Matthew 27:33

Mat_27:33-37

And they crucified Him, and parted His garments, casting lots.

The watch by the cross

The thought of those who with tender heart watch by the cross of Jesus.

I. The first thought concerns the visible tragic elements of the scene.

II. The contemplation of the sufferer, His character, and His works.

III. The Divine permission of these atrocities.

IV. What a plenitude of grace there is in this Divine provision. (J. H. Davison.)

I. The spectacle.

1. There was that which all might see.

2. There was that which only enlightened and quickened minds can see.

II. The spectators and their various emotions. Of the spectators some were-

1. Bad.

2. Hopeful.

3. Good. (Anon.)

Christ crucified

I. The process of the crucifixion.

1. The preliminary by which it was preceded.

2. The act itself.

3. The explanation by which the act was accompanied.

II. The designs of the crucifixion.

1. It was the accomplishment of a Divine purpose.

2. In order to offer an all-sufficient atonement for human sin.

3. In order that it might found for our Lord an exalted mediatorial empire.

III. The conclusions which the crucifixion should leave on the hearts of those who contemplate it.

1. To esteem supremely the love from which it emanated.

2. To repent humbly of the transgressions it was necessary to pardon.

3. To repose implicitly upon the merit by which it is signalized.

4. To avow zealously the cause with which it is identified. (J. Parsons.)

Crucifixion

I. What they did to Him. They crucified Him.

II. How He conducted Himself under it.

III. The results of all this.

1. A great consternation did befall the universe at this crucifixion.

2. It gave to the church its sublimest and most central theme.

3. It established a city of refuge for guilty men.

4. It was the opening of a fountain for the washing away of sin.

5. It was the stretching forth of a mighty hand to help, comfort, and deliver in every time of need.

6. It gave to the believing soul a pillow on which to lie down and peace. (J. A. Seiss, D. D.)

Gambling

That is the Bibles picture of gamblers. What is gambling? It is neither begging nor stealing, but it resembles both in that it consists in getting money from another for which you have rendered no honest equivalent. The winner of a bet has rendered no service at all to country or to the individual; and ought to feel a sense of theft. Do you ask where is Gods commandment against it? In its results scored deeply on the character of gamblers. The love of gaming springs from the love of excitement that is in our nature. It unfits a man for lifes duties. It is strange how uniformly no good comes of it. It has been disallowed by all ethical and religious teachers. (B. J. Snell, M. A.)

Gambling unproductive of wealth

In honest business you give an equivalent for so much received. It may be a service, or it may be the result of service. The farmer gives his farm produce, the result of his toil; the mechanic renders his skill; the pilot his knowledge of the channel; the lawyer his acute knowledge required to navigate channels more intricate. In any one of these cases money is earned by the performance of actual service, and in every case the body politic is the richer for the service. But gambling is unproductive, the wealth of the whole body is not increased. The only result is the circulation of moneys, and even that is a questionable benefit seeing that the cash is but transferred from the pocket of the fools to the pocket of the knaves, always with a contingent reversion to the publican. The community is no more enriched by the mere circulation of gold than the level of a pool is raised by a tempest blowing upon it; gain in one direction is balanced by loss in another. (B. J. Snell, M. A.)

The excitement of gambling

The love of gaming springs from the love of excitement that is in our nature. This has existed always and everywhere. Tacitus says that the ancient Germans would stake their property and even their life on the throw of the dice-box. The typical Asiatic will risk child or wife on the turn of a die or the fighting of a game-cock. Civilization does not seem to diminish the fascination of gambling. And excitement, so long as it is within bounds, is healthful, bracing, and necessary; beyond these bounds (which no man can well define for another), it is exhausting and destructive. At first a man bets to gain a new sensation, a certain thrill of the nerves; to repeat the pleasant thrill an increased dose is necessary. The sensation itself palls; it must be intensified. The process itself is luring, and at last it heats every part of the mind like an oven. It is notorious that the passion grows; no more experiments need to be tried in that direction, vivisection could not demonstrate it more amply. The winnings that come so easily are not so much the gifts of fortune as they are the baits of misfortune that lead on to beggary. Nice distinctions are drawn between playing and gambling. Play is harmless so long as it is play; but playing is a seed that comes up gambling. It is a dangerous seed to play with. Not drunkenness itself is as hard to cure as is the gambling mania when it has once enthralled a man; he cares only for it-every passion is absorbed into that one intense consuming lust. The day lags heavy on his hands without it, all other pursuits are tasteless; he is only alive when he is gaming, and then the very dregs of his soul are stirred into fearful activity. (B. J. Snell, M. A.)

The watchers round the cross

Note the varied types of watchers around the cross.

1. The careless watch of the soldiers.

2. The jealous watch of the enemies.

3. The anxious watch of the women.

4. The wondering watch of angels on high. (Anon.)

The blind watchers at the cross

These rude soldiers had doubtless joined with their comrades in the coarse mockery which preceded the sad procession to Calvary; and then they had to do the rough work of the executioners, fastening the sufferers to the rude wooden crosses, lifting these with their burden, fixing them into the ground, then parting the raiment. And when all that is done they sit stolidly down to take their ease at the foot of the cross, and idly to wait, with eyes that look and see nothing, until the sufferers die. A strange picture!

