Matthew 27:32–44

Follow Him from Pilate's judgment hall. There they mocked Him, and His own nation rejected Him, crying out, "Away with Him, away with Him, crucify Him"... So Jesus is given up to be the Sacrifice, and there the cross is laid on Him. Do you not envy the one who had the privilege of bearing that cross with Him? He goes outside the gate to Golgotha, "the place of a skull," the unclean place.

At the time of His death, and until Jerusalem fell, everyone there knew well where Golgotha or Calvary was. So the different Gospel writers who mention the place do not directly say it was outside the gate. To mention Golgotha was enough for readers then. John (19:17), if not Matthew also (27:32) and Mark (15:20), seems to indicate it was outside the city. But God had another purpose in the Lord's death at Golgotha: Christ suffered there so that His people might be sanctified, or set apart for God, by His blood.

Then they led Him away to be crucified. On the way they forced one Simon, a Cyrenian, a Greek-speaking Jew, to bear the cross behind Him. Was he a disciple? He had clearly taken no part with the crowd, for he was coming from the country. So he must have met the procession on its way to Golgotha. He was also, as Mark tells us, the father of Alexander and Rufus — very likely that Rufus mentioned by Paul in Romans 16:13.

The contrast between the two Simons has been pointed out: the one who promised the fullest obedience but denied his Lord in the hour of testing, and this man who bears the cross. It does not seem that he offered himself; the demands of the moment pressed him into service. Still, we are not told that he refused. The Spirit of God has recorded this incident, and it deserves our careful attention.

Notice how Luke's account brings together John's statement with that of Matthew and Mark. The Lord must have borne the cross alone until Simon relieved Him of part of it.

Part of the way He had borne His own cross (John 19:17), but Simon, a man of Cyrene, was then commandeered to do so. Some have imagined that Jesus fainted under the load. We must not trust that assumption: it is only imagination.

Nor had He forgotten Simon the Cyrenian, who was passing by. As he came from the field, a mob of soldiers and others forced him to carry the cross while they led Jesus out to His crucifixion. The Lord repaid with interest the burden of that day. Compare Mark 15:21. Rufus is here before us as "the elect in the Lord," along with his mother, who had been a mother to the apostle as well. Salvation came to that house.

God's goodness, I suppose, used this very circumstance, wicked as it was on man's part. He would not allow even His Son's humiliation to fail to turn to the blessing of man.

Simon carrying His cross does show that in a certain sense believers have the privilege of bearing the cross of the Lord Jesus. Certainly this does not involve His atoning sufferings, but a path of rejection by the world for His sake.

Every disciple of Christ bears a cross. It is his — the disciple's — cross. Without it he cannot be a disciple of Jesus (Luke 14:27). It is the reproach of Christ, that is, as reproached by man. The Lord Jesus did not say, "Whoever does not bear My cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple." That would mean perfect reproach, and would imply a perfect walk. But every believer, in his measure, suffers reproach. It is the same in character as Christ's, and so it is called a cross. But it is his cross, not Christ's.

The Greek word is kranion, "a skull." The word "Calvary" comes from the Latin Calvaria, which means the same thing. It agrees with the Hebrew Golgotha, which also means the same. Matt. 27:33; Luke 23:33. This is the place where the Lord was crucified, and near it was the tomb in which He was buried. The traditional site of the Holy Sepulchre now lies well inside the city of Jerusalem. A much more likely place is the one the Jews point out on the north of the city, near the Grotto of Jeremiah. Visitors have said that this site has, from a distance, the natural contour of a human skull.

The place got its name from the peculiar shape of the rock, but it is significant all the same! A skull speaks of the humiliating end of all man's power and glory. In some living man it may once have held as brilliant and powerful a brain as ever existed; and it has come to this! The Son of God accepted the judgment of death as from man's hand. He went to bear it in a place that pictured the end of all man's glory.

Golgotha, that place of a skull, sets out the features of man's empty knowledge. No eyes to see God. No ears to hear anything about God. No tongue to speak for God. Nothing in the mind held for God. The skull is an empty thing, standing for all man's accumulated wisdom.

