hi^./r o. i^ ^/ J 'Let cy I Kit "i-^' ^d^i czyfc. Q^xaJL GOSPEL HISTORY. A SYLLABUS Professor C. W. Hodge's Gospel History. I'KIXTED — XOT PrBLISHEU — EXl'l.lSI VEI,Y KOlt THF. rSK OK STT'DEXTS OF THE iMlDDLh: CLASS IN PRINCETON SEMINARY. [Prepared by the Class of '7' PRLSCETON: CHAULES S. KOBIN'SOX. rillNTEK. 1 S 7 9 . Eiitercil, accdi'iliiig to Act of Congress, in the yeiir ISTH, by C. W. HODGE, In the office of the Librarian of Congress, at Wasliington. PREFACE. This volume originated in the desire to have in more permanent and satisfactory form, than the meager pencil-scratches of any ordinary set of notes, the substance of a highly-valued course of lectures. And it is but just to say that Professor Hodge is responsible for nothing here printed, since his manuscript was not consulted, and no part of the work was supervised by him. It may also be added that this Syllabus is not intended to be well understood except in connection with the full Lectures in the class-room, and also in connection with Robinson's Harmony and the small syllabus. The preparation of these notes has been a very laljorious task, so much so that the editors have no expectation that their labor and pains will be adequately appreciated. But before any one indulges in wholesale criti- cism, let him ^ra^ sit down and prepare, from the various sources, the manuscript for only five of these printed pages, taking special pains to look up the different authorities and hunt down the various references. Then let him remember that all this work had to be done in addition to the regular, and in some cases the extra, duties of the Seminary coarse. To any student who will comply with these two conditions, the editors herewith give full p('rmi.«sion to cut and slash to his heart's content. ABBRKVIATIOXS. Alf. for Alfred. Rob. for Robinson. Ell. " EUicott. San. " Sanhedrim. Gal. " Galilee. Syn., Syns. '• Synoptists. Jems. " Jerusalem. Tisch. " Tischendorf. Lich. " Lichtenstein. Wies. " Wieseler. The other abbreviations will l)e re.'idily understood by the reader. Birth Circumcision on 8th Day Adoration of Magi — i;?th Day Flight uito Egypt. Presentation in Temple Return to Nazareth. AS MODIFIED. Birth ('ircumcision on 8th day Adoration of Magi — 18th Day. Presentation in Temple — 40th Day Flight into Egypt. Return to Nazareth COMMON VIEW. Birth Circumcision on 8th Day Presentation — 40th Day Adoration of Magi \ Flight into Egypt J Return to Nazareth WORDSWORTH. Birth Circumcision Presentation Return to Nazareth. — Luke. Visit to Bethlehem to Feast Adoration of Magi Flight into Egypt Return to Nazareth. Matthew's. EARLY JUD^AN MINISTRY. The devil leaveth him., Matt. 4.11. Mark 1:13. Luke 4:13. Commissioners from .Jerusalem ) to John. > Testimony of John to Jesus. ; -Tesus gains disciples Goes to Galilee. Miracle in Cana. First Passover. Traders driven > from temple. ) Discourse with Nicodemus. . . Teaches and Baptizes in Tudea. ) Testimony of John. j On way to Galilee discourses i with woman of Samaria. > Arrives in Galilee. S §18 §19 §20 §21 §22 §23 §24 §25 Jesus departs into Galilee. Matt. 4:12 Mark 1:14 Luke 4:14 LANGE, GESS, FARRAR. BAPTISM AND TEMPTATION. EARLY JUD^AN MINISTRY. Tiseh. and EUicott Baptism Dee. 780 1st Passover Journey thro' Sam'a Tiseh. and Ellieott ,EM. GALILEAN MINISTRY. S Purim 2d Passover S o LAST JOURNEYS TO JERUSALEM. Tabernacles John 5 782 Dedieation "* i 3d Passover nOBINSON, ORESWELL. I'TIHM ANI> TBMPTATION, DEr. 77 KAHi.y .iui)/i:an ministry. )«a Jolin 2, » OAMI.KAN MINISTiiV, 1 PAHBOVor 781 John ST JOIIRNEYS TO .lEHUSALEM. 'rabcrnnolOK Joliii 7 Dedlohtion Jolin 10, 22 4tli PnMovsr 1783 John ANDREWS. n,VPTrBM AND TEMPTATION, 78". EARLY .UTD.KAN MINISTKV. JJoumey thro' Sam'n Def. E ' 2d Pnssovor "HI CIALII.EAN MINISTRY. I,AST .lOURNEY'S TO JERUSALEM. 'rnhprn»rle« f,\ Dcdlontion E "I 41h P«.«i.ovor ITKI LICHTENSTEIN. AND TEMPTATION, DEC. 779. EARLY JUDvEAN JIINISTRV. 1st PaR.over Itsii Journey thro' Snm'a Tflbeinacles |781 John .-. GALILEAN MINISTRY. LAST .TOURNEYS TO JERURALEM. WIESELER, ECLICOTT, TISCIIENDORF. IIAPTISM AND TEMPTATION, .-iUMMEU, 78(1. EARLY .lUD.EAN MINISTRY. ney thro' Snm'n Tl«oh. and Klllooi John 4, Mt. Ptirlm John ; LAST .lOURNEYS TO .lEKUSALEM. LANOE, GESS, PARRAU. BAPTISM AND TEMPTATION. EARl.Y .TUD.EAN MINISTRY. Journey thro' finin'o OALILEAN MINISTRY. LAST .lOUUNKYS TO .JERUSALEM. ' Tahornnolea *i| ■ Dedication "* [ 3d Pasflovor 783 II o r. -e-; « Pp- .S '-^ fe .Si 1^ E^ !- -Ih' o r_ .=« iJ CJ « OS 00 OS Oi -^ :: :: - EASTERN GALILEE. §28 Annunciation. I. §39 Organization. II. §§29-34 Miracles. III. §§34-38 Opposition. IV. §41 Teaching. I. §40 Organization. II. §§42-43 Miracles. III. §§44-50 Opposition. IV. §§54-55 Teaching. Second Circuit. One Day. One Day . One Day. Third Circuit. f §43 Raising of widow's son at Nain. I §44 Jolin the Baptist sends disciples. \ §45 Upbraids the cities. I §4() Anointing by a woman. t §47 Second circuit through Galilee. f §48 Healing of dumb demoniac. People cry "Son of David." Scribes and Pharisees blaspheme. §49 Pharisees seek a sign. I §50 Mother and brethren interfere. I §§54-55 Parables. L §56 Cross the lake. Tempest stilled. . §57 Demoniacs of Gadara. §58 Levi's feast. §59 .Jairus' daughter and woman with issue. §60 Two blind men and dumb demoniac. §61 Second rejection at Nazareth. §62 3rd circuit in Galilee. Mission of twelve. §63 Death of John the Baptist. onA ^ Return of the twelve. ^ ( Feeding of five thousand. §65 Walking on sea. §66 Discourse in Synagogue at Capernaum. J. 1 J||.s ^ ill ilfl ■is I. - it J nPM I wtfllll ijilJii IrPisIl ii " liliil ® lilltill ^^itiilllll fl .H2h lis ^ J5 Si as J tfl a ac ^ ■■+3 ^ a :c -in 3 2 -J _r a O S" 22 r^ D O -4^ a •Ji a: CO ^ rt 1h K H Cm -3 to 73 1 = &3« 13 ^ '^ &4 a 2.2.5 S2 ^ o .a sl o 1h ^ ^ f— a • • a (D O ^ rt 5 u. ;;^ u S o^^ M 1-1 W ^" P4 « ^ ^ c _o OQ 'E <1 « • W ^Sc; P3 <1 S t-l ^ ^ -^^ o OS'S . t- ^ Oi fccoj a C « 41 o ^"^ a iti.a a y3 as O bog ®* .2 "o 5 tre€ Par, Dis Pass. hany. udas. iH p _« ^^1- T* as _. 1 S"!- ^ ?i 4J a ^ 5 f« S i:.2 2 ■A a ICr-TS ^.2^^" ** 3 a o O tH ■'-' li ffJ rt « ^Ph bCbC-C « a -j= a '-3 ax; a %%%% re CCCU M t- S 4> d o ^ 2 2 52 •- -f? ? '^ o >i as - a; a CO ^co ^ CO -u. i: » o Ph o w P. a CO cs a e ail C) •6mbs -oi -uns "II -uoj^ 'z:! -sanx -fl -p^AY '"^sij^ t'l sanqx 'ffl 'PHJ CO >j ^ I CO goj. 1 "S o (^^ O' P< P< a CO tfl O 0H PLh 09 > H Oh o 0! o ;§ £ a; o JC K 3E- X o i) OJ I-H CO ->** 00 ■^ t-^ H- * I-H pH -I-H CJ (N > fO iO ci "H 10 M "^ ^~' 'rj fl X> o E >-» -s ■3 c u Q 3 CO C8 -4-3 ation w An alphas P <1 O _co 03 c £ S3 OO 09 03 H £ dn pii .^. Ph 09 Hi H &4 P4 >^ c3 o3 t Q pq pL. i 10 WESTCOTT'S APPROXIMATION. 1:00 a. m. The Agony. Betrayal. Conveyance to the High-Priest's house, probably ad- joining "The Booths of Hanan." 2:00 a. ni. The preliminary examination before Annas in the presence of Caiaphas. 3:00 a. ni. The examination before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin at an irregular meeting at "the Booths." 5:00 a. m. The formal sentence of the Sanhedrin in their own proper place of meeting, Gazith or Beth Midrasli. First examination before Pilate at the Palace. 5:30 a. m. The examination before Herod. Scourging and first mock- ery by the soldiers at the Palace. The sentence of Pilate John xix:14. The second mockery by soldiers. The crucifixion and rejection of stupefying draught. Mark xv:25. The last charge. The darkness. The end. 6:30 a. m. 7:00 a. m. 9:00 a. m. 12:00 m. 12—3 p. m. 3:00 p. m. 11 A =' ci ^ ii -^ ■^^^ c « o ^^ -^^ s o -" 5 ^ to t, -^ *-• >^ S ^- c ^ £; o ^ L. X t£ fe '5 2 i rt rt-l --■ .--i V. H 2 2 a g o O 4 !«► o o o »C !S L- 1-^S c5 O H CO oi S to is « >.::3 > rt rt c3 ^ p !2 5 4) r 53 ^ S t, 7! T S ?• t*^ hr r^ 2m — ^ — *^ jj ^ 42 rt 2 Si o o aj -•> TO ^ Ml C th ci CO .s -O -kJ o ^ jO O) ^ y: rt rt - r— :/: IB o) . C ^ !^ > >^ §2 J^ CP H<1 C3, QJ r— I i-s =: -^ » 4) (U_^ S a oj "S 4> !-< OJ t« 3 2 •= " o • -iJ -u r3 cc as S .-r a =s « c o -i o >2^ a ic o ^ s a «^ ® ^S cS ^2 a -t^ a a ^ S 5 S 8 QJ » HH tc g "~! ■-^ ,a cc H 6 OJ t/3 '^ ^2 35 s 11 © ffl a cc J t3 a t-y rt -c tc ^ 10 c3 a u (0 a 05^ a.a' a o ■- o 2 O OJ c« +^ ,, .a •— ' ^ cj 1^ © a a "3? a^ a •s ci._^ a tu .a « « ^ a ^ - '^ ^a ^ cc "j^ " r-'"^ aj « aj :;3 ■^ a ^ ^ a © ■" ^ &f) . aT :g ^ 2 a bc^ ^ tcj2 S a ff 45 « Si s- a T-i (m' aj ^' to ffl j> 00 SYLLABUS OF GOSPEL HISTORY. chro:nology. 1. Rationalists attempt to overthrow date of the Gos- pels, on external grounds; they give a later date. 2. Alleged discrepancies of the gospels are exagger- ated. Two kinds : general, in which a difterent character of Christ is presented ; special, one gospel being supposed to contradict another. If we can trace a gradual histori- cal growth from beginning to end, we have in this unity of the gospels, most efiective answer to opponents. Birth- place of Christ is beyond question, but the date of birth is unknown. It is assigned to 753, 751, 750 (C. W. H.) 749 (Rob.) 748 (Kepler) 747 (Ideler). No one is at liberty to dogmatize where there is so much diversity of opinion. Give gospels benefit of their own reticence. It does not vitiate their historical value. The Passion is variously assigned between 781 — 790. Positive chronology is the particular date. Relative chronology is the relation of events to one another, their succession. Absence of chronological precision shows it was not essential to the plan of the writer. It seldom disturbs the order ; Matt, and Mark are less regular than Lk. and Jno. The year and the day of the nativity are to be determined. Pres- ent era was fixed in the 6th century by Dionysius, a Scythian monk who flourished in Rome 553 — 556 A. D. He assumed that year of Ciirist's birth was coincident with IsiA. If 750 be the correct date, our era begins 4 years too late. This era was 1st used in historical works by Venerable Bede, early in the 8th century, afterward was introduced in public transactions by Frank kings, Pepin and Charlemagne. Gospels give 4 data : "% (1.) Tune of Herod the Great, Matt. 2:1, Lk. 1:5. (2.) Census in Judea under Augustus, Lk. 2 : 1. (3.) Star of the Magi, Matt. 2. (4.) Age of Christ when beginning public ministry, Lk 3 • 23 Joseplius (Ant. 17 : 8 : 1) : " Herod died, the 5th day after he had caused Antipater to be slain, having reigned, since he had caused Antigonus to be slain, 34 years ; but since he had been decLared king by the Romans, 37." (Ant. 17:6:4): " Herod deprived Mattliias of the high- priesthood, and burnt the other Matthias, who had raised the sedition, with his companions, alive. And that very night there was an eclipse of the moon." Now Herod was declared king in 714; therefore his death would be from 1st IsTisan 750 to 1st Nisan 751, ace. to Jewish com- putation, at age of 70. Astronomical investigation places this eclipse on the night of 12th and 13th of March 750. He was dead before the 5th of April, because the Pass- over of that year fell on 12th of April, and Josephus (Ant. 17: 8 : 4) states that before this feast, his son and successor Archelaus, observed the usual 7 days' mourn- ing for the dead. His death, therefore, must be placed between 13th March and April 4th, 750. (Andrews). How long before Herod's death was the Lord born ? Matt, and Lk. relate events that occurred between his birth and Herod's death ; circumcision, presentation in temple, visit of Magi, flight into Egypt, murder of Inno- cents. Whatever view nuiy be taken as to order of these events, they can scarcely have occupied less than two months. This would bring his birth into Jan. or Feb, at latest, 750. Luke 2: 1-2; a all the world should be taxed. b the taxing was first made when Cyre- nius was governor of Syria. OBJECTIONS URGED. I. Wo such universal taxing under Augustus on record: the censuses of contemporary history are local ; a clear case of inaccuracy, say the skeptics. Ans. : It is known from Suetonius and Ancyrian monument, tliat Augustus three times instituted a census, in 726, 746, and 767. The second only needs to be considered. It ap[)ears to have been a census civhini, confined to cives Bonirmi, and not to have extended to the provinces ; cannot, therefore, have been the taxing of Lk. Some restrict olxo'jinvrj to Palestine or Syria. It would be improbable and un- natural for Luke to make this restriction. A better an- swer is, that if Lk. mentions the census, that is enough. Other answers : 1. The omission of contemporaries has its analogy; an argument from silence is never conclusive. Various laws were established, of which we are informed by no liistorians, but by monuments. In year of Cesar's death, there was a geographical survey of Rome, but his- torians do not tell us of it. Ancient historians omit to irive a complete list of governors of the provinces. On this period, Suetonius and Tacitus are very brief. This argument from silence, if pushed, would compel us to believe that no important event took place in the long reisi'n of Augustus, of which the few historians whose works remain have not made specific mention. 2. Prob- ably the censuses referred to on the Ancyrian marbles were confined to Italy, and did not extend to the Provin- ces. But beyond question, the census did at times ex- tend to particular [provinces. 3. A considerable ^t) oc- curs here in Dion Cassius (Roman historian); from 747 to 757, the very period in which Lk. says the taxing was made. 4. In josephus the names of several who were governors of Syria about lime of Lord's birth are men- tioned, but only incidentally, nor is the list complete. Being a professed Roman flattei^r, he leaves out all that miglvt excite the discontent of Jewish readers. He passes over as lightly as possible whatever testifies to degrada- tion of his people. A posidre argument is this : In time of Augustus, there was strong tendency to centralization, and establishment of the mifitary power. Tiberius read in Senate an auto- graph MS. letter of Augustus's, which showed resources of the empire, how many soldiers could be raised and how much money thev could give. How did he know, unless he had tried "it? The citizens -of Ancyra had marble copies made of bJXLaze_tablets in which he re- corded the chief events of his life. IijJ±£Se. he_4eclares. he made a census of Roman citizens four times; shows that He was doing this kind of work and confirms Lk. indirectly. Cassiodorus says that a careful survey was made in all provinces wherelioman sovereignty extended, that there were enrolment lists. His authority of itselt would have no great weight; but he may have read many works unknown to us, on this period. Mommseu donbts his statement, but Zurapt accepts it. " Being a Christian, he might have drawn his information from Lk." (Lauge). Suidas: " Aiigustus sent out twenty men of great probity into all parts of the empire, by whom he made an assessment of persons and estates ^' has no intrinsic improbability, but is unsupported. Sui- das, like Cassiodorus, was a Cliristian. Indirect Proofs. — 1. Under the Republic, each prov- ince retained its own mode of taking census, and under the Antonines, there was a regular land tax. ,/ 2. Exemption from land tax in Italy (by Jus ItaUcum)^^> began with Augustus. The exception proves rule. The ^y land and poll tax under Pompej- must have been in full ^ force, which presupposes a census. Here again is a diffi- culty. When was the census made ? II. Palestine was not yet a Roman province ; a Roman census was ordered during reign of Herod Great. But Herod was a vex socms, who had to pay tribute to the Romans : and then, this census may have been for statis- tical and military purposes, as in the decennial census of U. S. Jews were first compelled to pay tribute to Rome in time of Pompey. From time of Julius Ceesar, certain tributes were levied in Judea for Rome. III. Cyrenius was Governor of Syria for 10 years after the nativity, and made a registration of inhabitants, Acts 5 : 37. The trouble is, to find room for another census in Palestine under same Cyrenius and at time of Christ's birth. Tholuck: "This enrolment took place before {ixpcoz'/j) Cyrenius was gov. of Syria: Ttpwrvj in compara- tive sense as John 1 : 15. This solution is not impossible grammatically. The taxing in question was 1st, as dis- tinguished from 2d, which took place during his 2d administration. N"eander takes i^ys/wueuovTo:: in wide sense of" leader;" is confirmed by Tacitus who says this man was thus employed. Ebrard : o.Tiojpaip/) means reg- istration as well as taxation. aTtoypaf/j has a double sense : (a) transcription, [b] enrolment. If passage be read, this was 1st taxing, in distinction from 2d, and took place under him as governor of Syria, but in fact he was not so gov. until 760, we must construe ^ys/ioueuouTo:; as applicable to any one who rules. Thus Cyrenius may have been a joint or assistant ruler as Josephus speaks of Saturninus and Voluninius as Presidents of Syria ; or an extraordinary commissioner sent from Rome especially for this purpose. In all this, is nothing improbable; it agrees with the fact that about that time he was in East and engaged in political afiairs. Wieseler : " this taxing Q^cy'i^b'V^-OL^U) ^'=^'^>2/-~~^<^fc€^^--^^.,,i>:2Z: 'T^ ^ U^. .•n-^Kiv-.T.e^^V ^u»~nxAj VLx lux^'f S^^'^JL^ ^'^ 2 -^'-■^•^^^ — --^-^ 9 was before Cyrenius was gov. ofS." Ziimpt, in Iiis list of Syrian governors, B. C. 30 to A. D. 66, thus tills the interval from 748 to 758 : 748—750 P. Q. Varus or 6—4 B. C. 750 — 753 Quirinus or 4—1 B. C. 753—757 M. Lollins or 1 B. C. to 3 A. I). 757—758 C. M. Censorinus or 3—4 A. I). 758—760 L. V. Saturninus or 4—6 A. I). 760 — 765 " " is succeeded by Qidrinus (Cyrenius.) If he be right, Quirinus was twice gov. of Syria. His fact is that because (Mlicia, when separated from Cyprus, was united to Syria, Cyrenius or Quirinus, as gov. of the first mentioned province, was also really gov. of the last mentioned, whether in any kind of association with Saturninus, or otherwise, can hardly be ascertained, and that his subsequent more special connection with Syria led his earlier, andapparentl}' brief, connection to be thus accurately noticed. Varus was in (office at least till the summer of 750. But that he did not continue as gov. until 759 is probable from the fact that Augustus ruled that no OJie should govern a province more than live years. A coin of Antioch proves that in 758 L. V. Saturninus was gov. of Syria. Zumpt's list shows who filled this office 750—758, Varus till B. C. 4 or 750. ^o names are given till Quirinus A. D. 6, by Josephus. During interval he was on military duty near Syria. The tri- umphal insignia granted him prove him legate and in Syria. This taxing began a little before he became actual legate. As he had been proconsul in Africa, and as it was a rule that the same person should not be ruler over more than one of the consular or praetorian prov- inces under care of Senate, he could not have been gov. of any of the provinces adjacent, Asia, Pontus, Bithynia, Galatia; he must then have been acting as gov. of Syria and legate of emperor. If he succeeded Varus, he may have completed taxing begun before, ace. to Lk. Ter- tullian says the census at the birth of Christ was taken by Lentius Saturninus. When then was he gov. of Syr- ia ? Most say 746—748 ; consequently the birth must be placed as early as 747. Monmisen adduces a marble recording honors to man who had been twice legate in Syria. Only two had been, L. Saterninus and Quirinus. 10 Concerning importance of tliis investigation, we are not bonud to establish any one of these views any more than Luke. Star of the Magi. — Kepler has sliown that in year 747 a three-fold conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in the sign Pisces occurred, and that in spring of following year planet Mars likewise appeared in this constellation. He regarded it as probable tliat an extraordinary star was conjoined with these tliree planets, as in 1603. He thought this conjunction formed star of Magi. Ideler rejects the new star of Kepler, and looking only to con- junction, puts birth 747 — thinks Christ was two yrs. old when the command of Herod was given. If this be true, the year would be 748, and agree with Kepler's conjunc- tion. Hence the star had been seen bj^ Magi two years before their arrival at Jerusalem. Wieseler argues cor- rectly that we have no certain gi'ound for believing that star of Matt, was this conjunction of planets. He men- tions tliat the Chinese astronomical tables record appear- ance of a new star at a time which coincides with the 4tb year B. C. Precise conclusions are not to be drawn, but confirmation of approximate date is secured. Day of the Nativity. — Up to the 4th century, 6th of Jaa. had been observed as day of Lord's baptism, and had been regarded as day of his birth, from Lk. 3 : 23, the supposition being that he was just 30 when baptized. In 4th centur}^, under influence of western church, this was changed, and both churches observed Dec. 25th. This is good date, because it gives time enough for the records in Matt, to transpire. During Dec, Jan., Feb. and Mar., there is no entire cessation of rain for any long interval, yet an interregnum of several weeks of dry weather gen- erally occurs between middle of Dec. and of Feb., some- what distinguishing the former rains of the season from the latter. Lightfoot: "The spring coming on, they drove the beastsinto wildernesses, or champaign grounds, where they fed them the whole summer. The -winter coming on, they betook themselves home again with the flocks and herds." The climate of Bethlehem is not un- like that of Jerus., though milder. Shepherds could have been pasturing their flocks in Dec. Barclay: "in this month the earth is full}' clothed with rich verdure, and there is generally an interval of dry weather be- -^■N>' -^'".^ v^^ ■s- ^ r V 11 tu-eeii middle of Dec. and Feb." (Andrews, 32-35). Abia's course was 8th in the 24. At destruction of tern- pie by Titus on Auor. 5, 823, the 1st class had just en- Je^C^ tered on its course. Its period of service was from the evening of the 4th of Aug., which was the Sabbath, to the evening of following 8abl)ath, Aug. 11th. We can now easily compute backward and ascertain at what time in any given year each class was officiating. Date of the Crucifixion. — Lk. 23 : 54 ; Mk. 15: 42:^ Mtt. 27: 62, Tiapaaxz'jrj was comm.on designation of 6th day of flie week. The iSabl)ath occurring on 2d day of the feast, the 1st feast day became the preparation, the day before the Sabbath. 1. That 7:ao«a/£!^y; might not be apprehended as the weekly one, referable to the Sabbath, i but be regarded as connected with the feast day of the / Pass., Jno. expressly adds zou -day^ci (19 : 14). rzo.rto.a- xvjYj — Friday in the passover season, or paschal week, as a day of preparation for the Sabbath. The true refer- ence is to tlie paschal feast, coming in on the evening of the day, of which feast the first day fell, according to! John, upon the Sabbath. Day of Month. — Crucifixion was 14th or loth Nisan. 'Vl'.Ji^^^^ Was the last meal of Christ with his disciples, the regu- lar Passover supper or did it anticipate it? Ans. The paschal iamb was usually killed 14th Nisan and eaten same evening. The meal, therefore, was on preparation day, Thursday, "N^isaji 14th, and the crucifixion on Fri- day, Nisan 15th. (Mk. 14: 12; Lk. 22:7). According to Synopts., the supper was the regular Passover. But John calls it the preparation of the Passover (19: 14); speaks as if the paschal supper was legally upon the evening of Friday, and consequently- the Lord, who ate it upon the evening of Thursday, ate it before the time. 4 apparently discrepant references: 1. John nowhere calls it the Passover. " Out of J) times in which 7i6.aya is used by John, in 6 it is applied to the feast generally, and not to" paschal supper only. The meaning in the other 3 is in dispute." (Andrews). 2. Jno. 13: 1—" Be- fore the feast of the passover." Does this refer to the supper of verse 2 ? Tubingen critics say 3'es. Therefore it must have been a supper of a private nature, and not the Passover meal which it preceded ; and according to John, Jesus never ate the Passover, but oidy a private ^ 12 meal beforehand. Being crucified next day, it must liave been on Thursday, thus directl_y contradicting Synopts, who make it I'all on Friday. But the clause does not refer to the supper of verse 2 ; it refers to what immedi- ately follows, " that Jesus knew that his hour was come." He knew it beforehand. 3. Jno. 18 : 28 — They themselves went not in, lest they should be defiled ; that they might eat the passover. Held : that on day of crucifixion, Passover was not yet eaten. As it Avas not eaten before 6 o'clock, i. e. at be- ginning of next day (the Jews' day commenced at even- ing) the defilement incurred in the morning would have ceased before the regular Passover. Probably " eat the Passover " is used here in more general sense of keeping the paschal feast, and is not confined to eating of the lamb. Their scruple could have had reference only to the paschal sacrifices ottered during the same daj- before evening. 4. Jno. (19 : 14,16), calls crucifixion day the prepara- tion of the Passover. The point at issue decides the gen- uineness of John's gospel. 4 methods of meeting the difiiculty : 1. iSome follow John, as most accurate, and allow that the others made a mistake. Reasoning: Jno. was an apostle, an eye-witness, and his gospel written last; therefore he would correct their mistakes. Bleek holds that Christ anticipated regular time of Passover; he translates Jno. 13 : 1 — " Before the feast, when Jesus knew that his hour was come to depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved His own who were in the world (He did love them unto the end), when a repast was spread (or during supper," &c. The seiUence thus formed is intricate, unlike John's usual manner, and with- out necessity. 2. Some endeavor to reconcile Synopts. and John by explaining away the Synoptical forms. No success. The Synoptics are explicit. 3. Rationalists, (Bretschneider, Baur, Davidson,) up- hold the synoptical account vs. John, maintain the former is true history and John not genuine, tliink John wrote with dogmatic intent, not historically, and that the error shows he could not have been an eye-witness as he claims. 13 4. Hengst.. Wiesel., Rob., (215-222) and a majority of harmonists hold that synoptical accounts can be made to* harmonize with John. John nowliere calls the meal a Passover, and this has negative weight. Bat omits Lord's Supper and that does not warrant^the conclusion that no such rite was instituted. He omits other things design- edly, because he possessed the Synoptists. The omission is a tacit reference to what they had written, and what needed no repetition. Thus answer 1st objection. The 2d, by making r.ob r^c ^ooz/^^ qualify sroojc, or ere TsAo:: yfdzr^aeiy. If s/owc, the sense is: " Jesus knowing before the festival of the Passover, that liis hour was come," &c. In this way the passage has no bearing upon the present question. If ere vsko- iff6.7zr^azv, it is equiva- lent to festival-eve, and here marks the evening immedi- ately before the koprq or festival proper, on w^hich eve, duiing suj)per, our Lord manifested his love to his dis- ciples by washing their feet. The 3d (18: 28), by extend- ing meaning oi zAaya. to paschal festival, and remember- ing that "eating the passover" meant not merely the [)aschal lamb of the evening before, but sacrifices and unleavened bread of the whole Passovei- week. The 4th (19: 14), i)y interpreting Tzaoaaxe'jrj as referring to the Jewish Sabbath, which actually occurred ne.Kt day. It was Friday in the passover season or paschal week. Bleek's Argument. — 1. According to John's account (19 : 31) 15th Nisan, the great day of the feast coincided that year w'lih. t\\Q. weekly Sabbath, (our Saturday); and the day before (i. e. the Friday) would be the preparation day both for the weekly Sabbath and for the great feast day. He argues [a) that the Sanhedrim would not have sent an armed band vs. Jesus on the holy night after the eating of the Passover, because it was expressly forbid- den to carry arms on the Sabbath ; [b) that on such a night the Sanhedrim would not have sat in council to judge Jesus, for to hold a court of judgment on the Sab- bath was expressly forbidden ; that crucifixion could not take place Nisan 15th, for it must have been a glaring violation of the Sabbatical rest of the day, according to Jewish notions still in vogue. Yet Bleek admits that criminals were often arrested on the Sabbath, and of course, if necessary, by men bearing arms. In opposi- ton to Bleek: the strict Sabbatical law w^as not appli- 14 cable to tlie feast Sabbath. Besides fanatics would liave •caused them to kill Christ, whenever they had opportu- nity. (Lk. 23: 2, 18). If the law did govern feast Sab- bath, the hatred of the Jews mnde then^, break the law. (Andrews, 457.) i 2. Luke 23: 26,27, we read that Galilean women, when they returnetl from the sepulchre, prepared spices, and rested the Sabbath day according; to the command- ment, and returned again to the sepulchre when Sabbath was past. Now it would have been illegal for ti.em to have prepared the spices on the day preceding the Sab- bath, if that day was I^isan 15th. (Ex. 12 : 16^; Lev. 23 : 7). The same argument applies to the burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea on the day of crucifixion, and sfill more strongly to Lk. 23 : 26 ; Mk. 15 : 21. Simon would not have been in the fields at work, Nisan 15th. Opposed : Here all depends on the strictness with which the Jews observed the feast Sabbaths. Maimonides mentions bathing and anointing, as things that might be done on the feast days; and of course then everything necessary to prepare the dead for burial would be per- mitted. Multiplication of instances may show that the law does not apply. 3. The Synopts. had, as the basis of their narrative, an account which represented the 14 Nisan, and not the 15th, as the date of Christ's death. By a misunderstand- ing, however, there came to be incorporated with this the notion that Jesus ate the last supper with his disci- ples at the hour legally instituted for the Jewish pass- over ; and as we have the Synopts., both representations though non-coincident, yet unconsciously to the evange- lists, now lie side by side. 4. The feast (Easter, paschal cont. of 2d cent.) about wdiich the dispute was, was held in Asia 14th Nisan, at the hour in which the Jews celebrated their passover (i. e., on the night which, according to Jewish reckoning, began Msan 15th); and hence Christians of Asia Minor who followed this practice were called Quarto-dccimam. They were chiefly Jewish converts, and pleaded the au- thority of John and Philip. The western church, com- posed of Gentile converts, discarded the pass., and cele- brated annually the resurrection on a Sunday, and observed the previous Friday as a day of penitence and n 15 fiisting ; pleaded authority of Peter and Paul. The Tu- bingen school (llilgenfeld's Paschasireit, pp. 5-118 make inference vs. John and say that that Gospel was not ascribed to him by the East, church. Neander (Hist. I., 513) thinks that Christians of Asia Minor celebrated Xisan 14th as day of Chrisfs death, but he says that they kept the Jewish passover and included in it the com- memoration of Christ's death. Bleek : "John's know- ledge that Jesus had eaten the last supper witli his disci- ples not on the day legally fixed, but a day earlier, could not have obliged him to refuse to keep the yearly pass., as he had been wont to do at Jerus'm, among Christians at Ephesns, wlio also were wont to celebrate it, for Jesus himself had kept the pass, in the earlier years of his ministry. It is likely too that the Christians of Asia Minor subsequently retained the custom simply because it had become a custom, and because of the opposition raised vs. it." Hengst., Tliol. and Wieseler urge that, according to John, Jesus celebrated last supper with disciples, not on the day of the pass, (evening of Nisan 14th or beginning of Xisan 15th), but a day earlier, and therefore that John's account does not diifer from that of Synopts. The harmonists find clear proof that eastern and western churches had all four gospels, proving they knew all the circumsti^nces and saw no difficulty in the statements. Wieseler: Xisan 15th fell on Friday, 783 or A.D. 30. The darkness at crucifixion could not have been caused bj' an eclipse, for it was then full moon. Phlegon, of Tralles, tries to show that it was caused bj- an eclipse which took place between July 785 and 786. But the astronomer Warm, that the eclipse referred to took place 782. Date of the Baptism. — Six data are given in Lk. 3: 1-2: "aSTow in the 15th year (780) of reign of Tiberius Csesar, Pontius Pilate being Governor of Judea (779 — 789), and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee (750 — 792) and his l)rother Philip being of Iturea and of the region of Trachonitis (750—787), and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene ( ), Annas (759—767) and Caiaphas 778 — 789) being the high priests." Luke's least carelessness or ignorance of the history would lead to a mistake. Yet "his credibility remains unimpeachable. An anach- 16 roiiism is cljargcd. Joseph us mentions one Lysaiiias killed sixty years before. Therefore, it is said, that Lk. is sixty years too late. Lysanias was probably a family name. We can see clearly why Luke, writins^ after Abi- lene had been made a part of tlie Jewish kingdom, should have mentioned the fact, having apparently so little con- nection with gospel history, that at the time when the Baptist appeared, this tetrarchy was under the rule of Lysanias. It was an allusion to a former well-known political division that had now ceased to exist, and was to his readers as distinct a mark of time as his mention of the tetrarchy of Antipas, or Philip. This statement respecting Lysanias shows the accuracy of Luke's know- ledge of the political history of his times, and should teach us to rely upon it even when unconfirmed by con- temporaneous writers. Annas had been high-priest, yet Caiaphas actually was such when the Baptist appeared. The sovereign pontificate had fallen to a degraded con- dition. The office had become subject to removal. Dis- missal from it happened almost every year (Jos. Ant., 15: 3: 1; 18: 2: 2 ; 18 : 5 : 3 ; 20: 9: 1,4). Caiaphas maintained himself longer than the rest (25—36) ; his three predecessors only "about one year each. As a Sad- ducee and a priest he was animated with double hatred to the Saviour. (Andrews 131—138). Lightfoot sup- poses that Annas was the sagan, or vicarius of the high- priest, the next in order to him, in his absence to over- see, or in his presence to assist, in the oversight of the affairs of the temple, and the service of the priests (C. W. H). Wieseler: The common explanation, adopted by Farrar, is that Annas was Nasi or President of the Sanhedrim. Fifteenth Year op Tiberius Cjssar.- Luke 3:1, 23. Augustus died Aug. 767. The 15th year of Tiberius began Aug. 781. Christ's 1st Ptissover then would be in 782. But Luke 3 : 23, " he was about 30 years of age when he began his ministry." As already seen, he could not have been born later than 750. He must have begun his ministry, therefore, 780, and been baptized in that year. Tertullian, however, gives the 15th year of Tibe- rius as the year of Christ's passion : " Christ suffered under Tiberius Cjesar, R. Geminus, and P. Gemiuus, be- ing consuls, on the 8th day before the Calends of April," I \Q 'l^ r^S. , I r 17 (25th March). He was followed by Lactaiitius, Aucrus- tine, and others, especially of the Latin Fathers. San Clemente so explains Luke from chronological necessity. He attempts to show that the 15th year of Tiberius is " not to be referred to the beginnins: of the ministrv of John, nor to the baptism suffered by Christ in Jordan, but to the time of his passion and crucifixion, the evan- gelist himself being our leader and interpreter." This mjtkes the whole ministry last but few months; Christ would be 32 years old at baptism, and Jolin's account re- quires him to begin his ministry 3 years before, and be- fore Luke makes Baptist's ministry to begin. Brown thinks that the heading of St. Luke's 8d chapter contains the date, not of the mission of John the Baptist, but of the year of our Lord's ministry, especially in reference to the great events with which it closed. Wieseler refers Luke's words to the imprisonment of John, not to tiie baptism of Christ ; holds that Christ was baptized 780, John was impi'isoned 782, and Luke 3: 1 is anticipatory, find chapter followinggoes back to period prior to John's imprisonment. The exegesis is violent. The usual so- lution (started by Zumpt) is that 15th Tiberius dates from the time he was made associate emperor (765) by the Sen- ate, 2 years before the death of Augustus (767.) This would bring 7.80 for the year of baptism and- solve the difficulties. There are various dates for computing the reign Augustus, according as he increased in power. The same is true of Tiberius. This increases the diffi- culty. Certain Egyptian coins date from the connection of Tiberius with Augustus. Tiberius obtained full con- trol in the Provinces in 767. His 15th year then, 779, or first passover 780. Luke 3 : 23 — {a) began to be or (6) was about 30 when he began, i. e. his public ministry. The solution is confirmed by Jno. 2: 20. Herod began the temple in 734; to this add 46 (time of build- ing) and the result is 780, the proper date. RESULTS. ROBIXSOX. WIESELER. Zr.MPT. Born 749 or 750 . . 750 . . 747 . Pilate, 779-789 Bap. 779 or 780 . . 781) . , . 779 A. D. 26 ., . Herod, 750-792 1st Pass. 780 . . 781 . , . 780 " 27 . . Philip, 750-786 2d " 781 . . 782 . . 781 " 28 . . Lysanias, 3d " 782 . 782 " 29 . . Annas-, 759-767 €ruc. 783 ." .' 783 .' , 30 . . Caiaphas, 778-789 Tib. 765 or 767-782 18 Duration of the Public Ministry.— 3 views are held : 1. That it was 3i 3'ears ; 2. 2| years; 3. 1 year or less. ^y(yv^^TyxZu^T\ie Fathers, from Is. 51 : 2, held that it was 1 year. .^^^y^,ui^ -^ But the word year is to be miderstood as the poetical parallel of da3% or hour. The opinion of Fathers is also based on tradition of crncifixion 15th Tib., 782, com- bined with Luke's putting l)aptism same year. (Lk. 3 : 1). Brown holds that the ministrj- was 1 year, doubts the text (of John) even though it says the feasts were pass- overs. The Syn(^pts. seem to give an entirely different account from John ; they say Christ went to Galilee and only after considerable time went to Jerusalem and the Temple. John says he went to Jerusalem and the Tem- ple immediately, cleansed the latter, &c. The feynopts. make no feast till crucifixion ; inference, that ministry was 1 year or less in length. John makes scene Judea, and mentions 3 or 4 Passovei's. The Sj'uopts. were aware of Judean ministry: Mtt. 4: 25 ; 27 : 57. When X Saviour wept over Jerusalem, they mention it. There is no explanation exce})t that he had worked in Jerusalem. Attempts to (werthrow this argument do not succeed. Bauer : that Jesus w^eptover tiie Jews in particular. B. had to give tliis up. Strauss : that the words are per- sonified wisdom and are quoted from lost writings. Schenkel : that Jno.'s mention of Passovers all refer to one. Lk. 10 : 38, another reference to Judean work. It is impossible that a pseudo-Jolin should represent the course of the Life of Christ so differently from the Synopts., when the latter were duly accredited. He wrote with a dogmatic purpose, and would not expect to be be- lieved. On other hand John was aware of the Galilean work. (7 : 6-9). He implies that Galilee had been the chief scene of our Saviour's visitations. ..He allows all the time necessary for it and on several occasions leaves it to be inferred. Jno. 6 : 2, multitudes went with Jesus because of His miracles, but the miracles are not related. Jno. , 6 : ^^, many of his disciples went back from him, but Jno. had not told us of the formation of a band of disci- ples. Jno. 6 : 70, the 12 are mentioned, but there has been no account of their calling. Between chapters 6 and 7, there is an interval of 7 months. To reconcile Synopts. and Jno., all that can be required is to give a good reason for their differences. The Synopts.' plan in- P ;^^, 19 eludes active life in Galilee. Matt, seeks proof in mira- cles for Christ's Messiahship. Luke gives biography of Christ in his active work. Jno. came later, when doc- trinal points were discussed, particuhirly the person of Christ. Jno's purpose is to give His own discourses so that they may know what He claimed concerning Him- self. It was not in Galilee, in parable, that these pro- found Christological statements were made. It was among the educated, cultivated Pharisees of Jerusalem. Renan : " I dare def}- any person to compose a consis- tent life of Jesus, if he makes account of the discourses \yhich John attributes to Jesus." ^ John's feasts : 1. " the Jews' passover,!-.' (781) (Jno. 2:\ 13); 2. " a feast of the Jews, (782) (5 : 1 :" 3. " the Pass, nigh," (6: 4); 4. " Before Pass," (12: 1); 5. "feast of Tabernacles," (7 : 2); 6. " feast of dedication," (10 : 22); (Bible Diet, for Pass., Pentec, Tabern., Dedic, and Pu- rim.) Of these feasts 4 were Passovers, if Jno. 6: 1 be so interpreted. We gain or lose a year here. Pentecost- occurred this year (782) on the 19th of May. No special argument in it? favor; was not so generally attended as Passover or Tabernacles, and no reason appears why Jesus should have omitted Passover and gone up to Pente. Tabernacles followed, Sept. 23d. Chief argu- ment in its favor; it brings feast of 5 : 1 into close con- nection with that of 7 : 2, and thus best explains 7: 21-23. But some months more or less are not under the circum- stances importajit, for the miracle with its results must have been fresh in their minds even after a much longer interval If He had not in the interval between these feasts been at Jerusalem, as is most probable, His reap- pearance would naturally carry their minds back to the time when they last saw him, and recall both his work and their own machinations vs. Him. The great objec- tion to identifying the feast before us with that of Taber- nacles is that it puts between the end of ch. 4, and be- ginning of ch. 5, a period of 8 or 9 months, which the Evangelists pass over in silence. Four Objections vs. Passover. — 1. Jno. 6 : 4, "pass- over nigh." Christ did not attend. If not, then he was not at any feast till Tabernacles (7 : 2), a period of 18 mos. ; was absent from Jerusalem for that time. Ar- gued : as a strict Jew he could not have been so long 20 away. An. : that Jesus should have absented himself for so long a time from the feasts is explained by the hos- tility of the JeAvs, and their purpose to slay Him (Jno. 5 : 16-18; 7: 1). We know that He would not needlessly expose Himself to peril. To the laws of God respecting the feasts He would render all obedience, but with the liberty of a son, not the scrupulosity of a Pharisee. He was Lord of Sabbath ; so He was of the feasts. He at- tended them or not as seemed best to Him. Chief argu- ment in favor of Purim is, that it is brought into such close connection with the Passover (only 7 mos. absent). Ellicott : " If the note of time derived from Jno. 4 : 35 be correct, then th« festival here mentioned clearly falls be- tween the end of 1 year and the Passover of tlie one fol- lowing (6 : 4) and therefore can be no other than the feast of Purim." That Jesus should have absented him- self a long time from the feasts, is explained by the hos- tility of the Jews. 2. John does not here name the festival, whereas he seems always to specify it (2 : 13, 23 ; 6 : 4 ; 7 : 2 ; 10 : 23 ; 11: 55; 12: 1). 