I. How ignorant men are of the real meaning and outcome of what they do. Think of what a corporals guard of rough English soldiers, out in Northern India, would think if they were bade to hang a native charged with rebellion against the British Government. So much, and no more did these men know of what they were doing. And so with us all. No man knows the real meaning, the possible issue and outcome of a great deal in our lives. If we are wise, we will let results alone, and just take care that our motive is right.

II. Responsibility is limited by knowledge. These men were ignorant of what they were doing, and therefore guiltless. God weighs, not counts, our actions.

III. It is possible to look at Christ on the cross and see nothing. For half a day there these soldiers sat, and it was but a dying Jew they saw-one of three. They were the unmoved witnesses of God manifest in the flesh, dying on the cross for the whole world, and for them. Their ignorance made them blind. Let us all pray to have our ignorance and blindness removed, our hearts softened by the sight of Christ crucified for us. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 27:33-34. And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha — A Syriac word which signifies a scull, or head. In Latin it is called Calvary. The place was so named, either because malefactors used to be executed there, or because the charnel-house or common repository for bones and sculls might have been there. Being upon an eminence, it seems to have been a proper spot of ground for the execution of criminals, as those that were crucified there might be seen at a considerable distance, and by a great number of spectators. They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall — The word χολη, here rendered gall, is used with great latitude in the Septuagint. The Hebrew word, signifying wormwood, is twice so rendered, Pro 5:4; Lam 3:15. At other times it seems to denote any bitter or poisonous infusion that tasted like gall. Mark says, They gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh, εσμυρνισμενον οινον. But, it seems, the two evangelists speak of the same ingredients. For though Mark terms that wine which Matthew calls vinegar, he may really have meant vinegar, which was a common drink among the ancients, (see Num 6:6,) and such as might very properly be called wine, as it was usually made of wine, or of the juice of grapes. Besides, it is well known that the ancients gave the general name of wine to all fermented liquors whatsoever. It is evident, therefore, that to reconcile the evangelists here, we have no occasion for the reading of Beza’s copy, which has οινον instead of οξος. As to the other ingredient of this potion, it is probable the bitter, or poisonous infusion of Matthew mentioned above, might be called myrrh by Mark, because it had myrrh mixed with it; there being nothing more common than for a medicine, compounded of many ingredients, to take its name from some one of them that is prevalent in the composition. Or the evangelists maybe reconciled more directly by supposing, that the word used by Matthew and rendered gall, and which, as we have seen, is applied to wormwood, signifies any bitter drug whatsoever, and therefore may denote myrrh, which has its name from a Hebrew word signifying bitterness. Casaubon has given a third solution of this difficulty. He thinks that our Lord’s friends put a cup of myrrhed wine into the hands of one of the soldiers to give to him, but that the soldier, out of contempt, added gall to it. Whatever were the ingredients in this liquor, it is probable that it was offered to Christ by some of his friends, with a view to stupify and render him insensible of the ignominy and pain of his punishment. For it appears it was not unusual to give criminals drink of this kind, before their execution, in order to make them insensible of the pains of death. Jesus, however, refused the potion that was offered him, because he would bear his sufferings, however sharp, not by intoxicating and stupifying himself, but through the strength of faith, fortitude, and patience.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Matthew

THE CRUCIFIXION

Mat 27:33 - Mat 27:50.

The characteristic of Matthew’s account of the crucifixion is its representation of Jesus as perfectly passive and silent. His refusal of the drugged wine, His cry of desolation, and His other cry at death, are all His recorded acts. The impression of the whole is ‘as a sheep before his shearers is dumb, so He openeth not His mouth.’ We are bid to look on the grim details of the infliction of the terrible death, and to listen to the mockeries of people and priests; but reverent awe forbids description of Him who hung there in His long, silent agony. Would that like reticence had checked the ill-timed eloquence of preachers and teachers of later days!

I. We have the ghastly details of the crucifixion.

Conder’s suggestion of the site of Calvary as a little knoll outside the city, seems possible. It is now a low, bare hillock, with a scanty skin of vegetation over the rock, and in its rounded shape and bony rockiness explains why it was called ‘skull.’ It stands close to the main Damascus road, so that there would be many ‘passers by’ on that feast day. Its top commands a view over the walls into the temple enclosure, where, at the very hour of the death of Jesus, the Passover lamb was perhaps being slain. Arrived at the place, the executioners go about their task with stolid precision. What was the crucifying of another Jew or two to them? Before they lift the cross or fasten their prisoner to it, a little touch of pity, or perhaps only the observance of the usual custom, leads them to offer a draught of wine, in which some anodyne had been mixed, to deaden agony. But the cup which He had to drink needed that He should be in full possession of all His sensibilities to pain, and of all His unclouded firmness of resolve; and so His patient lips closed against the offered mercy. He would not drink because He would suffer, and He would suffer because He would redeem. His last act before He was nailed to the cross was an act of voluntary refusal of an opened door of escape from some portion of His pains.

