(13) And, behold, two of them.—The long and singularly interesting narrative that follows is peculiar to St. Luke, and must be looked upon as among the “gleaning of the grapes,” which rewarded his researches even after the full vintage had apparently been gathered in by others. The Emmaus in Galilee, about a mile from Tiberias, was famous for its medicinal warm springs (Jos. Ant. xviii. 2, § 3; Wars, iv. 1, § 3), and had the narrative referred to it, we might have supposed St. Luke to have visited it on that account. We have no record of any such springs in the Emmaus near Jerusalem, which is also named by Josephus (Wars, vii. 6, § 6) as at a distance of sixty stadia, or furlongs, from Jerusalem. The name, however, was probably, as Josephus states (as above), significant, connected with the modern Arabic term, Hammâm, or Hummum, for a “bath,” and indicating, therefore, like the Latin “Aquae,” or the French “Aix,” the presence of such springs, and if so, the same hypothesis may fit in here. In the case of the Emmaus (afterwards Nicopolis), in the plain of Philistia, there was a fountain mentioned by early writers as famous for its healing powers (Euseb. Chron. 41). We can hardly doubt, from the prominence given to the name of Cleopas, that he was St. Luke’s informant. We are not told when the disciples started, but as it was “towards evening” when they reached Emmaus, it could not well have been before their noontide meal. The fulness with which the whole account is given may well lead us to think of it as taken down at the time from the lips of the narrator.

Luke

THE RISEN LORD’S SELF-REVELATION TO WAVERING DISCIPLES

Luke 24:13 - Luke 24:32.

These two disciples had left their companions after Peter’s return from the sepulchre and before Mary Magdalene hurried in with her tidings that she had seen Jesus. Their coming away at such a crisis, like Thomas’s absence that day, shows that the scattering of the sheep was beginning to follow the smiting of the shepherd. The magnet withdrawn, the attracted particles fall apart. What arrested that process? Why did not the spokes fall asunder when the centre was removed? John’s disciples crumbled away after his death. When Theudas fell, all his followers ‘were dispersed’ and came to nought. The Church was knit more closely together after the death that, according to all analogy, should have scattered it. Only the fact of the Resurrection explains the anomaly. No reasonable men would have held together unless they had known that their Messianic hopes had not been buried in Christ’s grave. We see the beginnings of the Resurrection of these hopes in this sweet story.

I. We have first the two sad travellers and the third who joins them.

Probably the former had left the group of disciples on purpose to relieve the tension of anxiety and sorrow by walking, and to get a quiet time to bring their thoughts into some order. They were like men who had lived through an earthquake; they were stunned, and physical exertion, the morning quiet of the country, and the absence of other people, would help to calm their nerves, and enable them to realise their position. Their tone of mind will come out more distinctly presently. Here it is enough to note that the ‘things which had come to pass’ filled their minds and conversation. That being so, they were not left to grope in the dark. ‘Jesus Himself drew near, and went with them.’ Honest occupation of mind with the truth concerning Him, and a real desire to know it, are not left unhelped. We draw Him to our sides when we wish and try to grasp the real facts concerning Him, whether they coincide with our prepossessions or not.

It is profoundly interesting and instructive to note the characteristics of the favoured ones who first saw the risen Lord. They were Mary, whose heart was an altar of flaming and fragrant love; Peter, the penitent denier; and these two, absorbed in meditation on the facts of the death and burial. What attracts Jesus? Love, penitence, study of His truth. He comes to these with the appropriate gifts for them, as truly-yea, more closely-as of old. Perhaps the very doubting that troubled them brought Him to their help. He saw that they especially needed Him, for their faith was sorely wounded. Necessity is as potent a spell to bring Jesus as desert. He comes to reward fixed and fervent love, and He comes, too, to revive it when tremulous and cold.