So Calvary was a witness to the moral condition of the whole world. It was also a witness to the love and grace that came down to the very place where the ugliness of sin was shown, to triumph over it there. From the skull of Calvary springs the beauty of resurrection. Death had no power at all over the Son of God, and could not disfigure Him, though it might hide His beauty from human eyes. But that resurrection beauty is for the whole family of the redeemed too, who are risen with Christ, forever beyond the power of death to mar or disfigure.

The priests of old could not have guessed what their act pictured. As they carried the body of the sin offering out to a clean place outside the camp, they were picturing the suffering of our Lord Jesus Christ outside the gate. Here alone (Heb. 13:12) is this fact plainly stated. But God had another purpose in the Lord's death at Golgotha, little as the enemy could have guessed it. Christ suffered there so that His people might be sanctified, or set apart, for God by His blood.

So the place of a skull is reached, the destination which had been before the Lord all through. A scene of death was the attraction for the Lord of life; no one else could have found any attraction in it. But He comes into it, then, not merely as a visitor, but to "taste death" in its reality. So He refuses the numbing drink offered to those led out to execution. He gives Himself up to the full endurance of all that lies before Him.

In the other records we read that He was led out by His enemies. John tells us this too, for that was the height of their guilt. But He went out, and that was the triumph of His love. He went out; do we not see the majesty of that lonely Man, with thorns on His head and a cross on His shoulders? He was not driven out or dragged out, but in obedience to His Father's command He went out to lay down His life and to take it again.

Gall (rosh, chole) is some extremely bitter or poisonous plant, not identified for certain. This word is used as a symbol of "bitterness." … The Roman soldiers drank sour wine, or vinegar, and gall was mixed with it and given to those about to be crucified. The purpose, it is now thought, was to make them feel the torture less. It was offered to the Lord, but refused. Ps. 69:21; Matt. 27:34. In Mark 15:23 myrrh is read instead of gall; the meaning would be the same.

He tasted it first before refusing it. Of course He knew what it was before tasting it. But by tasting it He let His enemies see why He refused. He was not turning down a drink out of defiance. He refused it because of the stupefying gall added to it. He would bear His sufferings without this, and in full awareness of all that was involved. That means not only what men inflicted, but the far deeper sufferings of being made a curse of God.

The drink of vinegar mixed with gall reminds us of the bitterness of the "cup" our Lord drank at the hands of man. It also implies a rough try at easing the intensity of His physical sufferings, like an opiate. This seems to be the ground of our Lord's refusing to drink it. He would not allow anything to dull the sharpness of those sufferings. The physical ones were the least of them.

Sometimes people take steps to strengthen the body against the feeling of these trials and pains. Not so the Lord Jesus. No; He would take the vinegar, but He did not take the potion meant to deaden feeling — that He refused. There was a cup given, out of human mercy, to the ordinary criminal, to deaden pain, a kind of opiate, as we call it. But the Lord would not allow that. No, no; He allowed no anaesthetics for Himself.

We must not confuse this circumstance with the one mentioned in John, where the Lord says, "I thirst." In Matthew's account it was the stupefying drink given to prisoners before they suffered. This the Lord would not drink. Whereas in John, the Lord, while on the cross, fulfils a Scripture. … He was alive to the honour of Scripture, and to fulfil a word that had not yet come true, He says, "I thirst." … He did drink the vinegar then. But here in Matthew, on the contrary, when He had tasted it He would not drink — He wished for no relief from man.

This was doubtless because He would have nothing of any human device to lessen the physical suffering involved. Also, at that moment He felt no thirst. Divine predictions must be fulfilled with exactness and precision.

Or was it mercy that offered Him vinegar mingled with gall? Mercy, we believe it was not. It was a stimulant they offered Him. They did not know that the Life in their hands could not be overcome; no one could take that life from Him. He would not drink what was given to Him; He did not seek relief, He did not need it. His loving will was to endure all the suffering in perfect consciousness.

