PRINCETON, N. J. 5/^t>//: Ntifnb<:^ . .. Q-P PY WHY FOUR GOSPELS? OR, THE GOSPEL FOR ALL THE WORLD. A MANUAL DESIGNED TO AID CHRISTIANS IN THE STUDY OF THE SCRIPTURES, AND TO A BETTER UNDER- STANDING OF THE GOSPELS. BY D. S. GREGORY, D. D., PROFESSOR OP THE MENTAL SCIENCES AND ENGLISH LITERATURE IN THE UNIVERSITY OP WOOSTER: AUTHOR OP "CHRISTIAN ETHICS." NEW YORK: SHELDON AND COMPANY. 1877. OOPTRIGHT, 1876, By D. S. GiiEGOKY. RIVERSIDE, CAMBRIDQE: STEREOTYPED BY II. HOUOHTOX AND COMPANY, TO MY WIFE, 1$. 25. <©M TO WHOSE CONSTANT ENCOURAGEMENT AND ASSIDUOUS HELPFULNESS THE CHRISTIAN PUBLIC OWES WHATEVER OF VALUE THIS VOLUME MAY CONTAIN, IT IS, WITHOUT HER KNOWLEDGE, ^(UttiaiinUlu JBciricatclr. PKEFACE. It is admitted on all hands that the central point of attack upon Christianity in the present age is found in the Gospels. " The life of Jesus," says Tischendorf, " is the most momentous of all questions which the Church has to encounter, — the one which is decisive whether it shall or shall not live." The assailants demand that the Christian apologist shall put his system to the test of ex- hibiting its philosophic basis and its rational explanation. Whether the demand be reasonable or unreasonable, it is certain that this scientific age will continue to press its questions of why and how. While it is absolutely certain that God's Word will stand all legitimate tests and remain intact to the end of time, it is no less certain that some of the old modes of viewing, exhibiting, and defending it must be abandoned for others which are more truly scientific, or, in other words, more in harmony with the divine truth and thought. It is a growing conviction in many Christian minds, that the most conclusive argument for the divine origin of the four Gospels is not that furnished by the external evidences but by the Gospels themselves ; that whoever can be brought to take a truly scientific view of them, that is, to see them as they really are in themselves and their relations, will need no further arguments to con- vince him that these productions are each and all from God. VI PREFACE. The present work is designed to aid the intelligent reader in his efforts to see the Gospels as they really are, that they may present their own claims — based upon their unity, harmony, completeness, and perfect adapta- tion to human needs — to be from God, divinely inspired, and worthy of God. It is the application of simple, com- mon-sense principles to the study and elucidation of the productions of the Eyangelists, with the hope that the re- sult may be helpful to Christians who would go beyond the old conventional methods and seek to gain clearer, fresher, truer, and more reasonable views. It is desired especially that the present essay may commend 'the study of the Gospels to the minds of that class of thinkers, daily increasing, who are to be satisfied only by a rea- sonable explanation of the facts, whether of the world or of the Word, with which they come in contact. The studies which led to this work originated in the efforts of a pastor to awaken a new interest on the part of his flock in the study of the Word of God. The en- couragement received led to the embodiment of portions of the subject, in a form different from the present, in a series of articles for one of the leading Quarterlies. In response to the urgent request of many earnest laborers in the Gospel, the thought has been embodied — during the intervals of a life filled with most pressing duties — in the present form, in order to bring it within the reach of a larger number of intelligent readers. Should it be owned of God in helping inquiring minds to a clearer and more comprehensive view of the Gospel of Christ, and to a firmer faith in its Divine origin and aim, the highest and chief end of its preparation will be secured. WOOSTER, 0., October 2, 1876. CONTES-TS. INTRODUCTION. PAGB The Question and the Proposed Answers 9 — ♦ — PART I. THE PURPOSE OF GOD AND THE GOSPEL. CHAPTER I. The Preparation for the Advent op the Messiah .... 29 CHAPTER II. The Advent and the Written Gospels ,56 PART 11. MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. CHAPTER I. Historical View of the Jewish Adaptation of the First Gospel 85 CHAPTER II. Critical View of the Jewish Adaptation of the First Gospel 109 Vlll CONTENTS. PART III. MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. CHAPTER I. HiSTOKiCAL View of the Roman Adaptation of the Second Gospel 150 CHAPTER 11. Critical View of the Robian Adaptation of the Second Gospel 169 PART IV. LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK. CHAPTER I. Historical View of the Greek Adaptation of the Third Gospel 207 CHAPTER II. Critical View of the Greek Adaptation of the Third Gospel 228 PART V. CHAPTER I. Historical View of the Christian Adaptation of the Fourth Gospel 277 CHAPTER II. Critical View of the Christian Adaptation of the Fourth Gospel 299 CONCLUSION. The Gospel for all the World 343 INTEODUOTIOK THE QUESTION AND THE PROPOSED ANSWERS. Question stated. The one Gospel of Jesus Christ appears in the Sacred Scriptures in four forms, — a first, according to Matthew ; a second, according to Mark ; a third, according to Luke ; and a fourth, according to John. Why not in three, or five, or twenty forms ? Or, why not, in accordance with a prevailing desire of the present age, in only one form ? Since the fact of four Gospels cannot be escaped, wherein and why do they differ ? Do the order, har- mony, and design, which are found everywhere in God's world, appear also in that other work of God, his Word ? In particular, did the infinite Reason preside in the pro- duction of the Gospels, so that we may confidently look for a divine plan in each of them considered by itself, and a like plan in the whole of them taken together ? Answers proposed. For eighteen hundred years, these brief productions, occupying but a few pages in a single book, have evinced their power to raise such ques- tions as these, and to keep the world employed in the effort to answer them. In all ages thoughtful men, and especially the great souls of the Church, have shrunk from looking upon the Gospels as aimless and disjointed productions, mere med- leys of fact and truth. But in seeking to reach the order and unity which tlieir natures craved, they have tried different and often irrational methods. 10 WHY FOUR GOSPELS? The Jiarmonists have attempted to construct, from the four Gospels regarded as a poorly arranged mass of ma- terial, one complete life of Jesus, or, at least, to remove the obstacles to the construction of such a life. The allegorists, seizing upon certain available script- ural symbols, have done their best, in their arbitrary and fanciful way, to put aim and plan into the Gospels. From such irrational methods, pursued through cent- uries with no definite and valuable product of the kind sought after, resulted the method and work of the mod- ern rationalists. From the despair of plan and aim, or the assertion of unreasonable plan and aim, there came, as a natural and inevitable reaction against the old un- reason, the vehement and unreasoning denial of any plan and aim. Against all these the method of right reason is now vindicating itself. The course of modern progress in this, as in so many other fields of investigation, has been from irrationalism through rationalism to the true rea- son. A comprehensive view of this line of work — irra- tional, rationalistic, and truly rational — of the past cent- uries, will best open the way for a new attempt to solve the old and ever-recurring problem. SECTION I. THE HARMONISTS. The Christian Fathers seem to have made little effort to find any plan in the Gospels. Very early, however, they began to produce what may, in a loose way, be called Lives of Christ. These did not so much aim to explain apparent discrepancies, or even to ascertain the exact chronological order of the events, as to reduce the four Gospels to one continuous narrative. They were THE HARMONISTS. 11 luilike the modern so-called Lives ; for although in those as in these the writings of the Evangelists were torn member from member, yet the scattered members were not wholly whelmed in a flood of weak and vapid senti- ment, nor entirely lost in the mazes of a cheap but am- bitious rhetoric. They shared with some of the moderns the error, that uninspired man can give a better form to the material of the Evangelists than the divine form given by inspiration ; but they did not share with them the more monstrous modern error, that uninspired man can improve upon the divine material by adding to it either his profound philosophy or his sentimental twad- dle. As early as A. D. 170, Tatian the Syrian compiled his Diatessaron, — that is, his Gospel according to the four Evangelists, — a work now lost. It was substantially a life of Christ, compiled in accordance with the view of its author, that the ministry of Jesus lasted only one year. Ammonius of Alexandria prepared a similar work, about A. D. 220, which he entitled a Harmony. He divided the four Gospels into short Sections, which he numbered according to the order in which they were to be placed in his combined Gospel or Harmony. The Canons of Eusebius, A. D. 315, was in fact a harmony upon a somewhat different plan from the Ammonian Sections. There are ten of the Canons or Tables, — one exhibiting the Sections common to all the Gospels ; three, those common to any three of the Gos- pels ; five, those common to any two ; and one, those peculiar to any one Gospel. Very little advance has been made upon the work of Ammonius and Eusebius in this direction. The necessity for explaining in a systematic way the apparent discrepancies of the Gospels made itself felt at a later date. The best known, and, perhaps, the most 12 WHY FOUR GOSPELS? valuable of the Harmonies, constructed under pressure of this necessity, is that of Robinson (A. D. 1845), based upon the earlier works of Newcome (1778) and Le Clerc (1699). In the class of works of which it is the repre- sentative, learning the most varied and profound has been brought to bear in the discussion of times, places, and circumstances, with the aim of reconciling apparent discrepancies and contradictions, and of arranging the material of all the Gospels in exact chronological order in one narrative. The Harmonists have done good and worthy work so far as they have assisted to explain the apparent incon- sistencies of the Gospels and to make the true relations of the various portions better understood. So far, how- ever, as they have undertaken to construct one continuous and complete narrative of the career of Jesus of Naza- reth, they have attempted an impossible task. There are no sufficient data upon which to base a just conclu- sion concerning the precise time when many of the events recorded in the Gospels occurred. It will appear subse- quently in this discussion, that it was no part of the aim of the Evangelists to give a complete account of the life of Jesus strictly arranged in the order of time. Their chronology is clear and distinct, at the most, only in the opening and concluding chapters. But even if the exact time of each event could be ascertained, it would still be impossible to combine the four Gospels in one consistent whole. The writers were themselves unlike in nature and culture, and so the style of each is different from that of all the others. They wrote, as will be shown, for different classes of readers, each class requiring a dif- ferent mode of presentation. Each of them looked at Jesus from a different point of view. Some one has compared their four productions to four photographs of the four different sides of a house, — each is distinct, THE HARMONISTS. 13 and the four sides could not possibly be taken in one picture. Results. It is hardly too much to affirm that the efforts to make a complete and harmonious whole out of the Gospels have failed. Says Dr. Isaac Da Costa : " Unhappily by far the most of these Harmonies, for want of any principle of solution drawn from the very nature and organical con- struction of these writings, have contributed rather to embarrass than to resolve the problem, owing to the purely mechanical and forced manner in which its solu- tion has been attempted." ^ Dr. J. Addison Alexander, in an article on Harmonies of the Gospels, ably sums up the whole matter. " What then, it may be asked, is the use of all this harmonistic labor, from the second to the nineteenth century ? We answer, much every way — or rather, every way but one — and that the very one on which the heart of the harmonical interpreter is often set — the undesirable, im- practicable, and chimerical reduction of these four ines- timable gems to one bright but artificial compound. The true use of Harmonies is threefold, Exegetical, Histori- cal, Apologetical. By mere juxtaposition, if judicious, the Gospels may be made to throw light upon each other's obscure places. By combination, not mechanical but rational, not textual but interpretive, harmonies put it in our power, not to grind, or melt, or boil four Gos- pels into one, but out of the four, kept apart, yet viewed together, to extract one history for ourselves. And lastly, by the endless demonstration of the possible solu- tions of apparent or alleged discrepancies, even where we may not be prepared to choose among them, they reduce the general charge of falsehood or of contradiction, not only ad absurdum, but to a palpable impossibility. How 1 The Four Witnesses, p. 4. 14 WHY FOUR GOSPELS ? can four independent narratives be false or contradictory, which it is possible to reconcile on so manj^ distinct hy- potheses ? The art of the most subtle infidelity consists in hiding this convincing argument behind the alleged necessity of either giving a conclusive and exclusive an- swer to all captious cavils and apparent disagreements, or abandoning our faith in the history as a whole. This most important end of Gospel Harmonies has been ac- complished. It has been established, beyond all reason- able doubt, that however the Evangelists may differ, and however hard it may be often to explain the difference, they never, in a single instance, contradict each other. This is a grand result, well worthy of the toil bestowed upon it by the Fathers and Reformers and Divines for eighteen hundred years ; while, on the other hand, the minute chronology, which some of these have viewed as the great object to be aimed at, is as far from its com- plete solution now as in the days of Tatian or Augus- tine ; so that the inquirer may still say to the most able harmonists, with one of Terence's dramatic characters : Fecistis probe, incertior sum multo quam dudmn ! " ^ When one has clearly grasped the characteristics of each of the Gospels, the attempt to mass them all in one, while preserving the glory of each, will appear as absurd as would the attempt of an architect to construct, from the materials of Solomon's Temple, of the Parthenon, of the Coliseum, and of Westminster Abbey, a new temple which should preserve and harmoniously combine the peculiar features of them all, and be neither Jewish, Greek, Roman, nor Gothic. 1 Princeton Review, vol. xxriii. p. 395. THE ALLEGORISTS. 15 SECTION 11. THE ALLEGORISTS. While the Harmonists have been engaged in their im- possible task, another class of minds, delighting in alle- gory and given to imagination, has been engaged upon a work equally impossible. The Cherubim of Ezekiel and the Four Living Creatures of the Apocalypse have played as important a part in their interpretation of the Gospels as the cycles and epicycles played in the theories of the old astronomers. There are four Gospels and there are four of these figures of prophecy. Is not that a wonderful coincidence ? Besides, have not all script- ural symbols an inexhaustible fullness of mystic, pro- phetic signification and application? Why, then, were not those symbols of Ezekiel and John intended by the Spirit of God to symbolize the four Evangelists, — or, at least, those aspects of the person and office of Christ which they respectively exhibit in their Gospels ? Who could say they were not so intended ? Irengeus, Bishop of Lyons in the second century, be- gan with the vision of the four Cherubim, in the first chapter of Ezekiel. That vision, in its symbolical mean- ing, he applied to the distinctive peculiarities of the Gos- pels. " As for the likeness of their faces, they four had the face of a man, and the face of a lion, on the right side ; and they four had the face of an ox on the left side ; they four also had the face of an eagle." The man, according to Irengeus, symbolizes Matthew's Gos- pel ; the lion, Mark's ; the ox, Luke's ; the eagle, John's. So happy a thought could not fail, in the circumstances, to perpetuate itself. The later Fathers adopted and de- veloped the idea of Irenaeus. At the end of two centu- ries, Jerome completed the development, and proposed 16 WHY FOUR GOSPELS? that special arrangement and application of the symbols which the Latin Church adopted, and which Art has perpetuated. His order is that of Ezekiel. The Rhemist fathers interpreted and applied the vision, in accordance with this order of Ezekiel and Jerome. " St. Matthew is likened to a man, because he beginneth with the pedigree of Christ, as he is a man ; St. Mark to a lion, because he beginneth with the preaching of St. John the Baptist, as it were the roaring of a lion in the wilderness ; St. Luke to a calf, because he beginneth with a priest of the Old Testament (to wit, Zacharias, the father of John Baptist), which, priesthood was to sacrifice calves to God ; St. John to an eagle, be- cause he beginneth with the divinity of Christ, flying as high, as more is not possible." This is plainly worse than childish, — absurd ! It explains nothing. It opens to view no aim or harmony before invisible. The great Augustine was dissatisfied with the expla- nation of Iren^eus. So were some even before his day, and more after it. He preferred the order in John's vision of the Four Living Creatures^ as found in Reve- lation iv. 7 : " And the first beast was like a lion, and the second beast was like a calf, and the third beast liad a face as a man, and the fourth beast was like a flying eagle." Matthew's Gospel, according to this view, is symbolized by the lion^ because he sets forth Christ as the Lion of the tribe of Judah ; Mark's by the calf or ox^ because he exhibits Christ as the servant in a life of patient, humble service ; Luke's by the man^ because he hold's forth Christ as the perfection of humanity ; John's by the eagle^ because of his heavenward gaze and fliglit in unfolding the mysteries of Christ's Deity. This was better, — if anything better be attainable by a method so arbitrary, — for it suggests a half-truth in connection with each of the first three Gospels, to which Jerome's inter- THE ALLEGORISTS. 17 pretation did not open the way. Still there was room for new efforts in attaching to the Gospels the symbols of these prophets of the two dispensations. Among the latest adaptations is that of Lange, in his " Life of Jesus," — an adaptation approved by Stier. The ox, the lion, the man, the eagle, is Lange's order. His view is presented in his introduction to the commen- tary on the Gospel according to Matthew. " The first Gospel is preeminently that of history, and of the fulfill- ment of the Old Testament by the sacrificial sufferings and death of Christ and the redemption thus achieved. Hence, the sacrificial bullock is the appropriate symbol of Matthew. The second Gospel presents to our minds the all-powerful revelation and working of Christ as di- rect from heaven, irrespectively of anything that pre- ceded, — the completion of all former manifestations of the Deity. Symbol, the lion. The third Gospel is pre- eminently that of humanity, — human mercy presented in the light of divine grace, the transformation of all human kindness into divine love. Symbol, the figure of a man. Lastly, the fourth Gospel exhibits the deep spir- itual and eternal import of the history of Christ, — the divine element pervading and underlying its every phase, — and with it the transformation of all ideals, in con- nection with Christ. Symbol, the eagle. ''^ Very differ- ent, truly, is the symbol of Lange for Matthew from that of Augustine, — the ox., from the Hon., — ignoring en- tirely the order of divine revelation, — yet with his ex- planation it serves to bring out another half-truth con- cerning the priestly character of Messiah as taught in prophecy and realized in Jesus of Nazareth. Results. But accommodating as these symbols of prophecy have been, the various and never-ending changes in the attempts to apply them to the Gospels show most clearly that the thing attempted is purely ar- 18 WHY FOUR GOSPELS? bitrary. Admitting that they may have been of some nse in the past, in helping to group some of the facts pe- cuhar to the respective Gospels, — of use just as the C3^cles and epicycles were in the old astronomy, or the. nebular hypothesis in the modern, — still they are scarcely worthy to be taken into serious account in any attempt to reach a philosophic and common-sense view of the existence and structure of the four Gospels. It is not too much to say that the attempts to put a plan into the Gospels, in this arbitrary way, have failed no less utterly than the attempts of the harmonists to put the material of the Gospels into a new form better than the divine. SECTION in. THE EATIONALISTS. Out of these irrational modes of treating the Gospels has come the modern reaction, which has taken form, on its worst side, in Rationalism. The Rationalist accepts the failure of the irrational method as conclusive against all aim and plan in the Gospels. As the Gospels are a medley, they are therefore not from God. Still, the med- ley — a very extraordinary one certainly — remains to be accounted for. To account for it without the aid of the supernatural is the aim of the rationalist. Pantheistic form. David Friedrich Strauss, who has but recently passed away, was the man who first gave literary shape — in his " Life of Jesus," published in 1835 — to a view of the Gospels which had been for some time floating in dim and undefined form in the German mind of his age. The reality of our Lord's life may be attacked in two, and only two, ways ; it may be urged that the Gospel history is pure fable, without any better basis of histori- cal fact than the " Arabian Nights," or that it is a mixt- THE RATIONALISTS. 19 ure of fact and fable, like the Grecian and Roman le- gends, which can only be separated by the aid of critical intuition. Strauss took the former method of attack. His work was the inevitable last outcome of German Pantheism. Pantheism denies a Personal God. The Gospel history must therefore be false or at least mythi- cal, because the notion of a Personal God and Creator of men, and of a Son of God, revealing the will of the Heavenly Father, is unphilosophical, — a dream of su- perstition, and not a truth of reason as expounded by its latest and highest prophet, Hegel.^ It was not by his science, but by his fundamental hypothesis, the assump- tion of the truth of Pantheism, that Strauss aimed to rid the world of the Gospeifacts. His scientific method led him to apply both philosophy and criticism to the Gospels, and in his hands, with the truth of Pantheism postulated, botli were of course equally destructive. As Strauss adopted the philosophy of Hegel, we ac- cordingly find the Hegelian idea prominent in all his speculations on the Gospels. He maintained that he be- lieved as an idea what others believed as history. The idea is before the facts and creates the so-called facts. The need of a deliverer created the idea of a Saviour. The old prophecies, misinterpreted, fashioned in the pop- ular mind a character to be attributed to that Saviour. The whole Gospel history is an attempt of the ruling idea of the Jewish race in that age to realize itself in fact. The imagination, or mi/thus, to which the need of a de- liverer gave rise, grew in process of time into the great four-fold fable of the Gospels. The facts in Christianity were temporary, the ideas eternal. Christ was the type of humanity. His life, death, and resurrection were the symbol of the life, 1 See Tulloch, Lectures on M. Renan's "Vie de Jesus," p. 32. 20 WHY FOUR GOSPELS? death, and resurrection of liumanity. The former was unimportant and temporary, the latter momentous and eternal. An exoteric religion for the people might ex- hibit the one ; the esoteric for the philosopher might re-, tain the other. In short, the dogmas of the Gospel are true, but the history false. With his Hegelian philosophy and criticism, Strauss would have done for the Gospels what Niebuhr and Grote have done for the Roman and Grecian legends of the pre-historic age, given in poetry and tradition ; and he would have relegated the Jesus of the Evangelists to the same shadowy place in history with -^neas, Hercules, the early kings of Rome, and the Brutus of England. It is already acknowledged by all competent critics that, in spite of all his marvelous learning, the attempt of Strauss was, philosophically, a complete and miserable failure. Jesus of Nazareth lived not in fabulous but in historic times, — in fact, in the most cultivated age of antiquity. The four Gospels are, on the very face of them, not poems, or legends, or myths, but simple, life-like, histori- cal narratives, which could have been produced only by or with the aid of eye-witnesses. It can be proved that they all existed in their present form before the close of the first century, so that no time is anywhere given for the growth of the wonderful myths of Strauss. It were far easier to prove Julius Caesar a myth, than to prove Jesus Christ a myth. The principles by which Strauss would prove the life of Jesus a fable, would as readily prove the life of Napoleon a fable. Positivist form. In the acknowledged failure of Strauss is found the secret of the changed plan of attack by M. Ernest Renan, in his " Life of Jesus." It is im- possible to show the Gospel history to be all fable ; the next thing to that is to show it to be a mixture of fact and fable. There must be a basis of fact. M. Renan THE RATIONALISTS. 21 will pick it out according to his own taste. He has a monopoly of the intuition of Gospel fact. So he gives the world his " Fifth Gospel," — his " Life of Jesus." It might more appropriately be styled M. Kenan's " Ro- mance of Jesus ; " since there is no Gospel left in it ex- cept what may be found in the author's very French no- tions of sentiment and morality. This work was the inevitable outgrowth of French Positivism. Positivism affirms that the universe is gov- erned by necessary law, and its order is therefore un- changing. The notion of a personal Will interposing in human affairs is therefore incompatible with science. The miracles of the Gospels, in short whatever professes to be a manifestation of the supernatural or of a per- sonal Will, must be false.^ The chief problem of positivist criticism must there- fore require the separation, by some power of critical intuition, of the true in the Gospels from the false, of the fact from the fable. To this work Renan, with his brilliant erudition and his still more brilliant style, sets himself. Renan finds three periods in the life of Jesus. In the first, the hero has some features of the Jesus of the Evangelists left. M. Renan would make him appear as a moralist and a gentle reformer of the noblest and pur- est character, according to the attenuated French idea of moralist and reformer and of nobility and purity. In the second, Jesus is brought under the influence of the gloomy Baptist, and his sweet nature is changed by close contact with that sterner character. Somehow the notion of a strange ideal kingdom gets into his head, and he sets about establishing it. In this he fails, and the third period is marked by a radical change of character and conduct. Disappointed and embittered, he raves 1 See Tulloch, Lectures on M. Kenan's "Vie de J^siis," p. 33. 22 WHY FOUR GOSPELS? against all classes of men ; is tempted to make use of deception and yields; and, in the belief in some com- ing world-revolution, hurries on his own violent death, and is buried in a grave from which M. Renan does not allow the stone to be rolled away. This is the basis of fact, according to Renan, on which the great romances of the Gospels were constructed. Naturally not a few readers have inquired how it happens that the brilliant Frenchman has a monopoly of that critical intuition which is absolutely necessary to cull the facts of the Gospels from the fable. Those in- clined to receive him as their teacher have gone farther and insisted on claiming a share of that intuition for themselves. The intuition of the equally brilliant author of Ecce Homo differs from that of the Frenchman and from that of everybody else. Even M. Renan's intuition changes from time to time ; and there is no one to decide where the rationalistic doctors all disagree. Men of sense begin to see clearly that this new prin- ciple once admitted would destroy all the foundations of History, no less surely than would the older principle of Strauss. As they read the grand story of the Gos- pels, they feel that the life, character, and mission of Jesus of Nazareth are " one in idea, in purpose, in ac- complishment, and result." They turn away from M. Renan's no-gospel as a repulsive thing, and the polished Frenchman's romance, after being a nine-days' wonder, is making haste to the upper shelves or the waste bas- ket. Not even with the aid of French vivacity and genius can such a baseless and sentimental production hold its own against the clear unity, the intense reality, and the divine spirituality of the Gospel narratives. Results. On the whole, Christianity has little reason to complain of the final results of these German and French ventures. The year in which Strauss published THE COMMON-SENSE CRITICS. 23 liis life of Jesus is as memorable in theology as 1848 in politics. Theologians of all classes saw that it called for a reconstruction of the whole subject of the origin and foundations of Christianity. If it formed the starting point of the new literature of unbelief, it likewise awak- ened Christian thought and directed it to the central facts of Gospel history, and above all to the Divine Per- son revealed there. The life of Jesus has thus called forth from Christian scholars the richest results of critical investigation and exposition of the place of the Gospels in literature and history, and has given the historical Christ a firmer hold on the intelligent faith of mankind than he has ever before had. In fine, both pantheism and positivism did their best in Strauss and Renan, and failed. The conflict that has since been waged is but the nec- essar}^ disagreement of the inquiring in passing from the blind and worthless agreement of the ignorant to the priceless unanimity of the intelligent and enlightened. But for the efforts of Strauss and his successors, the Church might still have known nothing of the common- sense, historic criticism, to which it ah-eady owes so much, and from which it may reasonably hope for so much more. SECTION IV. THE COMMON-SENSE CEITICS. The modern reaction from the irrational and rational- istic methods has given rise to a common-sense criticism, which promises to lead ultimately to a correct and full understanding of the Gospels. It asks men to look at the Gospels as they are, and to study them in the light of the times and forces that shaped them. It aims to do for the Gospels the work that the Baconian philosophy has done for the world of nature. 24 WHY FOUR GOSPELS ? Says Matthew Arnold : " Of the literature of France and Germany, as of the mtellect of Europe in general, the main effort, for now many years, has been a critical effort ; the endeavor in all branches of knowledge, — theology, philosophy, history, art, science, — to see the object as in itself it really is." We accept this as cer- tainly the proper aim of all critical study of words from God, if not of the proper study of merely human pro- ductions, — to come to see them as they really are. The practical question in connection with the criticism of the Gospels is. How can this end be attained ? Through a long period of honest, earnest work the Christian Church has been approximating to the true method, and through it to the true answer. It is obvious, however, from what has already been presented, that the progress toward the goal has not been made in a right line. Human reason, when employed on these great divine subjects, has a most unreasonable way of taking to by-ways and cross-roads of investiga- tion, and of losing sight of the one main track. Along the line of Gospel study two things have been prominent : the divine records themselves ; and the ever- increasing mass of related facts, geographical, biographi- cal, and historical, drawn partly from those records and partly from independent sources. There are, therefore, three possible methods of proced- ure. The true method and the best results obviously require that both these sources of knowledge shall be taken into account. In the actual work of criticism, however, one class of critics has looked only to the records, and another only to the related facts ; and both, by adopt- ing wrong methods, have failed of securing the most val- uable results. The work of the former class has too often degenerated into a barren consideration of petty details or of the mere letter of the Scriptures, while that THE COMMON-SENSE CRITICS. 25 of the latter lias sunk into equally barren geographical, biographical, or historical speculation on subjects only remotely connected with the truths of the divine reve- lation. But it is a satisfaction to be assured, that even the departures from the right line of progress must ulti- mately assist in reaching the truth, by showing that the truth does not lie in the directions in which these depart- ures have been made, but somewhere midway between them. The history of Gospel study, up to the present time, may be said to have fairly demonstrated that the old commentary of petty detail, which sticks to isolated facts and to words and letters, to the neglect of the more important things of the Scriptures, will not greatly help men to see the productions of the Evangelists as they really are. It ignores the divine system and the infinitely varied relations that must exist wherever God's thought finds expression. It is a fatal mistake to fix the attention upon verses and phrases, upon names and dates, upon words and syllables, and to lose sight of that spirit which is infinitely above the mere letter, and of that truth of the entire Gospels which is infin- itely grander than the mere sum of the separate parts. In a whole library of commentaries constructed after this microscopic method, one can scarcel}^ find a trace of the truest, highest glories of the writings of the Evangelists. In like manner it has been shown very clearly that the commentary which devotes itself to things external and incidental to the Gospels, and which so generally sinks into petty biographical, historical, or geographical criticism, can give even less aid toward understanding the productions of the Evangelists as they really are. It is doubtless important, in the examination of literary works, to consider the personality, the circumstances, the country and the career of the author. But when this 26 WHY FOUR GOSPELS ? degenerates into petty search after curious facts, often more useless than curious, it fails to lay open the secret of an author's life, and does little toward making his pro- ductions intelligible. Of what imaginable help is it, in understanding the mighty work of a Newton in the world, to know that he was "small enough, when he was born, to be put into a quart mug, and that if he had any animal taste, it was for apples of the red-streak sort ? " Of what possible service in understanding the sublime tragedies of ^schylus, is the much-paraded story, that the old man had his bald head broken by an eagle, which, high in air, mistook it for a 'stone, and dropped a tortoise on it to crack for a meal ? And yet how much of so-called gospel illustration deals with facts and fables as petty and worthless as these ! Thoughtful men are beginning to see that valuable lives may be worse than wasted by scholars who give themselves up to such work in connection with the history of the Evan- gelists. A whole library of such materials may fail to give any one the least insight into the real spirit of Mat- thew, Mark, Luke, and John, or the slightest glimpse of the true spiritual power of their productions. Results. The final result of these erroneous methods has been to turn the attention toward the true method, whicii may be characterized as that of genuine textual and historical criticism. It gives due attention both to the sacred records, in their minute details and in their grand unities, and to the important related facts. The fundamental law of this criticism requires, on the one hand, that he who wishes to understand the Gospels shall devote tlie proper stud}^ and accord due weight, to the agents and forces, human and divine, individual and national, which wrought in producing them, and to the ideas, customs, circumstances, relations, and aims which gave them final shape. Without proper regard to this THE COMMON-SENSE CRITICS. 27 canon no right understanding of tlie Gospels in their completeness and unity is possible. The same law re- quires, on the other hand, that he who wishes to under- stand the Gospels as they really are shall devote no less earnest study to the sacred records themselves, — seeking in the light of all the related facts to grasp them in de- tail and in completeness, in part and in whole ; making use of the previously sought out secret of the author's age and life and genius, and of the revelation of the di- vine purpose, to reach the still higher secret of the glad tidings to all men. In the " Life, Times, and Travels of St. Paul," Cony- beare and Howson have applied this method with nota- ble success in dealing with a portion of the Acts of the Apostles and with the Pauline Epistles. Their work has thrown new and marvelous light upon apostolic times in general, and especially upon the career of the Apostle to the Gentiles. A proper application of the same method to the Gos- pels cannot fail to bring out something of the divine sys- tem, which most certainly inheres in the mass of Gospel facts of which Jesus of Nazareth is the central figure. The light which it must cast upon the productions of the Evangelists cannot fail to invest them with a new, fresh, yet common-sense and historic, interest. The Gospels themselves will at the same time be permitted to present their own best vindication against both rationalism and irrationalism ; and will furnish, in their respective aims and plans, and in their complete unity and harmony, a new and most convincing argument in favor of the Christianity based upon them. Topics. In the course of such a work the questions : Why are there four Gospels ? and. Wherein and why do they differ ? will, it is trusted, be satisfactorily answered ; or, at least, the direction along which the true answer can alone he found be clearly pointed out. 28 WHY FOUR GOSPELS ? It will appear incidentally how false is the common notion that the divine work for the redemption of the world might have been accomplished just as well by one Gospel, or any other number than four, — so false, in- deed, that history would have to be - transformed, the world revolutionized, and the nature of the races radi- calty changed, before the divine purpose could have reached its fulfillment through one or three or five or any other number than the divinely chosen four. The method. The proposed application of this com- mon-sense method will require : — Firsts the consideration of such introductory topics as the preparation of the world for the advent of the Mes- siah ; the advent and career of the Messiah ; and the actual origin of the four written Gospels. Secondly^ the special consideration of each of the four Gospels, in its origin, design, arid authorship, and in its adaptation in structure and matter to those for whom it was originally prepared. PAET I. THE PURPOSE OF GOD AND THE GOSPEL. " Careless seems the Great Avenger ; history's pages but record One death-grapple in the darkness 'twixt old systems and the Word ; Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne, — Yet that scaffold sways the future, and, behind the dim unknown, Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above his own." James Russell Lowell. " For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe." 1 Corinthians i. 21. CHAPTER I. THE PREPARATION FOR THE ADVENT OF THE MESSLA.H. Though man often works irrationally and without plan, God never does. In tlie introduction of Christian- ity into the world there was a divine plan whose work- ing out reached through all the ages until the complete embodiment of the one Gospel in the four forms in which it appears in the Bible. Into that plan the an- cient world, Jewish and Pagan, consciously or uncon- sciously entered. In general terms, it has been said that " Judaism prepared salvation for mankind, and heathenism prepared mankind for salvation." ^ This statement may perhaps be shown to be only a half-truth, — since it will be found that Judaism did a chief part 1 Kurtz, Text Booh of Ch. History, vol. i. p. 44. 30 PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH. of the work of preparing mankind for salvation, — but a most important half-truth nevertheless. Two parts may be seen in this plan : a first, which in- cludes the preparation made for the Advent, or the com- ing of Messiah ; a second, which includes the coming and career of Messiah and the preaching and written embod- iment of his Gospel. The preparation for the advent of Jesus Christ in- volved the missions of Jew and Pagan. In the case of the former, the work of preparation was carried on by means of revelation ; in the case of the hitter by means of free experience. So, in substance, writes Pressense.^ It will be seen, however, that revelation had much to do, through the Jewish dispersion, with the preparation of the heathen world for Messiah. SECTION I. THE PEEPARATORY MISSION OF THE JEWS. " The salvation is of the Jews." - These are the words of Jesus Christ himself to the woman of Samaria by the well of Sychar. Salvation is the one necessity of the race. No religion, therefore, that has not salvation as its essence can meet the wants of the race. It was the mission of the Jew to receive directly from God, and, in due time, transmit to the whole human race the only religion of salvation, and therefore the only true world-religion. Everything connected with the history of the Jews had reference to the completion of this one religion for mankind. Each revelation and dis- pensation, all discipline and punishment, every promise and threatening, their constitution, laws, and worship, 1 Religions before Christ, p. 191. 2 John iv. 22. The defiuite article used in the original gives the mean- ing : The (promised and only) salvation comes from the Jews. MISSION OF THE JEWS. 81 every political, civil, and religious institution (so far as they were legitimate and proper), tended toward this one goal.^ In the light of providential developments and later revelations, the divine plan as connected with the Jews may readily be traced, in its great outlines, from the calling of Abraham to the advent of Christ. The history of the chosen people has been providen- tially divided into two periods, the first of which ended with the captivity and the extinction of national inde- pendence, and the second, with the Advent. The first was, in general terms, a period of national unity and integrity, and of complete separation from the outside world. The second was a period of national disintegra- tion, of dispersion throughout the whole world, and of most varied union with mankind. To the careless glance there seems a contradiction in the parts of this divine plan. Why first the policy of complete isolation, and then an abrupt change to the op- posite ? As always elsewhere, so here, to a closer inspec- tion, the unity and consistency of the divine purpose clearly appear. The one purpose was twofold. The work of the period of isolation may be characterized as the revelation of the world-religion to the chosen people and the establishment of its sway over them. The work of the period of dispersion may be characterized as missionary in its nature, and as intended to impress the world-religion, in the form in which it had been revealed to the chosen people, upon the pagan races, in order to prepare them for the reception of the Divine Saviour with his salvation. I. The Jewish Isolation. Two great epochs are to be distinguished in the his- tory of Judaism during the period of isolation. In the 1 Kurtz, Text Book of Ch. History, vol. i. p. 43. 