‘Their eyes were holden,’ says Luke; and similarly ‘their eyes were opened’ {Luke 24:31}. He makes the reason for His not being recognised a subjective one, and his narrative affords no support to the theory of a change in our Lord’s resurrection body. How often does Jesus still come to us, and we discern Him not! Our paths would be less lonely, and our thoughts less sad, if we realised more fully and constantly our individual share in the promise,’ I am with you always.’

II. We have next the conversation {Luke 24:17 - Luke 24:28}.

The unknown new-comer strikes into the dialogue with a question which, on some lips, would have been intrusive curiosity, and would have provoked rude retorts. But there was something in His voice and manner which unlocked hearts. Does He not still come close to burdened souls, and with a smile of love on His face and a promise of help in His tones, ask us to tell Him all that is in our hearts? ‘Communications’ told to Him cease to sadden. Those that we cannot tell to Him we should not speak to ourselves.

Cleopas naively wonders that there should be found a single man in Jerusalem ignorant of the things which had come to pass. He forgot that the stranger might know these, and not know that they were talking about them. Like the rest of us, he fancied that what was great to him was as great to everybody. What could be the subject of their talk but the one theme? The stranger assumes ignorance, in order to win to a full outpouring. Jesus wishes us to put all fears and doubts and shattered hopes into plain words to Him. Speech to Christ cleanses our bosoms of much perilous stuff. Before He speaks in answer we are lightened.

Very true to nature is the eager answer of the two. The silence once broken, out flows a torrent of speech, in which love and grief, disciples’ pride in their Master, and shattered hopes, incredulous bewilderment and questioning wonder, are blended.

That long speech {Luke 24:19 - Luke 24:24} gives a lively conception of the two disciples’ state of mind. Probably it fairly represented the thought of all. We note in it the limited conception of Jesus as but a prophet, the witness to His miracles and teaching {the former being set first, as having more impressed their minds}, the assertion of His universal appreciation by the ‘people,’ the charging of the guilt of Christ’s death on ‘our rulers,’ the sad contrast between the officials’ condemnation of Him and their own fond Messianic hopes, and the despairing acknowledgment that these were shattered.

The reference to ‘the third day’ seems to imply that the two had been discussing the meaning of our Lord’s frequent prophecy about it. The connection in which they introduce it looks as if they were beginning to understand the prophecy, and to cherish a germ of hope in His Resurrection, or, at all events, were tossed about with uncertainty as to whether they dared to cherish it. They are chary of allowing that the women’s story was true; naively they attach more importance to its confirmation by men. ‘But Him they saw not,’ and, so long as He did not appear, they could not believe even angels saying ‘that He was alive.’

The whole speech shows how complete was the collapse of the disciples’ Messianic hopes, how slowly their minds opened to admit the possibility of Resurrection, and how exacting they were in the matter of evidence for it, even to the point of hesitating to accept angelic announcements. Such a state of mind is not the soil in which hallucinations spring up. Nothing but the actual appearance of the risen Lord could have changed these sad, cautious unbelievers to lifelong confessors. What else could have set light to these rolling smoke-clouds of doubt, and made them flame heaven-high and world-wide?

‘The ingenuous disclosure of their bewilderment appealed to their Companion’s heart, as it ever does. Jesus is not repelled by doubts and perplexities, if they are freely spoken to Him. To put our confused thoughts into plain words tends to clear them, and to bring Him as our Teacher. His reproach has no anger in it, and inflicts no pain, but puts us on the right track for arriving at the truth. If these two had listened to the ‘prophets,’ they would have understood their Master, and known that a divine ‘must’ wrought itself out in His Death and Resurrection. How often, like them, do we torture ourselves with problems of belief and conduct of which the solution lies close beside us, if we would use it?

Jesus claimed ‘all the prophets’ as His witnesses. He teaches us to find the highest purpose of the Old Testament in its preparation for Himself, and to look for foreshadowings of His Death and Resurrection there. What gigantic delusion of self-importance that was, if it was not the self-attestation of the Incarnate Word, to whom all the written word pointed! He will still, to docile souls, be the Interpreter of Scripture. They who see Him in it all are nearer its true appreciation than those who see in the Old Testament everything but Him.

