Mary Magdalene, however, who it seems had followed Peter and John to the sepulchre, did not return home with them, being anxious to find the body. See the next verse.

John 20:15. She, supposing him to be the gardener, &c.— It is very probable that Jesus might speak low, or in a different way from what he usually did; and Mary's taking him for the gardener, seems to intimate, that there was nothing very splendid in his dress. Accordingly, when he appeared to the two disciples in their way to Emmaus, they seem to have taken him for a person of a rank not much superior to their own. Her eyes might also be withheld at first from knowing Jesus, as theirs were, Luke 24:16. It is observable, that Mary accosts this stranger in respectful language, even when she took him for a servant; for the word κηπουρος cannot with propriety signify the owner of the garden. She prudently reflected that an error on that hand would be more excusable than on the other; supposing he should have proved one of superior rank in a plain dress. It is also observable, that she does not name Jesus, but speaks in indefinite terms, If thou hast borne him hence; intimating, that he was the one person of whom her own thoughts and heart were so full, that she took it for granted every one must know whom she meant. Such language in such circumstances was perfectly natural.

John 20:16. Jesus saith unto her, &c.— Christ had stood by her some time, had spoken to her, and she answered him before she knew him to be Christ; on the contrary, she took him for the gardener; by all which it is manifest, that it was not a spectre of her creating. Her mind, as we have observed in a preceding note, was otherwise engaged; and had it been either at leisure or disposed to raise apparitions, it is most likely she would have called up some person with whom she had more acquaintance and concern than a keeper of a garden, whom probably she had never seen or known before. Besides, Jesus called her by her name, by which she discovered him; for turning immediately about, she accosted him with the respectful title, Rabboni, my Master; and, as may be inferred from the ensuing words of Christ, offered to embrace him. His voice and his countenance convinced her that it was Christ himself.