32 PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH. first, the Jewish system was definitely constituted, re- ceiving its institutions from God, in the Covenant, through Abraham, and in the Law, through Moses. In the second, Israel was established in the land of Canaan, and the power of the new religion developed by the growth and perfection of its institutions and by a cycle of sublime revelations throwing vivid light upon the future. The first epoch was characterized by the pre- dominance of the legal element, the second, by that of the prophetic, — though neither element was ever alto- gether absent. The Covenant, the Law, and the Proph- ets thus represent the three aspects of the Jewish rehg- ion during the age of isolation. The Covenant. The first stage of the divine work of salvation began when Abraham of Ur of the Chal- dees was called to be the head of a privileged family, and the progenitor of a race privileged for the world's sake. In the covenant which Jehovah made with Abraham are found a command, a promise, and a seal. " Get thee out of thj country, and from thy kin- dred." ^ "I am the Almighty God ; walk before me and be thou perfect." 2 So ran the command. It called to a separation from paganism with its many gods and to a dedication to the one Almighty God. Its monothe- ism and its separation foreshadowed the more complete revelation and law which were to come by Moses. *' And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing : and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee : and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed." ^ So read the promise. While assuring to Abraham and his descendants special bless- ing and grace, whereby they should be exalted and the 1 Genesis xii. 1. 2 Genesis xvii. I. ^ Genesis xii. 2, 3. MISSION OF THE JEWS. 33 true religion preserved, it reached out to the whole hu- man race and was made in its interests, and so foreshad- owed the world-religion to be brought in by Christ. It involved the germ of all the subsequent prophecies of Messiah and all the later developments of God's plan for the salvation of the world. '' This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and thee, and thy seed after thee ; every man child among you shall be circumcised." ^ Such was the seal. It was a " fit symbol of that removal of the old man and renewal of nature which qualified Abraham to be the parent of a holy seed." ^ Thus were furnished the germs of the world-religion. The Mosaic System. The holy seed which was called and created ^ in Abraham grew into a nation and in due time was called out of Egypt to receive, by the hand of Moses, a fuller revelation of God's law and grace. This was the second stage of the divine work. The era of the Law began with the experience in the wilderness, on the way from Egypt to the promised land. It was then that the descendants of Abraham received those divine revelations which shaped their whole na- tional life. They were, at the foundation, revelations of law, and expressed what it was God's will that the chosen people should do and become ; but they were likewise revelations of grace, unfolding the method by which the people might, in conduct and character, attain to the ful- fillment of the divine will. The legal element of the divine revelation through Moses embraced the Jewish civil code and the moral law. The chosen people, already united by common suffering 1 Genesis xvii, 10. 2 Muvphy, Commentary on Genesis, xvii. 9-14. 8 Hebrews xi. 12. 34 PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH. and blessing, were tborougiily organized as a nation, and their union confirmed and consolidated at Sinai, by the establishment of a civil code. This code — the similar- ity of which to our own has been remarked by the emi- nent French jurist, De Tocqueville — was subordinate to higher than civil ends.^ The moral law, summed up in the Decalogue, adjiressed to the understanding, sanc- tioned by suitable authority, and enforced by adequate penalties, was designed to impress upon the people God's moral attributes. It was " the clearest expression of the holy will of God before the advent of Christ. It set forth the ideal of righteousness, and was thus fitted most effectually to awaken a sense of man's great departure from it, and to give the knowledge of sin and guilt (Rom. iii. 20). It acted as a school-master to lead men to Christ that they might be justified by faith (Gal. iii. 24)." 2 The gracious element in the Mosaic system, as distin- guished from the legal element, was embodied in concrete and sensible form in the ceremonial law. This was nec- essary, for abstract statement was not enough. God's purpose both of law and grace needed to be put into such a form that it could be impressed upon the mind tlirough the senses, — needed to be put in the form of a perpetual object lesson. This was accomplished by the ritual of the Mosaic religion. That religion was embodied in the four institutions which were at the basis of all the an- cient religions : sacrifice ; the priesthood ; the sanctuary, or sacred place of adoration ; and religious festivals, or periods consecrated to adoration. These institutions were purified from all heathen elements and given their full significance. It was necessary that the grace element should be ^ See "Wines, Commentaries on the Laws of the Ancient Hebreics. 2 SchafF, History of the Apostolic Church, p. 39. MISSION OF THE JEWS. 35 added and placed over against the law, for mere law was not enough to save men. There was therefore attached to the Mosaic rites " both a symbolical and typical value, representing important truths having a present applica- tion, and being at the same time the shadow of good things to come." ^ They spoke at once of present duty and future blessing. The moral law brought despair and death ; the sacrifices brought in the idea of reparation, of atonement, by death for death, and typified the great comino; atonement. The moral law made man feel his unfitness to approach Jehovah ; the priest, set apart and purified, appeared between the sinner and an offended God, symbolizing the separation while typifying the great High Priest by whom the race should be brought nigh to God. There was needed a permanent centre for this sac- rificial system, a sanctuary ; this was found at first in the tabernacle (afterward in the temple), which perpetually symbolized the salvation of God, and typified the better things to come. The people must be brought into close and frequent contact with this great centre that they may effectually learn the lessons of their religious sys- tem ; the sacred festivals, with the daily sacrifices and sabbatic ordinances, were for this end. The Mosaic ritual and the whole system of Judaism, given in the wilderness, were developed and perfected in the land of promise. Judjea was as admirably situated in that age, for maintaining the isolation of the Israehtes from all the world, as it proved to be, in a later age and in altered circumstances, for bringing them into closest connection and union with all the world. It was at the common centre of the three grand divisions of the old world, and surrounded by the great nations of ancient culture ; but it was separated from them by deserts on the south and east, by sea on the west, and by mountains 1 Prcssense, The Religions before Christ, p. 207. 36 PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH. on the north.^ The Mosaic legislation reared a still more impassable barrier than deserts and seas and mountains, between God's people and the pagan world. What with the land and the legislation and the de- struction of the Canaanites, freedom for the full develop- ment of Judaism, without disturbing influences from the heathen at home or abroad, was secured. When the monarchy reached the height of its glory, under David and Solomon, the ritual reached its most complete and magnificent embodiment in the temple then erected and made the centre of the Jewish system. Development of Prophecy. The third stage in the divine work had already been entered upon. While the law was advancing toward its most perfect unfolding, the element of prophecy began to assume increasing prom- inence. The Pentateuch opens with the promise that the seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent's head. That promise had always kept its place in the unfolding of Judaism. To Abraham it was made more definite ; from his seed was to come the mysterious benefactor who was to restore the whole human race. Thus the promise of the world-religion, the theme and burden of prophecy, was given. Each new phase of Jewish history enriched it. In the time of Samuel, some eleven centuries before Christ, prophecy received an organized form in a perma- nent prophetical office and order, and was thus prepared to take its place as a leading element in the Jewish re- ligious development. It was the vocation of the prophet to keep alive the fundamental truth of the covenant, to keep before the minds of the people their high vocation, to call them back from idolatry, and to inspire them with a living faith in their glorious destiny. Borrowing his 1 Schaff, History of the Christian Church, p. 36. MISSION OF THE JEWS. 37 symbols from the times in which he Hved, and thus secur- ing an ever-present freshness, the prophet of the Lord pointed, with a clearness increasing to the last, to the Messiah in whom all the promises should be realized to Israel and to the world. Says Dr. William H. Green, in an essay on " The Mat- ter of Prophecy " : " The prophetic exhibition of Christ is accomplished by successive teachings, each suited to its own age and its own special design, but all combining to produce the general effect. The prophets may thus be likened to a grand orchestra. Each musician plays a part adapted to his own particular instrument, which, taken by itself, is designed to give a particular effect to the piece ; and yet they are attuned in such precise har- mony, and so contrived with reference to the various pos- sibilities of the melody, that, combined upon the oratorio of the Messiah, they bring out, as could in no other way be done, the full power of that magnificent production. The necessities of one period call for the presentation of the coming Saviour and his work under one point of view ; those of other periods lead to the contemplation of them from different sides. And the necessities of the people, as they arise in the progress of their history, are themselves accommodated to the grand end to be accom- plished, being of such a variety and character, that the instructions which they demand may complete the total of the revelations to be made respecting Messiah before his advent." ^ When the prophetic era closed, the idea of the coming Messiah, to whom the whole ritual pointed and in whom all prophecy centred, had been made as prominent in the Jewish mind as was the law when it had become en- shrined in the temple of Solomon at the close of the legal period. Every eye was turned toward the coming Christ. 1 Princeton Review, The Matter of Prophecy, October, 1862. 38 PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH. But before this great work had been fully accomplished and the voices of the prophets hushed, the chosen peo- ple had passed from the period of isolation from all the world to the period of dispersion through all the world. II. The Jewish Dispersion. Certain events in the progress of the prophetic period, and especially toward its close, prepared for the transi- tion from the early condition of national unity and iso- lation to the later one of disintegration ■ and dispersion. The extraordinary material prosperity of the Jewish monarchy began the work of breaking down the barriers between the chosen people and the world ; the judgments of God completed it. In the prosperity and the judg- ments originated the system of means divinely employed for disseminating the truths of the world-religion; Prosperity and judgments. In pusliing the bounds of his kingdom out to the limits of the other great na- tions of the earth, King David made the Israelites one of the most prominent nations of that age, the rival in power and splendor of Eg3^pt and Assyria, and a fit object for their fear and jealousy. Still later, the necessity for gold and silver and other building materials, arising from the construction of the temple of Solomon and the various works in which that monarch attempted to rival the other great empires, gave an impulse to a world-wide commerce and intercourse. The sea on the west ceased to be a barrier, and became instead a highway to the nations, even as far west as Tarshish or Spain. The ports of Ezion-geber and Elath, at the head of the Akabah, opened the way for an active trade, both to the south and east, with the nations aloug the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean. The deserts on the east, north and south, no longer shut them out from the older nations of the world from which the Jewish race MISSION OF THE JEWS. 39 originally sprung. By building Tadmor, or Palmyra, on an oasis midway between Damascus and the Eu- phrates, Solomon gained control of the immense trade of Egypt and Asia Minor with the east by caravan, and thus made the wealth of both the east and the west tributary to the prosperity of his own realm. A highway for trade was opened into Egypt, and Solomon allied himself to Pharaoh by marrying his daughter. The way was thus prepared for the Jews, who were by nature a race of merchants, to become the merchants of the ■world. The story of the very general departure of the Je^vish race from the true God and of their lapse into idolatry, which resulted from their connection with the heathen nations, is too familiar to need rehearsal. In tliis defec- tion Solomon himself — who, with all his wisdom, was unable to withstand the seductive influences of prosperity — took the lead, by the introduction and establishment of idolatry in the various forms in which it was practiced by his heathen wives. He had taken these wives in dis- obedience to God's plain command, thereby showing his own early departure from the true religion. The story of the divine judgments which followed the apostasy of the chosen people is equally familiar. The divine wrath did not delay, but fell even upon Solomon. At his death the vast empire of David had already shrunk to its original narrow limits, and the Lord declared that even what remained should be rent from his successors. Jeroboam, when he had drawn off the ten tribes in re- volt, established the idolatrous worship as the religion of the State, and from that time Israel, or the ten tribes, made haste to destruction, in spite of the many warnings and judgments of God. The final blow fell when Shal- manezer, king of Assyria, took Samaria, razed it, de- stroyed the kingdom of Israel, and carried the captives 40 PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH. away to Halali and Habor (Chebar). Judah followed in the idolatry of Israel, and a little more than a cent- ury later its people were carried away captive to Baby- lon, save a remnant that fled into Egypt. The prophetic activity reached its height during the decline and captivity. It was then that the sins against the covenant needed most to be rebuked. Early in that period appeared Elijah and Elisha, who wrought more miracles than any prophet since the days of Moses and Joshua. Just before the overthrow of Israel, Isaiah and Micah flourished in Judah, contemporary with Hosea and Amos in Israel. The two former survived that overthrow, and were succeeded by Nahum and Zephaniah, through whom, in the reign of Hezekiah and Josiah, a partial and temporary reformation was wrought in Ju- dah. It is obvious, moreover, that in the captivity the hopes of the Messiah needed to be kept most clearly before the people. Still more earnestly, therefore, did the prophets then ply their vocation among the captives of Judah, directing them in working God's purposes, — Jeremiah with the remnant in Egypt ; Ezekiel among those by the river of Chebar ; Daniel at the court of the great eastern monarch ; Ezra and Nehemiah in leading back the band that rebuilt Jerusalem and the temple. Hag- gai, Zechariah, and Malachi, after the restoration, con- cluded the communications of God, in that age, touching the coming of Messiah and the great events of the future, using the deliverance from captivity as the type of Mes- siah's work. With them the roll of the prophets ended, and the voice of prophecy ceased till the near approach of the Advent. Disseraination of the World-religion. The work of transmitting the true religion from the narrow limits of the Jewish race, where it had been prepared, to the MISSION OF THE JEWS. 41 widest limits of the human race, for which it had been prepared, had ah*eady begun. Providentially, in connection with the prosperity and the judgments, there was somehow perfected the most complete system of means possible for the dissemination of the truth. It may now be seen that everything wrought together marvelously in God's plan, and for the accomplishment of his ends. It is manifest from his- tory that the captivity and dispersion made tlie profound- est moral impression upon both Jew and Gentile, and that the restoration of the Jews resulted in the most constant and intimate intercourse of Jerusalem with all the world. The captivity produced a revolution in the sentiments of both Jews and Gentiles respecting the true Judaism. It cured the Jews of their idolatry, bound them as never before to their sacred records, and urged them on to make proselytes of all the world. Says Dr. S chaff : " As to religion, the Jews, especially after the Baby- lonish captivity, adhered most tenaciously to the letter of the law, and to their traditions and ceremonies, but without knowing the spirit and power of the Script- ures." ^ This is the universal testimonj^ on the sub- ject. Neander has shown how the Pharisees, or strict Jews, labored to make proselytes. The wavering au- thority of the old national religions, the unsatisfied relig- ious necessities of so many, came in to aid them. Hence, the inclination to Judaism, particularly in the large capi- tal cities, became very marked.^ The character of the Jew, as elevated by the judg- ments of the captivity, turned the favorable attention of the heathen world to the true religion. The Jew was the cultured religious man of that age. With Egypt he 1 Schaff, History of the Christian Church, p. 37. 2 Neander, Church History, vol. i. p. 67. 42 PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH. had shared the early knowledge of the arts. In the exo- dus, before the origin of Greek letters, his written lan- guage exhibited the fruits of his sojourn in the land of the Nile. He belonged to that Semitic race which has given the world, besides so many precious words of sci- ence and art, the three great and only systems of The- ism. It is obvious, too, that the religion of the Jew, unlike that of the heathen, was bound to a law of moral purity. Men might complain that they could not see the God of the Jew ; but the}^ could not help feeling the morality of his law. As a slave in heathen households moulding the young, as a steward overseeing his master's business, as a counselor of kings directing the destinies of nations, the true Israelite was everywhere doing in his measure, by the purity and diligence of his life, the work which Daniel the prophet did, in the highest, positions, by his personal influence in winning men to his own pure and lofty faith. The Jew, moreover, was then as ever the thrifty man of the world. Born with a tendenc}^ to acquisition, made by his religion a man to be trusted, he was prepared by his tact and thrift and enterprise to be the banker, merchant, and executive man of business, and so to cooperate in the work for heathendom which God was carr3ang forward both by natural and supernatural agencies. Xerxes, who attempted the conquest of Greece, had a Jewish cup- bearer, a Jewish consort, and a Jewish prime minister. But the most striking impressions made upon the na- tions in favor of the true religion were due to the special manifestations of divine power. These manifestations were very marked during the ex- ile. They were needed both to correct and comfort the people of God, and also to impress the character of Je- hovah, as the only true God, upon the greatest of the MISSION OF THE JEWS. 43 Oriental Empires. In all this miracalous work, tlie prophets were the representatives of God. Foremost among them all was Daniel, the most faultless character of the old dispensation, and one of the grandest of all the prophets. The book which bears his name is one con- tinued record of miracles of power and foresight, wrought at the veiy centre of oriental magnificence, and exerting an influence on the future destiny of the nations that witnessed them, perhaps greater than those wrought in Egypt and at Sinai. Kings heard his prophecies, and knew that God spoke by him. They witnessed his mi- raculous works and his striking deliverances, and ac- knowledged the God of the Jews to be *' the God of gods." By royal decrees they did what was in their power to make their own feeling the universal feeling of western Asia. Influenced by the prophet, Cyrus issued the decree for the rebuilding of the temple and provided the requisite means for the work. The reestablishment at Jerusalem of a grand religious centre, from which light was to go out into all the world while men were waiting for the advent of Messiah, was therefore one of the most impressive proofs of the wonderful revolution wrought by the exile, in Oriental heathendom. The New Religious Centre. Never was there a more complete and marvelous provision of God than that for making the most of this moral impression, upon Jew and Gentile, in giving the true religion the widest possi- ble influence. The restored city and temple, the com- pleted canon of the Scriptures, and the synagogue system constitute the chief features of that provision. Jerusalem was restored to be henceforth not a national centre, as under David and Solomon, but simply a relig- ious metropolis to the whole dispersed nation, from which sliould go forth the spiritual influences which should fash- ion the future of mankind. 44 PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH. Hence tlie edict of Cyrus, which originated in the di- vine counsels, was a permission and not a command. The long period of war and desolation had changed the aspect of Judaea. It had ceased to be in the old sense " a land flowing with milk and honey." It could never again be the great natural centre of wealth it had once been, for the line of trade had been changed, and its history was to be one of dependence. Henceforward it must be sought as a home chiefly for the memories of what it had been, or for the hopes of what it should again become through the Messiah. No decree of earthly king could have brought back more than a small portion of the descendants of Abra- ham. The great mass had become engaged in commerce, banking, and retail traffic, and would not make the Holy City their place of residence. " The emigrants doubt- less consisted chiefly of the pious and the poor ; and as the latter proved docile to their teachers, a totally new spirit reigned in the restored nation." ^ Jerusalem thus became comparatively pure, as a religious centre, and was fitted to elevate the Jews of the dispersion who came up from year to year to the great festivals. While the Holy City and the temple were thus being restored, the divine religion, which gave them their sig- nificance and their sacredness, was receiving its final and unalterable written form. One step toward securing this result was taken in the gathering up of the sacred writings and the completion of the Old Testament canon, by Ezra, the propliet and scribe. From that time forward nothing was to be added to the word of God until Christ should come, and the Jews guarded it with jealous care against all attempted additions whatsoever. Another step was taken when the Hebrew ceased to 1 See Kitto, Cyclopcedia, article "Captivities." MISSION OF THE JEWS. 45 be a living language. Living languages change ; old words die or receive new meanings ; new words are con- stantly produced. "With a living language, in constant contact with new phases of Oriental and Greek thought, the Jews might have greatly corrupted the sacred rec- ords. But in the violent disruption and the foreign in- tercourse, the Hebrew became a dead tongue, and Juda- ism, in its divinely revealed form, thus became fixed and incapable, through the centuries preceding the ad- vent of Messiah, of any extensive corruption. From the day of the restoration the true religion spoke out from that spiritual centre of the world with no uncertain voice. The establishment and development of the synagogue system furnished the connecting link between the tem- ple with its divine religion, and the Jew of the disper- sion, and the heathen world wherever the Jew was to be found. The synagogue probably originated during the captiv- it}^ At all events, its great development took place then. When the temple had been destroyed, the Jews natu- rally established the synagogue to take its place in keep- ing up their religion. The rule was, that " a synagogue was to be erected in every place where there were ten Batelnim^ that is, ten persons of full age and free condi- tion always at leisure to attend the service of it."^ The services to be performed in these synagogue assemblies were prayers, reading the Scriptures, and expounding them. Morning and evening the Law was read on three days in the week, and then on the Sabbath it was re- read. Each year the five books of Moses were read through and repeated. Besides, each day had its reading of the Prophets, and of certain passages of the Law called the Sliema. The greatest familiarity with the let- * See Prideaux, Old and New Testament Connected, vol. i. pp. 298, 299. 46 PREPAKATIOX FOR MESSIAH. ter of the Scriptures was thus secured wherever the wan- derings of the Jews carried the synagogue system. After the restoration of the temple, the cessation of prophecy turned the attention of the rehgious leaders at that great centre with tenfold eagerness to the study of the Scriptures, especially of the prophecies concerning the Messiah. The Jews of the dispersion, who went up annually in immense numbers to Jerusalem to the great religious festivals, carried back from the temple to the synagogues, in all parts of the pagan world, the latest developments of this study. The extent of this inter- course may be imagined from the statement of Josephus, that, when Jerusalem was besieged by the Romans under Titus, three millions of Jews, who had come up to the Passover, were shut in by the besiegers. By this vast telegraphic system the latest thought at Jerusalem was speedily made the propert}^ of all the Jews, and through them was borne to the doors of the entire pagan world. As the time of the Advent drew nigh, the expectation of a coming Messiah, deepened and directed to the times designated in prophecy, had been awakened in all lands. All men were looking for a great Deliverer to come out of Judsea. The old religion in its Jewish form had done its part of the preparatory work for the Christ, in accordance with the divine plan. SECTION n. THE PREPARATORY ]\nSSION OF THE GENTH^ES. A view of the preparation for the Messiah would be incomplete if confined to the Jews alone. Salvation has been seen to have come forth from JudaBa, but to be adapted to the necessities of the world. Three great his- toric races, the Oriental, the Greek, and the Roman, sue- MISSION OF THE GENTILES. 47 cessively entered, along witli the Jew, into the work of preparing the world for the advent of Messiah and the spread of his divine salvation. This was in accordance with the prophecies of Daniel, contained in the second and seventh chapters of his book. These great empires were to precede and prepare the way for the miglitier kingdom of Messiah which the God of heaven should set np, and Avhich should be an ever- lasting kingdom. Each will be found to have accom- plished a twofold preparatory work. I. Tlie 3Iission of the Oriental Races. The Oriental empires which entered into this work were the Babylonian, represented by the head of gold in the great image of prophecy, and the less magnificent Medo-Persian, represented by the arms and breast of silver. In the later prophecy, of the four beasts, the former is symbolized by the first beast, which was like a lion, and had eagle's wings ; since it was a lion in strength and an eagle in swiftness : the latter is symbol- ized by the second beast, which was like a bear ; since, in the desire for conquest, it was all-voracious like the bear. The Oriental Problem. These great Oriental races represented material riches, power, and grandeur. It was a subordinate part of their mission to prove the in- sufficiency of the greatest wealth, luxury, and splendor to satisfy and save man. It was the problem on which Solomon wrought, and whose solution he gives in Eccle- siastes when he brings back from his varied experience the conclusion : " Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole of man," — the same problem, only on a vastly grander scale. The nations of the Orient came from its attempted solution wretched and perishing. But the more important part of their mission was to fur- nish the agencies and theatre for the Jewish dispersion, 48 PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH. and for the early dissemination of the germs of the world-religion. For this they were eminently fitted. The Jew was their proper representative, belonging to their own race. He had come forth from the valley of the Euphrates, in Abraham the Chaldee. The captivity was but a return to the primitive home. Who was so entitled as the Jew to be called the representative Ori- ental ? The Oriental races could most easily come into sym- pathy with Judaism, and could most readily furnish the conditions requisite for the fuller development of the germs of the true religion. In the Oriental mind, therefore, the Jew was to place the grand truths of his religion first, and thus to open the way to reach, at a later date, the Greek and Roman. By their self-will and brute force the Oriental races were meantime to chastise the Jewish race and cure it of its idolatry. II. The 3Iission of the Grreeks. The eastern empires fell successively under the sen- tence which the handwriting on the wall passed upon Belshazzar, and which history repeats against every des- potism to the end of time : " Thou art weighed in the balance and found wanting," — wanting in fulfilling the true ends of states and governments, in securing the welfare of mankind and their union in the bonds of social life.i In the later period of its history, when in the height of power under Xerxes, the Medo-Persian empire came into direct and open conflict with the West as repre- sented by Greece, the nation which was divinely ap- pointed to work out another problem, — wdiether man's free energy in poetry and art, in learning and philoso- phy, could perfect his social state, and thus accomplish 1 See Philip Smith, History of the World, vol. i. p. 242. MISSION OF THE GENTILES. 49 that in which the East with its despotic power and wealth and magnificence had failed. The Greek empire under Alexander was the third kingdom which was to rule over all the earth. Its strength is represented by the brass of the image of the vision, in Daniel, and the rapidity of its conquests and the insatiableness of its ambition, by the third beast, the leopard, with its four wings and four heads.^ The Greek Problem. In its career the Greek race tested the insufficiency of the human reason with the highest human culture to satisfy and save man ; while in the conquests of Alexander it gave the world the high- est human civilization of the ancient ages, and the most perfect of languages in which to embody the true re- ligion. These are the main points of interest in the mis- sion of the Greek. In fact, Greek wisdom exhausted its free energies upon the same great problem which despotic Oriental power and magnificence had failed to solve. For a millennium the Greek race directed its varied powers and consummate genias in vain to the work of perfecting humanity. It achieved the greatest results in thought ever permitted to unaided human effort. Its civilization was one of the grandest the world has ever seen, — grand in its recognitions of humanity, in its po- etry and philosophy, in its science and art. But its cult- ure was purely intellectual, having no religious and moral ground of support capable of withstanding every shock and indestructible under all changes, and in the natural course of its development it could only degener- ate into false civilization and end in social corruption. It had no light and life from God. *' There was yet no salt to preserve the life of humanity from decomposing, or to restore it back again when passing to decomposi- tion." 1 Daniel ii. 32, 39 ; vii. 6. 4 50 PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH. It is not too much to say that the Greek did every- thing toward the perfecting of man that could be done by a purely intellectual civilization. He demonstrated for all time what human reason, when situated most fa- vorably and tasked to the utmost, could accomplish for the salvation of a race with endowments superior to the other races. The later ages showed it to be very little. It became manifest that the glory of the Greek thought needed to be saved from its own corruption, — saved for the good of mankind. This could only be accomplished by extending its sway over the Oriental empires, and bringing it in contact with the saving influences of the world-religion which was being diffused everywhere by the scattered and exiled seed of Abraham. The "World Hellenized. When the Greek had voiced his wonderful thoughts of beauty and power in a lan- guage made for them and by them, and, therefore, the most perfect of the languages of the ancient ages, — the one most worthy to become the world-language, — and before the blight and decay had fallen upon the race, Alexander of Macedon appeared to perform the needed office of Hellenizing the world. Of the work of Alexander, Howson says : "He took up tlie meshes of the net of civilization, which were lying in disorder on the edges of the Asiatic shore, and spread them over all the countries which he traversed in his wonderful campaigns. The East and the West were suddenly brought together. Separated tribes were united under a common government. New cities were built, as the centres of political life. New lines of communication were opened, as the channels of commercial activity. The new culture penetrated the mountain ranges of Pisidia and Lycaonia. The Tigris and Euphrates became Greek rivers. The language of Athens was heard among the Jewish colonies of Babvlonia ; and a Grecian Baby- MISSION OF THE GENTILES. 51 Ion was built by the conqueror in Egypt and called by his name." ^ When Alexander passed away leaving his vast plans unfinished, in his dying words, '' to the strongest," he left his empire to the only men who could have carried out the work of making the world permanently Greek, — his own great generals whom he had trained to com- mand. When the empire was broken into four, the four were Greek, and Antioch and Alexandria rivaled Athens and Corinth as centres of Greek learning and art.^ From Alexander to the Advent Judaism and Hellenism were in world-wide contact. The man of prophecy was elevating the view of the man of reason, while the man of reason was widening the vision of the man of proph- ecy. Even where the Greek contemptuously held him- self aloof from the Jew, the Jewish religion was one of the most powerful influences in breaking down the old paganism. At the bar of reason, polytheism could not stand before the doctrine of one God. It was doomed from the hour when the Greek heard the first whispers concerning Jehovah. But the Greek did not everywhere hold himself aloof ; the two modes of thought came into direct contact ; the philosopher and the scribe met and became one. This occurred especially in the great centres. At Alexandria, the Septuagint, or Greek ver- sion of the Old Testament Scriptures, was made three centuries before the Advent, for the use of those employ- ing the Greek language, and the old revelation of the world-religion was thus scattered abroad for the Greek- speaking communities. At the same centre of culture Platonism and Judaism came together and were consoli- 1 See Conybeare and Howson, Life, Times, and Travels of St. Paul, vol. i. p. 9. 2 . See Dollinger, The Gentiles and Jews in the Court of the Temple of Christ, vol. i. p. 341. 52 PREPARATION FOR LIESSIAH. dated in the Neo-Platonism which exerted such an in- fluence both before and after the Advent. In this twofold manner, by despair of reason and hope from prophecy, the Greek was borne onward to the completion of his part in the work of preparation for the coming of the Messiah, until mankind was found in possession of the world-religion with its predictions of the coming Redeemer, written in the perfected world- language, and made capable of greater expansiveness by the Greek forms of thought. The Greek mission was thus evidently essential in the preparation for Messiah. It forced the thinking men of that age to feel and confess the insufficiency of human reason, even in its most perfect development, for the de- liverance and perfection of mankind, and left them wait- ing and longing for one who could accomplish this work. It brought in a dawning sense of human brotherhood, and so helped to bring mankind together into the true unity. It aided men to cut loose from the hoary but unreasonable traditions of the past, and thus prepared them to receive the reasonable truth of God. It made ready and living the better and broader forms of thought and speech in which the Gospel with its grander truths — too grand and living to be put into the narrow and dead Hebrew — should be proclaimed to all the world. III. The Mission of the Romans. Kome was already the rising power of the West when Alexander gave the Greek civilization to the East. The Roman Empire was the fourth kingdom of the prophecy of Daniel. Its strength is represented by the iron of the great image, since it was to be " strong as iron ; " its terrible character, by the fourth beast, which had more than the power of the lion, more than the greed of the bear, and more than the swiftness and insatiable , MISSION OF THE GENTILES. 53 cruelty of the leopard, and to which no name could be given. ^ The Roman Problem. The Roman was to try another solution of the problem on which the Oriental and the Greek had failed. He was to try whether human power, taking the form of law, regulated by political principles of which a regard for law and justice was most conspic- uous, could perfect humanity by subordinating the indi- vidual to the state and making the state universal. '' The power which was destined at length to raise a uni- versal empire on the ruins of the Eastern Monarchies, of the free states of Greece, and of the commercial oligarchy of Carthage, combined in itself the strongest points of the systems which it superseded," ^ — more than the ma- terial power of Oriental despotism ; much of the free- dom and intelligence and more than the social order of Greece ; a stronger and better aristocracy than that of Carthage. In the old Roman race, the will, or that part of man which pushes to action and enables him to control and mould nature and mankind, was the predominant ele- ment, associated with conscience or the natural sense of justice. Its herculean tasks and its universal empire furnish the highest expression of the human soul as the repository of the energy for shaping the world to law and order. The Roman, as the man of power, was to attempt the solution of the same problem of perfecting man in which the man of prophecy and the man of reason and taste had already failed, and in his failure was to com- plete the preparation for the coming of him who could solve the hitherto insoluble problem. The TATorld Romanized. Before the time of the Ad- vent, Rome had demonstrated the powerlessness of hu- 1 Daniel, ii. 33, 40 ; vii. 7, 19, 23. 2 Smith, History of the World, vol. i. p. 131. 64 PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH. man power to save mankind. It liad done its best, but its best was little, — practically nothing. It needed the coming Christ that itself might be saved. Imperialism was as helpless as Orientalism and Hellenism. But the Roman performed a still more important part in preparing the world for the Messiah and the spread of the world-religion. It was Rome that cast up the high- ways along which the Jews plied their traffic and carried out to the ends of the earth the truth of God and the expectation of a coming Deliverer. It was Rome that made the influence of the divine religion free, rapid, and world wide. But more than all, Rome did for the whole world that law-work without which man never feels the greatness of his need of the Gospel. In carrying out his mission of power the Roman was, as already hinted, the representa- tive of natural justice in the world. It was doubtless some alleviation that the moulds into which the Roman power so ^remorselessly crushed men and nations were moulds of justice ; yet in proportion as the world was a wicked world was the justice a terrible justice. Rome is aptly described by the prophet Daniel as the iron 'king- dom : " The fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron, foras- much as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things, and as iron that breaketh all these shall it break in pieces and bruise ; " and again, as the ferocious beast, " dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly, with great iron teeth, which devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it." It was justice practically omnipotent and omnipresent, and so neither to be resisted nor escaped, — justice which never dreamed of mercy until the work of conquest and consolidation was done. It made men long for mercy, because it dem- onstrated to them that there was no hope for them in righteous law. MISSION OF THE GENTILES. 55 The Total Result. So it came about that there was going lip from all the world a wail for deliverance when the divine Deliverer appeared. Says Neander : " The three great historical nations had to contribute, each in its own pecuhar way, to prepare the soil for the planting of Christianity, — the Jews on the side of the religious element ; the Greeks on the side of science and art ; the Romans, as masters of the world, on the side of the political element. When the fullness of the time was arrived, and Christ appeared, — when the goal of history had thus been reached, — then it was, that through him, and by the power of the spirit that pro- ceeded from him, — the might of Christianity, — all the threads, hitherto separated, of human development, were to be brought together and interwoven in one web." ^ Regarding the subject from another point of view, hu- man nature had exhausted itself in the efforts of the Gentile world to solve the problem of man's elevation and salvation. The Oriental had given the freest rein to human desires, in the most favorable circumstances, and was perishing in magnificence and luxury. The Greek had given fullest scope to reason and taste, in circum- stances equally favorable, and was perishing in the very glory of his creations of thought and beauty. The Ro- man had made all the other powers subordinate to his ex- ecutive energy, and conscience, with its insatiate justice, was crushing him, and all the world with him, even by his universal empire. There were no other powers in human nature to bring to the task. The world over, on the great and all-absorbing question of man's salvation, the oracles of heathenism were dumb. It was only as Judaism had wrought with heathenism and for it, that hope remained for mankind. Along the line of the divine purpose of grace, Jew and Gentile had 1 Church History, vol. i. p. 4. 