3. That if 5 : 1 and 6 : 4 are Passovers, there is a whole year of which Jno. gives no account. Ans : this is in accordance with analogy of Jno. 's gospel. The Synopts fill in this and Jno. confines himself to feasts. Andrews: " this is not the only instance in which Jno. narrates events widely separated in time, without noting the in- terval. Thus, ch. 6 relates what took place before a Passover, and ch. 7 what took place at feast of Taberna- cles, 6 months after. In 10 : 22 is a sudden transition from Tabernacles to Dedication." 4. Accounts for Synopts. not mentioning feasts. His work in Galilee has reference to national salvation thro' the faith of those who should believe on him there. This may explain their silence in respect to the feasts which Jesus attended while in Galilee. Any transient work at Jerusalem, addressing itself especially to the hierarchy, had no important bearing upon the great result. For Passover. — 1. Common text wrongly omits arti- cle, which would naturally refer to chief feast. Modern critics and best AISS., including Sinaitic, agree as to this. (Winer, p. 119 or 126). Lange : " The article is not ab- 21 solutel}- conclusive, for in Heb. a uouii before tbe ^eti. is made definite by prefixing article, not to noun itself, but to the gen. and the same is the case in the Sept."' Ellicott : " The true reading appears certainly to be eofizrj. It has in addition to secondary authorities, the support of three out of the four leading uncial MSS., and is adapted by Lachm., Tisch., and others." Tholuck : " Were the article genuine, we would be compelled to regard the Passovei' as meant. If it is not genuine, the Passover may be meant, but so also maysome other feast." (Andrews, 172). 2. Phrase " feast of the Jews" is not applicable to Purim. P. was "not a Mosaic feast, nor of divine ap- ])ointment, but established by the Jews while in captivity, in commemoration of tlieir deliverance from the murder- ous plans of Haman. (Esther, 3 and 9). It was national and political, rather than religious. Why then should Jews go up from Jerusalem to this f 'ast ? Ellicott: " The view of the best recent harmonists and commen- tators is that feast was the feast of Purim." Lauije : " Fanaticism in the people naturally sought to make it a festival of triumph over the Gentiles (subsequently over the Christians also). On this account, the particular feast was p)reeminently the f east of the Jews (with the art.) and the art. in C. Sinaiticus cannot be made to speak exclu- sively for pass." • 3. Jesus went and found a crowd. J', was observed all over tlie land : had no reference to Jerus. TSTo special services were appointed for its observance at the temple, nor does it appear that it was their custom. Each Jew observed it wherever he chanced to be. Lange : "Christ may have attended this f. as he attended other festivals, (7: 2; 10 : 22) without legal obligation, merely for pur- pose of doing good." 4. JSTo adequate motive is assigned for Christ's going to Jerusalem : he was not required to do so by the law. Ellicott: "In the year under consideration, Passover would occur only a month afterward, and our Lord might well have thought it was advisable to fix his abode at Jerusalem and to commence his preaching before the hurried influx of the multitudes that came up to the great yearly festival." 00 5. Healing of infirm man was on a Sabbath. The fes- tival of Purim lasted 2 days, and was regularly observed on 14th and 15th Adar (March); but if i4th happened to fall on Sabbath, or on 2d or 4th day of tlie week, the commencement of the fest. was deferred until the next day. Pnrim was never celebrated as a Sabb. Lange : " The Sabb. spoken of 5 : 9 may have preceded or suc- ceeded the feast." 6. Lk. 13 : 6-7. " These 3 years." Hengst. says the reference is to Jewish people, among whoni^ Christ had wrought for 3 years. But we cannot draw argument from parable ; not conclusive enough, Andrews : '' It is doubt- ful whether the expression has any chronological value." Lange: "If one insists on having a def time for God's work of grace on Isr., we may reckon the time from the public appearance of Jno. B., one-half year before the entrance of Jesus upon his office, up to the present mo- ment, which altogether does not make up much less than three years." 7. Time needed for events. Otherwise we must com- press into one month, what according to the other scheme took a whole year. It can hardly be conceived that he should have done so much in such narrow limits. The harmony will make Christ's ministry 3J years (Rob.) or 2J (Wiese. and Zumpt.) y^,A-'ijbA''( PREPARATORY PERIOD. §1. Limits : from beginning of gospel narrative until entrance upon public ministry. Subdivision : (a) all pre- ceding nativity ; (b) all succeeding it until entrance upon public ministry. Mtt. and Lk. are authorities for nativ- ity, and are supplementary to one another, in no case parallel. Matt, gives histor. proof that Jesus was the Messh. of O. T. Therefore he records his birth, gene- alogy, and other events connected therewith. Lk. gives events in order, and therefore goes back to annunciation and to his predecessor. Mk. portrays active life of Christ. John's design is to represent him as a historic person in his own words. The history differs from every other h. The facts have no parallel ; naturally it should have none. The miraculous element predominates here as nowhere else. This is history written for a purpose. Charged : that it was written afterward. But we have, intermingled, ct> THa^ 23 the divine, angelic, and linman. When the Son of God was to come, there must be peculiar circumstances. Un- believers stumble here, and believers find proof for o-en- uineness. Some believers, however, find their stron'o-est difficulty liere. Classification of characteristics : (a) Events were to be so adapted as to form basis of our faith. If it be true that Son of God became S. of man, it is more than probable it was done in this way. We must have prac- tical evidence of birth at the time of its occurrence. It would not do to attest it afterward, else it would be charged that it was an invention, or dream of an enthu- siast. Ebionites and Socinians say he became Son of God first at baptism. Miraculous element, therefore, is inseparable from the hist. It grows out of it from the very nature of the case. Incarnation itself the greatest miracle, (b) Publicity must be secured; attention at- tracted. Chain of evidence was so good, as here written, that it was neve-r doubted by enemies (primitively), (c) The child must be secured, so as not to appear a rival of civil rulers, and to prevent prematare action by them. Yet witnesses must be numerous enough to identify Christ from birth ; to show that babe of Bethlehem and Jesus of JSTaz. were one and same person, [d) While humility of Son of God was to be shown, yet from first moment, he must be attended with all dignity and honor due to divinity. He must bring heaven with him, angelic choir, homage of good men (Sheph'ds and Magi.) As at cross, so at manger, humility is relieved by heavenly dignities, (e) Ante-typical; as life and death of Christ are the final facts of O. T., it must be shown he came to fulfill it. Unity of divine plan must be vin- dicated ; his relation to the law be made clear. These things belong to this period as preparatory. If men had been left in doubt, they would have rejected Christ at beginning of his ministry. Hence we read repeatedly, ■'■ all this, that the Scriptures" &c. ; we see express re- cognition of faithful few, in whom spirit of old economy was manifested. Gospel hist, is last ch. of old dispens'u. N. T. begins with Pentecost, where O. T. scenery, poe- try, &c., find their fulfillment. (/) Typical; his life is type of every Chn. and of Church as whole. Old econ- omy is typical bee. it points to the future, as it embodies 24 what lias been already realized. That very life in whicli the old is fulfilled is still a type of Chii. spiritual life. Impossible to interpret Gospels and Acts, without vio- lating meaning, unless we believe facts are arranged purposely to embody the doct., the spiritual truth. Such were miracles, the fact that he carried his dealings be- yond borders of Palestine (gospel for world). Why did he attend temple ? why submit to eircum. ? to teach the evil of sin. §2. Official character of John Baptist was necessary at outset. Ritualists claim Christ was disciple of John, that his work grew out of John's. Annunc'n of Bapt's birth prepared people and his parents to understand his mission, and how to treat him. Honor is done to O. T. in choosing priest of temple (1 Chron., 24), prophecy is fulfilled, type is given, in declaration that John was to be a Nazarite from the womb (as Samuel and Samson). Spiritual meaning of incense is seen (prayer); Lk. 1 : 10. Emphasis is laid on character of parents (Lk. 1 : 6), they were observers of rites and exercised a lively faith. Cer- emonial righteousness was their possession. Mass of the Jews corrupt. But some were willing to introduce new economy. Meaning of both names was explained and fulfilled by what happened to those who bore them : Zach. (the Lord remembers), Eliz. (God's oath.) Hope of giving birth to the deliverer was common among Jew- ish women. 400 yrs. angelic visitation had been discon- tinued, now it is renewed. John as Nazarite (Numb. 6 : 1-21) was to be a reformer. Mai. 4 : 6, the Jewish con- ception of this p'cy was that E. was to be the forerunner and hence had not died. This impression was to be cor- rected. Z's faith not strong enough at first ; asks a sign, and is given one (dumbness, a punishment for his unbe- lief). "As faith is to be the chief condition of the new covenant, it w^as needful that the first manifestation of unbelief should be emphatically punished; butthewound inflicted becomes a healing medicine for the soul," (Lange). Objections answered : 1. Z's treatment was not only punitive but was to confirm his faith, and to be a lesson to the people. 2. Strauss objects, that a name is given to an individual angel, wh. we do not find in 0. T. until after the captivity in Danl. Obj'n is therefore that Jews 25 had no doct. of angels before captivity, that they bor- rowed tlieir ideas from Persians. If so, how came they to have Hebrew names? Furthermore (a) the O. T. is full of the doct. ; and (/>) we have no proof that Jews borrowed from Persians; (c) Tho' names are given to none until Dan.'s time, yet it is characteristic of O. T. to be progressive. Names of angels might be expected in an Apocalyptic book like Dan. (d) Doct. of angels was received and confirmed by Christ and Apostles. 3. Doubted, whether such definite names are borne in heaven. Gab'l represents ministries of angels toward man ; Mich, is type and leader of their strife, in God's name and His strength vs. the power of Satan. In 0. T., therefore, he is guardian of Jewish people in their antag- onism to godless power and heathenism. Many Reform- ers embraced idea that Mich, is Christ. If true, some would represent name of Gab'l (man of God) in same way. Interpretation is inadmissible. Whenever angel Jehovah appears, it is always as God. We are never left in doubt. Myth, theory holds that this was a myth'l age, that disciples believed Christ was raised from dead, owing to the enthusiastic statements of the women. Myth is a story or narrative, involving moral or relig. truth, in wh. narrative form and idea involved are blended. There is no conscious invention to give birth to a popular idea. This theory saves moral character of ea,r\y disciples ; holds that John became imp. after he began his public ministry, and these stories grew up in connection with both. Only question is, how much is mythical and how much historical ? Practical application of the theory necessitates in many cases the charge of conscious deceit. Naturalistic exp. maintains that Christ worked great cures, but by nat. causes. He seemed to raise from dead, but the man was not dead. So here, Z. was paralyzed owing to excitement. Tendency hypoth. holds that there was a conscious falsification of history in accommodation to certain current ideas ; hist, is rewritten to give currency to certain doctrines. Strauss (2d Life) came over to this theory; shifted his ground. Legendary theory (Renan) holds there is a basis of fact, but altered by blending of natural enthusiasm and pious fraud ; very much like leo^ends of saints in Rom. church. Renan adopts more 26 of Gospels than others, because his romancing is not bound by so doing; his method is not so destructive as Strauss's. §3. Six mos. after conception of Elizabeth, an angel (Gab.) appears to Mary and announces that she was to give birth to Messiah. Points of analogy and contrast with annunc'n and birth of John (Alexander): 1. Analogy : (rt) Both were announced by angel of God. {h) " to be extraordinary. (c) " named by the angel. {(() " connected with prophecy. ((?) Offices of both were described. (/) In both, a sign was given to strengthen faith of the parents. 2. Contrast : [a) John's was communicated to priest in the temple ; Christ's to humble virgin in small town of Galilee. (6) John's announcement was more honorable than Christ's birth, (c) Our Lord surrounded his messenger with pomp which he denied to himself. The announcement must be made previously to his birth, that the woman may know what was happening to her. Is. 7: 14 fulfilled in Mt, 1 : 23. A virgin betrothed should be chosen, partly that she miglit be protected by a good man in circumstances into whicli she was brought, partly that the heirship tt) the throne might be conformed to. Two points : 1. Whether both (J. and M.) were of house of David. 2. Whether Lk. 1 : 27 is to be confined to Jos. Angel tells M. that the child must be of h. of D. What meaning would this have to her before her concep- tion, unless she knew that she was of h. of D. ? Lange "The words relate solely to J. They by no means deny descent of M. from D." Annunc'n was privlite to avoid notice of civil authorities and the jealousy of Herod. Lk. 1 : 32, Dan, 7 : 14, his kingship over Israel is promised. For M,, intimate with O. T,,this p'cy wd, contain essence of most remarkable promises (2 Sam, 7, Ps, 45, Is. 9, Mic. 5). Lk. 1 : 42, 44, the extraordinary conception of her kinswoman was a sign of more ext. c. of her own. Objections: 1, That doct, of immac. conception is inadequate to account for sinlessness of Jesus. But he 27 who was light and life of men must sarely see light of clay, not by carnal procreation, [)at by inimediate exer- cise of divine power. How could he be free from every taint of original sin, and redeem us from power of sin, if he had been born by iieshly intercourse of sinful parents? The strong and healthy graft which was to bring new life into the diseased stock, must not originate from this stock. but be grafted into it from without. Miraculous con- cep. 19 a axduoolou to those alone who will see in our Lord nothing but pure humanity, and who put hiB sinlessness in place of tlie real incarnation of God in him. Ration- alistic explanation : that he was of ordinary birth, and that this view existed among the Jews, and continued until the 5th cent. By that "time, gospels were embel- lished to give expression to current views, and the con- clusion is the immaculate concep. Answ'd : (a) The re- lation in wh. Christ stands to his mother is emphasized, as compared with Jos. The latter is never mentioned except as protector of Christ's infancy. From the moment of the conception, the Holy Spirit continued to influence and penetrate mind and spirit of M., to suppress power of sin and make her body his consecrated temple, (b) Titles, " born of a woman," " made flesh," " son of man," the constant reference to mode of his origin, as well as the nature of his constitution show his relation to the woman was more important than to the man. (c) The doctrine is based on prophecy. 2. That in gospels he is son of Jos. (John 1 : 45 ; Lk. 4 : 22 and 2 :"48). Mary, in publicly speaking to her son of Jos., must saj- " thy father." Pressense: " This assertion .sow of Jos. is always put into mouth of Jews as sign of unbelief or contempt. It is even so in the case of ISTathaniel." 3. That the doctrine is not found elsewhere in N. T. Then we have no Saviour. Naturalists and others indulge in diflerent forms of blasphemous interpretation. They deprive Jos.'s bride of chastity and purity, her richest dowry. The notion was first conceived in brain of heathen (Celsus) who de- rides mother of Jesus as victim of seduction. Jewish version of this fable {raiionalismus vulgaris) names one Panthera or Pandira as her seducer. Myth, theory : that this conception in cont. to hist, probability, that Jews did not sympathize with expression "sons of God," bee. 28 polytheistic. It was a story invented to support church claims, referring to the religious feeling of ancients, who revered their great men so much as to make them sons of God (numerous in mytiiology.) So also, it is said, the Evangelists did with Christ. §4. Visit of Mary to Eliz. Ebrard and others : that Jos. had taken his betrothed wife to his home, after a public solemnization of their nuptials, before this jour- ney. Alford: *' that as a betrothed virgin she could not travel alone." But that no unmarried female could journey to visit her friends is incredible. M. may have journeyed with friends, or under spec'l protection of a ser- vant, or with neighbors going to Pass. Lange: "She told Jos. of visit of angel." But Jos.'s knowledge of her con- dition was subsequent to her return. M. leaves it to God to enlighten him as He had her. 3-fold design of visit : 1. To give occasion for exercise of the spirit of inspi- ration, to confirm claims of the 2 children. 2. To connect these extraordinary events in minds of people, before these persons were born. The children were brought together in the bosoms of their mothers. 3. To make known their relative dignity ; Jesus over John. ^ — ■ ^ X Mary's hymn is modeled on Hannah's. (1st Sam. 2). \ It may be divided into 3 or 4 strophes, forming an ani- mated doxology. The grace of God (Lk. 1 : 48), his om- nipotence (49-51), his holiness (49, 51, 54,) his justice (52-3), and especially his faithfulness (54-5), are cele- brated. It sounds like an echo of Miriam's and Debor- ah's harps ; has characteristics of Heb. poetry, in tone and language, and can be rendered almost word for vi^ord. Historically, it is important as showing the Messianic hope, and the form of Messianic expectation. Lk.'s pre- face is classical Greek ; yet this hymn is in best Hebrew. This fact confirms hist, proof of text. Obj'ns : Rational- ists reject the supernatural and account for it on nat. o-rounds. Meyer rejects it on purely subjective grounds (M. could not go alone and Eliz. would not receive her). Strauss consistently rejects all, even the relationship bet. Jesus and John. Home of Zach. : " The supposition is that Vou^a (Lk. 1 : 39) has been substituted for ' I our a, and it is credible." (Lange.) Most common idea: that Hebron was the place, bee. in " the hill country." It was 17 miles S. of Jerusalem. (20 Rom. miles.) / • 29 §5. Birth of John. Effect was shown by the concourse at his circumcision. It was customary to name child on same day as circumcision (Gen. 21 : 3, 4). Eliz. insisted on his being called John. Some say that Zach. had not told Eliz. of the name given in temple. Therefore this was new revelation. Most likely he had told her. From making signs to Zach., some have inferred that he was deaf as well as dumb. Others : it was to spare the feel- ings of mother. Zach. wrote on tablet that his name was John (already given and not open to change). The first N. T. writing opens with grace.' Prophetic cycles accom- panied great hist, epochs; there is an equal advance of proph. with hist. It comes at revolutionary periods; Moses, Joshua and Judges, the completed kingdom un- der David and Solomon ; Isaiah, Hosea, &c., during As- syrian period ; Jere., Hab'k, Zeph., during period of exile. Zachariah's song was to Jewish witnesses a renewal of inspiration, the highest circumstance of the occurrence. For 400 years it had ceased. By its renewal, they regard- ed a new national change as intended. Like Mary's, it refers to fulfillment of 0. T. prophecies, but is not based on any O. T. song, and is more national than individual. In Mary's there is a relative want of originality, and it is full of rerainiscenses. Lange : " The royal spirit is more expressed in her song; the priestly character in Zach.'s In his the O. T. type, in hers the New prevails." Mary's expectations of the Messiah (Lk. 1: 5) were not of a par- ticular and exclusive, but of an universal nat. Zach's song (Lk. 1 : 76, 78) is a striking proof of the prevalence of theocratic over paternal feeling, as the Mssh. is always placed in a more prominent position than his forerunner, Dayspring, Mai. 4 : 2. Both songs breathe theocratic spirit of O. T. ; show the expectation of Him who was to have spiritual rule. John dwelt by himself in wild and thinly peopled region S. W. of Dead Sea near his home, perhaps to show by his seclusion that he was un- instructed in ordinary way but by Holy Ghost. Renan : " the masses had become accustomed to look upon ' the man of God' as a hermit. They imagined that all the holy personages had their days of penitence, of severe life, and of austerities. It was readily conceived that the leaders of sects must be recluses, having their pecu- 30 • liar rules and their institutes, like the founders of rel. orders." Strauss and Meyer see in his seclusion, influ- ence of the Essenes (m^'st. ascetics and devotees). But there is no analogy. 'N. T. does not mention them, Joseph us does largely. §6. Annunciation to Joseph nee, bee. a direct wit- ness was needed to the person most interested, to show that her acct. was not a mistake nor a matter of mere enthusiasm. Her explanations were not believed and her faith was tested. Jos. determ'd to divorce her (privately). Milman : " Bill of divorce was nee. even when the par- ties were only betrothed, and where the marriage had not actually been solemnized. It is probable that the Mosaic law wh. in such cases adjudged a female to death (Dt. 20 : 23-5) was not at this time executed in its origi- nal vigor." Joseph was dtxacoz (Mtt. 1 : 19), not kind, but legally just, merciful. A public divorce would be in writing from the priest, with the causes of it stated, else the woman could not marry again. Annunciation - was at Naz. God appears 4 times to him in a dream (Mtt. 1 : 20 ; 2 : 13 ; 2 : 19 ; 2 : 22). Prophecy of Mtt. 1 : 22 is littered b y the angel , from Is. 7 : 14. Strauss : it is not at all applicable to Christ ; theEvgst. by mistake thought it was. Alexander: "the application of it to Christ is not a mere accommodation, meaning that the words originally used in one sense, and in reference to one object, might now be repeated in another sense, and of another subject ; for this does not satisfy the strong sense of the passage (that it might be fulfilled), nor would such a fanciful coincidence have been alleged with so much emphasis by Mtt., still less by the angel. The only sense that can be reasonably put upon the words is, that the miraculous conception of Mssh. was predicted by Is. in the words here quoted. This essential meaning is not affected by the question whether the prediction was first fulfilled in the nat. birth of a child soon after it was uttered, and the subsequent deliverance of Judah from invasion, but again fulfilled in a higher sense, in the na- tivity of Christ ; or whether it related only to the latter, and presented it to Ahaz as a pledge that the chosen people could not be destroyed until Mssh. came." Best resort is (Hengst.) that the prophecy applies to Christ, and is presented to Ahaz as the sign of deliverance. ^1 / ^c<^'06'C QUui^Cti fXOC'^ J^j>nAA.<>ijud^CcZo6~x^ c^t^t^^^ ^-^^U^^^^^^JcMjt 31 Matt, gives anuunc. to Jos. only; Lk. to Mary only. Objected: 1. That these accts. exclude each other. 2. That the child's name was given to Jos., after it had been given to Mary; therefore not nee. second time. The two accounts harmonize and confirm each other. Each supposes the same basis of fact. («) Silence in one hist, does not contradict astatement in another, (b) Selection of incidents is ace. to their respective plans. xMatt. liv- ing Jos's genealogy, must show how Jos. took Mary as his wife. He is theocratic. Jesus is presented as ful- fillment of the theocracy. Lk. supplements Matt, and gives what belongs to Christ's human relations; depicts the Son of Man appearing in Israel, but for benefit of whole race of man, §7. Birth of Jesus was at Beth, In consequence of an edict that all the world should be taxed, Jos. and Mary leave JSTaz. to go to Beth, the city of Dav, to be taxed there. Pressense: '-The Jewish law laid no obligation on a woman to undertake such a journey, for the writing of her name was enough. But who can wonder at the young wife, situated like Mary, accompanj'ing her pro- tector ? Besides, she was not ignorant of the prophecy which pointed out Beth, as the city of Messiah." Lk. dates from decree of Augustus, bee. it was the occasion that brought Jos. and Mary to Bethlehem. It suggests 1, That the Saviour was born during the reign of Augus- tus (the golden age of Roman history), 2, That the theocracy had sunk to its lowest possible level, 3. That the parents enrolled their names in the registration of the whole world, ,\ VU-(;u3 4/otXA. o/. t:fcv-e^AjL (>/ xu refer to wlionir Not Joseph. But there is no difliculty in applyinij xadainfffiou to Jesus, because He represented His people. It is not positively stated that Simeon was tar advanced in j'ears. Some suppose he was Rabbin Simeon. Some interesting points just here. rH 'Mn-i V^^-CU, CW^->,^oi^i Aw-L-o^ -tUrC 35 1. The fact of inspiration shown in th« promise that he should see the Messiah. 2. The clear recognition in Simeon's words of the fact announced in the aiio-elic dox- ology of the universal application of our Lord's work 3. Prophecy veritied. 4. His sutJerings foretold. These four points teach three things: (1)': Rejection by the ^i'/z.-^ Jews. (2). Calling of the Gentiles. (3). His sacrificial " ^''^ cliaracter. We also infer that tribal relations were not ^/.f all lost, as Anna is mentioned as beloiiging to the tribe -^ ^'*^'^*^ '^ • ' of Aser. Fasting and prayer to be understood literally and not of an ascetic order, as they simply mean Anna led a religions life. The sceptical objections here are larae. The Mythists assert that the motive for miracles in tlie narrative was a desire to exalt Christ on the part of later writers. This alone they say was the cause lor the multi])licity of Miracles. UO. Adoration of flir MiHii. Matt. 2:1-12. According to the most approved plan, this belongs to verses 38-39 of Lk. 2. Its signification is the counterpart of the last. The time after presentation was brief, as Herod's death soon followed. The adoration of the Magi represents His acknowledgment by the Gentiles. They could not have been dews. Their question was, where is He who is born King of the Jews ? The salient change in the church at this time was the calling of the Gentiles. X. T. dispensation is of grace, hence universal, and not an ac- cident of its condition, but an inward change in the essential character of the dispensation. O. T. prepara- tory and honored in its being superseded. Care was taken that He did honor to the law— the O. T. Like- wise in the fulfillment of prophec}^ and calling of the ^^ Gentiles. Christ was apprehended by the Magi as the kiug^ and they tendered Him royal gifts. This custom common to the East. Divinely guided, hence it is nat- ural to infer that they cherished a real faith in the Son of God, but not so clear as was possible after the resur- rection. By some it is thought the gifts were significant. 1. Gold significant of royalty, authority, sovereignty. 2. Frankincense of prayer and intercession, thus recog- nizing him as the hearer and answerer of supplication. 3. Myrrh, being a favorite anodyne and antiseptic, had reference to his sufferings and resurrection ; hence the incorruptibility of his nature; and the promise that his 86 body should not see corruption. The mother accepted the gifts as His due. Tradition has greatly embellished this event. The three donors represent three different races, viz : Shem, Ham, and Japheth. In pictures, one is represented as a negro. But more important than these traditionary views we shall observe 1. The Magi, called lidyoc 6.710 duazo?Mv. Originall}', a tribe of Medes set apart for priests, same as the Levites among the Jews. They embodied the learning of the people. Their knowledge consisted principally of astrology. 2. The country of their abode the text leaves uncertain. Three have been given, Arabia, Mesopotamia, Persia. The last best. Notice the change from auazohou to avazoArj. Both forms are used as definite geographical expressions. Auazo?uou is the far-east Persia. Avazo)xj, east Bal)ylonia. Observe the representatives of the race are chosen from the cradle of the race. The Greeks and Romans were too impure and familiar with the Jews, and treated them with con- t-empt. Barbarians were too ignorant. The east chosen because the cradle of Science. The writings of Zoroaster come nearer to the Holy Scriptures than any others. 3. What brought the Magi ? Phenomena natural or super- natural? Prevailing belief, natural. To its being mi- raculous it is objected : {a) Nowhere taught in the text. {b) Magi saw the star in the East. If seen in the East it could not go before them. To remove this difficulty read ver. 2 : " while we were in the East &c." (c) They were not led to X. but came to Him. Not guided to Bethlehem until they asked for the child. When directed again to Bm. they saw the starthe second time. Popular tradition is that the star led them. Ans. : Kepler the first to sug- gest the natural explanation in 1604. (See Andrews pp. 9-10). He observed in that year a conjunction of" Jupiter and Saturn, in Pisces, in Dec. 1603. Mars w^as added in the following spring, and a new star of surpass- ing brilliancy appeared in the autumn of 1604, In 747 A. U. C. there werq three such conjunctions of Jupiter and Saturn, and M-ars was added in 748 A. U. C. Both of these conjunctions have been supposed to be the star of the Magi. Kabbi Abarbanel states that the same thing occurred at the birth of Moses, and also in 1463, w^hich led him to look for the birth of the Messiah in his own day. Wieseler says it was a new star in 749 and 750, 37 and finds it recorded in the Chinese annals. This cUishes with Zunipt, whose theory is determined by the date that Cyreuius was governor of Syria, as previously stated. Ques : How is this star to be associated with X's birth ? Ans : 1. They knew this was the part of the heavens which belonged to Judea. 2. A prevailing expectation at the tinie for a Deliverer, who should appear in Judea. (Vide Suetonius and Tacitus). 3. Collateral traditions from common sources of knowledge. Chinese sages, 33 years later, coming west, inquired for the long expected and common Saviour. 4. These were combined with Jewish expectations. Jews were scattered widely over the world, who spread knowledge of God and Messianic predictions. David and Daniel had prophesied of Him. In Num. 24 : 17 and Is. 60 : 3, he is spoken of under the figure of a star. Mary applies N. 24 : 17 to X. Balaam's words may have been handed down outside of the church. These passages may have given shape to as- tronomical expectations relative to X. Hence the Magi were naturally led to observe heavenly phenomena. Hengstenberg objects. 1. o.(TTf]p is applicalDle to only one bod}', and aazpov to a constellation. The former is true, but the use of the latter is wide. 2. Kepler has been reviewed by Pritchard. He says conjunction in no case was perfect. The stars ahvays separated by two diameters of the moon between. Ans: Still, the phe- nomenon was very remarkable as well as the coincidence of his calculations". The two planets came together about three hours and a half before sunrise, and hence in the East, The first appearance would be seen in the East May 20, 747, just"before sunrise. The second in Nov., five months later in the south, at 8 P. M. : hence star ap- peared toward Bm, The former indicated the birth, the latter the way to Bm. This involves those who claim 747 in all the chronological difficulty to which we have referred. Accordingly, the birth of X. is put three years earlier, and makes Him 33 years at Baptism. Therefore the Magi did not probably set out at the first appearance, but delayed some time. "^Again, the term of Quirinus was not earlier than 750, whereas this makes nativity three years before. But the taxing might have been four years earlier than 750. The only alternative for this naturalistic explanation is to adopt the theory of a new 5tar, natnra! or miracnloiis, 3. Objections: Why should Herod slaughter 3 year old children ? As the first star \vas ouly five months before, tlierefbre Ave must agree tliat stai' at Bm. was a new star or a miraculous one. Milton supposes a leading of the rays; Dr. Pritchard tlie going and standing of the star was in consequence of the Magi's journeying and arrival: Dr. Alexander that the words mean they saw the star again on the road to Bm. and thus <'onfirmed their hopes, and hence it was a star seeming to go before theni. 4. God would not usetlieir false notions of astrology for such an end. Strauss asks, Is astrology wrong elsewhere but right in this case? Ans : God employs men as they are, bringing good out of evil. Also, astrology was then considered as associa- ted with all true astronomy. It embodied true science. Astrology and Alchemy embraced all that was known of science. There are perplexing difKculties either way. Still, the astrological phenomena must have given cor- roboration to the expectations for the Messiah. Observ- ed at the time of birth, and hence they furnish collateral evidence to the time of the nativity. Mythists assert the whole to be a myth. Arabian mer- chants befriended the parents in their poverty. The magi were fixed upon, as they were astronomers; and star, be- cause of O.T. passages referring to a great light, and which were literally understood. The gifts referred to Isaiah 60 : 6. As to the general effect, Herod and the city were trou- bled. The wise rnea of the Jews called and questioned, and replied, "Christ was to be born in Bm." Mic. 5 : 2. Note the difference in reading between Micah and Matt. A striking illustration of two opposites meaning the same thing. Warned of God in a dream, the magi avoided Herod and returned home another way. §11. FHiihi into J'J(/)/pf— Iff rod's Oru(ltii—-The. Betxrn.— Matt. 2: 13-23. Besides saving the child's life, it sym- bolically embodies the great truth that the Messiah was to suffer, llitberto all peaceful. Except poverty and humility, notliing as yet indicated His suffering. The design of the flight is five-fold. 1. To introduce the suf- fering element. 2. Christ's kingly office set forth. Princely honors bestowed. 3. O. and N. T. typical relations established. Egypt was a refuge, being near 39 and under Roman power. Moses was saved there, where also was the transitional state of the church from the ft^niily to the nation. Church came up out of Egypt when preserved. Xow in danger church repairs there again. Christ is saved. 4. In'^Egypt, Hos. 11 : 1 fulfil- led. ObJ'n : misapplication. Ans: The calling of Israel /roni Egypt bears a typical relation to Christ" 5. New evidence of miraculous care observed for the child. Jo- seph conspicuous, as evidence for nuraculous c(uiception, and preservation. Hence he is too much underrated. Massacre of the Luioeenls. Objections: 1. Herod .de- feated his purpose by inquiring of the Magi. Too cun- ning for this. Better accomplished by secret messenger, &c. 2. Silence of contemporaneous history. Could such cruelty escape notice ? No, say negative critics. Jose- phus and Fioman liistorians make no record of it. Ans : Whatever was unpleasant to Roman ears Josephus was careful to omit. Roman historiajis did not mention it because they had no sympathy with Jewish hist'y. Again, this was only as a drop in the bucket as compared with Herod's cruelties. Through jealousy he killed his wife and sotis. When dying he issued orders to destroy his nobles, that there might be weeping at his death. The wise men mocked Herod. Pride, ambition and fear caused him to kill all the male children, ryjc -tuoa^, Xo mention of secrecy. From two years old and under cannot be limited to those beginning their second year, nor can it be said Christ was two years old. If the child had just been seen by the Magi, why those two yrs. old and under? Herod would liave killed enough children without extending his order to those two years old. Ans. Prophecy was thus fullilled, Jer. 31: 15. Objected again that the prophecy is misapplied. Rachel is poetically represented as rising from the grave, owing to the de- portation of captives at Ramah, the descendants of Jos. and Benj. Here as rising to weep for the massacre of the innocents at Bm. Ans: Typical connectiou between the two events. As to the number of children slaugh- tered, sceptics exaggerate. Voltaire says 14,000. Anti- quarians estimate" the population by aieasurement of space. This necessarily is liable to mislead. Variously estimated about 90, 10,'^or l± Smallest most probable. Mvthists, &c., say all heroic persons passed through 40 dangers duriiisjinfiincy and childhood. Romnhis, Remus, Cyrus, &o. Hence the eventful infancy of Christ, or, it was a pure invention to connect it with Moses and Heb'ws in Egypt. The place of sojourn is unknown. Traditions clash. Some, near Heliopolis; others, at Memphis. Nor is the duration of the sojourn fully known. Varies as the date of birth by different critics. The return was soon after Herod's death, as Jos. had not heard of his successor. We may Tiote Math.'s agreement with con- temporaneous hist. Period of intricate changes, yet no mistake is made. Herod's territory divided into three parts. Herod Antipas, tetrarch over Galilee and Berea ; Archelaus ; Judea, Idumea anci Samaria. Herod had appointed Archelaus king, but Augustus allowed him the title of Ethnarch. Philip was allotted Trachonitis, Au- ranites. The gospel narrative moves through all these without a single blunder. It was Joseph's intention to return to Bm. Warned in a dream to return again to Nazareth. Prophecy ful- filled, Jud. 13 : 5. That Nazareth is never mentioned in O. T. is based partly on the etymology of the word. Supposed to be from a Heb. word meaning a hoig ; others from a word signifying a crown. Allusion to Is. 11 : 1 compared with 53 : 3. Messiah to be a twig from the prostrate stem of Jesse, i. e., of humble origin. There is reference to the reputation of the town. " Can any good come out of Nazareth ?" Christ fulfilled prophecy by living there. The return and settlement at Nazareth close. the period of infancy. {^' ' The peculiarities of this first subdivision of the pre- paratory period are heightened by the silence that fol- lowed. 1. Matt, and Lk. combine to form a unit, fitting like a lock and key. 2. The supernatural and historical elements are one. If miracles, they must be received on historical evidence. Bleek says Christians cannot but expect Christ's entrance into the world accompanied by peculiar signs. 3. The attempt to discredit is based on subjective and rationalistic grounds, i. e., difficulty to be- lieve, varying with the individual. Critics argue in circub. The choice is between Matt, and Strauss. 4. The histori- cal characteristics already justified in connecting with O. T. The typical and symbolical exhibited, and facts im- .ply and embody truths, which were brought out. ^ ^^-t^K^xJ^^iJ^ ^\jU^<^nrcU err- ^-^iJ^J^-y 'H^i-u^/l ^^^-^-^^-^^<^t-i^W^..e,^ 41 Second Subdicision of Preparatory Period. — Its limits comprise the return and end ofSOyears of quiet lifeat Naz- areth, or settlement at Nazareth to commencement of ministry. Profound silence. No uninsj3ired writer could refrain from his own interpolations. Hence the contrast between apocrypha and N. T. Desis^n of the silence. 1. Essential to have a full account of Christ's origin, his ministry, public work and sacrifice. To this the "gospels correspond. 2. Period of growth, not work. Just enough presented to maintain hist, connection. Silence a check upon those who would dwell on unimportant truths. More would have been gratification of curiosity to which sacred historians never descend. Otherwise the narrative would be impaired. 3. Such given as adds to our ideas of Christ. Two extremes to be avoided : [a) That Christ learned nothing in a natural way, but all supernatural, even to reading and writing. This view unwarranted by facts, and unnecessary to his divinity. (6) Naturalistic. This exalts his mental powers to the exclusion of the divine. This untrue, as the people wondered at his wisdom, having never learned. Narra- tive says " he taught not as one taught by the scribes." He probably lived and learned as other boys. Supposed to have learned his father's trade. Mk. 6:3; 13 : 55. See Dr. Alexander. Gospel Lessons. — 1. Early life uneventful. 2. Growth, not action. Grew in wisdom and stature. 3. He grew in favor with unbelieving Galileans, who knew him best. His brethren the most difficult to persuade, and his tow^nsmen sought twice to kill him. They were scan- dalized by his assuming superiority. There was no un- natural and repulsive precocity in him. He possessed a perfect human nature. Early Fathers say he had no personal beauty, based on Is. 53 : 2. Later view founded on Ps. 45. 4. The most important is the following: §12. Visit to the Passover.