The Harmony of the Gospels 3.39–3.55

Matthew continues: “And after they had crucified him, they divided his garments by casting lots, and sitting down they kept watch over him.” Mark the same thus: “And crucifying him, they divided his garments, casting lots over them, who should take what.” Luke says this thus: “And dividing his garments they cast lots, and the people stood waiting.” It is said briefly by the three. But John sets out more distinctly how it was done: “The soldiers, then,” he says, “when they had crucified him, took his garments and made four parts, a part for each soldier, and the tunic. Now the tunic was seamless, woven from the top throughout. So they said to one another, ‘Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be,’ so that the Scripture might be fulfilled which says, ‘They divided my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots.’”

Matthew continues: “And they put over his head the charge against him, written: This is Jesus, the king of the Jews.” But Mark, before saying this, says, “Now it was the third hour, and they crucified him.” For he adds this after speaking of the division of the garments; and this matter must be considered most carefully, so that it does not produce a great error. For there are those who think that the Lord was crucified at the third hour, and that from the sixth hour darkness came until the ninth, so that three hours are understood to have been completed from the time he was crucified until the darkness came. And this could indeed be understood quite correctly were it not that John says that at about the sixth hour Pilate sat on the judgment seat at the place called the Pavement, but in Hebrew Gabbatha. For it goes on: “Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover, about the sixth hour. And he said to the Jews, ‘Behold your king.’ But they cried out, ‘Away with him, away with him, crucify him.’ Pilate said to them, ‘Shall I crucify your king?’ The chief priests answered, ‘We have no king but Caesar.’ Then he handed him over to them to be crucified.” If, then, at about the sixth hour, with Pilate sitting on the judgment seat, he was handed over to the Jews to be crucified, how was he crucified at the third hour, as some, not understanding Mark's words, have thought?

First let us see at what hour he could have been crucified; then we shall see why Mark said he was crucified at the third hour. It was about the sixth hour when he was handed over to be crucified, with Pilate sitting, as was said, on the judgment seat. For it was not yet the full sixth hour, but about the sixth, that is, the fifth was finished and something of the sixth had also begun. But these writers would never say “five and a quarter” or “five and a third” or “five and a half” or anything of the kind. For the Scriptures have this custom, to put the whole for a part, especially in times, as with those eight days after which they say he went up the mountain, of which Matthew and Mark, looking at the days in between, said, “after six days.” Especially since the same John spoke so moderately as not to say “the sixth” but “about the sixth.” And even if he had not spoken so but had said only “the sixth,” we could understand it in the way the Scriptures usually speak, as I said, the whole for a part: that, with the fifth finished and the sixth begun, these things narrated in the crucifixion of our Lord were done, until, when the sixth was completed, while he hung there, the darkness came, to which three evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, testify.

Let us now ask next why Mark, having recorded that “crucifying him, they divided his garments, casting lots over them, who should take what,” went on to add, “Now it was the third hour, and they crucified him.” He had certainly already said, “And crucifying him, they divided his garments.” So too the others attest that his garments were divided when he had been crucified. If Mark wanted to record the time of that event, it would have sufficed to say, “Now it was the third hour.” Why did he add “and they crucified him,” unless because he wanted to signify something by recapitulation, which would be found on inquiry, since the Scripture itself was being read in those times when it was known to the whole church at what hour the Lord was hung on the wood, from which either his error could be corrected or his lie refuted? But because he knew that the Lord was hung up by the soldiers, not by the Jews, as John says most plainly, he wanted to show covertly that those who cried out for him to be crucified crucified him rather than those who rendered service to their chief according to their duty. It is understood, then, that it was the third hour when the Jews cried out for the Lord to be crucified; and it is most truly shown that they crucified him then, when they cried out, especially because they did not want to seem to have done it and for that reason had handed him over to Pilate, as their words according to John show clearly enough. For when Pilate had said to them, “What accusation do you bring against this man?” they answered and said to him, “If this man were not an evildoer, we would not have handed him over to you.” Pilate said to them, “Take him yourselves and judge him according to your law.” Then the Jews said, “It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death.” What, then, they most of all did not want to seem to have done, Mark shows they did at the third hour, judging most truly that the tongue of the Jews was more the Lord's killer than the soldiers' hands.

