Not Paul, but Jesus · Jeremy Bentham
FOOTNOTES:
As to the phrase--"_to signify the accomplishment of the days_," what seems to be meant by it is--to make known when the number requisite for the completion of the train of operations had been _accomplished_. But, to make known when that number had been _accomplished_, it was previously requisite to make known when it had _commenced_: and, for making _this_ known, the act, probably a public one, of making entrance into the temple, was employed. As to the origin, as well as particular nature, of the ceremony,--though no such word as _Nazarite_ is here employed, on turning to the Book of _Numbers_, chapter the sixth, it will be manifest, that the ceremony here in question is the same as that, by which, according to the receipt there given, any man whatever, whether, and any woman also, must be left to conjecture, might be converted into a _Nazarite_. _Nazarite_ is from a Hebrew word, which meant originally neither more nor less than a person _separated_. A person consigned himself to the custody of "_the priest of the congregation_:" or, as we should now say, the _parson of the parish_. The ceremony accomplished, the patient was thereby put into a state of appropriate sanctity: and, from this metamorphosis, as the priest and the Nazarite could agree, any inference might be drawn, and any purpose at pleasure accomplished. Neither to the _extent_ of the inference, nor therefore to the _purpose_ designed, were any limits visible.
Everything depended upon the priest: for, though of certain particular operations made requisite, a most particular list is given, all of them of the most insignificant character in themselves, yet so thickly and so plainly sown are the seeds of _nullity_, that, when all the appointed fees, of which there is also an enormous list[IV.], had been paid, it would still lie at the option of the priest, to pronounce the whole procedure null and void, unless, and until any such final compliment as he chose to expect, were paid to him. Among the most obviously, as well as extensively convenient purposes, to which it was capable of being applied, is this of which the present case affords an example: namely, the manufacturing of evidence: could he but find means to satisfy the priest, a man might, to all legal purposes, and even to the satisfaction of all appropriately disposed minds, prove, and with conclusive effect, any thing to be false, which everybody knew to be true. By fabrication, falsification, or suppression of evidence, what is the right that may not be usurped? what is the wrong that may not, with success and impunity, be committed?
In the Mosaic law, immediately before _this_ institution Numbers, chap. 5., comes another, by means of which every man, who was tired of his wife, might, in another way, with the assistance of a priest--and, for aught that appears, any priest--clear himself of that incumbrance. All the man had to do was--to _say_ he was "_jealous_" of her: the priest thereupon took charge of her. If priest and husband were agreed, "_the water of jealousy_" did its office: if not, the woman remained imprisoned. Against the superhuman evidence, afforded by the purifying process here in question, no quantity of human evidence was to be available. In like manner, to warrant this poisoning process, not any the smallest particle of human evidence was necessary: the case in which it is to be performed, is "_if there be no witness against her, neither she be taken_," says the text, _Numbers_ 5. 13. Verily, verily, not without sufficient cause, did Jesus, from first to last, take every occasion, to weaken the attachment of the people, to a system of law, of which those institutions afford two, among so many samples. Yet, while in the very act of depreciating it, is he represented as declaring his purpose to be the _fulfilling it_: Matt.
5. 17. for, such was the verbal veil, which the prejudices he had to encounter, rendered it necessary to him at the moment, to throw over the tendency of his endeavors. Fulfill the very law he was preaching against? Yes: but in one sense only: namely, by fulfilling--not the real purpose of it,--the establishment of the corrupt despotism of the priesthood,--but the professed purpose of it, the good of the community: in regard to the law, fulfilling, in a word, whatever there was that was good in it, whatever there was that deserved to be fulfilled. Jesus, in whose opinion death was too severe a punishment, for a wife, in the case of a breach, on _her_ part, of a contract, the breach of which was by the _other_ contending party practised with impunity--Jesus, who accordingly, in saving the offender, exposed to merited disgrace the sanguinary law--was doubtless still further from approving, that parish priests, in unlimited numbers, should poison innocent women for the accommodation of their husbands, or sell licenses to commit every imaginable wrong by perjury. _Vow_ is _oath_: this is not the only occasion, in which the self-constituted Apostle, if his historiographer is to be believed, took the benefit, whatever it was, of this ceremony. In Acts 18:16, he "_shaved his head_," it is said, at Cenchrea:--why?--"for he had a vow upon him." What the vow was, we are not told; this, however, we know, as well from Acts 21:26, as from Numbers 6, he could not have got anything by it, had the parson of the parish of Cenchrea been otherwise than satisfied with the "_offering_" that was made.
Fees payable, on a contingency: a contingency not describable without more time and labour, than would be paid for by the result. III. { 9. Turtle-doves or pigeons, two. { 10. Lamb of the first year, one. IV. Mysterious addition, the liquidation of which must be left to the Hebrew scholar. Ver. 21. "Besides _that_ that his hand shall get:" (whose hand? priest's or vow-maker's?) "according to the vow which he vowed, so he must do after the law of his separation:"--probable meaning, according to the purpose, for which he performed the ceremony--the advantage which he looked for from it. Moreover, by any one whose curiosity will carry him through the inquiry, causes of _nullity_ may be seen as sedulously and copiously provided, as if by the _astutia_ of an English judge, or pair of judges, to whose profit the fees were to be received: effect of the nullity, of course, repetition; necessity of repeating the process, as in case of _new trial_ or _arrest of judgment_, with the fees. Religion was thus no less aptly served at Jerusalem, under Mosaic institutions,--than Justice is to this day, under matchless constitution and English institutions, at Westminster. [56] Paul at the suit of Tertullus, A.D. 60. Acts 24:1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 11, 18.
"And after five days Ananias the high priest descended with the elders, and with a certain orator named Tertullus, who informed the governor against Paul.--And when he was called forth, Tertullus began to accuse him,--Saying, We have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes:--Who also hath _gone about to profane the temple_; whom we took, and would have judged according to our law.--And the Jews also assented, saying, that these things were so.--Then Paul, after that the governor had beckoned unto him to speak, answered,--Thou mayest understand, that they are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship.--Whereupon certain Jews from Asia _found me purified in the temple_, neither with multitude nor with tumult." [57] Paul before Festus alone, A.D. 60. Acts 25:7, 8. "And when he was come, the Jews which came down from Jerusalem stood round about, and laid many and grievous complaints against Paul, which they could not prove:--While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended anything at all." [58] Paul before Festus and Agrippa, A.D. 62. Acts 26:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 20, 21.
"Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Thou art permitted to speak for thyself. Then Paul stretched forth the hand, and answered for himself:--I think myself happy, King Agrippa, because I shall answer for myself this day before thee, touching all the things whereof I am accused of the Jews;--Especially because I know thee to be expert in all customs and questions which are among the Jews; wherefore I beseech thee to hear me patiently.--My manner of life from my youth, which was at the first among mine own nation at Jerusalem, know all the Jews;--Which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straightest sect of our religion, I lived a Pharisee.--And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers:--Unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come. For which hope's sake, King Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews.--20. But showed first unto them of Damascus and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.--For these causes, the Jews _caught me in the temple_, and went about to kill me." [59] "And when the seven days were almost ended," says Acts 21:27, "_the Jews which were of Asia_, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him."
Text from Project Gutenberg, public domain in the United States.