What a gap there is between Mat 27:34 - Mat 27:35! The unconcerned soldiers went on to the next step in their ordinary routine on such an occasion,-the fixing of the cross and fastening of the victim to it. To them it was only what they had often done before; to Matthew, it was too sacred to be narrated, He cannot bring his pen to write it. As it were, he bids us turn away our eyes for a moment; and when next we look, the deed is done, and there stands the cross, and the Lord hanging, dumb and unresisting, on it. We see not Him, but the soldiers, busy at their next task. So little were they touched by compassion or awe, that they paid no heed to Him, and suspended their work to make sure of their perquisites,-the poor robes which they stripped from His body. Thus gently Matthew hints at the ignominy of exposure attendant on crucifixion, and gives the measure of the hard stolidity of the guards. Gain had been their first thought, comfort was their second. They were a little tired with their march and their work, and they had to stop there on guard for an indefinite time, with nothing to do but two more prisoners to crucify: so they take a rest, and idly keep watch over Him till He shall die. How possible it is to look at Christ’s sufferings and see nothing! These rude legionaries gazed for hours on what has touched the world ever since, and what angels desired to look into, and saw nothing but a dying Jew. They thought about the worth of the clothes, or about how long they would have to stay there, and in the presence of the most stupendous fact in the world’s history were all unmoved. We too may gaze on the cross and see nothing. We too may look at it without emotion, because without faith, or any consciousness of what it may mean for us. Only they who see there the sacrifice for their sins and the world’s, see what is there. Others are as blind as, and less excusable than, these soldiers who watched all day by the Cross, seeing nothing, and tramped back at night to their barrack utterly ignorant of what they had been doing. But their work was not quite done. There was still a piece of grim mockery to be performed, which they would much enjoy. The ‘cause,’ as Matthew calls it, had to be nailed to the upper part of the cross. It was tri-lingual, as John tells us,-in Hebrew, the language of revelation; in Greek, the tongue of philosophy and art; in Latin, the speech of law and power. The three chief forces of the human spirit gave unconscious witness to the King; the three chief languages of the western world proclaimed His universal monarchy, even while they seemed to limit it to one nation. It was meant as a gibe at Him and at the nation, and as Pilate’s statement of the reason for his sentence; but it meant more than Pilate meant by it, and it was fitting that His royal title should hang above His head; for the cross is His throne, and He is the King of men because He has died for them all. One more piece of work the soldiers had still to do. The crucifixion of the two robbers {perhaps of Barabbas’ gang, though less fortunate than he} by Christ’s side was intended to associate Him in the public mind with them and their crimes, and was the last stroke of malice, as if saying, ‘Here is your King, and here are two of His subjects and ministers.’ Matthew says nothing of the triumph of Christ’s love, which won the poor robber for a disciple even at that hour of ignominy. His one purpose seems to be to accumulate the tokens of suffering and shame, and so to emphasise the silent endurance of the meek Lamb of God. Therefore, without a word about any of our Lord’s acts or utterances, he passes on to the next group of incidents.

II. The mockeries of people and priests.

There would be many coming and going on the adjoining road, most of them too busy about their own affairs to delay long; for crucifixion was a slow process, and, when once the cross has been lifted, there would be little to see. But they were not too busy to spit venom at Him as they passed. How many of these scoffers, to whom death cast no shield round the object of their poor taunts, had shouted themselves hoarse on the Monday, and waved palm branches that were not withered yet! What had made the change? There was no change. They were running with the stream in both their hosannas and their jeers, and the one were worth as much as the other. They had been tutored to cry, ‘Blessed is He that cometh!’ and now they were tutored to repeat what had been said at the trial about destroying the temple. The worshippers of success are true to themselves when they mock at failure. They who shout round Jesus, when other people are doing it, are only consistent when they join in the roar of execration. Let us take care that our worship of Him is rooted in our own personal experience, and independent of what rulers or influential minds today say of Him.

A common passion levels all distinctions of culture and rank. The reverend dignitaries echoed the ferocious ridicule of the mob, whom they despised so much. The poorest criminal would have been left to die in peace; but brutal laughter surged round the silent sufferer, and showers of barbed sarcasms were flung at Him. The throwers fancied them exquisite jests, and demonstrations of the absurdity of Christ’s claims; but they were really witnesses to His claims, and explanations of His sufferings. Look at them in turn, with this thought in our minds. ‘He saved others; Himself He cannot save,’ was launched as a sarcasm which confuted His alleged miracles by His present helplessness. How much it admits, even while it denies! Then, He did work miracles; and they were all for others, never for His own ends; and they were all for saving, never for destroying. Then, too, by this very taunt His claim to be the ‘Saviour’ is presupposed. And so, ‘Physician, heal Thyself,’ seemed to them an unanswerable missile to fling. If they had only known what made the ‘cannot,’ and seen that it was a ‘will not,’ they would have stood full in front of the great miracle of love which was before them unsuspected, and would have learned that the not saving Himself, which they thought blew to atoms His pretensions to save others, was really the condition of His saving a world. If He is to save others He cannot save Himself. That is the law for all mutual help. The lamp burns out in giving light, but the necessity for the death of Him who is the life of the world is founded on a deeper ‘must.’ His only way of delivering us from the burden of sin is His taking it on Himself. He has to ‘bear our griefs and carry our sorrows,’ if He is to bear away the sin of the world. But the ‘cannot’ derives all its power from His own loving will. The rulers’ taunt was a venomous lie, as they meant it. If for ‘cannot’ we read ‘will not,’ it is the central truth of the Gospel.

