Pee ow 
 Ne ww ent 
 
 ps Δ, μ“" ΩΝ " » —— ᾳ 
 2 ἊΨ —— 2 ling al var Ψ ~ μι soltieinade ee 4. =. nue a aud np 
 ES PE Ss API pe ~bapebae TOA peas pes amon = “+ ~~ ~~ τσ 
 Ὡρῶν» te phn 5... γα, οἰ pour A ae -΄συ > en wm nea ain a — —s nd ~ ~ ato na 4 NA Pr mene 
 anes 2 τ ~~ va - tS - Nf Fe ὁ “τ Ἀπ το 5 ΛΑ ἐς, 
 
 ag te rt hein sien ae ww ~~ » ~~ ' ~- ᾿ tare ¥ ΄ το τοῦσ , 
 “7 4 a ~* ~ a — +> — - , 
 
 ww ate 1s 
 -tete oe a " 
 
 προ πῆ 
 wie Re 
 
 +4 ΕΒ ἘῸΝ “ (ὦ 
 eee 
 PP a BD ee ww Gg wt = eee 
 Ne > 
 . συ, «τὸ 
 
 ern νυν, 
 Se me ποτ ττςΣ 
 
 git 
 
δ 1 
 
 OF PRING 
 Ss Se: 
 JAN 27 1972 
 
 BSesss 
 4.58 
 ως. 
 
PTH Ss 
 ΓΑ The 
 
 ΤΩΝ 
 
 i 
 
 er) 
 AK 
 
 a 
 4 
 AA 
 ut 
 
 ἡ 
 
Ν ἵν! 7 iu 
 Δ } nt | iu ’ 
 ἢ FP} 
 \ 
 } ‘ 
 1 ; 
 Ι 
 : 
 ἢ j 
 ‘ 
 + 
 ΠῚ 
 τὴ 
 ' 
 ᾿ 
 pit 
 i Ἢ i 
 ἡ ἡ 1 } 
 " ΠΝ si j 
 ] sit i j { ‘ ᾿, ᾿ 
 Nicky ah 4} 
 ‘ we . ᾿ ita Ay 
 y f ii a ἡ ᾿ ris 
 | Y ‘ ι ΤΥ "ἢ 
 Ι i 1 ἢ 
 
 i ie Ae NA}: 
 BER AOR iy St 
 UD A ae 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 Ι TO THE 
 
 SPUDY OF THE GOSPELS 
 
 HISTORICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES 
 
 st 
 4, 
 ΒΗ toss WESTCOTT, D. Ὁ. 
 REGIUS PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY, AND LATE FELLOW OF TRINITY 
 COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE 
 
 NEW YORK 
 THE MACMILLAN COMPANY, 
 1902 
 
Co my Mather. 
 
Εὐλόγως ὁ διδάσκαλος ἡμῶν éreyev' 
 
 ΓΙΝΕΟΘΕ ΤΡΑΠΕΖΙΤΑΙ ΔΟΚΙΜΟΙ. 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 TO 
 
 ΠΕΡ AM REC AN BE DITION. 
 
 Mr. Westcott, the author of the volume which the American 
 publishers have here reprinted, was formerly a Fellow of ‘Trinity 
 College, Cambridge, and is now one of the Masters in Harrow 
 School. He enjoys a high reputation in his own country as a 
 scholar and a theologian, and is held to be a writer of acknowledged 
 authority on the subjects which he has brought within the circle 
 of his studies. His work on the Canon of the New Testament is 
 well known, on this side of the Atlantic as well as abroad, as a 
 performance of great learning and ability. Some of the more 
 elaborate articles in Dr. Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible are from 
 his pen. This Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, his latest 
 work, was published during the last year, and has been received 
 with marked favor in England. Competent judges in this country 
 who have examined the treatise agree in their estimate of its 
 value to the cause of sacred learning. It was found that different 
 persons were so much impressed with its merit and its adaptation 
 to meet a palpable want of the times, that they had been led, 
 without concert with each other, to adopt measures to reissue the 
 volume here, and thus render it more accessible to the American 
 public. 
 
 Perhaps I cannot better accomplish the object of these introdue- 
 tory words, than by alluding briefly to some of the characteristics 
 of the work which deserve attention. It must be an imperfect 
 
 1* 
 
ΥΙ INTRODUCTION. 
 
 sketch; for a careful study of the treatise itself is necessary to 
 give the reader any idea of its character that would be just to 
 the author. 
 