We are spared the pain of details in the actual crucifixion of the blessed Sufferer. It is described in these brief words: "They crucified Him." We know from other scriptures that they nailed Him to the cross. The cross was lifted up from the earth, and He hung on the tree.

Here they crucified Him. No description of the act itself is given in any of the Gospels. Crucifixion was the most horrible, torturing way of putting criminals to death. It began in Phoenicia, and the Roman government took it up. The Jews themselves knew nothing of putting offenders to death by the cross. The Holy Spirit does not describe the awful act, the nailing of the Lord to the cross. So we shall not try to describe it either.

The soldiers in charge of the execution thought no further than their poor perks. But God's eye was now, as ever, on His Son, and He had taken care to mark this in His word. One of the psalms that speaks most clearly of the Messiah (Ps. 22:18) holds the detailed prediction, written a thousand years beforehand: the soldiers would take the garments of the Saviour in a way that can only fit Him... The very smallness of the detail bears witness to how exactly real the prophecy is.

Four soldiers, it seems, were on duty at the cross, and the garments were divided into five lots. But to whom would the fifth lot fall? That was a coat woven without seam throughout. To divide it would spoil it. So they cast lots for it, and in that way fulfilled the words of Ps. 22:18... The cross and all connected with it had been under the eye of God. David, by the Spirit, wrote of the events around it as a historian might write of past history.

Someone added the words "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots" to Matthew 27:35. A copyist doubtless took them from John 19:24.

They part among them the garments they have stripped from Him. They cast the lot — in Israel sacred to Jehovah (Prov. 16:33) — to decide who owns that seamless priestly robe. The robe marks Him as what He is, "the Mediator between God and men," on whom all the blessing of man depends... Here is the complete stripping of Christ, in the very madness of passion and unbelief. They strip Him of all that shows Him to be man's tender and compassionate Saviour, and qualified to be it.

The 22nd Psalm, that great prophecy about the sin-bearer, comes first of all into view... Some say that dividing the garments of the victims was a Roman custom. But there is a deeper significance than a mere fulfilment of prophecy. His enemies, those who nailed Him to the cross, received His clothes. And so for His naked creature He has provided the robe of righteousness by His death on the cross.

The soldiers crucify Him and part His garments among them by lottery. The world hates Him personally. Yet it will gladly profit from His pure character and habits, which His garments picture. Indeed, most false religions do this.

They write His accusation over the cross. It was the truth about who He was: "The King of the Jews." What charge could there be against the One who was perfect in every way? They put Him between two thieves, in the place of the murderer Barabbas. He stood there as a Substitute for him. Yet "this man has done nothing wrong" (Luke 23:41). Yes, this is "Jesus, the King of the Jews."

This confession that He was the Son of God meant nothing to the Roman judge. He needed something more if he was to condemn Him too. So came the charge that He made Himself a king. When Pilate asked Him about this, He confessed the truth again. For this cause He had come into the world. So the accusation that Pilate wrote and placed over His head on the cross was not, This is the Son of God, but "This is Jesus, THE KING OF THE JEWS."

Usually a board naming the crime of a condemned man went ahead of him. They led him through the crowded streets to the place of execution. This custom was most likely followed with our Lord. Pilate himself had the inscription drawn up... Pilate could not help himself. He had to write what he wrote, though he may have meant it as revenge on the Jews and as mockery. Despite their hatred, He received His true title, and from a Gentile at that. There it stood written and could not be changed; so it is still.

We are told by John that the title was written in Hebrew, Greek and Latin. Here again we see God's almighty hand, for God would bring in the whole world guilty of this foul crime. The religious world (Hebrew), the heathen world (Greek) and the political world (Latin) all had a part in rejecting and crucifying the Holy Son of God. The Jews were stung by the form of the sentence... and would gladly have had it changed, but Pilate is unmovable.

The accusation set over His cross is what Pilate had pronounced as his sentence of condemnation. It was the technical charge on which He had been declared guilty. It meant, of course, the end of all Jewish kingship, and much else besides. Here we see, in this Gospel of the kingdom, the final rejection of their King by the Jews.