Nor did they succeed better with their second gibe, which made mirth of such a throne, and promised allegiance if He would come down. O blind leaders of the blind! That death which seemed to them to shatter His royalty really established it. His Cross is His throne of saving power, by which He sways hearts and wills, and because of it He receives from the Father universal dominion, and every knee shall bow to Him. It is just because He did not come down from it that we believe on Him. On His head are many crowns; but, however many they be, they all grow out of the crown of thorns. The true kingship is absolute command over willingly submitted spirits; and it is His death which bows us before Him in raptures of glad love which counts submission, liberty, and sacrifice blessed. He has the right to command because He has given Himself for us, and His death wakes all-surrendering and all-expecting faith.

Nor was the third taunt more fortunate. These very religious men had read their Bibles so badly that they might never have heard of Job, nor of the latter half of Isaiah. They had been poring over the letter all their lives, and had never seen, with their microscopes, the great figure of the Innocent Sufferer, so plain there. So they thought that the Cross demonstrated the hollowness of Jesus’ trust in God, and the rejection of Him by God. Surely religious teachers should have been slow to scoff at religious trust, and surely they might have known that failure and disaster even to death were no signs of God’s displeasure. But, in one aspect, they were right. It is a mystery that such a life should end thus; and the mystery is none the less because many another less holy life has also ended in suffering. But the mystery is solved when we know that God did not deliver Him, just because He ‘would have Him,’ and that the Father’s delight in the Son reached its very highest point when He became obedient until death, and offered Himself ‘a sacrifice acceptable, well pleasing unto God.’

III. We pass on to the darkness, desolation, and death.

Matthew represents these three long hours from noon till what answers to our 3 P.M. as passed in utter silence by Christ. What went on beneath that dread veil, we are not meant to know. Nor do we need to ask its physical cause or extent. It wrapped the agony from cruel eyes; it symbolised the blackness of desolation in His spirit, and by it God draped the heavens in mourning for man’s sin. What were the onlookers doing then? Did they cease their mocking, and feel some touch of awe creeping over them?

‘His brow was chill with dying,

And His soul was faint with loss.’

The cry that broke the awful silence, and came out of the darkness, was more awful still. The fewer our words the better; only we may mark how, even in His agony, Jesus has recourse to prophetic words, and finds in a lesser sufferer’s cry voice for His desolation. Further, we may reverently note the marvellous blending of trust and sense of desertion. He feels that God has left Him, and yet he holds on to God. His faith, as a man, reached its climax in that supreme hour when, loaded with the mysterious burden of God’s abandonment, He yet cried in His agony, ‘My God!’ and that with reduplicated appeal. Separation from God is the true death, the ‘wages of sin’; and in that dread hour He bore in His own consciousness the uttermost of its penalty. The physical fact of Christ’s death, if it could have taken place without this desolation from the consciousness of separation from God, would not have been the bearing of all the consequences of man’s sins. The two must never be parted in our grateful contemplations; and, while we reverently abjure the attempt to pierce into that which God hid from us by the darkness, we must reverently ponder what Christ revealed to us by the cry that cleft it, witnessing that He then was indeed bearing the whole weight of a world’s sin. By the side of such thoughts, and in the presence of such sorrow, the clumsy jest of the bystanders, which caught at the half-heard words, and pretended to think that Jesus was a crazy fanatic calling for Elijah with his fiery chariot to come and rescue Him, may well be passed by. One little touch of sympathy moistened His dying lips, not without opposition from the heartless crew who wanted to have their jest out. Then came the end. The loud cry of the dying Christ is worthy of record; for crucifixion ordinarily killed by exhaustion, and this cry was evidence of abundant remaining vitality. In accordance therewith, the fact of death is expressed by a phrase, which, though used for ordinary deaths, does yet naturally express the voluntariness of Christ. ‘He sent away His spirit,’ as if He had bid it depart, and it obeyed. Whether the expression may be fairly pressed so far or no, the fact is the same, that Jesus died, not because He was crucified, but because He chose. He was the Lord and Master of Death; and when He bid His armour-bearer strike, the slave struck, and the King died, not like Saul on the field of his defeat, but a victor in and by and over death.

Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And when

The Order of Events at the Crucifixion

The order of events at the crucifixion:

(1) the arrival at Golgotha Mat 27:33; Mar 15:22; Luk 23:33; Joh 19:17

(2) the offer of the stupefying drink refused Mat 27:34; Mar 15:23

(3) Jesus is crucified between two thieves Mat 27:35-38; Mar 15:24-28; Luk 23:33-38; Joh 19:18-24

(4) He utters the first cry from the cross, "Father, forgive," etc. Luk 23:34.

(5) The soldiers part His garments Mat 27:35; Mar 15:24; Luk 23:34; Joh 19:23

(6) The Jews mock Jesus Mat 27:39-44; Mar 15:29-32; Luk 23:35-38

(7) The thieves rail on Him, but one repents and believes Mat 27:44; Mar 15:32; Luk 23:39-43.

(8) The second cry from the cross, "To-day shalt thou be with me," etc. Luk 23:43.

(9) The third cry, "Woman, behold thy son" Joh 19:26; Joh 19:27.

(10) The darkness Mat 27:45; Mar 15:33; Luk 23:44.

(11) The fourth cry, "My God," etc. Mat 27:46; Mat 27:47; Mar 15:34-36

(12) The fifth cry, "I thirst" Joh 19:28.

(13) The sixth cry, "It is finished" Joh 19:30.

(14) The seventh cry, "Father, into thy hands," etc. Luk 23:46.

(15) Our Lord dismisses his spirit Mat 27:50; Mar 15:37; Luk 23:46; Joh 19:30. (See Scofield "Mat 26:57")

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 27:33. Κρανίου, of a skull) The hill was called so from its shape.[1193]

[1193] Not, as I am inclined to think, from the skulls of malefactors punished with death, which lay about there; for Golgotha, in the singular, means a skull, sc. the place of a skull.—B. H. E.

From all quarters in the circuit of the cross the whole world might behold the Son of God suspended thereon.—Harm., p. 562.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat_27:33 Γολγοθᾶ, Chald. גֻּלְגָלְתָא, Heb. גֻּלְגֹלֶת meaning a skull. Jerome and most other expositors (including Luther, Fritzsche, Strauss, Tholuck, Friedlieb) derive the name from the circumstance that, as this was a place for executing criminals, it abounded with skulls (which, however, are not to be conceived of as lying unburied); while Cyrill, Jerome, Calovius, Reland, Bengel, Paulus, Lücke, de Wette, Ewald, Bleek, Volkmar, Keim, Weiss, on the other hand, trace the name to the shape of the hill.[35] The latter view, which is also that of Thenius (in Ilgens Zeitschr. f. Theol. 1842, 4, p. 1 ff.) and Furer (in Schenkels Lex. II. p. 506), ought to be preferred, because the name means nothing more than simply a skull (not hill of skulls, valley of skulls, and such like, as though the plural (skulls) had been used). A similar practice of giving to places, according to their shape, such names, as Kopf, Scheitel (comp. the hills called Κεφαλαί in Strabo, xvii. 3, p. 835), Stirn, and the like, is not uncommon among ourselves(Germans).

ὅ ἐστι κρανίου τόπος λεγόμενος] which, i.e. which Aramaic term denotes (ἐστί) a so-called (λεγόμ., Kühner, II. 1, p. 232) place of a skull, Lat.: quod calvariae quem dicunt locum significat. It was probably a round, bare hill. But where it stood it is utterly impossible to determine, although it may be regarded as certain (in opposition to Raumer, Schubert, Krafft, Lange, Furer) that it was not the place within the city (the so-called Mount Calvary), which subsequently to the time of Constantine had been excavated under the impression that it was so,a point, however, which Ritter, Erdk. XVI. 1, p. 427 ff., leaves somewhat doubtful. See Robinson, Paläst. II. p. 270 ff., and his neuere Forsch. 1857, p. 332 ff. In answer to Robinson, consult Schaffter, d. ächte Lage d. heil. Grabes, 1849. But see in general, Tobler, Golgatha, seine Kirchen und Klöster, 1851; Fallmerayer in the Abh. d. Baier. Akad. 1852, VI. p. 641 ff.; Ewald, Jahrb. II. p. 118 ff., VI. p. 84 ff.; Arnold in Herzogs Encykl. V. p. 307 ff.; Keim, III. p. 404 ff.

[35] In frying to account for the origin of the name, the Fathers, from Tertullian and Origen down to Euthymius Zigabenus, make reference to the tradition that Adam was buried in the place of a skull. This Judaeo-Christian legend is very old and very widely diffused (see Dillmann, zum christl. Adambuch, in Ewalds Jahrb. V. p. 142); but we are not warranted in confidently assuming that it was of pre-Christian origin (Dillmann) simply because Athanasius, Epiphanius, and others have characterized it as Jewish; it would naturally find much favour, as being well calculated to serve the interests of Christian typology (Augustine: quia ibi erectus sit medicus, ubi jacebat aegrotus, etc.).