56 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. wrought together, for the most part unconsciously, for more than a thousand years, and the final results were now to be reached. When the Cagsars were firmly established on the throne of the Empire, and the three phases of civilization, in Judaism, Hellenism, and Imperialism, had in measure blended and reached out over the world from Gibraltar and Britain to the shores of the Caspian, the Messianic expectancy and longing reached the highest intensity. It was the fullness of times. Could the world endure longer without the coming of Christ ? CHAPTER TI. THE ADVENT AND THE WRITTEN GOSPELS. Jesus Christ came in " the fullness of the time *' (Gal. iv. 4), or at the hour appointed in the divine plan and prepared for by the divine providence, — the hour when everything was ready for his coming. He pro- claimed the great truths of the Gospel, was rejected by men, and finished his sacrificial work on the cross. In due time, under commission from him, his Apostles gave that Gospel to the world, first in their oral preaching, and then in the permanent records known as the four Gospels. SECTION I. THE ADVENT OF JESUS CHRIST. In the life of Jesus Christ is to be found the key to the history of the world. As the ages before were but the preparations for his advent, and replete with events and prophecies which turned all eyes toward that advent, so the ages since have often been shown to be but the un- THE PKOPHECY. 57 folding of his true power and glory in the progress of his kingdom among men. With the historical verity of his person and career, Christianity stands or falls. The per- son of Jesus Christ constitutes Christianity in its highest and truest sense. ^ It is natural, therefore, in these days, when radical in- fidelity is pushing its destructive criticism to the utmost, that the life of Jesus Christ should become the centre of the religious controversies which are agitating the world.2 To attempt a full discussion of this whole subject, or to give a detailed chronological exhibition of the life of Christ, would obviously lead beyond the scope of the present work. Nothing more can be done than to group the main facts and direct the attention of the reader — who wishes to consider the subject further — to some of the writers from whom he can obtain the needed guid- ance and assistance. The Time of the Advent. Accordins: to the view long held and early indorsed by the Romish Church, Jesus Christ was born on Christmas, at the opening of the Christian Era, or about 754 years after the founding of Rome. A more accurate historical knowledge has made it evident that his birth was rather four or five years earlier, or about 750 or 749 after the founding of Rome, and most probably in the spring-time. This conclusion is based upon the fact that Herod the Great, in whose reign the birth of Christ took place, died in the fourth year before the commencement of our era, shortly before Easter.3 The important facts connected with the Advent may 1 See Schaff, The Person of Chri'st, p. 9. '^ See Tischendorf, The Origin of the .Gospels, p. 23. Also, Row, The Su- pernatural in ihe New Testament, pp. 4-8. ^ See Matthew ii. 1 ; Josephus, Antiquities, xvii. 9, 3 ; Andrews, Life of our Lord ; Robinson, Harmony of the Gospels. 58 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. be found in tlie opening chapters of the Gospels. That Christ came at just the right juncture in the unfolding of the divine plan is the main point for present consider- ation. Lange has remarked, that the days of Herod form the centre of the world's history, and that every review of the state of the Jewish and heathen world, at the time of Christ's birth, confirms the truth of the remark of Paul to the Galatians, that he appeared when the fullness of the time was come.^ Many prophecies combined to fix upon just that as the time for the appearance of the great Deliverer; Jacob, in blessing his sons, declared that the sceptre was not to depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver to cease from among his descendants, till Shiloh should come (Genesis xlix. 10). In Herod the Great, Judah still had a king, but perhaps in less than a month. after the birth of Jesus, Herod died, and the kingdom as such came to an end. A special period — marked according to the method elsewhere used in the Jewish Scriptures, of computing by heptads (weeks) of years — was fixed, from the going forth of the command to restore and to build Jerusalem, to the cutting off of Messiah (Dan. ix. 24-27). Start- ing from the time of the issue of the commission of Artaxerxes to Ezra (Ezra vii. 12-28), say about 457 B. C, the middle of the seventieth heptad reached forward 486^ years, to about 30 years after the opening of the Christian Era, as the date of the death of Messiah.^ The same prophecy fixed with great accuracy the dura- tion of Messiah's public work and the date of the de- struction of the Holy City by the Romans. The time of the manifestation of Christ in his public 1 Lauge, Commentary on Luke, p. 33. 2 See Prldeaux ; also, Wordsworth, Daniel and the Minor Prophets. THE EXPECTATION. 59 work was also determined by prophecy. He was to come, the desire of all nations, to the second temple, and to impart to it by his presence a greater glory than that of Solomon's temple (Hag. ii. 7-9 ; Mai. iii. 1). A generation later than the death of Jesus the temple passed away and this prediction could not have been ful- filled after that date. More definitely still, a herald was to appear before Messiah, a voice crying in the wilderness, making pre- jDaration for his coming (Isa. xl. 3; Mai. iii.; iv. 5). A few months before the entrance of Jesus upon his pub- lic mission, John the Baptist appeared, claiming to be such a herald, and in due time baptizing Jesus and intro- ducing him to the Jewish nation as the Messiah (Matt, iii. ; Mark i. ; Luke iii. ; John i.). The Expectation of the 'World. These are only instances taken out of that great mass of prophecy which at the time of the Advent, through the temple and syn- agogue system, had brought the Jews into an attitude of hourly expectancy of the Messiah. That there was a like expectancy, throughout the heathen world, of some deliverer or ruler to come forth from Judsea, is equally clear. It was tlius that the Magi came, at the right hour, inquiring at Jerusalem after the new-born King of the Jews. Suetonius relates that " an ancient and definite expectation had spread throughout the East, that a ruler of the world would, at about that time, arise in Judgea." ^ Tacitus makes a similar state- ment.2 Schlegel mentions that the Buddhist missiona- ries traveling to China met Chinese sages going to seek the Messiah about 33 A. D.^ The entire world was thus evidently in an attitude of 1 Life of Vespasian, c. iv. 2 History, v. 13. 8 Philosophy of History. 60 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. expectancy. The Oriental had despaired of his material magnificence, the Greek of his reason and philosophy, and the Roman was despairing of his universal empire. God must interpose or the world must perish.^ SECTION II. THE CAREEH OF JESUS. At just the right hour Jesus Christ came and accom- plished his appointed task, in a life of probably a little over thirty-three years, about three and a half of which were devoted to his public ministry. The ' attempted chronological arrangement of all the recorded facts of his career may be consulted in the various Harmonies.^ I. Outline of the Career, Without entering into the minute details of the har- monists, a fair working outline of the life of Christ may be constructed from the chronological data furnished chiefly by John and Luke. John, as is well known, nar- rates the whole period of our Lord's public ministry in connection with his journeys to Jerusalem to keep the different feasts, omitting no single passover occurring during this period, but even mentioning the one not kept by him at Jerusalem (John vi. 4). He has thus furnished the scheme of Christ's public ministry. Luke has not only supplied several special dates of the greatest importance,^ but has in his preface intimated his inten- tion of narrating the events of our Lord's life in order, — an order doubtless largely chronological. Wieseler's Outline. Paying due regard to these data from John and Luke ; admitting and emphasizing the 1 See Dollinger. 2 See Andrews, Life of Our Lord ; Robinson, Harmony of the Gospels. * Luke ii. 1 ; iii. 23 ; Acts i. 1,3; and particularly Luke iii. 1, 2. THE CAREER. 61 impossibility of securing a perfect chronological arrange- ment of all the facts ; and avoiding that fatal error of the harmonists, of attempting to secure chronological unity at the expense of the individuality of the Gospels, — Wieseler divides the Gospel History into six Sec- tions.^ Section 1. The history of our Lord's childhood. Luke i. 5-ii. 52. Compare Luke iii. 23-38. Matt, i., ii. Section 2. From the first public appearance of John the Baptist, and then of our Lord, to the imprisonment of the Baptist, and Christ's return to Galilee, after his journey to the Feast of Purim. Luke iii. 1-iv. 13 ; Mark i. 1-13 ; Matt. iii. 1-iv. 11 ; John i. 19-v. 47. Section 3. From our Lord's return to Galilee to his journey to the Feast of Tabernacles. Luke iv. 14-ix. 50 ; Mark i. 14-ix. 50 ; Matt. iv. 12-xviii. 35 ; John vi. 1-vii. 1. Section 4. From our Lord's journey to the Feast of Tabernacles to his last regal entry into Jerusalem. Luke iv. 51-xix. 28 ; Mark x. 1-52 ; Matt. xix. 1-xx. 34 ; John vii. 2-xii. 11. Section 5. From our Lord's regal entry into Jerusalem to the day of his crucifixion and burial. Luke xix. 29- xxiii. 6b; Mark xi. 1-15, 47; Matt. xxi. 1-xxvii. 61; John xii. 12-xix. 42. Section 6. From our Lord's burial to his ascension. Luke xxiii. 56-xxiv. 53 ; Acts i. 1-11 ; Mark xvi. 1-20 ; Matt, xxvii. 62-xxviii. 20 ; John xx. 1-xxi. 25. Simplified Outline. It will be observed at a glance that Section 2 takes in our Lord's early ministry in Judaea ; Section 3, his public ministry in Galilee ; and Section 4, his ministry in Persea, after he Avas driven from his public ministry in Judaea and Galilee by the hos- tility of the Jews. This suggests, as more easily remem- 1 See Wieseler, Chronological Synopsis of the Four Gospels, p. 24. 62 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. bered, the following statement of the divisions given by Wieseler : — Section 1. The childhood and youth. Thirty years from 4 B. c. to 26 A. D. Section 2. The inauguration and ministry in Judaea. About one year, from 26-27 A. D. Section 3. The public ministry in Galilee. About two years, from 27-29 A. D. Section 4. The public ministry in Persea — beyond Jordan. About six months, from October, 29 A. D., to Api-il, 30 A. D. Section 5. The atonement by death. About one week, April 2d to 8th, 30 A. D. Section 6. The burial, resurrection, and ascension. About forty days, from April 9th to about May 18th, 30 A. D. II. The Historical Reality of the Career, It is admitted on all hands that " the life of Jesus is the most momentous of all questions which the Church has to encounter, — the one which is decisive whether it shall or shall not live." ^ If his life be not a reality, then even the morality which is based upon the Gospels has its root in immorality, — in a lie. What then of the histor- ical reality? The direct knowledge of the life of Jesus is derived al- most exclusively from the four Gospels. The other writ- ings of the New Testament, however, furnish some addi- tional facts. After these comes the indirect knowledge from writings based upon the Sacred Scriptures, whether by the advo- cates or the opposers of the Christian system, and which attest the facts of Christ's life, because these writings must have originated in the facts. 1 See Tischendorf, Origin of the Four Gospels, p. 24. THE CAREEK. 63 Finally, in two classical writers, Tacitus and Pliny, we possess incidental expressions which have a lasting inter- est. The former testifies that Christ, the founder of the religion which had gained so strong a hold even in Nero's time, had been punished with death, by the procurator Pontius Pilate, during the reign of Tiberius.^ The latter asserts, in a communication to Trajan, that the Chris- tians, already a numerous body in Bithynia, were in the habit of singing songs of praise to Christ as God.^ It is therefore easy to see why the Gospels are the main point of attack in the present age. They are the chief direct witnesses to the historical reality of the life of Jesus Christ. Whether judged by the plain principles of common sense or by the formal canons of a scientific criticism, the argument for the historical verity of the life of Christ, as that life is presented in the Gospels, is of overwhelming force. It will only be proper, in this connection, to ad- vert to some of its forms, chiefly in order to direct atten- tion to some of those works accessible on the subject which may be consulted with profit. From Common Sense. From the point of view of common sense, the history of the world, both before and since the beginning of the Christian era, is a Sphinx's rid- dle, if the historical truth of the life of Jesus Christ be de- nied. How was it that all the ages before reached out in type and prophecy and human longing and development toward the man of Nazareth, and found their fulfillment and completion only in him ? How is it that all the ages since have been but the logical unfolding from the life of that central figure of human history ? How could a myth — an impostor, a cheat, a lie — give to man all his highest blessings, and all his grandest civilization, and inspire all 1 Tacitus, Amxal. xv. 44. 2 Pliny, Epist. x. 97. See Tischendorf, Origin, etc. p. 2.5. 64 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. his noblest purposes and acliievements ? The historical verity of the Christ-life in the Gospels is the only suffi- cient reason for the movements of the ancient ages, the only adequate cause for the developments of the modern ages and the Christian anticipations of the future ages. In the view of common sense, a mythical Christ and no Christ at all are equally fatal to the rationalistic hy- potheses. 1st. On the supposition that Jesus of Nazareth never actually existed, it is not within the range of rational be- lief that the idea of such a being was formed in that country, in that age, and in the minds of such men as the Evangelists are held to have been, and as in point of men- tal endowment and culture and social rank they certainly were. When it shall have been fully ascertained what that being wdio is presented to us in the Gospels really was, the evidence will be irresistible -that this is not Avithin the range of rational belief, btit is so unlikely and unnatural as to be morally impossible. It would contra- dict all experience and all legitimate induction from ex- perience, and be as utterly out of the course of human things as any miracle ever recorded.^ The men of that age never could have conceived the life of Jesus unless they had first witnessed it ; never could have conceived his sublime doctrine unless they had first heard it. 2d. On the supposition that Jesus of Nazareth did act- ually exist, and that the statements made by the Gos- pels concerning the facts of his humanity are on the whole what the writers saw and heard, then the facts concern- ing his divinity must likewise be true, and the entire record of the Gospels must be true. It has been shown by various able writers, in pursuing this line of argument, that the life of Jesus stands out a mysterious exception to all the laws which ordinarily govern the destiny of men. 1 See Youug, Christ of History, p. 24. THE CAREER. 65 The outer conditions of that life were most unfavor- able. He was born in poverty, among the lowly and ignorant, wrought for most of his life as a carpenter, re- ceived no formal education, had only the companionship of peasants and fishermen, and no acquaintance with the great and wise, received no patronage of any kind from any one. His public life was the briefest, — only a little over three years and this friendless young peasant of Galilee came to his death of shame by the cross. Even in that brief course he used no ordinary weapons or machinery or plans, but only the simple utterance of great spiritual truths which men hated, and the setting at work of invisible spiritual forces at which men scoffed. The moral condition of the age and place in which he ap- peared was eminently unfavorable. It was an age of awful corruption, as witnesses Paul, in the Epistle to the Romans, in his description of the state of the Gentile world, and as also witness the heathen historians of that age. The land of the chosen race, with its greater light, was the centre of moral perversity ; Galilee was disrepu- table even in that ; and Nazareth was the focus of intel- lectual as well as of moral darkness. There was notliing in those thirty years in that centre of darkness to develop such character, life, and doctrine as those of the Jesus of the Gospels. A righteous man could ask with pious horror, " Can any good thing come out of Nazareth ? " Yet out of Nazareth came forth Jesus, of his own free will, claiming to be the Messiah, yet wearing a form wholly different from that of the Messiah expected by his age, and possessed with an idea wholly original and totally different from that of his age, — he came forth to save not from earthly subjection but from shi, and to save not Judaea only, but all the lost world. Just as evidently unique was he in his spiritual indi- 5 66 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. yiduality, — in his constant and conscious communion "with God ; in Ms consciousness of sinlessness, of divinity and of the grandest of missions ; in the universality, com- jDleteness, and unapproachable greatness of his manhood, attained and manifested by him without apparent cause and without conscious effort ; in the entire unselfishness and boundless self-sacrifice of his life and in the sublime devotion of it to God and humanity ; in his faith in God and truth and in his calm assurance of the triumph of his kingdom on earth. In all these he was absolutely alone among men. In the centre of darkness he began a unique work with the revelation to men of their moral condition and with the call to repentance, and there he gathered the disciples who in his name should conquer the world. Mingling a terrible severity with a divine tenderness, and uniting the severest simplicity with the most abso- lute authority, he dealt with the corrupt age, sparing no wickedness, overlooking no sorrow, teaching in a form and clearness unattained by any other teacher the three great doctrines which are announced in the Gospels, — the doctrine of the soul, the doctrine of God, and the doctrine of the reconciliation of the soul and God by his sacrificial death alone. Such a character, personality, work, in such outer conditions, are simply impossible, except upon the sup- position of the Deity of Jesus Christ. They forbid — even if the supernatural elements are left out of sight — his classification with men as a mere man. The simple facts of his humanity, once admitted, irresistibly bear with them the undoubted truth of his Godhead.^ The historical verit}^ of the life of Jesus of Nazareth cannot be denied without abjuring common sense. 1 See Young, Christ of History. Also, Bushnell, Nature and the Super- natural, ch. X., " The Character of Jesus forbids his possible Classifica- tion with Men." THE CAREER. 67 Frora Scientific Criticism. It has been sliown to be equally beyond tlie range of rational belief that the Apostles did their preaching and wrought the mightiest revolution of all ages without the actual existence and career of Jesus as presented in the Gospels. Without the verity of the history no adequate and rational motive for their conduct can possibly be pointed out. " There never was such a being as Jesus of Naza- reth! " Whence then this mightiest movement of time, which is seen in the origin, development, and world-wide sway of Christianity ? " He was but a miserable deceiver, at the best, himself deluded while misleading others ! " How then this world of light out of such utter darkness ? Who can believe that all the best blessings of the world could come from such a source ? Is a lie more beneficent than the truth ? " The disciples were convinced that he was a failure, but they stole away his dead body and devoted them- selves heart and soul to keeping up the work of decep- tion which he had begun ! " Can a sane man believe that ? Do men naturally act from such motives ? Would they keep up such a course, with no whisper of dissent or exposure of the base secret, through fire and blood, along all ages, until the world is converted to their lie ? Imagine the poor fishermen and peasants, in deadly fear and in despair, stealing away that lifeless body of Jesus for such a purpose ! The conclusion of scientific criticism is in accordance with that of common sense, — that the Gospels are ver- itable history. Such criticism in its only proper form is simply the best rational application of common-sense principles. The evidence bearing upon the genuineness and au- thenticity of the Gospels has been often and admirably presented by the scientific defenders of Christianity. 68 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. Tischendorf has exhibited in a simple and interesting, though not eminently systematic, manner, for the Chris- tian public at large, and with a knowledge of the an- cient authorities nnequaled by any of his opponents, the main facts and arguments in favor of the Gospel claims.^ Professor Fisher has set forth, in his clear and compact style, for the more cultivated Christian public, a broad and complete view of the subject, in which he has not only established the claims of the Gospels by the prin- ciples of scientific historical criticism, but has also stated and refuted successively the various false hypotheses of the rationalists, — including those of Baur, Strauss, and Renan, and that of their chief American imitator, Theo- dore Parker.2 But perhaps the freshest, ablest, and most complete presentation of the latest aspects of this whole question may be found in " The Supernatural in the New Testa- ment Possible, Credible, and Historical," by Rev. C. A. Row, prepared and published at the request of the lead- ing British Society devoted to the work of keeping the subject of Christian Evidences before the public. The author was invited to undertake this important work, because in his previous publication he had shown him- self peculiarly qualified to meet and answer the later skeptical writers on their own ground.^ What with the common-sense and the scientific criti- cism, the Christian may confidently conclude that there is nothing in the ancient history of the world more cer- tain than — nay, nothing so certain as — the facts of the career of Jesus Christ. The probabilities in favor of the view that Jesus Christ was born, lived, suffered, died, and rose from the dead, as the Gospels represent, 1 See The Origin of the Gospels. 2 See Essays on the Supernatural Origin of Christianity. * See Kow, The Jesus of the Evangelists. PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES. 69 are overwhelmingly great, as against either the hypoth- esis of a mythical Christ or of no Christ at all. The Gospels are veritable history, or else no such thing as veritable history can be shown to have come down to us from the ancient times. The deliverer came forth from Judaga, as the world expected, and by his life and death prepared the forces which were to renovate the race. How out of the shame and death with which his career ended could the longed-for life and glory arise ? SECTION III. THE PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES. There are two sources of information concerning the apostolic work : the Sacred Scriptures, and the facts and traditions preserved by the early Christian writers. I. Facts from the Scriptures. The Apostolic History, as given by the sacred writ- ers, may be subdivided into two parts : a connected narrative, extending from our Lord's ascension to the second year of Paul's captivity at Rome, embodied in the Acts of the Apostles ; and a body of detached and incidental statements, scattered throughout the other books of the New Testament. Of the Acts of the Apostles, Dr. J. Addison Alex- ander has said, that the subject is " a special history of the planting and extension of the Church among the Jews and Gentiles, by the gradual establishment of ra- diating centres or sources of influence at certain salient points throughout a large part of the empire, beginning at Jerusalem and ending at Rome." ^ The two central figures in the Acts are Peter and 1 Alexander, Acts of the Apostles, vol. i., Introduction. 70 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. Paul, — the former in the first twelve chapters and the latter in the last sixteen. Yet the book is as far as pos- sible from being a biography of these two men, either as individuals or as Apostles. The subject of the first part is not Peter, but the planting and extension of the Church among the Jews by the ministry of the Apostles, among whom Peter appears as a leader, often associated with the whole body, but sometimes especially with John. The subject of the second part is not Paul, but the planting and extension of the Church among the Gen- tiles b}^ the ministry of Paul. From the point of view of the present work, it will appear that the Acts of the Apostles furnishes a glimpse — an outline sketch — of the work of the Apostles in fulfilling the commission and giving the Gospel to the world. It describes its promulgation among those repre- senting the three great world-wide phase's of thought, — at Jerusalem, the centre of Jewish religion and influence in the early Church ; at Antioch, the centre of Greek thought and influence ; and at Rome, the centre of Ro- man power and influence. Along these three lines of apostolic effort, as will subsequently appear, the first three Gospels had their origin. The book begins too late to take in the work done for the Jews during the life of Jesus, and recorded in the Gospels ; and it ends before the later and more extended spiritual influence of John's work in Asia Minor and throughout the Church. Nevertheless, all the men con- nected with the four Gospels engage in its work, and, with the exception of one, are prominent in it ; Matthew, as one of the Twelve, at the opening of the history ; Peter and Mark, and Paul and Luke, as the chief actors in the early progress of the Christian movement ; and John, as singled out from the rest at the outset. From the remaining portions of the Sacred Script- PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES. 71 ures — the Epistles and the Apocalypse — a body of detached and incidental statements is derived, which may be used to supplement and complete the account given in the Acts. Among other things, glimpses are given of the movements of Peter and John among the Gentiles, by which, after their work recorded in the Acts, they ex- tended their influence over the Roman world ; and it is suggested that Paul was probably released from prison at Rome, to push his mission work still farther among the heathen, and to be again at a later date placed in bonds to suffer martyrdom. It is manifest to the careful reader of the Acts of the Apostles, that the same temple and synagogue sys- tem which had so long connected Jerusalem with all the world, and by means of which the universal expectancy of a coming deliverer had been awakened, was one chief agency employed by the followers of Jesus of Nazareth in disseminating his doctrine. The early work centred in Jerusalem, and especially in the temple itself, as may be seen from the first five chapters of the Acts, which end with the declaration that, " daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ." The influences, however, reached out almost immediately to the syna- gogues of the foreign Jews and Judaized foreigners. The sixth and seventh chapters of the Acts give a glimpse of the work in one of these synagogues, so numerous in the Holy City. In it the proto-martyr Stephen discusses the truths of the Gospel with the representatives of Europe, Asia, and ^feca. In thei^work abroad over the world the Apostles and other early preachers found the synagogues the great cen- tres for influencing men, and the new faith was pro- claimed in these throughout the Roman Empire in an incredibly short space of time. When Saul went on his 72 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. journey of persecution to Damascus, it was with letters to the synagogues ; and when he was converted he straightway preached Christ in the synagogues (Acts ix. 2, 20). It was in the synagogues that the way was pre- pared for reaching both Jew and Gentile, — as in the preaching of Paul and Barnabas at Antioch in Pisidia (Acts xiii. 14, 42) ; at Iconium (Acts xiv. 1) ; and at other places. In the providence of God the same great system of in- tercourse which had been the means of preparing the world for the Advent became a most important agency in giving that world the Gospel. 11. Facts from Tradition. It is true, however, that the work of the majority of the Apostles in spreading the Gospels throughout the world is not exhibited in the sacred writings. What is known of it is learned chiefly from the early ecclesiasti- cal writers, — as Nicephorus, Tertullian, Eusebius, and others. It is sometimes difficult to pick out the precise histori- cal facts from the mass of statements, yet the current traditions, generally received at the time, doubtless had a basis of historic fact, and are worthy of some degree of credence. It is made clear that such were the zeal and success of the Apostles, that at the close of the first century Christianity had been preached and embraced throughout and even beyond the bounds of the Roman empire. It is said that Andrew carried the Gospel through Scythia and the neighboring countries, and then over into eastern Europe ; and that he at last suffered mar- tyrdom on the cross at Patra^a, a city of Acliaia. James, the brother of John, is said to have preached to the dispersed Jews in Judaea, Samaria, and Spain, PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES. 73 and to have settled at last in Jerusalem, where the Acts assure us he was beheaded by Herod (xii. 2). Philip, after preaching successfully for several years in upper Asia, went to Hierapolis, the centre of idolatry in Phrj^gia in Asia Minor, and perished by martyrdom in the attempt to overthrow that idolatry. Bartholomew, or Nathanael, preached abroad as far as Hither India ; then returned westward and labored with Philip in Hierapolis in the overthrow of idolatry ; and, barely escaping martyrdom there, bore the message of his Master up to Albania, on the shores of the Caspian Sea, where he won the martyr's crown. Simon, the Canaanite or Zealot, is said to have preached the Gospel in Egypt, Cyrene, Africa, and finally in Britain, where he was put to death on the cross. Jude first preached in Syria and afterward throughout Judaea, Galilee, Samaria, Idumea and Arabia, Syria, Mesopotamia and Persia, and at last fell a martyr through the zeal of the Magi in the defense of the old Oriental faith. Matthias, who took the place of Judas, first preached with great success in Juda9a, and afterward in Ethiopia, where he was stoned and beheaded. Tradition adds to the statements of the Scriptures much that is interesting and important concerning the lives of the men whose names are immediately connected with the Gospels. This will properly be brought for- ward in treating of the authorship of the Gospels.^ It is obvious from the Scriptures and tradition com- bined, that before the close of the apostolic age the Great Commission had already met its fulfillment, in spirit at least. This brought the crisis of that age, fore- told by Christ in his last days. The Church, a spiritual 1 See Kitto, History of the Bible. 74 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. kingdom, had now been firmly established the world over. The time had come when men could everywhere worship the Father in spirit and in truth. There was, therefore, no longer need of the great religious centre at Jerusalem and of the temple and synagogue system. Apostate Judaism had become only an influence for evil, everywhere interfering with the progress of the Gospel. The proclamation of the crucified Christ seems quickly to have sifted the false and the true ; and then the re- jecters of the new doctrine, still holding possession of the synagogues, became the agents of bloody persecutions. It was in this way that Stephen met with his death and that the first persecution arose (Acts vii., viii.). It was the apostate Jews in the synagogue at Damascus who sought to slay Saul of Tarsus (Acts ix. 22) ; and the Hellenistic Jews at the synagogue at Jerusalem who afterward attempted the same thing (Acts ix. 29). It was largely out of the foreign element connected with the synagogues that the Church was gathered, while most of the Jews rejected the claim of Jesus to be the Christ, and organized persecution against the Christians ; as was the case at Thessalonica (Acts xvii. 1-9). The synagogue at Berea is instanced as a marked exception to this general rule (Acts xvii. 10-12) ; but the Jews of Thessalonica, by their emissaries, extended the perse- cution even to Berea, and drove Paul out of it (Acts xvii. 13-15). This inference from the Acts is confirmed by Justin Martyr, who affirms that '' converts, in greater numbers and of more genuine character, proceeded from the body of the pagans, than from the great mass of the Jews." ^ It is still further manifest from the writings of Justin, that the more thoroughly Judaized this pagan element 1 See Justin Martyr, Apolog. 1. 2, f. 88. Neauder, Church History, vol. i. p. 63. ORIGIN OF THE WRITTEN GOSPELS. 75 had become, the more hopeless was the task of preaching the Gospel to it. Of the proselytes in the strict sense, he says to the Jews, that they *' do not simply not be- lieve, but they blaspheme the name of Christ twofold more than yourselves, — and they would murder and tor- ture us, who do believe on him ; for they strive in every respect to become like you." ^ It was from proselytes of the gate, or those who had adopted from the Jewish sys- tem the principles of theism and the hope of Messiah, without becoming wholly Jews, that the mass of con- verts to the Church came. When these converts had been gathered into the Church, — the few Jews and the many pagans, — the work of temple and synagogue as a connected and world- wide system was done. They could henceforward be a source of only evil to the world-religion, — a source of terror in that age only less dreadful than Jesuitism with the Inquisition in a later age. The destruction of the temple by Titus, in 70 A. D., and the breaking up of the Jewish nation, destroyed at once the centre and the power of the old system, and brought the Christian Church into its true place of prominence and influence. Thenceforward there were four distinct classes of rep- resentative men, and four definite and different phases of thought, recognized in the ancient world, — Jewish, Greek, Roman, and Christian. SECTION IV. THE ORIGIN OF THE WRITTEN GOSPELS. While the great work of the Apostles and their co- laborers was still going forward in the full tide of its energy, the chief business was that of preaching the doctrine of Christ's life, crucifixion, and resurrection for 1 See Neander, Church History, vol. i. p. 67. 76 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. the salvation of the world. In the early stages there was little need of written records, for there were the living and divinely inspired witnesses. But as the work widened there came, in the various local churches, emergencies requiring special instruction on the varied topics of the Gospel as related to Chris- tian life. Before the Apostles passed off the stage of ac- tion there arose the necessity for a permanent record of the story of the Gospel as they had proclaimed it to men. Hence were given to the Church the Epistles and the Apocalypse, and the four Gospels. The origin of the latter alqne requires to be considered in this connec- tion. I. Theory of the Origin, In a true theory of their origin is found the explana- tion of the number of the Gospels, their peculiarities, their agreements and differences. Such a theory must evidently be based upon and constructed out of the facts of the age and work of the Apostles.^ It must run somewhat as follows : — The Gospel for the World. The aim of the Great Commission and the common design of the four Gospels were to commend Jesus the Nazarene to all mankind as the great Deliverer from sin and its evil consequences. " Go preach my Gospel to every creature." The Races of the World. As has been seen, there were three great races and three great phases of thought reaching throughout that world with which Christianity first came into contact, — the Jewish, the Roman, and the Greek. There was in addition the kingdom of Christ, the Church, constituted of those brought out of the three races of men and made spiritual by the preaching of the Gospel. 1 See Westcott, Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, ch. iii., for a clear and valuable discussion of the origin of the Gospels. ORIGIN OF THE WRITTEN GOSPELS. 77 The Preaching to the World. The Apostles went forth preaching the Gospel like common-sense men, pre- senting Jesus to each of the three great races or classes of mankind in the way best suited to the end in view, of leading those races to submit to him as the divine Saviour. The same presentation would not equally com- mend him to all the races. Each of them had its pecul- iarities which must be taken into account ; each of them its side to be reached ; each of them its own character- istic view of the evils of the world and of the qualities of the needed deliverer, of which, so far as it was right, the Gospel must take advantage. Those early preachers took wise account of all this, and preached to tlie Jew, to the Roman, and to the Greek, — from the three great centres, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Rome, as set forth in the Acts, — in a form suited to their needs. After the Church had been founded and enlarged by converts made in all lands by the preaching of the mis- sionary Gospel in its varied adaptation to the races, that Gospel which presents Christ as the light and life, for the purpose of leading men, already Christians, to higher attainments in the Christian life, became necessary and was preached throughout the world. The Permanent Records for the "World. But the Apostles could not be everywhere and always with men. Before they passed away there arose the desire in the va- rious races of men, who had heard their Gospel, to have it embodied in permanent written form, that it might preach to them still when the early preachers were ab- sent or dead. This desire expressed itself among the Jews, and Mat- thew, by divine inspiration, gave them his Gospel to meet that desire. It was the Gospel which his long preaching to the Jews, the men of prophecy, had already thrown into the form best suited to commend to their accept- ance Jesus as the Messiah. 78 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. The same desire expressed itself among the Romans, and Mark by divine inspiration gave them his Gospel to meet that desire. It was the Gospel which Peter, by his preaching to the Romans, the men of power, had already thrown into the form best suited to commend to their acceptance Jesus as the almighty deliverer of men. The same desire expressed itself among the Greeks, and Luke by divine inspiration gave them his Gospel to meet that desire. It had its basis in the Gospel which Paul and Luke by their long preaching to the Greeks, the men of reason and universal humanity, had already thrown into the form best suited to commend to their acceptance Jesus as the perfect, divine man. All these, the missionary Gospels, were given their final shape before the fall of Jerusalem, probably be- tween 50 and 70 A. D. It was later that the longing came, in the Church, for a spiritual Gospel, which should help the Christian to develop, strengthen, and perfect the life already begun, and John by divine inspiration gave his Gospel to meet that longing. It was the Gospel the materials for which he had gathered in the more intimate communion with his Master, and which, by his long preaching to the brethren, he had thrown into the form best suited to com- mend to the faith of Christians Jesus as the light and life of all who believe. II. Historic Basis and Adequacy of the Tlieory. Basis. That this is not a mere groundless hypothesis may readily be made to appear. It has a stable basis of fact. That the aim of the Great Commission was to give the Gospel to all the world, appears upon its very face. The Gospel was to be preached to every creature. That there were three great races and three corre- ORIGIN OF THE WRITTEN GOSPELS. 79 spending phases of thought throughout the world has al- ready been shown in treating of the preparation for the Advent. That the Apostles went forth presenting the Gospel to these various classes of men in the way best suited to the nature of each, and with the view of winning them to Christ as the Saviour, has been seen in considering the preaching of the Apostles. That the four Gospels actually originated in the man- ner stated will be shown in the subsequent chapters in treating of the origin of each of the Gospels. Adequacy. If this be the true theory, it may read- ily be seen that it will furnish a most perfect and satis- factory explanation of the number and character of the Gospels, and of their otherwise unexplained agreements and differences. This will appear best in the course of the subsequent discussions, but a brief statement of some few points will help to make those discussions more in- telligible. 1st. There are four Gospels, because Jesus was to be commended to four races or classes of men, or to four phases of human thought, — the Jewish, Roman, Greek, and Christian. Had not these exhausted the classes to be reached there would doubtless have been more Gos- pels ; and had there not been so many classes, with es- sential differences in temperament and modes of thought, there would doubtless have been less. The world of that age must have been revolutionized and the nature of the races materially changed to admit of either more or less. 2dly. The very striking differences seen in the three missionary Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and be- tween these three and the Christian Gospel, John, are fully explained. While the resemblances of the three Synoptics originated in the common facts of the charac- ter and career of Christ, which all the Apostles went 80 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. forth to preach, the differences originated in the adapta- tion of each by a different Apostle to a different class of men, — of Matthew to the Jew, of Mark to the Roman, and of Luke to the Greek. The fact that the first three Gospels were missionary Gospels, originally preached to unspiritual men with the view of bringing them to the faith in Christ and to the Christian life, accounts for their so marked variation from John, the Christian Gos- pel, originally preached to spiritual men already brought to faith in Christ and into membership in the true Church by the Gospel in its first three forms, and preached for the purpose of aiding them in making prog- ress in the divine life. The impossibility of only one Gospel, the absurdity of four Gospels of precisely simi- lar character, the insufficiency of the three missionary Gospels, and the completeness of the four Gospels as they are, all appear manifest from this point of view. 3dly. The force of the great mass of alleged discrep- ancies, as objections to the historical character of the Gospels, is utterly broken by the simple consideration — essential to the theory and based upon undoubted facts — that the productions of the Evangelists are not histories, but memoirs in a modified sense ; in short, not at all biographical sketches of Christ, but records of the Apos- tles' practical preaching of Christ as the Saviour of men.