But whoever says that it was not the third hour when the Jews first cried this out shows himself most insanely an enemy of the gospel, unless perhaps he can solve the same question in another way; for he has nothing by which to prove that it was not then the third hour. And so the truthful evangelist is to be believed rather than the contentious suspicions of men. “How,” he says, “do you prove that it was the third hour?” I answer: because I believe the evangelists. If you too believe them, show how the Lord could have been crucified both at the sixth hour and at the third. For about the sixth, to admit it, we are pressed by John's narrative; Mark records the third. If both of us believe them, show me another way in which both could have happened, and I will most gladly agree. For I love not my own opinion but the truth of the gospel. And would that others might find still more ways out of this question! Until that happens, use this one with me, if you please. For if no other way out can be found, this alone will suffice; but if one can be, when it has been shown, we shall choose. Only do not think it follows that any of the four evangelists lied or erred at so great and holy a height of authority.

But if anyone says he proves it was not the third hour when the Jews cried this out from the fact that, after the same Mark said, “And Pilate again answered and said to them, ‘What then do you want me to do with the king of the Jews?’ And they cried out again, ‘Crucify him,’” no delay is inserted by the same Mark in his narrative, but it comes immediately to the Lord's being handed over by Pilate to the cross, which John records was done at about the sixth hour, let him who says this understand that many things done in between were passed over, while Pilate was dealing, seeking how to rescue him from the Jews, and was striving most urgently, in whatever ways he could, against their most insane will. For Matthew says, “Pilate said to them, ‘What then shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?’ They all said, ‘Let him be crucified.’” We say it was then the third hour. But in what Matthew goes on to narrate, “And when Pilate saw that he was gaining nothing, but rather a riot was starting,” we understand that the time of two hours was spent in Pilate's efforts to rescue the Lord and in the riot of the Jews resisting him, and that the sixth had begun, before the end of which the things were done that are narrated from the time Pilate handed over the Lord until the darkness came. As for what Matthew records above, “And as he was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent to him, saying, ‘Have nothing to do with that righteous man, for I have suffered much today in a dream because of him,’” Pilate sat on the judgment seat later; but among the things he was narrating as done earlier, Matthew, recalling what he said about Pilate's wife, chose to insert it there, so as to prepare beforehand the chief reason why Pilate was unwilling even at the last to hand him over to the Jews.

Luke, however, narrates that when Pilate had said, “I will therefore chastise him and release him,” the whole crowd cried out, “Away with this man, and release to us Barabbas”; but perhaps they had not yet said, “Crucify.” Then Pilate, according to the same Luke, spoke to them again, wishing to release Jesus. But they shouted back, saying, “Crucify him.” It is understood that it was then the third hour. As for what Luke goes on to say, “And he said to them a third time, ‘Why, what evil has this man done? I find no cause of death in him; I will therefore chastise him and release him.’ But they pressed with loud voices, demanding that he be crucified, and their voices prevailed,” he himself also signifies clearly enough that there was a great riot; and after how much delay he said to them a third time, “Why, what evil has he done?” one may understand, as far as suffices for finding out the truth. And afterward, as to his saying, “They pressed with loud voices, and their voices prevailed,” who does not see that this happened because they saw that Pilate did not want to hand the Lord over to them? And he who was so unwilling did not, surely, give way in a moment of time; rather, two hours and something more passed in that delay.

Ask John too, and see how great was that delay of Pilate and his refusal of so foul a service. For he narrates these things much more fully, though even he certainly does not say everything in which two hours and something of the sixth slipped by. Yet when he had scourged Jesus and allowed him to be ill-treated by the soldiers with a mocking robe and many mockeries (I believe so as at least to soften their fury in this way, so that they would not persist in raging to the point of death), “Pilate went out again and said to them, ‘Behold, I bring him out to you, so that you may know that I find no case in him.’ So Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. And he said to them, ‘Behold the man,’” so that they might be appeased by seeing that disgraceful sight. But he adds and says, “When the chief priests and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, ‘Crucify, crucify.’” We say it was then the third hour. Attend to what follows: “Pilate said to them, ‘Take him yourselves and crucify him; for I find no case in him.’ The Jews answered him, ‘We have a law, and according to the law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.’ When Pilate heard this word, he was the more afraid, and he entered the praetorium again and said to Jesus, ‘Where are you from?’ But Jesus gave him no answer. So Pilate said to him, ‘Will you not speak to me? Do you not know that I have authority to crucify you and authority to release you?’ Jesus answered, ‘You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above; therefore he who handed me over to you has the greater sin.’ From then on Pilate sought to release him.” In this, then, that Pilate sought to release him, how much time do we think was spent, how many things passed over that were said by Pilate or contradicted by the Jews, until the Jews said something by which he was moved and gave way? For it continues thus: “But the Jews cried out, saying, ‘If you release this man, you are not Caesar's friend; everyone who makes himself a king opposes Caesar.’ So when Pilate heard these words, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judgment seat at a place called the Pavement, but in Hebrew Gabbatha. Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover, about the sixth hour.” From that cry of the Jews, then, in which they first said, “Crucify,” when it was the third hour of the day, until he sat on the judgment seat, two hours passed amid the delays of Pilate's hesitation and the rioting Jews, and with the fifth finished something of the sixth had already begun. “So he said to the Jews, ‘Behold your king.’ But they cried out, ‘Away with him, crucify him.’” But even now Pilate, though moved by fear of a false charge, did not easily give way. For it was then that his wife had sent to him as he sat on the judgment seat, which Matthew anticipated, who alone recorded it before coming to that place in the narrative, so as to put it where he judged fitting. Pilate, then, still trying, though he gained nothing, said to them, “Shall I crucify your king?” The chief priests answered, “We have no king but Caesar.” Then he handed him over to them to be crucified. And while he goes, and while he is crucified with two robbers, while his garments are divided and lots are cast for that tunic, and amid these things he is mocked with various insults (for insults were thrown at the same time as these things were being done), the sixth hour was completed and the darkness came, which Matthew, Mark, and Luke record.