 In all ages of the church the Gospels, which describe the life and 
 record the teachings of the Saviour, have been regarded by believers 
 as the primary source of their faith and hopes, and by skeptics as 
 the ground on which they could most effectually assail the claims 
 of Christianity and of the sacred writings to a divine origin. The 
 peculiar character of the Gospel narratives, as separate and inde- 
 pendent histories, has enabled objectors to compare them with 
 each other, and to point out variations which they allege to be 
 contradictory, and hence subversive of the historical credibility of 
 the Evangelists. Porphyry in the third century had already taken 
 the position, in this respect, which Strauss and his followers occupy 
 at the present day. It must be confessed that the friends of the 
 truth have often set forth views of the Gospels as historical com- 
 positions, have prescribed to the writers of them an order of nar- 
 ration, and made them subject to assumed laws of inspiration, with 
 which it is not easy to reconcile the facts of the case; and oppo- 
 nents have thus been able to show that, according to such standards 
 of judgment, the Gospels do not answer to the character which is 
 claimed for them. No small degree of ignorance respecting what 
 the Evangelists have done and proposed to do, as ascertained from 
 the actual contents and structure of the histories, has been shown 
 on both sides of this controversy. The chief object of the present 
 work is to present to us the results of a critical and comprehensive 
 examination of the Gospels, for the purpose of settling the princi- 
 ples which distinguish them from other writings, the points of agree- 
 ment and disagreement which exist between them, the plan on 
 which they are composed, the peculiar traits of the several writers 
 as individuals, their diverse training, mental habits, differences of 
 style; and thus, by means of the apparent contrariety itself, estab- 
 lishing their character of essential unity, and of harmony both 
 
 with the truth and with one another. Such a vindication of these 
 
INTRODUCTION. Vil 
 
 Scriptures is essential to their authority as truthful records, and 
 preliminary, therefore, to a proper use of them as a source of 
 religious instruction and discipline. Hence it will be seen with 
 what significant propriety this book, which is founded to such an 
 extent on a study of the Gospels, has been entitled an “ Introduc- 
 tion to the Study of the Gospels.” 
 
 But the accomplishment of this more immediate object requires 
 the author to introduce other related topics of great importance 
 in the study of the New Testament. The Saviour performed his 
 earthly work among the Jews; and the system of truth which his 
 teachings perfected passed through the Jewish mind to the rest 
 of the human family. It becomes, therefore, an interesting inquiry 
 what was the process of intellectual and moral education which 
 adapted this remarkable people to be the instructors of mankind ; 
 and, in order to comprehend fully the scheme of revelation, we 
 must view the inspired writers in their connection with the manifold 
 national influences which wrought out the Jewish type of faith and 
 character, as it appeared at length in its completed form in the first 
 promulgators of Christianity. The chapter on the Preparation for 
 the Gospel is designed to supply this information. It enables us to 
 see how God from the first had been arranging all the antecedents 
 of the chosen race, to fit them to be the medium through which 
 his final and highest revelations of truth were to be made to Jews 
 and Gentiles. It is shown that the bondage in Egypt, the Assyrian 
 captivity, the Persian rule, the Maccabean dynasty, the contact 
 with Greeks and Romans, as well as the numerous changes which 
 took place in the inner life of the nation, all served to bring forward 
 “the fulness of the times,” and to discipline the people for the 
 advent of Christ. The development of this train of thought will 
 be found to be original and instructive. The section on the Jewish 
 Idea of the Messiah, as presented in the Bible and other writings, 
 is an admirable summary of the most reliable results of the re- 
 searches of scholars on this subject, so vitally connected with the 
 
 interpretation of the Scriptures. The account of the Apocryphat 
 
VIII INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Gospels is necessarily brief; but furnishes ample means for answer- 
 ing the important questions which arise out of the known existence 
 of such Gospels, for which some in early times claimed a high place 
 as a source of traditionary and supplementary knowledge respect- 
 ing the Saviour’s history. Though the author’s plan does not 
 require a formal exegesis of extended portions of the text, the 
 reader will meet here with the exposition of many single passages, 
 and with forms of translation which show the hand of a master in 
 philology. The distribution of the miracles and parables of our 
 Lord into different classes according to the moral ends or the 
 aspects of religious truth which they were designed to confirm or 
 illustrate, evinces a rare power of analysis, and will be useful to 
 the preacher for homiletic purposes. 
 