— Lk. 2: 41-52. This single paragraph presents the fact of his extraordinary powers. Were it not for this, there would be room for the asser- tion that Christ received no miraculous gift till Baptism. The event marks a transition in his consciousness. The growing boy, full of heavenly wisdom, seeking after knowledge, kind to his parents, obedient in all things. Olshausen beautifully says, " He was a perfect boy, per- f M^u/j 42 feet man." A marked ari'ival of fuller consciousness of Ills mission is also noticeable. Impressed with his desti- ny. In analogy with human experience. Christ had a child knowledge of himself. Now a youth's experience, then the sudden mental changes, of which a youth is often conscious. Hence glimpses of a portentous future. How or when came to Jesus the consciousness of his Messiahship we are not told. It must have been gradaal. A sinless being, with a knowledge of sin, yet pure, and conscious of difference between himself and others. Reading the law, and yet having perfect love to God; the types and prophecies of O. T. and conscious of their fulfillment in himself. A gradual conception of his Mes- sianic character must have been wrought in him. There are evident traces however, when touching upon great truths, of modern flashes gleaming in upon his soul. This is one, and those at Baptism and on Mt. of Trans. At this point the " Lives of Christ" open themselves. The authors show what is to be their theory of the per- son of X., upon which they explain the events of his life. Rationalists deny or explain away the supernatural. Orthodox writers vary. It is important to know the author's standpoint, and guard against misinterpretation of forms of statement. Ebrard, Pressense, and Beecher explain by the xev oiocQ theory, which is a self-limitation, or self-emptying of the Logos. Divine and human one and the same. jSTot two natures, but one. Distinction made between essential nature and attributes. X. was God essentially and potentially, but emptied himself of his divine contents. A babe like any other babe. Void of ideas, was a bundle of germs which developed through- out his whole life, and at exaltation his Divinity fully restored. The human developed into the Divine ; the Infinite having become finite, and the finite growing back into the Infinite. This theory denies the real humanity of X., robs him of liuman sympathv. X. is an undeitied God. Others lower X's humanity by separating it too much from his divinity. He possessed all of our humanity, but the converse is not true. Hence iiis was not ours, but his own. Yet ours touches his. For this view, two reasons. 1. He was sinless, therefore his capacities un- like ours. We do not know what sinless humanity is. M ,^-(,4./T5>t'-lL^ oy ^d.'t-cWAX.O- ^ ^~PUjU k-^tt;^^*^'^ 43 2, He was Divine, and two natures in his person, there- fore above us. All he did was not as a mere man. The human influenced by the divine, and hence all he did was done by God. Illustration : A Christian is exalted, owing to the indwelling of the H. G. So X., though a man, is exalted, by a personal union with the Father and H. G. Hence as a man is infinitely above any other man. Paul maintains this in Hebrews, as the ground of the infinite value of his sacrifice. It is possible to so view X. as to conceive of him as sustaining a double per- sonality. Most of the "Lives of Christ" are based on German theories, largely tainted with this speculation. This is growing common with the Baptists. We study him not merely as coinciding with our views of his nature, but as a true man, developing according to his nature, acting and acted upon. Jesus went up to the temple with his parents. At 12 Jewish bo3's became " sons of the law," and took part in the feasts &c. The country was safe from former dan- gers. When X was about 10, Archelaus was banished to Gaul. The government in the hands of procurators, subordinate to governor of Syria, and thus Galilee, Sama- ria and Judea were under Roman protection. The parents returned from Passover but Jesus stayed behind. They had proceeded a day's journey before they missed him, thinking he was with his kinsmen. Failing to dis- cover his whereabouts, they returned to the city. Found him the third day at the temple, " sitting in the midst of the doctors." " Sitting" does not necessarily imply equal- ity. Strauss says it is unnatural that a boy of 12 should be instructing men, that a scholar would have stood. *' Hearing and asking" imply instructing. Ans: Xothiug in the narrative inconsistent with an intelligent boy, pure and curious for knowledge. Scholar standing was not customary. The mother's question shows their mutual relation. It is beautiful, zsxuou, u iTtoivjaaQ -fjiuv bozioy, The reply is variously interpreted. The grammar admits of two. Some supply ellipsis locally—" Why did you look elsewhere, did you not know I would be in my Father's house ?" Better : " in my Father's affairs," and thus at the Temple, as the article roj'c is indefinite. The first recorded words of X., and an acknowledgment of God as his Father. Others affirm that at this juncture 44 the consciousness of his destiny became more real. Pre- viously he had been passive, but not so cow. Best humanitarians claim the words are expressive of penetra- ting insight into his divine mission. We may remark that the incident serves to enhance our interest occasion- ed by his miraculous birth. The parental anxiety, inquiry for a lost child, public place where lie was found, were all calculated to arouse thoughts in the parent's minds. Critical Objections. 1. Unnatural that his mother should lose him. Ans : He was old enough to take care of him- self Easily lost in a large crowd. 2. Unnatural that he should cause his mother so great anxiety, and then give her such a reply. Ans : Reply not rough, but a gentle admonition that her claims were subordinate to a higher duty. 3. If the circumstances of conception were true, the mother could not fail to comprehend his answer. Ans: Mary ma}' not have fully known what he meant. 12 years could have glided by with nothing extraordina- ry. Hence the origin of the Mythical interpretation, based on Moses and Samuel. From the narrative, we learn that he returned to Nazareth and was subject to his parents. Joseph's t/eat/t. Supposed to have died soon after this. I^ot mentioned again. Apocryphal gospels say he died when Jesus was 19. Evidently dead at the time of cru- cifixion, as Jesus gave his mother into John's care. Why Nazareth chosen as abode ? 1. To fulfill prophecy. 2. It was his parents' home. 3. It afforded safety. Greater danger in Jerusalem. 4. Could gain more influ- ence in Galilee than in Jerus. under the Pharisaic eye. 5. Isolated from Jewish instruction, he is supposed to have been taught of God. His wisdom given by inspira- tion. 6. Reared where the scenes of his public ministry- were to be chiefly laid. Renan : "The whole Galilean ministry was within sight of iiis youthful home." Pres- ent Nazareth consists of 3000 inhabitants. It lies in a narrow valley, shut in between two rocks. North of the Esdraelon plain, the hill looks n. e. to Ilermon. There- fore the view was familiar to him when looking towards the snow-capped Herraon, the northernmost point of X's work. The eastern view confronted by Tabor, west by Carmel and the sea. The southern by Gilboa and Samaria. -CatesS&is^ 45 §13. Genealogies. Mth. 1: 1-17; Lk. 3 : 23-38. The importance of these lies in the necessity to prove X's Messianic claims. The Jewish genealogies were sacredlv kept and open to all. Strauss considers them fraudulent, and that they involve difficulties, being opposed to O. T. Hence no proof of Christ's Davidic descent. 1. On the contrary, the royal line could not be obscure. People would have guarded the royal seed as He was to descend from David. This was the promise. If Christ had been of Davidic descent, he would have been hailed as Mes- siah. Ans : No theocratic rulers on account of sin. 2. Birth at Bra. was not generally believed, nor does Jesus reply to this. John? : 42. ANazarene, and so he passes in Gospels and Acts. Ans: Nowhere else charged, not in Sanhedrim. Were the charge substantial, it would have been fatal to him. He was not ignorant of his lineage, as he calls himself Daufc/'s son. Peter at Pentecost, the Acts and Ejfistles use it. Strauss says title is officially no real fact. 3. No concurrent testimony, no reference to Ebionites. Ans: Abundant proof without the gene- alogies. " The son of" or " begat " not limited to literal relationship of father and son. This true when line runs out. This remark clarities Mth.'s genealogy. Remote ancestors called fathers when distinct line vanishes. Case : Math, says " Jacob begat Joseph." Lk., " Joseph was the sou of Heli." No literalness here. Again, Mth. speaks of three divisions of fourteen genealogies each. Difficulty. But the most obvious way to remove it is to count David twice. Another difficulty. In second table four kings omitted which Chronicles supplies, thus mak- ing eighteen generations instead of fourteen. Therefore "so all the generations" must mean all given in Mth. Charge of ignorance absurd, as every child in Judea knew'the royal list better than we do the Presidential, or the royal line of Gt. Britain. But why fourteen ? 1, K>^ To aid memory. 2. Symbolic value of the number of letters, which were fourteen. David=14. DS V^ D*= 14. 3. P.ej-iods chronologicjfUy equal. Untrue, because the first period is twice as long as the other two. 4. These periods of national history. This the raoat satis- factory, i. e., the theocratic descent. What names omitted and why ? Amaziah, Joash and Ahaziah, occurring be- tween Joram and Ozias. Some say because they de- 46 sceiicled from Jezebel, and others because the}' were mere ciphers. Jehoiachim omitted as captivity began in his reign, or because made king by a foreign power. Ob- jection to Mth. 1 : 11. Jechonias had no brethren. Ans: Brethren may mean contemporaries. Again Jechonias had no chihlren, hence not the father of Salathiel. " Write the man childless." Jer. 22 : 30. Perhaps this meant he should lack in a direct line of successors to the throne. All these little difficulties sufficiently accounted for. Discrepancies hehijccn Mt. and Lk. 1. Mth's genealogy opens the narrative and was probably copied. Lk's is introduced as a part of X's personal history. 2. Mth. descends while Lk. ascends. 3. Math, traces the royal line, Lk. the natural to Adam. 4, Lk. fuller than Mth., giving 42 names to Mth's 28. To David the lists agree. Difficulty : Between Salmon and David only three names occur for 400 or 500 years. Same dif in Ruth, and hence another instance of contradiction. Ans : Names omitted. Said that Rahab was another line than Jewish. Divergence of lineage from David downward. Mth. fol- lows Solomon, Lk. ISTathan. Two hypotheses : 1. Both Mth. and Lk. give Joseph's genealogy. 2. Mth. that of Joseph and Lk. Mary's. (1) current before Reformation, and now supported by manj' of the best critics, viz. Alford, Meyer, &c. (2) held by Wieseler, Ebrard, Gres- well, Alexander, &c. If both of Joseph, why different? Ans: One through kings the other from father to son. How same names iu two different lines, e. g. Salathiel and Zorobabel ? Ans : 1. Two persons with same name. 2. A mere coincidence. Lines together in Salathiel, as direct line runs out and Sal. nearest heir. This explains how Jechonias is Salathiel's father, while Lk. makes Salathiel son of Neri. Main obj : If both Joseph's, they only establish X's legal right to the throne, but no personal descent. Ans : Some say this was all that was required. But prophecy does not allow this as it is too definite. Compare 2 Sam.^: 12 and Acts 2:^ ; 13: 23. Hgjjothesis of Jos. and marij. First cousins relieves the objection. Grandfather of both one and the same person: Matthat and Matthan. Matthan had two sons. Heli and Jacob. Hence Jos. and Mary were first-cousins — of Davidic origin. M. had sisters, but no mention of 47 brothers. Tradition says M. was a ward of Jos. Thus . a partial relief afforded if genealogies be of Jos. They give X's right to the throne'personally and officially. Ob- ~ jections against Lk's giving Mary's : 1. Female line not recorded. Ans : This not female, but genealogy of woman through her father, and thus the mak line of M's ancestry. 2. AI. and Eliz. were cousins, and Eliz. of un- royal line, hence M. not of royal line. Ans : This could be on mother's side. Intermarriage allowed among the tribes. 3. M's name not mentioned in Lk's genealogy, but purports that of Jos. Ans: This not easily over- come, yet not absolutely fatal to the theory, as Lk. says, " who was supposed to be the son of," &c. 4. IsTo other proof that M. was from David. Ans: untrue — proved outside of genealogies that Christ was of royal line, which confirms the probability that list was M's. Lk. 1 : 31-32. This prior to marriage and thus necessary that the child should have a volantarr/ father. This the light ' in which she could understand her union with Jos. if she were of the house of David. Lk. 1 : 27. David may re- fer to the principal subject, as well as to the nearest ante- cedent, i. e. Jos. M. went to Bm. to enrol her name the "-' same as Jos. Lk. 2:4. So far then as she was not from Levitic genealogy, proofs contrary. All texts which prove Christ to be from David also prove the same for M. This subject is beset with difficulties. Slight mis- ■' takes destroy certainty. Genealogical principles un- ^ known to us. Much has been cleared up which critics \ . deemed insurmountable, and hence reasonable to suppose that coming researches will remove all difficulties. (See Smith's Diet., Arthur Harvey, and Dr. Green on Colenso.) §14. History of John the Baptist. Mth. 3 : 1-13 ; Mk. 1: 1-8; Lk.3/: 1-18. Ministry of John and Tempt, introduced Christ's public work. Lk. begins by formal transition of six dates. Mth. and Mk. begin with preach- ing of the Baptist. Prophecy groups the Baptism and entrance upon public work. Predictions of Malachi are now fulfilled. John began to preach in 7f9, a Sabbatical year by best chronology, which relieved the people from labor and thus aftbrcled them leisure to attend John's / ministry. '' The word of the Lord came to John in the ^^ wilderness," given to commence work directly, and hence "" he was inspired and divinely guided. Rationalists say f\ -\ '' ^ ?> ^i^ 48 this was useless, that John had a conviction that he was a man of God, and, seeing the condition of the people, undertook the work of reformation. But the scriptures show he was under divine guidance. Design of Jolm's Ministry. — 1. Preparation for Christ. John represented O. T. economy, and was the last and greatest of O. T. prophets, being an embodiment of its spirit. Hence first design was to announce New Dispen- sation. Popular belief in external kingdom, which John proposed to remove. 2. Preparation of people by repen- tance. O. T. economy educated religious life without satisfying it and the people to expect the Messiah. But the majority of the people had lost the spiritual import of prophetic teaching. The Sadducees were sceptical and Pharisees self-righteous. The earnest Essenes had become fanatics. Hence the necessity of repentance to restore the spiritual, so that Christ might come in con- tact with O. T. religion in revived life and power, and not an effete religion. 3. To point out the Messiah in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, and hand over to Christ the 0. T. Dispensation. " This was He of whom," &c. 4. To show both dispensations united in Christ, that the old yielded to him and withdrew. John accomplished his designs, first Dy preaching. No new doctrine, but a return to the power and spirit of the O. T. Its character was severe, denunciatory, and replete with threatenings of wrath. Abounded in O. T. figures. Points out specific sins. Calls all to repentance, but never inculcates asceticism, yet wants them to observe the purity represented by it. Points to Christ as the lamb of God, advances upon Isaiah by pointing to the individual. His preaching more weighty because of the purity of his life. Personally fitted to revive O. T. relig- ion, representing the formal and spiritual. Design further'shown by the rite of baptism. The people were wont to connect the spiritual with the sym.- bolical. Baptism something new, not associated with the law. Its significance was the^washing away of their sins, a rest oration of the spiritual. John charged with having learned his baptism from the form of receiving prose- lytes. Ans : As an initiatory rite of Judaism it did not assume form until after the destruction of the temple. He received it from the washinirs of the O. T. %l^ A.<^r:Ub (D ^ ■ ^— ^-^^^^ 49 John's relations to O. T. 1. By birth, being of priestl^^ origin. 2. By his fulfiUraent ofMalachi's prophecy, 3 : 1, and Isa. 40 : 3. 3. By the j)Jace he frequented, viz., the Desert of Judea, or, as Lk. says. " the region round about Jordan," i. e. between mountains, lower Jordan and the Dead Sea. Boundary crossed where Israel entered Ca- naan. Symbolical of the moral and religious destitution of the people. So regarded in 0. T. Hence John lived unlike his master, who sought men at their own homes. He must be found in the wilderness. His personal ap- pearance was peculiar. Dress made of the cheapest and coarsest material, and had camel's hair which is shed yearly. But this raiment was not official, only assumed b}' Elijah and John to symbolize renouncement of ease and luxury. In 2 Kings 1 : 8 Elijah called a " hairy man." Comp. Zech. 13 : 4. Hence our conclusion. His food was locusts and wild honey. The nearest at hand. All these things were fit to mark him as a representative of 0. T, dispensation. Was JjQhn's preaching merely negative ? Was his repentance a saving grace? Did baptism cleanse or simply symbolize ? Rationalists affirm that repentance meant renouncing of sin outwardly. Some orthodox writers say no vitality in John's work. Answer : John taught all the grace and power of O. T. Hence real re- pentance and faith, as far as O. T. exhibited. He vindi- cated the relation between O. and N. T. "I baptize with," &c. Further said baptism was a mere external ceremony ; others make the contrast between John and Christ, " I baptize in dependence upon him who," &c. Best : ISTo allusion to Christian baptism as an ordinance. Eminent authorities hold this view. Christian baptism not yet established. Meaning then, "I baptize ceremo- nially with efficacy." Proposed to the people's faith — " He shall pour out the Spirit." Thus the distinction is _iii degree and not in kind. " He shall . . . with tire :" inieference to judgment fire. J^ext clause, " chatiP, &c." 2. Purifying fire. Drs. Alexander and SchafiF. Better : Holy Ghost, and therefore zeal. The popular success of John was immense. Yet it was not a national success. Jerusalem emptied itself to the banks of the Jordan. Judea, Samaria and Galilee gathered there. Priests, scribes, lawyers and soldiers, 50 all conditions thronged to hear him. Yet, success not enduring,as the masses only received him formally. His pmver enhanced by his peculiar position, as a voice from the desert. Had he preached in Jerusalem it is said he IK 34'ould have been powerless. y^ §1.5. The Baptism of Jesus.— Matt. 3: 13, 14; Mk. 1 : 9-11 ; Lk. 3 : 21-23. John began six months before. Clirisl now ready to be brought before the excited crowd. It was the design of Christ's journey, to be baptized. " Too j3a7rT(adr^vai" which denotes purpose. The act anomalous, that the less should bless the greater. Matt. sa3'S John felt this and tried to hinder him. Christ's words peculiar: sufter now. Two things implied in them : 1. Something was to be allowed, suffered, al- though unusual. 2. Seeininglj temporary. . " Suffer it to be so now." It is Trftsnov, seendy to complete the law's obligation, what is right in a specific sense for the fulfill- ment of redemption. The xfifusal of John shows : 1. John knew and believed Jesus to be the Messiah. 2. \vas subordinate, did as Christ commanded him. John baptized on Christ's authority, ^^hat was the design ? As John's baptism involved confession oFsuTT'wTial'reTa- tion did Christ's bear to this? 1. Strauss : Confession of sin actual. 2. Others, it implied peccability, and hence Lange, it was ceremonial nncleanness. Too narrow a view. Schenkel says it means sympathy with others. ^^-Txii a.view . (1) As the circumcision", it was expressive oTlils^ssunjl^tion of hi.8jjeoplc'8 sins. In__thejawls yi^w he was a sinner, and therefore exhibited the necessity of the washing away of the sins assum ed. As Messiah he was sin-bearer. Objection to last : Jesus confounded with the people; they made confession, and might infer Christ did likewise for his own sins. Guarded : Lest the}' might think so, the divine and John's testimony intervened. (2) The design is again shown as manifest- ing the unity of the two dispensations. The chief £e{ii:e- ^eritatives of each meet. The _0^. T. covenant baptizes the N. T. covenant. Christ publicly gives authority to tne work of John, and John confesses Christ to be superior to himself. John decreased, Christ increased. (3) Baptism served to inaugurate.. the work of Christ. Afibrded opportunity to God to recognize his Son. This was the chief import of the baptism — cr^aou jSa-naf^si^TO^, *^! 51 the genitive ubolute, Lk. 3: 21. Main subjects the mi- raculous manifestations. J^Lviue- attestations necessary to the Messiah's coming. Wherefore Christ's arrival de- layed till a great concourse had flocked to John. (4) A.t Baptism Christ was anointed for his work by the^ Spirit. ISTot only formal, but full of vital power. The person of Christ is acted upon. Holy Ghost the agent in making him a fit place for the indwelling of the Logos, ^hn's baptism represented cleansing from sin jiihiiili- is the Spirit's work. In the case of Christ the gift confirmed by a pign of the Spirit's descent. The sign and descent go together. Lk. says " Jesus was pray- ing " — a religious act, a real communication of the Spirit to Jesus. After baptism is the temptation, the trying of his gift. Cf>nj^.cti]rf^ : Christ now for the first time re- alizes his mission, the full consciousness of his sacrificial character. _Ans.: It is not given to penetrate so deeply into tbe mind of Christ. Certain : He did advance in knowledge of ati important spiritual crisis. Always full of the Spirit sufficiently for his purposes, but now re- ceives it immeasurably for his public ministry. Had it before in kind, not in degree, as now he is the organ of the Holy Ghost. ■ | 4.s a dm^e. 1. Motion of the dove — Riding. 2. Quickness. 3. Softness of the dove. But these are in- coTTsistent with what Lk. says, aw/iaTcxu) el'dsc ; hence an appearance, a bodily shape, reaTdove shap e, if language means anything. Why dove? 1. Reference to O. T. after the deluge. ^.Brooding, symbolical of new crea- tion. 3. Puriy. 4. Symbol of sacrifice, ceremonial associations. (3}_aiixL4AXcombined the best. Represented the~ whole spirit of his ministry. 1. The salvation he preached was peaceful, pure and lovely. 2. iLsacrificial work. 3. Productive agency of Spirit at creation — brooding dove. Difficulty: Mth. 3: 16— "the heavens were opened aJzoj— to him;" Mk. 1: 10— "He saw the heavens, &c.;" John 1 : 32— " I saw," i. e., John Bap. Heiice.the Baptist^j?i«s^ have seen the Spirit himself AnsTl. 'fhis was the sign by which he could recognize Christ. Van Oosterzee considers the event as private, alid Spirit seen only by John and Christ. Obj : a. Nat. inter, deny the objective reality of the phenomena. The vision became so only in the spiritual world, and for the 52 spiritualized, h. Discrepanc}' in the several accounts. Mth. and Mk. say "Jesus saw;" John — Baptist,." saw ;" while Lk. is s^eneral — " heaven opened and Spirit de- scended." 2. Dramatic representations, in the reconcilia- tion between O. and N. T. Voice from heaven not con- fined to John and Jesus alone, "^y belo.ved Son," founded on 2 Sam. 7: 12. But the expression does not imply that he became Son at Baptism, because of his eternal relationship, Ps. 2: 25, 42 and "In whom J am pleased " from Is. 42. Lange says aorist, denoting an eternal act: Alexander — a definite act. The last best. In this expression we have another attestation -to Christ's Messiahship. Tlligisthe revelation of th e Trinity in their personal agency in redemption. The first in conception. 1 The Father at baptism declares tbe.Soals Messiahship and the Spirit gives grace for the office. Minor differences in form of expressions made a subject of cavil. Mth: "This is my," &c., while Mk. and Lk. " Thou art," &c. Some think both are proper and that there were two utterances from heaven. Words were doubtless in Hebrew or Aramaic and here in an inspired translation. Objections: — 1. vShortness of time. If John began six months before there was not time enough for liis success and influence. Ans : John's work not independent but an appendage to Christ's. Results accounted for by the condition and great state, of expectancy of the Jews. Strauss makes John to have begun when about 20 years old, long before Christ came to him. 2. Inconsistency between John and Syn. Syn. say John knew Jesus whilst John says the Baptist did not know him. Again John represents the Bap. as recognizing Christ as the Messiah from the first, whereas Syn. affirm that he sent a deputa- tion to Jesus from prison, saying, "Art thou he that should come ?" Strauss says John's gospel belongs to a later period, that John would not have said the "Lamb of God " as yet, because he did not know him as the suf- fering Messiah. Had he understood him, he would have baptized him and given up his work. Ans : In baptiz- ing, John obeyed. Strauss again : If the miraculous conception were true, Christ had no need of the Spirit at this time, and hence the event is a myth. Again : John an Essene, and he baptized and lived as the Essence did. 53 This gives a historical root of Christianity. John Bap- tist and Essenisra are the germs of Christianity. John saw the necessity of a moral reformation, and if the peo- ple could be aroused, the Messiah would appear, and hence he proclaimed time for repentance had arrived. But John according to Strauss never acknowledged Jesus as Messiah. Later, Christ is baptized and indoctrinated into Messianic ideas. Jesus possessed a freer and clearer nature than John, and felt a lack in John's negative method. Hence he realized all those graces of his nature which resulted from his communion with God, and which were unattainable by ascetic methods. They looked upon each other as other teachers did. Strauss has three mythical stages of growth : 1. Church idea of the dignity of Jesus required that John should acknowledge his Jj Messiahship. 2. Lk.'s story of his childhood. S.John's account of a clear acknowledgment of Christ by the Bap- , tist from the first. Strauss' canon : That account which \ i^ tends to exalt the person of Christ is the mythical one. ) TTiis rules out John's narrative altogether of the Baptist's recognition of Christ from the first. The remainder of John's gospel is assumed. The residuum : 1. The relation of John to theEssenes, who were entirely different. Essenes were dualistic. Enjoined asceticism upon all, John on himself 2. The ascetic washings were not baptisms but oft repeated. John's, once tor all. 8. Strauss: John founded a sect. An s : Untrue, but called the whole nation to repentance. Asceticism taught purity consisted in mortification, but receivers of John's baptism did not belong to any such school. 4. It involves a long continuation of Christ with John which is inadmissible. Renan : Christ more independent than John. Before Christ came, John had formed a full idea of reformation. Likewise Christ had deferred doing good until he had seen John and improved on him. Schenkel saj'S Christ and John were antagon- istic, Christ at first sympathized with John, but after- wards regarded his influence injurious. Baptism of Christ only a transaction in his soul, which he conceived to be his divine mission, and hence separated from John. Keim holds it was purely humanitarian. Relates with reverence. Christ merely a man. Outward signs unreal, but baptism a consecration to a work which John had begun. 54 §16. The Temptation. — This is a great mystery, as it involves the doctrine of his person. Follows baptism. Hengstenberg holds that there is not room enough in 40 days for Bap. and Tempt. Designs: 1. Typical. The heads of the Messianic and evil kingdoms brought face to face. Jesue, full of the Spirit, is subjected to a trial of strength v^'ith Satan, and triumphs in the complete overthrow of his adver- sary. Tempt, recalls the history of redemption, that of a conflict between the kingdoms of light and darkness. " Seed of the woman " in O. T. now fulfilled. Christ overcomes for his people, therefore, in connection with baptism and before his life work. 2. Had Messianic ^- signs. (a) It formed a part of Christ's humiliatjon. (/;) All the temptations proposed false vie wis aftheMessiauJc work. What couldt)e accomplished only through suffer- ing, Christ is urged to do at once by unlawful means. 3. Personal reference to his own inward experience. Spends forty days in prayer and fasting, and thus by outward means he w^as prepared for his work. 4. Exemplar J^^ It shows us how to triumph, by prayer, fasting and the Holy Scriptures. Christ's practical sermon on " Re- sist the devil and he will flee from you." A complete circle of temptations, addressed to his whole nature, so that he was tempted " in all points like as we." ''Xi£d>_bx..tbe_,Spint.'' 1. His_ii:flLij_-niuid. 2. The jievil. 3. TheJIoly Spirit. Probably the last who led him to_ com]uest over Satan in the wilderness. The des- ert wasTbTcXuara'ntania' mountain near Jericho. " Wjtj! A.yi^ld beasts" indicates a contrast with Adam's situation. "^ " Forty days fasting " has O. T, associations. Obj : Im- possible — too long a time. Ans : 1. Sirpernatural p^wer. 2. Power of spirit over body exalted to an eminent de- gree in Christ. 3. Abstinence Vnly from ordinary nour- ishments. Lk. 4 : 2 ; obx icpayev, thus making his ab- stinence total. Typical import in the number forty. Moses interceded for his people forty days ; punishment consisted of forty stripes ; Ninevites fasted forty days, Ezekiel's sin-bearing forty days, and purification same length. Hence connected with confession of sin. Mtb. ^ ajid Lk. difier. One puts tempt, at the end of forty days, the other says he was tempted all the time. Mo st^natural^ ^2iE.liiIlMiPliJtll9LLk£jw^£tei^^^ I » 55 Character of the Temptations. I. •' If thou be the Son of God " refers to God's words at baptism. Satan wants proof. " Command these^stones, &c." Stones numerous, a. Tempt, to gluttony. Improbable, because to eat bread after forty days fasting would iiot^be glut- tony, h. Xeiiipt. to distrust Providence, and escape suf- fering inseparable from the character and mission which die assumed. Not exclusively applicable to Christ. His suiierings were representative. Jews looked for the Mes- siah as an embodiment of plenty to supply their wants. (See feeding of 5000.) -AV here fore Christ, was teinptQd\ /to do by one stroke wdiat was to result from his deatlij ( and un iv^M'sa l law of love annong men. Ans : Deut, 8 : 3. .Misinterpreted as referring to truth. No reference to truth but to manna, as truth can not feed the body. Idea : Man must look to God to supply all his w^ants, not__pnmarily either to ordinary or extraordinary means. II. i)iiectl\- opposed to the first. A presumptuous distrust in God. As if Satan said, " If GocT is to support you, try him." Imitates Christ by quoting Ps. 91 : 11- 12. HTSfrrfcov too le/iou. a. Roof of Solomon's porch. b. Royal porch, c. Double pitch of roof like wings, d. Wing, as we use it. He is urged to forego suffering. Again Christ takes suffering as the appointed means to fulfill his mission. He quotes Deut. 6: 16. Double meaning. (1.) TJioashouldst not tempt me who am your ^yereign. (2.) I should tempt God by so doing. III."" All kingdoms." Not Palestine. Did Satan own the world ? Tlien he had a right to give. Called and is the prince of this world. The world and Messiah antag- onistic. Niit_dii'ist's. kingdoms now, though they are on§.^av to be Christ's. Falseness of his claim lay in regarding his power as superior to Christ's, whereas all his power is allowed him for the good of the church. The su prem e sin in the temptation istheworshippingof Satan. QuestionVh ether (a) civil homage due a sovereign or (6) religious worship is demanded here. The two are insep- arable. To acknowledge Satan would be to receive from him. Tempt, was to secularity and idolatry. Jews es- pecially exposed to this, adapting themselves to surround- ing nations by adopting their idols. Satan proposed to\ give the kingdoms of the world immediately. This wasi just the object of Christ's coming, i. e., to establish Mesy 56 sianic sway over the whole earth. The people expected this, but Christ chose tlie spiritual and suffering instead of the temporal. The humiliation and suff'eringare seen to be his choice rather than his accepting the proifer of Satan. From Deut. 6 : 13, " Thou shait," &c. Signal honor put on Deut. (Especially assailed by late critics.) Thrice qnotodby Christ under the usual form : yvfpdTtzac. Remarks: The three temptations were a summary of llis life sufferings. His triumph a token of final triumph. Three thiiigs. 1. Rebellion vs. God. 2. Denial of Christ's supreme Divinity. 3. Subjection of the same to Satan. Not vulgar seductions of sense, but are addressed to an enlighteiied, lofiy nature. Hence they are the highest conceivable forms of sin. Addressed to the whole nature, corresponding to the different periods of life, the sensual (childhood), intellectual (youth), and imaginative (manhood). The three temptations are therefore comprehensive. As to their order, Mth. and Lk. differ, hence the Rationalistic cavils. Mth. 's order is_preferred. 1. Because it exhibits the contrast between the first two. 2. Lk.'s " get thee behind me Satan " more fitting for the closing scene. Not easily ascertained what determines Lk.'s order. When Temptations ended "the devil departed from him." "Ay^ft: xacpob, till a fixed season, i. e., to be renewed at times. Some refer it to Gethsemane, but properly _h|s whole life was a temptation. Following the departure of the devil " angels ministered unto him." Jtrjxovotjv is serving food, and hence appropriate. Nature of the Temptation. How was Christ approached ? Owing to difficulties, sound, sober critics hav(* taken refuge in the symbolical rather than the literal, e.g., Pressense and Lange. Doubtless it was something akin to humanity because of the " worshipping him." Grounds: 1. Bodily appearance of Satan without anal- ogy in scripture. Ans : S. can assume the form of an "angel of light" if he wishes. 2 Cor. 11: 14. Whj^ not that of man ? 2. Unimao-inable that S. could trans- port Christ through the air, &c. Ans : These cavilers admit S. has power over the soul which i^ far greater, then why not over the body ? Dr. Alexander : No com- pulsion. Verb means " they went together," and thus a part of Christ's humiliation in allowing himself to be ^'Ix^CI^/XZa.J— r ^^^Ot^Z^^^^-^ A^(iX*'t-^.t<-<.,,st,/^ <--i^j,cfjiCtyU/ ^iI^j^mJu^aJL 57 tempted. 3. If Christ did not know S. lie was not omniscient, if he did he would not have conversed with him. 4. He could not see the world's kin,:^doms at once without a miracle and if he did Satan performed a mira- Pf"^ cle. Ans: Who knows Satan's power — how much divine power .God had given him ? Jsixi^'jarj is " causes to see." . 'Maii^elie\:e ^causejrlalj tlm ber'oi'e the mind's eye^ If tliis is so say some critics this surrenders the literal inter'n. N"ot ?}o. It is deciding whether the literal or metaphorical should be applied'to the passage. 5. Strauss : Satan too cunning to make such, a proposal. Again : If Christ could be tempted he was not sinless, if so, no temptation. (Lange and Pressense: Christ had but one essence and that divine.) If it be necessaiy to suppose that Christ could sin in order to be tempted, then the divine essence could have sinned. Ques. of mid- dle ages since Augustine: Can we conceive of Christ as peccable ? ^Now, we must hold two things. I.- Christ's tempt, not merely an external act, . His struggles fierce £lnd internal. They shook his very soul. "In all i points." 2. " Yet without sin." Wherefore he was sin- / less. Diverse views of the occurrences. 1. Strauss declares it to be a myth. Meyer says there was a conflict between the kingdoms of light and darkness. 2. Schleiermacher : A parable given by Christ, and mistaken by his disciples. Intended to teach them how to escape temptation. 3. Nat : External occurrence uttered in symbolical language. Lange. 4. An ecstatic state of mind brought about by fasting. Origen and Cyprian, with Olshausen in modern times. 5. Simply a conflict in Christ's mind produced by imagination. Therefore Christ was necessarily sin- ful. Literature on this is immense. Vide Trench's Studies on the Gospels. ♦ A .>^5r. PUBLIC MimSTRY. Early Judean Ministry. John 1:4. Preliminary : ^ynoptists and Jobji.now differ. I. A5 tojimits of the period. Syns. speak of Christ as leaving ^jidfia for Gal. immediately after the Temptation and there teaching. They mention no public work in Judea, previous to His s^oino- to Jerusalem, toward the close of 58 His ministry. John (chs. 1-4) supplements their account, mentionino; a brief visit to Gnlilee, then a going to Jeru- salem to His first Passover, and a subsequent tarrying and baptizing in Judea. Hence. John chs. 1-4, may be termed History of Early Judean Ministry. n. They^difFer as to Christ's teaching, its iiature and manner. 1. According to ^yn. substance of Christ's teaching is " khigdom of j^God," its nature, design, conditions of membership. (Sermon on Mt., Parables, etc.) In John th.e phrase occurs in but two chs. (3 : 3-5, 18: 36). "" 2. SyiL. Christ silent as to Messianic claims, suppresses popular Messianic enthusiasm and refuses Messianjc titles. In John His Divine Person is the main theme. (Nicodemus. Woman of Samar.) 3. Syn. say little of His sacrificial death, In John it is predicted from the first. (Vide. 1 : 29, 2 : 19-2X3 flC 4. In Syn. Christ teaches universality of ^ospeLanJy toward close of His life. J_ohn records it among His earliest utterances. (Vide. 4 : 21-23). Sceptics, exaggerating these difficulties, reject John, begin with Gal. Ministry, and adopting Syn. account, allege : 1. At first Christ had no consciousness of Messiahship, but was driven to assume Messianic character to accom- plish His plans. 2. Doctrine of a sacrificial mission grew up in His mind gradually. Strauss says both these ideas conceiv- ed late in life while in Cpesarea Philippi, when He saw death was inevitable. 3. Idea of a universal gospel did not originate until after His rejection by the Jewish nation. To reconcile these differences is the great problem of gospel harmony. This may be done by showing 1st. That there is no j^n consistency in the accounts, or 2. T'hat their combination yields historic unity. (1.) These .ac- counts involve one another and are parts of one whxvk;. The idea of king and kingdom are supplemental. (2.) Syn's teaching as to Person of Christ is not so meagre as sceptics claim. Messianic titles are suppressed, because of false Messianic notions. From the outset authority is claimed which is irrational unless divine. The critical view requires the rejection not of John alone, but also of a great portion of the Syn's account. £ 9 f ) ^ 59 (Baptism, Temptation, Synag. at Xazareth, Sermon on Mt., Parables.) (3.) In John, Christ does teach "the kingdom." (To Nicodemus 3:3-5. Before Pilate 18:36.) In Syn. there are passages teaching divinity (Matt. 11 : 25-30.) (4.) A progress is marked in the self- revelation of Christ in Jno. as well as in Syn. In public it is enig- matical ; direct declarations are private. (Cleansing tem- ple. Discourse with Nicodemus and Samaritan woman.) Historical reason for this difference : Christ owed a duty to the Jews as a nation, first. They could not be rejected until they had rejected Him, Jno's plan is to record instances of Christ's declaration of Messiahship in Jerusalem. When rejected there, He goes to Galilee, prepares for the founding of a church, with its officers and government, as is related by the Syn. ^ ' Jno. 1-4 : 45 in the harmony are inserted between \ Matt. 4: 11 and 12 (Vide Scheme.) To justify such in-^ sertion, it must be shown : ^ 1. No real contradiction exists between the two ac- counts. 2. The portion omitted was not in the plan of the individual writer. 3. Combination furnishes a con- sistent view. 4. Many undesigned coincidences evince that the accounts presuppose one another. Reasons for insertion here : 1. Alt^ '"iiitl Mk. indicate space between Temptation and Galilean Ministry, by^aylng that Christ went to Galilee because of the imprisonment of Jno. Bap. 2. These four chaps. Jji(x.xeeord interviews between Jesus and Jno. Bap. They must have occurred before Jno. was imprisoned. They must have occurred ^fter the Baptism — as it is referred to as past (Jno 1:32), and if later than the Baptism thev must be subsequent to the Temptation, as nothing intervened between these ev^ents'(Mk. 1 : 12). Four chs. of Jno. at least should be inserted here as the narrative is unbroken. Some har- monists insert five — thus changing the time of the begin- ning of the Galilean ministry. Length of this period is inferred from §25. Jno. 4 : 35. Four months till harvest. Harvest time was the middle of Nisan, i.e. beginning of April Four months previous brings us to December, eight months subsequent to the first IPassover (ch. 3), and one 60 / yea r _ j,tter_ th e Baptism. Hence duration of Judean\ [ minTstry is estimated a s one year! (So Meyer, Wieseier)7) xiie exegesis ot sOme assigns to this verse merely the weight of a proverb — (1) (jlratuitons. No evidence of such proverb, (2) Force of in forbids (so Meyer vs. Alford and Wieseler). These minor difterences do not essentially affect the events of the period. Designs of the events of this period : 1. Priynary. Offering Himself, to nation as the true Messiah^ — by, n. Testimony of Jno. T3af).~fc Clean sing Temple — showing supreme authority in House of God. c. Miracles. (/. Teaching spiritual nature of Plis kingdqni. 2. Secondary. Preparation for Galilean mTimfiy', in consequence of foreseen rejection by Jewisli hierarchy^ — by, a. Brief visit to Galilee, b. Choice of disciples irje- spective^of existing theocracy, c. Stay in Jndea, teach- ing and baptizing with J no. Bap., until his imprisonment. S ej'ies of first things is given in Jno. ; viz. first gath- ering of discipTes,lEn^mTracle7^rst Tassover, first teach- ing, &c. Jno rpcorfl &jU}Leek^Iii^tQxy-3;^daX-l>Xl]i^li-- 1st day 1 : 19-28, 2d. 1 : 29-34, 3d^. 1 : 35-42;iJ|iiri : 43-51, and 2 : 1, zfj '^jfJ-ifO- rfj TfilzYj, i. e. the third day after starting on His journey, making seven days in all. Compare Jno's record of last week of Christ's life. yf §18. Testimony of John Bapt. to Jesus. ^iichlestijTipn^', ^ naturally to be expected at this period, historically oc- curs. Sjuilifidrim send from Jerus. a deputation of Priests and Levites to i n q u i r e iif f o tli em ea n i n g of John's work. Their arrival at the Jordan coincides with Christ's return from the desert of the temptation (v. 27.) (Others however place Christ's return at v, 29 on the day follow- ing). This deputation evinces the extensive i nr^iiigigsion produced by John's work. The mission was authorita- tive, sent out by the highest ecclesiastical court of the nation, whose duty it was" to investigate all religiou s movements. It_\yi,is not necessarily hostilejit fir^t* Had they found John easily influenced'and a courtier (Lk. 7 : 25), they would have favored his views and used him as an instrument in furthering their own designs. (John 5: 35); b_iitJiaviiig .heard Im tes.timony to Christ, tfiev charge him with " having a devil.'' (LkrT : 33.) Their questions show acquaintance with the prevailing belief that the Messiah was at hand, and exhibit the state of 'hvci^k o-lJV -f^ X^QjcLu^^^^ ^ 61 popular Messianic expectations. Art thou the Christ, or Elias (Mai. 4 : 5), or that prophet. (Deut. 18 : 15.) Does not John's denial that he is Elias, contradict Christ's express statement. Matt. 11: 14? Ans : John denies he is Elias in pers on : admits he is in spirit bj quotinp^ prophecies referring to^TflTas, as referring to himself otHcially. Jews of that day, seem to have made a false distinc- tion based on Deut. 18 : 15, between Christ and '• that prophet." (John 4 : 19, 25, 6 : 14, 7 : 40, 41). To these questions, John returns an abrupt " No," wishing to keep himself in the background, while he brings Jesus forward. He defines his own mission and character, In- simply quoting Is. 40 : 3. Points of interest are 1. Extent of John's J_nfluence. 