John 20:17. Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended, &c.— The objectors to the resurrection of Jesus, have inferred fromthis circumstance, that Christ's body was not a real tangible body: but this could never be inferred from the words Touch me not; for thousands make use of that expression every day, without giving the least suspicion that their bodies are not tangible, or capable of being touched: nor could this conclusion be built upon the words, I am not yet ascended to my Father; for though there is a difficulty in those words, there is no difficulty in seeing that they have no relation to Christ's body; for as to his body nothing is said. The natural sense of the place, as collected from comparing it with Mat 28:9 is this, "Mary Magdalene, upon seeing Jesus, fell at his feet, and laid hold on them, and held them as if she meant never to let them go. See 2 Kings 4:27. Luke 7:38. Christ said to her, Touch me not, or embrace me not now, you will have other opportunities of seeing me, for I go not yet to my Father; lose no time then, but go quickly with my message to my brethren." In the Jewish language, to touch, often signifies to embrace, with affection and regard. Thus Mark 10:13. They brought young children, that he should touch them; that is, express his affection to them by the imposition of hands, accompanied with blessings; accordingly it is added, He took them up in his arms, laid his hands upon them, and blessed them. So also, Luke 7:39. Simon the Pharisee observing a woman, who was a sinner, washing the feet of Christ with her tears, and kissing them, expressed her action by the word απτεσθαι . This man, if he were a prophet, would, &c. who touched him. In this sense the word απτου, touch, was used by our Lord on the present occasion.—In the words of this verse is contained a most clear proof that it wasChrist himself who uttered them. To understand this, it must be remembered, that they allude to the long discourse which our Saviour held with his disciples, the very night in which he was betrayed, Ch. 14: John 15:16 : wherein he told them, that he should leave them for a short time. A little while, and ye shall not see me; and that he should come to them again, though but for a short time, And again a little while, and ye shall see me, because, added he, I go to my Father. By the phrase, I go to my Father, Christ meant his final quitting this world; as he himself explained it to his disciples, who did not then understand either of the above expressions, I came forth, &c. Ch. John 16:28. But, lest they should fall into despair at being thus forsaken by him, for whom they had forsaken all the world, he at the same time promised to send them a comforter, even the Holy Spirit, who should teach them all things, and enable them to work miracles; and that finally, though they should for a season be sorrowful, yet their sorrow should soon be turned into joy, &c. Ch. John 14:16; John 14:26; John 16:13; John 16:20-21. These were magnificent promises, which, as the disciples could not but remember Christ had made to them, so they might be assured, that no one but Christ was able to make them good; and therefore, when they came to reflect seriously on the import of these words, Touch me not, &c. it was impossible for them to conclude otherwise than that it was Christ himself who appeared to Mary Magdalene. For as the latter expression, I ascend to my Father, &c. implied a remembrance, and consequently a renewal of those promises which were to take place after the ascension to the Father, so did the former, I am not ascended to my Father, give them encouragement to expect the performance of that other promise of his coming to themagain before his ascension, by his giving them to understand that he had not yet quitted this world. And Christ's forbidding Mary Magdalene to touch or embrace him, might have been meant as a signification of his intending to see her and his disciples again, just as in ordinary life, when one friend says to another, "Don't take leave, for I am not going yet," he means to let him know, that he purposes to see him again before he sets out upon his journey. That this is the true import of the words, Touch me not, is evident, not only from the reason subjoined in the words immediately following, For I am not yet ascended, &c. (by which expression, as we have shewn above, Christ meant he had not finally quitted the world) but from these farther considerations:
Christ, by shewing himself first to Mary Magdalene, intended, doubtless, to give her a distinguishing mark of his favour, and therefore cannot be supposed to have designed at the same time to have put a slight upon her, by refusing her an honour which he granted not long after to the other Mary and Salome: and yet this must be supposed, if touch me not be understood to imply a prohibition to Mary Magdalene to embrace him, for any reason consistent with the regard shewn to the other women, and different from that now contended for, namely, that he intended to see her again and his disciples. On the contrary, if these words be taken to signify only that this honour was denied to Mary till some fitter opportunity, they will be so far from importing any unkindness or reprehension to her, that they may be rather looked upon as a gracious assurance, a kind of friendly engagement to come to her again. In this sense they correspond exactly with Christ's purpose in sending this message by her to his disciples; which, as we observed before, was to let them know that he remembered his promise of coming to them again, and was determined to perform it, not having finally quitted this world: and of his intention to perform it, this, his refusing to admit the affectionate or reverential embraces of Mary Magdalene, was an earnest; as his coming to them would be a pledge of his resolution to acquit himself in due time of those promises, which were not to take effect till after his final departure out of the world. And thus this whole discourse of our Saviour with Mary Magdalene will be, in all its parts, intelligible, rational, andcoherent; whereas, if it be supposed that Mary Magdalene was forbidden to touch Christ for some mystical reason, contained in the words, I am not yet ascended, &c. it will be very difficult to understand the meaning or intent of that message, which she was commanded to carry to the disciples; and still more difficult to account for his suffering, not long after, the embraces of the other Mary and Salome.