^ The justness of this consideration is manifest, as has been shown by Mr. Row, from the statements of their object by the Evangelists themselves. The Gospels most distinctly affirm that they do not belong to the class of professed histories, but to that of memoirs. " They not only affirm that they are memoirs, but memoirs of a peculiar character, that is to say, religious memoirs, composed with a double purpose, namely, that of setting 1 See Eow, The Supernatural, etc. p. 475 ; and Westcott, Introduction, etc. ch. iii. ORIGIN OF THE WRITTEN GOSPELS. 81 forth the events of a life and at the same time of teach- ing a religion." Matthew's object appears in the opening line of his book, — to bring the Jew to faith in Jesus as the Mes- siah. Mark opens with " the beginning of the gladsome message of Jesus Christ the Son of God." Luke writes for the special and immediate purpose of communicating systematic instruction concerning the Gospel facts to Theophilus. John more distinctly declares that he has selected his materials out of a large mass and written them for a definite religious purpose : " Many signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book, but these are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye may have life through his name " (John XX. 30, 31). Even more definitely is the character of the Gospels presented in the traditions of their origin, not as his- tories but as records of the Apostolic preaching, — as will be seen in the subsequent chapters. It follows, therefore, that it was no part of the design of the writers to secure that chronological accuracy of arrangement and of detail which is " essential to history, but which forms no portion of the plan of a memoir." ^ It is absurd to demand it of them. They nowhere pro- pose to give it. It would have prevented the accomplish- ment of their great object ; since religion and not chro- nology, conversion of men to Christ and not the writing of history, was the chief thing. In preaching to the va- rious classes of mankind, those facts and truths were brought forward which suited the practical end in view, and they were put in that order which seemed best fitted to secure the one great result, the acceptance of Jesus as the Saviour. Where the order of time suited the preach- 1 See Row, The Supernatural, etc. 82 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. er's purpose, it was freely followed, and it was as freely- departed from where it did not suit that purpose. In short, chronology is of comparatively little impor- tance in the Gospel view of the life of Christ, — of so little, indeed, that from John onl}^ can be learned the ex- tent and the successive periods of the public ministry of the Saviour. A rigid adherence to the order of time and a complete biography of Jesus would have been the worst of faults, a fatal fault, since by eliminating their practi- cal features, it would have unfitted the Gospels for reaching the various classes of mankind. The same point of view makes clear the object of the Evangelists in devoting so much space to the narration of the events connected with the death of Jesus. The cross is the capital fact of Christianity as a religion, the one upon which salvation and eternal life depend. Hence Matthew, Mark, and Luke give one third of their Gos- pels to it, while John gives it one half of his. 4thly. The theory presented explains the fitness of the Gospels for the world in all ages. Those classes were representative classes for all time. There are the same needs among men to-day, — one man needing, for con- viction of the truth of Christianity, to hear an authori- tative word of God in type or prophecy, in the Script- ures, and to be assured of its fulfillment as proclaiming the divine mission of Jesus ; a second needing to see him as the divine power in his living activity, confirming his own claims ; a third requiring a manifestation of God addressed to reason, through the perfect manhood of Je- sus ; a fourth demanding only the spiritual presence and teachings of Jesus to recognize in him the light and life. The Gospels appeal respectively to the instincts which lead men to bow to divine authority, power, perfection, and spirituality, and may thus be shown to exhaust the sides of man's nature from which he may best be reached ORIGIN OF THE WRITTEN GOSPELS. 83 and led to submission to the Saviour, and to complete- ness in him. The four Gospels given to men in the apostolic times are therefore the complete Gospel of God for the world in all ages. III. Object of the Present Work. The object of the present work is to verify this theory, while using it in the elucidation of the meaning of the four Gospels. The Aim. The attempt will be made to show that all the Gospels, both in their general drift and in their special peculiarities, fall in with and confirm the theory which has been outlined, while the theory itself explains or renders significant much in the structure and matter of the Gospels that is otherwise inexplicable or without significance. The subordinate part which the chronological order of events plays in the work of the Evangelists will be seen in the prosecution of this work. It w^ll appear that there is a higher law of unity and arrangement than mere succession in time. Out of the vast array of facts and events which were crowded into the life of Jesus, the Holy Ghost leads each writer to select those which will best serve the special purpose of each ; and to ar- range them in accordance with his own design, now fol- lowing the order of time and now departing from it. No one of them attempts a complete life of Christ after the pattern of the biographers. All of them together can scarcely be said to furnish the materials for such a hfe. The Method. It will manifestly be necessary to con- sider in connection with each Gospel such questions as the following : — What was the actual origin of this Gospel, and for whom was it especially designed ? 84 ADVENT OF MESSIAH. What was the character and what were the needs of those for whom it was written ? How far does this Gospel itself agree with the answers to these questions, in its authorship, its point of view, its material, and its entire scope ? No one capable of duly weighing them will consider these inquiries unimportant. How important will best appear when they have been answered. PAET II. MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. " One God, one law, one element, And one far-oflF divine event, To which the whole creation moves." Alfred Tennyson. " The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham." Matthew i. 1. "Primus omnium Matthaeus est Publicanus, cognomento Levi, qui Evangelium in Judaea Hebraeo sermone edidit, ob eorum vel maxime causam, qui in Jesum crediderant ex Judasis, et nequaquam Legis um- bram, succedente Evangelii veritate, servabant." Jekome. CHAPTER I. HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE JEWISH ADAPTATION OF THE FIRST GOSPEL. The investigation of the Gospels for present purposes is either historical or critical. The former includes the inquiries into their actual historical origin and design, into the character of the class for whom they were in- tended, and into their authorship. The latter embraces the inquiries into their actual contents, and into their general and special adaptation to the classes for which they were prepared. MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. SECTION I. ORIGIN AND DESIGN OF THE FIRST GOSPEL. Two questions need to be answered, in accordance with the facts of history, if possible, before any complete and critical knowledge of the structure and drift of the Gospel can be attained. These questions are : What was the actual origin of the Gospel according to Mat- thew ? For what class of readers was it primarily de- signed ? I. Imagined Origin. The so-called scientific criticism, in the hands of the rationalist, has lost both its science and its criticism. It lias exhausted the power of an ungoverned and ungov- ernable imagination in the attempt to account for the origin and form of the Gospels, while it has not given the least attention to the plain facts of history touching the points in question. One has imagined an original Hebrew or Aramasan Gospel out of which the four were afterwards compiled in the most bungling and mechanical manner. By turns Matthew, Mark, and Luke have each been made to play the part of a fundamental Greek Gospel, on the basis of which the remaining ones have been constructed. Some have fancied that there was one primitive Gospel, and that the separate or remaining Gospels grew out of lesser evangelical essays representing single incidents in the life of Christ, or out of memoirs of Christ current in the early Church. Still others have assumed that the Gospels are the productions of the Evangelists whose names they bear, who do not however give plain histor- ical facts, but " whose minds are said to have expressed in nave fiction the consciousness of the Church." A first fatal objection to all such hypotheses is, that ORIGIN AND DESIGN. 87 they are pure imagination, with just as considerable a basis of fact as " Baron Munchausen " or the " Arabian Nights." A second, and equally fatal, is that they do not in the slightest measure account for the free and beautiful originality and the wonderful and sustained unity found in each and all the Gospels. As a conse- quence of their utter baselessness and inadequacy, and at the same time furnishing a further proof of their fal- sity, these innumerable hypotheses have all alike failed to command the general assent of even the unbelieving world, while the most able and brilliant of them all have ultimately, and often speedily, failed to secure the abid- ing faith of their own authors, and have fallen into merited contempt and oblivion. II. Actual Origin and Design. The question to be asked by the seeker for truth is not, What possible origins of the Gospels can be con- ceived ? but rather, What was their actual origin ? Con- cerning the first Gospel the question is, What, as a mat- ter of history, was the origin, and what the design, of the Gospel according to Matthew. It must be manifest to any one of average common sense, that even second-rate tradition on this point, if no better can be obtained, is infinitely more valuable than the best conclusions of the uncertain rationalistic imag- ination. Of what use, then, the imagination, if the real historical origin of the Gospels can be clearly estab- lished ? Now the fact is that the investigator is not left to uncertain tradition, much less to pure conjecture, for it can be conclusively shown that Matthew wrote his Gos- pel for the Jewish race, the first of the three great rep- resentative races of which the civilized world of his day was made up. 88 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. Most Ancient Witness. The most ancient direct tes- timony concerning the Gospel according to Matthew is that of Papias. Papias was bishop of Hierapolis, in Asia Minor, a city which, according to the tradition al- ready given, was evangelized by Philip and Bartholo- mew. The testimony of Papias possibly reaches back to the end of the first century, certainly to the beginning of the second. Eusebius names him among the famous bishops of his age, makes him contemporary with Justus of Jeru- salem and Ignatius of Antioch, in the first quarter of the second century ; and speaks of him as " a man in the highest degree eloquent and learned and above all skilled in the Scriptures." ^ Irenseus writes, that he was said to be the disciple or hearer of John and the associate of Polycarp, who was bishop of Smyrna at the opening of the second century .^ That he refers ta John the Pres- byter (or elder), the disciple of the Apostles, and not to John the Apostle, is evident from the statement of Pa- pias himself, as quoted by Eusebius, in which he confesses that he heard the words of the Apostles from those who were their followers, especially from Aristion and John the Presbyter.3 The testimony of Papias was originally given in the fourth book of a work in five books, which he called, " Interpretations of our Lord's Declarations." From this work, — now no longer extant, but which still ex- isted in the time of Eusebius, in the fourth century, — the early church historians have made copious extracts.* In the preface to his work Papias makes known his object and method, declaring that he not only recorded 1 Hist. Ecclee. lib. iii. 36. 2 Idem, lib. iii. 39. 8 Idem. * Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. iii, 39. Iren. Against Heresies, book v. ch. xxxiii. 4. ORIGIN AND DESIGN. 89 what he found in written form, but also made special effort to gather up such unwritten tradition as could be traced back to the Apostles. "Nor shall I regret," said he, " to subjoin to my Interpretations, also for your ben- efit, whatever I have at any time accurately ascertained from the Elders and treasured up in my memory, in order to give additional confirmation to the truth by my testimony. For, as it seems to me, I have never (like many) delighted to hear those who make a great show of words, but those who teach the truth, nor those who relate new and strange precepts, but those who give the commands of the Lord and things which came from the truth itself. Whenever, therefore, I met with any one who had been on intimate terms with the Elders, I used to make special inquiries touching what were the utter- ances of the Elders, — what Andrew, or Peter, or Philip, or Thomas, or James, or John, or Matthew, or any other disciple of the Lord, or what Aristion and John the Presbyter, also disciples, said. For I believed that the books would not be of so much profit to me, as the living word of men still surviving." ^ In the course of his work, in a passage preserved by Eusebius, Papias recorded what he was able to learn in this way respecting the origin of the Gospels. His tes- timony concerning the first Gospel is, that " Matthew wrote the Oracles (of the Lord) in the Hebrew tongue, and every one interpreted them as he was able." ^ The circumstances connected with this testimony are given thus in detail, in order that the full value of it may be seen. It is true that Eusebius elsewhere speaks of Papias as a man of inferior judgment ; ^ but it is also 1 Hist. Eccles. lib. iii. 39. 2 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. iii. 39. See Fisher, Supernatural Origin of Christianity, p. 160. 2 Idem. 90 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. true that this was chiefly on account of the millenarian yiews of the latter, which were so offensive to the church historian. The latter opinion is therefore of little weight in comparison with the former high estimate al- ready quoted. Papias was evidently a good man, and Professor Fisher has rightly said, that " however moder- ate his intellectual powers, he was justly regarded as an honest witness or reporter of what he had seen and heard. He reports what he had received from compan- ions of the Apostles." It is likewise well to remember that the testimony of a man of narrow intellect may, in such circumstances, be even better than that of a greater man whose view of facts is warped by adherence to some favorite theory. Judged by his purpose, method, and opportunities, no better witness need be cited than Papias. The statement of Papias is then that of a competent witness, made after devoting himself intelligently and diligently to the work of ascertaining the facts in ques- tion. He made his investigations less than a generation after the writing of the Gospels, or after an interval less than our present remove from the first Napoleon or even from the Duke of Wellington. He had the best of op- portunities, for Polycarp, whose associate he was, had been the disciple and friend of John, and knew more about that Apostle than did any one else in that age, and more, doubtless, than any of the contemporaries of even Napoleon or Wellington knew of them. Such testimony can only be made to appear worthless by that destructive criticism which would sweep away all the facts of history and make Homer, Shakespeare, Napoleon, and Jesus all myths alike. Later Testimony. But Papias is not alone in his tes- timony. Some of the ablest of the leaders of the early Church agree with him. ORIGIN AND DESIGN. 91 Iren^eus — the pupil of the same Polycarp, and who was bishop of Lyons in the last quarter of the second centur}^ — affirms, that " Matthew issued a written Gos- pel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foun- dations of the Church." ^ His position in the Church and his wide acquaintance with it made him a most credi- ble and competent witness. Still more explicitly ; " The Gospel of St. Matthew was written for the Jews, who specially desired that it should be shown that the Christ was of the seed of David ; and St. Matthew endeavors to satisfy this desire, and therefore commences his Gos- pel with the genealogy of Christ." ^ Origen (disciple of Clement of Alexandria) — a man of extraordinary learning and of extensive travel, who was known throughout the entire Church during the first half of the third century — also declares, that " St. Mat- thew wrote for the Hebrew, who expected the Messiah from the seed of Abraham and David." ^ Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, — a historian of great celebrit}^ whose veracity has never been questioned by any one except the infidel Gibbon, and who flourished during the latter part of the third century and earlier part of the fourth, — besides preserving the testimon}^ of Papias, as already cited, gives the following definite statement of the facts concerning the origin of the first Gospel : " Matthew having in the first instance delivered his Gospel to his countrymen in their own language, af- terward, when he was about to leave them and extend his apostolic mission elsewhere, filled up, or completed, his written Gospel for the use of those whom he was leaving behind, as a compensation for his absence." * It 1 Irenaeus, Against Heresies, book iii. i. 1. 2 Caten. in Matt. Massuet, p. 347 ; Against Heresies, iii. 9, 1. ^ Origen, In Joann. torn. i. 6. * Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 24. 92 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. is doubtless true that of all the men of his da}^ Eusebms was the best acquainted with the historical records and the traditions of the Church. Jerome — " the most learned of the Latin Fathers of the Church," who lived still later — says; " The Church, which according to the word of Christ is built upon a rock, has four evangelical rivers of Paradise First of all is Matthew the publican, called Levi, who composed a Gospel in the Hebrew tongue for the special use of those Jews who had believed in Christ, and no longer followed the shadow of the Law, after the reve- lation of the substance of the Gospel." ^ Gregory Nazianzen also affirms that Matthew wrote for the Hebrew.2 But there is scarcely need of further presentation of testimony on a subject upon which there was one harmo- nious tradition. Pertinent Facts. While many points suggest them- selves as worthy of discussion, only the main facts touch- ing the origin and design of the first Gospel are related directly to the present investigation. These facts are : that Matthew wrote the Gospel for his Jewish country- men ; that it was the embodiment of the oral Gospel which he had preached to them ; that it was intended to give that preaching permanent form for their benefit ; and that it took advantage of the Jewish Messianic be- liefs and was in this way fitted to commend Jesus as the Messiah to the Jews. There is still another point that should be noticed, which bears indirectly upon the theory of the Jewish origin of Matthew and is confirmatory of it, but which is not essential to that theory. Patristic authority, represented in and by the witnesses already cited, is almost unan- 1 Hieron. Comment, in Evang. Matt. Prolegom. 3, 4. ^ Carmin. lib. i. sect. i. 12, vers. 31. ORIGIN AND DESIGN. 93 imous in asserting a Hebrew original of the first Gospel. The treatment which this testimony has often received at the hands of the critics illustrates well the ease with which a rash and dogmatic criticism can dispose of the plainest facts of history. The testimony of these witnesses — the very men upon whom largely depend the establishment of the canon of the Scriptures and the settlement of the great questions of primitive church history — is declared to be false, because if there had been a Hehreiv original of the first Grospel it would have been preserved. How utterly unwarranted the assumption may be made apparent by a fair presentation of the case. These men of the highest character, and with the best opportunities for knowing the facts, declare it to be a fact, that Matthew first wrote his Gospel in the Hebrew. There is entire agreement in the matter, since no one in that age contradicts the statement. Aside from its being contrary to their acknowledged character to utter falsehood, they had in this case no conceivable motive for it. Moreover, in the view of common sense it seems em- inently natural and appropriate that Matthew should ad- dress the Gospel to his countrymen in the Hebrew. It was at once their sacred language and, in modified form, their vernacular tongue ; and one of the best methods of allaying prejudices and conciliating them, would be to make use of it. Paul used the Hebrew, and with marked effect, for this very purpose, when, standing on the stairs of the castle above the temple at Jerusalem, he addressed the Jewish mob below : " He spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue, .... and when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence" (Acts xxi. 40-xxii. 2). That Mattliew, a na- tive of Judaea, should address the native Jews in the He- brew was, of course, still more natural and appropriate. 94 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. But the entire question of fact is set at rest by the best of direct testimony from those w^ho saw the Gospel in its Hebrew form. Jerome, the most skilled of all the Fathers in the Hebrew tongue, and who lived in Pal- estine, declares that he himself saw the Hebrew Gospel, and had an opportunity of transcribing and translating it.i Epiphanius, one of the most learned among the Fathers of the Eastern Church, gives similar testimony.^ The disappearance of the Hebrew form of the Gospel is easily accounted for by a state of things peculiar to that age. Few of the early Christian writers were famil- iar with that language. They were accustomed to go to the Septuagint or Greek version for their knowledge of the Old Testament, and they therefore naturally turned to the Greek form in which Matthew's Gospel existed, and which was confessedly of divine authority. It is moreover true, as is affirmed by early Christian writers, that " the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew was used, and alone adopted of all the Gospels, by certain heretical sec- tions of the ancient Church, the Ebionites, and the Naz- arenes ; and was mutilated and interpolated b}^ them." ^ This abuse of it naturally led the early Christians to neglect and avoid it ; while it also explains the fact that the authors of the Peschito, or Syriac version of the Gos- pels, translated the Greek Gospel of Matthew, instead of reproducing or modifying the apostolic original in He- brew. Or, if these causes were not sufficient to account for its disappearance, the great historic event of the age is cer- tainly sufficient. The destruction of Jerusalem swept away the centre of Hebrew civilization, brought to an 1 Hieron. de Vir. III. c. 3 ; Contra Pelagianos, lib. iii., etc. 2 Epiphan. Hceres. xxx. de Ebionitis. 3 See references to Epiphanius, Jerome, etc., in Wordsworth, Greek Tes- tament, Introduction to St. Matthew's Gospel. ORIGIN AND DESIGN. 9o end the knowledge, among the scattered Jewish masses, of even the modified or Aramsean form of the language which had survived the wreck of the Babylonish captivity, and consigned to ultimate destruction most of the He- brew literature save the Old Testament Scriptures. The Jewish historian Josephus furnishes an illustration of the fate of the Hebrew original of Matthew.' Josephus him- self informs us that he " wrote his great work, the His- tory of the Jewish Wars, originally in Hebrew, his na- tive tongue, for the benefit of his own nation ; and he afterwards translated it into Greek. No notices of the original Hebrew now survive : it has perished ; but the Greek version is often referred to by the early Christian Fathers, and is now extant.'* ^ Is it any wonder, then, that the Hebrew original of the first Gospel, with the strong prejudices existing in the Church against its use, soon perished ? ^ As already said, the theory of the present work does not directly depend upon the acknowledgment of a He- brew original of Matthew's Gospel. Indirectly, how- ever, it does ; for if that original be admitted it furnishes another indication of the Jewish aim of the Evangelist. Besides, the same d priori critical methods that would sweep this Hebrew document out of existence would carry away with it all the most stable facts of history, leave the Gospels without any historical basis, and make all investigations concerning them worse than useless. As Archbishop Whately so admirably showed in his " Historic Doubts," this new and advanced mode of play- ing fast and loose with facts would annihilate all history. In protesting against such reckless criticism, Principal TuUoch, in his "Lectures on Renan," says, on this very point : " It appears to us, however, that it is impossible 1 Josephus, Jeiuish Wars. 2 See fuller discussion in Wordsworth. 96 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. to disregard these statements (of the Fathers) altogether, especially while resting so confidently as we do on the tes- timony of the same Fathers to the genuineness of the Gos- pels. We regret, tlierefore, to notice that, in the last edi^ tion of his Greek Testament, Dean Alford goes the length of repudiating a Hebrew original of St. Matthew's Gos- pel, in the face of evidence which, with all possible deduc- tions, seems irresistible." ^ It may be confidently afiirmed then, that, taking into account the number, credibility, and competency of the witnesses cited, it cannot be reasonably maintained that their statements on these points are not in the main in agreement with the historical facts, and that they did not arise out of those facts. Matthew undoubtedly pre- pared his Gospel for the Jews. SECTION n. THE CHARACTER AND NEEDS OF THE JEW. If the first Gospel originated, as has been seen, in the preaching of the Apostles, especially of Matthew, to the Jews, and was designed to commend Jesus to the accept- ance of the Jews, then the character and needs of the Jew must furnish the key to that Gospel. The Jew must be understood before the Gospel for the Jews can be adequately appreciated and interpreted. What manner of man was he ? What, especially, were his spiritual needs ? The answers will cast light upon whatever has been prepared for the Jewish race, under the influence of the Holy Ghost. I. The Jews, There are certain characteristics which clearly distin- guish the Jews from the other great historic races. 1 Lectures on Henan's ' Vie de Jesus,' note, p. 119. THE JEWISH CHARACTER. 97 They were the chosen people of God, and were con- scious that God was in a peculiar sense in their his- tory. They had the oracles of God, the true world-re- ligion. They had the only divinely ordained forms of religious worship. Above all, they had the promise of the Messiah, in whom all their blessings and privileges should attain perfection, and his coming was the central and ab- sorbing thought in the mind of the race. Out of these characteristics, which made the Jew an altogether peculiar man, came the needs of the Jewish race, — partly through a right development, partly through a wrong. Along the line of these peculiarities must, therefore, be sought the correct understanding of the Gospel requirements of the Jews in the time of Christ and the Apostles. A development altogether right would have produced the ideal Jew ; a right and wrong combined produced the actual Jew. The Chosen People. The Jews were the chosen peo- ple of God. They were elected to be the objects of his special care, the recipients of his special favor, and, nota- bly, to be, in religion, the repository of God's revealed truth, the hope of the world, and the central race of the ages. No other people has ever occupied such a position. Had the Jews made the most and the best of their election, they would doubtless have been to-day the most favored race of mankind. A sense of the distinguishing love of God did indeed lead the true Israel to humility, to thankfulness, to devotion to Jehovah, and to an appre- ciation of their high destiny. But in the days of Christ and the Apostles, as in the time of the Prophets, the true Israel was but a remnant. With the great mass of the Jews the election had resulted only in pride, conceit, ar- rogance. They were ever ready to ciy, " We be Abra- ham's seed and heirs to the promise of God," — thus claiming as their own inherited and inalienable right 98 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. what could be theirs only through the grace of God and fidelity to the covenant. The Jews had the clear consciousness that Jehovah was in a peculiar sense in their history, as their God. This naturally resulted from their election and from their ex2:)erience as a people. No other nation could point to such a miraculous career, to such deliverances in which God himself appeared in his omnipotence to save them from their bondage, from their adversaries, from their captivities. Jehovah was known throughout the world as the God of the Jews. With the true Israel this consciousness of intimate union with God was doubtless a source of spiritual profit. It was a great comfort in prosecuting the ends of right- eousness to feel assured that all the world existed for them, that its changes took place for them, that its real treasures were to be inherited and enjoyed by them, and that all the nations were to become submissive to their faith. It sustained them in sore trials and lifted them above disaster and defeat and all the accidents of time. But with the mass of Jews it led to a national narrow- ness and exclusiveness, which had reached their height at the time of the Advent. Their selfishness had become extreme and proverbial. While they had forgotten that they were elect out of the world, not against it but for it, in order that all the world might be blessed in them, they had also forgotten that the world was not theirs for them to make the most of as Jews for their own selfish ends, but theirs to bring to the true faith through the oracles of God and the coming of the Messiah. Their selfishness naturally led to worldliness and covetousness. The old Mosaic enactments — such as that of the Sabba- tic year and of the tithes to be used in the religious fes- tivals and to be distributed to the poor — which were intended, negatively, to scatter the Jews* property and THE JEWISH CHARACTER. 99 to check the cupidity of their nature, and, positively, to bring out a genuine and large benevolence, had long since become a dead letter, and through their haste to become rich the name Jew was becoming then, as it is now, " a by-word and a hissing." The Evangelist who would reach and save the Jews must recognize their election and the presence of God in their history, and must at the same time aim to correct their errors. The "World-religion. The Jews had the oracles of God. The world-religion had been delivered to them. They alone had the written revelation of the true God. That revelation gave them the key to the character of Jehovah, to his works, to his providences, to his sublime and eternal plan. It cast the only clear light in the world upon the nature, character, condition, and destiny of man. It alone gave man a glimpse of the origin and end of the universe and the present earthly system of things. In short, the Jews had all the clear rehgious light in the world. An Apostle has declared that the benefits of the elec- tion of Israel were every way great, and chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of God (Rom. iii. 2). The revelation of doctrine given to the Jew had in it all the germs of the fuller revelation by Christ ; so that the true Judaism found its natural culmination in Christian- ity. As a fact that old revelation led the true Israel, along lines of thought and experience the most natural, directly to Christianity. It is likewise a fact that it led the most of the Jews to a knowledge of the true doctrine concerning God, a knowledge to which the Gentiles did not attain, and thus made it unnecessary for the Evangel- ist of the Jews to dwell upon these elementjiry doctrines. At the time of the Advent, the masses had departed from the pure religion of the Law and the Prophets. 100 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. The great council, the Sanhedrim, the head of the Jewish system, had been brought, in large measure, under the influence of the heathen rulers of the nation, and secular- ized. There had sprung up a party, the Herodians, doubt- less numerous, who had cut loose from Jewish hopes and aspirations as well as Jewish worship, and who " saw in the power of the Herodian family the pledge of the pres- ervation of their national existence in the face of Roman ambition," — a party so entirely worldly that a Herod could meet all their longings for a deliverer. The remain- der of the nation was divided into the two great religious sects, — the Pharisees and Sadducees (the Essenes or mystics were too few to be of importance), the tradition- alists and the skeptics. The former class, embracing by far the greater number and reaching down among the common people, had added to the teaching of the Script- ures a mass of traditions which had completely overlaid that teaching, and taken its place, making their religion mere form and ceremony, mere theatrical show. The lat- ter class, comprising the more scholarly and cultivated of the people, had not only discarded all tradition, and re- jected every doctrine which was not plainly taught in the Scriptures, but had made free with the Scriptures them- selves — very much after the style of the modern ration- alists — receiving or rejecting as best suited them, and giving little or no attention to practical religion. In truth practical religion was at the lowest ebb. Most of the Jews had lost sight of or perverted those great doctrines which are the proper regulators of human conduct. Their practical creed ran thus : " Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy." " Thou shalt not take interest from a Jew, but shalt exact usurious in- terest from all Gentiles." *' Be scrupulous about outward forms, for God looks mainly at these." To each living truth they had conjoined the fatal error which destroyed it, or else had quite substituted the error for the truth. THE JEWISH CHARACTER. 101 The Evangelist who would reach and save the Jews must recognize their possession of God's oracles, and must seek to recall these lost principles and to correct the perverted ones. He must carry this apostatizing race back to the oracles of God. The Divine Forms. The Jews had the only divinely ordained forms of religious worship. The Mosaic ordi- nances embodied the Mosaic truth. The Mosaic ritual embodied God's view of the best forms of the divine worship in that age of tutelage, when prescribed forms seemed necessary to a rude people who were under train- ing for a later spiritual age and worship. The Jews alone had the true and God-given forms of worship. These religious forms were doubtless very helpful to the true Israel in keeping the revelations of God before their minds, and lifting their thoughts heavenward. The ritual undoubtedly served as a perpetual object-les- son to the whole nation, keeping some of the main truths of Judaism always before them. But the mass of the nation, long before the Advent, had lost sight of the substance in the form. Their relig- ion had become intensely formal, a mere outward show, •^ procedure in which man only acted a part, played the hypocrite. The Pharisees could steal the possessions of widows and orphans, and then tithe the herbs and weeds in their gardens and make long prayers at the corners of the broad streets, and think themselves the patterns of the world in religion. The Evangelist who would reach and save the Jews must understand the true import of these divine forms, as the changing shadows of an unchanging substance, and must aim to correct this awful, and, if uncorrected, fatal perversion of the truth. The Messianic Promise. Above all, the Jews had the promise of the Messiah. 102 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. Acknowledging tlie divine authority of tlie Old Tes- tament Scriptures, they read in them of a coming Deliv- erer. The promises and prophecies had grown clearer all along the centuries. He was to be the seed of the ' woman, the seed of Abraham, a prophet like unto Moses, the royal son of David, the child of a virgin. All the types found their explanation in him, all the sacrifices pointed to him, all prophecy centred in him, all the ex- perience and history of Israel shadowed his coming and work. In person he was to be God and man, Emmanuel, the everlasting Father and the man of sorrows in one. Officially he was to be Messiah, or, as the Greek has it, Christ, the anointed of God ; and as the anointing of the old dispensation was used in inducting into the three offices of prophet, king, and priest, he was to be a prophet, like the greatest of the prophets, was to be the legal heir to the throne of David, and was to bear the sins of his people. This great outline was filled in with a multitude of details, made up of circumstances and in- cidents connected with his birth, his life, and his death, and serving to mark his character and his work for the world. The Jews had daily access to this prophetic his- tory of the Messiah, and were hourly expecting his ad- vent when Jesus of Nazareth came and claimed to be the fulfilhnent of prophecy. To the true Israel, the Simeons and Annas, the doc- trine of the Messiah was the support and solace in the trial and sorrow which fell upon the later days of the old dispensation and made way for the opening of the new. But the masses had departed from the correct teaching on this subject. They had not read the prophets aright. They had started out from the prediction of Christ as the son and heir of David, or as king, and had warped all their reading and interpretation to agree with their THE JEWISH CHARACTER. 108 worldly notions of what was demanded by that. The Roman Empire dazzled them and they could only inter pret prophecy in its light. David had conquered and imposed tribute on the surrounding nations, had led the armies and decided the great civil questions, had made Israel one of the powerful kingdoms of the earth. The Jew overlooked or explained away everything that did not accord with the temporal splendor of a king and kingdom after this model. He had cast away that grander idea of a spiritual, universal, and everlasting kingdom, which fills the books of the Prophets. He had lost sight of the part to be played by the prophet and priest in the Messianic work and character. His Messiah was to be the Jewish Coe^ar of the world. As the Messianic idea was the one in which all the other Jewish ideas of that age centred and culminated, the Evangelist who would reach and save the Jewish race must, above everything else, keep in view the true doctrine on that point, and must, most of all, give him- self to correcting the otherwise fatal perversions of the truth by the degenerate Jews. II. The Key to Matthew's Gospel, Such being the character of the Jews, it is easy to see how it furnishes the key to the Gospel intended for them. Clearly it would have been a fatal mistake to set forth Jesus of Nazareth — as Mark sets him forth for the Ro- man — simply as the Son of God, wielding almighty power in establishing a universal empire. It would not have commended him to the true Israel who had been holding out for ages, with brave heart and boundless en- durance, against the material power of all the great nations of the world, and who ever bowed to Scriptures and prophecy, but never to mere power. It would have 104 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. had little attraction for the apostate Israel, absorbed in their dream of a magnificent world-empire, except as it tended to foster their perverse view of the Messiah. Equally vain would it have been to bring him forward as Luke does — as the divine-man, coming down from God out of heaven, passing through a perfect human de- velopment, entering into sympathy with all suffering and sorrowing humanity — for the Jew was not looking for the perfect man, the son of Adam, the son of God, but for a son of Abraham, a king descended from David by the royal line. Still more fruitless would it have been to exhibit him as John does, — as the eternal Word, the very God, the light and life of the world, — for the veil was before the eyes of the Jew, and he could not discern the spiritual God as manifested in the Word. The light shone into the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not. For the Jew the credentials of Jesus must be drawn from Moses and the Prophets. In his origin, human and divine, in the capital facts of his life, in his character pri- vate and official, in short, in his work and in his king- dom, he must be shown to meet the requirements of the Messianic Scriptures. Jesus must be set over against the prophetic Messiah, so that they shall both be seen to be one and the same. This work properly done, no Jew could escape the conclusion ; Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah. SECTION III. THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE FIRST GOSPEL. There has been but one prevalent opinion concerning the authorship of the first Gospel. It has always been ascribed to a Jew, the Apostle Matthew. This author- ship is sufficiently established by the witnesses already cited. THE AUTHORSHIP. 105 Like most of the Apostles of our Lord, he was a man ahnost without a biography. He takes occasion to men- tion but the fewest facts concerning himself : his call to become a disciple of Jesus ; the feast which he made for his new Master ; and his appointment to the Apostleship. The other Evangelists simply corroborate his statement of these facts. Tradition, as has been seen, makes some additions concerning the origin of the Gospel which bears his name, and concerning his later ministry outside of Judaea. I. A Representative Jew in Nature, From these facts and traditions in connection with the Gospel itself, the Apostle is seen to have been a repre- sentative Jew and eminently fitted by his nature, and by his experience, Jewish and Christian, for the work of preaching and embodying the Gospel for the Jewish race. What is known of his personal history marks him as a man appreciating the need for the Gospel most fully him- self, and fitted to press it most earnestly upon the accept- ance of his countrymen. His own account of his call to become a disciple of Christ, and of the feast in his house, is as follows : " And as Jesus passed forth from thence, he saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom ; and he saith unto him. Follow me. And he arose and fol- lowed him. And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him, and his disciples " (Matt. ix. 9, 10). Mark, in his account, calls Matthew by liis Jew- ish name, " Levi, the son of Alpheus," and represents the feast as occurring in his house (Mark ii. 14, 15). Luke names him Levi, and declares that "he left all," that he made Jesus " a great feast in his own house," and that there was " a great company of publi- 106 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. cans and others that sat down with them " (Luke v. 27-29). The account of his appointment to the Apostleship is given by himself, by Mark, and by Luke. All the cata- logues place him in the fourth couple of the twelve Apos- tles along with Thomas ; Mark and Luke place him first, " Matthew and Thomas" (Mark iii. 18; Luke vi. 15) ; but he places himself second, and writes, " Thomas and Matthew the puhliccm^^ (x. 3). The business of the tax-gatherer, from which he was called, had doubtless trained him to system. The public official is obliged to methodize his business, to use titles, headings, indices, to put things into such shape that they may be easily grasped and understood. Hence his emi- nent fitness to present to the Jew the claims of Jesus as Messiah, in a clear, systematic, and business-like man- ner. It is obvious, likewise, that the business of the publi- can must have led him to an intimate knowledge of the Jewish character, especially of the covetousness and hy- pocrisy which were such marked features of it. As a publican he was at variance with the Pharisaic party, and the Pharisaic disposition among his own peo- ple. By the orthodox Jew he must have been looked upon as unclean and often treated as an object of con- tempt. He may have been freed from the power of Pharisaism in either of two ways : by being overcome and carried away by the spirit of covetousness and extor- tion, which reached their height in the average tax- gatherer of the day ; or by attaining to a more liberal piety and a more vital comprehension of the Old Testa- ment, and so reaching a contempt for the common for- mality and hypocrisy which passed for piety. It was in the latter way that Zaccheus attained to his emancipation from Pharisaism, and it has been suggested THE AUTHORSHIP. 