III. We have finally the disclosure and disappearance of the Lord.

The little group must have travelled slowly, with many a pause on the road, while Jesus opened the Scriptures; for they left the city in the morning, and evening was near before they had finished their ‘threescore furlongs’ {between seven and eight miles}. His presence makes the day’s march seem short.

‘He made as though He would have gone further,’ not therein assuming the appearance of a design which He did not really entertain, but beginning a movement which He would have carried out if the disciples’ urgency had not detained Him. Jesus forces His company on no man. He ‘would have gone further’ if they had not said ‘Abide with us.’ He will leave us if we do not keep Him. But He delights to be held by beseeching hands, and our wishes ‘constrain’ Him. Happy are they who, having felt the sweetness of walking with Him on the weary road, seek Him to bless their leisure and to add a more blissful depth of repose to their rest!

The humble table where Christ is invited to sit, becomes a sacred place of revelation. He hallows common life, and turns the meals over which He presides into holy things. His disciples’ tables should be such that they dare ask their Lord to sit at them. But how often He would be driven away by luxury, gross appetite, trivial or malicious talk! We shall all be the better for asking ourselves whether we should like to invite Jesus to our tables. He is there, spectator and judge, whether invited or not.

Where Jesus is welcomed as guest He becomes host. Perhaps something in gesture or tone, as He blessed and brake the bread, recalled the loved Master to the disciples’ minds, and, with a flash, the glad ‘It is He!’ illuminated their souls. That was enough. His bodily presence was no longer necessary when the conviction of His risen life was firmly fixed in them. Therefore He disappeared. The old unbroken companionship was not to be resumed. Occasional appearances, separated by intervals of absence, prepared the disciples gradually for doing without His visible presence.

If we are sure that He has risen and lives for ever, we have a better presence than that. He is gone from our sight that He may be seen by our faith. That ‘now we see Him not’ is advance on the position of His first disciples, not retrogression. Let us strive to possess the blessing of ‘those who have not seen, and yet have believed.’