Now, then, let impious obstinacy collapse and believe that the Lord Jesus Christ was crucified both at the third hour by the tongue of the Jews and at the sixth by the hands of the soldiers, since in the riot of the Jews and the agitation of Pilate two hours and more passed from the cry in which they said, “Crucify.” But Mark himself, who above all pursues brevity, wished to convey briefly Pilate's will and effort for the Lord's life. For when he had said, “And they cried out again, ‘Crucify him,’” where he shows that they had already cried out when they wanted Barabbas released to them, he added, “But Pilate was saying to them, ‘Why, what evil has he done?’” In this way he briefly indicated what was done over a long time. Yet he too, mindful of what he wanted understood, did not say, “But Pilate said to them,” but, “But Pilate was saying to them, ‘Why, what evil has he done?’” For if he had said “said,” we would understand it as said once; but because he said “was saying,” he indicated clearly enough to those who understand that it was said in many ways and often, until the sixth hour began. Let us consider, then, how briefly Mark said this compared with Matthew, how briefly Matthew compared with Luke, how briefly Luke compared with John, though each recorded different things; and finally how briefly John himself in comparison with the things that were done and the delays while they were being done; and without the madness of resistance let us believe that two hours and something could have passed in that interval.

But whoever says that Mark, if it were so, could have said at the time when it was the third hour, when the cry of the Jews about crucifying the Lord sounded, that it was then the third hour and also that they then crucified him, imposes laws too proudly on the narrators of truth. For in this way he could say that, if he were narrating these things himself, they ought to have been narrated by all in the same manner and order in which he would narrate them. Let him deign, then, to have his own counsel surpassed by the counsel of Mark the evangelist, who judged that it should be put in the place where it was suggested by divine inspiration. For their recollections were governed by the hand of him who governs water, as it is written, as it pleases him. For human memory floats through various thoughts, and it is not in anyone's power what comes into his mind and when. Since, then, those holy and truthful men had entrusted the seeming chances of their recollections, for the order of their narrative, to the hidden power of God, for whom nothing is by chance, no human being, far cast away from the eyes of God and wandering far off, ought to say, “This should have been put in this place,” of which he is quite ignorant why God willed it to be put there. For “even if our gospel is veiled,” says the apostle, “it is veiled in those who are perishing”; and when he had said, “To some we are the fragrance of life to life, to others the fragrance of death to death,” he immediately added, “And who is sufficient for these things?” that is, who is sufficient to understand how justly it is done? This is what the Lord himself says: “I came that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.” For this is the very depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God, by which he made from the same lump one vessel for honor, another for dishonor; and it is said to flesh and blood, “O man, who are you to answer back to God?” Who, then, in this matter too knows the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor, when he so governed the hearts of the evangelists as they remembered, and raised them in the church to so high a summit of authority, that through these very things that can seem contradictory in them many might be blinded, deservedly given over to the desires of their hearts and to a reprobate mind, and many might be exercised in polishing a pious understanding, according to the hidden justice of the Almighty? For the prophet says to the Lord, “Your thoughts have become exceedingly deep; the senseless man does not know, and the fool does not understand these things.”