They reviled Him, wagging their heads, and saying, "If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross"... They did not understand the meaning of His Name. Because He was Jesus, He could not come down from the cross. If He had come down, He must have given up His Name. He must have denied Himself, for He could not have been Jesus any more. How blind these foes of His were! Their hatred had so darkened their minds that they missed one thing. The very Name He bore was the reason He could not save Himself.

He was born King of the Jews (Matt. 2:2). He died as King of the Jews (Matt. 27:37). He shall reign as King of the Jews (Zech. 9:9).

They had to add one more insult, so that the words of Isaiah might be fulfilled: "and was numbered with the transgressors" (Isa. 53:12). "Two others, who were criminals, were led away to be put to death with him." What a sight! He who was God, walking with two thieves to that place. There the great work of the preparation day had to be done — the work that would bring lost sinners into the sabbath, the rest of God.

That morning they searched the prison cells of Jerusalem for the worst of all the criminals that city held. They led them out to die along with Jesus. These men had been guilty of appalling crimes. That is why they picked them to hang one on His right hand and the other on His left, and why they put Him on the centre and highest cross. They meant to proclaim by their well-considered and malicious plan that He was the worst of the three.

Mark, like Matthew, mentions the robbers — in fact all the Gospel writers do. It is a testimony to the complete humiliation of God's Servant and Son on the cross. Men would not even give Him that place by Himself. He was indeed alone in the grace and moral glory of the cross. But to increase the shame of it they crucified these two robbers with Him, one on His right hand, and the other on His left.

It proves, beyond all question, that there was no difference between the two thieves. They were both condemned criminals. And more than that: when they were on the very edge of the eternal world, both were busy with the awful sin of reviling the blessed Son of God.

The cross is the only perfect measure of man — of the world — of sin. If we really want to know what the world is, we must remember this. It preferred a robber to Christ. It crucified between two thieves the only perfect man who ever lived.

God's sovereign power and grace was over this. He used it to bring one of these men to genuine repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus. He used it, too, to show the solemn fact that Christ crucified is the great Divider between the lost and the saved.

The two thieves represent the two great classes into which mankind has been divided. God's Christ is the one great and all-deciding test in every case. Every shade of moral character, every level of social life, every caste, class, sect and party into which the human family has been, is, or ever will be divided — all are absorbed in this one momentous point: "In or out of Christ."

The work of grace for us and the work of grace in us are not the same thing. Take the thief. The death of Christ for him, and the change inside him that made him stop blaspheming and own Jesus, were not one and the same thing either. The first is outside of us, and was in and by CHRIST. The second is in ourselves, though worked there by grace.

Those who passed by were mere travellers along the road, men left in the distance, or as far as they were concerned. They revile Him, venting helpless hatred, like so many Shimeis in the day of David. And disciples, a people brought near and privileged, show the same common corruption. They take part in this scene of shame to man. They heartlessly abandon their Lord in the hour of danger, when He had looked for some to stand by Him.

The Gospel writer's quiet remark settles the meaning of His reply. "He spoke," he tells us, "of the temple of His body."... When first spoken, the Jews thought He was talking about the building they were standing in. Later, on the cross, they taunted Him with His supposed statement: "You who would destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, save yourself." They still thought He meant the temple building. So they put into His mouth what He had never said. "Destroy this temple," He did say. "You who destroy the temple," they assumed He had said, so misquoting His words and getting it thoroughly wrong.

His words were turned against Him, not only at His trial, but in His dying moments... How little they knew that His very words were now on the point of being completely fulfilled!

It is sad that such ridicule from man fell within the appointed sufferings of the Messiah. But it was written of Him, "All who see me mock me" (Ps. 22:7), and the fulfilment of this scripture reached its climax at the cross. He was the Servant whom man despised and the nation abhorred (Isa. 49:7).

The gospels note this wagging of the head by those passing by. They also note the very words of the psalm, used by the chief priests with the scribes and elders as they mocked Him. On the surface it might look as if God's rule over events had supplied them with this reproach. In fact it was their own hardness. They had no sense of what they themselves deserved, nor of the holiness and mercy of God. That is what blinded them to the meaning of the scriptures they were so plainly fulfilling.