Luke 24:13-24. Behold, two of them — Not of the apostles, for those two, returning, told what had passed between Christ and them to the eleven apostles, (Luke 24:33; Luke 24:35,) but two of the other disciples that were with them; went that same day — On which Jesus arose; to a village called Emmaus — Not that Emmaus near Tiberias, so called from the hot baths there, for that was in Galilee, but a village in the tribe of Judah; about threescore furlongs — That is, near eight miles from Jerusalem. Some MSS. say it was one hundred and sixty furlongs distant from Jerusalem, which is evidently a mistake, Josephus confirming the declaration of Luke, Bell., Luke 7:27. And they talked together of all these things — As they walked along they discoursed together of all these wonderful and important things which had lately happened, and which could not but lie with great weight on their minds. And while they communed together — About the sufferings and death of their beloved Lord, and the report which had been spread that morning of his resurrection; and reasoned — Concerning these things, namely, whether it was probable that he actually was risen, and therefore, notwithstanding he had suffered death, was the Messiah. The word συζητειν, here rendered reasoned, properly signifies, as Mr. West observes, to discuss, examine, or, inquire together; and it appears from the connection, that as they were discoursing on the sufferings, and death, and resurrection of Jesus, the scope of their inquiry was, how to reconcile these events with what had been foretold concerning the Messiah, which, by the message that the women had but just before brought from the angels, they were particularly called to remember. Accordingly, when Jesus had inquired, (Luke 24:17,) What manner of communications, &c.? or, as Mr. West would render it, What arguments are these that ye are debating one with another? this is the point he took occasion to illustrate and explain, (Luke 24:26-27,) by showing them it was necessary, in accomplishment of what was foretold, that the Messiah should suffer these things, and so enter into his glory. Jesus himself drew near, &c. — As one come from Jerusalem, and who was travelling the same way. But their eyes were holden — Their sight was supernaturally influenced; that they should not know him — Probably, also, one reason why they did not know him, was that, as Mark says, (Mark 16:12,) he appeared, εν ετερα μορφη, in another form, or habit, namely, different from that which he formerly had when he conversed with them. And he said, What manner of communications are these that ye have, and are sad? — Jesus spake thus to them in the character of a stranger, making free, as travellers might do one with another, to ask what the subject of their conversation was, and why they looked so sad? And one of them — One of the two; whose name was Cleopas — The same with Alpheus, the father of James the Less and Judas, who were two of the apostles, see on Luke 6:15-16; answering said, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem? — Cleopas was surprised that any one who had come from Jerusalem should have been ignorant of the extraordinary things which had lately happened there. “There are two ways,” says Dr. Campbell, “wherein the words of Cleopas may be understood by the reader: one is, as a method of accounting for the apparent ignorance of this traveller; the other, as an expression of surprise, that any one who had been at Jerusalem at that time, though a stranger, should not know what had made so much noise among all ranks, and had so much occupied, for some days, all the leading men in the nation, the chief priests, the scribes, the rulers, and the whole sanhedrim, as well as the Roman procurator, and the soldiery. The common version favours the first interpretation; I prefer the second, in concurrence, as I imagine, with the majority of interpreters, ancient and modern. I cannot discover, with Beza, any thing in it remote from common speech. On the contrary, I think it, in such a case as the present, so natural an expression of surprise, that examples remarkably similar may be produced from most languages.” And he said, What things — What are those matters to which you refer? And they said, Concerning Jesus, a prophet mighty in deed and in word — Who wrought the most astonishing miracles, and taught the most instructive and excellent doctrine; before God — Who evidently bore testimony to him; and all the people — Among whom he appeared publicly for some years. And the chief priests, &c. — Delivered him to the Roman governor; to be condemned — Prevailing on him, by their importunity, to pass sentence of death upon him. But we trusted, &c. — Having thus given an account of Christ’s character, miracles, and sufferings, Cleopas was so ingenuous as to acknowledge, that they once believed him to be the deliverer of Israel, and in that faith had become his disciples. But that they now began to think themselves mistaken, because he had been dead three days. He added, that some women of their acquaintance, who had been that morning at the sepulchre, had astonished them with the news of his resurrection, affirming, that they had seen a vision of angels, which told them that he was alive. It seems his companion and he had left the city before any of the women came with the news of Christ’s personal appearance. And certain of them who were with us — Meaning, probably, Peter and John, as is related, John 20:2, &c.; went, &c., and found it as the women had said — That is, that the body was gone, and that the funeral linen was laid in order there; but him they saw not — They had not the satisfaction of seeing Jesus.

24:13-27 This appearance of Jesus to the two disciples going to Emmaus, happened the same day that he rose from the dead. It well becomes the disciples of Christ to talk together of his death and resurrection; thus they may improve one another's knowledge, refresh one another's memory, and stir up each other's devout affections. And where but two together are well employed in work of that kind, he will come to them, and make a third. Those who seek Christ, shall find him: he will manifest himself to those that inquire after him; and give knowledge to those who use the helps for knowledge which they have. No matter how it was, but so it was, they did not know him; he so ordering it, that they might the more freely discourse with him. Christ's disciples are often sad and sorrowful, even when they have reason to rejoice; but through the weakness of their faith, they cannot take the comfort offered to them. Though Christ is entered into his state of exaltation, yet he notices the sorrows of his disciples, and is afflicted in their afflictions. Those are strangers in Jerusalem, that know not of the death and sufferings of Jesus. Those who have the knowledge of Christ crucified, should seek to spread that knowledge. Our Lord Jesus reproved them for the weakness of their faith in the Scriptures of the Old Testament. Did we know more of the Divine counsels as far as they are made known in the Scriptures, we should not be subject to the perplexities we often entangle ourselves in. He shows them that the sufferings of Christ were really the appointed way to his glory; but the cross of Christ was that to which they could not reconcile themselves. Beginning at Moses, the first inspired writer of the Old Testament, Jesus expounded to them the things concerning himself. There are many passages throughout all the Scriptures concerning Christ, which it is of great advantage to put together. We cannot go far in any part, but we meet with something that has reference to Christ, some prophecy, some promise, some prayer, some type or other. A golden thread of gospel grace runs through the whole web of the Old Testament. Christ is the best expositor of Scripture; and even after his resurrection, he led people to know the mystery concerning himself, not by advancing new notions, but by showing how the Scripture was fulfilled, and turning them to the earnest study of it."Two of them." Two of the disciples. The name of one of them was "Cleopas," Luke 24:18. Many have supposed that the other was Luke, and that he omitted his own name from modesty. Others have supposed that it was Peter. See Luke 24:34; 1 Corinthians 15:5. There is no evidence to guide us here. Dr. Lightfoot has shown that "Cleopas" is the same name as "Alpheus," who was the father of the apostle James, Matthew 10:3.