I ask and admonish those who read these things worked out by us with the Lord's help to remember this discussion, which I have thought fit to insert here, in every similar difficulty of questions, so that the same things need not be repeated more often. Anyone who will pay attention without the hardness of impiety will easily see how fitting a place Mark chose to put this about the third hour, so that each one may recall there at what hour the Jews crucified the Lord, who wanted to transfer the crime itself to the Romans, whether rulers or soldiers, at the point where the deed of the soldier servants is recorded. For he says, “And crucifying him, they divided his garments, casting lots over them, who should take what.” Who did this, if not the soldiers, as John makes clear? So, lest anyone turn the thought of so great a crime away from the Jews to those soldiers, he says, “Now it was the third hour, and they crucified him,” so that those are found rather to have crucified him who, as the careful inquirer will find, could have cried out at the third hour that he should be crucified, when he notices that what was done by the soldiers was done at the sixth hour.

Although there are some who want the sixth hour of the Preparation, which John recorded saying, “Now it was the Preparation, about the sixth hour,” to be understood as the third hour of the day at which Pilate sat on the judgment seat, so that the same third hour appears completed when he was crucified, and while he already hung on the wood three more hours passed and he gave up his spirit, so that from the hour at which he died, that is, the sixth of the day, there was darkness until the ninth. For they say that on that day, which was followed by the Sabbath day, it was the Preparation of the Passover of the Jews, because from that Sabbath the Unleavened Bread was already beginning; but that the true Passover, which was already being celebrated in the Lord's passion, the Passover not of the Jews but of the Christians, began to be prepared, that is, to have its Preparation, from the ninth hour of the night, in that the Lord was being prepared to be killed by the Jews. For parasceue means preparation. From that ninth hour of the night, then, up to his crucifixion, comes the sixth hour of the Preparation according to John and the third hour of the day according to Mark; so that Mark did not record by recapitulation the hour he remembered when the Jews cried out, “Crucify, crucify,” but meant exactly the third hour at which the Lord was fixed to the wood. What believer would not favor this solution of the question, if only some point of time could be inferred from the ninth hour of the night at which we might fittingly understand the Preparation of our Passover, that is, the preparation of Christ's death, to have begun? For if we say it began when the Lord was seized by the Jews, it was still the first parts of the night; if when he was brought to the house of Caiaphas's father-in-law, where he was also heard by the chief priests, the cock had not yet crowed, as we gather from Peter's denial, which took place while he was being heard; but if when he was handed over to Pilate, it is most plainly written that it was already morning. It remains, then, for us to understand that this Preparation of the Passover, that is, the preparation of the Lord's death, began when all the chief priests, before whom he was first heard, answered and said, “He deserves death,” which is found in Matthew and Mark, so that they are understood to have said afterward by recapitulation, about Peter's denial, what had been done before. For it is not absurdly conjectured that at that time when, as I said, they pronounced him deserving of death, it could have been the ninth hour of the night. From that hour up to the hour at which Pilate sat on the judgment seat, it was about the sixth hour, not of the day but of the Preparation, that is, of the sacrifice of the Lord, which is the true Passover; so that at the full sixth hour of that Preparation, which coincided with the full third hour of the day, the Lord was hung on the wood. Whether, then, this is chosen as the better understanding, or Mark recalled the third hour and wished to record it above all for the condemnation of the Jews in the Lord's crucifixion, as the hour at which they are understood to have been able to cry out that he should be crucified, so that we would take them rather to have crucified him than those by whose hands he was hung on the wood, just as that centurion came more to the Lord than those friends whom he sent: without doubt the question of the hour of the Lord's passion has been solved, a question which more than any other usually stirs up the impudence of the contentious and disturbs the inexperience of the weak.

Matthew continues and says, “Then two robbers were crucified with him, one on the right and one on the left.” Mark similarly, and Luke. Nor does John raise any question, although he did not call them robbers. For he says, “And with him two others, one on each side, and Jesus in the middle.” But it would be contrary if, when they had said robbers, he said innocent men.

Matthew continues and says, “And those passing by blasphemed him, wagging their heads and saying, ‘You who destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, save yourself; if you are the Son of God, come down from the cross.’” Mark agrees with this in almost the same words. Then Matthew continues and says, “Likewise the chief priests also, mocking with the scribes and elders, said, ‘He saved others; he cannot save himself. If he is the king of Israel, let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe him. He trusts in God; let him deliver him now, if he wants him; for he said, I am the Son of God.’” Mark and Luke, although they use other words, nevertheless agree in the same meaning, while one passes over what another records. For they are alike not silent about the chief priests insulting the crucified Lord; although Mark was silent about the elders, while Luke, because he said “rulers” and did not add “priests,” included all the leaders under a more general name, so that both scribes and elders can be understood there.