Without knowing it, they use the very language of the tempter himself in the wilderness: "If you are the Son of God." Satan may have been tempting Him again. But he could no more move Him to come down from the cross than to make bread out of the stones or to throw Himself down from the temple.

Power displayed would in their eyes be proof of His divine Sonship. He gave no reply to their taunt. But because He was God's Son, He stayed on the cross... "Save yourself." Those words showed where their thoughts ran: self, not the Father's will, should be the rule for how people live.

There is none to pity in the scene before us. He is alone, cruelly mocked, and He must have felt the reproach as only one who is absolutely holy could feel it. He was reviled but He did not revile in return. Our Gospel does not report a single word from His lips.

When He first said this, the Jews thought He meant the building they were standing in. Later, on the cross, they taunted Him with what they thought He had said. They still thought He had meant the temple building itself, so they credited Him with words He had never said. "Destroy this temple," He did say. "You who would destroy the temple," they assumed He had said. They misquoted His words, and so got it completely wrong.

Power displayed would in their eyes be proof of His divine Sonship. He gave no reply to their taunt; but, because He was God's Son, He stayed on the cross. They linked power with Sonship. He accepted that obedience was part of that relationship. He showed perfect obedience to His Father's will by staying on that cross… "Save yourself." That kind of talk showed the way their minds ran: self, not the Father's will, should guide how a person lives. Without realising it, they were defending the sin of Adam and Eve. They proved they were descended from them, born in Adam's likeness.

Here is the echo of the old desert temptation, "If you are the Son of God." And here too is the constant temptation of God's people in every age — if — why? If you are a child of God, why is this allowed to come upon you? If you do trust Him, why are you left in this condition or circumstance?

If it were only a question of power, He might have stepped in. The holy Sufferer could have come down from the cross with ease. It was even part of His suffering at that moment to be challenged by a dying criminal to do so — what did He not suffer? But we must see this: no act of power could atone.

His name, given at His birth, means Saviour… They did not understand the meaning of His name. Because He was Jesus, He could not come down from the cross. If He had come down, He would have given up His name. He would have denied Himself, for He could not have been Jesus any more. If He was to bear that name for ever, He had to die, for only by His death could He be the Saviour of those who lay under death's power.

They revile Him, and He does not revile back. Our Gospel does not report a single word from His lips… He is silent under the cruel and vile mockeries, born in the pit, the very breath of Satan. Once more they hold the old accusation up against Him. They had no idea that they were fulfilling that very word about destroying the temple. The third day, when He would rise as the mighty victor, was not far off.

Verses 39-44 show us how all classes united in reviling Him as He was dying on the cross. Hardened criminals have had to listen to stern words when they were condemned to death. But we have never heard of even the worst and most depraved being mocked while they died in agony. Yet this is what happened to Him who was perfection itself, Divine as well as human. The only difference was the kind of language used. "Those who passed by" were ordinary people going about their business. "The chief priests … with the scribes and elders" were the upper classes. "The thieves also … threw the same insults at Him." They were the lowest, the criminal class; but they were only following the fashion, in their own crude and vulgar way.

They wagged the head, saying, "He saved others: himself he cannot save." What words! They admitted that His power had been fully displayed, they rejected what was divine, they declared that they had driven God out from among them! In fact, He could not save Himself, because He could not think of Himself: the love which had saved others went farther and gave Himself for us. Perfect love for His Father, obedience to His commandments, His perfect love to us, hindered His saving Himself. He might have had His twelve legions of angels, but He had come for others, not for Himself.

What they add is completely false, for they say, "Let the Christ, the King of Israel, come down now from the cross, so that we may see and believe." Faith comes by hearing, not by sight. Besides, if He had come down from the cross, belief would have been pointless. We would still be in our sins.

In their wicked glee, they promise to believe in Him if He would come down from the cross and so prove Himself the King of Israel. Sadly, when His resurrection from the dead gave them a mightier proof, they could bribe the Roman soldiers to hide the dreaded truth.