2. Excited Messianic expectations and their character. 3. ProvidentiaL care that rulers should be brought into contact with Christ, and receive ample proof of His claims, fmm^the very first, 4. Humility of John Bap. Lange noies analogy between temp, of Christ and John, a temptation to external power. Place. Text. Recpt. eu Br^&a^apa, (John 1 : 28), critical reading, lirj&o.vta. Location, now unknown. Probably e. of Jordan ; a ford near Jericho. Renewed testimony, (v. 29). " Lamb of God." One of the most striking passages of scripture. It embodies the great truths of both Testaments and declares the fulfillment of })rophecy. The theme of the O. T. is one to come . John^ saysJ^Behold Him," " He is here." '' Hengst(Mn3erg~confin~es"lT!ir~reference to the Paschal Lamb, as being the true sin-oiiering. But John uses ^' Lamb " as rep' resentative of all O. t. sacrificial types. ^ KeasonslxJTselec tja^'JLamb" as a titleof Cb-Fistiire, 1. FjalfiJii-i g- 5'^ : "TT " LamS^to the slaughter," which Jew-srecognTzecTas Messianic. 2. Expresses the spirit of. Christ's ministry. (Comp. Rev. 5:6.) Some critics deny a sacrificial reference, others object, 1. That John in here teaching vicarious death of Christ as Son of God, for the woricl, displays a knowledge of doctrines not then current, but which were the after development of advanced theology.' Ans. a. Objection based on subversion of history. These conceptions of Messiah's work were fundamental : 62 they liad died out of tbej20jgular_.cr^ sion \vasto revive them. "6. John speaks as ajmx)phet and was himself sur- prised at the manner in which his prophecies were ful- filled. (Lk. 7 : 20):r >vVJa. >..^ xv ->c-..- 2d Objection, John 1 : 33 " I knew him not " contra- dicts Mt. 3 : 14, which presupposes knowledge of Jesus, both as man and Messiah. Ans. a. Distinction between knowing officially and personally. (Rob. Gk. Harm. p. 187, §18. Note.) John Bap. was aware that Jesus of Naz. was Messiah of proph- ecy. "But he knew not Jesus personally " before His baptism, when the spirit descended as sign upon him. This is not an explanation. If he did not know him per- sonally, why refuse to baptize him (Mt. 3 : 14). To ex- plain by dignity of Christ's personal appearance (Farrar I. p. 114 seq.) is unsatisfactory. h. Better explanation, oox -qdecv has only relative force. John Bap.'s previous knowledge was subjective, now possessing a iiewj£iiowledge based on testimony from heaven, he makes an official declaration. . (Comp. relative use of terms by John in chs. 2 : 11, and a further and increased belief based on testimony of miracles, also 7:5). §19. Jesus gains disciples. Had the writer of the fourth gospel been an impostor, John Bap.'s testimony would have been succeeded by the abandonment of his separate work, his following Christ as a disciple, going with him to Jerus. and testifying to His Messiahship before the Sanhedrim. Multitudes would have accepted and fol- lowed Him. On the contrary, the gospel narrative in- forms us that but few believe, that John Bap. recogniz- ing the independency of his own ministry keeps aloof from Christ and continues bearing testimony to Him as the Messiah. Design of Christ in gathering disciples. 1. JTd Ifind peo- ple to Him gradually. 2. He thus begins to lay the foundation of that church which was to continue after He had been taken away, an action based on foreknow- ledge of His death. Although submitting Himself to the people for their rejection, He acts as knowing the re- sult. # A ^ ^ ^ 1)- 63 V. 35-37. Next day at tenth hour i. e.-4=P~M., two disciples of John follow Jesus: first converts: their ad- dress " Rabbi " the first recognition of Christ as a teacher. Of these two, one was Andrew, the other is argued to have been Evangelist John, from, 1. Hls_ habit aal silence as to himself. 2. The minuteness of the details proves the narrator to have been an eye witness, 3. SjiLjiiendon John^among the first disciples. 41 V. Twofold exegesis, — r.riono^ : 1. Andrew and John seek each his own brother : An- drew finds his first. (So Meyer and Alexander). 2. Both seek Peter: Andrew is first to find him. 43 V. The next day Philip, being called, brings ISTath. commonly understood to be Bartholomew — because 1. John never mentions a Bartholomew nor the Synops. a Nathaniel. 2. Time of his call, while journeying through Gal. : (Barthol. resided at Cana of Galilee). ^"3. When Christ showed Himself to his disciples after resurrection at sea of Tiberias, Nath. was of their number. (John 21 : 1, 2.) 4. Philip brought Nath. : and the names Philip and Bartholomew always together in the cata- logues of the Twelve. 5. Bartholomew is u patronymic, son of Tolmai, by which name he was probably better known than by that of Nathaniel. (Vide. Farrar I. p. 152 and Note). Thus 6 disciples are called in the first week. ObjecUm : In Mt. 16 : 18, Peter's change of name is connected with his confession, thus contradicting John 1 : 42. Ans. Name Cephas is here fiioen ; in Mt. Christ confirms and applies it. Note the character of those called : religious-minded men : come to Jordan to hear John ; meet Christ : listen to Bap.'s testimony concerning Him, and are convinced of the validity of His claims. Rationalists allege that Syn. (Lk. 5: 1-11) represent disciples as following Christ because of miracles He per- formed. John says (1. 35-51) they were impressed by His j)ersonal influence. These accounts are not incon- sistent. According to both, Christ furnishes evidence of His Messiahship. "Here he calls Philip with authority, shows divine knowledge in reading mind of Nath., claims to be the connecting link betw^een heaven and earth. (Comp. Gen. 28 : 12). 64 .N-ot© the only recorded words of Jesus^jip_to_this point. At 12 years of ao:e to liis mother7Tdv,_2_LJ.9. To Jphn.Bap.MtTS : 15." TolSatiji,:Mt,_4 : 1-11. To His disciples, John 1 : 39. §207 John 2: 1-12. 31arriage at Cana. John here emphasizes the fact of the '^ ber/inninc/ of m iracles." Ch. 2 : 11. Cana of Gal. mentioned, not to distinguish tlie town from another of the same name, but to show that the beginnijTgs of Christ's work were in Gal. Wi2jJii.ixali]ee and before in Jerusafem ? 1. Predig- tion (Is. 9 : 1, 2, quoted Matt. 4 : 14) that Gal. should be first to receive spiritual light, is thus fulfilled. 2. John, who confines his account to Christ's Judean work, thus shows his knowledge of the work in Galilee. Christ went to Galilee at this time, both as aj^repara- tion fbiiTtHe coming Gal. ministry, and to produce a simultaneous jmpression in dift'erent parts of the country by his appearance in various places within a short time, o-iving opportunity for judgment upon himself and work. This visit is an episode in Judean Period, pointing for- ward to the next. Farrar identifies Cana with Kefr-Kenna. (Vide Vol. I. Note, p. 161. Andrews, p. 149). Robinson prefers Kana el Jelil. That the marriage was among Chrlst's-i*eia-tives has been inferred from Mary's prominence at the feast ; as to the parties themselves conjecture is fruitless. Joae-ph beiiig unnientioned, it may be assumed he was now dead. Jewish marriage feasts usually lasted 7 days (Tudg. 14 : 12). Festivities had begun when Jesus ar- rived. Objections: 1. How did Mary know he could perform mirac]§.s, if this was first? especiallj as the occasion did not demand it. Wine might readily be purchased. Ajis : Soraej^he wrougbt miracles in private; some, she looked toHBiTm naturally for aid; others, from circumstaiices of his birth, she bad come to believe in his divinity; others, knowing his work had been inaugurated by his baptism, she looked for a speedj- fulfillment of her hopes. 27 How reconcile Christ's working the miracle with his statement, " My hour is not yet come," v. 4. Ans : Mistaken idea in her mind as to character of Messianic kingdom, viz., ^ jme of niateriaj_j)lenty. Christ shows hx-^y^^a^-c/^ .^c^ ?t .WU«^cc.tlg /^j^^r-y, /^-^.^aIvU, /C 3'^'ux^ a^rt^C^^ ^,,^^'c;L ti^ c^LU^C^^^r^-oji^ a^j..,_ ^ ^ g-^ .y^j S^^t,L^.^^ cJr^ktj^ -Lv-o
    uJ^ t}) '-^J^-o-^ XJUt,-^ (// >2v^x> .^L/.l^LC:^c0^^y^^.,^^....:ao<>^ . 2Xi^ /^ ■'^^ t/tJb 65 that human motives, even the most urgent, were not to be the cause of the manifestation of his ^lory as Messiah Comp. Lk. 2 : 49. 3. Amount of wine produced. Each firkin or bath (Heb.) contained from 7 to 9 gals., hence each jar held about f of a barrel. (Vide Farrar, Vol. L, p. 166, note 2) Ans: Some argue from v. 8, that the water became wine, as drawn, or was a handsome wedding gift for a poor household. The large quantit}' is significant of Christ's giving without measure. It pr^chides all possi- bility of collusion. Designs. 1. To manifest his glory. 2. To relieve want and embarrassment of host. 3. Teaches true mor- ality ; contrasts John the ascetic with Christ, who did not withdraw from the world, but lived above it. 4. Enforces the sanctity of the marriage tie. It is analogous to feeding the multitudes; but here, substance is changed, there multiplied. (On this miracle, vide Princeton Review, July and October, 1865). From Cana, Christ goes to Capernaum (emended text, e/c Kaifafjvaohn)^ probably to join a caravan there making up for the feast. From Lk. 4 : 23 it has been inferred that Christ at this time wrought miracles there. It is preferable to refer this allusion to healing noble- man's son, Jno. 4 : 46-54. §21. John 2 : 13-25. First Passover. Temple Cleansed. Christ finds the Temple polluted by the presence of cat- tle and doves for sacrifice, and of money changers, ex- changing foreign coin. Although Christ used a scourge, the foxce employed was moral and spiritual rather than physical. Fdvza^ (v. 15) refers to men as well as cattle. Some infer from v. 16, said, etc., leniency toward dove- sellers. Captious cavil. Command is given, because doves could not be scourged. V. 16, " make not," etc. Comp. stronger utterance Matt. 21 : 13,— quoted from Is. 56 : 7, — employed at sec- ond cleansing of the Temple. V. 17 quot. from Ps. 69: 9. Significance of the act : 1. Teaches lesson in repent- ance, and need of reformation. 2. Symbolical expression of Messianic claims. Declares God his Father (v. 16), assumes supreme authority in temple (fulfilling Mai. 3 : 1-3), refers to Temple as type of his body (v. 19), God's 66 permanent indwelling, typically represented in the Tem- ple, being literal in his life. Christ in public declares Messiahship thus enigmatically, because, 1. People are not ready to receive him ; false Messianic notions pre- vail ; more explicit statement would lead to popular out- break. 2. Bibje an oriental book. Jews an Eastern nation. To them an enigmatic act needed no interpre- tation. That the Jews understood him is evident from their demanding a sign, v. 18. This shows they were knowingly rejecting Christ, although possessing evidence of John Bapt., of prophets, and of Christ's miracles. By si(/n they denoted an outward manifestation coinciding with their idea of Messiah. Sign given v. 19, afterwards called sign of Jona, contains indisputable reference to his resurrection (v. 21). This is only occasion of Christ's predicting his resurrection on third day. That his ene- mies understood him is seen from their allusion to it after his death. (Matt. 27 : 63.) Critical Objections. 1. Unhistoric expectation and pre- diction of his death. He could not yet forsee this issue; people and disciples could not understand him. [Nean- der and Olshausen, denying any reference to resurrection, interpret, ' Persist and destroy this national temple, and I will found a spiritual church.'] Ans : Not necessary for Christ to limit his discourses by what others could understand. True exegesis uses padv, V. 19, in typical, not double sense. 2. Obj. Boldness of act would enrage the Jews and excite opposition. Ans : The suddenness and justice of the act combined with the air of Christ's personal authority (Cp. John 18 : 6) account for no popular disturbance. 3. Syn. record a similar scene in Passion Week ; could not have occurred twice, hence both are mythical. Alls : Why not twice ? Appropriate at beginning and end of ministry. A first and last opportunity of accept- ing him. John, who above records the early Judean ministry, mentions the cleansing occurring in that period, and to avoid repetition omits the second, contained in the Syn. Strauss understands cleansing as a real act, but in opposition to Judaism and the entire sacrificial system. V. 23 alludes to further miracles. None recorded, John introducing miracles only for sake of the connected ^d.x^^ '^.A^-i-i.^^-'CA'^ ^-v-w <3c^ ^'ay\y -t,*«-t,-€^ -^b-J-r/, i:^ 'C o^-itZrJ-^-^ , ,4:^^->-r.£-'V'5 67 discourses. Verses 23, 25. Effect. " Many believed," with evanescent faith, founded only upon the miracles. (Comp. eruaze'jaay, v. 23, s-ktzsusv, v. 24. " Many trusted him. He did not trust himself to them.") §22. John 3 : 1-21. Discourse with Nicodemus. Nico- demus, member of Sanh-edrim, on evidence of miracles believes Christ to be a divinely appointed teacher. He is mentioned (Comp. 7 : 50), Tabernacles, also (ch. 19 : 39) burial. "Coming by night " shows odium already at- taching to Christ. Being a Pharisee and ruler, his visit shows that Christ's influence was not confined to a sin- gle class. Jesus teaches, 1. Nature, necessity, source of the new birth, 2. Spiritual nature ot kingdom of heaven. 3. In order to regeneration there is necessit}' for faith in him- self, as only revealer of the Father, and sacrifice for sin. Christ declares his pre-existence ; displays foreknowledge of the atonement. Perplexity of Nicodemus evinces total loss among his class, of spiritual meaning of 0. Test. Christ's rebuke (v. 10) shows that he is teaching no new doctrine. Objections to genuineness of the Discourse. 1. These doc- trines not developed until later. 2. Terms and ideas are those of heretical school in early church, especially such phrases, " Christ the only revealer of the Father," " new birth," etc. " Regeneration'" not a N. T. word. Verbal iorm occurs 16 times; peculiar to John. Only allied form in N. T. is nahrrevsaia, Mi. 19: 28, Tit. 3 : 5. Strauss regards whole discourse as Jc.tlon, bearing impress of Pseudo John's mind. Nicod. an ideal charac- ter introduced as offset to the reproach that all first con- verts were trom the poorer class. Bauer. All^^egory; Nicodemus representing unbe- lieving Judaism, seeking a sign, a counterpart of the woman of Samaria, who represents believing heathen- ism. Sceptical Inferences. These doctrines, peculiar to John's gospel, are those of Gnosticism. Hence the fourth gospel must have been written as late as close of 2nd Cent, by a Gnostic, probably a Valentinian. Ans. 1. Terminology alone is peculiar to John, not the doctrine. Both Testaments teach these doctrines. Comp. O. T. expression Ps. 51 : 10 " clean heart :" also 68 Paul's phrase ''xrcma'' Gal. 6: 15. 'i. True relation of Gnosticism to N. T. doctrine, a. Sceptics exaggerate the resemblance ; more difference than likeness, b. Gnosticism a heresy arising within the church. Its ideas andierms are borrowed from John. c. Alexandrian phi- losoj)hy of which Gnosticism was an otf-shoot was imbued with O. T. ideas. N. T. was the development of these ideas. Hence both drawing from a common source em- ployed to some degree similar modes of thought and ex- pression, d. Chi^ist dealt with the philosophical ques- tions of his time. e. John, writing when Gnostic specu- lation had begun to disturb the church, like Paul, (Cp. Eph. and Col.) writes against it, using its nomenclature. Christ's teachings now are clearer than those subse- quently given in Galilee, because, 1. His great purpose of offering Himself to the Jews as their Messiah neces- sitated lucid statement of nature and blessings of His kingdom. In Galilee His audiences were popular and His aim was to establish the church. 2. This was pri- vate interview, with a well disposed inquirer. (Cp. woman of Samaria.) . §23. John 3 : 22-36. Jesus remains in Judea and bap- tizes. Some conjecture, without reason, that Christ re- turned from Jerus. into Gal. Christ leaves Jerusalem, not on account of open hostility, but because after offer- ing Himself to the Jews, he had been rejected. He tar- ries in Judea (v. 22). 1. National promises must be ful- filled : offer of Himself be made more general, not re- stricted to a single feast. He may have attended Pente- cost and Tabernacles during this period. 2. John's testi- mony having not yet ended, the Galilean Ministry could not properly begin. Meagre description of Christ's work ..at this period, no miracles, no long discourses, leads to inference that little was done. His work is same as that of Bap. 1. Facts show likeness. Christ employed the same rite as John, with same import, for as no subsequent mention of baptism occurs until Pentecost, Christian baptism was not instituted until after Christ's death. 2. Christ's early teaching in Galilee, evidently similar to that in Judea, and John Bap.'s work, are described in the same language. 3. As Christ's work and John's are parallel in time, both would naturally pursue the same line of - . .t-«— >.-<>^ ..-o<^-oi^H-t-K>dAj 3 t f/^--^^ ,^2fi^ ^i^cu^ckoA X;/^l^£r^- --^ ^^-^^--^ X^^^c^ , CUjiUu ^IJ^^dU ^a<^.<^^>'rr^^ ^ ^^H^ -^ /L/y^y^^^lt^oU^^^ ^UoCAf^^^yvCotM/ C^Q^^z^{yu,..ajAM/i- r\ 69 teaching. There would not be two different baptisms in same period of development. Remarks ; John Bap.'s hold on the masses gradually transferred to Christ: His work thus growing out of John's. They do not unite, for that would destroy their proper relation. Christ stands aside as Messiah. John points to Him. They do not separate widely, either in place or teaching, lest they should be mistaken for rival prophets, v. 24. " John was not yet cast into prison." From fourth gospel alone i no exegetical reason can be assigned for this statement../ John however wrote with Syn. before him. They make/ no mention of Judean ministry but date Christ's work! in Gal. from the imprisonment of John Bap. John shows that his narrative of Judean work does not con- flict with any Syn. statements because Christ had not at this time enteretl upon Galilean ministry, "for John was not yet caat into prison," i. e. Bap.'s testimony was not yet ended, it was not yet time for Christ to leave Judea. ^non near Salim probably in Valley of Jordan Western side, near Jericho. (Farrar 1. p. 202, Note.) v. 25. Question started as to purifying, between John's disciples and a Jew (Emended Text v. 25. loodaeoo.) Bap.'s disciples complain to him of Christ's baptizing. He bears additional testimony to Jesus; declaring that not to accept Him as Messiah, means condemnation. (v. 36.) -yp/ - V. 31-36. Some say without good reason that these are <^ words of Evangelist, rather than of John Bap. for they display an acquaintance with doctrines not then revealed. r Points of interest. 1. John Bap. still had a body of dis- /ciples. 2. John still regards his ministry subordinate to I Christ. 3. Clear views of John concerning Christ. ^ §25. John 4 : 4-42. Woman of Samaria— Si/char. This name occurs nowhere else in scripture. Common view, that it is nickname for Shechem, meaning " drunkard," or " liar" is based on, Is. 28 : 1-7, where Ephraimites are called, shiccorim " drunkards ;" Hab. 2 : 18 moreh sheker " teacher of lies" which is said to refer to Moreh, the original name of district of Shechem ; and habitual use by John of hyo/Mvo^ (v. 5) to denote a soubriquet (cp. 11 : 16, 19 : 13-17.) Some say Sychar was suburb of Shechem. Jacob's well, near entrance of valley, mile from present city, 70 " one of few spots identified with Christ's presence." 6th hour i. e. noon. Diiferent tone of woman and Nicodeinus. Nicodemus, sober, grave, and earnest, regards Christ as teacher. Woman, sprightly, conversational, looks upon Christ as traveller. Christ varies His teaching to suit each case. With Nicodemusan instructed Jew, He dwells on techni- cal topics of religion e. g. doctrines of new-birth. To the woman He speaks of a supply for the soul — thirst common to all. Two views of Samaritans. 1. Common view. En- tirely heathen ; no descent from Jacob, no right to 0. T. privileges. 2. Mixed race — remnants of 10 tribes and heathen settlers — looking for Messiah as a prophet (John 4 : 25). They stand in N. T. as a link between Jews and heathen. Not regarding them as chosen people, Christ does not pursue ministry among them Mt, 10 : 5. Although non-Judaic, they were not pagan (v. 20). A historical import of this incident, prediction of the universal spread of the gospel, — the natural sequel of discourse with Nicodemus. To him Christ taught the spiritual nature of His kingdom. If spiritual it must be universal, and all formal barriers be done away. Samaritans believed on hearing Christ's words (v. 41, 42). Jews disbelieved though beholding His miracles. Sceptics object: Christ here makes distinct claim to Mes- siahship, " I am He," but few days later, in Galilee, for- bids any allusion to his divinity, even among disciple*. Ans : Christ is in foreign country. His statements would provoke no hostility from the rulers. This is no real ad- vance on His teaching to Nicodemus or John Bapt's testi- mony concerning Him. But now He assumes title of Messiah for first time. / Distinguish in this period between private and pjiliiic / teaching. His utterances in private are unrestrained, in 1 public, symbolic. _ . ^v ^y GALILEAN MINISTRY. Ministry in Eastern Galilee. Gal. Ministry extends from the close of Judean until the three last feasts. The Feeding of 5,000 divides this Ministry into those of Eastern and Northern Gal. Its ^^i^-^ ^ A*^L^ , tla^^ Ck-^^ nn^lJl^ Py^ Q^ oi/^J^^y'Ac^ ^JM^./ yu.^. a-v-^^ctdd^ , /'yhya^ i^J-^ ^A^ -^^^-^ 71 commencement and duration depend upon two questions (l) Is Syn. journey (Mt. 4 : 12. Mk. 1 : 14. Lk. 4: U\ same as that of John 4, or subsequent to John 5 ? (1) Was feast of John 5. 1. Passover, Pentecost, Taberna- cles, Puriin ? Wieseler has attempted to settle question first by historically making time of John Bap's imprison- ment coincident with feast of John 5. Discussion of Ques. First. I. Those identifying jour- neys argue. 1. Motive assigned by Syn. and John for Christ's leaving Judea is similar (§24. Mt. 4 : 12, Mk. 1 : 14. Lk. 4: 14. Jno. 4: 1-3). Syns. say it was im- prisonment of John. John says he was aware that Phari- sees knew that He " made and baptized more disciples than John " (ch.^)jj. John had been imprisoned by Herod through Pharisaic intrigue. Hence Jesus, as being born a greater object of hatred than John, departed into Gal. to avoid persecution. Two obj's: a. Syn. do not mention Pharisees as concerned in John's imprisonment. Ans : True ; but if not, wh}' does Jesus leave Judea ? A pri- vate quarrel between Herod and John is no sufficient rea- son. Jno. 3: 25 certainly implies Pharisaic hostility evinced by endeavors to stir up differences between John and Jesus. Jesus' saying (4 : 44) that " a prophet hath no honor in his own country " (i. e. Judea) declares hos- tility to himself and hence to John as they were engaged in the same work. Objectors cannot say that Jesus de- parted merely to begin His. Gal. work, for according to their own theory the Gal. Ministry does not begin till after next Passover, b. If John was imprisoned by Herod, how did Christ escape persecution by going to Gal., Herod's kingdom ? Christ's mission being religious, not political. Ans. : He feared Pharisees, acting upon Her- od's example, rather than Herod. His care even in Gal. where their influence was slight, to repress Messianic enthusiasm and His reserve as to his Messiahship, show his apprehension of their hostility. 2. Journey of John 4 : 43 is emphasized as though a formal leaving of Judea, while the return to Gal. after feast of John 5 is passed over without mention. Gess. characterizes John 4 : 43 as comm. on Mt. 4 : 14. 3. The discourse with Sam. woman (John 4) precisel}' accords with this view. Christ, rejected by the Jews, and about entering on his Gal. ministry, discloses the universality of the gospel. 72 4. deception given Christ in Gal. (John 4 : 45) implies a formal beginning of His work there of which John gives a specimen 4 : 46-54, If His work did not com- mence at this time, if the Syn. account be not inserted here, four months from this arrival until feast of John 5 : 1 are unaccounted for, a single miracle alone being recorded. 5. At^feastof John 5, John Bapt's ministry is referred to as past "(v. 35 ''■loas a light"), hence his imprisonment and Christ's consequent entering upon the Gal. ministry must be placed before John 5. n. Those holding journeys of Syn. and John 4 to be different, argue : 1. The exegesis of John 4 : 1 implit»s that John was still at large^(^vrde And. p. 162 ; Wies. 161 ; Gress. IL 212) Ans : Best comm. explain, " John was not as successful as Jesus." From John 4 : 54, "this is again second miracle," etc., which mention seems to Indicate that this miracle, like the first at Cana, was something out of the ordinary course of events, it has been argued that the regular Gal. ministry had not yet begun. Ayis : The emphasis lies upon i/3cov^ i, e., second miracle performed by Christ coming out of Judea into Galilee. Hostility of Pharisees undeveloped until charge of Sabbath-breaking at feast (John 5). Ans: Hostility in its effects is certainly spoken of in ch. 3 : 22 and 4 : 3. Unless Syn. account be introduced after John 5, we are obliged to bring in after this time a Passover not mentioned by Syn. Ans: This argument does not hold {a) in measure — Syn omit other feasts, e. g., Tabernacles and Dedication — u or (b) in inode — it is not their 'plan to record their feasts at Jerusalem. Arguments 2^ro and con nearly balance.. Compromise view is held by Ellicott and Tischendorf, influenced by Wieseler's chronology, who say Syn. journey and that of John 4 is identical, yet Syn. history does not commence till after John 5. Ans : The statement of Lk. 4 : 14, " Je- sus returned in power of Spirit into Gal." is irreconcilable with this view of four months of inactivity. Also state- ments intimately connected must be forcibly separated (Tisch. in later editions makes retractions from Wieseler's scheme of chronology.) Result. Weight of authority places John Bap.'s imprisonment at John 4, and thus identifies journeys (So Lange, Gess., Farrar, Robinson, Greswell.) J Va>V-^ LoaXv, cWto -vv>oV ^^ \^:^ r^\JK ^ ^ ^ G^^^ ^ V^cL-cWi ^^*Wi3L^ r^iUjLAJv voKtrV^l!^ oxsj \>u5t^ 4 tJ)^oj^)^^'«'v-^ 73 Discussion of Qaes. Secomf. What was feast of John 5:1? (Vide Chronoloo^y on Duration of Public Ministr^^, also Farrar, Vol. I. p. 368 and Vol. 11. p. 467 Excursus VIII.) It the feast be not Passover the Gal. ministry will be shortened by one year. The method of combin- ing these two central points determines the entire Chro- nology of Gospel History, and a knowledge of it is a key to the understanding of any harmony. Adjustments of different harmonists : 1. Robinson identities the journeys ; feast of John 5, he considers Passover; hence, ministry in Eastern Gal. 16 months, in Northern Gal. 6 months, total Gal. ministry 22 months. 2. Andrews places Syn. journey after John o: consid- ers feast Passover; hence E. Gal. 12 months, IsT. Gal. 6 months, total Gal. ministry 18 months. Christ inactive in Gal. 4 months before John 5 : 1. 3. Lichtenstein — places Syn. journey after John 5, /considers feast Tabernacles (in Oct. 6 months later) : hence E. Gal. 6 months, N. Gal. 6 months, total Gal. jninistry 1 year. Christ inactive 10 months. 4. Wieseler — places Syn, journey after John 5 : con- siders feast Purim (one month before Passover, John 6 : 4 according to his scheme second Passover) : hence E. Gal. 1 month, N, Gal. 6 months, total Gal. ministry 7 months. Result of this plan is demonstration of its fal- sity, giving but one month to E, Gal. to which other schemes give six or twelve. This was most active period of Christ's life : time is needed for development of Phar- isaic opposition, for change of popular sentiment, for growth of faith, for falling off of the merely curious. Mission of Twelve alone would occupy more than one month. 2. Lange, Gess, Farrar — identify journeys ; consider feast Purim; avoid Wieseler's brevity in E. Gal. by be- ginning Gal. ministry between John 4, and 5, thus length- ening E. Gal. to 5 months. They synchronize John 5, and Mt. 11, also John 6. (Second Passover according to their scheme) and Mt. 14. 6. Ellicott, Tischendorf, vide supra. " Compromise view." General Result. Harmony shows no contradiction in- validating the Gospel narratives. Note. 1. Robinson's 74 scheme, identifying journeys, making' feast John 5 : 1, Passover, gives needed time in E. Gal. and accounts for facts. Individual bias eliminated, we come back to this' scheme. 2. In no respect do these different schemes affect apol- ogetic importance of Harmony. Same periods, with same relations, intentions, and order, occur in all. They differ only as to time of beginning Gal. ministry, its length, and rapidity of its development. 0— Order of events during this period of ministry in E. Gal : Narrative gathered from three Syn. who are some- times parallel, sometimes supplemental. In obtaining chronological order, positive statements, when occurring, are to be followed, in other circumstances probabilities are to be considered. The order is more irregular be- cause of activity and great ruimber of events, but the commencement (imprisonment of John) and close (feed- ing 5000) are fixed. Nothing following the passover of John 6 : 4 is to be included in this period, for no inter- change of events between periods occurs in several gos- pels. _ ^ ^ jl Robinson arbitrarily takes Lk. 11-13 ; 9 t)elonging to ;;: last journeys to Jerusalem and, breakitig up, inserts, ii j E. Gal. Mk.'s and Lk.'s order scarcely disturbed ; onh I deviations Mk. §§ 24, 58, Lk. §§ 29, 58. Matt, mucin disturbed in adapting to their order. To justify, note 1. Mt. makes no statement as to se(juen(!e in portions changed. Tots often used loosely as connective, when no consecution is intended. 2. Mt.'s gospel is topical, e. g.. Teaching, 5-7; Mira- cles, 8-9; Parables, 13. Chronological order general : after Feeding 5000, consecutive. Characteristics of this period, are 1. Activity, frequent journeys, development of plan, miracres"and teaching. Christ's greatest success iB achieved; opposition is aroused. 2. Preparation forfonnding the church, rejec- tion of Jews as a nation being not yet final. Christ re- news the offer of himself at feast of John 5. Relation of Gal. to Judean work. Jesus' Messiahship and the future church are the subjects of both periods, but in different order. In Judea the prominent theme is his Messi^Uship, in Gal. the church, also sacrificial ele- ment enters from succeeding period. This blending ot i^ 75 the period as record of a siugle life, the best answer to sceptical objection of irreconcilable discrepancies. Four sQccessive subjects oLthk p eriod twice repeated are^ 1. QrmiozatiLuL ^ Call of apostles, that there mav be witnesses of Christ's work, who shall found and guide the church after his ascension. 2, MiraeleR . Attesta- tions of Christ's divinity. Xot arbitrary works of power, but a regularly developed system. 3. OpposUion . At first_secret, it increased until Christ was driven from Caf>eruaum, after which it became the main feature of his life. 4. Teaching , a. E5.t&ftded. discourses, b. Para- bles. (Andr. divides arbitrarily by ••circuits/') These topics are interwoven : e. g. call of apostles l^orgauization I is connected v\-ith miracles: miracles not onlv attest divinity, but teach spiritualtroth : opposition "TsUnked with teaching iJohn 10,7 and parables iMt. 21 : 23-46., » Teaching to some extent linked witk all. Christ is set forth Prophet (teachijigj, -Exiest propitiation . j Kimg (organization). 2nd Passover d'--' - ..;.;,-„.- :.j ^ZjGaL_iBtQ_ two parts ot 4~aucri2 ~ r period , during which TTirist's place of work ;s .aid down and developed. ij_baiis.xif Gal. ministry. Cha racteristics oi 4 m onths perio^d. Choic e of apostles. MiracleSj^ sel ected _ as _ specimens of important classes. XTiracles predominate over teaching. Peop le are^ ^rgt aroiised, then taught. ^^ 5267 Jotm4: A^6-Ab. Mt. 4: 17. Mk. 1: 14, 15. Lk. 4 : 14, 15. Arriial in GaliUw Reception Christ was cor- dial, Galileans having witnessed Christ's miracles iu Jerus., (John ^t: 457 John 4.-14 •' his ow n country ." Meyer, Alford and Andrews ip. 168) say GalT is meant ; others Xazaretl;, ^Farrar Vol. I. pp. 219); best opinion is Judea, his native country. Supplemental character of TfoKlTTgospei is seeiTin TaTTing Judea Christ's country, though not mentioning his birth there. Subject of Christ's teaching: Kingdom of Godai handy (Mk. 1 : 15.) §27. John 4: 4&-54. Xoblenuvts son at Capernaam, heakii. Only event recorded by John between Christ's leaving Judea to begin work in Gal., and his return to 2d Passover. i5 : 1). John Jii3erts_taJ2aiiIia;St-£ailii-iif- Gali leans — and unbelieF'omews. 76 f \. 54. Emphasis on ehJcoi^^ showing Christ wrought this cure " as he ums c/oing" to Gal. Hence insert before Syn. narratives, Strauss. This miracle same as that Mt. 8 : 15, circum- stances being the same ; but the differences are contra- dictions, hence both are false, mere mvths based on Naaman's being healed at distance by Elijah. Ans: The differences of time and place, plainly prove two dis- tinct miracles (Trench on Mir. p. 100). §28. Lk. 4: 16-31, Mt. 4: 13-16. Announcement, Rejection at Nazareth. Do Lk. 4 : 16, Mt. 13 : 54, Mk. 6 : 1 as Lange, Farrar and Lich. say, refer to the same event ? Robinson and Andrews hold that these passages record distinct occurrences, because _L. Mt. mentions Christ's removal from Naz. to Cap. prior to Mt. 13 : 54 and Mk. 6 : 1, Lk. 4 : 28-31, assigns his rejection at Naz. as the reason. ^. Lk. 4 : 29, 30, after discourse in syna- gogue, Christ escaped death miraculously; Mk. 6: 5, mentions Christ healing sick at Naz. after discourse, thus showing there was no tumult. 3. Two visits not impossible. WonK! most probably make his own countrynien more than one offer. (Conip. Andrews, p. 198.) Reas ■!} for Visit. Christ first proclaimed his mission at Jerus., the religious centre of God's chosen people. So at the outset of Galilean ministry he affords his own kinsn)en earliest opportunity of accepting him. Driven from Nazareth, he goes to Capernaum (Mt. 4 : 13), re- jected there, he returns to Nazareth a second time. (Matt. 13: 54.) Synagogue usages. (Farrar L p. 220.) Only instance of Christ's reading, usually addressed the people. (Cp. Acts 13 : 15.) Christ's intentions were not revolution- ary. He conforms to Jewish habits. Sacraments are first innovations. First time Christ applies prophecy to himself. Is. 61 : 1, describes work and character of Mes- siah. Christ declares the passage refers to himself. Contrast. Christ's rejection at Jerusalem following an act symbolizing judgment (cleansing temple) ; at Naz- areth after proclaiming the gospel. Gospel preaching, severe or mild, to natural man displeasing. Hearers be- come suddenly enraged, because Christ taught the com- ing rejection of Jews and calling of Gentiles, illustrating M ^^x-^ ■->^ Q.X£^ yj^CJt ^•'t^^i;^ r— «j J\^^^Jy.A^/\J CA^AA^^*^' UJ-M"^ *\j TPJ^Ji 1/tLyktUjr, If /^'U^'^ . A^ a^-^^-f-^ ..c^-^^-^-^x^e-^-^j^ 79 ^Jordan to be learners^ not required to leave home or reliiiCLiiisb business, h. Lk. 5. . To be witnesses, in con- 'slant attendance on Christ, c. Mk. 3 : 13, 14. Prior to sermon on Mt. Definite orw'anization of Twelve, d. Lk. 9 : 1-6. Temj)orarv commission conferring autliority to preach and work miracles. Full apostolic authority, not until Pentecost. 31iracle is an event in external world due to immediate ao;encv of God. (Hodge's Theol. Vol. I. p. 618.) Some argue effect here might be produced without divine interference, by union of second causes and divine prescience, hence analogous to prophecy. Supernatural element just as great but strictly miraculous element, i. e. immediate exercise of divine power, does not enter. (Comp. stater in fish's mouth Mt. 17 : 27. Comp. Ps. 8 : 8). Trench insists on this distinction : allow second causes where we can. But, 1. These two cases belong to class of events where Divine efficiency is intended to be set forth. Ordinary reader makes no distinction. 2. Impression on mind of eye witnesses opposes this dis- tinction. 3. Symbolical import of- miracle overlooked by this view. It teaches, God not only foreknows, but his power- cooperates with human. -AIiRACLES. 1. Classifiention. Some speak of miracles of knowledge, of powe r^ of love. But such classifica- tion is objectionable, for, according to definition, all mir- acles are acts of power. If they are not acts of Divine power immediately exercised they are not miracles. The expression ".Miracle" should be kept distinct and ap- plied to a special class of events. Regeneration, etc., should not be termed miracle. Power, love, etc., may however be used to distinguish the main design of the miracle. 2. Variou-'< names. (Vide Trench p. 75). Gospels speak of a.^^W^^uecaUy-H- token of presence and working of God. 6. ^;£^ac, a_}vonder, astonishment of beholder transfeiM^ed toTthe work. ' c. ^f>v«//£/c, powersi. e. of God. 'dre f)y(£ , works i/erof Divinity. 3. Twofold design and proof of each. a. Attract attention and impress; for always in the presence of witnesses : cases of.popular sympathy ; impression always recorded. ^Relieve suffering ; for same rt?/;t' might have been'pTi>d1iced by miracles of different characters, i. e. (ilJl^l^'C^J^JL^jM. ^ 4^jj{l^^ 80 of judgment. Fig-tree cursed is the only miracle of this class. '^Destruction of swine work of demons, not of Christ, c. Teach truth ; they are dramatized parables, each teaching^some^aspect of truth. They teach : a. Christ's power and willingness to save souls ; b. Sinner's condition and way of approach, by prayer and faith. Disease and death are parts of the penalty of sin inflicted by the curse of the law; hence (T whence these are removed a part of the punishment of sin is removed. Mt. 8 : 16, 17 quoted from Is. 53 : 4.c,The atonement also is thus taught, Christ bearing oar sins. d. AttestChrist's claims ; for Christ says (Lk.'o : 23, 24) " whether is easier " . . . " but that ye may know" etc. Vide also Mt. 11 : 3-5. Rationalists say, "• if these miracles were real, why disbelieved ?" Ans : Abraham's answer is suflicient, Lk. 16 : 31. Christ's miracles (■jjAtx-asted with those of O. T. and of Apostles. 1. liis were performed by ^ his ovyn power. Others were wrought in his name or that of God. It is • no fair exception, as Rationalists declare, that Christ is said to sometimes work " by power of God," " by spirit of God," " by finger of God." There were special rea- sons for Christ's procedure on these special occasions. Sometimes also Christ's true humanity is expressed by his faith. 2. O. IVmiracles were punitive, those of Christ were miracles of mercy. 3. O.T. miracles largely con- lined to the sphere of nature; Christ's were performed in all spheres, the larger portion on man. 4 O. T. mira- cles wrought with delay wrestling in prayer ; Christ's were performed with ease, instantaneously. The number of Christ's miracles must have been in- definitely great ; as the cases recorded are mere speci- mens. Vide Mt. 4 : 24, 8 : 16, 11 : 5, 14 : 2, 15 : 30. We may imagine that no cases which could be brought to him were not brought. Wherever Christ went disease] and death disappeared. Thus was signified the fulnessi and sufficiency of Christ's salvation. A selection from this vast number is made upon the\ principle that each case shall make prominent some new phase of truth. When repeated it is because of a difi'er- / ence in method of cure, or the effect upon the subject, or! on account of some new development in the work of Christ. x9 cxUAAH. C^^'^^yjoh CWotJyL /tM^tAJi^ t/^^ocfKMyu^ CMy- yLtist to report to him the spiritual results of his work — not real mira<;Ies — when he said "the blind see," etc., Mt. 11 : 4, o. Strauss rejects all miraculous cures ; all miracles with accompanying conversations ; miracles introduced later to ex[)!ain the conversation ; all mentioned as occurring twice; all to which there are analogous parables — the allegory transformed by later writers into a miracle. Thus the numbei- is reduced, the residuum is explained away. ^ All such writers are ixivolved in tliefollowingdilemma: either Christ is a mere enthusiast, not above the people, or a conscious deceiver. In either case how could Christ be a moral teacher, the author of the Christian religion ? Yet this they hold. e man. Aiis. We must not look to consciousness for information respecting facts outside the sphere of consciousness. Scripture teaches Stan has ac- cess to minds of men, to lead them captive at his will. Possession must have accorded with their nature and ours. 2. Possession not recorded elsewhere in Scripture and does not now occur : Ans. Latter position cannot be proved. Special propriety of such cases at time of Christ ; culmination of the conflict between the kingdoms of good and evil, Saul is an instance found in O. Test. 3. No curse of this kind mentioned in John but all are in Gal. J.«s. Silence proves nothing. John does introduce the obnoxious doctrine. John 8 : 48, " hast a devil," 13 : 27, " after the sop Satan entered into him." John records only miracles introducing long discourses, hence these omitted. 4. Demoniacal possession is analogous to mania, idiocy, epilepsy, etc., hence mere nervous affec- tions controllable by will power. Jesus, possessing great personal magnetism, wrought these apparently miracu- lous cures. Ans. Mythicaftheory here is inconsistent; aiming to prove the gospels myths, it admits that narra- tive of these cures relates actual, historical events, hence becomes Naturalistic. Dogmatic theory of Baur. Vic- tory of Christ over heathenism set forth under this sym- bolic form. Accommodation Theory. Spinoza: Christ, 84 though not sharing popular superstitions, accommodated himself to them, by acting as though the cases of pos- session were real, while he knew they were only appar- ent. Christ's literal words are parabolic. Ans : a. This view irreconcilable with Christ's character, as portrayed by those who hold it. It charges him with conscious deception. 