Matthew continues and says, “And the robbers who were crucified with him also reviled him in the same way.” Mark does not differ, saying the same in other words. Luke, however, can be thought to conflict, unless we do not forget a quite common manner of speaking. For Luke says, “One of the robbers who were hanging blasphemed him, saying, ‘If you are the Christ, save yourself and us.’” The same goes on and joins thus: “But the other answered and rebuked him, saying, ‘Do you not fear God, since you are under the same condemnation? And we indeed justly, for we are receiving what our deeds deserve; but this man has done nothing wrong.’ And he said to Jesus, ‘Lord, remember me when you come into your kingdom.’ And Jesus said to him, ‘Truly I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.’” How, then, as Matthew says, did the robbers who were crucified with him revile him, or, as Mark says, those who were crucified with him insult him, since according to Luke's testimony one of them insulted him, while the other both restrained him and believed in the Lord, unless we understand that Matthew and Mark, touching briefly on this passage, put the plural for the singular? As we read in the Epistle to the Hebrews it said in the plural, “They shut the mouths of lions,” when Daniel alone is understood to be meant, and in the plural, “They were sawn asunder,” when this is handed down of Isaiah alone. And in the psalm, what is said, “The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers gathered together,” is shown in the Acts of the Apostles to be the plural put for the singular. For those who used the testimony of that psalm understood “kings” of Herod and “rulers” of Pilate. And since pagans too are wont to slander the gospel, let them see how their authors spoke of Phaedras, Medeas, and Clytemnestras, when each was one. And what is more common, for example, than for someone to say, “The country people insult me,” even if one insults him? For Luke's statement about one would be contrary if they had said that both robbers insulted the Lord; for then one could not be understood under the plural number. But when it is said “the robbers” or “those who were crucified with him,” and “both” is not added, this could be said not only if both had done it, but also, because one did it, it could be signified by the plural in the usual manner of speaking.

Matthew continues and says, “Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land until the ninth hour.” The other two also attest this; and Luke adds also where the darkness came from, that is, that the sun was darkened. Matthew continues: “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, ‘Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?’ that is, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’ And some standing there, hearing it, said, ‘This man is calling Elijah.’” Mark agrees in almost the same words, but not almost, rather entirely, in the same meaning. Matthew continues: “And immediately one of them ran and took a sponge, filled it with vinegar, put it on a reed, and gave it to him to drink.” So too Mark says: “And one ran and, filling a sponge with vinegar and putting it around a reed, gave him to drink, saying, ‘Wait, let us see whether Elijah comes to take him down.’” Matthew narrated that not the man who offered the sponge with vinegar, but the others said this about Elijah. For he says, “But the others said, ‘Wait, let us see whether Elijah comes to save him’”; from which we understand that both he and the others said it. Luke, however, before narrating the robber's insult, recorded this about the vinegar thus: “And the soldiers also mocked him, coming up and offering him vinegar, saying, ‘If you are the king of the Jews, save yourself.’” He wished to include at once what was done and said by the soldiers. Here it should not trouble anyone that he did not say one of them offered the vinegar; for he kept the manner of speaking we discussed above, putting the plural for the singular. John too recorded this about the vinegar, where he says, “After this, Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, said, ‘I thirst.’ A vessel full of vinegar stood there; so they put a sponge full of vinegar around hyssop and held it to his mouth.” But as for what is found in the same John, that he said, “I thirst,” and that a vessel full of vinegar was there, it is no wonder if the others were silent.

Matthew continues: “And Jesus, crying out again with a loud voice, yielded up his spirit.” Mark similarly: “And Jesus, uttering a loud cry, breathed his last.” Luke, however, made clear what he said with that loud voice; for he said, “And crying out with a loud voice, Jesus said, ‘Father, into your hands I commend my spirit,’ and having said this, he breathed his last.” John, however, just as he was silent about that first cry, “Eli, Eli,” which Matthew and Mark reported, was silent also about this one, which Luke alone indicated, while those two signified it by the name of a loud voice, that is, “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit,” which Luke himself likewise attested that he said with a loud voice, so that we might understand that this was the loud voice which Matthew and Mark recorded. But John said, what none of those three said, that he said, “It is finished,” when he had received the vinegar, which we understand he said before that loud voice itself. For these are John's words: “When, then, Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, ‘It is finished,’ and bowing his head he gave up his spirit.” Between his saying, “It is finished,” and his saying, “and bowing his head he gave up his spirit,” that loud voice was uttered which John passed over and the other three recorded. For this appears to be the order: that he said first, “It is finished,” when what had been prophesied of him had been completed in him, and as if he were waiting for this, he who certainly could die when he willed, then, commending it, gave up his spirit. But in whatever order anyone thinks these could have been said, we must take great care that no one should think any evangelist contradicts another, if he either passed over what another said or said what another passed over.