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

He is led out of the city, that we may be brought into the heavenly kingdom.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Verse 33. A place called Golgotha] From the Hebrew גלגתה or גלגלת, golgoleth, a skull, probably so called from the many skulls of these who had suffered crucifixion and other capital punishments scattered up and down in the place. It is the same as Calvary, Calvaria, i.e. calvi capitis area, the place of bare skulls. Some think the place was thus called, because it was in the form of a human skull. It is likely that it was the place of public execution, similar to the Gemoniae Scalae at Rome.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(33) A place called Golgotha.—The other Gospels give the name with the definite article, as though it were a well-known locality. It is not mentioned, however, by any Jewish writer, and its position is matter of conjecture. It was “nigh unto the city” (Joh_19:20), and therefore outside the walls (comp. Heb_13:12). There was a garden in it (Joh_19:41), and in the garden a tomb, which was the property of Joseph of Arimathæa (Mat_27:60). A tradition, traceable to the fourth century, has identified the spot with the building known as the Church of the Sepulchre. One eminent archaeologist of our own time (Mr. James Fergusson) identifies it with the Dome of the Rock in the Mosque of El Aksa. Both sites were then outside the city, but were afterwards enclosed by the third wall, built by Agrippa II. The name has been supposed by some to point to its being a common place of execution; but it is not probable that the skulls of criminals would have been left unburied, nor that a wealthy Jew should have chosen such a spot for a garden and a burial-place. The facts lead rather to the conclusion (1) that the name indicated the round, bare, skull-like character of the eminence which was so called; and (2) that it may have been chosen by the priests as a deliberate insult to the member of their own body who had refused to share their policy, and was at least suspected of discipleship, and whose garden, or orchard, with its rock-hewn sepulchre, lay hard by (Mar_15:43; Luk_23:51; Joh_19:38). A later legend saw in the name a token that the bones of Adam were buried there, and that as the blood flowed from the sacred wounds on his skull his soul was translated to Paradise. The more familiar name of Calvary (Luk_23:35) has its origin in the Vulgate rendering (Calvarium=& skull) of the Greek word Kranion, or Cranium, which the Evangelist actually uses.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

33. a place called Golgotha] The site of Golgotha is unknown; it was outside the walls, but “nigh to the city” (Joh_19:20), probably near the public road where people passed by (Mat_27:39), it contained a garden (Joh_19:41). The name, which = “place of a skull,” is generally thought to be derived from the shape and appearance of the hillock or mound on which the crosses were reared. This, however, is uncertain. Pictures often mislead by representing the crucifixion as taking place on a lofty hill at a considerable distance from the city.

The English “Calvary” comes from the Vulgate translation of Luk_23:33, “Et postquam venerunt in locum qui vocatur Calvariæ.” Calvaria=“a bare skull.”

33–50. The Crucifixion and Death of Jesus

Mar_15:22-37; Luk_23:33-46; Joh_19:18-30.

St Mark’s account differs little from St Matthew’s. St Luke names the mockery of the soldiers and the words of the robbers to one another and to Jesus. Three of the sayings on the cross are related by St Luke only: “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do;”—“Verily, I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise;”—“Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” Among other particulars recorded by St John alone are the attempt to alter the superscription—the commendation of His mother to John—the breaking of the malefactors’ legs—the piercing of Jesus—three sayings from the cross: “Woman, behold thy son!” and to the disciple, “Behold thy mother!”—‘I thirst”—“It is finished.” St Matthew and St Mark alone record the cry of loneliness: “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?”

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

They gave him vinegar to drink,.... It was a custom with the Jews (o) when

"a man went out to be executed, to give him to drink a grain of frankincense in a cup of wine, that his understanding might be disturbed, as it is said, Pro 31:6. "Give strong drink to him that is ready to perish, and wine to those that be of heavy hearts"; and the tradition is, that the honourable women in Jerusalem gave this freely; but if they did not, it was provided at the charge of the congregation.

The design of it was to cheer their spirits, and intoxicate their heads, that they might not be sensible of their pain and misery. But such a cup was not allowed Christ at the public expense, nor were the honourable women so compassionate to him; or if it was sent him, the soldiers did not give it him, but another potion in the room of it; indeed Mark says, they gave him "wine mingled with myrrh",

Mar 15:23; which was either a cordial provided by his friends, and given him, and is different from what the soldiers gave him here; or the sense is, that they gave him the cup, that was so called, but not the thing; but instead of it,

vinegar mingled with gall. The Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions, instead of "vinegar", read "wine"; and so does Munster's Hebrew Gospel, and so it is read in Beza's most ancient copy, and in another exemplar, and in one of Stephens's; and which may be easily reconciled with the common reading, and that with Mark; for the wine they gave him was flat and sour, and no other or better than vinegar; and real vinegar may be so called, as this seems to be; and the rather, because vinegar was a part of the Roman soldiers' allowance, and so they had it ready at hand; See Gill on Joh 19:29. As also, because it was thought that vinegar was useful to prolong the life of a man ready to die; and therefore they might choose to give it to Christ, that he might live the longer in misery: so the Jews (p) write, that "if a man swallows a wasp or hornet alive, he cannot live; but they must give him to drink a quarter, , "of vinegar of Shamgaz", (which the gloss says is strong vinegar,) and it is possible he may live a little while, until he hath given orders to his house.