6, Christ's language is not hypothetical, but explicit. Separate personality of demons is evident, for Christ distinguishes demon from the person possessed, addresses them, they answer, when cast out man becomes as other men, they enter herd of swine, &c. (Vide Ebr'd, p. 251, Farrar, L, p. 236, note). Christ silenced {(fcixwi}r^7c = hQ muzzled) demon's testi- mony (Lk. 4 : 34, 35) because, a, He would not accept testimony of such a witness. /;, To permit such a title, "Holy One of God," at this stage of his work would have precipitated Pharisaic hostility. Prominent fea- tures of dispossession : loud voice, crying, bodily pros- tration. Effect : Christ's authority established ; his fame spread abroad; attention attracted to his preachino:. (Mark 1 : 27-28.) §31. Matt. 8 : 14-17 ; Mk. 1 : 29-34 ; Luke 4 : 38-41. Peter's Wife's Mother. This miracle wrought sajne^day as preceding. Mt.'s }>lan being topical, not chronolog'l, this is grouped with otlier miracles in ch. 8. Disease, great " fever," nujiirrj ficYd/,aj being medical phrase, it has been inferred Luke was physician, and had personal knowledge of the case. Fever probably signifies general disability of sinner joined with burning restlessness of sinful desires. Mode of cure : Christ stood over her (Lk.), took her hand, lifted her up (Mk.) and rebuked the fever (Lk.) Note completeness of cure; no weak- ness, nor gradual convalescence, but "immediately she arose and ministered unto them." (Trench on Mir., p. li'2.) Sceptics argue from '•'rebuked fever," either possession is ordinary disease, or fever is possession. Ans : Use of figurative language is overlooked. This is an isolated case — fever personified ; it does not answer or cry out. Comp. Christ's command to winds, " Peace, be still." This is first time Peter is distinguished above the other apostles ; miracle worked in his own family. Com- pare " wife's mother," Mk. 1 : 30 and 1 Cor. 9 : 5. Mk. C^u^"-^ ci^r^ oUaJL tc cdux-^^^y^^,^ ,0.^ «.--<_X?fx Q£lajl^I> .hjUj^Kiu- dda ^Vva-<^-»-o^ ]^-<^ cLo-'LM 'V^.-^t^A/ (Ltr-tH^^ -Aey^y a^la-^-^Ho , 4-^€lyC^oC,ec_, -0.^ ^^X/vwte^A^ ivA>i;UMVa^. 85 1 : 32, 33, says at sunset, whole city brought sick to Christ. Some say, waited until evening, because unlaw- ful to heal on Sabbath, but that objection not yet raised. Observe that it is tirst proposed by Pharisaic emissaries from Jcrus'm. True explanation, cool of evening proper time to move the sick. This. Sabbath^a specimen day. C rowels seek hira.next morning. Note "all tha^were diseased^" contrasted with "them possessedTA-ith devils," W^. 1 : 32. Hence possession differs from ordinary dis- ease §32. Mk. 1: 35-39; Lk.4: 42-44; Mt. 4: 23-25. Ftrst Circuit in Galilee. Mk. 1 : 38, 39, contains Christ's iirst intimation of future plan of labor. Taken in connection with disciples' statement v. 37, it te.iches his work was not stationary. Cap. being: selected merely as headquar- ters. It is conjectured this circuit very brief, but a week, a single miracle being recorded. Christ's work itinerant and thorough (Mk. 1: 39, "synagogues in all Galilee"). Christ's method, teaching in synagogues; his doctrine, " kingdom of God," " gosj)el of the kingdom." Xote Christ's habit of private devotion, Mk. 1 : 35. §33. Mt. 8:2-4; Mk. 1 : 40-45 ; Lk. 5 : 12-16. Heal- ing Leper. Ebrard, Trench, Lange, follow Mt.'s order: Uobinson, Lk's, who more carefully observes chronolog. sequence. Ten lepers only recorded cure of this disease (Lk. 17: 12). These two instances are only specimens. Comp. Mt. 10: 8; 11: 5; Lk. 4: 27; Lk. 7^: 22. Jose- phus notes current slander that Jews driven from Egypt because ot leprosy. Two kinds of leprosy, a. Elephan- tiasis. (Job), b. White Leprosy, kind mentioned in Leviti- cus and g.)spels. Ceremonial law. Lev. 13. Sult'erer clothed in mourning, with head bare and garments rent. When pronounced clean, ceremonies occupying a week were requisite and ^11 classes of sacrifice. Import of these requirements. Two views. 1. Michaelis and Ra- tionalistic School say were civil acts to prevent spread of contagion, and for social protection. Ans: a. Dis- ease was "hereditary, but probably nor contagious, e. g., Naaman, general of Syrian army. (2 Kings 5 : 1). Ge- hazi couv'ersed with king of Israel (2 Kings 8 : 5), (Trencli on Mir. p. 174). b. This view does not account for the religious rites, or sense of moral impurity attach- ing to this disease. 86 2. True view. Leprosy selected as most appropriate type of nature of sin ; liereditary, spreading from single spot over entire body, incurable by human agencies, loathsome. Lepers were thought smitten by God. Hence Vulg. renders Is. 53: 4 '■'■quasi Icprosum," giving rise to idea that. Christ was to be a leper. (Farrar Vol. I. p. 149). So Talmud and early church, hence disease an honor. Christ healing leprosy typified his abilitj- to save from sin. Sj'mbolic nature af this disease is seen in form of leper's request, to be cleansed, not healed, and in Christ's answer "Be thou clean." Christ touched the leper, although contrary t(j Mosaic law. Lev. 13 : 24-46 ; Num. : 2. Shewing that in his saving work he shrinks from no man however polluted. (Farrar Vol. I. p. 275). Leper commanded to shew himself to priests (Lev. 14:4). a. To gain official recognition of cure. b. To exhibit his relation to the law. Christ enjoins secresy (Mk. 1:44). Objection — cure wrought in presence of multitudes, hence secresy impossible. Lange, Fari'ar, Andrews, cure wrought in presence of but few. Grotius, Bengel, Alexander, injunction limited to time between cure and shewing himself to priests. (Trench on Mir. p. 180.) Better opinion : Christ intended to repress fanati- cal enthusiasm, which would hinder liis work. He would subordinate works to word. He would not attract peo- ple as mere miracle-worker, but as Saviour. (Andrews p. 235. Farrar Vol. I. 277). Man disobeying and spread- ing report, (Mk. 1 : 45). Christ was forced to avoid all centres of population because of undue popular zeal. Supposition that Christ's retirement was caused by cere- monial uncleanness, is fanciful. Naturalistic view. Schenkel. Leprosy could not be healed b}' will power; hence man was nearly well, Christ observing this, simply announced it. §34. Opposition. Mk. 2: 1-12; Lk. 5: 17-26; Mt. 19: 2-8. Healing Paralijtic on Christ's return to Cap'ra after Gal. circuit. Head Mt. 9 : 1 as conclusion of ch. 8 and follow Mk.'s order. Mt. grouping miracles places this as though wrought upon Christ's return from coun- try of Gergesenes. This class of diseases exhibits the lielplessness of sin- ner. In healing them Christ always commands patient C^ '?.-^^,c^,-x..^^ Z^:^ C— 7f.,:^-^fr>,^ty^i.^ o2.5-^Lx.-<-^L- AxJo^-A-^ (ImJUIA/ ^ t/t^-O-^l-O'C^ i:2.i vi .*^•ii^ 5 : 1, I'or liie fii^?t time, Christ is chargeii with Sabbath breaking. In the Svn. narrative the same eha^g^e taken np and pressed by his e! eni'es in Gal. The iuierenee is unavoidable, that Jo' - be inserteii here. The supposition that ttt '. ..rist went up to the J'assover and was there o|:.enly charged with being a Sabbath-breaker, by the Jews. Pharisees, the highest religions authorities, gives the best and only adequate explanation of the in- tr* it by the Syn. of the same charge, as . _ -: him by the Pharisees of Gal. Christ bad f»reviousiy wrought many cures in Gal., on Sabbath, aud even in the Synagt^gues, without Pharisees making slightest opposition, but their bitter p»ersecution of him on '- _ ^forward, admits of easy exp»lanation, wl. c>hn 5, that Jerus. Pharisees attempt to < .ise of a Sabbath cure. 4. Gal. ministry be,: :i . ^n 4. Where can John 5, be inserted ? This the only palace. Site of Bethsaida cannot be accurately determined. It was near Sheep Gate (i. e. market), which was toward the X. E. of the city. Robinson identifies with small intermittent spring called fount of the Virgin. Objected to, as not iar^^e enough for the five porches, and multi- tude of " sick folk-"' Weight of authority rejects v. 3 (latter clause) aud whole of V. 4. Wanting in B, D, and Sinaitic. luter- Dal arguments against its genuineness are, 1. Xever al- loded to elsewhere. If such spring existed, its fame woold be world wide. 2. Wholly out of analogy with miracles of O. andX. T. Xo spiritual truth is connected with it, to be believed or attested. Angelic agency never recorded as working miracles elsewhere. (Farrar Vol. L p. 372. S<. Title denoted Christ was ideal man, nothing superhuman. Gess. remarks, this view irreconcilable with Christ's constant claims of divine attributes, c. Orthodox. "The Son of Mail^," above other men, dis- tinguished by some peculiarity, which may be discovered by considering what is predicted of him, viz,, divine honors, prerogatives, etc. Why does Christ employ this title ? 1. Ans : Incognito to hide his real divine nature till men should be prepared to accept him. So Ewald, Bleek. 2. A mere circundo- , ' cution for Jesus, witlj which it is interchanged. 3. Used ^p^ ..Jd! ^^'^M. 9^^ /J W^ oL^e.*?^ a-^Ju vUH>^r '^fez Oi ^MM.AAjaJ'^ e<..-^ s-^o-^^^^'X/uai AOt^ ■^ .^6^v":^/^A-t^i^ /M-'^U. ^^C^-^^^^^ 1m {Icc^r^^ . rj!^ .-.^v-ttvi/^y -""'ct-t-'^'^-^f 4-L^^^iAjM' 95 to set forth Christ's Messiahship. The title " Messiah " could not be employed because of the false ideas of the peo[)le respecting it. Had he assumed this title men would have expected him to fulfill their wrong concep- tions. Jesus would not be called Christ until late in his life. Only once did he call himself " the Christ;" and that was at his trial and led to his condemnation. The title evidently contains the two ideas of exaltation and humiliation. After the Resurrection it was not used by the disciples. It is evidently based on Ps. 8, and Dan. 7 : 13, 14. Cess, sees a reference to the Protevangelium, Gen. 3: 15. The expressions " kingdom of heaven," •' kingdom of God," should also be noticed.. "Kingdom of God" is employed by Mk.. Lk. and John. Matt, used the phrase but twice. His expression is Kingdom of Heaven {zcov o'j/jauiov, plur., Heb. form, alluding to different spheres.) Some regard the two expressions as identical. Heaven is put for God as being the place of his dwelling. This, iiowevei', does not explain Matt.'s exclusive use of one. Others, therefore, say the phrase " kingdom of heaven" is used by Matt, to contrast the new stage of God's rule with that of O. T. theocracy, i. e. gospel is heavenly ful- lillment of God's rule on earth. "Kingdom of God" is equally applicable to both dispensations. The same essential idea is, however, involved in b')th. Diff. views iield as to what Christ intended to do in establishing " the kingdom": 1. Infidel. Christ attempted to establish an earthly kingdom, to free the Jews, but perished in the attempt. 2. Rationalistic, a, He aimed at political re- generation. Seeing that social reform was necessary to this, he became a moralist, b, Christ at first held the same view as Pharisees. Gradually his mistaken ideas w^ere corrected, and he sought to carry on a spiritual work. Renan r^Christ vacillates between these two views of his work, the Pharisaic and Spiritual. 3. Accoinmo- datioii-Schleiermacher, Schenkel : The aim which Christ had in his mind was simply to found as a teacher a moral, spiritual system. He however accommodated himself in his instructions to the popular misconceptions of the people with regard to the theocracy. Either he, like the people, was blinded by misunderstanding, or he made use of their false notions to elevate them. 96 Sermon, on. the Mount. Christ now gives a fuller and more orderly arranged specimen of his teaching than he had previousl}' afforded the people. Tiie time has now- come for a more complete revelation, that friends and foes may be separated and the gospel sj'stem somewhat consolidated. Place. According to tradition the Mt, of Beatitudes, a lime-stone ridge 7 or 8 m. S, W. of Cap'm, called Kurn Hattin on account of its two peaks. To this identification Robinson objects that the Mt. is too far distant from Cap'm to be consistent with Matt. 8 : 5 and Lk. 7 : 1. The tradition, also, is only in the Latin church and from tlie 13th century. Matt, and Lk. difter. As to j^lacc, Mt. says, " w^ent up into a mountain and sat;'' Lk., " came down and stood in the plain." Mt. however uses TO 6(10^ in a wide sense — a mountain district. Christ " went up to pray," (Lk. 6 : 12) and came down, i. e part way, to the level plain between the two peaks, and taught. As to time^ Mt. places it at commencement of Gal. ministry ; Lk. puts it some months later in connec- tion with the call of tlie Twelve. The miracle following in Mt. is healing of leper ; in Lk., healing of centurion's servant. In length, \it. gives 107 verses; Lk. but 30. The accounts resemble one another in the facts that both are mountain sermons occurring early in Gal. ministry; that the beginning and close are alike in both, and the drift of thought is the same. Theories of the relation be- tween the two. 1. Two accounts of the same sermon, blurred and distorted by tradition. Some follow Mt. as most complete, others Luke as presenting fewest difficul- ties. 2. Conscious selection lies at base of differences ; one discourse purposely varied by Evangelists ; Lk. omits what was special to Jews. This coincides with differen- ces, but does not offer an adequate explanation. 3. Com- mon. One discourse ; Lk.'s acc(mnt historical as Christ gave it; Mt.'s an amplification by additions grouped from other discourses, analogous to Mt.'s plan in parables. A specimen of Christ's teaching. Objection to this is the unity of Mt.'s account. Calvin and Neander hold that both Mt. and Lk. give specimens of Christ's teaching. 4. Two discourses on same occasion, the one esoteric (Mt.'s) to the disci[)les, tlie other exoteric (Lk.'s) to the multitude. (So Augustine, Lange). Objections: There is nothing esoteric in Mt. Christ makes no distinction of 2e^-^-aic ideas and to O. T. economy ? There was need of explanation, that the people might know to what they were committing themselves. Christ in this discourse gives it, removing all erroneous views and false interpre- tations of his work. Some have mistakenly thought that Christ here sets forth a system of theology, others, a sys- tem of Ethics. The sermon was related to Pharisaic errors in.teaching in opposition to them, that membership in God's kingdom was dependent not upon external cir- cumstances but upon personal character; that the Law was to be observed not in a formal manner but in its spirit. Tliree main divisions : 1. Ch. 5 : 1-16, character ot- members; characteristics required, spiritual. 2. Ch. 5 .^' 17-2t>. Claims of kingdom, a, 5 : 17-48, moral requisi: tions : b, ch. 6, religious requisites. 3. Ch. 7, exhorta* tions to true life; temptations and dangers, how avoided. The effect was astonishment (Mt. 7: 29) " for he taught them as one having authority." Sceptics view this dis- course as genuine, making an exception in its favor. They regard Christ as teaching an ethical and religious system. They draw a contrast between its free tone and the later dogma of Paul and other Apostles. Hence Christian dogma was a late invention. Christ taught morals, not doctrine. Such is true Christianity, love to God as our Father, to our brother-man as to ourself. Ans : 1. Discourse was not intended to be a full system, but adapted to the comprehension of the people. 2. Adapted to its position in historj' of redemption. Reve- lation corresponds to the period in which it is given. 3. Completed Christian doctrine is based, on life, death and resurrection of Christ, hence could not be brought for- ward at this stage. 4. Unity of truth is always preserved, 98 althougli it is more definitely stated from time to time. O. T, and Christ's teaching involved all fundamental doc- trines. In the Epistles, however, the^^ assume a more analytic form. That the discourse is Eoauf/elical not Ethical, as Skep- tics assert, is seen : 1. Because its standard of spiritual- ity is so high that supernatural aid is required. Need of forgiveness is shown. Christ must be sought and this search is to be by means. 2. Righteousness is distinguished from moral right because it is connected with Christ's kingdom. His per- son is involved in his work. His disciples are spoken of as those having purity. The discourse was an evangelical restatement of Law of Moses, and a preparation for the gospel. §42. Miracles. Mt. 8 : 5-13 ; Lk. 7 : 1-10. Healinc/ Centurion's servant. Capernaum. §42, 43, resume the sub- ject of miracles. All centurions mentioned in N. T. ap- pear in n favorable light. Mt. 8 : 5, he loved Jewish na- tion and built a synagogue. Though a heathen Christ declared of him, '• 1 have not found so great faith, no not in Israel." Comp. centurion at cruciti.xion (Mk. 15 : 39; Lk. 23 : 47), Cornelius (Act. 10 : 1), Julius (Acts 27 : 1), (Smith's Diet. p. 406.) Legion contained about 6000 in- fantry, with a varying proportion of cavalry. It "was subdivided into ten cohorts ("band," Acts 10: 1), the cohort into three maniples, and the maniple into two centuries, containing originally 100 men, as the name implies, but subsequently from 50 to 100 men, according to the strength of the legion." (Smith's Diet. Army, p. 162.) Gal. "was garrisoned with Roman soldiery; Her- od's bodyguards, and those farming imperial revenues. New features in this miracle. 1. Intercessory faith. Master prays for his servant. 2. Striking greatness of faith. ' As his servants obeyed his word, so disease would ol)ey the ivord of Christ.' 3. It was a Gentile's faith. This is first recorded instance of individual heal- ing, outside the ciiosen people, hence intercession of Jewish elders is sought. (Lk. 7: 3.) Christ praises this Gentile'p faith, as greater than any in Israel, and applies this fact by declaring ' Many Gentiles shall be called, many children of the kingdom cast ofiT' (Mt. 8 : 11-12.) Objections. 1. Mt. says centurion came in person to hlSL^^ OU^ '' ^MLy-^<^-'^ yl^^CL^^lM-^ ^ L^>t^'^ iM^rri^ Ud-'2^C^--^<^C^ (^ ^ 99 Christ: Lk. he sent tlirough the elders, then tliron^h friends, but had no personatinterview, Ans. " Qui facit per alium, facit per se." " What one does by his agent, he does himself" Mt. dwells on mere fact of miVacle as displaying great faith; Lk. goes into detail. (Robin. Gk. Harm. p. 198.) 2. Christ lacks either sincerity or foreknowledge. He starts for house, but does no"t go to it ; either did not intend going and practiced deception, or changed his mind, because ignorant of what he was about to do. Ans. This assumes Christ was bound to disclose all of his intentions. No inconsistency in Christ's not knowing things about to happen. To his human consciousness things came as to ours, §43. Lk. 7: 11-17. Raising son of loidow of Nain. Lk. 8 : l-o, narrates a second general circuit of Gal. Some hold this refers to prospective journey, undertaken near close of ministry. Common view (Andrews, Wieseler,) the reference in Lk. is retrospective, summing up the events narrated in §§43 — 47. Exegesis favors this interpretation. "Nain, the modern Nein is situated on the northwestern edge of the ' Little Hermon,' where the ground falls into the plain of Esdraelon." The entrance must always have been up the steep ascent from the plain and here, on the west side of the village, the rock is full of sepulchral caves. (Smith's Diet. p. 2058.) Christ appi'oaches N^ain attended b^^ many disciples, and much people. "^Style of gospel description simple, beautiful, impressive, " only son of his mother, and she was awidow.'^ This was onl}^ time Christ was ever in plain of Esdraelon. This class of miracles manifest Christ's power over departed spirits and attest his claim to be source of life, physical and s[iiritual. Three cases of this kind are recorded, each exhibiting more striking power than the preceding, viz., Jairus' daughter, from death bed; Widow's son from the bier; Lazarus, from the tomb. Chronological order. Widow's son, Jairus' daughter, Laz. Sceptical iheories cunceryiing these miracles. 1. Nat- iircdisttc. Cases of suspended animation ; death only ap- parent ; pretended miracle, only resuscitation. 2. Mythical. Mere inventions of early church to make Christ's life accord with O. T. prophecy and type. Effect: all feared, glorified God, saying "Great Prophet has arisen," " God has visited Israel" Christ's 100 fame spread not only through Judea, but through whole " reo^ion round aboutj^' §44. Opposition. Mt. 11: 2-19; Lk. 7: 18-35. Mes- sageof.Jolm Bap. In this section renewal of opposition is occasioned by Bap.'^s disciples, and continues to §50. Mt. places this narrative after sending out the Twelve, but this is too late, for during absence of Twelve, John was beheaded: Mk. 6: 30-" Mt. 14: 13. Lk's order is therefore best. The report of Christ's miracles was the occasion of Bap.'s message. John was imprisoned at Machaerus, "• on the borders of the desert, N. of Dead Sea, on frontiers of Arabia," "identified with the ruins M'Kauer." Fathers say John did not doubt himself, but sent to Christ that his disciples might be satisfied. But that Bap. was, at least to some extent, staggered and per- plexed by Christ's method of developing his work, is evident from fact of Clirist's answer being addressed not to disciples, but John himself. Message expresses im- patience mingled with distrust. He was languishing in prison, multitudes of others were being relieved and blessed by miracles ; he the forerunner, was forgotten ; " was this really the Christ, or should they look for another?" (Farrar Vol. I., p. 289.) Christ's only reply is reference to his miracles, thus showing estimate he put upon them : His works were equivalent to assertion of divinity. John Bap. was greatest prophet because ot'his p.isition as " index finger of 0. T." Christ received bv the people, but Pharisees and law- yers doubted (Lk. 7.^ 29.) ' §45. Mt. 11 : 20-30. Upbraids the. cities. Discii)1es of John having returned to him, Christ gives his estimate of the reception he had met in Gal. The same or a simi- lar denunciation of woes is recorded in Lk. 10: 13, in connection with sending out seventy. Exact location of these cities is unknown ; |)robably W. shore Sea of Gal. Their rejection of Christ contrasted with ancient heathen opposition to theocracy, viz., Tyre and Sidon, Sodom and Gomorrah. There is no record of a single miracle, wrought in Bethsaida or Chorazin, yet the Evangelist says these were the cities " wherein ???os/ of his mighty works were done." — ^ §46. Lk. 7 : 36-50. Anointiiuj bji a inoman. This took place at either Cap., Nain, Magdala. It differ3 from the v7 'kZy ^(AU>/iJljL^<°M 4Lf^ /-t>'L>=«»-»-t^v^ 'TTn.txV;- al^-^-^^^-aZy at^-'-^^-sL- o -^-O^r; ■v^ ^OL ^^--^ ~eM-e:^U^cm -^j^yyQ^ oAjJLi ^ ■C^ajA-i^^Ju^^.'x..UX^ vtl^ . 105 Wiet^eler, EUicott, Tischendorf, synchronize it with call of Mt, Mt. gives feast on account of Christ's intended de- parture from Gah Two new charges from Pharisees, and disciples of John Bap. : a.'^Eating with publicans and sinners. O. T. regulations insisted upon social sev- erance ; no Jew was permitted to eat with those ceremo- nially unclean, b. Christ and his disciples neglect fast- ing. Former charges were, Christ's making himself equal to God, breaking Sabbath, casting out devils by Beelzebub. §59. Mt. 9: 18-26; Mk. 5: 22-43; Lk. 8:41-56. Jairus comes whilst Christ was conversing with disciples of John, at Levi's feast. On way to Jairus' house, heals woman with bloody issue. Peculiarity of cure, is mode of approach. " Virtu e*(r?'jva/^^v) had gone out of him" does not signify emanation of unconscious power. Christ voluntarily performed the cure. 'Trouble not the mas- ter' Lk. 8:49, indicates respect of higher classes for Jesus. Privacy of raising of Jairus' daughter was due to Pharisaical o]:)position. §60. Mt. 9 : 27-34. Txpo blind men and dumb demoniac. Organic disease symbolizing darkness of mind. v. 27 " Son of David," Messianic title used as argument to ob- tain cure, for first time, v, 28 " Yea, Lord" — Christ re- quires faith. V. 34. Blasphemous charge of Pharisees reiterated. §62. Mt. 9:35-38; 10:1,5-42; 11:1; Mk. 6:6-13; Lk. 9 : 1-6. Third circuit iu Gal. Christ now sends out the Twelve. Opposition had become dangerous. The crisis of his life was fast approaching. Whatever he would do to impress the people of Gal. must be done quickly. Design of mission of Twelve, a. To facilitate making such impression. Their mission a practical com- ment on his own words, ' Harvest plenty, laborers few.' b. To exercise apostles in independent action. Fourth step in organization of his kingdom. They still held the erroneous ideas common to the people, so Christ now begins to separate them from the world. On their re- turn, he retires with them to the desert for further in- struction, c. To acquaint the people with apostles, as those who had been with him from the first. Their com- mission was temporary and national. Their circuit ended, their miraculous power ceased. Into any Samari- Vo 106 tan village they were not to enter. Plenaiy apostolic authority conferred at Pentecost. Subject of their teach- ing was, ' Kingdom of heaven at hand.' Their miracles were limited to acts of healing. Anointing with oil, oil being type of Holy Spirit, shewed that they were mere instruments, and made prominent in people's minds the Spirit's agency. Disciples were to be supported by those to whom they were sent. Mt. 10 : 16 contains reference to future opposition Christ knew he was to encounter. First reference to coming trials. Note prominent place given to his person and author- ity ; whole work of disciples derives its authority from him, its trials are to be borne for his sake. §63. Mt. 14: 1-2, 6-12; Mk. 6: 14-16; Lk. 9: 7-9. Death of John Baptist. Date of Death rightly inferred to be just prior to third Pass., after feeding 5000. Duration of his imprisonment depends on feast of John 5 : 1. If Pass., then 16 months (Robinson), if not it varies from 5 months to 3 weeks. John Bap. dies be- fore seeing the establishment of the kingdom he had heralded. His earl}- ministry had been full of glory, its end is filled with gloom. His fate accords with his life. It was well that an ascetic, a preacher of repentance, a pioneer for righteousness sake, should die a martyr. His life had been long enough to disclose the unity of his work and Christ's ; his death turned popular attention to Jesus. As his imprisonment had caused Christ to withdraw from Jndea, his deatli led him to retire into the wilderness. §64. Mt.l4: 13-21; Mlv. 6: 30-34; Lk. 9: 10-17; John 6: 1-14. Return of Twelve. Feeding of 5000. John now parallel with Syn. Twelve begin to return from their mission, the disciples of John Bap. report their master's death, hence Christ withdraws to N. E. side of Lake, Mk. says for rest and safety. Lk. 9: 10; Place belonged to a citj' called Bethsaida. Common opinion is there were two Bethsaidas, Bethsaida of Gal., Bethsaida Julias, Others think there was but one, built upon both sides of the Jordan : but this is improbable, no bridge being men- tioned, and a ferry would liave been very dangerous. Bethsaida was an easy resort from Cap. and crowds fol- lowed him, having seen him embark, going around the Lake, by land. Christ was moved witti compassion for aJ<^<3 , (/ z^Ct^ &^--<5W/; ~toc<: juJ-L attend the approaching passover " because the Jews sought to kill Him." THE MmiSTRY IX NORTHERN GALILEE. Second Period. Time 6 Months. Duration of the Period : From the third Passover (coin- cident with death of the Baptist) to the Feast of Taber- nacles, six months later. The record is contained in Mt. 14:13; 18:35; Mk. 6 : 30 ; : : 50 ; Luke 9 : 10-56. John gives all in one verse, 7: 1, which corresponds with the statement of the Synoptists. It is a period of great journeyings. The order of events in the Syn. is perfect. This is because the period is shorter, and there is less room for variations. Then the subjects of conversation are closely connected with the historic events. Characteristics of the Period: 1. Dangerous opposition causing Christ's withdrawal from Capernaum. 2. This withdrawal widened the sphere of action. Instead of remaining in Capernaum he now goes into Phoenicia, then into Decapolis, passing up the Jordan to Caesarea Philippi. 3. He had two ends in view : «. To avoid dan- ger ; 6. to extend his useiulness. Besides, his passing the borders of the Holy Land signified the calling of th'ed be- cause he is in a new countr}-. But the present miracle has some peculiarities. 1. It is the first case of combined deafn(^ss and dumbness. 2. Not an absolute but a partial dumbness — tongue-tied. 3. The mode of healing — takes the rhan apart and prays.' Why? Because the Messianic question is not prominent, and the people are Polytheists. Therefore he wished to ^teach them of the true God. Many other miracles were wrought, and the effect of -them is stated in Mt. 15 : 31, X ';P^.,aJL^ Ockl, .e.^iy~^L^.,,^.X^ /? ot^Iay\. /^^/L^c^d-e^^ r tfex/ ti^Cte. -^U^ d.,a_J^ -vx-^^ ^-^^^^o-r^ cLiy^^Jo JL&- Arr^^^^oXi A VV ^ Sux^ VlA^vu Vi^cixp-^ , -KuyW" \AHrrdL (Lt>uA-< C3•«^y IX'VT^' Ill Then follows the miracle ot feeding the 4000, wrought from compassion for the people far from home, and especially to lead them to the true God. §70. The Pharisees and Sadducees again rcijuire a Sign. Mt. 15 : 39 ; 16 : 1-4; Mk. 8 : 10-12. Our Lord comes back to Capernaum and again to Magdala, a little town south of Capernaum. For the first time, the Pharisees and Sadducees are united against him, which Lange thinks is proof that the Sanhedrim had passed official measures against him. For the fourth time the Pharisees seek a sign, and Christ'8 answer is recorded in iMt. 16: 2-3. §72. Blind Man of Bethsaida healed. This miracle is mentioned by Mark alone. It is private, and the cure is gradual, to illustrate, as some think, the gradual enlight- enment of the regenerated soul. §73. Peter's Confession at Cxsarea Philippi. Mt. 16 : 13-20: Mark 8: 27-30; Luke 9: 18-21. Luke men- , tions these events because so important. C. Philippi lay *^ p^-^^-Yy at the base of Mt. Hermon, which is about 8000 ft. high. .OnJ/k, The sources of the Jordan are here. (Vide Smith's Diet.) ^pUjz_ iuJz^cJX..^^ ^ — Result of the Galilean Ministrg. As a whole, the re- sult has not been to lead any but the disciples to believe that he is the Messiah. This truth is not popularly pro- claimed. He still enjoins them not to say that he is the Christ. But the truth is so clear that it brings out Peter's famous confession : " Thou art the Christ, the son of the living God." Christ's reply contains ixxb^aia for the first time. It is used only once besides this in the Gospels. (Matt. 18: 17.) The Rationalists confess that the agreement of the Evangelists here denotes a crisis in the life of Christ, but they dispute as to its nature. Baur and Strauss say that " Son of Man " (Mt. 16 : 13) had not before been consid- ered a Messianic expression. The change, therefore, was from an idea secretly and suddenly entertained by Christ to its open profession. Schenkel thinks the crisis to be that after this he offered himself for the first time as the Messiah. But these theories require rejection of the Gospel by John, and they subvq^-t. the whole history. The only thing true is that the claim to be the Messiah had not 112 been made prominent before. But the Disciples had recognized him as Son of God before this. Vide Mt. 14 : 33. He now makes his chaim public, and goes on to teach that his kingdom would be independent of the old Theocracy. "Upon this rock will I build my Church." That is, the doctrine contained in Peter's confession would be its corner-stone. §74. Prediction of his Death and Resurrection. Mt. 16 : 21-28 ; Mk. 8 : 31-38 ; 9:1; Lk. 9 : 22-24. This is a new element in Christ's teaching. The Syn. recognized this transition. Our Lord shows them that he had not come to set up the material kingdom that they expected, but that he was to suiter death. This shocked them, and Peter says : "• Be it far from thee, Lord.'.'*^ These predic- tions are important in three respects : 1. In correcting the mistaken ideas of liis Apostles. These predictions prepared them for that suffering which they had not anticipated. 2. In preserving their faith. What would have be- come of them when Christ's death came, without these predictions ? 3. Although they did not apprehend his words at the time, they did remember them during Passion Week (Luke 24: 7-8). The Divinity of the Savior gleams through these predictions in a striking manner. They are very minute, a. As to the place — Jerus., which he had avoided, h. His death was not to be a local but an otKcial and national event, e. The mode of his suffering was predicted. He was to be " put to death " but was to rise I'gain on the third day. The Rationalists make strong assaults upon these pas- sagfis. I. They claim discrepancy in the accounts. 1. John is enigmatical while the Syn. are plain. 2. John's references cover the whole life, while the Syn. refer only to the end. 3. In John the words are addressed to the multitude; in the Syn. to the Disciples. 4. Christ ap- peals to the O. T. and mistakes its meaning. He avails himself of certain Messianic passages which the Ration- alists deny to be so, Ans : a. Christ appeals to the O. T. as proof only to those wlio believe in theO. T. b. The objection is based on the false assumption that only isolated passages refer to the Messiah, whereas the whole O, T., especially the ^y^rt^djU.^LuJb JuoUA^^M", l^^-^^'ctuLAJC jg^xA^i^J-^ txA.L>LX_ out/- aL--^i^.f-9 113 whole eerenionijil law, refers to Ciirist. He is the key to it all. c. The exegesis on which these discrepancies are based is accepted only by unbelieving Jews and Rationalists. II. Again it is objected that if Christ predicted his death in this way, the surprise and vacillation and in- credibility of the Disciples, when his trial and death did occur, are inexplicable. Ans: a. Prophecies however explicit require fnltill- ment as the key to their signiticancy and inspiration. Although the second advent of Christ has been foretold, how much do we know about it? b. Again this was a time of great excitement. The Disciples were struck dumb for the moment, and had not sutticient calmness to reason about these matters. c. The true interpretation of these prophecies contra- dicted all their notions of the Messiah. Besides, 'O. T. prophecies were not all to be fulfilled in his present advent. III. These predictions simply a shrewd forecast. His suffering would be at Jerus. because he could bring that about. But the question arises. How did Christ know he would not be arrested in Galilee on this theory? To obviate this, Strauss says tlie whole matter was incorpo- rated with the record and is without foundation. Intermediate Position of Theistic critics: These predictions belong to Cesarean period. Before this Christ had ex- pected to -convert the nation. But experience taught that death was necessary to victory. Ans : 1. It is inconsistent with the record in Mt. 12 : 40 ; 23 : 38, 39. 2. This theory is inconsistent with itself. For if the Resurrection was not an actual fact, why did the Apostles suffer martyrdom for their belief in it? 3. Christ's knowledge of the O. T. renders it impossi- ble (Isa. 49 : 3.) The Sceptics themselves claim that he got his knowledge from O. T., and by a false exegesis applied it to himself. Hence on their own ground he had a definite conception of his sufferings and death. Another objection attempts to relieve Christ from all participation in the tlieory of the Atonement. But see how one sceptic devours another. For some of them say that all such passages are an interpolation, while otliers deny that they teach the Atonement. 114 Transition Period. Thus far Christ had addressed the Twelve. But he now turns to the multitude. He fore- warns them of the cost of foUowinoj him — cjreat self-denial required, yet with the rewards of eternal life. But those who do not follow him must suffer the loss of their souls, (This was the last N. T. passage commented on by Dr. Addison Alexander just oefore his death.) §75. The Iransfiguration. The events of this section occurred about a week after the preceding conversation. No difficulty in the fact that Mt. says six days and Lk. eight, for both speak of one week, only one includes, and the other excludes, the first and last days. Besides Lk. says w^s}—"- about.'' Tradition makes Mt. Tabor in Gal. the Mt. of Transfig. But this goes back only to fourth cent., and then jiot to Palestine. Mt. and Mk. say " a high mountain," and Lk. " the mountain." Robinson and Stanley object to Tabor bee. at that time occupied by a fortified city. Last events occurred in the region of Caesarea Phiiippi, Lightfoot : "Evangelists intimate no change of place." Besides, Mk. 9 : 30 says : "And departing thence they passed tlirongh Galilee," implying that thej- were not then in Gal. Current opinion favors Mt. Hermon. Taking witb him Peter, James and Joiin, he goes into the mountain to pray, and then took place the Trans- figuration. What the Transfiguration was is a matter of much conjecture. It is sufficient to know that Christ's personal identity remained. (Farrar, chap. 36.) Peter proposed to make three Tabernacles, or tents, that they might dwell there. Then a cloud came, wliich is always a sign of Jehovah's presence, and on lookingaround they saw Jesus alone. ^ Three-fold design vfthe Transjiuration : 1. It afforded the Disciples a new proof from Heaven of Christ's divinity, thereby strengthening their faith for future conflict. 2. It was necessary for Christ's own spiritual support and comfort, before entering upon the agony and death which were near at hand — analogous to the baptism before the Temptation. 3. The design was symbolical — setting forth the na- rture of Christ's kingdom, and the glory fhat shall follow those that suffer for it. A specimen of the heavenly glory \JL' (XhJ^C 115 and of the resurrection. Also shows tlie essential one- ness of Christ's kingdom with the 0. T. dispensation. Moses and Elias representative men — one tlie giver, the other the champion of the Law. These two hist points set forth in II. Peter 1 : 16-18 . Christ charged them to tell no man, because the multitudes had not faith to un- derstand the scene, and the Disciples themselves could not understand " what the rising from the dead should mean." In the next four sections, we have a. the healing of the demoniac child, 6. the second prediction of Christ's death and resurrection, c. the miraculous provision of the tribute-money, and (/. the contentions of the Disciples as to who should be greatest in Christ's kingdom. LAST JOURNEY TO JERUSALEM. Our Lord now begins his last journey to Jerusalem, thereto renew the evidence of his Messiahship. The time is from Tabernacles to the Passover, six months lack- ing one week. Why is Luke so full ? a. Because he is supplementary. b. It accords with his plan to bring out the personal re- lations and human sympathies of Christ. The question of Harmony is very difficult, because John gives us five chapters which must go into the Synoptic narrative. Here is the problem : The Synopt- ists, after the Galilean Ministry, relate a journey to Jeru- salem as if it were the last. But John records three }ouv- neys: (1) A journey to the feast of Tabernacles in Octo- ber, (John 7 : 10.) (2) A journey to the Feast of Dedi- cation in December (John 10 : 22-23.) On account of opposition Jesus retires to Bethany in Perea, but the death of Lazarus brings him to Bethany, near Jerusalem. Then on account of further opposition he retires to Ephraim, (John 11 : 54.) (3) He sets out from Ephraim for Jerusalem " six days before the Passover" (John 12 : 1.) Where was Jesus during the two months between the Tabernacles and Dedication ? How are these to be harmonized ? It is best to con- fess that we have not enough material to settle the ques- tion satisfactorily. DeWette thinks the chapters in Luke are a collection of unhistorical material which the writer did not know where to place. Exegetical objections to this view; a. The unity of the discourses in Luke. b. All 116 the material furnished belongs to this period. Hengsten- berg thinks no order is discernible between Luke and John. Schleierinacher, Olshausen and Neander think that the accounts of the two journeys are blended, viz., the journeys to the Tabernacle and Passover. The narrative of the first two come in at Luke 18 : 35. They record no conversations or incidents previous to their be- coming parallel with Luke. V Greswell makes all the Synoptists connect with the last journey in John. Then Luke 9 : 51 is parallel with John 11:55. According to this view the Synoptists pass over the period and record only the last journey to Jerusalem just before the Passover. By this view the unity of Luke is preserved, and the Synoptists appear to record only one journey. But the difficult}* is that early in Luke's narration Christ is brought into the house of Mary and Martha at Bethany, (chap. 10) and then in chap. 17: 11 he is passing through Galilee and Samaria. Greswell thinks Luke refers to another village near Jerusalem. But this would make the journey protracted and irregular. Again John says our Lord i)as9ed some time in Ephraini, after raising Lazarus. ^^ Wieseler fixes on three points in Luke where it is said ^ Jesus was going to Jems'.' and makes them correspond with John's journeys : 1. To Tabernacles, Luke 9 : 51 compares witli John 7 : 10. 2. To Bethany, '^ 13:22 " " "11:1. 3. To Passover, " 17 : 11 " " " 11 : 55. Arguments for Wieseler' ?, via n : It is claimed that the narrative in John^te in to the break in Luke, e. g., we are told that the journey to the Tabernacles was made secretly. This agrees with Luke's statement that he went through Samaria. The common way was tli rough Perea. The Samaritans reject him because his " face was set towards Jerus." Here comes in the parable of the good Samaritan. Such striking coincidences all through have won over many supporters. Ellicott fol- lows it in full. Tischendorf qualifies it l)y saying that it is not so certain as it seems to be. Objections. 1. Lack of positive evidence. Butinsuch a case we look only for probabilities. 2. Luke purports to give only one journey. Ans. : Luke does not say there w\as but o>ze journey. 3. Luke 9 : 51 seems to refer to a ^X C^^^.^^^-^CA-jlIXL CUu ^ C^^A^^ S yiA^O/X^cu t '^^>.-^ ■ ^l^XJiyUJ' 117 period just before his deatli. Aiis. : Could as well refer to the whole period of six months. 4. Luke 18 : 22 must mean, it is said, into or wp t • Jerus. But this interpreta- tion denies that cj'c ever has the sense of direction. 5. The plan implies a sojourn in Jerusalem from the Taber- nacles to Dedication. This is said to be contrar}' to John 12 : 1. Tischendorf takes an exception to Wieseler and makes the Dedication occur in John 10: 22. An- drews agrees as to the last two journeys, but makes this difference: He considers Luke 9:51 the journey to Dedication, and makes it parallel with John 7 : 10, whicli passage he makes refer to a final departure. Objections to Andrews: 1. It assumes a new return to Galilee after Dedication. 2. It is unnatural to put John 7 : 8, 9 at the close of the Galilean ministry. The}- belong to this period of journeyings. Robinson makes Luke 13: 22 — 19: 28 the last jour- ney; Luke 1^:17 — 11:33 the journey between Taber- nacles and Dedication, and Luke 11 : 33 — 13: 10 he i)Uts in the ministry in Eastern Galilee. Objections: 1. It is arbitrary. 