They acknowledged His works done on behalf of others, yet refused to accept the claims those works proved. Those acts showed that He was God's servant, the Christ, as the men who claimed to teach God's word should have known. Yet after all they had heard and seen, they asked Him to settle His claim to be the Messiah by coming down from the cross at once. Power used for the good of others was a proof that He was the Messiah. Power used to save Himself from death on the cross was never predicted as a proof that the King of Israel was on earth.

It is astonishing that these cultured religious men, in their fearful blindness, quoted Scripture as they gazed at Him. David had written Psalm 22 by the Spirit, the great prophetic psalm of the suffering One, and they knew it well. In that psalm the wicked enemies of the great sufferer speak. It even gives the words they would use to revile Him in the presence of the forsaken sufferer: "He trusted in the Lord that He would deliver Him; let Him deliver Him, since He delighted in Him." These very words the sneering chief priests, elders and scribes spoke before the cross.

Think of the Roman centurion watching the leaders of the Jewish nation come out to mock a poor criminal as he died — for that is how it looked. There was the religion and the learning of the nation, busy at this work. The two high priests, the elders and the scribes were degrading themselves, even in human eyes. The enmity expressed was against God Himself; but see how deep its display had sunk poor man!

They acknowledged His works done for others, yet refused to accept what those works proved. They knew His life on earth, and could speak of His acts of kindness and power. Those acts testified that He was God's servant — the Christ — as the men who professed to explain God's word should have known; yet they asked, after all they had heard and seen, that His claim to be the Messiah should be settled by His coming down from the cross at once.

As has often been the case, the very insult they threw at Him is His glory. It was true in a way their spite never dreamed of: "He saved others; Himself He cannot save." That was not the "cannot" of weakness or inability. It was the "cannot" of divine love.

In fact, He could not save Himself, because He could not think of Himself. The love which had saved others went further and gave Himself for us. Perfect love for His Father, obedience to His commandments, and perfect love for us kept Him from saving Himself. He might have had His twelve legions of angels, but He had come for others, not for Himself... If He was to save others, He could not save Himself.

He laid down His life for us. There was no other way we could be saved. More than that, He obeyed the Father at all cost, set on carrying out His will — even our sanctification. In that sense only He could not save Himself. Nothing in the nature of the Lord Jesus Christ made death necessary. All other men must die because of Adam; Christ did not have to... So He says plainly about His death: "I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again" (John 10:18).

He could not have come down from the cross, for His Name was Jesus. Had He come down, as their mocking demanded, He would have had to strip Himself of that Name. No sinner could then be saved, and He would never have done the work God gave Him to do.

The chief priests joined the others in mocking the Lord. They said, "He saved others; Himself He cannot save." This was true, little as they realised it. But what they add is wholly false... Faith comes by hearing, not by sight. Moreover, had He come down from the cross, belief would have been in vain. We should still be in our sins.

It is astonishing to see these educated religious men, in their terrible blindness, quoting Scripture as they stared at Him... Israel's great king David had written by the Spirit that great prophetic psalm about the suffering One — Psalm 22, and they knew it well. In that psalm the wicked enemies of the great sufferer speak. The psalm gives the very words they would use to insult Him in front of the forsaken sufferer: "He trusts in the LORD; let him deliver him; let him rescue him, for he delights in him!" (verse 8). The sneering chief priests, elders and scribes spoke those very words in front of the cross.

There is no help for Him in His God. Others had cried in their need, and God heard and answered them (Ps. 22:4-5). But now righteousness stands alone and unheard. His enemies read this — and in one solemn sense they read it rightly — as if God were against Him. They say, "He trusts in God" — literally, "rolled Himself on Jehovah"... They daringly claim God as on their side against His blessed Son.

The bitterness of its sting lay in the truth of the sneer, and in its apparent reasonableness. For no one ever trusted in God as this suffering One did. His whole life had been one of unwavering confidence in God, so that of no one else could it be said so truthfully and so emphatically, "He trusted in God."