To the same, or even greater difficulties, will that interpretation of this passage be liable, which supposes that the prohibition to Mary Magdalene was grounded upon the spiritual nature of Christ's body, which, it is presumed, was not sensible to the touch or feeling. And indeed both these reasons for the behaviour of Christ to Mary Magdalene are overturned by his contrary behaviour to the other Mary and Salome. But besides the assurance given by Christ to his disciples, in the words here spoken, of his intention of performing his promises, &c. he might have a farther view, which is equally deducible from those words. That remarkable expression, I ascend to my Father, Christ undoubtedly made use of upon this occasion, to re-cal to their minds the discourse that he held with them three nights before, in which he explained clearly what he meant by going to his Father, Ch. John 16:29. But this was not the only expression that puzzled them; they were as much in the dark as to the meaning of, A little while, and ye shall not, &c. Joh 20:16-18 which they likewise confessed they did not understand. But Christ left those words to be explained by the events to which they severally related, and which were then drawing on a-pace. For that very night he was betrayed, and seized, and deserted by his disciples, as he himself had foretold: the next day he was crucified, expired upon the cross, and was buried. Upon this melancholy catastrophe, the disciples could be no longer at a loss to understand what Christ meant, when he said to them, A little while, and ye shall not see me: he was gone from them, and, as their fears suggested, gone for ever, notwithstanding he had expressly told them he would come to them again, in the words, Again, a little while, and ye shall see me.This latter expression was fullas intelligible as the former; and as the one now expounded by the event, was plainly a prophesy of his death, so must the other be understood as a prophesy of his resurrection. But if they understood it in that sense, they were very far from having a right notion of the resurrection from the dead; as is evident from their imagining when Christ first shewed himself to them after his passion, that they saw a spirit; even though they had just before declared their belief that he was risen indeed. The resurrection of the body, it should seem, made no part of their notion of the resurrection from the dead: to lead them therefore into a right understanding of this important article of faith, Christ, in speaking to Mary Magdalene, &c. makes use of terms which strongly imply his being really, that is, bodily risen from the dead: I am not yet ascended—but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, &c. The words, I go to my Father, Christ, as has already been observed, explained by the well understood phrase of leaving the world; and to this explanation the words immediately foregoing give so great a light, that it is impossible to mistake their meaning. The whole passage runs thus: I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father, Chap. John 16:28. By the expression, and am come into the world, Christ certainly meant to signify his being and conversing visibly and bodily upon earth; and therefore by the other expression, I leave the world, he must have intended to denote the contrary, viz. his ceasing to converse visibly and bodily upon earth. But as they very well knew that the usual road by which all men quitted this world, lay through the gates of death, and were assured that their Master had trodden the irremediable path, they might naturally conclude, that what he had said to them about leaving the world, &c. was accomplished in his death; and consistently with that notion might imagine, that by his coming again, no more was intended, than his appearing to them in the same manner as many persons have appeared after their decease. To guard against this double error, Christ plainly intimates to his disciples, in the words, I am not yet, &c. that his dying, and his final leaving of the world, were distinct things; the latter of which was still to come, though the former was past: he had indeed died and quitted the world like others; but he was now risen from the dead, returned into the world, and should not leave it finally till he ascended to his Father. Of his being returned into the world, his appearing to Mary Magdalene was intended for a proof; and yet of this it could be no proof at all, if what she saw was no more than what is commonly called a spirit; since the spirits of many people have appeared after their decease, who, notwithstanding, are supposed to have as effectually left this world by their death, as those who have never appeared at all. If therefore Christ was risen from the dead, as the angels affirmed he was; if he had not finally left the world, as the words, I am not yet ascended, &c. plainly import; and if his appearing to Mary Magdalene was intended as a proof of these two points, as undoubtedly it was; it will follow, that he was really, that is bodily, risen from the dead; that he was still in the world, in the same manner as when he came forth from the Father, &c. and that it was he himself, and not a spirit without bodily parts, that appeared to Mary Magdalene.
The term ascend is twice used by our Saviour in the compass of these few words. In the discourse alluded to, he told his disciples he should go to his Father, and he now bids Mary Magdalene tell them that he should ascend to his Father; a variation which had its particular meaning. For as by the former expression he intended to signify in general his final departure, so by the latter is the particular manner of that departure intimated; and, doubtless, with a view of letting his disciples know the precise time, after which they should no longer enjoy his converse, or expect to see him upon earth. When the disciples therefore beheld their Master taken up into heaven, they could not but know assuredly, that this was the event foretold about forty days before to Mary Magdalene; and, knowing that, could no longer doubt whether it was Christ himself who appeared and spoke those prophetic words to her. For if it was not Christ who appeared to her, it must either have been some spirit, good or bad; or some man, who, to impose upon her, counterfeited the person and voice of Christ; or lastly, the whole must have been forged and invented by her. The first of these suppositions is blasphemous, the second absurd, and the third improbable. For, allowing her to have been capable of making a lie for the sake of carrying on an imposture from which she could reap no benefit, and to have been informed of what our Saviour had spoken to his disciples the night in which he was betrayed, which does not appear, it must have been either extreme madness or folly in her, to put the credit of her story upon events, such as the appearing of Christ to his disciples, and his ascending into heaven, which were so far from being in the number of contingencies, that they were not even in the number of natural cau
Thus Jesus, having finished the great work of atonement, contemplated the effects of it with singular pleasure. The blessed relation between God and man, which had been long cancelled by sin was now happily renewed. The disciples had now a fresh assurance given them that God was reconciled to them; that he was become their God and Father; that they were exalted to the honourable relation of Christ's brethren, and God's children; and that their Father loved them with an affection greatly superior to that of the most tender-hearted parent. The kindness of this message will appear above all praise, if we call to mind the late behaviour of the persons to whom it was sent. They had every one of them forsaken Jesus in his greatest extremity; but he graciously forgave them; and, to assure them of their pardon in the strongest manner, without so much as hinting at their fault, he called them by the endearing name of his brethren.