2. It breaks up .fhe connection just where commentators find a striking nnit\-. 3. Robinson him- self says, " I suggest." The sceptics say that this diver- sity proves the record unhistorical. Coincidences of John and Luke: 1. Both represent Jesus, after the Galilean Ministr}', as entering upon an extended period of journeyings. 2. Both agree that the region was Judea and Ferea, 3. Both agree that it was tow- ard Jerus. 4. Both agree as to the character of tlie works and teaching, for both refer to a period of hostility which brings out declaration of his Divinity. Design of the Period: A more open avowal of Mes- siahship — at the feast and while journeying. He offers himself again at Jerus. and is rejected. Notice the ad- vance in the doctrine of his person. He speaks of com- ing forth from God; of his pre-existence ; of his one- ness with the Father; of his being the source of life. But he still withholds the titles, Messiali and Christ. The sphere of labor is now changed from Galilee to Judea. In the Synoptists this is brought out in the journeyings through Perea. The opposition increases. The Pharisees seek to break down his popularity by put- ting difficult questions so worded that a direct answer 118 would ofFend one partj* or anotlier. For example, the question about divorce. On the other hand, our Lord delivers a series of discourses against the Pharisees, warning tlie people against them. John gives evidence of the covert purpose of the Pharisees to put Christ to death, John 7 : 25. Christ now proceeds to give private instruction to his disciples, in reference to the change so soon to occur. He gives new charges, prophecies and parables. (The numbering of the sections, from this point, is irregular, but Tischendorf s plan is preferred.) o—^ V_ ;^ r §81. Final Departure from Galilee. Luke's expression JVC (jl^'^^is remarkable: "He steadfastly set his face to go to if^ i Jerusalem.'" The journey was not compulsory but ^J' \'^ voluntary. VQ/^\;^ • Objections: 1. He said to his brethi-en that he would , ' not go, and afterwards went up secret!}- (John 7: 8-11.) ^ It is claimed that this is either vacillation or deception. Ans : Our Lord's words refer to the time and manner of his going. Did not say he was not going, but " I go up not yet." He refused to go in the public procession. 2. Again, it is said that the rejection of his messen- gers at the Samaritan village (Lk. 9 : 58) does not agree with the favorable reception in John 4th. Ans: The latter was at the beginning, the former at the close of his Galilean ministry. The rejection by the Samaritans is now caused b}- their prejudices. Christ's face now toward Jerus. He was therefore regarded as favoring the Jews. 3. Again it is said Lk. 9 : 52 represents Christ's last journey to be through Samaria. But Mt. and Mk. make it through Perea. Andrews (p. 361) answers this by the reasonable supposition that he started to go through Samaria, but after his rejection changed his plan and went through Perea. §83. Feast of Tabernacles. This was one of the great annual feasts of the Jews, (Lev. 23 : 34) to commemorate the Divine goodness in the Wilderness, and also to show gratitude for the rich fruits of the season. It was the most joyous of all tlie Jewish festivals, — so joyous that Plutarch mistook its character and called it a festival \n honor of Bacchus. There was a division of sentiment concerning Christ among those at Jerus. Some said, " He is a good man : vO^ , /ti(^f-v^v>^ ^WJL.^'V- dUtO AA>-OtA. rva>4.A.tA^KjL^ 4^ r)fc-^ (p. A^ / Z^ 119 others said Nay, but he deceiveth the people" (John 7: 12.) Another expression of John is noticeable: " How- beit no man spake openly of him for fear of the Jews." This refers to the Jews who opposed Christ. The peo- ple did not know which side to take, because it was un- certain wliat the Sanhedrim would do. Historic Points: 1. Christ takes u[> his discourse with the Pharisees where he liad left oft' (John 7 : 23) eighteen months before. The miracle to which he refers in v. 21, is the healing of the impotent man at Bethesda, which was followed by the cliarge of Sabbath-breaking. He here openly cliarges them with their purpose to kill him. 2. The emphatic statements in verses 28-31 of his Divinity. This gave great oftense to some, but no man laid liands on him, and many believed in him, asking ".When Christ cometh will he do more miracles than these which this man hath done ?" 3. The ofticial act of the Sanhedrim to arrest him, be- cause of his influence over the people. All this on the first day. Now we come to the second day — " that great day of the feast " which was the last. Jesus stood and cried : " If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink." The water which suggested this invitation is supposed to have been that which was taken from the pool of Siloam on each of the seven days and poured upon the ground in commemoration of the miraculous provision of water in the Wilderness. In it Christ saw a type of that Spirit which the world was to receive through him. The otiicers report to the Sanhedrim that they were unable to arrest him. The reason they give is remarkable: -'Never man spake like this man " — showing the strong impression Christ's personal bearing had made upon them. The answer is received with ridicule : " Are ye also deceived ?" Except for the remonstrance of Nicodemus (v. 51), the Sanhedrim would have condemned Christ, immedi- ately. To him they sneeringly replied : " Art thou also of Galilee? Search and look, for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet." But in the last statement they were mis- taken. §84. Woman taken in Adultery. Most critics reject the first eleven verses of the 8th of John. The external and grammatical evidence against it is very strong. Tres^elles 120 claims that it is not original with John, but is an ancient extra-canoiiical record of an actual fact. The passage is not in tlie Sinaitic, Peshito, A., B., or C, uncial MSS. It is found only in the Vatican MS. and some of the early Fathers. But it seems to accord too well with the chai-- acter of Christ, to be an invention. §85. Discourses in the Temple. The effect of striking out John 8: 2-11 would be to bring all these discourses on the last day of the feast. But it is more natural to con- sider the references in John 7 : 37 and 8 : 14 to relate to two different days. If this be correct, there are two prominent periods of teaching: (1) 8 : 12-21 (2) 8 : 21- 59. In the first, Christ proclaims himself the Light of the world. The Pharisees object to his bearing witness of himself, and say his record is not true. Our Lord proves its truth, a. by saying that the Father bears testimony of him; and b. by declaring his oneness with the Father. In the second, he discourses of his origin, of his going away and of their dying in their sins. He charges them with the design of killirig him, and alludes to the man- ner of his death in verse 28th : "When ye have lifted up the son of man." The pre-existence of Christ is asserted by him in ex- press terms. The Jews regard the declaration as blas- phemy and give way to rage. They tear up tiie stones from the Temple pavement to put him to death as a blas- phemer. But Jesus hid himself, and so got out of their way. §90. Healing of a man blind from, birth, on the Sabbath. Robinson postpones this till just before the Dedication. Butthe prevailing opinion isthat it cornesin immediately after stoning referred to in John 8 : 59. In proof of Messiahship, Jesus opens eyes of blind man. The Phari- sees after conversing with the latter, are enraged because he adheres to Jesus, and cast him out of the Synagogue. [Farrar, chap. 41, Vol. II.] The effect of this miracle was to produce a division among the people. Many of them claimed that he had a devil. Others, that a devil could not open the eyes of the blind. (John 10 : 19-21.) Qo^§^ The Sec enty sent oat. Tisch. places this section in the interval between Dedication and Tabernacles ; Wies. while Jesus is on the way to Tabernacles. Place : 121 Majority say Perea, some Gal. Best, Perea, Judea and Samaria. The design has a clear reference to Christ's coming once more to oft'er himself as the Messiah. Meyer : Tliis whole jonrney intended to present to the people opportunity for tinal decision. Andrews: Their mission was not only to preach tlie kingdom, but to proclaim the King. In addition, probably, a desire to accustom the disciples to their work, and familiarize the people with them as witnesses of the truth. Some say that the second order of church officers, viz., Presbyters, is here established. Wies. : The Seventy represent the calling of the Gentiles. Their mission was the counterpart of that of the Twelve. The latter chosen in reference to the twelve tribes; the seventy with ref."»rence to the seventy nations of the Gen- tiles for which prayers were offered, or the number may Ijave reference to the seventy- elders of Isi-ael, or to tlie Sanhedrim. But the leading idea seems to be a visita- tion of tlie whole countrv. (Vide Ebrard, pp. 322-3 ; Andrews, pp. 352-355; Farrar, Vol. II., ch. 42. Also comp. Gen. 10 and Gen. 46 : 27 with Deut. 32 : 8.) Objections : I. Silence of the other Evangelists, Lk. being the only one that mentions the Seventy. Ans : a. The objection would be valid if the Seventy had been set up as a permanent order in the church. Other Evangel- ists silent concerning a great portion of this period, but say nothing contrary- to Lk's account. II. Instructions to Seventy and Twelve so similar that the Evangelists give different accounts of same occur- rence. Ans : a. The instructions were similar because the duties were similar, h. But there is an important difference in the fact that a permanent commission was given to the Twelve but not to the Seventy. Ebrard : Address to Twelve has the character of induction into a permanent office, whereas that to Seventy has reference to a single task. III. Symbolical use of number Seventy is proof of a later date, and of artifice. Ans: Some number of mes- senger^ must have been chosen, and whatever it might be the Sceptics would be sure to find fault with it. §89. Tlie Seventy return. Difficult to assign this section with any certainty. The Seventy probably returned, hoo by two, bringing a glorious report (Lk. 10: 17-21.) §86. The Good Samaritan. Lk. 10: 25-37. In the parable Christ teaches that God may make distinctions 122 among men, but men may not. All men are our neigh- bors. Hence, we must do good to all men. Second Group of Parables : There are seventeen in all, closely connected and illustrating personal duties — four- teen of them peculiar to Lk. Three things worthy of notice: 1. Their appropriateness to the plan of Luke's gospel. They set forth God's mercy to sinners, and the duties consequent therefrom. Mt.'s group of seven all addressed to the people and the Disciples : Lk.'s intend- ed for publicans and sinners. Mt.'s relate to the king- dom of God ; Lk.'s point out the way of salvation. 2. Their appropriateness to the period of Christ's life, in which he finally offered himself to the nation. 3. They are directed against prominent errors of the Pharisees. Olassijicaiion of these Parables. They may be reduced to a four-fold division: L Those showing the love of God in Christ as the source of all blessing, a. To the poor and lowly — para- ble of Marriage Supper, b. As preventing grace — Lost Sheep, Lost Piece of Money, Prodigal Son. II. Those showing the means of obtaining God's mercy, and the resulting duties, a. Importunity in prayer — Friend at Midnight, Importunate Widow, b. Repentance and humility — parable of Pharisee and Publican, c. Watchful preparation — the Waiting Ser- vants (Lk. 12 : 27). d. Counting the cost — Building a Tower, c. Universal love to our neighbor— the Good Samaritan, f. [Jsing this world's o-oods without abusing them — Unjust Steward. HI. Those showing the judgments which follow neg- lect or abuse of God's mercy, a. Abuse of God's grace — Barren Fig-tree. b. Abuse of God's providence — Rich Man that built Laro^er Barns, c. Abuse of Wealth — Dives and Lazarus, d. Danger of partial moral refor- mation. Leads tc worse state than the first — Return of Unclean Spirit. (Lk. 11 : 24.) IV. Those showing that rewards and punishments are to be proportioned to fidelity of stewardship — Parable of Ten Talents — Mustard Seed — Leaven. Sections 48, 49 and 51 are parallel with Mt. 12, and for this reason Robinson treats them together. Vide small syllabus, p. 12. §91. Feast of Dedication. Previous to this feast, (John 10 : 22) Jesus had retired to Bethany in Perea. Why 123 return to Jerus. ? Not merely to keep the Feast, since the whole land kept it, but to confront the Pharisees. Not a feast of the Law, but instituted by Judas Macca- baeus, 164 B. C, in honor of the cleansing of the Tem- ple, and the rebuilding of the Altar, after the Expulsion of the Syrians. Season : The only feast in the winter- time, which, according to Wieseler, fell this year on Dec. 20. (Vide Farrar. chap. 45.) Ohrist was walking in this place because it was winter, the porch being part of the original temple which escaped destruction by Nebuchadnezzar. Scene interesting because it discloses the straggle in the minds of the Pharisees. " How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ tell us plainly." (John 10: 24.) Request not unreasonable for Christ had all along claimed the office, and cfeclaimed the title. Two views in regard to the spirit of the question : I. That it was insidious and dishonest, intended to draw out a definite claim of Messiahship so that they could have something definite on which to base their charges. II. That it was honest and fair. Christ had never told them positively that he was the Messiah, and now when challenged he still does not answer directly, because of their misconceptions. According to their understanding of the term he was not the Messiah. But he affirms his Messiahship to them in three ways : 1. He had told them before, and they did not believe him. 2. By refer- ring to the works he had wrought. 3. His gift to his sheep is eternal life, and he is the Son of God, one with the Father. This enraged the Jews and they took up stones to stone him. " But," says Farrar, " his undis- turbed majest}' disarmed them with a word." " Many good deeds did I show you from my Father ; for which of these do you mean to stone me ?" He then quoted the 82nd Psalm, where judges are called gods. But he executes a higher office. This seems to ascribe his Son- ship not to his nature, but to his being sent by the Father. Ans. : 1. The terms used imply his ^^re-existence. 2. Even if he does here advance only the lowest claim to the title, " Son of God," it is no proof that he does not elsewhere use it in highest sense. No one besides Christ ever says, "I and my Father are one." 124 Then they attempt to seize him, but Farrar says "they conld not. His presence overawed them. They could only make a passage foi- him, and glare their hatred upon him as he passed from among them." Because of the opposition Christ goes to Bethany in Perea, where John had been baptizing. The latter is meiitioned because a witness for Christ. How long he staid there is not known, but St. John tells us that many resorted to him and believed on him, being convinced of the truth of John Bap.'s testimony. (John 10 : 41-42.) (The sections from 95 to 101 were passed over.) §§92, 93. Raising of Lazarus. Counsel of Caiapkas. A message comes to Christ in Perea from the sisters of Lazarus, stating that their brother is sick. After two days Christ came to Bethany and found that Lazarus had been buried four daN's (John 11.) Theories explaining the time : a. Lazarus died on the day when the message was sent. Christ delayed two days, and then went to Bethany occupying one day with the journey. h. Christ received the message that Lazarus was sick, waited two days for his death, and occupied four days with the journey. Farrar takes the former view, mainl}- on the ground that Bethau}- in Perea, where Christ was, is only about 2D miles from the Bethany near Jerus., where Lazarus lived. He also infers that the family of Lazarus was one of wealth and position from its proximity to Jerus. and from the concourse of Jews who had come to sympathize with the bereaved sisters. (Farrar, chap. 47.) Opposition among the Jeivs : This is again referred to in the remonstrance of the Disciples against Christ's going up to Jerus. lest he should be killed. Thomas says: " Let us also go that we nuiy die with him." (John 11 : 16.) Christ goes up voluntarily to sacrifice himself. Design of the Miracle: To understand it aright, recall design of period — to give the people final opportunity of accepting him as Messiah. On the other hand, the peo- ple hesitated to come to a decision because the action of the rulers was uncertain. Christ's oVjject was to secure a decision of the people, for or against him. Hence the prayer at the grave of Lazarus, — " because of the people which stood by." (John 11 : 42.) This culminating {_y i^. ' V OJ^MJy- ^^^ ^^A^^AJ djviouu&A. -fyrr /bUX^L^^-v^^ (j) jLC/i <)-u>iaJ (^Irj /^M.A^u' (y^^-M^ '<-<-XMb o- ^iU> A>y--c<^A- jg^^^AJLc^-^^^-^.jz.A. lW ijl^^j^MX' t^ v-vi_fia>o<^ ^?ZlI7t>f^ yv^^"-/-*^ yt^-tf ^-t^d,^^-*^J>..^^sMA^'f'C>^cJ^J^''^ c<^ -l^-Jfy6l.,^tJ>, . >4>o^XA^ <-TjL. iUproJ-d. -"^-^-^ 'T'^^^^-r^ IrfyLie^-tn . /^ (1,cl£I^ a.cy^-^^-»^ 4tVv_Ct^c£€. d' OU.^ 0'^od ^ hJL&^ji 127 Jesiis, and especially because Lazarus was a living wit- ness of his power to raise the dead. Hence there is a convincing argument in the fact that the Syn., writing tirst, forbore to make this family prominent lest the}' should sufter persecution. This obstacle, however, no longer existed when John wrote. But it may be added danger to themselves seems never to have influenced the Evangelists to hide any of the facts of Christ's life. b. But a better answer is found in the settled plan of the Syn. not to relate any events oecuring at Jerus. until the closing week of Christ's life. They confine them- selves mainly to Gal. Min. Each tells the things most directly within his own scope. Hence Farrar : " Now since raising of Lazarus was no greater evidence, to them, of miraculous power than those which they recorded, and since it fell within the Judean cycle, the omission of the miracle is no more inexplicable than the omission of the miracle of Bethesda (John 5,) or the healing of the man born blind, (John 9.") Farrar, chap. 47. It is further objected that we cannot accept the Syn.'s account of the sudden burst of applause with which Jesus was received in Judea after the Gal. Min. : Mt. 19 : 1, 2. But notice that it is Feast-time when he reaches Jerus., and multitudes from Gal. are ah-eady there. Naturalistic Theory of the Miracle : 1. Not actual natu- ral death. Only a case of trance. " He is not dead but sleepeth" is to be taken literally. Renan claims there was actual collusion between Christ and the sisters. 2. The miracle grows out of a misunderstanding of the con- versation with Martha about the resurrection. Mifthical Theory : Strauss held this theory at first, but he at last adopted the Tubingen view mairdy. He says raising of Lazarus is a fiction based on one of Luke's parables. Baur and others say it is a creation of the 2nd century, and its germ was the expression, "I am the resurrection." But all these theories illustrate the credulity of unbelief, since any one of these views is harder to support than the plain Gospel narrative. (Vide Ebrard, pp. 351-358.) Christ retires to JEphraim. On account of the action of the Sanhedrim (John 11 : 47-54) Christ retires to the city of Ephraim, to delay the execution of the decree until his time should come. Where is Ephraim ? Some 128 say east of the Jordan. More likely near Jerusalem. Some identify it with the Ephraim in 2 Chron. 13 : 19, near to Bethel, or twenty miles north of Jerusalem. Josephus speaks of a cavalry expedition ot Vespasian by way of Ephraim to Bethel. (Vide Robinson's Greek Har. pp. 203-4; Farrar, Vol. IL, p. 176.) Intervening sections not touched upon. Vide small syllabus, p. 14. /| — ^ §107. Third Prediction of Christ's Death. This predic- tion more specific than in 74th or 77th section. Judicial death now predicted, to be accomplished by the help of the Gentiles, (Mt. 20; Mk. 10; Lk. 18.) He foretells the manner of his death, viz., by crucifixion, and predicts that he shall rise on the third day. He tells this to the Twelve alone. Mark notes the fear of the Disciples, chap. 10 : 32, from which it may be inferred there was something supernatural in Christ's appearance. PASSIOIs^ WEEK. Natural Divisions : 1. From the arrival in Bethany to the Passover Supper — six days. 2. From the Supper to the Crucifixion. 3. From the Resurrection to the Ascen- sion. Recorded in Mt. 2i-28 chajjs ; Mk. 11-16; Lk. 19-24; John 12-21. Space given by each Evangelist; Mt. little more than one third ; Mk. little less than one- third ; Luke one-fourth; John nearly one half. In many cases three, in some four parallel accounts. Characteristics of the Period : I. A period of voluntary sacrifice. Christ's hour is now at hand, and he submits voluntarily to be condemned and executed by his ene- mies. Seeks the most public places. Takes possession of the Temple, and for three days holds his foes at bay. All their former plots to take him had failed. But now, by an event accidental on their part, but designed on his, they are enabled to seize him, and he without resist- ance gives himself up to them. His death, therefore, voluntary, and hence sacrificial — a sacrifice for sin. No other theory can explain the facts. II. It is a period in which Christ prominently asserts his claims to the title of Messiah. This he does in three ways : a. Typically by securing the Hosannas of the multitude as he enters Jerus. h. Publicly during his trial, c. By his teaching. i^^^W JtL'CUe^\^i.yl..y^ Z*?"^ J^^^-T-L-^Vnj 129 III. Tlie Teacliing is siippleineiital and appropriate to the period. In all Christ's teacliing there is a marked ^ advance. We have here three kinds of teaching : a. ^ V'-'-'a^-^ The h^st of the three groups of Parahles. 1. Concern- ^lJ|;>-^-'^ ing "Kingdom of Heaven;" 2. The way of salvation ; 3. The Judgment, b. Final discourses against Phari- sees, c. Consolator}' instruction to Disciples. In Mt. these instructions largely pxojdl£tifi ; in John both pro- phetic and consolatory. Explains to them that he must go away in order tliat the Comforter maj come. Order of Eveids. The Evangelists governed by same plan. The order is alike in all four except in two instan- ces : a. John makes the Supper at Bethany the first event of the week, while Syn. place it on the eve of the third day. h. They differ as to the time of cursing the barren fig tree. In their plan, Mt. refers to prophecy, Mk. to details, by days, and Lk. is supplementary. Rul- ing idea is contrast between Christ's personal dignity and gentleness and his cruel treatment by the priests, rulers and people. Succession of daj/s. This is obtained from Mk, by count- ing back from the Passover Supper five days; and also from Jolin 12: 1. "Then Jesus six daj-s before the Pass- over came to Bethany." John's peculiar idiom means, literally six days. Notice we have in John a iceek both at the beginning and end of Christ's ministry. Mode of counting days involves two questions : a. Shall we count in both extremes? b. Was 14th Nisan, Tliursday or Friday? Did the Supper come on the day of the feast, or on the evening before? The day of Crucifixion, we have seen in the opening lectures on Chronology, was Friday, 15th Nisan. The Supper was the regular Paschal meal eaten on Thursday the 14th, Theories: 1, Wies., Lich,, Andrews count back six days from Thursday the 14th, excluding the latter which brings us to Friday, the 8th, as the day of arrival in Bethany. 2, Lange includes Thursday which gives the 9th, or the Jewish Sabbath as the day of Christ's arrival. Lange supposes that Christ halted on Friday a Sabbath- day's journey from Jerus. 3, Those who follow Bleek's arrangement, as Tisch,, Ell., Alford and Schaff, make Friday the 14th Nisan, But as they count backward six days excluding Friday the days of the week remain un- 130 altered. 4. Robinson holds Friday to have been the first day of the feast. Six days before would make the arrival in Bethany on Sunday, and he supposes the Jewish Sab- bath to have been spent in Jericho. Objections to Robinson : a. He begins a day later than any other Harmonist and compresses the 4th and 5th days into one. (Mk. 14: 1.) h. The feast did not begin on the 15th. (Levit. 23 : 5.) c. It is contrary to tradition which makes Palm Sunday the commemorative day of Christ's entrance into Jerus. Robinson makes the entrance on Monday, d. His own earlier editions take the other view. Farrar : " Thither (the loved home at Bethany) he arrived on the evening of Friday, Nisan 8, A. U. C. 870 (March 31, A. D. 30,) six days before the Passover, and before the sunset had commenced the Sab- bath hours." Vol. n. p. 188. Vide Andrews, pp. 396- 7-8. §§111,131. Supper atBethamj. John places this on the evening before the public entrance into Jerus. The Synoptists place it on the eve of Tuesday, or two days before the Passover (Mt. 26 : 2.) This difference alleged to be irreconcilable. Ans : Neither John nor the Syn. date the Supper positively. The six days of John do not date the Supper but the arrival in Bethany ; and the two days of Mt. and Mk. do not date the Supper but the betrayal of Judas. Farrar : " It is only in appearance that the Syn. seem to place this feast two days before the Passover. They narrate it there to account for the treachery of Judas, which was consummated by his final arrangements with the Sanhedrim on the Wednesday of Holy week ; but we see from St. John that this latter must have been hit* second interview with them — at the first interview all. de- tails had been left indefinite." (Farrar, Vol. II., p. 188, Note.) Robinson follows order of Syn. These are his rea- sons : 1. The offence taken by Judas at this feast was the occasion of his treason. Rulers had resolved to de- lay arrest. But Judas' proposal on Tuesday, (Supper on Tuesday eve.) gave them an unexpected opportunity. Ans : It does not appear that Judas went immediately to the priests. 2. The rore of Mt. — "then Judas went out." Ans: But TOTS is not always used by Mt. in reference to time. Xcr&'iC -.AJ^^^-*i^ Obx.^ -Uj^i^ hXj^^-^^SiAj olMWh 137 sole autliority. The second step in events of the week is found in events of this day. Christ does not yield possession of the Temple to force. When he goes it is voluntarily. Here we meet with efforts of the priests to destroy- his influence. It was necessary that his power should be thus tested, so that the subsequent surrender of himself should be clearly voluntary. The moral tri- umph of this day is the preface of his trial. Xotice 1. The assault of the Sanhedrim upon his authority. It is followed by three parables — the tw^o sons, the wicked husbandmen, and the marriage of the king's son. All set forth the character of the Pharisees and the nature of the judgment to come. ^..Crafty questions intended to involve him in ditticulty with civil authorities, and break down his influence. Attempts by Pharisees, Sadducees and lawyers. 3. Long judicial 'J'y\jyn^x.'i.A..,-^jty,..J\^ ^i^U? . / ^^^'^^^^M^-t-'-iW -i-Tn^-ts^Jvi^iU^^ "td'i^^.^L.*.^ _i^^^^t^cxL4^are introduced after Christ went away and hid himself, as ^,^ijjUr\A if they were something remembered. 2. Jesus stood and ' cried, which implies a great audience. §§127-130. Great Prophetic Discourse on the destruction of Jerusalem, the end of the world and the second advent. Having kept possession of the Temple tor three days and having been rejected bj' the Jews, Christ now leaves it finally. Seated upon the Mt. of Olives his disciples ^^-vvi-^Hto^P-i^t^ i^y^..'i>€LuLytQjL' JU-^ '^A^ d-t^-Ki^ ^ \Lt4juuO ^ MaX^ ' >J€LUJr<^ x£jL %^e^ /urty^^ ^:^X)3 UaA^' ^-ac^ *-uf^^ ^i^uiA^ (^^ ^iU/. --<.'<-^ciyh ' i-^»-^ ' ^ / U3 come to him and speak coiiceruing the Temple. His public teaching had ended, but there were two import- ant instructions to disciples. 1. The outward progress of the kingdom of Messiah until the second advent. 2. John 14-17 chaps, give the inward and spiritual condi- tions by which the outward triumph was to be secured. Such instructions naturally private, and necessary for completion of his church's preparation. In the O. T. prophecy, the advent, the outpouring of the spirit, the foundation of the church and the final triumph of the Messiah's kingdom are as a whole connected together. To the 0. T. prophecies concerning himself, he had, at different times, added his suffering, death and resurrec- tion, the persecution of his disciples and the necessity of patient self-denying labor. The great prophecy belongs therefore to the transition stage in the development of prophecy. It stands related both to the O. T. prophecies and those of Paul and the Apocalypse. Two things must be always remembered : 1. The main design of the discourse was practical, to induce patient watch- fulness. Hence a large part of Mt's 25 ch. is in form of parables enforcing this duty. Signs of the advent given are all negative. The disciples are to be on their guard against misunderstanding them. 2. The indefinite con- ceptions of disciples connecting the advent and the end of the world largely condition the form of our Lord's discourse. Tlie combination of these events is the great difficulty of the prophecy. Christ says " this generation shall not pass away before all be fulfilled." The dis- ciples' questions contain three periods according to the pre-millenial theory : 1. When shall these things be ? 2. What shall be the sign of thy coming? 3. And of the end of the world ? It is best to find only two periods with two correspond- ing questions. 1. When shall the destruction of Jerusa- lem be? and 2. When shall be the time of thy coming? with which the disciples naturally associated the end of the world. Relates other Parables — the stewards, the virgins and the talents. Parable of virgins teaches not only duty of watchfulness but of watchful preparation. Bridegroom delaying his coming shows that the time of the advent is distant. A current pre-raillenial theory encounters in /^'r~E>u-<-o-'^^'-^ L'^^^lA /t-'i--. J) /i^^^eyC^-'^^y^Lfy. -<:^-^ «pLcarT-^way a-.^.t^y^c^:-^-^.^^^M-^£^^^ ox^^viAiti^ Ti^yh 6n^l- ct-i^-il. ^ ^$L<^-.^^^J2_/ Q/xJMny^^^^ C-^^wv.<...,yJ5^ 149 fore that. c. Pointing out was while eating, but sacra- ment was after supper. Judas took wine as well as bread before he left. d. Lk. changes order. 1. To contrast spirit of Supper and spirit of disciples. 2. Mention of cup in V. 17 naturally leads him to describe the Supper. Exact lime of insfitutuu/ Sacrament. See Lightfoot for description of Rabbinical customs. Possible that Christ followed all the customs and observances, but still evi- dent that Lord's Supper was grafted on the Paschal Sup- per. Cannot identify exact time. Christ may have chosen to contrast the Supper. §133. Opening inords ami contention of the Twelve. They were seated — original rule to stand, reminding of haste in leaving Egypt. Christ in sanctioning this departure from the rule, teaches that we are not bound in unessen- tials. Prominence of Saffering. "With desire I have de- sired to eat this Passover witli 3'ou before I suffer" — hinting that his suffering is near at hand. Reason for the desire — " For I will not eat again until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God '' — makes last supper emphatic. He takes " cup of blessing " — not cup of sacrament, which is mentioned in 20 . v. Inference is unfounded, that Christ did not partake. Main idea of passage is in TtkTjpcodrj^^. Central point of economy of Redemption is reached — type fulfilled in presence of Antetype. N'otice allusion to the formulas offcast in t'jy^aoc(7zf]aa:;. Contention for pre-eminence. Objections to its occurrence. 1. Strauss and DeWette. Mentioned only in Lk. and the promise of exaltation is out of place. 2. Unnatural that such dispute should occur among disciples at such a time. Ans : It had occurred before, and clearly shows strong impression existing among theni even now of external nature of Christ's kingdom. Jesus rebukes their worldly spirit — teaching that only humility can exalt; commends fidelity and promises exaltation to thrones of judgment of twelve tribes. §134. Washing disciples' feet. It may have been done on entering, John 13: 1-20; hinted at in Lk. 22: 27. John puts it after receiving of wine. Three lessons : a. Proof of continued love of Christ. b. Example of humility, c. Implied sanctification — washing of grace, a part of Christ's service. J^iii only refers ^ o Judas's treachery 13 : 11. Ps. 41 : 9 fulfilled. — _, 150 §135. Pointing out the Traitor. Separation of Judas preceded the sacrament. Christ's distress very great at horror of the crime and sorrow for Judas. Announce- ment withheld till now that Judas may be kept near. Made noio : 1. To show Christ's foreknowledge, and make disciples believe after it occurred. 2. To be rid of .Judas' presence. 3. To carry out Christ's design of being crucified at the Feast. 4. As a warning to disciples and ail his followers. Effect on Disciples : At intimation of Christ that one of them should betray him — natural they should not suspect Judas. Ask eacli other " Is it I?" Translation does not give force of Gk. ; better read, " Lord it is not 1, is it ?" More simple and negative. Synoptists make each disciple ask it of Christ. John omits this ; says Peter beckoned to John to ask. Mt. and Mark give Christ's reply, " He that dippeth," &c. ; .John, " To whom I give the sop." Objections: 1. John's account does not imply private communication of Peter, and act of dipping together could not be distinctive. Ans : The act of simultaneous dipping could be so marked as to call attention to Judas. 2. If public sign given, it could not afterwards be said they did not understand his treason. Ans : Objection based on wrong conception of amount of their knowledge. They did not know that betrayal would lead to cruci- fixion. Andrews, &c., put questions of Syu. prior to that of John, and j:)oint to iniquity of deed. Again Mt. and Mk's description more general than John's. " Son of Man goeth ..... but woe, &c.," often quoted in proof of eternal punishment on ground that hope of salvation after ])eriod of disappointment would always render life desirable rather than never to have been born. Judas' s perplexiti/ : Feeling that the words were di- rected to him and seeing attention of disciples directed to him, he asks also, " Is it I?" — consummate hypocrisy. Night when he went out, implies quickness of his plan — time was God's, deed was Judas's. Also significant of darkness he was soon to enter. Christ's glorying is come. Departure of Judas was sign of his victory — and the beginning of his death and glory. " A new Com- /nandment ;" neiv not \n principle or in measure, but in degree and mode. Brotherly love among christians made test of discipleship — love flowing from faith in Christ. C^-CdJ^ c//^ OU:^ i-^W ya^^-2/W-^^.wtfV >^ x//.5M^. ^7 ^-^^-^--^-^^^^ £. ec^ Z:^ . <^ t:i-a-t/(iZ>^i/tXH^ ..(^y&-^^^vC^ .t..,^ ...J^JUlJl_^ ^CX-'ii^iV. 151 /37§1^. Prediction of Peter's denial and dispersion of (he Twelve. John relates denial in close connection with Christ's prophecy about goins^ away. Lk. in connection with strife for [jrecedence ; Mt. and Mk. after the sacra- ment, as if spoken on way to Gethsemane. Two alterna- tives : Robinson combines these — prediction uttered once and before sacrament. Mt. and Mk. therefore relate them retrospectively. Mej-er, &c., say, prediction was uttered twice to include twelve with Peter; at the Supper, John and Lk. ; and on waj' to Gethsemane, (Mt. and Mk.) Design of prediction to fortify disciples and prepare them for trial of their faith — their conception of Christ's king- dom was so mistaken, they needed to be humbled. This design shown also in Christ's appointment to go before into Galilee after his resurrection. What they did does not indicate utter apostasy — still sheep, though scattered. He will deliver them by interceding — " I have prayed for you that your faith fail not." The Cock's Growing. Mt., Lk. and John — " cock not crow ;" Mk., " not crow twice till thou hast denied me thrice." /36§i3^- The Eucharist. The last passover culminated in the institution of the Sacrament. It now becomes a commem orative and jjiit a typical ordinance. Changed by Christ in person, its celebration by his people in future will signify to them ; a. A memorial expfessive. ofjiis dying love, h. A pledge or seal of his covenant. c. To be partaken of by all on his authority and thus unite them to him. Shows man's inability to live a spiritual life. Needs an outward sign to strengthen weak faith. This rite is distinctive mark of Christians in all ages; sets forth Christ's death, and spiritual presence — " the life of the crucified Savior." Precise time not cer- tain. Paragraph in John so close that it is impossible to break it. Lange and Tisch. place it in 32 v, A more prevalent view is that sacrament came between 13 and 14 chaps, of John — confirmed by hymn being sung after- wards. Some associate the bread with the supper, and cup after — but more probable that the elements were not separated. Variations in words of record ; Lk. and Paul (1 Cor. 11 : 24) are alike ; Mt. and Mk. are alike ; but add, after distribution of bread the blessing of the cup. Explanation : Some think prayer was repeated — yet this was not essential to celebration or Paul would 152 not have omitted it. Bat the blessing or (hanksr/iving should be made fci- both elements. Sceptics magnify these discrepancies. But these words are repeated con- versationally and taken from Aramaic where ^'- is " isjiot expressed: "this my bod3^" Note also that 1. These variations give fuller idea to the meaning. 2. They allow freedom in celebration of the sacrament. 3. How are we to distinguish between binding acts in the ordinance and those not binding? Ans : a. Nothing actually binding which does not appear in each account, b. Nothing binding which is not intended to be such by Christ. 4. Is there distinction between breaking bread and pouring out of wine? The t vvo _acts are really one . Paul makes no distinction — neither without the other. Bread signi- fies nourishment of life. Wine shows more clearly atonement; jy blood of new covenant we are united to Christ. 5. Did Jesns commune? Lk. 22: 15. " Took cup and gave thanks," &c. Mey.'r and others think our Lord only gave to disciples and did not partake himself Alford, that he took of Supper, but not of Sacrament. Most think there is no distinction. He partakes with his people — as their head. " I will no more drink of it," &c., implies that he drank. — ' Sceptical Objections : Strauss admits a degree of proba- bility ill the occurrence of the Supper. Jesus may have instituted it as a raliyiiig:4)oint for his disciples. Others deny any evidence that it was"to be repeated as a bind- ing ordinance. It was only for disciples — had no refer- ence to the future. The celebration is due to and rests upon Paul's words (I Cor. 11 ch.,) written long after its adoption by the church and therefore must have grown up at a later period. Ans : 1. Perpetual observance is alluded to by the Syn. Mention of the Passover itself is enough. " My blood of the new covenant shed for many," has no meaning if confined to disciples. "I will not drink it until I drink it new in the kingdom," &c., referred by best exegesis to union and communion of Christ with his disciples. 2. Institution does not rest on divine communication to church alone, but on author- ity of the Twelve as inspired witnesses. It is thus one of the most important and authoritative monumental records. It was universal in the church from earliest times, must therefore have been established by the apos- Z,QyuJM^^>^-'^>Uyt-~ jdyZ[7[J<:j r:f^y^--^ry^ oc^<^U.Jt^)^cCc 6A.W.5& ^.^.u^^^,., ^^f:^^ ./...,^ yy/^ t^ / Y"^ ^d^.^A^ ^ 153 ties. Second Objection : John's Gospel leaves out the Sup- per, but gives washing of disciples' feet. Ans: John is supplementary. Strauss asks why then did he not leave out the feeding of the 5000, which is in all other Gospels? John would naturally be disposed to mention supper, especially on opportunity to correct a false representation. Ans: Supper already in church when John wrote and there- fore needed no mention. Strauss says too important. to be left out. Ans : It was not adapted to John's purpose, Strauss denies this. Others say John was ignorant of the institution. This supposition would accord with John's context but not with his practice. His purpose to record Christ's lono- discourses requies mention of feeding 5000. Omission of Lord's Supper only shows characteristic difference be- tween John and other evangelists. §§138-141. Final Discourse and Prayer. John's ac- count, 14-17 chs., to be inserted in Mt. 26 between 29 and 30 vs. ; in Mk. 14 between 25 and 26 vs. Different opinions : a. He went into a safe room unknown to Judas. b. Lange, &c., infer that John 14 was spoken at table, and remainder of discourse on way to Gethsemane. c. Difficulty then of separating discourse. When was hymn sung? Whether last thing before they went out, or after John 14: 31, or after the whole is uncertain. Historical jyosition and design of Discourses : A summino- up of Christ's teaching as a system — complete — connect- ed with \\\^ going away. It is our Lord's fullest expo- sitioiiof the cpiisequeiices of his resurrection and gift of ho\y Spirit — properly a transitional discourse. Per- soiTal position of disciples a type of the church— -they were in sorrow and fear. He teaches necessity of his going away and promises to send Holy Spirit to build up the spiritual kingdom he had established. Compare previous discourse m Mt. 24 and 25 on great prophetic day. Interval of vicissitudes and judgments between his death and second Advent, but inward life and knowl- edge of church were also to be extended. It combines the general elements with personal elements of tender- ness and love. Every distress of the believer finds relief in these chapters — germ of the Gospel. Meyer says no need to descend to proof of divine origin. 154 Common misconception in regard to the disciples thinking too much of what they oughtAohave been. Nar- rative guards against this ; Christ said so much in order that the spirit miglit bring to their remembrance what had been said. They were in trouble and in sympathy with their Lord, but did not understand their condition. The whole prophecy was addressed to their misconcep- tion. Analysis: Ch. 14, Christ goes to the Father, and promi- ses the Spirit — vs. 1-14 ; going to the Father, he would answer prayer — vs. 15-17; give Holy Spirit — vs. 18-24: does not imply separation from his dispiciples. 