Emmaus - In regard to the locality of Emmaus, it seems quite probable that it is the same village which is referred to by Josephus ("Jewish Wars," vii. 6, Section 6), who states that, after the destruction of Jerusalem, Titus gave "Emmaus," distant from Jerusalem threescore furlongs, to 800 of his troops, whom he had dismissed from his army, for their habitation. Dr. Thomson ("The Land and the Book," vol. ii. p. 307, 540) regards it as the present Kuriet el 'Aineb, which Dr. Robinson identifies with Kirjath-jearim. Of this place he says: "Kuriet el 'Aineb itself would be the proper distance from Jerusalem, and being on the road to Jaffa, and on the dividing ridge between the plain and the mountains, the Roman emperor might have deemed it an advantageous post for a colony made up of his disbanded soldiers, who could keep in check the surrounding country. Certain it is that in these later ages the occupants of this place have controlled the whole adjacent region, and for many a generation exercised their lawless tyranny upon helpless pilgrims.

"It took just three hours' moderate riding from Kuriet el 'Aineb to Jerusalem: first, a long descent into Wady Hanina, which passes between it and Soba; then a similar ascent, succeeded by a very steep pass, and a very slippery path down to Kulonia. At this place are some heavy foundations of church, convent, or castle by the road-side, which may be of almost any age, and also gardens of fruit-trees, irrigated by a fountain of excellent water. Kulonia is on a hill north of the road, and appears in a fair way to become a ruin itself before long. The path then winds up a valley, and stretches over a dreary waste of bare rocks until within a mile of the city, when the view opens upon its naked ramparts and the mysterious regions toward the Dead Sea."

Threescore furlongs - Sixty furlongs, or about seven or eight miles. It is not certain that these were apostles, but the contrary seems to be implied in Luke 24:33. See the notes at that verse. If they were not, it is probable that they were intimate disciples, who may have been much with the Saviour during the latter part of his ministry and the closing scenes of his life. But it is wholly unknown why they were going to Emmaus. It may have been that this was their native place, or that they had friends in the vicinity. They seem to have given up all for lost, and to have come to the conclusion that Jesus was not the Messiah, though they naturally conversed about it, and there were many things which they could not explain. Their Master had been crucified contrary to their expectation, their hopes dashed, their anticipation disappointed, and they were now returning in sadness, and very naturally conversed, in the way, of the things which had happened in Jerusalem.

Lu 24:13-35. Christ Appears to the Two Going to Emmaus.

13. two of them—One was Cleopas (Lu 24:18); who the other was is mere conjecture.

Emmaus—about seven and a half miles from Jerusalem. They probably lived there and were going home after the Passover.

Who those two were is variously guessed; that the name of the one was Cleopas, appeareth from Luke 24:18. Some will have the other to have been Luke, but he in the beginning of his Gospel distinguishes himself from eyewitnesses, Luke 1:2. Some will have it to have been Nathanael; others will have it to have been Simon, from Luke 24:34, and 1 Corinthians 15:5. But these things are so uncertain, that all the instruction we can learn from them is the vanity and uncertainty of traditions. This Emmaus was from Jerusalem about sixty furlongs, which make seven miles and a half, according to our computation.

