When discussions concerning Biblical Theology arise, it is unusual for Matthew Henry to be mentioned as a model of this grand theological discipline. As a young believer I would often rush home from a Worship service and read Matthew Henry on the particular passage preached that Lord’s Day morning. On one occasion I distinctly remember finding a biblical theological gem in regard to Christ sweating great drops of blood in the Garden of Gethsemane. Henry noted:
That, in this agony, his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground. Sweat came in with sin, and was a branch of the curse (Gen. 3:19). And therefore, when Christ was made sin and a curse for us, he underwent a grievous sweat, that in the sweat of his face we might eat bread, and that he might sanctify and sweeten all our trials to us.
It was not long after reading this that I came across the most satisfactory, biblical-theological interpretation of the crown of thorns, in a short pamphlet by Iain R. K. Paisley. In this short work Paisley made the point that thorns find their significance in the Garden of Eden, where Adam sinned and brought down God’s just wrath on all of humanity. Christ, as the second Adam, bears the curse, due to sin, in His body on the tree. The crown of thorns that were pressed into His brow are a symbol of His role as sin-bearer. I think this is one of the most amazing truths in all the Scriptures. The organic relationship between Genesis 3 and the rest of the Bible is evident in many places, but this is perhaps the most penetrating and impressive of them all. The Seed of the woman (Gen. 3:15), promised to our first parents in the Garden, is the One who would bear man’s curse (Gen. 3:17-19). This thought is also found in the writings of Matthew Henry. In his notes on Matthew 27:28-29, Henry explained:
They platted a crown of thorns, and put it upon his hea d. This was to carry on the humour of making him a mock-king; yet, had they intended it only for a reproach, they might have platted a crown of straw, or rushes, but they designed it to be painful to him, and to be literally, what crowns are said to be figuratively, lined with thorns; he that invented this abuse, it is likely, valued himself upon the wit of it; but there was a mystery in it.
[1.] Thorns came in with sin, and were part of the curse that was the product of sin. Therefore Christ, being made a curse for us, binds them as a crown to him; for his sufferings for us were his glory.
[2.] Now he answered to the type of Abraham’s ram that was caught in the thicket, and so offered up instead of Isaac.
[3.] Thorns signify afflictions. These Christ put into a crown; so much did he alter the property of them to them that are his, giving them cause to glory in tribulation, and making it to work for them a weight of glory.
[4.] Christ was crowned with thorns, to show that his kingdom was not of this world, nor the glory of it worldly glory, but is attended here with bonds and afflictions, while the glory of it is to be revealed.
[5.] It was the custom of some heathen nations, to bring their sacrifices to the altars, crowned with garlands; these thorns were the garlands with which this great Sacrifice was crowned.
[6.] these thorns, it is likely, fetched blood from his blessed head, which trickled down his face, like the previous ointment (typifying the blood of Christ with which he consecrated himself) upon the head, which ran down upon the beard, even Aaron’s beard . Thus, when he came to espouse to himself his love, his dove, his undefiled church, his head was filled with dew, and his locks with the drops of the night , Cant. v. 2 .
In regard to Christ being striped naked Henry wrote:
They stripped him, v. 28 . The shame of nakedness came in with sin (Gen. iii. 7 ); and therefore Christ, when he came to satisfy for sin, and take it away, was made naked, and submitted to that shame, that he might prepare for us white raiment, to cover us, Rev. iii. 18 .
Tags: Add new tag, Biblical Theology, Curse, Garden of Eden, Matthew Henry
Thanks for this. For all the ribbing Matthew Henry has taken lately from some circles it is nice to see some appreciation thrown his way. Henry has many insights like this that are just mindbogglingly eye-opening.
As a side note thanks for the kind word towards Iain R. K. Paisley. He is primarily responsible for my own move away from Neo-Barthianism to a consistent Reformed theology.
Freedom of speech my friend, that’s why