107 that Matthew was a Jew of like spirit, and therefore an honest and upright publican. The readiness with which he left his vocation and his possessions to follow Jesus, and the necessity for some previous spiritual fitness on his part, have been urged in favor of this view.^ On the other hand, equally strong reasons may be brought forward for regarding him as belonging to the infamous rather than to the pious publicans. From the time of his conversion he seems to have regarded the publican on the one side, as he regarded the Pharisee on the other, as a representative Jewish sinner, each, in his place and way, the wickedest man of his race. It is re- markable that he has not recorded the story of Zaccheus, the honest publican, nor the parable of the Pharisee and the publican, nor anything else concerning the publicans which could raise our estimate of their character as a class. It is still more remarkable that he has recorded so much that blackens that character, and especially that memorable saying of our Lord, " Verily I say unto you, Z^- that the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you" (xxi. 31). While he joins with the other Evangelists in connecting the publicans and sin- ners, he alone, in this passage, conjoins publicans and harlots. II. A Representative Jew in Experience, There is also enough in these facts, in connection with his Gospel, to show that Matthew's experience of the saving power of the Gospel was that of a representative Jew. He arose and left all and followed Jesus. These words of Luke indicate, perhaps, that he had grown rich or was growing rich in the calling of the publican. He left behind him forever the gain and the means of gain, 1 See Lange, Life ofJesiis, vol. i. 108 MATTHEW THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. SO dear to the man who is a Jew by nature, to follow him who had not where to lay his head. It was a complete revolution of character and life. But if Matthew was one of the outcast publicans, justly regarded as infamous, then his conversion into an Apostle of the Lord, in whom he recognized the true and eternal king of Israel, must have been indelibly im- pressed upon his mind as a miracle of divine grace. He was despised in the eyes of the false theocrats of Israel, and the true Theocrat thus highly exalted him. He must have learned to feel the contrast between the true and the spurious kingdom of God in all their respective aspects. But even without taking into account the un- reasonable contempt of the Pharisees, it is still manifest that his former doubtful calling, when compared with his present exalted vocation, his former associates, who con- sisted partly of the most degraded of men, when con- trasted with the consecrated circle in which he now lived, and, finally, his former, when compared with his present, state of mind, must all have appeared to him in their darkest colors. He was translated from a condition of the deepest shame to one of the highest honor, from a most critical to a most advantageous position. Hence it would accord with such a state of things, that a strong feeling for contrasts should have been found in him," ^ along with a profound appreciation of all the various aspects of life. His many years of preaching the Gospel to his coun- trymen compelled him to study most diligently the great facts concerning the person and work of Jesus, and to throw them into the form best suited to commend him as Messiah to the Jews. Recurring to the peculiar characteristics of the Jew, as already given, it will be seen that Matthew had meas- 1 See Lange, Life of Jesus, vol. i. THE GENERAL PLAN. 109 ured tlie whole range of tlie Jewish character and expe- rience. He was one of the chosen people, and under- stood their arrogant, self-righteous claims to the peculiar favor of God and to exclusive right to the world. He was familiar with the oracles of God and with their per- versions. He had perfect acquaintance with the forms of the true religion, and with the formality and hypocrisy that had arisen out of them. He had been taught the true doctrine of Messiah and all the departures from it. All this is manifest throughout his Gospel. Take him all in all, there was no man among the Apos- tles so fitted as Matthew to embody the Gospel in per- manent form for the Jew. The impulse which led his countrymen to ask him to make a record of that Gospel for them, and that which led him to accede to their re- quest, were doubtless both from the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of all wisdom. Doubtless, out of all the men of that age, the Holy Ghost chose the man best fitted, by his nature and experience as a representative Jew, to write the Gospel for the Jew. CHAPTER n. CRITICAL VIEW OF THE JEWISH ADAPTATION OF THE FIRST GOSPEL. In" examining the first Gospel in the light of its Jewish origin, design, and authorship, its very marked adaptation to the needs of the Jew of that age will become apparent as we consider the plan of the Evangelist, the central idea and general drift of his production, the characteristic omissions and additions, and the incidental variations and peculiarities. 110 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. SECTION I. THE JEWISH ADAPTATION IN THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE FIRST GOSPEL. It may seem strange, and requiring explanation, that at this late day inquiry should need to be made in order to ascertain the plan of the Gospels. Have we not the di- visions of Matthew and its plan given in the twenty- eight chapters of the Gospel ? Is not the same thing true of the sixteen chapters of Mark ; of the twenty-four of Luke; of the twenty-one of John? Why,' then, look any farther ? I. The Plan of the Gospels. Even a partial investigation of the facts will convince any one that the outward history of the Bible is one con- tinued record of marvels. Sometimes an accident, often a trifle, has, in the ordainings of Providence and through cooperation with some prevailing tendency of human thought or drift of human events, decided the way in which the great mass of men should regard the Word of God for centuries to come. The mechanical division of its separate books into chapters and verses may be looked upon as one of these apparently trifling incidents, which has nevertheless ex- erted a vast influence upon the views taken of the con- nections of the Scriptures, from the time when the printed Bible first began to find a place in the Christian home until the present day. The work was done in a way, and at a time, to give it the greatest possible influence in hiding the structural harmony and unity of the Sacred Word. Prepared by a purely mechanical process, — as one would be led to conclude, without even the trouble of an examination, by the fact that Robert Stephens THE GENERAL PLAN. Ill completed the division of the New Testament into verses during a journey on horseback from Paris to Lyons, in the troublous times of the middle of the sixteenth cent- ury ; given to the Church ten years before the birth of Lord Bacon, while the mechanical philosophy still held undisputed sway in the world of thought ; it was exactly fitted to meet the intellectual wants of the times. Com- mending itself as a convenient arrangement, in favor of which much may yet be said ; completed in time to be attached to even the earlier English editions of the Bible (the earliest had been issued only sixteen years before, and King James's version was not issued till sixty years after), it was equally fitted to take advantage of the drift of events in extending and perpetuating its influence among the English-speaking peoples. It does not fall within the scope of the present discus- sion to inquire, what may have been the design of God in ordering such a thing at such a time. One result of it has undoubtedly been to turn the attention to the great doctrines that everywhere lie upon the very surface of the Scriptures, and to reserve the development of the argument for the rhetorical unity of the various books of the Bible until this age, when the attack comes from that side. On the other hand, it can scarcely be denied that its tendency has been to lead the multitudes to read the Word of God very much as if made up of de- tached portions, having little or no logical or rhetori- cal connection with one another, and each composed of ten or twenty words, more or less ; and to lead the popu- lar expounders of the Scriptures to construct their com- mentaries very much in accordance with this view. Perhaps the influence of this mechanical chopping up of the Scriptures, in preventing the recognition of a beau- tiful structural harmony, and in concealing most obvious and characteristic differences in aim and plan, has been 112 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. nowhere more positive tlian in that portion so much read and commented upon — the Gospels. The common theory among the masses seems to accept the productions of the Evangelists as so many lives of Christ, more or less com- plete, but it assigns no peculiar sphere and attributes no special design to any one of them. It recognizes no ex- isting reason why there should be more than one Gospel, or, since there are more than one, why there should not be three or five instead of four. It follows naturally from this failure to recognize a specific aim in each Gospel, that the masses come to look upon them all as being without coherent plan or inherent harmony of structure. Nor could one even remotely in- fer from most of the works professing to expound them for the masses, that Matthew or. Mark or Luke or John, whether consciously or unconsciously, each gave to the world a book with a definite plan, possessed of a harmony and unity entirely different from that which Cardinal Hugo and Robert Stephens together discovered so long ago, when the former divided the New Testament into chapters and the latter into verses. These considerations will fairly justify the present in- quir}^ after the plan of the Gospels. II. The Plan of 3fatthezv's Gospel. It may be seen, in the light of a careful study of its origin, aim, and matter, that the Gospel according to Matthew is naturally divided into five parts, or, rather, into three principal parts, — presenting the successive stages of the work of Jesus as the Messiah in establishing the kingdom of heaven, — with an appropriate introduc- tion and conclusion. In these divisions the character and career of Jesus are unfolded in their connection with the appropriate Old Testament exhibitions of the Messiah. The historic THE GENERAL PLAN. 113 personage is thus seen side by side with the prophetic ideal, and the exact correspondence of the two is made apparent. It may not be wholly unnecessary to remark that an outline view is given first, in order that, by getting the contents of the Gospel fully and clearly before the mind, the way may be prepared for a better understanding of the more specific and interesting views that are to follow. For the assistance of any who may desire to make a fuller comparative study of the characters of " Jesus " and '' Messiah," the Messianic teachings of the Old Tes- tament have been connected with the outline view given of Matthew's Gospel. OUTLINE OF THE FIRST GOSPEL. INTRODUCTIOK. The Advent of the Messiah. Matthew demonstrates by way of introduction, that Jesus had the origin and of- ficial preparation of the Messiah of the Prophets, i. 1- iv. 11. Section 1. Jesus had the origin of the Messiah, i. 1- ii. 23. A. In his royal and covenant descent from David and Abraham, i. 1-17. Prophetic References. For the prophecies suggested to the Jew by verse 1, see Ps. Ixxxix. 35, 36 , cxxxii. 11 ; Isa. ix. 6, 7 ; xi. 1 ; Jer. xxiii. 5, 6. For the scriptural basis of the argument of the genealogy, see the gen- ealogies in Gen. xlvi. ; Ruth iv. ; 1 Chron. iii. B. In his divine origin and human birth, as Imman- uel, — begotten by the Holy Ghost and born of the Vir- gin Mary. i. 18-25. Proph. Refs. For the prophecy fulfilled in this passage, and formally referred to in verses 22, 23, see Isa. vii. 14. For the prophecy that he shiill save his people from their sins, and for the scriptural data for de- ciding that this was the precise time for the appearing of the Messiah, see Dan. ix. 24-26. 114 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. C. In the place of his birth, — not Nazareth, as the Jews supposed, but Bethlehem ; in the circumstances of his early life in connection with the two places ; and in the place of his residence and development, the secluded Nazareth, ii. 1-23. Proph. Refs. For the prophecy of the star, ch. ii. 2, see Num. xxiv. 17. For tlie coming of the Gentiles, fulfilled in the Magi, verse 1, see Isa. xi. 10; xlii. 1 ; Ix. 3. With the decree of the Sanhedrim, verse 6, compare iVIic. V. 2. With the flight into Egypt, verses 13-15, compare Hos. xi. I. With the murder of the innocents, verses 16-18, compare Jer. xxxi. 15. With the settlement and residence in Nazareth, verse 23, compare Ps. xxii. 6 ; Ixix. 7, 12 ; Isa. xHx. 7 ; liii. 2, 3, etc. ; and John i. 46. Section 2. Jesus received the preparation and inaug- uration of the Messiah, iii. 1-iv. 11. A. In the preparation of the Jews, by a forerunner, for his public appearance and ministry, iii. 1-12. Proph. Rpfs. For the prophecy of the forerunner, referred to in verse 3, see Isa. xl. 3. For the garb of the forerunner, verse 4, see 2 Kings i. 8. For the prophetic character of Messiah, verses 10-12, see Isa. iv. 4; xli. 8- 16 ; Mai. iii. 1-3. B. In his external and public consecration for his work, in the baptism by John and in the recognition and anoint- ing from heaven, iii. 13-17. Proph. Refs. For the prophecy of the Messiah's subjection to the law of righteousness, verse 15, see Ps. xl. 6-10; Jer. xxiii. 6. For the promise of anointing by the Holy Spirit, verse 16, see Isa. xlii. 1 ;lxi. 1. For the prophetic recognition as the Son of God, verse 17, see Ps. ii. 7. C. In his internal and private girding for the Mes- siah's work and his actual commencement of that work, as man for man, in his first bruising of the serpent's head, in the temptation, iv. 1-11. Proph. Refs. Compare with this passage the Protevangclium, or first Gospel revelation, Gen. iii. 15. Also the promised obedience of the Messiah to the law of God for man, Ps. xl. 7, with the fulfillment in this passage, ia verses 3, 4, of the law of self-renunciation, Deut. viii. 3 ; in verses 5-7, of the law of trust in God, Ps. xci. 11, 12, and Deut. vi. 16 ; in verses 8-10, of the law of worship, Deut. vi. 13. Compare the experience of verse 11 with the promise of divine protection to Messiah, Ps. xci. 11, 12. THE GENERAL PLAN. 115 PART I. The Public Proclamation of Messiah's Kingdom. Matthew demonstrates that Jesus did the public work and bore the public character of Messiah, the King and Prophet, in the period devoted chiefly to the proclama- tion of the coming Kingdom of Heaven, with divine power, in Galilee, iv. 12-xvi. 12. Section 1. Jesus did this in his personal proclamation, unfolding the law and relations of his Kingdom, and demonstrating his own divine authority, iv. 12-ix. 35. A. In his early and preliminary work, — in the place, message, and results, iv. 12-25. Proph. Refs. For the prophecy of the place of begiuniug his mission, verses 12-17, see Isa. ix. 1, 2. With verses 18-22, compare the vision of holy waters, Ezek. xlvii. 9, 10. With verses 23-25, compare Isa. Ixi. 1-3, etc. B. In his proclamation of the Law of the Kingdom, — in its spirituality, as contrasted with Jewish views, — in the Sermon on the Mount, v. 1-vii. 29. The Lawgiver presents the Constitution of the King- dom of Heaven by exhibiting, — a. The Citizens of the Kingdom, v. 3-16. (a.) In their blessed character and experience. 3-12. (b.) In their salutary influence upon the world. 13-16. Proph. Refs. For the character of Messiah as King, Prophet, and LaAV- giver, compare the promise to Judah, Gen. xlix. 10; and of a prophet like unto Moses, Deut. xviii. 15. Also such passages as Lsa. ii. 2-4 ; ix. 6, 7 ; Mic. iv. 1-3, etc. For the prophetic basis for the spiritual character of the subjects of the kingdom, see the predictions and partial descriptions in Ps. Ixxii. ; Isa. Ix. ; Jer. xxx. and xxxi. ; Ezek. xxxiv. 22-31 ; Dan. ii. 34, 44, etc. For the world-Avide influence as the salt, compare Isa. Ix. 21-22; Prov. x. 11; xi. 30; xii. 12, etc. For the light, compare Prov. iv. 18 ; Ps. xxxvii. 6 ; cxix. 105, 130 ; Isa. ix. 2 ; Ix. 1-20, etc. b. The teachings of the Kingdom, in its relations to Jewish Law and Life. v. 17-vii. 6. (a.) To the old Jewish law : firsts as revealed in the 116 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. Old Testament Scriptures (v. 17-19) ; secondly^ as re- vealed in the doctrine of the Scribes and Pharisees, as given by the literal interpreter (v. 21-32), and by the liberal interpreter (v. 33-48). (b.) To the Jewish life, as seen in the pattern saints of the day : firsts in the religious life (vi. 1-18) ; seco7idJy^ in the worldly life (vi. 19-34) ; thirdly^ in the conversa- tion (vii. 1-6). Proph. Refs. With the teaching of the Lawgiver concerning the mis- sion of Messiah and the higher righteousness demanded in tlie kingdom of heaven, compare such prophecies as Isa. xxviii. 16-18; Dan. ix. 24, etc With the condemnation of the literalist and theliberalist, compare the Law as given in Ex. xx; Isa. v. 18-25; Jer. xiv. 13-16; xxiii. 38-40, etc With the contrast with the Pharisee righteousness, compare Ps. li. 16, 17 Isa. Ivii. 15 ; Ixvii. 1-4; Jer. vii. 1-28, etc. With the life of trust, as op posed to the Pharisee worldliness, compare Ps. xxxiv. 10 ; xxxvii. 3 ; xxiii. and the various enactments requiring the Jews to hold and use their wealth as stewards of Jehovah. c. The practical Way into the Kingdom, vii. 7-27. (a.) The positive directions. Verses 7-14. (b.) The warning against the two chief dangers. Verses 15-23. (c.) The final urgent exhortation. Verses 24-27. Proph. Refs. For teachings concerning the way of life, compare Ps. xxiv. 3-5; Prov. viii. 17; Isa. xlv. 19; lii. 13-15; liii. 1-12; Jer. xxix. 10-14, etc. For the fate of the rejecters of God, compare Ps. i. 4-6 ; Dan. xii. 2, etc. C. In his establishment of his divine authority to set up such a Kingdom and proclaim its Law, — as shown by three series of miracles brought together and arranged for the purpose, viii. 1-ix. 35. a. First series, exhibiting Jesus as the Messiah, in his relation to the Old Testament Law. viii. 1-18. Proph. Refs. For special prophecy fulfilled, compare verse 17 with Isa. liii. 4. b. Second series, exhibiting Jesus, the Messiah, as in THE GENERAL PLAN. 117 himself all-powerful, and as claiming absolute authority, viii. 18-ix. 8. Proph. Eefs. With "son of man," ch. viii. 18, compare Dan. vii. 13. With "Son of God," ch. viii., compare Ps. ii. 7. AVith the absolute divine authority, ch. ix. 2, compare the authority attributed to Messiah in Ps. ii ; Ps. ex. ; and throughout the Messianic prophecies, especially in Isa. ix. 6, 7. c. Third series, exhibiting Jesus, the gracious Mes- siah, in his relations to lost men, — showing active mercy and requiring active faith, ix. 9-35. Proph. Refo. With his character as Saviour of sinners, ch. ix. 10-13, compare Hos. vi. 6 ; Jer. xxxi. 33, 34 ; Isa. Hi. 53, etc. With his charac- ter as the Healer and Lord of life, ch. ix. 22, 25, 30, 35, compare Isa. liii. 4 ; ix. 2, etc. With Jesus as the conqueror of the demons and their prince, verse 33, compare Gen. iii. 15. Section 2. Jesus also did the public work, and bore the public character of the Messiah, in his labors, as associated with the Twelve Apostles, in the wider proc- lamation of the coming Kingdom in Galilee, ix. 36-xvi. 12. A. In the choice, preliminary instruction, and mission of the Twelve, ix. 36-x. 42. This embraces : — a. The occasion of the call and mission, — the spirit- ual destitution of Israel, — the general commission, and the catalogue of the Twelve, ix. 36-x. 4. Proph. Refs. For the prophetic view of the condition of Israel and the work of Messiah, the compassionate Shepherd for the lost sheep, espe- cially as seen in ch. ix. 36-38, and ch. x. 1, 6-9, compare Isa. liii. 6 ; Jer. 1. 6 ; Ezek. xxxiv., etc. h. The charge to the Twelve, or the law of associated effort in the Kingdom, and their exclusive mission to Israel, x. 5-42. Their instructions cover : — (a.) Their work in preparation for the Kingdom, in heralding the coming of Jesus to the various cities of Israel. Verses 6-15. (b.) Their work in the established Kingdom, or from 118 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. Pentecost on : firsts to the destruction of Jerusalem, verses 16-23 ; and, secondly^ to the end of time, verses 24-42. Proph. Eefs. For general character of Messiah's work, verses 6-9, com- pare Isa. liii. 6, etc., as just given. For the enmity shown to Mes.siah and his followers, compare the bruising of his heel by Satan, foretold in the ProtevangeHum ; Gen. iii. 15 ; Ps. ii. 1-3 ; Isa. liii. 2, 3, etc. For the social estrangement resulting, verses 34-39, compare Mic. vii. 6 ; Exod. xxxii. 26-29. B. In the awakening of doubt of his Messiahship, and consequent opposition, by the fuller revelation of the ex- clusively spiritual character of his Kingdom. , xi. 1-xii. 50. The antagonism as presented by Matthew, includes : — a. The apparent expression, on the part of John the Baptist and his followers, of doubt of the Messiahship of Jesus, — giving Jesus occasion to present his cre- dentials as the Messiah ; to vindicate the faith and di- vine mission of his forerunner ; to judge that childish generation, and the cities in which his mighty works had been done ; to claim the divine authority and extend the gracious invitation of Messiah, xi. 1-30. Proph. Befs, Compare verse 5 with Isa. liii. 4 ; xxxv. 5-10; viii. 14, 15. Compare verses 20-24 with Isa. i., etc. Compare the gracious invitation, verses 28-30, with Isa. xlv. 22; Iv. 1-3, etc. h. The appearance of open opposition, xii. 1-45. (a.) Unorganized, on the part of the leaders of Israel, for a righteous and merciful act. Verses 1-13. (b.) Organized, by the Pharisees and Scribes, result- ing in the withdrawal and quiet work of Jesus. Verses 14-45. c. The interference of his relatives, whose claims he rejects for higher, xii. 46-50. Proph. Rofs. Compare the acts which awaken the opposition, ch. xii. 1, 9-13, with 1 Sam. xxi. 3-6; Ex. xxix. 32, 33; Lev. viii. 31 ; xxiv. 9; Num. xxviii. 9, 10; Hos. vi. 6. See, also, Ex. xxiii. 4, 5; Deut. xxii. TPIE GENERAL PLAN. 119 4. For the quiet withdrawal and beneficent work, verses 15-21, see Isa. xlii. 1-4. C. In his consequent substitution of parabolic for plain teaching, in presenting the mystery of the opposition to the Kingdom of Heaven, xiii. 1-53. The parables of the Kingdom include : — a. Four parables to the people, with explanations to the disciples. h. Three parables to the disciples alone. Proph. Refs. For the Messianic prophecy fulfilled in this phase of the work of Jesus, compare verses 10-16 with Isa. v. 4-7; vi. 9, 10; Ezek. xii. 2. D. In the culmination of the opposition in his rejec- tion by the representatives of all the leading classes, xiii. 54-xvi. 12. The exhibition of this rejection in- cludes: — a. His rejection by the synagogue of Nazaretb, on account of his obscure origin, — resulting in the with- drawal of his works of power, xiii. 54-58. Proph. Refs. For the obscurity of Messiah, compare Ps. xxii. 6 ; Ixix. 7, 12; Is. xlix. 7; liii., etc. b. His rejection as the heavenly King by Herod the earthly king, — resulting in his withdrawal, and fur- nishing the credentials of the Messiah, in his character and works, xiv. 1-36. Proph. Refs. For proof that Jesus, in contrast with Herod, appears in the true character of Messiah, compare Isa. vii. 14-25 ; ix. 1-3 ; xi. 1-5 ; Mic. V. 1-5; Jer. xxiii. 1-6. c. His rejection by the Jerusalem Scribes and Phar- isees, the theological authorities and models, — resulting in his exposing their hypocrisy and wickedness ; and his withdrawal into the Gentile world, where he furnishes anew the credentials of the Messiah, the deliverer of the world. XV. 1-39. Proph. Refs. With the rejection, verses 7-9, compare Isa. xxix. 13. With his work iu his retirement, verses 21-39, compare the prophecies 120 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. of blessing to the Gentiles through Messiah, in Gen. xii. 3 ; Isa. xi. 10; xlii. 6, etc. d. His rejection by the Galilee Pharisees and Sad- ducees, — the true Head of the Theocracy by the earthly heads, — resulting in withdrawal, and his condemnation of them. xvi. 1-12. Proph. Refs. On the rejection compare with the same Scriptures as in the rejection by the Scribes and Pharisees. PAET n. The Distinct and Public Claim of Messiahship. Matthew shows that, after the rejection and the retire- ment from the public ministry in Galilee, Jesus openly claimed to be the Messiah, and abundantly proved the righteousness of his claim both to his disciples and to the people, xvi. 13-xxiii. 39. Section 1. Jesus did this with the Twelve, while cor- recting their false Jewish views of his priestly character and of his kingdom, xvi. 13-xx. 28. A. In calling forth their explicit confession of his Messiahship and giving them authority in the kingdom of heaven (the Church), — thus preparing them for the lesson of the suffering and conquering Messiah, xvi. 13-20. Proph. Refs. For prophecies of the authority here claimed, see Ps. ii. 6 ; xlv. 6, 7 ; Ixxii. 8-11 ; Isa. ix. ; Mic. v. 1-5 ; Dan. ii. 44, etc. B. In teaching in its first form, the lesson of his sac- rificial death at the hands of the Jewish Sanhedrim^ and of his resurrection, — and then confirming their faith anew. xvi. 21-xvii. 21. This includes : — a. The announcement of the death and its unwilling reception, xvi. 21-28. h. The twofold confirmation of their faith, in the transfiguration and in the healing of the epileptic demo- niac, xvii. 1--21. THE GENERAL PLAN. 121 Proph. Refs. For the doctrine of the suffering Messiah, compare all the sacrificial system of the Old Testament ; and such passages as Isa. liii. 4-10; Dan. ix. 26, etc. For the rejection by Israel, see Isa. xlix. 7, etc. For the doctrine of the resurrection, see Ps. xvi. 10. C. In teaching, in its second form, the lesson of his death, — through betrayal by his own followers^ — and then unfolding the true spiritual relations of his followers in his kingdom, xvii. 22-xx. 16. This comprehends the unfolding of, — a. The church relations and duties, — comprising the relation to the old religion and to worldly supremacy, and the law of church censure and of brotherly forgiveness, xvii. 24-xviii. 35. b. The earthly relations and duties, — comprising those arising out of the family and earthly riches in their subordination to the heavenly mission, xix. 1-xx. 16. Proph. Refs. For prophecy of the betrayal of Messiah by his omti friends, compare Ps. xli. 9, witli John xiii. 18. See also Ps. Iv. 12-14, etc. For the unworldly character of the kingdom of Messiah, compare references under ch. v. 3-16. D. In teaching, in its third form, the lesson of his death, — as a ransom for many, at the hands of the Roman rulers^ — and then checking the rising spirit of worldly ambition, xx. 17-28. Proph. Refs. For prophecies of the combination of many classes against Messiah, see Ps. xxii., etc. For the special rage of the Gentiles, or heathen, see Ps. ii. 1, in connection with Acts iv. 25. For the doctrine of the ran- som, compare Ex. xxi. 30 ; Prov. xiii. 8 ; Isa. liii. 5. Section 2. Jesus made this public claim before the people also, at Jerusalem, the city of the great King, — correcting the false Jewish notions and establishing his Messiahship by miracles performed in the Temple itself, xx. 29-xxiii. 39. This includes : — A. The public claim to be the son of David, in Jeri- cho ; the triumphal entry into the city of David ; the 122 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. assumption of Messianic authority and performance of Messianic works in the Temple, xx. 29-xxi. 17. Propli. Rffs. With the healing of the hlind men, ch. xx, 34, compare Isa. XXXV. 5-10. With the triumphal entry, compare Zech. ix. 9; Ps. cxviii. 24-26. With the cleansing of the temple, Isa. Ivi. 7 ; Jer. vii. 11. With the miraculous credentials of Messiah, ch. xxi. 14 ; Isa. xxxv. 5-10. With the praises of the children, Ps. viii. 2. B. The public conflict, defensive and offensive, as Mes- siah, with the hardened Jewish officials, xxi. 18-xxiii. 39. This comprises : — a. The introductor}^ sign of the nation's fate, in the cursing of the barren fig-tree. xxi. 18-22. Proph. Refs. Compare the symbolic curse with that of Israel in Isa. V. 4-10. h. The public conflict with the Sanhedrim, defensive and offensive, ending in their discomfiture and condem- nation, xxi. 23-xxii. 14. Proph. Refs. For the prophecy of the rejection of Messiah, compare ch. xxi. 42-44, with Ps. cxviii. 22, 23 ; also with such passages as Ps. ii. 9 ; xxi. 8, 9 ; Isa. Ix. 12; Dan. ii. 34, 35,44,45. For the foreshadowed re- jection of the nation, ch. xxii. 7-14, compare Dan. ix. 26; Zech. xiv. 1, 2. c. The public conflict, defensive and offensive, with the leading classes of the nation, as tools of the Sanhedrim, ending in the judgment and casting off of themselves and the nation, xxii. 15-xxiii. 39. Proph. Refs. With the argument against the Sadducees, compare Dent. XXV. 5 ; Exod. iii. 6 ; with that against the lawyer, Deut. vi. 5 ; Lev. xix. 18 ; with the discomfiture of the Pharisees, Ps. ex. 1. With the defining of the position of the Scribes and Pharisees, compare Neh. viii. 4-8 ; with the curse, Mai. ii. 7-9 ; with the judgment denounced upon Jerusalem, Jer. xxii. 5 ; Hos. iii. 4, 5. PAET ni. The Sacrifice of Messiah the Priest. Matthew dem- onstrates that, after his public rejection by the Jews, Jesus fully established his claim to be the Messiah, by fulfilling the ^Messianic types and prophecies in laying the THE GENERAL PLAN. 123 foundation for the Kingdom of Heaven by his own priestly sacrifice, xxiv. 1-xxvii. 66. Section 1. He represents Jesus as beginning his work, as the rejected and suffering Messiah, by preparing his disciples for his sacrificial death, xxiv. 1-xxv. 46. A. In unfolding the true doctrine of his coming in glory, and of the end of the existing order of things, xxiv. 1-43. Proph. Refs. For the fact of a coming judgment, compare ch. xxiv. 2, with 1 Kings ix. 7-9; Jer. xxvi. 18; Mic. iii. 12. For the time, compare ch. xxiv. 15, with Dan. ix. 27 ; xi. 31; xii. 11. For the suddenness of Messiah's coming, compare ch. xxiv. 27, with Zech. ix. 14. For the great events attending, compare ch. xxiv. 29-31, with Isa. xiii. 9, 10; Joel ii. 10, 30, 31 ; Amos v. 20 ; viii. 9; Dan. vii. 13, 14; Zech. xii. 10-12. B. In teaching them the true posture of his followers in waiting for his coming, and in describing that coming in glory to the judgment of the world, xxiv. 44-xxv. 46. Proph. Refs. For the terribleness of the final coming to judgment, ch. XXV. 31-46, compare Ps. i. 5 ; Isa. xxiv. 21-23 ; Dan. xii. 1, 2, etc. Section 2. Matthew represents Jesus as consummat- ing his work, as the rejected and suffering Messiah, by his priestly offering up of himself as the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets, xxvi. 1-xxxvii. QQ. A. In preparing for the sacrifice and in putting himself in the place of the Paschal lamb ; and in overcoming the terrors of death, xxvi. 1-46. Proph. Refs. With the conspiracy of the rulers, ch. xxvi. 3, compare Ps. ii. With the price of betrayal, verses 14, 15, compare Ex. xxi. 32; Zech. xi. 12, 13. With the pointing out of the traitor, verses 20-23, com- pare Ps. xii. 9. With the predicted death as Messiah, A-erse 24, compare Gen. iii. 15; Ps. xxii. ; Isa. liii. ; Dan. ix. 26. With the assumption of the place of the lamb in the Passover, verses 26-29, compare Ex. xii. 21-29, etc. With the predicted forsaking by the disciples, verses 30-32, compare Zech. xiii. 7. With the experience in Gethsemane, verses 36-46, compare Ps. Ixix. 20 ; Isa. liii. 3, 4 ; Lam. i. 12, etc. B. In his betrayal by Judas, and in his trial and con- demnation before the Sanhedrim and before Pilate, — or 124 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. as tlie Messianic Priest in the power of his enemies. XX vi. 47-xxvii. 26. Proph. Refs. For prophecies of the betrayal, with ch. xxvi. 47-50, com- pare Isa. xlix. 7 ; Ps. xli. 9, etc. With the unresisting surrender, verses 51-54, compare Isa. liii. 7, etc. For the general prophecy fulfilled, verse 56, see Isa. liii. ; Dan. ix. 26, etc. With the bringing of false witnesses, ch. xxvi. 59-61, compare Ps. xxvii. 12; xxxv. 11. With the silence of Jesus, verses 62, 63, Isa. liii. 7 ; with the oath to the high priest, and the predicted coming, verses 63, 64, Dan. vii. 13, 14; with the abuse, verses 67, 68, Isa. 1. 6 ; with the remorse and death of Judas, ch. xxvii. 3-10, Zech. xi. 13. With the experience before Pilate, ch. xxvii. 11-26, com- pare Isa. liii. 7, 9, 11, etc. C. In his experience in the hands of his executioners, as the Messiah sacrificed for sin, — mocked, crucified, dead, and buried, xxvii. 27-66. Proph. Refs. With the experience in the hands of his executioners, compare Isa. liii. ; Ps. xxii. ; Dan. xii. 2, etc. CONCLUSIOIT. The Triumph of Messiah the Saviour and King. Matthew shows in conchision that Jesus, after his death, fully established his claim to the Messiahship, as the risen Loi'd and Redeemer, xxviii. 1-20. Section 1. By his rising from the dead on the third day, and furnishing abundant evidence, private and ofl5- cial, of his resurrection, xxviii. 1-15. Proph. Refs. With the resurrection, verses 1-4, compare Ps. xvi. 8-11 ; Dan. X. 6 ; and Christ's own predictions. Section 2. By his formal assumption of Messianic au- thority, and by sending forth his disciples to the spiritual conquest of the Avorld. xxviii. 16-20. Proph. Refs. With the assumption of Messianic authority, compare Ps. ii. 6-9 ; xxii. 27, 28; xlv. 6, 7 ; Ixxii. ; ex.; Isa. ix. 6, 7 ; xi. 1-10; Dan. ii. 44, 45 ; vii. 27, etc. THE CENTRAL IDEA. 125 SECTION 11. THE JEWISH ADAPTATION IN THE CENTKAL IDEA OF THE FIRST GOSPEL. The outline, as already given, is its own witness that the first Gospel was prepared by Matthew for the Jew. It also opens the way for showing how the central idea and general drift of the Gospel confirm the historical tes- timony touching the Jewish aim of the Evangelist. I. The Central Idea. A single glance makes it clear that Matthew seizes upon the one idea of the Jewish system which was most prominent in the Jewish mind of that age. He gives us the Gospel of Jesus, the Messiah of the Prophets. The Messiah. His one subject, always and every- where, is, Jesus is the Messiah. He opens with the origin of Jesus, the Messiah, and closes with his assump- tion of the universal authority of the Messiah, and from the beginning to the close never for a moment parts com- pany with the Messianic idea. It is patent to the reader that the first Gospel is that of the Messianic royalty of Jesus. It seizes upon the regal idea, as the one uppermost in the mind of the race, and takes advantage of it to open the way for the pres- entation of Jesus, under the most favorable aspect, to the Jewish soul. Its opening genealogy is that of Jesus, the Messiah, the Son of David (i. 1). He is the de- scendant of Joseph, the son and heir of David (i. 20). The Magi inquire, '' Where is he that is born King of the Jews ? " (ii. 2). John the Baptist announces him as the founder of the kingdom of heaven (iii. 2). Jesus himself begins and continues Avith the proclamation of the kingdom of heaven (iv. 17 ; v. 3, etc.). Jesus is the Messiah, the King, throughout the Gospel. 126 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. But the Evangelist takes special pains, as will subse- quently appear more fully, to correct the false Jewish notions, at that day so prevalent, concerning the king- dom of Messiah, and to bring into their true place and rightful prominence the more important elements of his prophetic and priestly character, which had been so gen- erally lost out of view. He accordingly exhibits the kingdom not as a temporal one, like the Roman Empire, but as theocratic, or as a spiritual reign of God himself, in the person of Messiah, in the hearts of men (v. 3-12; xii. 1-52, etc.). The prophetic glory of the Messiah is seen, as Jesus speaks for God the grand truths of this spiritual kingdom, in the Sermon on the Mount, in the parables, and in the other chief discourses, and as he fore- tells the events of the future, in the prophecies of his own death and in the revelation of the last things (ch. xxiv.). The priestly character of the Messiah is given its true prominence by various teachings throughout the Gospel, but especially by the three remarkable prophe- cies of his death, uttered during the period given to the instruction of his disciples in the much needed lesson of his sufferings and sacrifice (xvi. 21 ; xvii. 22, 23 ; xx. 17—19), and in his experience in his trial, condemnation, and death for the ransom of the world. It should likewise be remarked that in pursuing his one central theme, the Evangelist never fails to take into account and attach due weight to the other ideas peculiar to the Jews. He regards them as the chosen people, their religion as the true world-religion, its forms as the only divine religious forms, and its promise of Messiah addressed first of all to the Jews. Every diligent reader of his Gospel will not fail to discern evidence of the con- stant aim of Matthew, while presenting his main theme, to press all these truths upon the attention, and at the same time to correct the erroneous and distorted views, which, as already seen, had arisen out of them. THE CENTRAL IDEA. 127 Use of Prophecy. Out of bis single central theme, so steadily pursued, arises Matthew's peculiar use of the prophecies of the Old Testament, so in contrast with the usage of the other Evangelists. His references to the Jewish Scriptures, while more numerous than in all the other Gospels, are not, as in them, merely incidental, or for the sake of giving the knowledge of some doctrine involved, but rather to fur- nish the basis for the entire argument and to correct the practical errors into which the Jews had fallen. Mark has perhaps, less than a score of such references, almost all of which are general. But three of them, at the most, are properly fulfillments of prophecy — Mark i. 2 ; i. 3 ; xv. 28, — and only the last of the three is dis- tinctly presented as such.^ Luke has perhaps thirty references or allusions to the Old Testament Scriptures. Most of these are simple in- cidental citations of fact or law. The allusions to proph- ecy are given in the discourses embodied in the Gospel, — as in that of the angel (i. IT) ; of Mary (i. 55^ ; of Zacharias (i. 69-75) ; of Simeon (ii. 32) ; in those of Jesus (iv. 17-21 ; vii. 22 ; xxiv. 25-28, 45-48). The argument of the book does not at all depend either upon the authority of the Scriptures or upon the fulfillment of prophecy.2 John has twenty or more references to the Old Testa- ment Scriptures. These generally take for granted that the Church is acquainted with the revelation of the Old 1 The references to prophecy in the Gospel according to Mark, are as follows : ch. i. 2, 3, 15 ; ch. ii. 25, 26 ; ch. ix. 12, 13 ; ch. x. 4, 19 ; ch. xi. 17 ; ch. xii. 10, 19, 26, 29, 36 ; ch. xiii. 14 ; ch. xiv. 27 ; ch. xv. 28. 2 The referencfs to the Old Testament Scriptures, iu the Gospel according to Luke, are as follows : ch.i. 17, 55, 69-75 ; ch. iv. 4, 8, 10, 12, 17-21 ; ch. V. 14 ; ch. vi. 2-5, 6-10 ; ch. vii. 22 ; ch. x. 26-28 ; ch. xi. 29 ; ch. xiii. 14 ; ch. xiv. 1-5 ; ch. xvi. 16-18 ; ch. xviii. 20, 21, 31 ; ch. xix. 46 ; ch. xx. 17, 28, 37, 38, 42, 43 ; ch. xxi. 22 ; ch. xxii. 37 ; ch. xxiv. 25-27, 45-48. 128 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. Testament. In the first half of the Gospel, the refer- ences are chiefly incidental and confined to fact and law, — the words of the Baptist (i. 23) being an exception. In the second half, in which the teaching of Jesus in con- nection with his death is presented in its relations to the Christian life, all the references are occasioned by direct fulfillment of Messianic prophecies, well known to those who first heard these discourses of our Lord, and familiar to all intelligent Christians in all ages. The main argu- ment of the Gospel does not, however, at all turn upon them as prophecies, but they are mainly introduced in order to bring out some hidden spiritual meaning, not brought out in Matthew and not needed for the purposes contemplated by him in his Gospel.^ Matthew, on the other hand, as has already been shown, rests his Gospel entirely upon a basis of Old Testament revelation. He presents one continued com- parison of Jesus of Nazareth with the Messiah of the Prophets, a comparison which could not fail to have mar- velous convincing power with any candid Jew. His argument is nothing, and his Gospel almost unintelligible without this, — in short, the Old Testament doctrine of the Messiah, as announced in the Protevangelium, in the opening of Genesis, and unfolded through all the ages till the final words of Malachi, is the only key to the first Gospel. II. The General Drift, The influence of the central theme of the Evangelist is everywhere manifest in the general drift of his Gospel, so different from that of the other Gospels. 1 The references to the Old Testament Scriptui'es, in the Gospel accord- inn: to John, are as follows: ch. i. '23; eh. ii. 17 ; eh. v. 9, 10; ch. vi. 14, 31, 45 ; ch. vii. 22, 23, 38, 42 ; ch. viii. 5, 17 ; ch. x. 34, 35 ; ch. xii. 14-16, 34, 38, 39-41 ; ch. xiii. 18 ; ch. xv. 25 ; ch. xix. 24, 28, 36, 37. THE CENTRAL IDEA. 129 To follow tlie outward form, the Gospel opens with the origin and preparation of Jesus for the work of Mes- siah, and his induction into the office of Messiah. Part First presents the public proclamation by Jesns as Mes- siah of the kingdom of heaven, first by himself alone, and afterward as associated with the twelve Apostles. Part Second exhibits his public claim to be the Messiah, made and confirmed first to the Twelve and then to the people at large. Part Third sets forth his sufferings and death as the Messiah, first announced as being at hand, and then prepared for and endured as a ransom for many. The Conclusion exhibits the fact and proof of the resur- rection of Jesus as Messiah from the dead, and his as- sumption of the royal Messianic prerogatives. To follow the inward drift of thought, the Gospel takes the life of Jesus as it was lived on earth, and his character as it actually appeared, and places them along- side the life and character of the Messiah as sketched in the Prophets, the historic by the side of the prophetic, that the two may appear in their marvelous unity and in their perfect identity. The greatness of the Prophet like unto Moses is seen in the Nazarene, as he speaks for God the fundamental truths of the kingdom of heaven and foretells its future. The grandeur of the suffering Servant of Jehovah, '' despised and rejected of men," " wounded for our transgressions," shines through all his words and acts that culminate in his vicarious death on Calvary. The sublimity of the King of whom Jehovah said, " I have set my King on my holy hill of Zion," ap- pears in the Son of David, as he forms and gives law to a world-wide spiritual society, an everlasting state, the kingdom of heaven. Jesus and the Messiah are demon- strated to be in all respects one and the same. All this was just what was needed to commend him as a Saviour to the Jews. It was a true view of the 130 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. prophet of Nazareth, for whatever Jesus may have been besides, he was also and primarily the Messiah, the high- est development of Judaism, — humanly speaking, the ideal Jew. He was not merely the accomplishment of Hebrew prophecy in an external sense, but the highest expression of all that was good in Judaism — the inher- itor of whatever moral wisdom, whatever spiritual genius, survived in it.