 It is an important feature of the work, that, though it is intended 
 specially to refute the form of skepticism represented, for example, 
 by Strauss in Germany, and by Theodore Parker in this country, 
 it is not directly polemic in its character, but treats of facts and 
 discusses principles which render the argument appropriate to 
 all times and places. The author seeks to accomplish his object 
 by a negative process rather than a positive, by instruction and not 
 by controversy. He is not so anxious to overwhelm the error, as 
 to remove the ignorance and correct the misstatements out of which 
 the error has arisen. 
 
 A work so distinguished by its ample learning, its thorough criti- 
 cism, its calm and philosophical spirit, its vigorous and_ polished 
 style, must challenge the respect of every class of readers, whatever 
 may -be their claims as scholars or their particular belief on the 
 subjects here brought under review. At the same time, it 15 grat- 
 ifying to see the evidence everywhere apparent of the author’s 
 convictions as a devout Christian, and a firm believer in the author- 
 ity and inspiration of the Sacred Word. A tone of hearty con- 
 fidence in the Scriptures, as true and the source of truth, pervades 
 the work. Though the discussions are necessarily critical in their 
 
 character, and afford but little room for the direct exhibition of 
 
INTRODUCTION. IX 
 
 personal feeling, they show at every step the unobtrusive influence 
 of an earnest faith, and a desire, as the predominant aim, to con- 
 vince the understanding for the sake of the conscience and the 
 heart. 
 
 The writer’s experience as a teacher of biblical exegesis has 
 Jed him to think, that there is no portion of the New Testament 
 on which it is so difficult to give to the instruction imparted a 
 character of unity and completeness, as the Gospels. The subject 
 has, no doubt, its intrinsic difficulties, which no labor can wholly 
 overcome. The time usually devoted to this part of the course 
 of study is and must be disproportionate to the amount of work to 
 be performed. It is possible to read and compare the different 
 narratives only in some of the more important sections. Very 
 few are able, in such a rapid survey of the ground, to lay up in 
 their minds a connected view of the events of the Saviour’s life. 
 The impression of his character as unfolded in his works is liable 
 to be indistinct and confused. _Numberless questions respecting 
 the plan of the Evangelists and the mode of reconciling them with 
 each other have been thrust on the student, of which he has ob- 
 tained no adequate solution. The use of the “Harmony,” so 
 called, may have thrown light upon many passages; but it will not 
 be strange if it has disclosed almost as many perplexities as it has 
 served to clear up. Every teacher must feel that a chief obstacle 
 in the way of greater success here has been the want of suitable 
 manuals or text-books of instruction, to be placed in the hands of 
 students as an accompaniment of the ordinary lectures and oral 
 teaching. We are confident that this work of Mr. Westcott will 
 do much to supply this deficiency. It will not be amiss to say, that 
 we welcome as another important aid of this nature the recently 
 published “Lectures on the Life of Christ,” by Professor Ellicott. 
 
 Such additions to our means of critical study invest the writings 
 
 1 HisTorRIcCAL LECTURES ON THE LIFE OF OUR LorD Jesus CuristT. With 
 Notes, Critical, Historical, and Explanatory. By C.J. Ellicott, B. Ὁ. Boston: 
 Gouldand Lincoln. 1861. 
 
x INTRODUCTION. 
 
 of the Evangelists with new interest, and place the student of the 
 Bible in a new condition for the useful and the more nearly ex- 
 haustive study of these first sources of Christian truth.’ 
 
 The work has been reprinted in strict conformity with the Eng- 
 lish edition, except a few changes in the mode of designating the 
 divisions, which consistency of plan and distinctness seemed to 
 require. Pains have been taken to secure accuracy in the nu- 
 merous proper names, titles of books, extracts from foreign lan- 
 guages, and similar details, so important in a learned treatise of 
 this character. Mr. Westcott, who has been consulted in reference 
 to the republication here, has forwarded some additions and cor- 
 rections, which have been inserted in accordance with his wishes; 
 and in this respect it may be claimed that this edition has some 
 superiority to the original English edition. 
 
 It is a matter of gratitude that such a book has been written. It 
 is hoped that it will receive the attention from theological teachers, 
 theological students, clergymen, and thoughtful readers of every 
 class, to which its claims entitle it. The writer believes that many 
 will join their prayers with his that God would be pleased to bless 
 this endeavor to “convince gainsayers,” and to lead believers to a 
 larger measure of the “full assurance of faith and understanding” 
 
 in the word and work of the Divine Redeemer. 
 
 1 The object here is not criticism, and this general commendation will not be 
 understood to imply an assent to all the views and principles which the emi- 
 nent writers referred to entertain. 
 