The Arabic version, instead of "gall", reads "myrrh"; nor are we to suppose that this drink was mixed with the gall of a beast itself, but with something that was as bitter as "gall"; as wormwood, or myrrh, or any other bitter, to make it distasteful. This potion of vinegar with gall, was an aggravating circumstance in our Lord's sufferings, being given to him when he had a violent thirst upon him; and was an emblem of the bitter cup of God's wrath, he had already tasted of in the garden, and was about to drink up: the Jews had a notion of vinegar's being expressive of the chastisements of the Messiah; the words in Rut 2:14, they say (q),

"speak of the king Messiah; "come thou hither", draw nigh to the kingdom; "and eat of the bread", this is the bread of the kingdom, "and dip thy morsel in the vinegar",

, "these are the chastisements", as it is said in Isa 53:5, "he was wounded for our transgressions".

By this offer was fulfilled the prophecy in Psa 69:21, and which he did not altogether refuse; for it follows,

and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink: not because it was the vinegar of Gentiles, which was forbidden by the Jewish canons (q), lest it should have been offered to idols; but because he would make use of no means either to prolong his life, or discompose his mind; and that it might appear he knew what he did, and that he was not afraid nor unwilling to die; though he thought fit to taste of it in a superficial way, to show he did not despise nor resent their offer; and that he was really athirst, and ready to drink a more disagreeable potion than that,

(o) T. Bab. Avoda Zara, fol. 12. 2. (p) Midrash Ruth, fol. 33. 2. (q) T. Bab. Avoda Zara, fol. 29. 2.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

33 And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull,

Ver. 33. A place of a skull] Here our thrice noble Conqueror would erect his trophies, to encourage us to suffer for him, if God call us thereto, in the most vile and loathsome places, as also to assure us that his death is life to the dead.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Golgotha - This is a Hebrew word, signifying the place of a skull. This is the word which in Luke is called “Calvary.” The original Greek, there, also means a skull. The word “calvary” is a Latin word meaning “skull,” or place of “skulls.” It is not known certainly why this name was given to this place. Some have supposed that it was because the mount resembled in shape a human skull. The most probable opinion, however, is that it was a place of execution; that malefactors were beheaded there or otherwise put to death, and that their bones remained unburied or unburned. Golgotha, or Calvary, was probably a small eminence on the northwest of Jerusalem, without the walls of the city, but at a short distance. Jesus was put to death out of the city, because capital punishments were not allowed within the walls. See Num 15:35; 1Ki 21:13. This was a law among the Romans as well as the Jews. He also died there, because the bodies of the beasts slain in sacrifice as typical of him were “burned without the camp.” He also, as the antitype, suffered “without the gate,” Heb 13:11-12. The place which is shown as Calvary now is within the city, and must also have been within the ancient walls, and there is no reason to suppose that it is the place where the Saviour was put to death.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Golgotha, i.e. the place of Calvary,[3] of heads and skulls: perhaps, says St. Jerome, from the skulls of persons executed, and buried there. Several ancient writers would have it so called, from Adam’s skull, whom they guess to have been buried there. Some also say that a part of this mountain was called Moria, the place where Abraham was ready to have sacrificed his son Isaac. (Witham) --- Isaac, carrying the wood on his shoulders for the sacrifice, was a figure of Jesus Christ carrying his cross. The mountain was situated to the north-west of Jerusalem.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Calvariæ locus. Greek: kraniou topos.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

33. Place called Golgotha — This was a Hebrew word signifying a skull-place. It is in Latin Calvaria, and thus it is in Luke called Calvary, which is the common name in English. It was called thus, some think, because, being the usual place of execution, the skulls of malefactors whose bodies had been there buried often become visible. But more probably it was so called from a supposed resemblance of the mound to a human skull. Calvary might have been a little elevated, but it could not have been a mountain or mount. Dr. Barclay, (with reasoning that may stand as valid enough in the existing absence of any proof to the contrary,) identifies Golgotha with Goath, (Jer_31:39,) which he locates on the east, close between the city wall and the Kedron, a little north of Gethsemane. If that was the place of crucifixion, there, also, was the garden containing Joseph’s new tomb. Joh_19:4. The scene of bloody sweat, the crucifixion, and the entombment was then properly one.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

A place called Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull; quod est Calvariae locus (Vulgate). Hence the Latinized name Calvary. The word means "a skull;" but why the spot was so called is a doubtful question. That it was the usual place of execution is a suggestion with no proof, and one would expect the designation in this case to be "the place of skulls." Tradition (authorized by Origen) pointed to it as the spot where Adam was buried, and where his skull was found a story that seems to have arisen from the typical reason that it was congruous that the first Adam and the second Adam should meet in death, the latter winning the victory there where the former showed his defeat. Most probably the name was given to it as descriptive of its appearance, a bare space of rock (not a hill) denuded of verdure, and bearing a distant resemblance to a human skull wanting hair. The actual situation of Calvary is hotly contested by exegetes and travellers, and is still far from being determined. The only criterion offered by our accounts in the Gospels is that it was without the then walls of the city, not far from one or the gates, and by the side of one of the principal roads leading from the city to the country. A certain knoll on the hill Gareb towards the northwest, by which the Damascus road led, and to which Jeremiah (31:39) refers, is supposed, not very happily, to answer these requirements, If the present Church of the Holy Sepulchre, on the northwest of Jerusalem, really contains the actual Golgotha and the tomb of our Lord, the course of the second wall as usually drawn cannot be correct, as it embraces this site completely (see the Guardian, August 30, 1893, p. 1353). Opinion, always altering, has lately been inclined to endorse the authenticity of many of the traditional sites in the holy city and its neighbourhood. Further discoveries will set this and other matters at rest. Meantime, judgment must be suspended (see on ver. 51).