^ This Jesus, at once the greatest among Jews, and the finisher of Judaism — the Messiah — is the Jesus represented by Matthew. SECTION III. THE JEWISH ADAPTATtON IX THE OMISSIONS AND AD- DITIONS OF THE rmST GOSPEL. The Jewish design of the first Gospel is still further manifest both from what the Evangelist omits of what is found in the other Gospels and from what he adds to what is found in them. I. The Omissions of the First Grospel. Matthew, in writing for the Jew, characteristically omits, as useless for his purpose, whatever is distinctively Roman, Greek, or Christian, in the presentation of the Gospel. In General. The careful reader will note the entire absence of such explanations of Jewish customs, as that which Mark gives of the religious washing of the hands before eating, and of '' the washing of cups, and pots, brazen vessels, and of tables " (Mark vii. 2-5), which were necessary for the stranger of Roman birth. There are no such explanations of Jewish topography, as that which Luke gives of the " village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs " (Luke 1 Principal Tulloch, Lectures on Re'nan's 'Vie de J€sus.' OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS. 131 xxiv. 13), and which were necessary to the strangers of Greek birth and philosophic turn of mind. There is an absence of such explanations of Jewish facts, as that which John gives of the enmity of the Jews to the Sa- maritans (John iv. 4), and which were necessary for the Christians over the world after the destruction of Jerusa- lem and the desolation of Judsea. For the Jew, at home in Jerusalem, or often visiting it, there was, at the date of Matthew's writing, no need of aiiy of these things. From Mark. The same careful attention will reveal the fact that the first Gospel uniformly omits those vivid details and scenic representations of events, which will be seen to abound in and to characterize the second Gospel, and which fitted it for the Roman, the man of power and action. From Luke. Still more marked is the omission of those eminently human features, in which Luke's Gospel will be seen to abound ; and of the facts of the ministry of Jesus in Perasa, with those universal aspects and rela- tions of Christ's teachings and work, which furnish so large a portion of the third Gospel (ix. 51-xviii. 30), features and facts which fitted that Gospel for the Greek, the man whose ideal was the perfect man of human de- velopment, and who was the representative of universal humanity. To one who duly considers this omission by Matthew of what constitutes the very heart of Luke's Gospel, and of what has been to mankind at large the most precious of all the teachings of the first three Gos- pels, it will never cease to be regarded as a marvelous thing, and a thing which can be explained only by the consideration that the one Evangelist wrote for the Jew, the man of the covenant and of prophecy, and the other for the Greek, the man of world-wide sympathies and aspirations. From John. Most remarkable of all is the absence 132 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. of the ministry in Judaea, to the true Israel, and those preeminently spiritual discourses which constitute the greater part of the fourth Gospel, and which fitted it for the Christian, the man already united to Christ by a living faith. One might at first suppose that these teach- ings were exactly suited to the wants of the Jewish race, since they were addressed directly to those who belonged to that race. But more careful consideration will make it plain that, as they were in the main addressed to that small class of Jews who held the advanced ground on the doctrine of the Messiah, and were possessed of more or less of the true spiritual insight, so they could have proved to the mass of the Jews only a stumbling-block, and were therefore fitted to form a part of that Gospel only which was prepared by John distinctively for the Christian. All these things, had Matthew embodied them in his Gospel, would have done little toward commending Jesus to the attention and interest of the mass of the Jews, who were waiting for the advent of the Messiah of the Scriptures, and holding peculiarly Jewish and unspiritual views regarding the nature of his person, character, and coming. They could, therefore, properly have no place in a Gospel for the Jews. But notwithstanding all these omissions, the Holy Spirit has guarded the first Gospel against being justly charged with presenting Jesus as exclusively the Saviour of the Jews. He is the descendant of Abraham, but four Gentile women find place in the genealogy ; Tamar of Timnath ; Rahab of Jericho ; Ruth of Moab ; and Bathsheba of Gath (ch. i.). He is born King of the Jews, but those who first seek him to worship him are not Jews, but " wise men from the East," the first fruits of the Gen- tiles (ii.)' He chooses twelve Apostles and sends them OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS. 133 forth first to " the lost sheep of the house of Israel," but only one of them, Judas Iscariot, or Judas the man of Kerioth^ is of Judjea, while all the rest are Galileans (x.). The final commission reads : " Go ye therefore and teach all nations" (xxviii.). The Gospel, in Matthew's view, is first a Gospel for the Jews, that it may ultimately become a Gospel for mankind. In short, the omissions of Matthew, while they mark his production as distinctively for the Jews, do not by any means confine salvation to the Jews, but extend it to all the race. II. The Additions of the First Gospel. The first Gospel gives even better evidence of its special Jewish aim in what it adds to the records of the other Evangelists than in what it omits of that which is to be found in them. Additions in Form. It has been remarked, of late, that Matthew adds an important feature to the form of his Gospel, in the careful and systematic grouping of his material, — a feature that especially adapted it to the Jewish mind. There is scarcely a more systematic production to be found. This will appear clearly from an examination of the outline view given. With reference to this point, Lange has remarked, that " it is a characteristic of this Gospel, which is increasingly recognized, that a careful grouping of events prevails throughout." This feature may be regarded as resulting from any one or all of three causes : the character of the contents of the first Gospel, as a comparison of the historic Jesus and the prophetic Messiah to establisli their identity ; the practical business training, already adverted to, of Matthew, the publican ; or the characteristic needs of Jewish readers, who were trained to such systematic use 134 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. of reason and memory by their entire religions system and practice. Doubtless all three influences had to do with the result under consideration. This careful grouping may be observed in all the more characteristic portions of the Gospel: in the genealogy (i.) ; in the Sermon on the Mount (v.-vii.) ; in the three series of miracles (viii.-ix.) ; in the charge to the twelve (x.) ; in the parables of the kingdom (xiii.) ; in the series of rejections (xiii.-xvi.) ; in the three successive predictions of the death of Jesus (xvi. 21 ; xvii. 22 ; xx. 17) ; and in the final conflict of Jesus with the authori- ties (xxi.-xxii.). It is not at all strange, considering the character of the rationalistic criticism, that this peculiarity has been made use of in the attempt to sustain the hypothesis, that the original Gospel of Matthew consisted only of a collection of fragmentary sayings ; but in the outline view, already given, it may readily be seen that there was a rational motive in the mind of the Evangelist for grouping them as they are. Matthew has, in short, given us the most systematic of the Gospels, because his plan and purpose called for it. His arrangement fits his Gospel to appeal most powerfully to the Jewish soul and to fix itself per- manently in the Jewish memory. Indeed, the Jew who once took its truths and facts into his mind could not get them out again, for it connected the name of Jesus of Nazareth indissolubly and forever with all the religious knowledge and hopes of the descendant of Abraham, and with all the glories of his past national history. Its sys- tem was, doubtless, divinely ordained to serve this very purpose. The rational aim, human and divine, leaves no place for the rationalistic conjecture. Additions to Material. Still more clearly do the addi- tions, which the first Evangelist makes to the material of the other Gospels, appear to be made to fit his produc- tion for Jewish readers. OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS. 135 By that mechanical analysis, which has always played so prominent a part in the study of the Scriptures, it has been shown that, if the Gospel according to Matthew be regarded as made up of 100 parts, 42 of these are peculiar to itself, and 58 common to this with one or more of the other Gospels. A much more important fact — and one that can readily be shown to be a fact, although it has been overlooked — is, that all the 42 parts peculiar to Matthew are precisely adapted to the Jewish aim of the Evangelist. This may be shown by passing in review the narra- tives, discourses, and groups of events of which Matthew's additions are made up. They all have such a special Jewish reference as is not to be found in the material of the other Evangelists. The origin of Jesus as Messiah (i.-ii.), is peculiar to Matthew. The genealogy given (i. 1-17) is that of Jesus, through Solomon and Joseph, as heir to the throne of David ; wliile that of Luke (Luke iii. 23-38) is that of natural descent through Nathan and Mary, which did not neces- sarily entitle him to the throne, but which was of interest to the Gentile world as giving his actual lineage. It should also be remarked that the first Evangelist traces back the line of Jesus only to Abraham, the father of the covenant people ; while the third traces it to Adam, the father of the race. The Jew would not listen to any one who had not the prophetic origin of the Messiah. The one line, of all possible opening lines, best fitted to attract and fix the attention of the Jew, was that with which Matthew opens his Gospel. The genealogy which it introduces gives the ofificial pedigree of Jesus. It is documentary evidence, drawn from the Scriptures and from the public records, which the Jew could examine for himself. Its threefold 136 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. division connected it with the greatest events of Jewish history, — the covenant, the monarchy, and the captivity. The divine origin and human birth of Jesus (i. 18-25) is in accordance with prophecy, and distinctively for the Jew. The Anointed of God was to be '' God with us," divine as well as human. Hence Matthew presents, in connection with the espousal of Mary and Joseph, the divine origin of Jesus by the power of the Holy Ghost, and his actual human birth of the virgin, — holding him up to the Jew, as not only the son and heir of David, but as named by God himself '^ Jesus,^' Jah-Hoshea, the Jehovah-Saviour, "Emmanuel." The families of Jo- seph and Zacharias were competent witnesses of the facts. The narrative of events from' the birth until the set- tlement in Nazareth (ii.) is given for the Jew, and was absolutely necessary for his conviction of the Messiah- ship of Jesus. The Jew would naturally and inevitably fall back upon the objection, that Jesus was from Naza- reth of Galilee, and therefore had not the birthplace of the Messiah. Hence Matthew proceeds to establish the fact that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, and to show how and why the misconception had arisen. That he was actually born in Bethlehem and not in Nazareth, appeared from a train of events which had already passed into his- tory, and which found their best and only sufficient ex- planation in his birth in the former place. When this Gospel was written, the notable coming of the Magi to Jerusalem, at the very time when Messiah ought to have appeared, was doubtless still remembered ; the record of the meeting and the decree of the Sanhedrim called by Herod doubtless still remained ; the flight into Egypt and the murder of the babes had still their living wit- nesses ; and the residence in Nazareth is at last fully ac- counted for by the divine command to settle there and OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS. 137 the prophecy that the Messiah should be called a Naza- rene. The Sermon on the Mount (v.-vii.), is peculiarly- adapted to the Jew. It is assumed here, in accordance with the view of many of the best authorities, that the Sermon given by Mat- thew was delivered on a different occasion and to a differ- ent audience from the so-called Sermon on the Mount of Luke (Luke vi. 17-49), which should rather be called the Ser7non on the Plain. But the Sermon illustrates equally well on either supposition the point here to be kept in mind. If the two are abstracts of the same address, then the fitness of Matthew's abstract for the Jew is seen in his preserving the Jewish features and references, which Luke so entirely omits. But regarded as an independent discourse, it will be seen at once that the Sermon on the Mount, in present- ing the constitution of the kingdom of heaven, keeps con- stantly in view the Law and the Prophets, and the con- dition and needs of the Jew of Christ's day. It might readily be shown in detail how it acknowledges the pre- eminence of the Jew by divine choice, and yet rebukes his unrighteous and arrogant pretensions, reveals his per- versions of the Scriptures, tears off the mask of hypocrisy, and presses upon him the only way of righteousness and life by the most solemn and emphatic appeals to the issues of the final reckoning. Every sentence of it was aimed directly at the Jew. The original mission of the Twelve (x.) was to the Jews (x. 6, 23), and in consequence of their spiritual destitution as witnessed in Galilee (ix. 35-38) ; and tlie charge given them had primar}^ reference to their work for Israel, as may be seen by an examination of it. The same peculiar features may be traced in the otlier 138 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. discourses of our Lord, added by Matthew, either wholly or in part, to the Gospel material : in the upbraiding of the cities of Galilee (xi. 20-30) ; in the answer to the Scribes and Pharisees who demanded a sign (xii. 38-45) ; in the divine compassion for the lost, and the law of Church censure and forgiveness (xviii. 10-35) ; in the judgment of the Scribes and Pharisees and of Jerusalem (xxiii. 1-39) ; and in the description of the day of judg- ment (xxv). Besides the capital fact, emphasized by Matthew, that Jesus changed from plain teaching to parabolic because of the blindness and obduracy of the Jews (Matt. xiii. 10-16), it may be shown that most of the long list of parables contained in the latter half of the first Gospel are especially condemnatory of the Jews. This is true of the parable of the unmerciful servant (xviii.), which opposes the boundless forgiveness required in the king- dom, to the teaching of the Jew which confined the for- giveness of an offending brother to three successive of- fenses ; that of the laborers in the vineyard (xx.), which lifts the Gentile to the same level of divine privilege with the Jew ; that of the two sons (xxi.), which exalts the Gentile above the Jew; that of the marriage of the king's son (xxii.), which threatens that the kingdom shall be taken wholly from the Jewish people and given to the Gentiles ; that of the ten virgins (xxv.), which contrasts true piety with Jewish f ormalit}^ ; that of the talents (xxv.), which opposes productive spiritual activity to Jewish obduracy and barrenness. The Jewish adaptation is also manifest in the great groups of events and teachings given by Matthew : in the three series of miracles (viii. 1-ix. 35) ; in the par- ables of the kingdom of heaven (xiii. 1-53) ; in the progressive stages of awakened doubt and opposition (xi. 2-xii. 50) ; in the series of rejections (xii. 54- INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS. 139 xvi. 12) ; and in the series of conflicts (xxi. 18-xxiii. 39). The examination of all these various passages might be entered into with thoroughness, and extended to the most minute particulars, and always with accumulating evidence and increasing conviction that they were all added by the Evangelist, under the special guidance of the Holy Spirit, to commend Jesus of Nazareth to the Jews as the Messiah their Saviour. Everything bears the plainest marks of the Jewish aim. SECTION IV. THE JEWISH ADAPTATION IK THE INCIDENTAL VARI- ATIONS OF THE FIEST GOSPEL. The adaptation of Matthew's Gospel to the Jewish needs appears in the incidental variations and peculiari- ties throughout the entire production. I. Incidental Variations. Different writers, in recording the same facts or events, under the influence of different aims, always exhibit their subject with manifold incidental variations. This feature is very marked in the Gospels, and in the case of each Evangelist it will be found that these variations always bear the marks of his special aim. Narrative Changes. This will appear in comparing Matthew's mode of treating some portions of the evan- gelic facts with the mode adopted by the other Evangel- ists. The mission of the Baptist is recorded or referred to in all the Gospels. In Matthew he heralds Jesus as the Messiah of the Jews, coming in fulfillment of prophecy. He who shall come after this heralding is to appear as the Lord Jehovah in person, to set up the kingdom of heaven 140 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. among men, and the Jews are called to repentance as a preparation for his appearance. In Mark, the work of the Baptist is introduced to exhibit by contrast the mightier power of the Son of God, who comes to set up the kingdom of God. In Luke, the work of the Baptist brings Jesus forward as the one perfect man, placing him- self on a level with all men by coming to be baptized " when all the people were baptized." In John, the Baptist witnesses to Jesus, before the Church and the world, as the divine, eternal, only-begotten Son of God, the Lamb of God sacrificed to take away the sin of the world, the life and light of men. The temptation of Christ appears only in the first three Gospels, but in each of these with characteristic differences. Matthew, commending Jesus as king to the Jew, presents the temptations in one order of the three- fold relation of Jesus : first, to human wants ; secondly, to dependence on God ; and, thirdly, to the sovereignty of the world, — closing thus by showing that the king, the second Adam, would win the kingdom by obedience to the law given to man and transgressed in the first Adam. Luke, commending Jesus to the world as the perfect man and Saviour, presents the temptations in a different order of the same threefold relation of Jesus : first, to human wants ; secondl}^, to the sovereignty of the world ; and, thirdly, to his human dependence on God, — closing thus with the preservation of the just re- lations of the divine-human Saviour to God. Mark, commending Jesus to the Roman, as the mighty God, the almighty worker and conqueror, gathers all up into a single sentence, and adds to the victory over Satan that over the terrors of the wilderness, thereby vastly increas- ing the impression of the power of the Son of God. All the Evangelists set out from the Baptist in intro- ducing their readers to the ministry of Jesus, but the dif- INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS. 141 ferences in procedure are characteristic. Mark, keeping in view the Roman, merely makes the imprisonment of the Baptist the starting-point of a wonder-working min- istry of Jesus in Galilee, into the marvels of which he hurries us at once, without even hinting at its prophetic relations. Luke, in tracing for the reasoning Greek the orderly development of the life and work of Jesus, opens with the ministry in Galilee, as the natural sequence of that of the Baptist, but does not emphasize the connec- tion. John, writing for the Christian, sets out with the Baptist, as preparing the way for that private ministry of Jesus in Judaea which preceded the public ministry in Galilee, and which, as being directed to the true Israel and dealing with high spiritual themes, is passed over in silence by the other Evangelists, but brought forward in the Gospel for the Christian, the spiritual man, as emi- nently fitted to further its peculiar aim. Matthew, with his eye on the Jew, starts with the public ministry of Jesus in Galilee, — which, strictly speaking, could begin only when that of the Baptist, the forerunner, closed, — and presents Jesus at once and most prominently in his Messianic character, fulJ&Uing prophecy. Or, passing on to the scenes of Calvary, and the clos- ing career, it will be observed that the only one of the seven sayings of Christ on the cross which is recorded by the first Evangelist is that from Psalm xxii. : " Eli ! Eli ! lama sabachthani ? that is to say. My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me ? " That is distinctively the Psalm of the suffering Messiah. He may have repeated it all. At all events, it must have passed through his soul at that hour. Ages before the inspired psalmist had drawn the picture, and it was the one Scripture of all to bring home and explain that scene on Calvary to the Jewish soul. The agony, the forsaking by God, the scoffing of men, the exhaustion and death, the piercing 142 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. of hands and feet, the castmg of lots for the garments, are all there in the Psalm as distinct as the reality it- self. The triumph and the glory are there, too, just as distinct. " All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the Lord : and all the kindreds of the na- tions shall worship before thee. For the kingdom is the Loed's, and he is the governor among the nations." So the Psalm (xxii. 27, 28) advances from the wail of the sufferer to the triumphant shout of the Messianic Con- queror and King. " All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore and teach all na- tions, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to ob- serve all things whatsoever I have commanded you." So the Gospel rises to the same triumphant Messianic note (Matt, xxviii. 18-20). Such examples might be extended to cover all the facts and events which Matthew records in common with one or more of the other Evangelists, and would every- where be found to exhibit the same characteristics. Slighter Additions. But passing over these, there is a very large and important class of incidental additions, made by Matthew, in connection with materials common to two or more of the Gospels. Matthew alone brings out the fulfillment of Messianic prophecies in connection with the great outward events of our Lord's life : in the place, time, and extraordinary circumstances of his public ministry (iv. 13-25) ; in the noiselessness of his work (xii. 17-21) ; in his rejection (xiii. 13-17) ; in his teaching by parables (xiii. 33-35) ; and in the miracles in the temple (xxi. 14-16). It is from Matthew that we learn that the conflict of opinion, which resulted in the death of Jesus, had already begun as early as the healing of the two blind men and the dumb demoniac in Capernaum (ix. 27-34) ; that the INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS. 143 Sanhedrim plotted his destruction in public assembly (xxvi. 3-5) ; that the price given the traitor was that of a common slave (xxvi. 16) ; that Judas repented, re^ turned the money, and committed suicide, fulfilhng prophecy (xxvii. 3-10) ; that Pilate washed his hands of the blood of Jesus, and all the people said, " His blood be on us, and on our children " (xxvii. 24, 25) ; and that the enemies of Jesus made his sepulchre sure (xxvii. 62-66), and afterwards invented the report that his dis- ciples stole his body away (xxviii. 11-15). Matthew alone tells us that Jesus declared John to be the EHjah who was to come (xi. 12-15) ; that he charac- terized the Jew and the Gentile in the parable of the two sons (xxi. 28-32) ; that he forced the Jewish leaders to pronounce judgment upon themselves, and then added his own (xxi. 40-44) ; and that he predicted the connec- tion of his death with the Sacrifice of the Passover (xxvi. 2). It is to Matthew that we owe the fact that after the resurrection of Jesus many saints came forth from their graves in testimony of his divine mission and power (xxvii. 52, 53) ; and that he was worshiped by the dis- ciples on the mountain in Galilee, and then assumed the divine authority of the Messiah (xxvii. 17-20). Such variations have an increased importance from the fact that they furnish incidentally, and in way not to be resisted, just the credentials needed in presenting Jesus as Messiah to the Jews. "Word Changes. There is another class of variations, slighter, perhaps, but no less characteristic, often in- volved in the change of a single word, which deserves notice as illustrating the same Jewish reference of the first Gospel. Only Matthew tells us, in narrating the temptation, that Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness /or 144 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. the express purpose of being tempted by the devil (iv. 1). The Jew alone felt it to be a necessity that the second Adam, in his work of fulfilling the law and restoring man, should meet and overcome the tempter by whom the first Adam fell. So Matthew tells us that the devil, in preparing for the second temptation, takes Jesus to the holy city of the Jew (iv. 5), and there makes his second assault upon him. Luke says the devil brought him to Jerusalem (Luke iv. 9). To the Greek, the former expression would have been unintelligible without expla- nation ; to the Jew it was the cherished form of speech, and his delight in Jerusalem was because it was the holy city. Matthew's account of the triumphal entry of Jesus into Jerusalem bears like marks ot the writer's aim. He alone tells us that the disciples brought both a colt and an ass to the Mount of Olives (xxi. 2, 5, 7) ; and this he repeats in three forms, showing that it was in exact ful- fillment of prophecy (Zech. ix. 9). Mark and Luke speak of the colt only (Mark xi. 2 ; Luke xix. 30), as that on which Jesus rode ; while John, in the language of prophecy, mentions the ass's colt (xii. 15). It is also worthy of remark that only the Evangelist who had a supreme interest in the Jews mentions the fact that all Jerusalem was moved at the entrance of Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee (xxi. 10, 11). Or passing on to the arrest of Jesus in Gethsemane, could anything be more marked than the variations of Matthew's account from the accounts of the other Evan- gelists ? Only he tells us of Christ's curse upon the use of the sword in his cause : " for all they that take the sword shall perish b}^ the sword " (xxvi. 52). It was the needed caution to the Apostles, whose Jewish nature was always leading them to put the temporal in the place of the spiritual. And as Matthew had before taught the INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS. 145 Jew most clearly that the sacrifice of Jesus was entirely voluntary, as a ransom for sinners (xx. 28), so here that Evangelist alone represents Jesus as declaring, and that with the most solemn emphasis, that he made it volun- tarily to fulfill the law and the prophets, when all the forces of heaven were at his command (xxvi. 53, 54). These are but instances of those slighter changes found throughout the first Gospel, and everywhere showing its Jewish aim and coloring. II. Other Peculiarities. From the entire survey, as pursued thus far, it is fur- ther obvious that the first Gospel exhibits certain other marks, in matter entirely peculiar to itself, which can only be explained by its Jewish aim. Jewish Assumptions. Matthew assumes, and every- where acts upon the assumption of what have been shown to be the characteristics of the Jews as distin- guished from the other men of that age. He acknowledges the Jews the chosen people of God, as in the words concerning the faith of the centurion (viii. 10-12) ; in the charge to the Twelve (x. 5, 6) ; and in the words of the Canaanitish woman (xv. 24) ; wliile, in the very same connection, he rebukes their exclusive- ness and wicked pretensions. He assumes that to them belonged the oracles of God, while he everywhere exhibits, corrects, and denounces their perversions of the great practical doctrines. He admits that they possess the only true forms of religious worship, while he unveils and denounces with merciless severity their hypocritical formalism. He proceeds, as has been abundantly shown, upon their familiarity with the doctrine of the Messiah, while he exposes their car- nal and worldly views of his kingdom, and presents it in its true spiritual aspects. 10 146 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. Jewish Expressions. There still remain certain ex- pressions and features of the first Gospel which may be noticed as bringing out for the Jew with peculiar clear- ness the spiritual character of Messiah and his kingdom. Here was the one most insidious dream of the age, which needed, therefore, most of all to be dissipated. The first of these expressions is the kingdom of heaven^ or of the heavens^ as the original has it. Matthew uses it no less than thirty times. He alone of all the Evan- gelists uses it. The Baptist's call was, " Eepent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand " (iii. 2). The open- ing proclamation of Jesus was, " Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand " (iv. 17). So throughout the Gospel the phrase is used. The phrase clearly expresses the idea that it is a king- dom distinct from all those kingdoms of this world after which the Jew had fashioned his idea of Messiah's do- minion. Its origin is in the heavens where God dwells : its throne, the seat of its king, is there ; its highest pres- ent and prospective glories are there. This simple phrase taught that the kingdom of Messiah was to be a spiritual and heavenly kingdom, unlike the old theocracy wdth its temple and throne in Jerusalem ; unlike the ma^gnificent empire patterned after Rome, which the worldly Jew was dreaming of ; wholly unlike the temporal empire of the Papacy long after established. Matthew uses the equally significant and spiritual ex- pression, the Church. The other Evangelists never use it. The Church, the ecdesia, is the body of Christ's fol- lowers, called out from the unspiritual world, from the kingdom of darkness, and brought into spiritual obedience to him as their head. Matthew represents Jesus as iden- tifying the Church with the kingdom of heaven, and giving it his divine authority : " And I say also unto INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS. 147 thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven " (xvi. 18-20). This authority of the Church is also reaffirmed in connection with the statement of the law of offenses in the kingdom (xviii. 18-20). The kingdom of heaven, as manifested in the Church, is thus clearly seen to be a spiritual or- ganization, independent of all temporal and worldly organizations. Lest there should still be room for the dangerous Jew- ish error of confounding the kingdom of Messiah with the kingdoms of this world, Matthew represents Jesus as still more clearly distinguishing between the two by his plain teaching that the two are distinct, — each being supreme in its own sphere. When the Herodians and Pharisees tempted him to teach sedition, by the crafty question, " Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar or not ? " Mark and Luke represent him as saying " Bring me a penny ; " and it has been alleged that his admirable reply, when it was brought to him, " Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's," was only an ingenious eva- sion of the question put to him ; but as Matthew puts it, he said, " Shew me the tribute money ^'' so that it was with the penny in his hand as tribute money that his reply was given ; and accordingly it was no evasion, but an ex- plicit inculcation of the duty of payment. ^ If there is still doubt, let it be remembered that Jesus actually paid tribute, and on one occasion wrought a mir- acle to provide the means of paying it (xvii. 24-27), — a fact which Matthew alone records. 1 For a suggestive summary of facts on this and other points, see Tht Four Evangelists, by Rev. Edward A. Thomson, pp. 41-46. 148 MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW. Still further, it will be found by examination, that in the first Gospel only is the authority of Pilate, the civil ruler, distinctly recognized. In this Gospel alone he is the governor. Moreover, in this Gospel only, as has been shown, is there added to the rebuke to the unlawful re- sistance of Peter, recorded also by John, " Put up thy sword into his place," the significant words, " For all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword." The foundation of the kingdom upon righteousness rather than force, its existence in the midst of the king- doms of this world, its rejection by the great leaders and rulers of men, complete the evidence of its spirituality, and give the death-blow to all the carnal expectations of the Jews. It is to be a universal kingdom established by the preaching of the Gospel throughout the world (xxviii. 18-20). SUMMARY. To one casting a final glance back, from the point now reached, over the entire course of investigation pursued, the Jewish adaptation of the Gospel according to Mat- tliew cannot fail to appear clearly. It has been shown to be a historical fact that Matthew, a Jew eminently fitted for the task, wrote this Gospel for the Jews, the men chosen by God to be the custodians of both the doctrines and forms of the true and divine world-religion, and the men from whom and to whom the prophets had ages before declared that the Messiah was first to come. This is the historical foundation of the true theory of the Gospel. It has also been shown that the first Gospel itself everywhere bears the marks of its Jewish origin and aim. This appears in its entire plan, which is the unfolding of the central idea that Jesus is the Messiah of the Prophets. It appears likewise in the omissions and additions made by the Evangelist, both of which have been shown to INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS. 149 have been made to adapt it to the Jewish soul and its needs. It appears no less clearly in all its incidental va- riations from the others, and in all its incidental, at first view almost accidental, peculiarities, — the entire pro- duction being moulded and shaped and colored, in its nar- ratives, sentences, and words, by its Jewish reference and adaptation. It is not, therefore, too much to claim, that the histor- ical and critical views of the Gospel combine to estab- lish the theory that Matthew was originally the Gospel for the Jew, and to demonstrate that this theory is the true key to the Gospel. PAET III. MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. " Sole victor from th' expulsion of his foes Messiah his triumphal chariot turn'd ; Son, Heir, and Lord, to Him dominion given, Worthiest to receive." John Milton. " The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God ; as it is written in the Prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. The voice of one crying in the •wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord ; make his paths straiglit." Mark i. 1-3. " Secundus Marcus, interpres apostoli Petri, et Alexandrinas ecclesife primus cpiscopus, qui Dominum quidem Salvatorem ipse non vidit, sed ea quae magistrum audierat pradicantem, juxta fidem magis gestorum nar- ravit quam ordinem." Jerome. CHAPTER I. HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE ROMAN ADAPTATION OF THE SECOND GOSPEL. SECTION L ORIGIN AND DESIGN OF THE SECOND GOSPEL. Following the order laid down in the investigation of the Gospel according to Matthew, it becomes neces- sary to ask and answer the questions : What was the ORIGIN AND DESIGN. 151 actual origin of the Gospel according to Mark ? For what class of readers was it immediately designed ? The latter question has seldom been asked, but a vast amount of time and effort has been expended upon the construction of a priori and imaginative theories of the origin of the second Gospel. Perhaps the most popular of these theories is that of the critics who would have us believe that this Gospel is only a very awkward rehash of that according to Matthew, with the occasional addition, no less awkward, of some statement from Luke. The remarkable resem- blance of the first and second Gospels seems at first sight to give probability to the theory, but it will be shown subsequently that this resemblance is to be accounted for in a different manner. The hasty and sometimes shabby treatment of the second Gospel by many of the commen- tators has done not a little to foster, in the minds of com- mon readers, a view too closely allied to that of these critics. A careful study of the Gospel itself, with a wise refer- ence to the age in which it was produced and to the act- ual history of its origin, will reveal the fact that it has a distinct aim and an independent unity of its own. Such study will scarcely fail to convince the candid mind that Matthew is quite as likely to be a rehash of Mark, as Mark is of Matthew. At the same time, much more ac- cordant with a due reverence for the four Gospels, as pro- duced by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost and forming together one part of a great plan of that Being who never really wastes material, is the theory that each one of the Evangelists, in writing what he wrote, was directed by infinite wisdom to perform an essential and distinct serv- ice for the world. From the historical point of view, it can be shown con- clusively that the second Gospel was written for the Ro- 152 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. mans, the second of the three great representative races of which the civilized world of Mark's day was made up. Witnesses. The most ancient direct testimony here, as in the case of Matthew, is that of Papias, as preserved by Eusebius. Papias recorded what he learned by in- quiry from the disciples of the Apostles. " Mark, the interpreter of Peter, wrote carefully down all that he recollected, but not according to the order of Christ's speaking or working. For, as I think, he neither had heard Christ, nor was a direct follower of him. But wnth Peter, as already said, he was afterward .intimate, who used to preach the Gospel for the profit of his hearers, and not in order to construct a history of the sayings of the Lord. Hence Mark made no mistake, since he so wrote some things as he was accustomed to repeat them from memory, and since he continually sought thig one thing, — neither to omit anything of those things which he had heard, nor to add anything false to them." ^ The character of Papias, his method, and the value of his testimony, have already been considered under the origin and design of the first Gospel. The considerations there adduced apply with equal force here. Irenagns confirms the testimony of Papias. He states that, after the departure of Peter and Paul from Rome, " Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter." ^ TertuUian of Carthage, who wrote later, agrees with Irenaeus, declaring incidentally that the Gospel " which Mark published may be affirmed to be Peter's, whose in- terpreter Mark was." ^ Clement of Alexandria, who flourished in the latter 1 Euseb. Hist. Ecclcs. iii. 39. 2 Iron.neus, Af/ninst Heresies, iii. 1 ; iii. 10 ; Euseb. Hist. Ecdes. v. 8, " Tertulliiiu, Against Marcion, iv. 5. ORIGIN AND DESIGN. 153 part of the second century, brings out more explicitly the Roman aim of the second Gospel. His scholarly attain- ments, wide acquaintance with the Church, and nearness to apostolic times, all combine to make him a most valu- able witness in this matter: his scholarly attainments, for, having studied first with the various philosophers, and afterwards with the distinguished Christian teachers, in Syria, Palestine, Greece, Italy, and Egypt, and having profited in all, he had scarcely an equal in his century, and so had readiest access to all the written opinions of the age ; his wide acquaintance with the Church, — for his travels and studies brought him into contact with well- nigh its whole extent from east to west, and gave him opportunity to learn the traditions on all such points ; his nearness to apostolic times, — for his life reached back so far as to need but a single link to connect it with the passing away of the last of the Apostles. With these facilities for arriving at the truth on that point, he makes his statement touching the aim of Mark's Gospel as an undisputed fact, and does it at a time when, if contrary to fact, it would have been the easiest thing conceivable to expose its falsehood. His statement was originally made in the sixth book of his Institutions, a writing not now extant but quoted by Eusebius. It is to the effect, that when the Gospel was preached to the Romans " such a light of piety shone into the minds of those who heard Peter that they were not satisfied with once hearing, nor with the unwritten doctrine that was delivered, but earnestly besought ]\Iark (whose Gospel is now spread abroad) that he would leave in writing for them the doctrine which they had received by preaching ; nor did they cease until they had per- suaded him, and so given occasion for the Gospel to be written which is now called after Mark. The Apostle, understanding this by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, 154 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. ^vas pleased with the earnest desire of these men, and commanded this Gospel now written to be read in the churches." ^ Clement elsewhere specifies some " Roman knights " as having made this request.^ Origen, the pupil of Clement, agrees with his master in his statement of the origin of the second Gospel. In the first book of his Commentaries on the Gospel of Mat- thew, in giving the catalogue of the New Testament Scriptures, he writes : " As I have understood from tra- dition, respecting the four Gospels, which are the only undisputed ones in the whole Church of God throughout the world ; the first is written according to Matthew, the same that was once a publican, but afterwards an Apostle of Jesus Christ, who having published it for the Jewish converts, wrote it in the Hebrew ; the second is according to Mark, who composed it, as Peter explained to him, who also acknowledges him as his son in his general Epistle, saying, ' The elect church in Babylon salutes you, as also Mark my son ; ' the third is according to Luke, the Gospel commended by Paul, which was written for the converts from the Gentiles ; and last of all is the Gospel according to John."^ At a later date, Eusebius the historian sums up the un- varying testimony of those who have gone before, and gives his own incjorsement to the statement that Mark wrote his Gospel under the direction of Peter, at the re- quest of the brethren at Rome, and with a special view to circulation in Italy and among the Romans generally.* Gregory Nazianzen confirms the main point in this testimony, in his Theological Poems, for the instruction 1 Euseb. Uist. Erch's. ii. 15. 2 Adumbrat. in 1 Pet. p. 1007. 8 Euseb. Hist. Eccks. vi. 25 ; Orig. Comm. in Matt. i. * Euseb. Hist. Ecclcs. ii. 15 : vi. 14 : vi. 25. ORIGIN AND DESIGN. 155 of the Church, declaring that Mark wrote his account of the miraculous works of Christ for Romans.