2.7~>o Conditions, vs. 25-26 : Inspiration ; vs. 2l-=Sjft. Bene- diction. Ch. 15, Christ the Vine: Fundamental work of the spirit, union with Christ. Those holding that he set out for Gethsemane after record in 14th ch., say figure was suggested to him by a vine on the roadside and by burning of pruned branches ; others, that he took figure from gold vine around the pillars of the Temple; others, with more probability, that association of the cup was sufficient. Vs. 1-11; Union, condition of fruitfulness and of God's love ; vs. 12-19; Union with each other; vs. 20-25 : Relation to the world; vs. 26, 27: Personal and official gift of Holy Spirit. Chp. 16, Work of Holy Spirit ; vs. 1-4, belong to last ch. ; persecution predicted ; vs. 5- 15: Work of Holy Spirit in the world to convince and guide the church to truth ; vs. 15-22 : Departure imme- diate ; vs. 23, 24 : Hearer of prayer; vs. 25-33 : Father's love and warning. Ch. 17, Sacerdotal Prayer : Vs. 1-5, for himself, that he may be glorified; vs. 6-11, for disciples that they might be one; vs. 12-19, that they might be sanctified; vs. 20-23 prays for all believers ; vs. 24-26, that they might be brought to his glory. .^142. Gethsemane. The Syn. record the agony in the Garden. After singing the Hallel, Christ descends to the streets to go to Olivet. A cold night — Peter warmed himself; and it was moonlight, for the Passover was at full-moon. Preparation completed, he went according to his custom to Olivet to spend the interval in prayer. Passing out of the eastern gate, he descends to the brook Kedron, (fr. xedfjoz, cedar, or to be dark) now red with blood of sacrifice ; a stream dry in Summer, but J IaSL^ ytyU-i^yUL- ^ ~AAyuu}(^ ^ P • iJ -iy^xy^UiJ^- " 155 swollen in Winter from n'in ; its bed 60 to 80 feet below the present surface. Crossing this they reach y^iopeov, a cultivated spot — Gethsemane — surrounded by a stone wall, 150 or 160 feet high, situated half a mile from the city wall. Objection : Too near the city for retirement. Ans : It may have been concealed by trees. Traditional site contains eight olive trees said to have been growing ill time of Christ, and the tax-levy on which can be traced up to occupation of Jerusalem by Arabs in seventh cen- tury. Leaving the rest to pray, he takes Peter, James and John to witness his sorrow: prays alone, returns, finds them asleep ; remonstrates " Could ye not watch with me one hour?" "The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak." Some say this is an apology for their weakness ; others that spiritual or regenerated nature was willing but corrupt nature weak; others, sleep due to force or depth of personal feeling. But Jesus evidently treats it tr^ as a weakness. The prayer : Mt. and Mk. sa}' it was thrice repeated " falTing on his face." Lk. says •' kneel- ,.^^^ ing duwn " and intimates no repetition — an angel ap- - ^-^^ peared and he prayed more intensely. Lk. adds also, " his sweat was as it were great drops of blood." Some say, like blood, i. e., in large drops. More commonly understood as blood-colored — showing sympathy of his physical with spiritual nature; agony caused palpitation of heart, weakening the frame so that blood oozed from the pores and colored the sweat. Prayer for relief not to be explained away ; it was real and sincere. " Thy will be done ;" same words he taught his disciples. These words play conspicuous part in discussion of Per- son of Christ — being exhibition of weakness of his humanity. No authority to restrict the " cup " to sufler- ings in Gethsemane — refers also to his death. Mk. says this hour, i. e. appointed season of the passion. That suffering was natural anguish upon approaching death, is lowept view and unsatisfactory, giving ground to infi- dels who say others not having as lofty notions as Christ died more nobly. Strauss makes it derogatory to char- acter of Jesus and considers accounts given only as opinions. Renan suggests a moral ground for his suf- ferring — his disappointed expectations, and sorrow for his people. None of these theories sufficient to account 156 for fact. Suiferiiig therefore must have been for sin. His anticipations, though great, were exceeded by realit}'. This excess of anticipated distress not superfluous. Some suggest its important relation to agony on the cross ; showing suffering as moral in nature, not merely physi- cal. But suffering in garden was greater than at cruci- fixion — throws light also on mind of Jesus and gives im- portant examples. Notice : First trial — in blood-like sweat — was private. His inevitable anguish hidden from profane eyes of men ; at cross he was as a lamb led to slaughter. Objections : 1. Discrepancies between Mk. and Lk. 2. Lack of sympathy in the discourse. S.John passes over agony entirely. 4. Main Objection : Synoptists' account inconsistent with John 14-17 chaps, especially in prayer ; not only an impossible change of niood but a falling from state of strength and majesty to one of doubt and con- flict ; hence either one or both accounts not historical. 5. Unnatural for Christ to deliver a long discourse at such a time and impossible for John to remember it. Strauss, more consistent than the rest, considers it a myth, and makes these its stages : a. After the Passover, rev- erence of believers led them to think Christ's sufferings were foreknown to him. 6, He not only foreknew, but had actually experienced them, c, Had also intended them beforehand. Ans : No real difficulty ; John says he speaks ; Syn., agonizes. No change of purpose but of feeling. Perfection of human nature would tend to change state of mind, while steadfast purpose under all suffering proves his divine nature. Reasoning of Rationalists Suicidal. They say natural anguish at approaching death not sufficient to account for his intense suffering. They therefore admit the his- torical fact of the suffering. But this snfferino; is unac- countable except on ground of union of divine and human in Christ, and his suffering for sin. As long as history stands, sceptics are condemned. §143. Betrayal and Arrest. Jesus, returning from prayer the third time, and finding the disciples asleep, says " Slefep on," and yet adds, " Arise." Sudden transition explained : a. As only a question : '• Sleep ye on still ?" (Gresweil and Robinson); b. As ironical (Calvin, Meyer) : c. Better to suppose interval of time elapsed between the (3-'^.\.^&' ^A-LA.-^ '^T^-t.-ot-^l- ^ /t.Le.-4_.,-c-<-Ajis_£-'e,^^xZ_<9---i..-,.__ ■ 157 sentences. From his elevated position he sees the ap- proaching procession after he spoke first. He then adds, " Rise, let us be going." Mode of Betrayal : As Christ pointed out traitor by •' a aop," Judas points Him out by " a kiss." Judas was at work while previous dis- course was going on. Priests still afraid of people, who would likely be about the streets on Passover night. Judas directs the priests. Mk. and Mt. say a crowd; Jno. a band and leader. Was it a Temple watch of Levites, or a Roman troop? More likely the latter, as priests would get these on the plea of keeping peace. John says they came with torches; 3'etit was moonlight. Ko inconsistency because they expected to search in secret places. John says Jesus went forth and said, " Whom seek ye?" They fell (0 the (jround. Some regard this as effect of personal power of Jesus on their feelings. But words show it was miraculous — his answer to their display of force. Some charge that it was a theatrical display of power which he did not intend to use. Ans : A miraculous evidence of divinity appropriate to the occasion, and served also to shield the disciples. Ques- tion of harmony : John says Jesus immediately surrender- ed ; Syn. say Judas gave a sign. Some think he surren- dered, and then Judas, to keej) his wor(], gave the kiss. Judas may have advanced too far bej'ond his companions, who could not notice the kiss, and therefore waited till Jesus came forward and addressed them. Robinson, Alford, &c., put incidents in John 18 : 4-9 before Judas' kiss. More probable that kiss was first. Peter' s Sword : Christ rebukes him and heals the servant. John gives names. Syn, make Christ refer to cup of Gethsemane which John had not related. Lk. adds another class of persons — priests, elders and captains of Temple. These may have been present from first and taken no part, or have arrived subsequently. Flight of Disciples needs explanation. They could not understand all the predic- tions. Until now they had always seen Christ victorious, and seeing him make no resistance are thrown upon their faith which tails them. To understand their action, must look from their standpoint. The young man with linen garment — mentioned only by Mark. Wh}' insert this when so much else of importance? Ans: a, Inci- dent is a stroke of reality. When the mind is aroused 158 the smallest thin^^ will strike it. Minute things confirm the account. 6, A familiar incident in court of justice. Garment a common night dress, conspicuous. It attracted the men and they seized it, when he fled naked, c^ The young man was John Mark himself (Lichtenstein.) Omits name from modesty. This removes all difficulty, Likely, for his mother was living in the city. Lange thinks he owned the vineyard and had been asleep in the w^atch tower. §144. Jesus led to Annas. Difficulties in harmony are here presented, Jesus is led before Annas and examined before Caiaphas. Jews are under necessity for haste. The arrest is contrary to law, and they are afraid to hold him prisoner on account of the people and his own mirac- ulous power. While one part engaged with Judas, another notifies the Sanhedrim. Their plan — to secure sentence of death before an ecclesiastical court, then as matter of form receive permission to execute it from the civil court. If Sanhedrim sentenced him on charge of blasphem}', the people would be gained to their side. Plan almost succeeded, but was made subservient to foreordained plan of God. Difference in accounts : Each gospel has its own plan ; Mt. contrasts Christ as Messiah and King with his rejection by the people; Mk. gives vivid descriptions of particular events, e. g., of Peter's denials; Lk., human maltreatment of Jesus contrasted with his dignity and love. So much is recorded in the different accounts, and each having a difi:'erent design necessitates differences; but a knowledge of all removes all difficulties. Three stages in the ecclesiastical trial : 1. Preliminary questioning by High Priest. 2. Trial before Sanhedrim. 3. The sentence and resolution to take Him to Pilate. Mt. and Mk. thus give the order: Before Caiaphas, Peter's denials. Sanhedrim in morning. Lk. gives; Peter's denials, the mocking, the morning trial. f-N Jno. gives : Meeting with Annas as the first High Priest, Peter's first denial, examination, Peter's denials. Mt. and Mk. alike, except Mk. omits name of High Priest. Jesus is charged and condemned by His own confession. Lk. differs, giving Peter's denial, then the morning trial, account of which is almost same as that given by Mt. and Mk. of council and trial held at night. 1. Question of Harmony is between Syns. and Jno. Jno, represents ^/^l 159 Jesus before Annas; Syn. before Caiaphas. Is Jno. 18: 13-24 a preliminary examination before Annas, cr only before him to be sent by him to Caiaphas ? Wieseler, Tisch., Ell., Lan^e, &c. consider it one examination. But this difficulty arises : Syn. say Peter's denials occurred in house of Caiaphas, and examination and denials were at same place at same time. Hence Meyer and Blackie consider this an irreconcilable contradiction. One sup- position, however, removes all difficulty : Annas and Caiaphas occupied same house. No improbability in this. Annas was old man and father-in-law to Caiaphas (Stier, Ebrard, Alford, &c.) Solution : John's examination was also in house of Caiaphas. «, John's form of expres- sion — gives long description of Caiaphas, only naming Annas. They led him to Annas first, as father-in-law to Caiaphas. Again, John and Peter follow Jesus; John knowing the High Priest entered his palace, and through- out describes the questioning as before High Priest, who was Caiaphas. Passage therefore is easy if we admit that Annas sent Jesus to Caiaphas at once. 6, The de- nials of Peter are thus explained : Syn. and John repre- sent them in hall of Caiaphas. c, Objections to this view an argument in its favor; v. 24, "Now Annas had sent him bound to Caiaphas, the High Priest." In beginning they took him to Annas. Natural then to conclude that whatever occurred before v. 24 happened before Annus. On the other view the aorist aTtsazedev must be translated as a pluperfect, " had sent ;" but no need for forcing tense thus. Statement (vs. 24-28) must be taken parenthetic- ally in connection with the blow of the hand. He Was bound and therefore defenseless. Most harmonists take this view. Preliminary Examination, probably during interval be- fore Sanhedrim could assemble. Robinson's plan adopted, though he obscures plan by grouping Peter's denials by themselves. Why should Jesus be taken before Annas at all ? Because he was father-in-law to Caiaphas and a man of influence and ability. In questioning, Jesus might show ground for accussng him. The examination was informal. John shows it to be such, evidently, what- ever view was taken. The High Priest's questions are concerning his doctrine and disciples ; dtdayrj;; includes substance and mode of teaching. Christ's answer, as in 160 the garden, shielils the disciples. His teaching had always been open. " Ask thern which heard me." He disappointed the purpose of the High Priest and he was struck by an attendant, and onlj' returned a rnild rebuke. Violence having commenced, steadily increased. Objec- tion to John's accowii : He omits examination of witnesses and forms of trial as given by Syn. as well as Christ's avowal of Messiahship. Hence gives no issue to the trial. Ans: a, John adheres to his sjjjjpje mentary plan. 6, Conchision is involved iti 19 ch., 7 v. : " We have a law, and by our law he ought to die." c. Charge of blasphen^y was not real ground on which Caiaphas consented to crucifixion — but consent of Pilate. Peter's Denials: In John, during first examination; Mt. and Mk. postpone them till the formal trial. All agree it was at night, before cock crew. Lk. therefore puts denials first, because failure of the disciples' faith in him was no small element of his sufltering. John tells how they gained admission to the palace — one of them being known to the High Priest. They were soon sep- arated, Peter warms by the fire in the court. First Denial: ISTo special difficulty. Addressed by damsel or portress, whose attention was probably attracted at his entrance. No one joined her in her accusation. Sicniid Denial: Went to tlie porch afterwards when the cock crew. Mk. same girl ; Mt. anotlier ; Lk. a man. John, " they." Probable that portress addressed him again in presence of another maid who joined in — others repeat it. Thir d- Denial : An interval perhaps of an hour had elapsed. Peter, to allay suspicion, joins in conversation and betrays his Galilean language. Kir)sman of Malchus (John) begins to accuse him, andisjoined by bystanders. Charge now made by so many, and on good grounds, threatens immediate danger, and^Peter therefore denies with oaths. Cock crew about 3 a. m. Sceptics say eight or nine denials; but the charges may have been many, with only three denials. " Looked upon Peter." Jesus was in the large hall, Peter in the court in sight. Or it may have occurred as Jesus was passing from Annas to Caiaphas. See Andrews, p. 491, seq. §145. Jesus before Sanhedrim. Mt. and Mk. put meet- ing of Sanhedrim and condemnation before Peter's deni- als, as if at night, and distinguish a reassembling in the ^^ytaiUy^-^-- r^-^^-^--^-^ ^Ui^lyy^ ^-^-^^-^ ^---' t^Cf-i^^^'v fiAytU^r -1 165 " Sou of God " always aroused violeneo, e. 2j., at the feast of the Jews (John s": 17,18) : in Galilee (Jo1in 6: 40, 41 ; at Dedication (John 10 : 30, 31) : Jews not sure he is the Christ (John 10: 24.) Now first asserted before his enemies, when he intends to abide consequences. Culmi- nates in a long conflict between him and the priests who would have accepted him had he accommodated himself to their views of Messiah. Effect : 1. His^h Priest rent^ his clothes, forbidden by Lev. 10 : 6 and 21 : 10. Farrar says : " But Jewish H'dwha considered it lawful in case of blasphemy (1 Mace. 11 : 71 ; Jos. B. J. 2: 15 : 4.") 2. All vote him " worthy of death." From Lk. 23 : 51 sjrae except J()se[)h of Arimathea from C^onncil. Saj' he was not called. Probably both he and Nicodemua present. Even small minoritiesmay be riijht. 3. Buffet and mock him. They " struck him in the fac o,'* •' spit in his face," " smote him with the palms of their hands, sayino; Pro- phesy, etc." Does this occur twice. Robinson, Grass- well say once. Probably parallel : 1. Improbable Luke would represent violence occurrintr in resfular court. 2. Position in narrative explained by contrast of men mocking, with Peter weepincr bitterly. B y wh om ? Mt. sa^-s indefinitely, " they;" Mk. says "some ;" Lk., " the men that held Jesus." Inference that Sanhedrim did it first, and Roman officers or soldiers followed their ex- ample. »J«ws reject this interpretation. Where occur? Some say in prison ; Laii^ in guard room of priest's house. The-^e are only guesses. Strauss says mockerv a myth founded on Is. 53, " braised for their inirpiities, . etc." (^ §146. Morning Meefhifi of Sanlmlrim. (Lk. 22:66-71.) On Friday 15th Nisan, \Vieseler, Lange, Robinson ; 14th Nisan, Bleek. Was this an informal consultation, or a Continuation of night session ? Or was all by daylight, or a new meeting very early ? In our view a new meet- ing for three-fold purpose : 1. To convince bystanders. 2. The Oral Law ordained trial by daylight, Zohar 56. Farrar: " And they who could trample on all justice and all mercy were yet scrupulous about the infinitely little." 3, T« consult how to put him to death. Farrar: " His 3d actual but His first formal and legal trial," and in a note — "It is only by courtesy that this body can be 166 regarded as a Sanhedrim at all. Jost. observes that there is in the Romish period no traces of any genuine legal Sanhedrim, apart from mere special incompetent gather- ings. (See Jos. Ant. XX. 9. §1 : B. J. IV. 5, §4.)/' The question " Art thou the Christ ?" and his answers read as though reff rring to a former trial. Then they " bound him " and led him to Pilate, a transfer from eeclesiastica! to civil court. Their evidence of his Messianic claim established. Strauss retains trial, on charge of over- throw of existing institutions, and condemnation for claim to be Messiah. Some Jews maintain that as they had not power of life and death, responsibility rests on /Romans. §151. Judas hangs hirpself (Mt. 27: 3-10, Acts 1 : 18, 19). Robinson transposes suicide till Christ was given up to be crucified. " Till then he had hoped, perhaps, to enjoy the reward of his treachery, without involving himself i" the guilt of his master's olood. Mt. places it here. Better to follow order ot Evang. till proof to con- trary. Introduced as showing by striking example the effect of ill-treating Christ ; also brought by Mt. in con- trast with re[)entance (.)f Peter. Another testimony to innocence ot Christ (Mt. 27: 4.) Lange, as symbolical of the suicide of tlie nation. Theory that condemnation of Christ took Juiias by surprise inconsistent with spirit of his own confession (v. 4) and every fact of case. Casts money in the Ploly Place, where he l)ad no right to enter — intent to return it to them. Significant that blood-money returns to Temple, Christ's body. Differ- ences: 1. Mt. says ''hanged Ijimself" — Peter (Acts 1: 18) "falling headlong, he burst asundoi- "— not incon- sistent if he hanged iiimself and rope or branch broke. 2. Mt. says "priests bought." — Peter: "Now tlu^ man purchased a field." Farrar : " There is in a great crime an awful illuminating power. In Judas as in so many thousands before and since this opening of the eyes which followed the consummation of an awful sin to which many other sins have led, drove him from remorse to despair, from despair to murder, from u)urder to suicide." Robinson "In Acts 1: 18 ixr/jaazo is to be ren- dered : he gave occasion to jiurchase. Analogous t*j Mt. 27: 60; John 3 : 22 ; 4:2, etc." f^'^^c^-dJl^.c^c^j^r^ 1 ^^.ju^^^.^^^ 6ts^-Ci.^xA,.d-yT/ ^SA^ixjz-^ -Ctj>^'^^ <>Mi!UvO H-y^ c^-thpUaj ,ph ^LL..t£j> vw..^^ y.^.^.^^ -^ (t^c/ fe f^-cfc* 167 §146. (resumed.) Jesus before PUaic. Had Sanhedrim tlie power of life and death ? No. 1. Distinctly stated in John 18 : 31 and confirmed by Talmud (Berachoth f. 58: 1— see Buxtorf Lex. Tal. p. 514.) 2. Im[)OSsible that the Romans would leave them such power. 3. Accounts best for anxiety to procure Pilate's con- sent. Dollin2:er thinks they had this jjower but could not [lur to death at feast time. Objection : Sanhedrim stoned Steplien. This, however, was the tumultuous act of a mob. Paul atter being tried by Sanhedrim was sent to Rome. Two results accomplished by Providence : 1. Christ's death by crucifixion (John 18 : 32.) 2. Par- ticipation by Gentiles. Pilate was fifth Procurator of Judea wliich was a hard country to govern. Not under Questor, nor was it a proconsnhir or imperial province. Pilate in- sulted the Jews, a. by removing army and images from Csesarea to Jerusalem (Jos. Ant. 18: 3, §1.) b. By ex- pending sacred money — Corban — on aqueducts (Jos. B. J. 2 : 9^ §4). c. By setting up in Jerusalem shields dedi- cated to Tiberius^Pliiio. Legat. ad Caium §38) (/. By mingling the blood of Gableans with their sacrifices (Lk. 13[:1) Rennned A. D. 36 (same year as Caiaphas), by Vitellius, Le'..:ate of Syria, on accusation of Samaritans for iiaving slain many while assembled on Mt. Gerizim (Jos. Ant. 18: 4, §§1, 2). Eusel)ius says, wearied with misfortunes, he killed himself. Traditions: 1. Banished to Vienna Allobrogum, where there is a pyramid called Pontius Pilate's tomb. 2. At Mt. Pilatu- by the lake of Lucerne, plunged into dismal lake at the summit. (See Smith's Diet.)'' Has strong conviction of innocence of Jesus and en- deavors to free him. He is impressed by Christ's claim to be the Son of God, and by his wife's dream. Pilate is perplexed by the Priests accusing, while the people are favoring Christ. His great fault is cowardice. He acted from policy and not from priiiciple "(Chrysos). Collateral evidence in Tacitus Ann. 15 : 44; Per pro- curaiorem Pontium Pilatum suppUcio aff'ectus erai.^' Also known from Justin, Tert., Euseb., that Pilate made re- 168 port to Tiberius (of Christ's trial and condemnation), which is lost. " Acta Pilati " now extant, spurious. Accusation of Sanhedrim. Still early when they lead Christ to the Prsetoriuni, whicli is generally understood to be the white marble palace of Herod ; by some (Ewald, Meyer, Lange), the tower of Antonia. In John 19 : 13, '• the Pavemeut," outside of the Prpetorium. Bears on direction of Via Dolor'>sa. Jews did not enter Prsetoriurn lest they should be polluted for Passover. John 18: 28, not [.roof it was Nisan 14th. So Pilate goes out to them. Synoptists give general description; John gives conversati(U) between Pilate and the Priests, also between Pilate and Je^us. Farrar : " The last trial is full of passion and movement : it involves a threefold change of scene, a threefold accusation, a threefold acquittal by the Romans, a threefold rejection by tlie Jews, a threefold warning to Pilate and a threefold effort on his part, made with ever increasing energy and ever deepening agitation, to baffle the accusers and to set the victim free." Pilate and the Priests First attempt is to obtain as a favor crucifixion of Christ. Charge of blaspheiuy against God notsufficient before heathen Pilate, and they had no other. "What accusation bring ye?" If he were not a malefactor etc., implies guilty of no ordinary crime. Pilate is sarcastic; ''take ye him and judge him." If you condemn, you must bear the responsibil- ity. I execute, when I judge. Jews say "• not lawful for us." Then began they to accuse him (Lk. 28: 2 be- tween John 18 : 32 and v. 33) of perverting the nation, forbidding tribute, and claiming to be king. Notice: 1. Not same charge as before Sanliedrim. 2. Charge false in fact. They knew Christ taught submission to the government. 3. Ignominious, as Priests advocate that for which they condemned Christ. Pilate and Jesus go within the Prpetorium. Pilate did not trust the Jews; knew they would not condemn Christ for treason against the Romans, — endeavors, ac- cording to Roman law, to obtain confession of accused. Synoptists give affirmation. John fuller : " Art thou a king then ? " Could not say "no." Pilate might not understand " yes." Reply : " Sayest thou this of thy- self?" Design : Hengst., Stier, to arouse Pihite's con- \^<.^'C^xM^ -^x>ty^J^-AJ L,^--Xv^ ,(LA>^^v\^(^^/i/(\ yL^— — OJuUj^e '^ -^-^S^-^--^ .^Ce^jx^^J ^ iLUjJ ^Y^-^^-"^^ ■ 169 science. Meyer, Christ demands who is his accuser. Olsh., Lange, to bring out sense in which Christ put the question. Jesus makes clear that his kingdom is not of this world. Pihite, "thou art a king then?" deprecating accent on then. Ans: "Thou sayest it . . . every one that is of the truth heareth my voice." Pilate's famous question, " What is truth ?" Whether in earnest (Chrysos.), impatient (Farrar), contemptuous (Meyer), skeptical, or indifferent, Pilate gives additional testimony to the innocence of Christ: "I find in him no fault at all." Priests enraged make new chrages. He stirreth up the people, beginning from Galilee (Lk. 23:5). Pilate hearing the word Galilee, eagerly dismisses him to Herod. Second effort to release Jesus. Objections: 1. Synoptists give Pilate's question to Jesus, rt6' {>' outside; John says in the Prfetorium. Ans: Synoptists give genei'al account, do not say \twas outside. No contradiction. 2. How did John know private inter- view ? Ans: He was present, or Pilate reported, or Jesus stood at the door and all heard, or some prosecutor was voluntarily within. Strauss, all an invention of John. Baur finds a tendency of Evangelist to throw guilt on Jews. 3. The narratives separately unintelligible. Ace. to John, Pilate's questions to Jesus before accusa- tion. Ans : John assumes possession of Synoptists — — also, Pilate knew much of Jesus. Whole city in ex- citement. In Synoptists, Jews accuse, Jesus admits and without investigation (mentioned by John),' Pilate pro- nounces liim innocent. John supplements not contra- dicts. §147. Jesus before Herod. (Lk. 23 : 6-12). Priests disappointed. Pilate sends Christ to Herod : 1. To get rid of a troublesome case. To keep from ofi'"iiding the priests. Other motives subordinate. Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee, was in Jerusalem to keep the Pass- over. Receives Jesus with curiosity. A frivolous, un- scrupulous, dissolute monarch, sensuous and murcurial in character, susceptible of religious impressions, unwill- ing to renounce sins. Shows no appreciation of the case ; hoped to see a miracle. Had Christ worked one miracle here or before Pilate he might have caused his release. Reserve of Christ sublime, Herod is disap- 170 pointed and sends Jesns back with scorn. Jndas, Priests, Pilate and Herod all testify to his innocence. He is mocked and arrayed in cloak. Color? lap.7Z(i6.v — bright. If white, means innocence or a candidate for ofHce : if red. royalty. Probably red military robe. Shows mock- ery.' Fnltillment of Ps. 2. (See Acts 4 : 26-27). Herod and Pilate made friends. Enmity probably because of Galileans slain (Lk. 13 : 1). Wliere Herod lodg-ed doubt- ful ; probably in old Herod Palace, Pilate in the new. Objections: 1. Why was Jesus sent back ? Ans : Olsh., because birth in Bethlehem was ascertained. More likely, could not find ground to condemn him, would not oppose Priests by acquitting, so preferred to return Pilate's compliment. 2. Why mentioned by Luke only? Strauss, because it neyer happened. Ans : Not essential to history, ^o effect except additional humiliation and new testimony to innocence. §148. Pilate' s third e fort to release Jesiis. (Mt. 27: 15- 26; Mk. 15: 6-15: Lk. 23: 13-25; John 18:39,40). Synuptists full. .John two yerses. Mt. and Mk. contrast Jesus and Barabbas. Pilate proposes to chastise and re- lease him; a compromise between sense of justice and fear of insurrection. Not succeeding, proposes to release a criminal, according to custom at Passover. People, influenced by Priests'(Mt. 27: 20), denjanded Barabbas. Pilate had been warned by misgivings of conscience. Now a second solemn warning in the dream of his wife. Again urges release; failing, he yields him to be cruci- fied. Notice, Pilate comes out and takes a seat on the bench (Mt. 27 : 19) in a place called " Pa.vement," Gab- batha (John i94^)r 3 probably, portable, mosaic pave- ment (Cfesar carried one) in definite locality Gahbatha. Where ? Lightfoot, outer court of Temple, i. e. of Gen- tiles. Common opinion — open space before Prffitorium. Not secret, examined in their presence ; acquits him fully. If innocent why punish? May have thought him worthy of some punishment, and wished to please the Priests. Now proposes to treat him as guilty — fatal step. Expects support of the people to release him but is disappointed. No custom known of releasing at feast. Originated probably with Pilate. Ewald, to commem- orate deliverance from Egypt; others, an allusion to scape-goat. Not so; scape-goat referred to Christ. Was qJ /i^coIqaJ ^^f^^,,^,,^.,,^ ^ -^^^^^-v^. ^-^^ Ax .Z^fLt. ^"^-e- 7, Jh / • ^>^<^ Li-a-^K ^0 171 Barabbas mentioned first by Pilate (Mt. 27: 17), or by people (Lk. 23: 18)? Ans: By Pilate, as Mt. is most specific. People choose. Note 1. Barabbas guilty of crime charged against Christ. 2. Hypocrisy of Priests confessed in choice of Barabbas, a murderer, political and social disturber. 3. Christ's purity in strong con- trast. Barabbas probably a zealot, making insurrection against the government. Name — Son of the father, dish, supposes he was a false Messiah. Syriac version reads Jesus — Barabbas, which reading is adopted by Tisch., Meyer and Schafi". Accounted for by supposi- tion that he was pseudo Messiah; rejected by Lachm. Treg. Popular mind changed ; now demands Barabbas. Meanwhile cotnes message from Pilate's wife (Claudia canonized by Greek Church). A disturbing morning dream (ar^usnov). Some say suggested by God's spirit ; others, by Devil to avert crucifixion because of conse- quences. Bible does not attribute foreknowledge to Satan. Proves Pilate not unimpressible. Pilate remonstrates, but is overborne by the tumult. The voice of the peo- ple and the chief priests prevailed. Choice of people renders rejection of Clirist national. How account for change of popular mind towards Jesus? a. People at entrance to Jerusalem mostly Galileans, now Jerusalem- ites. Inadequate reason as from narrative we infer that people as a whole do both. b. Hatred of Romans, and unpopularity of Pilate. People side with their own priests. c. Christ now convicted of blasphemy. d. Fundamental reason, disappointment'l)f Missianic hopes. At Christ's entrance, looked for external kingdom. Now humiliated, condemned, mocked. Might defend himself by n:>iracles but refuses. His own disciples forsook him and fled. While this explains, it is no excuse for their conduct. Nothing can wipe away the stigma, the great sin of the world by vox populi. Why did they cry " crucify," when this was not a Jew- ish mode ? J. A. A.: Jesus was substituted for Barab- bas, who was to be crucified. It was simply because they expected the Romans to perform it. They thus de- nationalized themselves. Handwashing by Pilate, given only in Mt. 27: 24. Andrews transposes to John 19: 15 (§150). Tisch. and Rob. follow Mt's order. Objected to 172 as Jewish practice (Deut. 21 : 6-9). Ans: Also lieathen (vide. Livy 37 : 3, Ov. Fast. II. 45); a natural symbolic act, evidence of Pilate's inner convictions. Compare words of Judas and Pilate. Judas: "I have betrayed the innocent blood." Priests. " See thou to that." Pilate: "I am innocent of the blood of this just person : see ye to it." Then the terrible imprecation by all tlie people, " His blood be on us and on our children." This curse fulfilled in history of Jews to this day. Strauss says imprecation invented later to account for destruction of Jerusalem. Ans: There is no real aro^u- ment against its historical character, for it arises natuially in the struggle between Pilate and Priests; it is not needed to account for the destruction of Jerusalem (this long ago foretold); it explains Pilate's readiness in giv- ing up Christ and releasing Barabbas. Pilate proves false to traditionary Roman tolerance in religion, and yields Christ on the ground the Jews first urge, ns a favor. The Hierarch}'. Political power and the people here combine to condemn the Lord of Glor^'. (Comp. Ps. 2: 1, 2). Some say scape-goat typified Barab- iDas. But Barabbas bears away no sin. Both goats typif}- Christ. Skeptics throw away historical accuracy of trial. §149. Jesus delivered up, scourged and mocked. (Mt. 27: 26-30; Mk. 15: 15-19; John' 19: 1-3.) Lk. alone irientions abuse from Herod. Mt, and Mk. allude to scourging as part of usual proct^ss before crucifixion ; John as tliough Pilate wished to excite compassion or contempt and procure his release. That this was purpose of Pilate, see Lk. 28 : 16-23. Many hold Christ was twice scourged. Improbable that Pilate would allow to be repeated this cruelty so dangerous to life. Soldiers were employed, and not lictors, as Pilate was a sub-gov- ernor, and not [-*roconsul. The word used {iprjayzXXcoaa:;) implies that it was done not with rods but with the jiagellam. Farrar : " It was a punishment so hideous that, under its lacerating agony, the victim generally fainted, often went away to perish under the mortifica- tion and nervous exhaustion which ensued." Why such malignity of Roman troops ? Sliaring the hatred against the Jews, inflamed by popular clamor and by contrast of claims and humble appearance of Christ, they are rude enough to enjoy the brutal sport as a break in the y " " v^i_--- <7 y-v-^-irV- -7 ;7^,=*--y "i-^ t^6s^ -^^ ^y^^^^^M^ i^^:Z^irZJ -^H>^^^ liJ^^^ 'ti7 oL'^-'\,^el(_ 173 (lull iiionotoiiy of their life. The publieity is noticed; a7T£ir)o.v, technicall}-, cohort, is the whole hand (armed by Pilate for fear of tiinuilt). Scourged in the PrBetorintii, enclosed court of the Palace. Then mock him as king, [Hitting on him a scarlet (Mt.), or purple (Mk.) soldier's cloak; on his head the painful crown of thorns; in his hand a reed. Did Christ grasp the reed with his hand ? Slight importance. Probably hands bound. They soon "took the reed and sniote hirn on the head,'' and then paid mock homage. Why a ll this indignity allowed Z^ 1. Exhibits the evil of sin 7~hlunaTi~(nnIFhynBxh~aTTstiTig itself against a Savior. Nevertheless " by his stripes we . are healed." 2. Shows Gentiles voluntarily participated _^ in rejecting Christ. Brings out character of Jesus^his sublime forbearance, his super-human dignity. A mere man could not have borne it. A.1I this quietly wiped out by skeptics. Strauss concedes the scourging may have been perfoi-med. & ^ §150. Pilate .^till seeks to release Jesus. Ecce Horn >. Jno. 19: 4-16.) Given by John alone. Some take this sec- tion with §148. Confusing, and forbidden by fact that this is after scourging. Pilate tries to excite pity or contempt by leading Christ out in humiliated appear- ance, and says " Behold the Man !" An arch on Via Dolorosa marks the scene. Doubtful. Effect is only to call out new rage — " Crucify him, crucify him." Meyer insists that the populace is not mentioned in whole sec- tion. Some sa}'. because priests were afraid of vacillat- ing populace. Most, priests mentioned as being leaders. Jews fear Pilate will insist on releasing Christ, when he sa3-s ironically, ^ take ye him and crucify him, etc." So they now introduce the charge of blasphemy : " We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God." Effect on Pilate extraordinary — hears it for the first time. Superstitious and afraid before, he now associates this claim of divinity with his notions of demigods, and is more afraid. Leads Christ back to Prsetorium, and in tones of deepest agitation asks : " Whence art thou ?" Contrast spirit of question with that in previous chapter. Jesus now silent. Pilate threatens. Jesus answers : " Thou couldest have no power, etc., . . . therefore he that delivered, etc." John 19 : 11-12. Wh}' therefore ? Not because lesser 174 guilt rests on weakness and timidity of Pilate (Luther), but because Jews illegal and willing persecutors, while Pilate with less knowledge is the unwilling though right- ful judge. Farrar : " Thus with infinite dignity, and ^-et with infinite tenderness, did Jesus judge his judge." Pilate felt it, and on that (E. V. " from" thenceforth,") determined to release him. If ever a prisoner had a chance to be released by his judge, Christ had now. This is the crisis of the trial. Jews threaten, " if thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend." Pilate knows the jealous severity of Tiberius towards subordinates, and remembering his own former cruelties, now yields to the threat. He brought Jesus forth and sat down on the judgment seat, and said in scorn, '-Behold your king!" They cry, "Crucify." Pilate; "Shall I crucify yonr king?" They answer: " We, have no king but C?esar." This is the lowest point in their hypocrisy. IMiey claim loyalty to Cfesarand thus renounce all expectation of the Messiah. This ends the trial. TSTotice Pilate has made six etitbrts to release Christ. 1. Told priests and people, " I find no fault in this man." 2. Sends him to Herod. 3. On return from Herod, "I will therefore chastise him and release him." 4. Appealed to the people to release Christ rather than Barabbas. 5. After scourging, said, " Behold the man !" 6. After claim of " Son" of God " made known. §151. See §146. ^txa^^ ,^^wuu^i?^eA-t^ trz^-o-rx/ §152. Jesus led away to he crucified. (Mt. 27 : 31-34 ; Mk. 15 : 20-23; Lk. 23: 26-33; John 19: 16, 17.) I. Ti)ne of Orucijixioit : Important discrepancy between John and Syn. Alexander : Impossible there should be a mistake in so public a transaction. Mk. 15 : 25 saj's, " it was the third hour (9 a. m.). and they crucified him." This agrees with M.M.L. that there was darkness from sixth to ninth hour, and with time required for trials. John 19 : 14, " And it was the preparation of the Pass- over and about the sixth hour (noon) ; and he saith unto the Jews, Behold yonr king !" Various attempts to re- move the difiiculty (see Andrews). 1. John's reading an error of transcription, rpirrj instead of exzv] supported by D. L. X., Euseb., Theophyl., Robinson, Farrar. But best text is 'ixrrj. So A. B. E. X. etc. 2.^-That John uses Roman reckonino^ from raidniijht. Therefore 6 a. m. )%ii^<^ T^v^l^ PO'^- a <2/l.-<---tf-L-/-<— yC ' 0me say they were his Galilean friends. This does not agree with " Daughters of Jerusalem." Some say, from mere pity. Yet Christ deems them worthy of a particu- lar address. Christ's reply, like his lamentation over Jerusalem, alludes to prophecies fulfilled. (Is. 54 : 1 : Hos. 10: 8; Ez. 20: 47,^ comp. 21: 3 seq.) These his last words of any length. Josephus gives a dire comment when he tells of women eating their children during the siege. No instance in gospels of women doing or pay- ing anything against Christ. Arrived at Golgotha, they proceed to crucify. Wine mingled with m3'rrh offered to deaden pain. Farrar : "It had been the custom of wealthy ladies in Jerusalem to provide this stupefying potion at their own expense, and they did so quite irre- spectively of their sympathy for any individual criminal." No analogous custom at Rome. Mt. says " vinegar mingled with gall." Mk., " wine mingled with myrrh." No contradiction. Soldiers carried a light acid wine (Mt. 27 : 34). This was mingled with yo'kq^ i. e., any- thing hitter. Our Lord refuses; an act of sublimest heroism. Not his purpose to avoid suffering. §153. The Crucifixion. (Mt. 27: 35-38; Mk. 15 : 24- 28 ; Lk. 23 : 33, 34, 38 ; John 19 : 18-24). Mt. and Mk. speak of dividing garments too soon. Was he con- demned and affixed to cross before or after its elevation? Commonly after; so early fathers. About centre of cross a sediU to support weight of body. Binding to cross essential to prevent tearing. Disputed whether the ^"H^ff-^/f^ld/ U^r:^<^ /.. u-c'^i^y-^ ^^(rr\ z.^rMxW A^ -Q.^if'ihyCi'tyuUfra^ C(^ Ua^'c^-'H^^ l^-i?-^ -«^ 4- 179 feet were nailed sefiarately or together. Most fatl>ers say nailed separately. Because Christ walked after- wards, Rationalists say feet simply bound, hence Christ did not die, only swooned, Justin and Fathers say Ps. 22 : 16 " They pierced my hands and my feet," fulfilled, and cite Lk. 24 : 39 : " Behold my hands and my feet." Two malefactors, robbers, were crucified with Christ. Was this caused by the Jews to degrade Christ, or by Pilate to insult the Jews ? Probably the latter. Is. 53: 12, " And he was numbered with the transgressors," ful- filled. Mk. 15: 28 omitted by A, B, C,^D, X, Tisch., Alf , etc. The Seven Utterances. Luke only (23: 34) gives first utterance, "Father, forgive them." No limitation |in truth implied. Universal, hence appropriate in Luke. Conjectured that these words were uttered during nail- ing. They signify : 1. Intercession of Chrisi as Priest, a sacrificial act. 2. The state of mind of Christ in midst of sutfering. 3. The spirit of his teaching, " Love your enemies." Fruits of this prayer at Pentecost. Comp. Stephen's last words. I\irting of garments. Custom to divide garments among executioners. Condemned was stripped naked, not even cloth about the loins. Divided upper garment into four parts. Cast lots for his coat. Priest's tunic seamless. Must not itjfer Christ's coat a priest's. Prophecy fulfilled (Is. 53 : 12). Mt. 3^: end of v. 35 an interpolation. »'" Title over Cross. Mt., " This is Jesus the king of the Jews." Mk., "The king of the Jews." Lk., "^This is the king of the Jews." John, "Jesus of JSTazareth, the king of the Jews." Notice difterences : 1. John full, others compress, 2, Three languages used. This might account for diflterenees, Farrar : " Title written in the otiicial Latin, in the current Greek, in the vernacular Aramaic," Why did Pilate write this superscription? Ans : a. To make a show^ of legality, b. To ridicule the Jews. This last strongest, and proved by remonstrance of the priests, " Write not. The king of the Jews; but that he said, I am king of the Jews." What Pilate had written in scorn was in reality a profound truth. Pilate had vacillated in serious matters, now obstinate in small. 180 r Lange insists (from Mt. 27 : 08) that the thieves wore brought on bv a different guard of trcH^ps, after the title was set up. Mt.'s use of zozz. not strongly temporal. §154. Jews mock at Jesus on (he cross. lie commends his mother to John. (Mt. 27: 39-44: Mk. 15 : 29-32; Lk. 23 : 35-37, 39-43 ; John 19 : 25-27.) Four classes par- ticipate in mocking : I. The. passers bv. (Mt. and Mk.) Xot (Uily tlio cas- ual f)assers, but the crowd railed at him, wagging their beads. Fnltillment of Ps. 22: 7. AVords o\^ mockery: " Thou that destroyest the temple, etc.," signiticant as now being fulfillpd. II. Chief Priests, Scribes and Elders (Sanhedrim) mock his official character. (MML.) They sneer (literally turn up the nose) at meaning of Jesus. " He saved others, himself he cannot save."' They mock also bis trust in God. Ps. 22 : 8. They unconsciously ex- press the profound truth that the salvation of others im- plies sacrifice of self. III. Tbe soldiers mock, saying, "If tbou be tbe Kin %y0^^n^' (j-iy^^.