Loading...
Mine own familiar friend - This is either a direct prophecy of the treachery of Judas, or it is a fact in David's distresses which our Lord found so similar to the falsity of his treacherous disciple, that he applies it to him, John 13:18. What we translate mine own familiar friend, שלומי איש ish shelomi, is the man of my peace. The man who, with the לך שלום shalom lecha, peace be to thee! kissed me; and thus gave the agreed-on signal to my murderers that I was the person whom they should seize, hold fast, and carry away.
Did eat of my bread - Was an inmate in my house. Applied by our Lord to Judas, when eating with him out of the same dish. See John 13:18, John 13:26. Possibly it may refer to Ahithophel, his counsellor, the man of his peace, his prime minister; who, we know, was the strength of Absalom's conspiracy.
Yea, mine own familiar friend - Margin, as in Hebrew: “the man of my peace.” The man with whom I was at peace; who had no cause of alienation from me; with whom I was associated in the most peaceful and friendly relations.
In whom I trusted - He whom I made my confidential friend, and on whom I supposed I could rely in the time of trouble.
Which did eat of my bread - This may either denote one who was supported by him as one of his family, or else one who partook of his hospitality. In the former case, if that is the meaning, he bad a right to expect that, as a matter of gratitude, such an one would stand by him, and not be found among his enemies. In the latter case, if that is the meaning, he had a right to expect that one who had shared his hospitality would not be found among his foes.
Hath lifted up his heel against me - Margin, as in Hebrew: “magnified.” So the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate. Lather renders this, “hath trodden me under his feet.” The figure here is taken from a horse that turns and kicks him that had fed him. This passage is applied John 13:18 to Judas, with the statement, in regard to him, that what he had done was done “that the Scripture might be fulfilled:” see the notes at that passage. It is not necessary to suppose that the Saviour meant to say that the passage in the psalm had original and exclusive reference to Judas; the phrase employed by the Saviour, “that the Scripture might be fulfilled,” may have been used by him in that large sense in which these words are often used as denoting, either:
(a) that the language found in the Scriptures, and applicable originally to another case, “would properly express the idea,” or describe the fact; or
(b) that the case referred to was one of a class; or that, as it was accomplished in the case of David, so in a similar sense it was accomplished in the case of the Saviour.
In other words, Judas was regarded as belonging to the same class as the individual to whom the psalm refers. He was one to whom the language of the psalm was applicable; and the Saviour endured the same kind of suffering which the person did who is referred to in the psalm. Thus the language of the Scriptures, applicable to all such cases, received a complete fulfillment in Him. It is remarkable that, in the reference to Judas, the Saviour quotes only a part of the verse: “He that eateth bread with me.” He omits, apparently from design, the former part of the verse in the psalm, “mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted,” as if he would not even seem to convey the idea that he ever regarded Judas as his intimate friend, or as if he had ever really “trusted” him. He conveys the idea that Judas had partaken largely of his favors, but not that He himself was ever really a stranger to the baseness of his heart, John 6:64, John 6:70.