^ Jerome writes that " the second Evangelist is Mark, the interpreter of Peter, and the first bishop of the Church of Alexandria, who did not himself see the Saviour, but related those things which he had heard his master preaching, and according to the belief of the re- porters rather than in strict order." ^ The veracity of these witnesses on this point has never been fairly impeached. No reasonable motive can be assigned for their making the main statements in which they agree, except the conviction that those statements wxre founded in fact. Pertinent Facts. We are therefore justified in ac- cepting as undoubted facts, that Mark wrote the second Gospel ; that it was substantially the preaching of Peter to the Romans ; that the Gospel was written at the re- quest of Romans, and was intended to give the preaching of Peter a permanent form for them ; and that it took advantage of the Roman peculiarities, and was fitted to commend Jesus, as the Saviour, to the Roman soul. The theory advanced in the present work does not di- rectly depend for its verification upon the establishment of the fact that Peter was actually at Rome and had to do with the founding of the church there ; for the Gos- pel was preached to the Romans all over the ancient world. The ease with which many writers throw aside, as unworthy of belief, the Patristic traditions concerning the connection of Peter and Mark with Rome, is, how- ever, to say the least, exceedingly marvelous. It appears all the more so when it is remembered that the Church rests upon the testimony of these same ancient writers for the most of her knowledge of the historic origin of the 1 Greg. Naz. Carmi'n. lib. i. sect. i. 12, vers. 32. 2 Hierou. Comment, in Evang. Matth. proleg. 3, 4. 156 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. canon of the Scriptures and of the Christian religion. The influence of the modern criticism is at present man- ifesting itself in the tendency to treat slightly the un- varying Patristic traditions touching the connection of Peter with the Gospel of Mark. The methods, scientific value, and inevitable results of such criticism have already been adverted to, in considering the origin and design of the first Gospel. The common-sense view, which is al- ways in accordance with the truly scientific one, undoubt- edly is that expressed by Principal Tulloch : " If the tes- timony of the Fathers is good for anything at all, this connection (of Peter with Mark's Gospel) is ^s certain as any historical fact can be, and not less important than it is certain." ^ Indirectly, therefore, as was seen in discussing the fact of a Hebrew original of Matthew's Gospel, the theory of the historic origin of Mark does depend, in some measure, upon the acceptance of these facts so clearly and unmis- takably stated by so many of the Fathers of the early Church ; for the same false principles of criticism must sweep away the entire basis of history and leave the pres- ent swinging loose from all the past. The clearly ascertained historical facts concerning the origin of the second Gospel, furnish the true starting- point in seeking an adequate understanding of the Gos- pel. SECTION II. THE CHARACTER AND NEEDS OF THE ROMAN. If the second Gospel originated, as has been shown, in the preaching of Peter, and was prepared through the agency of Mark for Roman readers, the character and needs of the Roman must furnish the key to this Gos- pel. 1 Lectures on 'Vie de Jesus' p. 109. THE ROMAN CHARACTER. 157 The questions to be asked and answered here are: What manner of man was the Roman ? What were his spiritual needs? The answers to these questions will cast light upon whatever has been prepared under the in- fluence of the Holy Ghost for the Roman race. I. TJie Romans, Certain characteristics clearly distinguish the Romans from the other great historic races of the age of Christ. They represented the idea of active human power in the ancient world. They embodied that idea in the state or empire, as the repository of law and justice. The}^ came in process of time to deify the state as the grandest con- crete manifestation of power. With the consciousness of being born to rule the world, they pushed the idea of national power to universal empire. Out of these characteristics, which made the Roman an altogether peculiar man among men, came his spiritual needs. Those needs were deepened and intensified by the ultimate failure of the Roman race in its attempted work for the world. Along the line of the peculiarities of this race must accordingly be sought the correct understand- ing of their Gospel requirements in the time of Christ and the Apostles. Active Human Power. The Romans represented the idea of active human power in the ancient world. The liberty is here taken of assuming that, under Providence, the history of each nation is, either con- sciously or unconsciously, the embodiment and working out of some grand idea. That idea once seized upon furnishes the key to the nation's character, conduct, and mission, and shows what is needed, humanly speaking, in order to commend Jesus Christ to that nation as the divine deliverer of men. This key to the character, career, and wants of the Ro- 158 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. mans is found in the idea of power. In writing to the Christians at Rome, therefore, Paul is " not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, because it is the poiver of God unto salvation to every one that believeth " (Rom. i. 16). "What, then, was the Roman idea of power, in its essence, modifications, and developments ? The horizon of Rome, broad as it was, was yet limited to this world. The Roman was not, like the Jew, the representative of supernatural and divine power, but of power natural and human. Even this lower and nar- rower domain he did not wholly appropriate, but leaving human power, as power of reason expressing itself in thought, to the Greek, seized upon power of will, express- ing itself in action, as his pecuHar governing idea. The Roman, as such, cared little for distinctively supernatu- ral and spiritual power such as moved the Jew ; he cared as little for the logical and aesthetic power of the Greek ; his was the power of will, his the beauty of action, his the logic of deeds. He became, accordingly, the mighty worker of the world, casting up the highways across em- pires, and leaving behind him public improvements in every form and of a grandeur fitted to astonish the race to the remotest ages. Power in State and Law. The Romans embodied their peculiar idea of power in the state as the repository of law and justice. The will of the individual was lost in the will of the state, the Roman lost in Rome. Rome regarded the race as being in a condition of anarchy, so to speak, out of which it was her mission to bring it. Her power was power ordered and organized, taking the form of law and government, directing and controlling. Law, and duty, or obedience to law, were ideas com- mon to both Jew and Roman. But the Jew taught the world law in its statical, divine, and eternal relations. With hlni it was a divine precept revealed from heaven, THE ROMAN CHARACTER. 159 pointing out the only way of blessedness and perfection for man here and hereafter, waiting patiently for man to come up to its requirements, and depending for its en- forcement, not so much upon a present hand of power, as upon divine sanctions drawn from prophecy and all the working of providence and from the distant future. It said to men : " God is long-suffering and can afford to wait ; but his law must be obeyed, for though the punishment of rebellion and evil-doing may be long de- ferred it will surely come at the last, since God is su- preme." The Roman, on the contrary, gave the world law in its dynamic, governmental, and temporal aspects. With him it was not a precept waiting for man to fall in with it, but the expression of a present force, the organ- ized and martial might of Rome, demanding submission and remorselessly crushing men and nations into its iron moulds. It said to men : " Rome is all-powerful and does not choose to wait ; therefore yield on the instant or die." The career of the Roman was, therefore, one of conflict and control ; war and law were necessary results of his nature. We are accustomed to say that he had a genius for war and government. The State, divine and universal. In time the Roman deified the state as the grandest concrete manifestation of power. It is easy to see how it came about. The Jew had only the one God of revelation, Jehovah ; the Greek had as many gods as there were qualities good and bad in human nature, and forces productive and destruc- tive in physical nature ; the Roman, at the first, accepted the gods of the Greek, but afterwards remade them to suit his own notions. With the growth of his power he outgrew them. Jupiter, Apollo, Bacchus, et id genus omne^ became either insignificant or dead to him. The day came when an active, mighty embodiment of force, working triumphantly in the world's great changes, alone 160 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. could claim his submission ; and then Janus, the god of war, was exalted to the high place. As the last phase of the worship of Olympus, Rome herself became the god of the world in virtue of being the mightiest thing in it, and Victory became the embodied symbol of national power and success. Rome thus became to the Roman at once the kingdom of god and god. The Roman had the consciousness of being born to rule the world. Under the special protection of his na- tional divinities he pushed his way to universal empire. The Embodiment of Natural Justice. In carrying out this mission the man of power became the .represen- tative of natural justice in the world. In the early his- tory of the republic he was narrow and unpractical. His rule was then essentially one of caste, for it was only the Roman who was in compact with heaven, only the Roman to whom the gods of Rome vouchsafed special protection. It is true that the broader and more humane doctrines of Plato, and the marked providences which prepared for the Advent, modified and somewhat molli- fied his views at a later date ; yet it must still be ad- mitted that, at the time of Christ, with something of the same tenacity with which the Jew clung to the notion that he had exclusive claim to the blessings of the cove- nant with Jehovah, the Roman clung to the opinion that he alone was privileged and ordained of heaven to rule mankind. As his ideas broadened through contact wdth many nations and by long experience, his entire system of laws came to be mainly controlled by those principles of nat- ural justice which come out so clearly in the divine ad- ministration of the world. It was thus that in pushing forward the conquest of the world he became fitted to consolidate those concjuests, and appeared at the last as the great organizer of the world into a single empire. THE ROMAN CHARACTER. 161 The Ideal Roman. The grandest Roman, the ideal man of the race, was therefore the mightiest worker, conqueror, organizer, and ruler, — the man who as Ccesar ^ could sway the sceptre of universal empire. Csesar and Ca3sarism were the inevitable last result of Roman de- velopment. II. The Key to 3Iar¥s G-ospel If the Roman was, as thus shown, the man of action, of law and justice, of state worship, of universal empire, these characteristics must furnish the key to the Gospel intended for him. Setting apart from all other men this man of power, — in the day when his splendid visions of empire had begun to fade, when disappointment and unrest were taking possession of his soul, and when he had been made to feel most deeply that natural justice in the hands of / a human despot is a dreadful thing for sinful men, — the Holy Ghost proposes to commend to his acceptance Jesus of Nazareth as his Sovereign and Saviour, the ex- pected deliverer of the world. How shall it be done ? Evidently — according to that law of divine fitness manifested everywhere in God's working — in that way which is best suited to the char- acter and antecedents of the Roman. A Gospel for the Roman must be moulded by the Roman idea. Scriptures and prophecy, so potent with the Jew, would count for little with the Roman ; he was ignorant of both. Reason and philosophy, so convincing to the Greek, Avould be scoffed at by the Roman ; he had no appreciation of either. Before the beginning of faith he was blind to the grand doctrines so precious to the Christian. The Gospel for him must present the character and career of Jesus from the Roman side, or point of view, as answer- ing to the idea of divine power, work, law, conquest, and 11 162 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOB THE ROMAN. universal sway. It must exhibit Jesus as adapted, in his power and mercy, in his mission and work, to the wants of the Roman nature and world. To the Roman these are the credentials of Jesus, no less essential than prophecy to the Jew, or philosophy to the Greek. With- out them there could not even be a reasonable hope of arresting his attention. At the same time, while making the most of every- thing correct in the Roman idea, the Gospel must aim to correct the errors in it, and lift it to the level of the di- vine idea. SECTION III. THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE SECOND GOSPEL. The divine adaptation of the second Gospel to the Ro- man race is seen in the selection of its author and in his preparation for his task. I. Mark, John Mark was the chosen instrument, in connection with the Apostle Peter. He was the son of an influential Christian matron of Jerusalem, named Mary, in whose house the believers at Jerusalem were wont to assemble (Acts xii. 12). He was evidently already known and es- teemed in the Church and identified with it, when Luke wrote the Acts of the Apostles, or that Evangelist would not have introduced the mother to notice by naming the son. Career and Character. He early devoted himself to the missionary work, accompanying Paul and his uncle Barnabas on their return from Jerusalem to Antioch (Acts xiii. 25). He also set out with these two men on their joint missionary journey (Acts xiii. 5), but turned back when they came to the more difficult and dangerous part of their work, and returned to Jerusalem THE AUTHORSHIP. 163 (Acts xiii. 13). When they were about to set out on a second journey to strengthen the churches, and extend the Gospel, Mark was at Antioch, and his uncle proposed that he should again accompany them, but Paul, remem- bering his former ignominious desertion, refused to allow it, and separated from Barnabas when he insisted upon it (Acts XV. 37). This so pointed and vigorous rebuke seems to have had a salutary effect. We find Mark afterward at Rome with Paul during the imprisonment of the latter. The Apostle sends salutations from him to the Colossians (Col. iv. 10). In the second Epistle to Timothy he sends for him because he has found him a valuable as- sistant (2 Tim. iv. 11). In his Epistle to Philemon he mentions him among his fellow-workers and sends greet- ing to him (Philemon 21). The same Mark is also found associated, probp.bly at a later period, with the Apostle Peter. He sends greeting by Peter from Babylon (1 Pet. v. 13). The traditions of the early Church affirm that he afterward accompa- nied the same Apostle to the westward, and even to Rome. After the death of Peter, he is said to have preached in Africa, especially at Alexandria, where he suffered martyrdom in the most terrible manner. In these facts are found clear indications of the char- acter of the Evangelist. Although the son of a Jewess, and bearing a name of special significance to the Jew (John, gift of Jehovah)^ it may, perhaps, be justly in- ferred from the prevailing use of his Roman name, Mark, that he was preeminently Roman in his nature and de- velopment. He was, like Peter, originally a man of ac- tion rather than of deep and abiding principle, a man of fervor and enthusiasm rather than of persevering effort ; but he was transformed, by the power of the same Christ who transformed Peter, into the man of rapid, contin- 164 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. lied and effective effort in tlie missionary work of the Cburch. The change in character for the better is very mani- fest in what is known of his history. If, as has been sup- j^osed, the young man who followed Jesus into the city, having a linen cloth about him (Mark xiv. 15) was Mark, the hasty and impulsive character appears in both the following and the flight. It appears again in the ready entrance upon the missionary work, with Paul and Bar- nabas, and in the equally ready desertion. But the old enthusiasm revives and brings him back to Antioch again, and he engages anew in the work and m-akes such progress in energy and principle and steadfastness as to become one of Paul's most trusted and successful helpers. After endearing himself still more to the Apostle Peter ill their mutual work across the Roman world, he at last bravely dares and endures the martyr's fate. Special Training. It is certain that his training was eminently adapted to prepare him to exert an influence on the man of power and action. Three men had to do chiefly with the shaping of his character after the Roman ideal. He was made to feel the influence of the gentle and merciful spirit of Barna- bas, whose fellow-worker for Christ he was in his early life. He received the impress of the tremendous sus- tained energy of Paul, whose companion he was in the Apostle's earlier ministry, and again at Rome during his captivity (Col. iv. 10 ; Philemon 24). He was moulded by the restless, unwearying activity of Peter, whose con- vert he probably was (1 Pet. v. 13), whom he accom- panied in his mission to Babylon (1 Pet. v. 13), and whose interpreter he was (according to the Fathers) in the mission to Rome in which the Apostle suffered mar- tyrdom. While being thus fashioned in character by these great THE AUTHORSHIP. 165 Apostles and preachers, he was providentially brought into the widest and most varied contact with the Em- pire, in its customs and language, in its law and legions, from the centre of authority at Rome to its remotest limits. It likewise seems strikingly providential that one who had come so largely under the influence of the two men, Peter and Paul, who represented the Christian idea of the conquest of the whole world for Christ and the es- tablishment of his universal kingdom (Gal. ii. 7-9), should be chosen to write the Gospel for the Roman, the man of universal empire. II. Peter. But the instrument, so fitted in character and training for the work of commending Jesus to the man of power, needed still to be supplemented. Mark was probably not personally cognizant of the facts of the Gospel, save per- haps the later ones. Peter, the man of deeds rather than words, was therefore appointed to supply in his preaching, out of his vivid memory, and after his strik- ing manner, the materials for the Gospel, while Mark was appointed, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and in accordance with his character and training, to give it final shaping. Career and Character. No more remarkable charac- ter appears in Gospel history than Simon Peter. Nor is there a more remarkable instance of the transforming power of Jesus Christ. The first words addressed to him by Jesus laid open his character, as he was at that time, and predicted what he should become through his acknowledgment of the Messiah (John i. 42) : " TJiou art Simon the son of Jona," the hearkening, timid one, the unstable man ; " thou shalt be called," and, according to the Hebrew idea, slialt becorrie, " Cephas," rock, the stable man. 166 MAEK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. Peter had the prime quality of the man of action, — his thoughts had the closest possible connection with the nerves of voluntary motion. With him for a thought to come into his mind was to have it express itself on the instant, at the end of the tongue, in the hand, or by the feet. He was the impulsive man. But in the earlier part of his career he had also a marked defect, which went far toward making his activity mere unprincipled and irrational motion instead of ra- tional, noble action, — the want of a settled purpose and grand governing motive pervading and controlling all the workings of his mind. Jesus, the Christ, was to furnish him with that, and thus to change the unstable Simon Jona into the stable Cephas. In his early course instability, fickleness, was his most prominent characteristic. When Jesus came to the dis- ciples, walking on the water, it was Peter that made haste to meet him, but whose faith failed on the instant (Matt. xiv. 28-31). It was Peter who, in Christ's ex- tremity, declared that he would die rather than forsake his Master, but who in the midst of peril denied him thrice and with added profanity before the cock crew (Matt. xxvi. 33-35, 69-75). It was the impulsive Peter who ran to the sepuchre, at the report of the women, and rushed past John into the tomb to examine the burial vestments (John xx. 3-10) ; but it was also Peter who in ten days was ready to propose a return to the old oc- cupation on the Lake of Tiberias (John xxi. 3), as if despairing of anything from Jesus of Nazareth. When Jesus came to the shore of Tiberias where the disciples were fishing, it was Peter who, seeing his Lord, jumped into the sea and swam ashore to him. After his Master, thrice addressing him as Simon Jona, to fix the old sin and fickleness in his heart, had restored him to the place of grace and apostleship from which he had fallen, it was THE AUTHORSHIP. 167 Peter who almost immediately asked that prying ques- tion, '' And what shall this man do ? " which called forth again the sharp rebuke of the Saviour. Even long after he had entered upon the full work of an Apostle, when the question of the circumcision of the converted heathen came up, Peter was the waverer and Paul was forced to withstand him to the face (Gal. ii. 11 ; Acts xv. 7-11). Special Training. Nevertheless one caimot run in thought along his career without the growing conviction, that he made constantly increasing progress in stability of character and fixedness of purpose all the way to tlie last. It was Peter who stood up at Pentecost, and in that recorded sermon distinctly accused the Jews of murdering Jesus of Nazareth, and boldly proclaimed his resurrection and Messiahship (Acts ii. 22-36). It was Peter who in the days of persecution dared to defy the magistrates, at the peril of his life, in that noble asser- tion of liberty of conscience : " Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye " (Acts iv. 19). It was Cephas of whom Paul wrote as one of the pillars of the mother church at Jerusalem (Gal. ii. 9). According to tradition, Peter, when about to be crucified, besought that it might be with his head downward, since he who had once denied the Master was unworthy to die as the Master had died. So fully did Jesus, the Christ, infuse into his soul that one grand purpose which came to control all his life. The remarkable development of his faculty for practi- cal work and organization is equally manifest. His quick, impulsive nature prepared him to be a leader of men. The infusing of a grand governing principle was also a requisite for leadership. It is evident that Christ took advantage of these characteristics and made him, in a sense, a leader in the early Church. The natural impulse to leadership comes out in such instances as Peter's pro- 168 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. posal to build tents on the Mount of Transfiguration (Matt. xvii. 4), and to elect a new Apostle in the place of Judas (Acts i. 15-22) ; and in many of the incidents just referred to as illustrating his original character. The divine calling to leadership appears from the repre- sentative place given to Peter in conferring upon the Church the power of the keys (Matt. xvi. 18, 19) ; from the prominent place accorded him in the wonderful events of Pentecost (Acts ii. 14, 38) ; and from the in- spired acknowledgment of his relation to the Jewish world by Paul (Gal. ii. 7-9). It is therefore manifestly true that, as the Head of the Church has in all ages since selected and trained men for the special work of organ- izers, so in the apostolic age he selected and trained Peter for such a work. It was in this way that Jesus completed the character of Peter, the man of action. His thought still remained so closely connected with the power of action, the man the quick impulsive man still ; but the profound Christian principle which had been in- fused brought the thought to be always true, the impulse to be always right, so that consistent and continued ac- tion at length made him in large measure the genuine representative of the unwearying, all-conquering, all- organizing Roman. It was this Apostle, who loved action better than logic, who saw deeds rather than heard doctrines, who felt the need of earnest and consistent activity more than of a profound and harmonious creed, — this Apostle whose in- tense personal affection for Jesus had made him watch every act and gesture and look and word of his divine Master, — that was chosen to preach that Gospel which Mark was commissioned to record for the Romans. These two, Mark and Peter, formed the one perfect in- strument, the one complete medium for introducing Je- sus to the favorable consideration of the Roman race of THE GENERAL PLAN. 169 that age. No other men, equally fitted for embodying the Gospel in permanent form for the man of action and control, can be pointed out in connection with the apos- tolic body. Neither of these men could have accom- plished the work alone ; for, even if Mark was of Roman birth and nature, he had not the facts of the Gospel ; and even if Peter was a man of action and trained as such, he was at the same time of Jewish birth and nat- ure. The two were indispensable. The impulse which led the Romans to ask for the permanent record of the Gospel, and that which led Mark and Peter to accede to their request, were both from the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of all wisdom and power. Doubtless, out of all the men of that age, the Holy Ghost chose the men best fitted in their character and experience to prepare and write the Gospel for the Roman world. CHAPTER n. CRITICAL VIEW OF THE ROMAN ADAPTATION OF THE SECOND GOSPEL. In examining the second Gospel, in the light of its ascertained origin, design, and authorship, its peculiar adaptation to the needs of the Roman of that age will become apparent. The order adopted in treating of the first Gospel will be followed in treating of the second. SECTION L THE ROMAN ADAPTATION IN THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE SECOND GOSPEL. The propriety of seeking for a' plan of the Evangelist, different from that given by the division into sixteen 170 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. chapters, has already been. shown, in preparing the way for the analysis of Matthew's Gospel. By examining the second Gospel with the aid of its known origin and aim, it will be seen that it may be nat- urally and conveniently divided, as that of Matthew was divided, into three principal parts, — presenting the suc- cessive stages of the work of Jesus, the Divine Con- queror, in establishing his universal empire, the kingdom of God, — with an appropriate introduction and conclu- sion. In these divisions the character and career of Jesus are unfolded, not from the Jewish point of view, but in those aspects which are peculiarly Roman. OUTLINE OF THE SECOND GOSPEL. INTRODUCTION. The Advent of the King and Conqueror. The Evan- gelist brings forward the Almighty King in his Divine Person and Kingdom, i. 1-ii. 12. Section 1. Jesus is exhibited as being the Divine Son of God. i. 1-13. A. In his name and heralding. 1-8. B. In his divine recognition at the baptism, and in the subjection of Satan, the wild beasts, and the angelic world, at the temptation. 9-13. Section 2. Jesus is exhibited mightily proclaiming the kingdom of power, i. 14-ii. 12. A. In his opening proclamation of the kingdom of God in Galilee, and the call of the first subjects, i. 14-20. B. In his opening works of power in Galilee, rising gradually to the authoritative pardon of sin, foreshadow- ing the future of the kingdom, and rousing the people. i. 21-ii. 12. THE GENERAL PLAN. 171 a. The authoritative teaching in the synagogue at Ca- pernaum, the manifold works of power there, and the rising fame. i. 21-34. h. The morning of solitary prayer, followed by the circuit of Galilee, with innumerable works of power, re- sulting in blazing abroad his fame. i. 35-45. c. The subsequent return to Capernaum, the preaching of the word, the assumption of the divine prerogative of forgiving sin, amazing the people and leading them to glorify God. ii. 1-12. PAKT I. The Conflict of the Almighty King. The Evangelist exhibits Jesus in the teaching, work, and conflict of the period of public ministry devoted to the continued pro- clamation of the coming Kingdom of Power, ii. 13- viii. 26. Section 1. He presents the teachings of Jesus con- cerning the foundations of the kingdom of God. ii. 13- V. 43. A. In the subjects and law of the kingdom, ii. 13- iii. 35. a. They are sinners, and not formalist Pharisees, ii. 13-iii. 12. h. The first subjects are called out of all classes, and include all those whose law is the will of the Father, iii. 13-35. B. In the law of growth and development in the king- dom, iv. 1-34. a. By the quiet outgrowth of truth in the heart (the Sower). 1-25. h. Yet independent of the will and effort of man (tlie Seed-corn). 26-29. c. And destined to fill the whole earth with its great- ness (the Mustard-seed). 30-34. 172 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. C. In the power of the King, who is omnipotent, iv. 35-v. 43. a. Power over nature, in stilling the storm, iv. 35-41. h. Power over the world of spirits and of irrational beings, in healing the Gadarene demoniac and destroying the swine, v. 1-20. c. Power over the kingdom of disease and death, in healing the woman with the issue of blood, and in. rais- ing the daughter of Jairus. v. 21-43. Section 2. He presents Jesus, in the activity of the work of the kingdom, passing through a series of con- flicts and withdrawals, vi. 1-Tiii. 26. A. Conflict in Nazareth with his old neighbors, leaving them in unbelief, vi. 1-6 (a). B. Conflict in Galilee, in connection with the mission of the Twelve, and resulting in withdrawal across the Sea of GaUlee. vi. 6 (b)-52. a. The mission and work of the Twelve. 6 (b)-13. h. The terror of Herod at the report of it, and the reason for that terror. 14-29. c. The return and withdrawal of the Twelve, with the symbolical miracles of power and mercy, — the loaves and fishes and walking upon the storm-tossed lake. 30-52. C. Conflict renewed in Galilee (in Gennesaret), re- sulting in rejection by Jerusalem Scribes and Pharisees and withdrawal to Gentile borders, vi. 53-viii. 9. a. The return to Gennesaret, the miracles, and the con- troversy concerning unwashen hands, vi. 53-vii. 23. 5. The withdrawal to the Gentiles, and the miracles of grace, in healing the daughter of the Syro-Phenician woman in the borders of Tyre and Sidon, and in restor- ing the deaf and dumb man and feeding the four thou- sand beyond the Sea of Galilee, vii. 24-viii. 9. D. Conflict renewed in Galilee, in Dalmanutha, with THE GENERAL PLAN. 173 the local Pharisees, and the withdrawal and work of mercy on the blind man in Bethsaida Julias, yiii. 10- 26. PART n. The Claim of the Ahnighty King. The Evangelist exhibits Jesus, tlie Almighty Conqueror, as distinctly claiming the right to the Kingdom of Power, to be won through suffering and rejection, and both explaining and maintaining his claim, viii. 27-xiii. 37. Section 1. He presents Jesus teaching his followers that the kingdom is to be won by triumph over suffering and death, viii. 27-x. 45. A. In a first revelation, occasioned by the confession of Peter, foretelling the rejection of " the son of man " hy the Jewish Sanhedrim^ followed by exhibitions of di- vine glory, and by exertions of divine power which are traced to the secret source of all power, viii. 27-ix. 29. B. In a second revelation, foretelling the treachery of his own followers, and followed by a period of instruction in the duties of subjects in the kingdom, ix. 3G-x. 31. C. In a third revelation, foretelling his death hy the Roman riders, and followed by instruction concerning the way for the subjects to rise to power in the kingdom. x. 32-45. Section 2. He presents Jesus claiming the right to the kingdom of power, in the city of David, and estab- lishing his claim, although rejected by the Jews. x. 46- xiii. 37. A. In his public advent as the almighty heir of Da- vid, and in the accompanying works of power, x. 46- xi. 26. a. At Jericho listening to the appeal of Bartlmeus. X. 46-52. h. At the triumphal entry into the Holy City. xi. 1- 10. 174 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. (?. In cursing the fig-tree and assuming royal authority in the temple, and in revealing anew the source of all true power, xi. 11-26. B. In his conflict with and overwhelming triumph over the various leading classes, xi. 2T-xii. 44. a. Jesus on the defensive, — against the Sanhedrim, the Pharisees and Plerodians, the Sadducees and the Scribes, xi. 27-xii. 34. h, Jesus taking the offensive, warning against the doc- trine of the Scribes, and contrasting with their religion the genuine piety of the poor widow, xii. 35-44. C. In his prophetic unfolding, for his disciples, of both the near and remote future of Jerusalem and his king- dom, xiii. 1-37. a. The events preceding the future coming. 1-23. h. The coming of the king in power and glory and the urgent call for watchfulness and prayerfulness. 24-37. PAET III. The Sacrifice of the Almighty King. The Evan- gelist exhibits Jesus, preparing for the setting up of the Kingdom of Power through his sacrificial sufferings and death, xiv. 1-xv. 47. Section 1. He presents the preliminary preparation for his death, xiv. 1-41. A. In the plotting of the Sanhedrim, the anointing for the burial, and the treachery of Judas. 1-11. B. In the Passover supper, when Jesus puts himself symbolically in the place of the paschal sacrifice. 12-26. C. In the sorrow over the foreseen desertion, and in the struggle with the terrors of death in Gethsemane. 27-41. Section 2. He presents Jesus in the hands of his enemies, the sinful leaders and rulers of the Jewish na- tion, xiv. 42-xv. 47. THE CENTRAL IDEA. 175 A. In his betrayal and apprehension, xiv. 42-52. B. In his trial before the Sanhedrim. 53-72. C. In his trial and delivering up by Pilate, xv. 1-15. D. In the hands of the executioners, the Roman sol- diers, — in the Praetorium, on the way to Golgotha, and on the cross. 16-41. E. Under the power of death. 42-47. CONCLUSIOIT. The Universal Empire established. The Evan- gelist exhibits Jesus, the Almighty King, conquering death and taking the universal Kingdom, xvi. 1-20. Section 1. He presents him as rising from the dead and convincing his disciples of his identity, xvi. 1-14. Section 2. He presents him as actually establishing the universal kingdom, xv. 15-20. A. In the Great Commission with its promise of grace. 15-18. B. In the assumption of divine authority in heaven. 19. C. In cooperating with his disciples in the fulfillment of the Great Commission. 20. SECTION II. THE ROMAN ADAPTATION IN THE CENTBAL IDEA OF THE SECOND GOSPEL. The outline thus given may be left to witness for itself that the second Gospel was prepared by Mark for Roman readers. In connection with its systematic exhibition of the material of the Gospel, it may more readily be shown how the central idea and general drift of Mark's produc- tion confirm the historical testimony regarding the Ro- man aim of the Evangelist. 176 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. I. The Central Idea, It is a principle, now coming to be generally admitted, that in all literature the organic idea will give shape to the characters, incidents, metaphors, diction, and phrase- ology, — to the entire tone and tenor of a production, — a principle that holds not less clearly in Matthew's or Mark's Gospel than in Shakespeare's Hamlet. One of the very first inquiries, therefore, must be : What is the central or organic idea of the second Gospel ? The central idea of the Gospel according to Mark is found in the opening verse : " The Gospel of Jesus Christ the Son of God (Mark i. 1). The Evangelist, accordingly, presents Jesus, not as the fulfillment of a past divine revelation, as does Matthew ; nor as the satisfac- tion of present human yearning, as does Luke ; nor as the foundation of the future Church, as does John ; but as the personal embodiment of the Son of God, in the full- ness of his present, living energy, demonstrating himself the Son of God by his divine working. Everything, from the opening with the mission of the Baptist to the closing vision of Jesus exalted to the throne of God, is so shaped as to deepen the impression of his almighty power. This Gospel represents him as proclaiming and estab- lishing a kingdom, but it is a kingdom of power, and not of prophecy. While, therefore, Mark has so much in com- mon with Matthew that manj^ insist that he is a mere copyist or abridger, there is yet this wide difference, that whereas Matthew rests wholly on prophecy, Mark is so entirely independent of prophecy that, after the opening verses, he never even records the words of a prophet, ex- cept as he quotes from the mouth of Jesus. For the Roman, the mighty worker and conqueror of the world, Jesus is held up as the divine almighty worker and victor. While Matthew furnishes us with the an- THE CENTRAL IDEA. 177 cient types of Christianity, Luke with its inmost con- nection with the unchanging heart of humanity, and John with its deeper spiritual mysteries, Mark holds up " the picture of the sovereign power of Jesus, battling with, evil among men swayed to and fro with tumultuous pas- sions." Lange, in the Introduction to his Commentary on this Gospel, has attempted — and with success — to show that the Gospel may be divided into " a progressive series of victorious conflicts," beginning with the conquest of the four chosen Apostles and ending with the final sub- jection and possession of the whole world. Through perpetual victory — victory even in seeming defeat, — the King, the incarnation of almighty power, moves on to realize the Roman ideal of universal dominion. It is therefore the almighty conqueror, and not the servant (symbolized by the ox of prophecy) as the allegorical in- terpreters would have it, that appears in Mark's delinea- tion of Jesus. But since the Roman had felt the crushing power of the iron kingdoin and the remorseless cruelty of the fero- cious beast of prophecy, Mark presents with peculiar dis- tinctness the diviner aspects of the kingdom of God, — its spirituality and mercy no less than its power and right- eousness. This great world-conflict and conquest, so realizing the Roman idea and yet so surpassing it, is everywhere represented as carried on with spiritual forces and weapons, and for spiritual ends. In retirement from men and in communion with the heavenly world the king is girded for the battle. No noise of spear or battle-axe is heard, for the contest is waged against the devil, his demons and his human agents in the world. The re- moval of the miseries of the world is sought through the forgiveness and eradication of sin. The Conqueror crushes into fragments the old social world, but he 12 178 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. crushes it in mercy ; and lie reconstructs it not as tlie Roman has done — in the moulds of resistless and savage justice, — but by the law of righteousness and charity. The false Roman idea of power, weapons, conflict, victory, and empire are discarded, and true spiritual ideas made increasingly prominent from the opening of the Gospel to the close. There are suffering and death in the kingdom, as in the earthly kingdom, but they are transformed. The suffering is not inflicted upon the vanquished, but en- dured by the victor for the sake of the victory of mercy and blessing. The death is borne by the conqueror to furnish the foundation and the beginning of a higher life of blessedness for all the king's subjects. To the Roman, with his deepening sense of misery under the stern reign of natural justice, as imperfectly embodied in Rome, Mark makes his exhibition of the kingdom of God in the fullest signification a Gospel^ by portraying the career of the King and his conquering hosts as subordinately a career of humble service, of kindly ministrations, of boundless sacrifices, of cheerful suffering, and even of vol- luitary death, in order to save the perishing race from its heavy woes. The complete triumph is reached in the final conquest of death and the world. In the great features of both character and career, Jesus eclipses all that is mightiest and best in the old Roman ideal, while at the same time correcting and exalting it. II. The General Drift. The influence of this central Roman idea is manifest throughout the second Gospel, in a general movement and drift quite unlike that of the other Gospels. Rising above all the details of the Gospel according to Mark, Da Costa has clearly pointed out certain pecul- THE CENTRAL IDEA. 179 iarly Roman and soldierly features that characterize it as a whole. By a deliberate comparison he finds that its style bears a close resemblance to that of Ca3sar's Com- mentaries, — both exhibiting the same emphatic repeti- tion combined with the same rapidity of movement, the same copiousness of description with the same dramatic effect, so that even the word straightway (cv^cco?) — which is so characteristic of Mark, being employed in his Gospel about forty times — appears in the writings of the great Roman captain in the ever-recurring celeriter. No work of old Roman, in short, was ever more Roman in its rhetorical movement than the Gospel according to Mark. With an aim differing from that of the present work, and yet in a form suited to the present purpose, the same distinguished author has called this Gospel, " The brief and terse narrative of that three years' campaign^ so to speak, of the supreme Captain of our salvation — whose name from of old was Warrior as well as Prince of Peace^ — carried on and completed, for the deliverance of our souls, the bruising of Satan, the glorifying of the Father, in his labors, his sufferings, his death, his resur- rection and final triumph." ^ This moulding of the entire material by the Roman aim of the Evangelist may be traced through the Gospel. In the Introduction, Jesus is brought forward at once as the Son of God, and by a few rapid and graphic strokes is exalted to the very throne of the God of power. To follow these rapid strokes in detail : a mighty prophet appears to herald the coming of one infinitely mightier, the Lord ; at the baptism of that mightier One the heavens are rent open in acknowledgment of his Divinity ; and when the Spirit has driven him into the wilderness three worlds gather round him. John is cast 1 The, Four Witnesses, pp. HI, 135. 180 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. into prison, and the wonder-working activity of this Son of God begins at once. He proclaims the kingdom of God at hand. He calls men, and they straightway follow him. He enters the synagogue at Capernaum on the Sabbath, and at 07ice begins to teach ; the audience is as- tonished at the authority of his teaching ; a demon recog- nizes his divinity and proclaims it, and is expelled by his power. Men are amazed at the omnipotence of his com- mand, and his fame immediately spreads through Gali- lee. And in this same life-like manner he is hurried from miracle to more notable miracle, from fame to more gen- eral fame, and from power to still greater power, until, in the space of forty-four verses, we find him exalted to the place of God^ the righteous, moral Governor of the universe, forgiving the sins of the poor paralytic, while the people, in their amazement, glorify God, who is re- vealed there as they had never seen before. Although all the main facts of this Introduction apj^ear in the other Gospels, yet it is as different from them all as if every one of its facts were new. Everything in it is familiar as possible, and yet the delineation is as vivid as if everything were strange as possible. Throughout there is just the logic to attract the attention and arouse the interest of the man of power, who is too much given to making history to stop to interpret prophecy, too much engaged in rapid doing to pause for slow philosophizing, and too much absorbed in reorganizing and remould- ing the present visible world to be disposed directly to give heed to the facts of an invisible and spiritual world, — just the logic for the Roman. Part First of Mark's Gospel, exhibiting the foundations of the kingdom of God, may be looked upon as corre- sponding in part to Matthew v. 1-ix. 35, to Luke vi.