-^-^' -t>-oc4- ou-^,^ o-^-*-J • ^ / tjh-r-'C<><— i-^ ^-^C'v./i,- — --^( *-C> I (J) l/O^^ ^V^ClZUj\..><.nr<:^X-M ^^^^^^---^^ §"0^ ^-^^^l _/U>i6/w^A^ ^ oJJl 'jCa --"^^UJr." 7/LX(:W/'i=^-^--'-'-c2-^ lQ.-^--2^'i-tu2My' ^x-zyLJiyh^ 183 21 refei's to previous ofier of vinegar. 3. Christ would not now say " I thirst," if not true. (See Meyer on John 19: 28.) This the only word from the cross expressing physical suffering. Gethseniane shows spiritual suffer- ing not to be lost sight of; this shows the sarae in re-; gard to the physical. One ran and filled a sponge with vinegar and gave him to drink. Having satisfied this compassionate impulse, he Joins the rest in mockery : " Let alone ; let us see whether Elias will come to take him down." Last words somewhat differently reported. Mt. and Mk. say he cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost. But word for voice {cpcovrj) mci'ns articulate ut- terance. Sixth Utterance: " It is finished," given by John. To be taken before utterance given by Luke, because more appropriate and intelligible here. Evident reference to V. 28. Perfect tense; it has been and continues finished. All O. T. prophecies and types fulfilled. He does not mean simply the scripture has been fulfilled. The words go back to the councils of eternity. Redemption, and Revelation of God to man are finished. Comp. John 17 : 4. Hengst. finds reference to Ps. 22 : 31. Finished is his farewell greeting to earth; the next utterance marks his entrance to heaven. Seventh Utterance : " Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." (Lk. 23 : 46). Tisch. reads ;r«oarr^£//«/. This more natural. His last words not an assertion of divin- ity but trust. He resigns himself to his Father. Taken from Ps. 31 : 5. These seven utterances have a literature of their own. Notice, 1. how many come from O. T.; 2. how wonderful their comprehensiveness; 3. how natural their sequence. He who exhausts them has little to know about either covenant. The first is a prayer for pardon of his enemies. Lk. 23: 34. Second, Shows judgment and saving power. Lk. 23 : 43. Third, Christ's tender care for his people. Jn. 19: 26, 27. Fourth, Depth of punishment for sin. Mt. 27 : 46; Mk. 15 : 34. Fifth, His humanity and physical suffering. Jn. 19 : 28. 184 Sixth, His triiniipbaiit victory. Jn. 19 : 30. Seventh, His trust in God. Lk. 23 : 46. It is remarkable that the four Evauijelists avoid the expression, "-y^f dipH " Thej say, " He ^ave up the ghost." It was a voluntary act. §156. Supernatural accompaniments continued. Impres- sion on different classes of witnesses. (Mt. 27 : 51-56 ; Mk. 15 : 88-41 ; Lk. 23 : 45, 47-49). The veil of temple ren.t, earthquake, graves opened and (iead raised. Luke puts rending of veil before statement of Christ's death. The same word used in LXX. for both inner and outer veil. Means here, inner veil. Denied, because 1. known only to priests, who would not tell, and 2. not referred to later in N. T. Naturalistic interpreters describe it as effect of earthquake upon veil old or tender or fastened at four corners. Tradition in Gospel of the Hebrews says a beam fell against it. Its meaning is plain. The typical system' is ended. All believers are now priests and may enter through the Veil to the Holiest of Holies (Heb. 10 : 19). Earthquake and grave-opening mentioned by Mt. alon e. Objected 1. That this resurrection of saints was never appealed to later. 2. What became of them ? 3. What was the use of it? Some try to destroy the text. Some say earthquake opened graves, which were found empty, hence the report. (Farrar). Others, it was all visionary. Strauss, all mythical ; they had not yet separated second advent from first. Do the words " after his resurrection " qualify their leaving the graves or their going into the city? Most place all after his resurrection, because 1. Christ is called the first-fruits, and 2. His resurrection necessary to new life of the saints. How did they rise ? Was it in physical bodies to die again? Most likely in resurrection bodies — recognizable — not to live with men, but to ascend with Christ. Who were they? Some say those recently dead, or they would not have been recognized. Others say O. T. patriarchs and prophets. Tradition gives their names. Meaning clear: The sacri- fice now made is victory over death. Schaft': " So much only appears certain to us that it was a supernatural and symbolic event which proclaimed the truth that the death and resurrection of Christ was a victory over death and Hades, and opened the door to everlasting life." The centurion and soldiers, after Christ's last cry (Mk.), and Ci^'-^^-^ ^v-#-X<-^-'^-^6'<:k.-'^^^ oS^iyf^ 185 the supernatural accompaniments (Mt.) say "Truly this was the Son of God." Luke gives, " certainly' this was a righteous man.'" Some say the words must be taken in heathen sense, i. e., a demi-god (So Meyer). More common opinion is that the centurion had some knowl- edge and this is incipient faith. At all events he is con- vinced that Christ is true. He is the precursor of Cor- nelius, the tirst fruits of Gentiles acknowledging the Savior. We have important witness to truth of these details. The mass of the people are impressed. Stricken with terror and remorse, they smote their breasts and returned (Lk. 23 : 48). Representatives of Israel and the Centurion of the Gentiles are witnesses to the fact and power of his death. The friends of Christ are also present. Lk. says "all his acquaintance." Mt. and Mk. specify names of some of the women. By these friends the knowledge of his teaching is preserved and handed down. All classes are witnesses. §157. Takimi down from the Cross and Burial. Two striking fulfillments of prophecy seen in a departure both from Roman and Jewish usage. The Roman custom was to leave the bodies hanging until devoured by birds. Jews of course did not. (Dent. 21 : 23).' And the Sab- bath was an "High Day." Bleek: "High Bay" be- cause the first day of the Feast, or Nisan 15. But if it were the second or 16th of i^isan, the day on which the ott'erings were brought to the temple — and from which Pentecost was reckoned, it would also be an " Bigh Dayr Did the Jews know that Jesus had died ? Not told. If they did, the request was for the thieves. This break- ing of the legs was for torture. It was only the usual adjunct of Crucifixion. There is no evidence that this was the " mercy stroke," for more merciful means were in use ; as the stab, &c. It seems to have been rather for additional torture and ignominy. Possibly they had in mind, the prophecy implied in Exod. 12: 46 — "Neither shall ye break a bone thereof" — and wished to disprove thereb}' his Messiahship. Some argue from John 19 : 32 that a new body of soldiers were employed in this. But the message was sufficient. They broke the legs of the two thieves first : probably because on the outside. One of the soldiers thrust a lance into the side of Jesus, { 186 to m:)ke sure of his actual death. It was an easier and more certain mode than the breaking of his legs. As already dead, there was no need of torture. Thus were these soldiers witnesses of the reality of his death. It has been argued against John's recording this inci- dent, that " no one doubted Christ's death in his day." Ans : 1, Even if true, the fact of his death is so im- portant that John would not omit it. And the Corin- thians did deny his real death already. Its bearing in our own da}' is obvious. 2. It proves the reality of the body of Christ against the Docetge. John himself says he did it to confirm the faith of his readers : a. " Neither shall ye break a bone thereof." Ex. 12: 46. Ps. 34 : 30. b. " They shall look on him whom they have pierced." Zech. 12 : 10. The main fact is the lance- thrust; the flow of blood and water is secondary and confirmatory, therefore not miraculous. No symbolical meaning dwelt on but (I. John 5 : 6) itself a symbol of the atoning and cleansing power of Christ's blood. ^ Rationalists who deny the reality of his death deny the spear-thrust, or pronounce it superficial. This is contrary to the words themselves — to the intention and to the invitation to Thomas — John 20 : 27. It was probably the left side, as that was surer death, and it accounts for n? the blood and water. The thrust nearly horizontal and but slightly inclined upward. The nature of this flow is included in the wider question — what was the physical cause of his death ? 1. Miraculous The ry, held by the Reformers, Fathers, Meyer, &c. If his death was miraculous, so was proba- bly the flow of blood and water. The natural arguments are a. his speedy death; his strength of body and mind to the end; the expectation of the Jews that he would linger. Pilate's surprise at the report of his death, h. The terms employed : '• He gave up the spirit." c. The words of Jesus : John 19 : 11 and 10 : 18. d. Argu- ment from the divine nature. Also the frequent N. T. expression " he died for us." The Jews slew him, which would not be true if he died from natural causes. 2. The spear thrust— the cause of his death. Founded on a reading of Mt. 27: 49; supported by B. C. L. and Cod. Sin. But it is an interpolation and contradicts John Griiner's view. His heart was pierced before death. o^ \,i^Aj\j^y\Si^ 187 The water was from the pericardium. Debility and anxiety produced effusion before his death. Ans : The physiolo2:ical facts are disputed, and the narrative plainly implies death before the lance-thrust. 3. Weakness. To the objection that it was too sudden, they answer : The perfection of his organization, or men- tal anguish. What then of the blood and watei'? a. If the heart was pierced, there would be no flow from it. b. Extravasations, c. The Bertholines argue a bloody serum in the cavity of the chest. Fact is disputed physiologically : and that is not blood and water, d. Lanffe's idea is that liis transformation had bei^un. c. His death was natural but the blood and water was miraculous. 4. Stroud's theory. He died from a rupture of the ven- tricle of the heart produced by mental agony. Blood separated in the thorax. There was time enough and this is analogous to the bloody sweat in Gethsemane. Objection : The blood would be coagulated. A coinci- dence of his death and the knowledge on the part of Jesus wiien the time came. But he may have spoken after the rupture took place, or he may have been warned b}' an increase of suffering. A difficulty here is met in the words of the Psalmist, Ps. 16: 10 in connection with St. Peter's assertion in Acts 2 : 31 ; "Neither his flesh did see corruption." Does the separation of the blood imply this? Meyer says John intends to describe it as miraculous. But compare the exegesis above. This view an elevated one. But it subjects phj'sical to moral causes. If Christ's life was subject to physical causes, so by analogy should be his death. It is impossible to decide absolutely. Comp. Baur, Strauss, Hanna, An- drews, Sir J. Simpson and Pseudo-John, The Burial. The history of the burial, shows a series of providences to adduce witnesses to the identity of the body in the interval before Resurrection. He was laid in a new tomb. Joseph of Arimathea asks for the body. John alone mentions Nicodemus as taking part, as he alone mentions him before. " It was in the power of governors of provinces to grant private burial to criminals at the request of friends; and it was usuall}' done, except they were mean or infamous. But for Joseph, Christ would probably have been buried with 188 the malefactors. J^e Wette argues that verses 38 and 31 are inconsistent. If Joseph came ij.zTa xwna and o^'vac — late in afternoon, a. how could Pilate be surprised that he was already dead? and h. how could Joseph go to Pilate before the body was taken down by the soldiers? Liicke says dprj means to take away to burial. But Syn. say Joseph and Nicodemus took him down from the cross, Lk. 23 : 58. Mk. 15 : 46. Friedlieb says Joseph asked before the Jews — but Pilate waited to hear from the Cen- turion. This disregards p.Exa to.uto.. M.e¥«4; — Jews' re- quest was first. Then the trouble is to find time for Joseph to act. But soldiers would wait till the malefac- tors' death before taking tliem down. Or Joseph may have followed the Jews very quickly. Very little time was necessary. The tombs of rich families were generally in a rock, hewn with the mouth so as to go in horizon- tally. By this interment in the new tomb of Joseph of Arimaihea was brought about, not only the fulfillment of prophecy, but also a proof of his resurrection. No other had been buried there, hence, no other could rise from that tomb. As early as Jerome was this fact noticed as important. He compares it to the pure womb of the Virgin Mary. 2. He was embalmed. If they had not known he was dead, they would not have embalmed his body. " One hundred pounds weight," extraordinary quantity' ; de- notes great honor. There is no proof that the disciples watched the tomb. Great emphasis is laid on the con- stancy of the women. The mother of Jesus is not men- tioned. The incident is important in the chain of testi- mony to the identity of his body. A contradiction as to the time of buying spices is alleged. Compare Lk. 23 : 56 with Mk. 16 : 1. No real contradiction. Some may have been brought at one time, some at another, or some on both evenings. But it is asked " If they saw the burial by Joseph and Nicodemus, why this additional anointing ?" John 19 : 40 shows that Joseph's was used. Nor is it probable that the women were ignorant of the first anointing. No real diflficulty. It was a new proof of love. Becoming that the last sacred offices should be performed by intimate friends. Strauss asks : " If they knew the tomb was sealed, and a w'atch set, how did they expect to get in ?" Some T'Mjz.M^e'^'^-^ Ijj irUiAJ^>^ ,^ -'lyM.^-^l-o- ' v^ .'Ok:/ ^X,yL--'tS^-t^<.-'/ have obtained it from believers before the crucifixion. At any rate they wish to test the truth of it? 2. If the priests feared removal of the body it was suicidal to allow it to remain in custod\- of friends. But they did not fear till they heard the friends had the body and then took immediate precau- tions. If the body was taken away Pilate would punish ti.e soldiers in execution of Roman Law. But they would invent an improbable lie. He argues the greater probability is against the truth of the narrative. vVhere- fore the Greek recension of Mt. But it is found in Mt. alone, because Mt. wrote for Jews. This Sabbath was indeed a final day. Lange saj's it was not the last Sabbath of the old economy for that continued till Pentecost. From the Resurrection to the Ascension. The length is not given in the Gospels. They record but two Sabbaths and a journey to Galilee. But in Acts 190 1 : 3, " for fort}' dajs, fitTo. to Tia^tiv durbv,'' forty has some significance. It was practically tinie enough to prove the resurrection. Proofs are frequent varied and numerous. "We can trace a picture of the subjective state of the disciples. Why was the mode of our Lord's communicatiou so changed ? He appears only at inter vals. Acts 1 : 3. Of course then not still in state of humiliation. Had there been no change — resurrection would have been more doubted. Again, it may have been to change the feelings of the discif>les towards him. Their faith and love to him must be made as great as to God, by his total absence in body and yet spiritual pres- ence. Here they were in different places and yet all present in body with him in each place. This shows how he is with us now. The nature of his Resurrection Body? Three an- swers: I. Some argue with Rob. and Meyer that it was the same material body which lay in the tomb. a. Nature of proofs of identity : Jesus said " A spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have." Sho\ys his wounds and eats with them. i). The ascension Avas the moment for transfoi-mation. According to this, his transpor- tation through space, entering through the closed doors, &c., are specific miracles. II. The change to a spiritual body occurred at Resurrection. But this contradicts his own words. Lk. 24 : 39. III. An intermediate condition suited to the period of transitions, A material body but endowed with new properties. We are safe only in holding to the facts which are : 1. The body was the same. This was necessary to recognition. 2. Some change in appearance is shown by the tardy recognition. This is partly accounted for by the subjec- tive state of the disciples, partly as meant by him, for Mk. 16 : 12 says, " iv kzsfia iiopiprj.^' 3. Either super- naturally endowed, or instrument of miraculous power. 4. Not fully transformed. " Flesh and blood can not inherit the kingdom of God." Harmony. We have four accounts from different points of view, none complete. It is not a continuous history of a life, but a series of disconnected miraculous appearances, hence the difficulty. Doubtless, too, the stupendous character of the events make witnesses con- fused. Again all is not recorded. John 20:30. Acts 191 1 : 3. Conip. 1 Cor. 15. i\o contradiction can be estab- lished. Means for determining the exact order do not exist in the narrative. General traits are the same. The same prominence given, in all, to the accounts of the women and the angels. The same messages are sent to the disciples. The very differences prove the simplicit}' of the witnesses. So in r/eneral differences. It is re- markable that Mt. should narrate only the events which occurred in Galilee^, while Mk. and Lk. those in Ju^ imd Jerus., John' giving both, clTr2trBeing laidin Jerus. and ch. 21 in Gal. Rationalists ascribe this to mixed tradition. But it is really a striking [)roof of the very opposite; and can be accounted for only by the special design of each. Mt. depicts the royal majesty of the risen Lord, contrasted witli Jewish expectations and con- fines himself to Gal. as in his ministry. Being opposed to Judaism, his record is out of Jerus. Mk. establishes the fact of the resurrection by the transition in the mind of the disciples from doubt to faith, the risen Son of God working on his church by his power through the ministers of his word. Lk. connects resurrection with the suffer- ings and the unity of the two and presents Christ as the great High Piiest — the Redeemer of all men, proclaim- ing remission to all nations beginning at Jerus. In John is shown the effect on the inner circle of believ- ers — the relation of the resurrection to the faith and life of the individual. Order of the Several Evangelists. MATT. XXVIII. MARK XVI. 1. Mary Mag. and the other Mary I. Two Marjs and Salome to the to the Sepulchre. Sepulchre. 2. Earthquake and angel rolls away 2. Stone already rolled away. the stone. 3. Angel sitting within. 3. Angel seated on the stone. 4. Message to disciples and Peter 4. Message to the disciples to go to to go to Galilee. Galilee. o. They flee and tell no man. 5. As women go, Jesus meets them K. Appears to Mary Mag. and she and sends message to disciples tells others. to go to Galilee. Watch re- 7. After, in another form, to two in turn to the city. country. 6. The eleven in Galilee. The 8. To the eleven at supper. Great Great Commisson. No ascen- Commission. sion. 9. After speaking, ascended. 192 LUKE XXIV. JOHN XX., XXI. 1. Women (Mary and others) to 1. Mary Magdalene comes. Sepulchere. "2. Stone removed already. '1. Stone rolled away. 3. Returns to tell Peter and John. 8. Two angels standing within. 4. Peter and John come and return. 4. Refers to predictions in Galilee. 5. Mary remains and sees two angels 5. They return and tell the I'est. within. 6. Peter views the Sepulchre. 6. Sees Jesus and tells the rest. 7. Appears to two going to Pjmmaus. 7. Same evening, Jesus appears to 8. They tell the eleven, and Jesus the eleven. appears. 8. Next week to the eleven and 9. Commission, tells them to tarry Thomas. in Jerus. Goes out to Bethany '.•. Galilee. Draught of fishes, Ch. and ascends. ' XXI. Third time to the dis- ciples. No ascension. 1 Cor. XV. 5. To Peter. XV. (J, to 500 in Galilee. XV. 7 To James, then to all the apostles. Acts i. 3-8. To all the apostles and commission and ascension. Resulting Difficulties: 1. The time ot the visit ot" the women. Mt. says " at the end of the iSabbath." Hence, it is argued it was at sunset. But rather, early in the morning. All say very early. Mk. says how- ever the sun was risen, or else Mk. contradicts himself. Or we may say one account may date from the time of starting and the other from arrival. 2. Mt. and and Joliii do not give the ol)ject of their going; but this is manifest. Mk. and Lk. distinctly say to anoint his body. 3. Mt. seems to imply that they saw the earthquake and the stone rolled away. Rob. suggests a pluperfect sense. This is impossible. Aorists, however, are in- definite. He don't say it then occurred. Some under- stand the earthquake figuratively. The mere mention of this is its refutation. The fathers say Christ left the tomb before the stone was rolled away — as he needed no help to rise. Henry says, Angels aided him as token of their loyalty. Remark, they shall assist in the general resurrection. The act of resurrection was seen by none. 0\\\y frknds beheld the resurrected Lord. In regard to other difficulties ; older harmonists took every thing as a different account and so give various companies of women, &c. Others make but one group. Ebrard says the main point in all was the appearance of Christ to the XI. Before, all was prefatory. He gives as illustra- tion : "A friend of mine is at the point of death. I am just returning from a journey. On n>y way I am f ..^ 193 met in succession by difterent friends : One tells me of his illness, two others inform me of his death, a fourth gives me a ring which he has bequeathed to me. I hasten to the house and find a mournful scene. On my return I write to an acquaintance, and with the scene at the liouse most vivid in my mind, I write briefly of the rest, that on my way home I met four friends who told me of his death and gave a ring. Of what import- ance to the reader, whether all came together, or suc- cessively, or which brought the ring?" D""''^ 4. While John speaks of Mary Mag. alone, Syn. represent others. Mt., Mary Mag. and another Mary, Mk. adds Salome. Lk. mentions two Marys, Joanna and others, a. Ebrard takes John as fact. But Syn. group her visit with others, h. Lange, Westcott, Ores, and others separate Lk. and suppose two companies. One led by Mary Mag., the other by Joanna. This ia improbable, as Lk. mentions Mary Mag. himself, and leaves the difficulty with John. More probably Lk. is with the other Syn. c. Lightfoot, Rob., &c., say all came together and Joiin specifies Mary Mag. to tell in- dividual faith. 5. How many visions of angels? Syn. record as if the women at first saw the angels. John as if they ap- peared to Mary Mag. on the second coming. Clearly two appearances of angels. John confines his narrative to Mary Mag. who ran back to the disciples before act- ually reaching the sepulchre. Lightfoot combines them all into one. Those who have two companies make three visions. 6. Number of angels. Mt.gives one sitting outside. Mk. one inside. Some say the stone was rolled inward so Mt. agrees with the others. Some say it was in the vestibule. Some, there were two angels. Either they did not see the angels till they were inside, or the angels moved. Lk. says " they stood " which may mean as some render " appeared suddenly." John says Mar^^ Mag. saw two angels. This is a distinct vision. So Lk. also gives two. If two companies there is no question ; if one — there is no contradiction.. The explanation seems to be : There was one main fact — a vision of angels — more ac- curately, of two angels. 194 7. Message of angels. In Mt. and Mk. the angel tells them to meet Jesus in Gal. This is natural, as Mt's narrative is Galilean. Lk, reminds them of his words in Gal. John records the message as given by Jesus himself, to Mary Mag. Here those who make two companies have no difficulties, nor those of one company either, as each tells what his plan demands. Each account calls to mind an empty sepulchre as the first witness. The angels point to it, and this accounts for Mary Mag.'s haste at her first visit. The angels first announce the fact " The Lord is risen " as a report from heaven. That the angels appear and disappear in a. remarkable manner is insisted on by those who make these mere visions, and hence all dependent on the sub- jective state of the witnesses. If so how is it that the keepers see the angels? This is to prove that the stone was not moved by the earthquake. The disciples do not see them, because their faith is to be tried before they can be constituted eye witnesses of the truth to the church. They must themselves experience difficulties of faith in what seemed to them disputable. The whole question of vision of angels admits of a very easy ex- planation on the ground of simple natural variety of ac- counts. Lessing says : " Do you not see that the Evan- gelists do not count the angels ? There were millions of angels around the tomb." Lange : " These harmon- ies are in the form of a four-voiced narrative, and indi- cate an agitated state of the Evangelists." 8. Did Christ appear to Mary Mag. alone or to more ? Sceptics argue much from the ease with which women are deceived. The great fact of the Resurrection of Christ was to rest on testimony ; so it is first to come to the disciples in that form, to subject them to trial and discipline them. This is prominent throughout. Angels bear witness to the women — they to the Apostles — they to the world. Mt. makes two Marys meet Jesus, in company with all the women. But John says Jesus met Mary Mag. alone on her return to the city. Mk. says " He appeared first to Mary Mag." There are three ex- planations : 1. Lightfoot, &c., make but one appearance and that to Mary Mag. alone. Mt. generalizes. The appearance was to Mary but he says " to the women." 2. Lange, Gres., two appearances, the first to Mary : 195 Strauss objects on ground of time. He sa^'s " Where are the women all this time?" Do they, as some say, linger near the tomb, or do they go back to the city, or is it as Gres. supposes, a week before Christ appears to the other women ? Most of us are content to pay we are responsible only for the succession of events and don't care what the women were doing. Rob. says there were two appearances, but the lirst was to the women. Mk's statement that Mary was first is but relative — i. e., the first of the three recorded by him. But Mk. is too emphatic to admit of any such explanation. 9. According to Mt., Lk. and John, the women go im- mediatel}- in jo\' to the Apostles. Mk. says d'josuc ouoku IcTiov. Admission into two companies is artificial. Mk's obvious meaning is they did not stop to tell every body they met. § 168. Marij Magdalene summons Peter and John. While the women are with the aiigels, Mary Mag. has gone to call John and Peter. There is a significance in their being together and Mary's going to them. " The youngei- reaches the tomb first " savs Harte. Peter im- pulsive is the first to rush in. There they find the linen clothes lying. Not carried away at if the body had been stolen, or as if the death of Christ were an imposition and he had escaped : but neatly folded, and laid away, indicative of tr;inquillity. John "saw and believed " — what? that the tomb was empty? No! but in the full significance of the scene. Lk. makes Peter stoop. John very vividU' describes himself as stooping and looking in. § 164. Jesus appears to 3Iart/ Magdalene. Mary is con- spicuous as of a most loving spirit. She is standing weeping — and does not share the faith of John — and a man appears. She does not at once recognize him. This indicates a change in external appearance or Mary would have known him. It also confirms the reality of the resurrectioii. If it were a mere subjective vision, she would have thought it to be Christ at first. This and the walk to Eramaus are fatal to the visionary theory. N-otice the peculiar inconsistence oi' Strauss. He says " A myth originating in Gal. some time after Christ's death. It grew out of a growing reverence for Christ and a study of Messianic prophecies." But how does it 196 suit Dr. Strauss to account for Mary's seeing Christ here? Her idea cannot be accounted tor on this theory, for she had no thought of the resurrection and Strauss says Christ had never predicted it I / " Touch me not." The rebuke is to Mary's mistake. She supposed that ordinary intercourse was to be re- newed. Jesus warns her that it is not to be so. He virtually says, " ISTo longer is sense, but faith, to be the mode of communion." So when he said to the eleven and Thomas, "Handle me," there is no inconsistency, as then he wished to convince them of his bodily iden- tity. Mary is here already convinced of that. §162. Jesus meets the icorpen. Mt. says Jesus met the women and gave them the message; how can we recon- cile that with this? Some argue that they are the same occurrence. But it is better to regard them as different. Three Evangelists distinctly state that the Apostles did not believe the report of the women. This is natural. It doubtless sounded strange to them that the women alone saw what Peter and John did not see. They were in a state of fear and excitement. §165. 7he Report of the Watch. Reported by Mt. only as he alone gave the account of its being set. The otter of bribes to the soldiers. The story is incredible on the face of it. It was impossible for the disciples to steal the body. Grotius collects evidence of its cur- rency among the Jews in the 2nd and 3d centui'ies, and says it was still believed by them ! Strauss objects : " Is it likely that the whole Sanhedrim at a regular meet- ing would unite in givitig otticial sanction to a lie ?" Ebrard replies : " Is it likely that the whole Sanhedrim at a regular meeting would unite in a judicial murder ? — The marvel is what pious, conscientious men the San. become in the hands of Dr. Strauss. The whole of Christendom, a multitude of humble, quiet men, may have devised and adhered tenaciouslv to a bare-faced lie ; but the murderers of Jesus were incapable of per- suading these soldiers to propagate a trifling untruth, which their own conduct had rendered necessary I" The priests believed the resurrection, as they knew of the empty tomb, not with a full faith, but as they had already witnessed many miracles. Their consciences w^ere uneasy. The Apostles do not refer to this because ) 197 they had better proofs, and this lie was not current in the places to which they were sent. Why not mentioned in Acts 4 ? Because the Sanhedrim did not deu}' the resurrection in their earlier persecutions, § 166. Jesus seen of Peter. The ten go to Emmaus. The third appearance, and first to an Apostle, was to Peter after the two went to Emmaus : Lk. 24: 34: I Cor. 15 : 5. An honor to Peter considering his denial,- and intended as a help to his repentance. The walk to Emmaus shows the feeling of the disciples. The mis- take of these men and their non recognition are incom- patible with the visionary theory. Who were the two ? Wies., &c., understand Cleopas to be Alphaeus (Mt. 10:3), and the other, the Apostle James his son. This is not probable. Lightfoot thinks the second person was Peter. Some, that he was Luke. Discrepancy : Mk. says their report is not believed ; Lk. that the eleven anticipated them with " The Lord is risen indeed and hath appeared unto Simon." Therefore they did believe. The ques- tion of Harmony is interesting, as on it turns the point, whether the Apostles believed at all on testimony, or remained unbelieving till they saw for themselves. The margin of the E. V. makes Mk.'s statement a question, which has little foundation. Some say they believed Peter, but could not believe the two from Emmaus, as it was a seeming contradiction that Christ should be seen l»y both. It this is a true solution it remains that all but Peter (and Thomas) believed upon testimony. The two goin^ to Emmaus betray a dim idea that the third day should bring some change and yet it was almost ended. The breaking of bread probably not Lord's Supper. The instructions of .lepus to the two agree with Lk's re- ^ port of the words of the angels. ^ n\ vk § 167. Jesus appears to the Apostles. Thomas absent. ^ '^J\^' Sunday evening. Most important and perhaps most de- t'SLy\r^ p^ cisive for then were their doubts tinally overcome, andcy ^A ^ they are appointed witnesses for the future. Given b}' vJ Mk., Lk., John, Paul. Mk. and Lk. close their narra- tive here, as the last essential thing. Mk. introduces a third appearance ; Lk. shows his bodily presence, — the nature of his resurrection body and the scars of his crucifixion. The question now was not the fact of his resurrection but the reality and identit}' of his body. 198 They were at their evening meal, perhaps in the room where they kept the passover. Coming through closed doors— Lutherans say it shows the ubiquity of Christ's person. The point of the visit was to show that he was not a spirit. He declares his body to be " flesh and bones." Handling him was an important evidence (1 John 1 : 1). Lk. adds a crowning evidence in Christ's eating. It is commonly accepted that it was not for nourishment, but as evidence of his material body. The identity of his body could not be better proved. The Apostolic Commission is now given, which shows the spiritual import of the resurrection. It was because they were personally convinced that they are made wit- nesses. Paul (1 Cor. 15: 5) speaks of Twelve Syn. give eleven. Clear and important that other Christians were present as iw.drfcat. The two from Emmaus were plainly present. Tlius the powers here conferred were not contined to ai)Ostles alone. .Was the commissioD given to-night? Mk. and Lk. add it here as the last thing. Van Cos. puts it after v. 44. John leaves no doubt that the commission was given here. So it was twice given. The commission to witness, preach and administer discipline was based on the gift of the Holy Ghost as authority. John says he breathed on them, and saith " Receive ye the Holy Ghost." This was in consequence of the resurrection. It was not however plenary, but partial and preparatory, corresponding to their wants till Pentecost. There was need of it; they were passing through a critical period, A transition from doubt to faith. They had still to gather and guide the body of disciples till* Pentecost. (N. B. The dis- tinction between nveuiw. djcov here and to Tivvjfw. dycov in Acts is untenable). Strauss says the command to tarry at Jerus. (in Lk.) contradicts the command to go to Gal. Van Oos. and Alf. say this command was not given till after the return from Gal, But there is no inconsistency. One qualifies the other. The " tarry " qualifies the Commission. Make Jerus. your headquarters, and do not go to preach till after Pentecost. § 168. Jesus appears to the Twelve. Thomas present. Time 2d Sabbath. John alone records it. 1. How came the apostles still in Jerusalem ? a. They would not travel during the feast, which lasted till Friday, b. Some •\'. V ■l\\ V Ar .r V;; \ ' J ■V) n'ty T r t^^^^>t-l^ 'L-nyu. Ulhi. /OLAy 199 think unbelief ivept them. Thomas and others stiil doubted, e. Others suppose the command to go was ac- companied by an intimation as to when and how. 2. Why together on the iirst day of the wpek ? To com- memorate the resurrection ? Certainly it is the begin- ning of the Christian Sabbath. They meet Christ on tliese days only. The force of their example issanctioned by Christ. What was Thomas's reception ? Jesus com- mends Thomas for faith, but shows there is a higher faith bpsed on spiritual evidences and shows the danger of subjecting faith to sense or reason. Thomas is con- vinced before putting his test to practice, and joyfully believes. An important point : that the claim of Divinity is variouslj' made elsewhere, but here only in the Gospels , , [ is d^o:; a|iip|ied _ to_Christ by the disciples or accepted by ^ctA/K^-*-^ h\m.- The Gospel of John begins : " The word was God " and closes with " My Lord and My God !" § 169. Jesus appears to seven Apostles on the sea of 7'iherias. By most harmonists put before Mt.'s narrative because of Jno. 21 : 14. The charge of Meyer that Paul's statement (I. Cor. 15 : 5-7), cannot be reconciled is not sustained. One explanation is that Paul includes under the expression " seen of the twelve," the three of John ; or it may be that Paul summarizes. The tirst appearance would be at the grave, then at Jerus. in vicinity of the ton'b. But it must not be confined to Jerus. as the witness is to extend to hundreds of be- lievers in Gal. It is also to show the bodily relations of Jesus; he was superhuman as to extension. Again, by this he corrects the mistaken idea of the disciples, that the new Dispensation should be also a Theocracy iu Jerus. Comp. Acts 1. Disciples had gone to Gal. and returned to their daily occupation. Early in the morn- ing Christ appears on the shore and repeats the miracle that had called them at first — thus reinstating them. A promise of great success in their work is seen in the number of fishes taken. There is no evidence that the fire and the bread were miraculous. They were signifi- cant of rest after toil. The results of toil give joy. Peter is especially reinstated. The three-fold question refers to the denials : " Simon, Sou of Jonas!" alludes to his original nature, reminding him of his unrenewed 200 , state. I^otice the comparison " more than these " based on " though all should forsake thee, yet will not I." Peter's humility appears in his not usingthe comparison. Peter asserts but the humbler personal love, (fcleto ; Jesus used the higher, ayanaoj. but at last descends to use even ifdzco. Notice also {a) lambs, [b) sheep, (c) little sheep. Also Ttociiacvs-cv and j^oaxeiu. The martyrdom of Peter is added to show his confidence in Peter's constancy. When this book was written Peter had been long dead and there is a reference to John's life and exemption from martyrdom. Upon Jno. 21 : 24 is based a strong argument for the authorship of the book. § 170. Jesus meets the Apostles and 500 ow a mount in Gal. Paul, I. Cor. 15 : 6. This is the same as Mt.'s eleven. It involves the question whether the commission was given to the whole church or not. Not so, unless others besides the eleven were present. The chief evidence is from Mt. himself: 1. Why appoint a meeting on a mount in Gal. for eleven only ? 2. Mt. says some wor- shipped but some doubted like Thomas. 3. Mt. 28 : 7 says " there shall ye see him" in the message to the women. 4. There is reason why Mt. should emphasize the eleven, as to him the ecclesiastical commission was the prominent thing. jSotice, they wont where they were commanded, hence had an interesting meeting. A fortuitous gathering is inconceivable. A general sum- mons was necessary. The 2l8t of John gives us the probable occasion of the command. Compare the second or great commission in Mt. with John. 1. This (Mt.'s) makes no mention of suffering or of the reality of his resurrection body. 2. It is fuller than the previous one. 3. Sets forth the completed authority of Christ as its basis. In Acts we have only the stor}' of this work. This Commission is the basis of the Christian sacrament of Baptism. § 171. Our Lord is seen of James, then of all (he Apostles. Which James? More likely James of Jerus. than the son of Zebedee, but it cannot be determined. Luke in Acts implies manifestations which are not recorded. Several facts are gathered from Acts 1, e. g. that Christ's mother and brethren accompanied him to Gal. Addi- tional evidences of continued false expectations on part of the Apostles. Again they are to tarry in Jerus. till ,^ ^ 'd/^e^yuh/iA^^-rU 201 they be " baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence." Also the order of the conversioi^ of the world is given : " In Jems, and in all Jadea, and in Samaria and even to the uttermost parts of the earth." From the climactic advance in the proofs of the resurrection, we find a final argument against the subjective visionary theory. No such thing could have arisen from merely accidental visions to difierent persons, §172. 7'he Ascension. At the end of the 40 days onr Lord once more appears. It is at Jems. He ascends in sight of the disciples. This is the proper conclusion of the record. The Ascension is necessarily associated with the resurrection for there could be no more dfuth to Christ. He must ascend, and in presence of the dis- ciples. They had seen him appear and disappear for 40 days. If this then was no more formal than those, they would be continually looking for him to return. Even as it was they expected him to come again in their own day. Also gives a definiteness and location to our ideas of a risen Lord and a Christian heaven. We cannot now enter into the difiiculties suggested by the Lutherans and others. Concerning the sacraments— local limita- tion, &c., can only touch on critical objections. I'ljice of the Ascension : An apparent contradiction : Bethany (Lk.), Mount of Olives (Acts). But they are so near to each other that there is no real difficulty. Was it visible to others than disciples? Hard to conceive that it was. John and Mt. don't mention the ascension at all. Only Mk. and Lk. tell of it, and Tisch. rejects avt(pe(JS.To from Lk. Then Acts is our only authority for a visible ascen- sion. But Tisch. is not followed by most critics At an}- rate, it is in Acts which is by Lk. Mk. and Lk. had a special object in recording it. Both show Christ as the Savior of the world and look to the future history of the church. And though Mt. and John. omit it, yet they refer lo it in the Gospel. The going away is not the final point, for he is to come again. Mk. seems to connect the ascension immediately with the first interview with the eleven on the resurrection Sunday. Lk. seems to imply the same thing. It is after the report of the two from Emmaus. (Though in Acts it is " after 40 days)." Upon this is based the theory of repeated ascensions. Baur says Evangelists teach that 202 Christ's abode after the resurrection was in heaven. So some Harmonists. The sceptics sa}' there were two tra- ditions of his Ascension. One on the first Sunday — and another (Galilean) after an interval of 40 days. But notice, the difficulty cannot be so great, or Lk. is at dis- cord with himself He records it in both forms ; and a sufficient explanation is found in the intention of the two passages. The mode of ascension was exquisitely appropriate. His speaking with them — blessing them, and then rising from them till a cloud enfolds him, con- cealing him from their sight. The words of the angels, also, to the gazing disciples, sanction the church's atti- tude of expectation. And he said that true waiting is to work as well as to wait. /■ ^ 1 f''. (P cf^^n *>' 4 \ ^y^'^' \^- ^o^^-