And behold two of them went that same day,.... Two of the disciples, as the Persic version reads; not of the eleven apostles, for it is certain that one of them was not an apostle; but two of the seventy disciples, or of the society of the hundred and twenty that were together: one of these was Cleophas or Alphaeus, as appears from Luke 24:18 the other is, by some, thought to be Luke the Evangelist, as Theophylact on the place observes, who, out of modesty, mentions not his name; others have thought that Nathanael was the other person; and Dr. Lightfoot seems very confident, from Luke 24:34 that the Apostle Peter was the other; but it is not certain who he was: however, this very remarkable affair happened, and therefore a "behold" is prefixed to it, on the "same day"; the first day of the week; the day on which Christ rose from the dead; and the third day from his death it was, see Luke 24:1 that these two disciples travelled:

to a village called Emmaus; whither they might go either to see their friends, or upon some secular affair, or to be retired from the noise of the city, and be secure from danger by their enemies; or it may be this was the place of Cleophas's abode, who, with the other disciple, was returning home after the celebration of the passover. The place whither they went is particularly mentioned, not because it was a place of note, but for the certainty of the fact. It was now but a village, having been burnt since the death of Herod the great, by the order of Varus, the Roman governors (l); though it afterwards became a considerable city, if it is the same with Nicopolis, as Jerom asserts (m); though that rather seems to be the Ammaus, or Chammath of Tiberias, since it was situated by the lake of Genesareth. However, it is certain, that Emmaus is reckoned, by Josephus (n), one of their chief cities; and Jarchi, and Bartenora (o) say, it is the name of a city; and Pliny (p) calls it a toparchy, and says it was watered with fountains; which agrees with the account the Jews give of it (q).

"R. Jochanan ben Zaccai had five disciples; all the time that he stood, or lived, they sat before him; when he departed, they went to Jabneh; and R. Eleazar ben Arach went to his wife, "at Emmaus", a place of pleasant waters, and a beautiful habitation.''

It is mentioned, in company with Bethoron, and Lud, or Lydda: it is said (r),

"from Bethoron, to "Emmaus", is the mountain; and from "Emmaus" to Lydda, the plain; and from Lydda to the sea, the valley.''

Bethoron is mentioned as near Nicopolis, by Jerom; and perhaps is the same with Betholone in Pliny: in Emmaus was a market: at least there was a butcher's market in it; hence we read of, , "the shambles of Emmaus" (s); mention is made of a place so called, as in:

"So they went forth with all their power, and came and pitched by Emmaus in the plain country.'' (1 Maccabees 3:40)

"So the camp removed, and pitched upon the south side of Emmaus.'' (1 Maccabees 3:57)

"Now when Judas heard thereof he himself removed, and the valiant men with him, that he might smite the king's army which was at Emmaus,'' (1 Maccabees 4:3)

Another Emmaus is here meant:

which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs; or seven miles and a half; for eight furlongs make a mile. Josephus (t) says the same, and confirms the account of the distance of this place from Jerusalem.

(l) Joseph. Antiqu. l. 17. c. 12. (m) Epitaph. Paul. fol. 59. B. Catalog. Script. Eccl. fol. 98. B. Tom. I. & in Daniel 8.14. Tom. V. (n) Antiqu. I. 14. c. 18. (o) In Misn. Ceritot, c. 3. sect. 7. (p) Nat. Hist. l. 5. c. 14. (q) Midrash Kohelet, fol. 74. 4. (r) T. Hieros. Sheviith, c. 9. fol. 38. 4. (s) Misn. Ceritot, c. 3. sect. 7. T. Bah, Cholin, fol. 91. 2. & Maccot, fol. 14. 1.((t) De Bello Jud. l. 7. c. 27.

{4} And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.

(4) The resurrection is proved by two other witnesses who saw it, and all the circumstances surrounding it declare that it was no forged event thought up on purpose in their own minds.