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

A place called Golgotha, that is, the place of a skull - Golgotha in Syriac signifies a skull or head: it was probably called so from this time; being an eminence upon Mount Calvary, not far from the king's gardens. Mark xv, 22; Luke xxiii, 33; John xix, 17

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

33. When they were come unto a place called Golgotha. A Hebrew word, meaning a skull. From its Latin equivalent, calvaria, comes our English word Calvary, which occurs in the English New Testament only in Luke 23:33, where it should be translated “a skull” The name was due, either to a rounded rock like a skull, or to the fact that it was a place of execution and that skulls were lying there. The locality is not certainly known.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

33–50. THE CRUCIFIXION AND DEATH OF JESUS

Mar 15:22-37; Luk 23:33-46; Joh 19:18-30

St Mark’s account differs little from St Matthew’s. St Luke names the mockery of the soldiers and the words of the robbers to one another and to Jesus. Three of the sayings on the cross are related by St Luke only: ‘Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do;’—‘Verily, I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise;’—‘Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.’ Among other particulars recorded by St John alone are the attempt to alter the superscription—the commendation of His mother to John—the breaking of the malefactors’ legs—the piercing of Jesus—three sayings from the cross: ‘Woman, behold thy son!’ and to the disciple, ‘Behold thy mother!’—‘I thirst’—‘It is finished.’ St Matthew and St Mark alone record the cry of loneliness: ‘Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?’

33. εἰς τόπον κ.τ.λ. The site of Golgotha is not known for certain, but see notes to Plan of Jerusalem; it was outside the walls, but ‘nigh to the city’ (Joh 19:20), probably near the public road where people passed by (Mat 27:39), it contained a garden (Joh 19:41). The name, which = ‘place of a skull,’ is generally thought to be derived from the shape and appearance of the hillock or mound on which the crosses were reared. This, however, is uncertain. Pictures often mislead by representing the crucifixion as taking place on a lofty hill at a considerable distance from the city.

The English ‘Calvary’ comes from the Vulgate translation of Luk 23:33, ‘Et postquam venerunt in locum qui vocatur Calvariæ.’ Calvaria = ‘a bare skull.’

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

33.] Γολγοθᾶ, in Chaldee גֻּלְגָּלתָא, in Hebrew גֻּלְגּלֶת, a skull: the name is by Jerome, and generally, explained from its being the usual place of executions and abounding with skulls—not however unburied, which was not allowed. This last consideration raises an objection to the explanation,—and as the name does not import κρανίων τόπος, but κρανίου τ. or simply κρανίον (Luke), many, among whom are Reland, Paulus, Lücke, De Wette, Meyer, &c., understand it as applying to the shape of the hill or rock. But neither does this seem satisfactory, as we have no analogy to guide us (Meyer’s justification of the name from κράνιον, or κρανεῖον, a wood near Corinth, does not apply: for that is so called from κράνον, the cornel tree—De Wette), and no such hill or rock is known to have existed.

As regards the situation, we await some evidence which may decide between the conflicting claims of the commonly-received site of Calvary and the Holy Sepulchre, and that upheld by Mr. Ferguson, who holds that the Dome of the Rock, usually known as the Mosque of Omar, is in reality the spot of our Lord’s entombment. See his Article “Jerusalem” in Dr. Smith’s Biblical Dictionary: and on the other side, Williams’s Holy City, and Stanley’s Sinai and Palestine, edn. 3, p. 459 ff.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

(M) 33. And they came to a place called Golgotha, that is (a place) called Skull-place.] Mk. has: “And they bring Him to the Golgotha-place, that is being interpreted ‘skull’-place.”—ἐλθόντες] avoiding, as often, Mk.’s hist. pres. Lk. also has ἦλθαν.—Γολγοθᾶ] is the Aramaic גולגולתא=“a skull.” For the dropping of the second ל, cf. Dalm. Gram. 2 p. 166.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Golgotha. An Aramaic word, Gulgoltha, = the Hebrew, Gulgoleth, and translated skull in Jud 9:53; 2Ki 9:35. The word Calvary comes through the Latin calvaria, meaning skull, and used in the Vulgate. The New Testament narrative does not mention a mount or hill. The place was probably a rounded elevation. The meaning is not, as Tynd., a place of dead men's skulls, but simply skull.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.