-vii., and to John iii. Comparing it with these, there is noth- THE CENTRAL IDEA. 181 ing in it of that reference to Judaism as the basis of tlie law of the kingdom, in which Matthew abounds ; noth- ing of the philosophic presentation of the world- embrac- ing law of charity to which Luke — writing for the nni- versal man — devotes his space ; nothing of the theology of the new life in which John delights. In short, Mark drops entirely the form of connected discourse in which the other Evangelists present the fundamental ideas of the kingdom and gives the character of the subjects, the law of growth and the power of the King, by a rapid succession of incidents, parables, and miracles, in what, for ease of execution and vividness of effect, must be ac- knowledged an incomparable picture. In the Introduction and Part First, Jesus appears as the Son of God, wielding almighty power in its most tan- gible forms^ in the former exercising the prerogatives of God himself, and in the latter demonstrating himself Lord of the universe. The Roman, the man of power, is thus as irresistibly attracted toward him, as the Jew, the man of prophecy, is by the genealogy of Messiali and other opening features of Matthew, and as the Greek, the world-man, is by the philosophic development of the life of the marvelous divine man by Luke, and as the Christian, the man of faith, is by the different opening, concerning the eternal Word, by John. Part Second, in delineating the kingdom of power in the activity of its conflict, still holds the attention of the Roman b}^ miracles second in grandeur to none of those which have preceded ; yet, in the fourfold withdrawal from enemies, — from' Nazareth, from Herod, from the Jerusalem Scribes and Pharisees, and from the local Pharisees of Dalmanutha, — it gives rising prominence to the spiritual weapons and influences by which the victory is to be gained, and which in the remainder of the Gos- pel are to hold the chief place. 182 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. Part Third, with its lesson of conquest by suffering, records in its opening section, after the confession of the Twelve, the transcendent miracle of the transfiguration with its divine recognition of the Son of God, and also the healing of the dumb demoniac at the foot of the mountain ; but the spiritual element, exalted in the con- sequent revelation of the secret source of power in the kingdom in prayer and fasting, predominates from this point onward. The presentation of the public claim of the King in Jerusalem has at the outset the restoring of sight to Bar- timeus and the symbolic cursing of the fig-tree ; but from that point forward the miracles of power, — the healing in the temple, the healing of the ear of Malchus, and all the wonders that gathered about the cross except the rending of the temple veil, — disappear from Mark's record, leaving only the miracles of foresight. The scenes of the last days are left to depend for their im- pressiveness upon the power of the naked facts of the final struggle with the Jewish authorities and the death upon the cross, — facts depicted with the life-like touch of an eye-witness, and fitted to draw from every true Roman the exclamation of the centurion at the cross, '' Truly this man was the Son of God ! " The narrative thus makes manifest that this Son of God, who wields at pleasure almighty power, is not to establish his kingdom by that, but by the ministrations of love, and the suffer- ing of death in the sinner's stead, — thus conquering by a new power infinitely mightier than that embodied in old Rome. It only remains at this point for the Evangelist to sketch the victory over death and the doubts of the amazed disciples, and the establishment of the universal kingdom by the new spiritual forces and weapons ; and this Mark does in the final chapter, the appropriate con- OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS. 183 elusion of this Gospel, in which the almighty King is en- tlironed and the work of conquest organized and pushed to its completion. All this was just what was needed to commend Jesus as a Saviour to the Romans. It was, moreover, a true view of the man of Nazareth, in whose many-sided char- acter was found not only the Messiah, the ideal Jew, but also the universal Conqueror and King, the ideal Roman. This Jesus, the inheritor of all the true power and man- hood found in the Roman nature, and adding to this a divine power and manhood, is the Jesus represented by Mark. SECTION III. THE ROMAN ADAPTATION IN THE OMISSIONS AND AD- DITIONS OF THE SECOND GOSPEL. The Roman design of the second Gospel is manifest as well from that which the Evangelist omits of what is found in the other Gospels, as from that which he adds to what is found in them. I. The Omissions of the Second Crospel, It will he seen on examination, that Mark omits what- ever is distinctively Jewish, Greek, or Christian, and would therefore be of little if any service in his work of presenting his Gospel to the Roman. Any one even tol- erably familiar with the evangelical records will remark how very extensive these omissions are. From Matthew. As compared with Matthew's Gos- pel, which it most resembles, the omission throughout the second Gospel of the Jewish features will at once appear even to a cursory reader. The long discourses which make up so large a part of Matthew are not found in Mark. According to the testimony of Papias, Mark gives an account of " things 184 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. both said and done " ^ by Jesus ; but the " things said '* were rather incidental or brief sayings than systematic and extended discourses. The sermon on the Mount. (Matt, v.-vii.) ; the charge to the Twelve (Matt, x.) ; the discourse to his disciples exhorting them to watchful- ness and activity in waiting for his coming to judgment (Matt, xxiv.-xxv.), are not in the second Gospel. Aside from the fact that the Roman appreciated deeds rather than discourses, these discourses would have been to him peculiarly devoid of interest, since they deal so largely with Jewish ideas, and aim so directly to correct Jewish errors or to guide Jewish life. But besides these great omissions, it has been remarked that there is in this Gospel a general freedom from Jewish references, and from everything that the Jew alone could fully understand and appreciate. There is almost nothing in Mark of the Messianic ori- gin and prophetic preparation of Jesus, to which Matthew devotes his entire introduction of more than three chap- ters (Matt. i. 1-iv. 11) ; and even that which does appear is with a different aim from Matthew's, — to give an im- pressive picture of Christ's opening work. John the Bap- tist comes forward in the wilderness in picturesque garb as the herald of Jehovah, the mighty coming Conqueror ; Jesus appears at the baptism and is acknowledged by God as his " beloved Son ; " and is then immediately driven into the wilderness, where Satan appears to tempt him, the wild beasts to terrify him, and the angels to minister to him (Mark i. 1-13). Mark omits the parables of special Jewish significance. Of the series of seven, delivered on the sea-side, only two are retained : that of the sower (Mark iv. 1-25), as containing a truth equally applicable to all men concern- ing the proclamation of the Gospel and the growth of the i Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 39. OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS. 185 kingdom of God ; and that of the mustard-seed (Mark iv. 30-34), which exhibits, in a peculiarly Roman aspect, the world-wide growth of the kingdom. The remaining five, as meant especially for the Jew, are passed over ; that of the tares (Matt. xiii. 24-35), as representing the field of the Messiah's work as not confined to the Jews as they suppose, but as extending to the whole world ; that of the leaven (Matt. xiii. 33), as exhibiting the influence of the Gospel not as Jew-transforming merely, as the Jews thought, but as world-transforming ; that of the hid treasure (Matt. xiii. 44), and that of the pearl (xiii. 45), as representing that the kingdom of heaven is not to be found and won easily by the king as something embodied in the Jewish institutions, as the Jews vainly believed, but rather as something concealed from the gaze of men, to be sought diligently by the divine King and to be pur- chased by him at the greatest cost (John i. 11) ; and that of the draw-net (Matt. xiii. 47-50), as teaching a mixed condition of things in the kingdom, rather than the ex- clusiveness of their own national election, of which the Jews boasted. The reader of Mark's Gospel will also note the absence of the numerous parables condemnatory of the Jews, found in the latter half of Matthew's Gospel. The Jew- ish lessons of these parables would have been lost upon the Romans. There is doubtless the further reason for their omission, that, as the parabolic form of instruction was adopted by our Lord for the purpose of partially hiding the "truth from the blinded Jews (Matt. xiii. 10- 16), it could scarcely have been at all intelligible to Romans, who were entirely unaccustomed to deal with highly figurative forms of speech. The same thing is illustrated by Mark's treatment of tlie first of the three series of miracles, given by Matthew to confirm the authority of Jesus as the Messiah, — the 186 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. series designed to show the relation of Jesus to the Jewish ceremonial law (Matt. viii. 1-17 ) . The first miracle, the healing of the leper, is recorded by Mark (i. 40-45) in bringing out the wonderful power and fame of Jesus, the Roman aspect of his work. The second, the healing of the centurion's servant, is omitted, as it chiefly presents the contrast of Gentile faith with Jewish unbelief. The third, the healing of Peter's wife's mother, with the added works of power, is recorded by Mark (i. 29—34), as exhibiting the excitement in the city and the marvel- ous power of Jesus over diseases, demons, and men ; but the reference which Matthew (viii. 16, 17) makes to prophecy is omitted. A notable exception to the general freedom of Mark from Jewish references appears, however, in the record of the conflicts of Jesus, with the disciples of John and the Pharisees, at the feast of Levi, about fasting (Matt, ix. 10-17 ; Mark ii. 15-22) ; and with the Pharisees about the desecration of the Sabbath (Matt. xii. 1-14 ; Mark ii. 23-iii. 6). It has been already seen, in the por- traiture of the Roman character, that the genuine Ro- man-born man was, on his religious side, the Pharisee of the empire, considering himself — as did the Pharisee of J udaea — the only favored child of heaven. It was true of his religion, that it was a mere empty form and tradi- tion, nay, more, an acknowledged hyprocrisy, for the priests of the Pantheon could not look each other in the face without laughing outright at the farce they were enacting. The Roman needed, therefore, to be taught, by Christ's treatment of Jewish caste, the true doctrine of equality on the basis of manhood, in the kingdom of God, and, by his treatment of Jewish formality and hypocrisy, the true doctrine of the spirituality and sincerity of the religion of the kingdom. Yet it must be observed that even these incidents are stripped of everything that a OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS. 187 Jew only could understand, and the passage in which they occur is completed by Christ's demonstration, in the healing of the withered hand, of his Lordship over the Sabbath. From Luke. As compared with the third Gospel, the omission of the merely Greek features is equally appar- ent. There is nothing in Mark of the marvelous coming down of heaven to earth, and of that human develop- ment of Jesus as the divine and perfect man, to which the introduction of Luke is devoted (Luke i. 1-iv. 13). These matters, which will be seen to be of such absorb- ing interest and such eminent appropriateness for the Greek, were not in place for the man of deeds. The part of this material which Mark uses has refer- ence to the baptism of John and the temptation, and is all comprised in ten verses. In the record which Matthew makes of the Baptist's mission, the fulfillment of prophecy is the prominent feature ; in that of John, the testimony of the Baptist to the Lamb of God, the light and life of men ; in that of Luke, the salvation of God for all flesh is the new thought brought out ; in that of Mark, the mighty herald before Jehovah, the almighty conqueror. Equally characteristic is the omission by Mark of the human experience of Jesus in the tempta- tion, as given by Luke and Matthew, while he only aims to bring out for the Roman reader, in the most graphic manner, the situation of the Saviour in the wilderness. Indeed, the absence of those universal and human feat- ures, which will be shown to be so essential to the third Gospel, cannot fail to be noted throughout the second. The successive stages of the life of Jesus, upon which Luke dwells, are not even mentioned by Mark. Jesus appears at once with his powers full-summed and at their highest, and engages without delay in his work as the 188 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. almighty Victor. For the Roman there is but one stage in his career. The entire ministry in Peraea, constituting ahnost one half of Luke's Gospel, and presenting the divine mercy in its most tender aspects to universal humanity, has no place in Mark. That which was fitted to move and mould the gentle Greek, with his thoughtful and beauti- ful soul, was not suited to influence the stern and martial Roman, who had in his nature as little as possible of beauty and sentiment. There are therefore wanting in the second Gospel the great parables of Luke, the favo- rites of all ages : the two debtors, the good Samaritan, the friend at midnight, the rich fool, the barren fig-tree, the great supper, the lost sheep, the lost piece of money, the prodigal son, the unjust steward, the rich man and Lazarus, the unprofitable servants, the unjust judge, the Pharisee and the publican, and the pounds ; besides the other rich instructions addressed to the heathen people in Persea, or the country across the Jordan (Luke ix.- xix.), and suited to the man of universal sympathies. From John. As compared with the fourth Gospel, the omission of the distinctively Christian features is apparent everywhere in the second. Strictly speaking, Mark gives nothing of the great Christian discourses that make up the Gospel according to John. In a missionary Gospel aiming at the conver- sion of the Roman, they would have utterly failed to be appreciated. These two Gospels have little in common save a few striking facts. These appear in Mark as facts in the wonder-working power of the conqueror, or as facts cen- tring in the cross and essential to redemption. The former kind comprises the feeding of the five thousand (Mark vi. 32-44 ; John vi. 1-14), and the walking of Jesus on the water (Mark vi. 45-56 ; John vi. 15-21). OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS. 189 The latter kind embraces many of the incidents of the hist Passover week, and some of those after the resur- rection. It will be seen, however, that the great Chris- tian lessons, which John connects with or draws from these facts, do not find place in Mark's Gospel. II. The Additions of the Second Gospel. The Gospel according to Mark gives equally conclusive evidence of its Roman aim in what it adds to the records of the other Gospels. A mechanical criticism has shown that, if the Gospel of Mark is regarded as made up of one 100 parts, 7 of these are peculiar to itself, and 93 common to it with one or more of the other Gospels. Substantially the same fact appears in the statement that there are but twenty- three or twenty-four verses in Mark which are not found also in Matthew or Luke. The historical origin of the Gospels, as already exhib- ited, opens the way to an explanation of the resemblances as well as the differences of the first three Gospels. Both Matthew and Peter were Apostles and familiar with the facts of the career of Jesus of Nazareth. Luke and Paul doubtless learned the facts and discourses either directly or indirectly from the Apostles, except so far as Paul was taught by Christ himself (Gal. i. 12). The verbal coincidences between the first three Gos- pels, which have led to the many ingenious hypotheses regarding their common origin, can better be accounted for without these elaborate imaginings. Mr. Westcott has observed that " they occur most commonly in the recital of the words of our Lord or of others, and are compara- tively rare in the simple narrative. Thus, of the verbal coincidences in St. Matthew about seven eighths, of those in St. Mark about four fifths, and of those in St. Luke, about nineteen twentieths, occur in the records of the 190 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. words of others." ^ The recitative portions — discourses, parables, etc. — came from the lips of Jesus himself, were fixed in the minds of the Apostles, were reproduced in their preaching and embodied in the Gospels, which therefore could not fail to be alike in these respects. The narrative portions were given their shape in each case by the individual Apostle or Evangelist, and therefore could not but be different. There is, therefore, no call for any- elaborate hypothesis. The extraordinary resemblance of Mark's Gospel to that of Matthew has led to three hypotheses of their connection : a first, that Matthew is an enlargement of Mark ; a second, that Mark is an abridgment of Matthew ; a third, that both had a common basis in an oral Gospel which existed in the Church at the time of their origin and from which they alike drew their mate- rial. But there is hardly a necessity for arbitrary conjecture in accounting for this most extraordinary resemblance, since history with the aid of common sense furnishes a far better explanation of the facts. Matthew and Peter were both personally cognizant of the great facts which they recorded, and they both first entered upon the work of preaching the Gospel to the Jews in Judaea. There is doubtless so much of truth in the theory of a common oral Gospel. The idea of power had its attractions, as has been seen, for both the Jew and the Roman. When Peter went abroad to proclaim the Gospel over the world, it was therefore natural that he should retain the exhibi- tions of the miraculous power of Jesus with which the preaching in Judaea had made him so familiar. It was equally natural and necessary that, in seeking to reach and influence hearers moulded by the Roman civilization, he should drop the references to prophecy which were un- 1 Westcott, Introduction, p. 203. OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS. 191 intelligible to the Romans, and give to everything that increased vividness and picturesque effect without which their attention could not be won and retained. From the small additions and large subtractions of the second Gospel, the mechanical critics have inferred the want of any great special significance of this Gospel. In their view it is the least important of all, in fact, of al- most no value to those who have Matthew's Gospel. The inference warranted is, rather, that the criticism which sees so little difference and is content with looking only at outward dissimilarity is itself insignificant and worth- less. A true and worth}^ criticism cannot fail to demonstrate that the number of verses in which Mark's Gospel out- wardly differs from the others is no proper measure of the real and essential difference. The score of verses, more or less, which he adds to the records of the other Evangelists, forms the least of all his contributions to the Gospel treasure. The greater additions will appear under the incidental changes and variations of this Gos- pel. But even the slighter and less important direct addi- tions may be shown to have aided materially in adapting the second Gospel to Roman readers. The portions usually reckoned additions to this Gospel are the following : the parable of the seed-corn (Mark iv. 26-34) ; the healing of the blind man of Bethsaida (viii. 22-26) ; the healing of the deaf man of Decapolis (vii. 31-37) ; and the form of the last commission (xvi. 15-18). The longest of all these is the parable of the seed-corn, occupying nine verses. Mark has altogether only four parables, and this is the only one peculiar to his Gospel. One of the four, that of the wicked husbandmen (xii. 1- 12), is introduced by Mark, as also by Matthew and 192 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. Luke, in its proper place in connection with tlie series of conflicts in which Jesus engaged with the leading classes. The remaining three constitute Mark's group of parables. The three can best be understood together. They have nothing to do with portraying the world-wide mercy to which Luke's parables, occurring later in his Gospel, are devoted ; nor with the spiritual truth and the blessed relations of Christ to his people, which those of John exhibit ; nor with the inward, subjective influ- ences, to the setting forth of which a part of those in Matthew's first great group are devoted ; but are all em- plo^^ed in unfolding the growth of the kingdom as an outtvard, objective thing. The first (the sower) contra- dicts the false Roman idea, by putting the invisible, spiritual power of truth in the place of the visible, mate- rial power of the Caesars ; the second (the seed-corn) presents a development as independent of human will and as inevitable as that of Rome herself according to the most Roman conception ; the third (the mustard-seed) completes the sketch of the development of the kingdom, by depicting its rapid growth into that universality which Rome, alone of all the worldly empires, had even imper- fectly realized. The next addition, the healing of the deaf and dumb man of Decapolis (vii. 31-37), comprises seven verses. There is another, the healing of the blind man of Beth- saida (viii. 22-26), which is not unlike it. The two are among the most striking of the miracles of Jesus, and, through the symbolical acts connected with them most eminently fitted to make a deep impression on the man of deeds. In the former miracle, the great Healer put his finger into the ears of the man, and spitting touched his tougue with the spittle, by these signs to awaken the faith of the man and arouse his expectation of blessing. INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS. 193 In the latter miracle, Jesus performed a progressive cure, — first spitting upon the blind man's eyes and putting his hands upon him, thereby bringing him to " see men as trees walking ; " and afterward putting his hands again upon his eyes, and making him to " see every man clearly." Both miracles furnish striking symbols of the dealings of divine grace with sinful man ; both picture Christ's saving power for the easy comprehension of the man of action. The last of these added passages in the second Gospel, the great commission, in a form quite peculiar (xvi. 15- 20), presents not only the warrant of the followers of Christ for the conquest of the whole world, — the orders of the army of the great conqueror for its marching and action, — but also the promise of miraculous, divine coop- eration, through the exaltation of the risen and ascended Son of God with his Father on the throne of the universe. It closes with the record of the actual pushing out into all the world, by the followers of our Lord, of the work of universal conquest (verse 20). It is the true Gospel commission for the man of action and of universal empire, the Roman. Both the omissions and additions of the Evangelist were eminently fitted to commend Jesus to the Roman world of that age. SECTION IV. THE ROMAN ADAPTATION IN THE INCIDENTAL VARIA- TIONS OF THE SECOND GOSPEL. The adaptation of Mark's Gospel to the Roman needs appears even more clearly in the incidental variations and peculiarities throughout the entire production. In these features, as already intimated, are to be found Mark's most important contributions to the Gospel treas- 13 194 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. ure. He has added something of value to ahiiost every line which he has given in common with the other Evan- gelists. By variations of incident, by touching, shaping, or coloring, and by new and fresh grouping of the facts, he has produced out of apparently old material an origi- nal Gospel, into the entire tone and movement of which he has infused, by the aid of the Holy Spirit, a living energy born of Jesus, the divine and almighty worker and conqueror. I. Incidental Variations. It has often been noticed that Mark's is the Gospel of minute and vivid details. Through Peter, whose amanuensis or interpreter he is, in a sense, to be regarded, the Evangelist takes the posi- tion of an eye-witness and ear-witness, and renders every- thing life-like by the thousand varied and delicate touches fitted to make past events become present realities again. In recording ordinary occurrences, while he omits much of the didactic matter preserved by Matthew and Luke, he adds some circumstance of condition or of place. In picturing the extraordinary events, he alone of the Evan- gelists dwells upon the looks and gestures and, in general, upon the outward expressions of feeling on the part of Jesus. In describing the miracles, he dwells upon the instrumental or accompanying acts. By these processes which the careless reader may pass over almost without observing them, the plain narratives of the other Evan- gelists are transformed by Mark into living pictures. In truth, he must be acknowledged as being, among the Gospel authors, the " exclusive master of the pictorial and scenic in describing what took place." Narrative Changes. This peculiarity of the second Gospel may be illustrated by any of the narratives given by it in common with some other Gospel. INCIDENTAL VAKIATIONS. 195 The meeting of Jesus with the rich young man and what occurred in immediate connection with it are re- corded by the first three Evangelists (Matt. xix. 16-30 ; Mark x. 17-31 ; Luke xviii. 18-80). Only Mark brings out the earnestness of the young man by mentioning that he came running and kneeled to Jesus when he asked him the momentous question concerning eternal life. The touching incident, that Jesus, before pronouncing the decisive words given by the three Evangelists, One thing thou lacJcest, looked upon him and loved him, with- out in any wise softening the severity of his declaration on account of this natural amiability, is recorded only by Mark. He alone adds, immediately afterwards, to the follow me, which he has in common with Matthew and Luke, the important words, taking up the cross. As only Mark relates that Jesus looked round about, when he uttered those terrible words : How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God ! — so he alone follows this up with an account of the astonishment of the disciples, and the Master's repeated yet explana- tory saying : And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them. Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God I And when our Lord adds that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, and the still more astonished disciples say among them- selves, Who then can he saved ? it is Mark who records, in the most forcible yet simple manner, that saying so full of comfort to the heart truly in search of salvation, in re- peating the expression of God's almighty power in man's salvation, /or with God all things are possible. When, shortly afterwards, Jesus promises to the disciples, that whatever any one shall have forsaken on earth for his sake he shall have restored to him an hundred-fold, and 196 MAKK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. that lie shall receive eternal life in the world to come, Mark adds what might have been but too easily forgot- ten, that this recompense, in so far as this life is con- cerned, shall be coupled with persecutions. The account of the poor widow's mite is found in Mark (xii. 41-44) and Luke (xxi. 1-4). In the four verses of his Gospel Mark adds to the parallel account of Luke : that Jesus sat over against the treasury ; that he saw the people cast in their gifts ; that many that were rich cast in much ; that the widow's two mites make a far- thing (a quadrant, a well-known Roman coin) ; that he called unto him his disciples and told them that the poor widow had cast more in than all they which have cast into the treasury. Add to this the constant rep- etition of the words, cast in, and there is furnished the material which makes all the difference between the sober statement of Luke, designed to be read by the thoughtful Greek, and the vivid picture of Mark, de- siofned to make the active Roman see the event itself. These examples might be extended to cover all the events which Mark records in common with one or more of the other Evangelists, and would exhibit throughout the same characteristic features that so adapted this Gos- pel to the man of action. Slighter Additions. The same distinguishing feature of the second Gospel may be illustrated by a large class of incidental additions made by Mark in connection with materials common to two or more of the Evangelists. He usually gives the names and surnames, and men- tions the relations, of the persons whom the other Evan- gelists mention more generally. The blind man restored near Jericho is Bartimeus, the son of Timeus (x. 46). The high-priest from whom David received the shew-bread as food is Abiathar (ii. 26). The Jewish name of the publican Matthew is Levi, and he is the son of Alpheus INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS. 197 (ii. 14). The sons of Zebedee are surnamed by Jesus Boanerges, which. is the sons of thunder (iii. 17). Simon of Cyrene was the father of Alexander and Rufus (xv. 21), one of whom seems to have been a well-known per- son in the circle of Roman Christians (Rom. xvi. 13). He takes peculiar pleasure in giving the identical Ara- msean words used by Jesus. In the accounts of the young woman's restoration to life, Matthew mentions the bare fact, Luke gives our Lord's words in Greek, but Mark tells us (v. 41) that our Lord said to her : " Talitha, Cumi, which is being interpreted, Damsel, I say unto thee, arise." So in the account of the healing of the deaf and dumb man in the region of Decapolis (vii. 34), we have the word of Jesus : " Uphphatha,'^ and have it in- terpreted for the Gentile reader, — " that is to say, Be opened." In Gethsemane we have the Syriac " Abba " (xiv. 36) ; and, in answer to the Jerusalem Scribes and Pharisees, the Hebrew " Corban^'" caught from the lips of Jesus (vii. 11.) The cry of agony on the cross is given by Mark in the precise Aramsean words in which it was doubtless uttered : " Eloi ! JEloi ! lama sabachthani ^ " By Matthew it is given in the original Hebrew — then already a dead language — ^'Mi I Mi ! " etc. But this point is perhaps best illustrated by some of those characteristic details by which Mark casts a flood of light upon the daily life of our Lord. The account of the storm on the Sea of Galilee is found in Matthew (viii.), Mark (iv.), and Luke (viii.). Mark alone tells us, that " they took him even as he was in the ship" (iv. 36), — that is, exhausted by his labors and without any preparation for the comfort of the voyage. All three of the Evangelists tell us that while the terri- ble mountain storm was sweeping down over the waters, Jesus lay sleeping in the little ship. But Mark adds a circumstance equally picturesque and significant : " And 198 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN/' he was in the hinder part of the ship asleep upon the hench^'' — for so, as is now generally admitted, must the hist word be translated. He lay sleeping upon the bench covered with leather, on which the rowers were accustomed to sit, and not upon a pillow, *' No convenience brought on board for that purpose, but only what the place itself offered, served for some moments as a couch to him who otherwise, on his own earth, had not where to lay his head." Da Costa, who has given a detailed account of the characteristic differences of the Gospels, brings out an- other very striking feature in connection with Nazareth, the town in which Jesus was brought up: All the first three Gospels show that his doctrines and miracles had given rise to great astonishment and offense among the Nazarenes. Luke (iv.) tells us that they became so en- raged that they thrust him out of the city and attempted to cast him headlong from the precipice on which the town was built. Matthew (xiii. 54, 55) records the ques- tions of amazement, skepticism, and contempt : " Whence hath this man this wisdom and these mighty works ? Is not this the carpenter's son ? Is not his mother's name Mary? And his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas ? and his sisters, are they not all with us ? " But Mark (vi. 3) writes, " Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary ? This difference between the Gospels, ap- parently so unimportant, clearly reveals to us two striking circumstances in the private life of Jesus : firsts that he himself, along with his father, and apparently until his baptism in Jordan, followed at Nazareth the trade of a carpenter ; seco7idly^ that in those days Joseph, the hus- band of Mary, must have long been dead. And thus it is that the Lord from heaven, he by whom the heaven and the earth were created, is found in his human nature exercising a trade on this earth, and by that trade, that INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS. 199 labor of his own hands, providing, as a son and support, for Joseph's widow, the daughter of David, whose eldest son he was according to the flesh." Word Changes. The word changes, occurring in every paragraph of the second Gospel, bear the same characteristic mark of adaptation to the man of deeds. By means of these the expressions of the other Evangel- ists are strengthened and intensified and their bald state- ments transformed into living realities. Matthew and Luke tell us that at the baptism of Jesus the heavens were ofeyied unto him ; Mark tells us that Jesus saw the heavens rent open (i. 10). Matthew and Luke tell us that after the baptism Jesus was led up^ or led^ into the wilderness for the temptation; Mark says that the Spirit driveth him (i. 12). In describing the feeling awakened by the healing of the paralytic, Mat- thew (ix. 8) says they marveled ; but Mark (ii. 12) says they were all amazed (literally, beside themselves). In the description of the storm at sea, Matthew (viii. 24) says the ship was covered with the waves ; Mark (iv. 37), the ship was full. Matthew (xxvi. 37) says that in Getlisemane our Lord began to he sorrowful; Mark (xiv. 33) uses a stronger expression : to be sore amazed. Mark likewise makes use of that repetition of words which is a form of figurative energy so common in the Latin tongue. This may be illustrated by such expres- sions as that used concerning the disciples, after the storm on the sea (iv. 41), *' and they feared exceedingly " (lit- erally, they feared with a great fear') ; that used concern- ing the people when the daughter of the ruler was re- stored to life (v. 42), " and they were astonished with a great astonishment ; " and that used in speaking of the sin against the Holy Ghost (iii. 28), " blasphemies where- with soever they shall blaspheme." This usage may be even better illustrated by the emphatic repetition of the 200 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. exact words and phrases. In this way the Evangelist uses the words cast in seven times, in giving the account of the widow's mites (xii. 41-44). In like manner he repeats the Gospel and the kingdom of Grod (i. 14, 15) ; the words eat and publicans and sinners (ii. 16, 19) ; and the word sea (iv. 1). These are only specimens of the variations that are to be found throughout the entire Gospel. The possessor of an English Harmony of the Gospels — still better, of a Greek Harmony — can readily examine them in detail for himself. They will everywhere be found to bear the Roman stamp. II. Other Peculiarities, The survey taken of the second Gosj)el brings to light other and incidental variations, not to be classed with those already referred to, but which can only be explained by the Roman aim of the Evangelist. Roman Assumptions. As already indicated, Mark has furnished the Gospel of action, and especially of the divine activity of Jesus. This assumes the point of view of the Roman, the man of action. Although so much the shortest of the Gospels, it has nearly as many miracles as Matthew. It deals but little with logic save the logic of facts. Mr. Westcott has called it " a series of perfect pictures ; " and again, " the living portraiture of Christ in the clearness of his present energy." The teaching of mighty fact everywhere out- runs that of verbal statement. Its very brevity, resulting from these characteristics, Avould, as Canon Wordsworth has suggested, '' commend it to the acceptance of a great body of the Roman people, especially of the middle classes, engaged in practical busi- ness, legal affairs, commercial enterprises, and military campaigns, and migrating in frequent journeys from INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS. 201 place to place. Such an Evangelical manual as this would be particularly appropriate and serviceable to them." 1 It is true that Mark nowhere represents Jesus as being addressed as Lord — as the other Evangelists so often do — but the authority of Lord and God is exhibited in all his career as it is not by any other Evangelist. It is Mark that has given us the God speaking out most clearly through the man in all the relations of life. Tan- gible forms, material symbols, were a necessity in a Gos- pel for the matter-of-fact Roman. To him an abstract God was no God at all. While Luke, writing for the so-human Greek, dwells upon the perfect humanity of Jesus as it appears exalted into union with the Divinity ; Mark, for the Roman, strives to make visible through the manhood of Jesus, the invisible and Almighty God. The fact has been often signalized, that the second Gospel gives with special fullness many of the events in the experience of Peter. There are throughout abundant indications of the in- timate connection of Peter with its authorship. It be- gins with Peter's first acquaintance with Jesus, at the preaching of the Baptist. Simon Peter is incidentally seen to be a central figure in it, as may be shown by com- paring statements of Mark with those of the other Evan- gelists. Where Luke (iv. 42), writes : " And when it was day, he departed, and went into a desert place ; and the people sought him, and came unto him, and stayed him, that he should not depart from them ; " Mark (i. 35, 36) says : " And in the morning, rising up a great while before day, he went out, and departed into a soli- tary place, and there prayed. And Simon^ and they that were with hhn^ followed (Greek, hunted^ after him." In the narrative of the fig-tree that was cursed, Matthew 1 Introduction to St. Mark's Gospel. 202 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. (xxi. 20) represents the disciples as exclaiming, " How soon is the fig-tree withered away ! " but Mark (xi. 21) represents Peter as first calling to remembrance the curse and making the exclamation. Matthew (xxiv. 3) writes that the disciples asked our Lord about the time when the temple should be destroyed ; Luke (xxi. 7), that some asked him ; Mark (xiii. 3), that Peter ^ James, John, and Andrew asked him privately. While Mark alone adds that strikingly significant circumstance that the cock crew twice before the Apostle's conscience was aroused ; ^ he alone adds to the expression of Matthew (xxviii. 7), in the message of the angel after the resurrec- tion, that equally striking and significant closing name of the denier : " But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee (Mark xvi. 7). It is a still more striking fact, that things recorded in the other Gospels, which reflect peculiar honor upon Peter, are modestly passed over in this. Matthew alone records the attempt to walk upon the sea (Matt. xiv. 28-32). There is nothing said of the bitterness of Peter's weep- ing after his denial of his Master.^ But most remark- able of all — considering the fact that Mark wrote for the Roman, and that the later Rome built its pretentious and inquisitorial hierarchy chiefly upon this one state- ment — is the absence of the benediction given to Peter on the occasion of his explicit confession of the Messiah- ship and Divine Sonship of Jesus : " Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona ; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church ; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of 1 Compare Matt. xxvi. 34, 75 ; Luke xxii. 34, 61 ; John xiii. 33, xviii. 27 ; with Mark xiv. 30, 63, 72. 2 Compare Mark xiv. 72, witli Matt. xxvi. 75, and Luke xxii. 62. INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS. 203 the kingdom of heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." ^ Could anything more clearly mark the guidance of inspiration ? It seems like a divine protest and provision against the Papal perversion of the passage with its doctrine of the keys, that it should have been omitted in the very Gospel for the Roman. It is likewise worthy of note that Mark, in his treat- ment of themes connected with the geography of Pales- tine and with Jewish rites and customs, seems always to assume such a reader as the Roman undoubtedly was. It has already been made evident, that there is, in gen- eral, in the second Gospel as compared with the first, a paucity of references to all matters that would require a Jewish reader, or copious explanations for the Gentile reader, in order to make clear the point and drift of the narrative ; and as compared with the third, an absence of the accurate geographic and historic statements so neces- sary to the reasoning Greek, whose character would impel him to the mental reconstruction of the history and to- pography, but so useless to the Roman, intent only on the incidents themselves as exhibiting the power of the almighty conqueror. With Mark the full impression designed to be made is not ordinarily dependent upon a minute and accurate ac- quaintance with Jewish peculiarities and places. When explanations of such things are introduced it is rather to add vividness to the impression than merely to give in- formation. But that he does not entirely withhold such explanations because of the familiarity, either partial or entire, of his readers with matters essentially Jewish — as some one has asserted — may be seen at once from his record of the discourse about unwashen hands (vii. 1 Compare Matt. xvi. 13-20, with Mark viii. 27-30, and Luke ix. 18-21. 204 MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN. 1-5), as compared with the parallel account of Matthew (xv. 1-3). Evidently the reader for whom Mark wrote that account was not familiar with Jewish customs ; and in this we have an unanswerable argument against the hypothesis which represents the usual absence of explana- tions as arising from such familiarity. The explanation is too elementary and superficial for the Greek ; it was not needed by the Jew ; but it exactly met the needs of the Roman. Roman Expressions. While all the features thus far noticed are best explained by the supposition that the second Gospel was written, as history afiirms, for the Ro- mans, there are certain expressions and forms of expres- sion which are, if possible, still more decisively Roman. Of this nature is the employment by Mark of Latin words in Greek form, a thing which is nowhere else found in the New Testament. The paralytic when healed is commanded to take up his bed. Here Mark (ii. 12) uses the word Kpa^arrov, the Greek form of the Latin gra- hatum ; instead of the pure Greek work kXivt) (Matt. ix. 6), or kXlvlSlov (Luke v. 19, 24). Li recording Herod's sending for the head of John the Baptist, Mark (vi. 27) uses the word