Yet the scoffers around the cross meant an untruth even while they spoke the truth. Their taunt charged Him with being a real impostor, since God's word and human experience alike said that God had never failed to deliver anyone who truly trusted Him.

Consider the sneer flung into the sensitive heart of our Lord by the chief priests and scribes and elders, who could say, "Let God deliver Him now, IF He desires Him." "If He desires Him!" With these words in His ears, the lonely Sufferer hangs in silence, with no voice from heaven to answer for Him then. One further note reveals the real force ranged against Him — the voice of Satan — in their closing reminder: "For He said, 'I am the Son of God.'"

What was it for the Holy One of God to be forsaken by His God, when He cried and no answer came? To be forsaken by His disciples? To be despised by men and scorned by His own people, from the high priest down to the lowest of the Jews, and by the very robbers crucified beside Him, who deserved it? Yet at no time was He suffering so effectively for God's glory. At no time was He so fully the object of divine delight. And yet His God, who could not overlook sin in the slightest, did not deliver Him then. Instead He made Him, the sinless One, sin for us.

His trust in God remained unshaken, even when He cried, "My God, my God, why have You forsaken Me?" And right at the end, after He had met death in its full power, it is to God He cries: "Save me from the mouth of the lion! You have rescued me from the horns of the wild oxen" (Psalm 22:21). His trust in God to the very end was not put to shame. God answered His cry by raising Him from the dead.

The Lord Jesus has left us an example, that we should follow His steps. God had one Son without sin, but none without suffering. The lesson of it all to our hearts is to trust Him at all times — despite the enemy, despite being misunderstood, despite our own hearts... Appearances were against Him. He met heart-breaking reproach, loneliness and desertion by nearly all. Still He trusted in God and finished the course without wavering.

Verses 39-44 show us how all classes united in reviling Him as He was dying on the cross. Hardened criminals have had to listen to stern words when a court condemned them to death. But we have never heard of anyone mocking even the most vicious and depraved while they died in agony. Yet this is what happened when He who was the embodiment of all perfection, Divine as well as human, was on the cross. There was no difference, except in the type of language used. "Those who passed by" were ordinary folk going about their business. "The chief priests, with the scribes and elders" were the upper classes. The robbers "also reviled him in the same way." They stood for the lowest class, the criminals. But they only followed the fashion in their crude and vulgar way.

The scenes around the cross expose the evil of fallen man in all its enormity. Every class is there — Jews and Gentiles, priests and people, the ruler and his soldiers, the passers-by and the criminals. Their political and social differences may be great, but they all share the same hatred and rejection of Christ.

The thieves heard the revilings, and adopted them, for they threw the same taunts at Him. But an entire change came over one of them. Light broke in upon his soul, and in its case it was the light of life — eternal life.

So it is completely useless for anyone to try to make a distinction between these two men. They were alike in their nature, in their guilt, in their criminality, and in their godless wickedness. There was no difference until the moment the arrow of conviction entered the soul of the one we call the penitent thief. The more clearly we see this, the more the sovereign grace of God shines out in all its blessed brightness. "There is no difference; for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God."

But no sorrow, no shame, no suffering brings the heart too low to scorn Jesus; a crucified robber despises Him! In every unrenewed heart there is an instinct, so to speak, against Jesus. Not even the power of love that carried Him down into the deepest humiliation could silence it… Do not say that you are one bit better than this wretched man.

We see still deeper sufferings of the Holy One… "Reproach has broken my heart; and I am full of heaviness; and I looked for some to take pity, but there was none; and for comforters, but I found none" (Psalm 69:20). No one pities Him in the scene before us. He is alone, and they mock Him cruelly. He must have felt the reproach as only one who is perfectly holy could have felt it. He was insulted, but He did not insult back. Our Gospel does not report a single word coming from His lips.

Here God would give a testimony of His grace to man, suited to His Son and suited to the Cross. So He was pleased to choose what nature would call the most hopeless circumstances. He was delivering a soul that until then was steeped in guilt and degradation. The man was in the agonies of death, and he dreaded a far more solemn judgment, one that is eternal.