John 20:19. Then the same day—when the doors were shut, &c.— "After this, in the evening of the very same day on which he arose and appeared to Mary Magdalene, that is to say the first day of the week; when the disciples were gathered together in a private room, and were comparing their informations concerning his resurrection (Luke 24:33-36.) after the doors were fastened (θυρων κεκλεισμενων ) for fear of being discovered and broke in upon by the Jews, Jesus himself, whose divine power could easily make his way, came in his usual form, before they were aware, to confirm his love to them, and their faith in him; and, standing in the midst of them, he, instead of upbraiding them for, or taking any notice of their having so shamefully deserted him in his late distress, saluted them in a friendly, affectionate, and authoritative manner, saying, All safety, comfort, and quietness, and the best of prosperity, be to you, as consisting of peace with God, with each other, and in your own souls."

John 20:20. He shewed unto them his hands and his side.— Probably the marks made by the nails and the spear were retained, on purpose to give the greater satisfaction to the disciples of the truth of his resurrection, and perhaps for many other reasons; though indeed, without that additional circumstance, the evidence might have been very satisfactory.

John 20:21. As my Father hath sent me, &c.— "As my heavenly Father sent me into the world, to discharge the office of the Messiah; even so I, by my plenary authority, and in proof of my mediatorial commission, send you to discharge the office of apostles and ministers in preaching the gospel to every creature, and to confirm it with miraculous signs wherever you may go." See Mark 16:15; Mark 16:17-18.

John 20:24. Thomas, one of the twelve,— It is said, Luk 24:33 that the disciples from Emmaus gave the eleven, and those who were with them, an account of their meeting with Christ, and of the other circumstances accompanying that event. The eleven was the name by which the apostles went after the death of Judas, whether they were precisely that number, or fewer; as we have observed in the note on the abovementioned passage in St. Luke: wherefore we are under no necessity, from this expression, of supposing that Thomas was present when the disciples came in. We are sure that he wasnot present at this meeting, when Jesus shewed himself; yet, if St. Luke's expression is thought to imply that Thomas waswith his brethren at the arrival of the disciples, we may suppose that he was one of those who would not believe, and that he went away before they had finished their relation. See Mark 16:1

John 20:25. Except I shall see in his hands the print, &c.— The repetition of the word print seems to be a very great beauty, as it admirably represents the language of a positive man, declaring again and again what he insisted upon. The word εις, rendered into, in the next clause, signifies upon, in Ch. Joh 8:6 and Luke 15:22.; and if that sense be retained here, the words will be, And put my hand upon his sid

John 20:27. Reach hither thy finger, &c.— It is observable, that our Lord here repeats the very words which Thomas had made use of; and thus demonstrated, not only that he was risen, but also that he was possessed of divine knowledge, from his being conscious of the words and actions of men, though spoken or done in secret. It is observable also, that Spinosa himself could find out no more plausible objections against this evidence of the resurrection of Christ, than to say that the disciples were deceived in what they imagined they saw, heard, and felt; which if granted, would be in effect to allow, that no men could be competent judges of any fact whatsoever relating to their own sensations; and, consequently, would overthrow all human testimony.

John 20:28. Thomas answered and said, &c.— Though the nominative often occurs for the vocative, it is the former case which is used here, the words συ ει, thou art, being understood. To this the context agrees; for we are told that these words were addressed to Jesus; wherefore they cannot be taken merely as an exclamation of surprise, which is the Socinian gloss; but their meaning is, "Thou art really he whom I lately followed as my Lord; and I confess thee to be possessed of infinite knowledge, and worship thee as my God." It is not fair that Thomas actually touched our Lord's wounds; and Christ himself says afterwards, Joh 20:29 that his belief was built on sight; which, though it does not exclude any evidence that might have been afforded the other senses, yet seems to intimate, that this condescension of our Lord, together with the additional evidence arising from the knowledge that he plainly had of that unreasonable demand which Thomas had made in his absence, with divine grace accompanying the whole, quite overcame him.

John 20:29. Because thou hast seen me, &c.— The word seen, according to the Hebrew idiom, is often applied to the other senses; and therefore may here signify that Thomas had the unitedtestimony of all his senses, that Christ had a real, that is to say, a material body. See 1Jn 1:1 and Acts 10:41. The words, blessed are they, &c. may in their original application be understood as a commendation of those then present, who had believed that Christ was risen before they had seen him, or without requiring such proof as Thomas sought for. But as they are indefinite, and imply no certain time, they may be extended even to the case of those to whom the gospel was to be proposed, by the apostles then, and by their successors after them. Accordingly, as in these words our Saviour tacitly reproves Thomas for his incredulity, in not believing a matter of fact so well attested, unless he himself saw it; so he lays down an universal proposition for the encouragement of all mankind in future ages, to believe in him, though they had not seen him.