tion
of His enemies, which is expressed in the preceding words, to give Him
His grave with the wicked. Since He had not acted like them, God took
care that He did not receive their ignominious burial, but an
honourable one. In reference to the passage under consideration, it is
said in 1 Pet. ii. 22: [Greek: hos amartian ouk epoiese oude heurethe
dolos en to stomati autou]. Instead of "violence," Peter intentionally
employs "sin."--_Hofmann_ has advanced the following arguments against
the explanation which we have given. 1. "By what is this contrast
(which, according to our explanation, is contained in the words: They
gave Him His grave with the wicked, and with a rich man in His death)
to be recognized in the text? There remains no trace of a contrast,
unless it be contained in [Hebrew: rweiM] and [Hebrew: ewir]. Are these
really two ideas so contradictory, that they alone are sufficient to
bring into contrariety two clauses which have altogether the appearance
of being intended for the same purpose?" But in this argument,
_Hofmann_ overlooks the circumstance, that the wicked are specially
_criminals_--for they alone had a peculiar grave--and that it is not
the general relation of the wicked and rich to one another which comes
into consideration, but especially the relation in which they stand to
one another as regards the _burial_. If this be kept in view, it is at
once evident that the contrariety is expressed with sufficient
clearness. From Isa. xxii. 16; Job xxi. 32; Matt. xxvii. 57, it appears
that the rich man, and the honourable grave, are closely connected with
each other. Hence, it must have been by an opposite activity that to
the Servant of God a grave was assigned with the wicked, and with a
rich. 2. "To be rich is not in itself a sin which deserved an
ignominious burial, far less received it, but on the other hand, to
find his grave with a rich man is not an indemnification to the just
for the disgrace of having died the death of a criminal." But the fact
that the first Evangelist reports it so minutely (Matt. xxvii. 57-61)
clearly enough shows the importance of the circumstance; comp. also how
John, in chap. xix. 33 ff., points out the circumstance that Christ's
legs were not broken, as were those of the malefactors. In the little,
the great is prepared and prefigured. And although the burial with a
rich man is, in itself, of no small importance when viewed as the first
point where the exaltation [Pg 296]