 NEWTON CENTRE, APRIL, 1861. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 Ix the present work I have endeavored to define and fill 
 up the outline which I sketched in “THe ELEMENTS OF THE 
 GospPeEL Harmony,” published in 1851. The kindness with 
 which that Essay was received encouraged me to work on 
 with patience within the limits which I had marked out, in 
 the hope that I might justify in some degree the friendly 
 welcome of my critics. The experience of nine years has 
 made me feel how much there was to remodel and correct 
 and explain in the first rough draught, so that 1 have 
 retained scarcely a paragraph in the form in which it was 
 originally written. 
 
 The title of the book will explain the chief aim which I 
 have had in view. It is intended to be an Introduction to 
 the Study of the Gospels. I have therefore confined myself 
 in many cases to the mere indication of lines of thought and 
 inquiry, from the conviction that truth is felt to be more 
 precious in proportion as it is opened to us by our own work. 
 
 From this cause a combination of references to passages of 
 
 1 A few sentences have been dropped here from the Prefaces in the English 
 
 edition, inasmuch as they relate chiefly to local or personal explanations. 
 
XII PREFACE. 
 
 Scripture often stands for the argument which it suggests, and _ 
 claims are made upon the reader’s attention which would be 
 unreasonable if he were not regarded as a fellow-student with 
 the writer. For the same reason I have carefully avoided the 
 multiplication of references, confining myself to the acknowl- 
 edgment of personal debts or to the indication of sources of 
 further information. 
 
 | My chief object has been to show that there is a true mean 
 between the idea of a formal harmonization of the Gospels 
 and the abandonment of their absolute truth. It was cer- 
 tainly an error of the earlier Harmonists that they endeavored 
 to fit together the mere facts of the Gospels by mechanical 
 ingenuity ; but it is surely no less an error, in modern critics, 
 that they hold the perfect truthfulness of Scripture as a 
 matter of secondary moment. The more carefully we study 
 the details of the Bible, the more fully shall we realize their 
 importance ; and daily experience can furnish parallels to 
 the most intricate conjectures of commentators, who were 
 wrong only so far as they attempted to determine the exact 
 solution of a difficulty, when they should have been contented 
 to wait in patience for a fuller knowledge. 
 
 Again: it must have occurred to every student of the Gos- 
 pels that it cannot be sufficient to consider them separately. 
 We must notice their mutual relations and constructive force. 
 We must collect all their teaching into a great spiritual whole, 
 and not rest satisfied with forming out of them an accurate, 
 or even a plausible history. The general schemes which I 
 have attempted to give of the miracles and parables will 
 probably be so far satisfactory as to direct some attention to 
 the wonderful harmonies which yet lie beneath the simplicity 
 
 . of Scripture. 
 
PREFACE. XITI 
 
 Once again: it seems to be a general opinion that the Bible 
 
 and the Church — Scripture and Tradition — are antithetical 
 in some other way than as uniting to form the foundation of 
 Christianity. I trust that the history of Inspiration which 
 I have appended to this Essay may serve, in some measure, 
 to remove an error which endangers the very existence of 
 all Christian Communions. 
 
 The quotations which occur from time to time, I need 
 hardly say, are derived from the original sources; and I 
 trust that I have carefully acknowledged my obligations to 
 others. In the history of Inspiration I could have wished 
 to have found more trustworthy guides. Rosenmiiller and 
 Sonntag are partial and inexact, and Hagenbach is neces- 
 sarily meagre. Every one, however, who has paid any atten- 
 tion to Patristic literature, will heartily acknowledge the deep 
 debt of gratitude which he owes to the Benedictines of St. 
 Maur. 
 
 In a subject which involves so vast a literature much must 
 have been overlooked; but I have made it a point at least to 
 study the researches of the great writers, and consciously to 
 neglect none. My obligations to the leaders of the extreme 
 German schools are very considerable, though I can rarely 
 accept any of their conclusions. But criticism even without 
 reverence may lay open mysteries for devout study. 
 
 On one question alone I have endeavored to preserve a 
 complete independence. With one exception I have carefully 
 abstained from reading anything which has been written on 
 the subject of Inspiration since my first Essay was published. 
 It seemed to me that it might be a more useful task to offer 
 the simple result of personal thought and conviction than to 
 attempt within narrow limits to discuss a subject which is 
 
 2 
 
LY. PREPACE,. 
 
 really infinite. At times independence is not dearly pur- 
 chased by isolation; and one who speaks directly from his 
 own heart on the highest truths, may suggest, even by the 
 most imperfect utterance, something fresh or serviceable. 
 Above all things, in this and other points of controversy, we 
 cannot remind ourselves too often that arguments are strong 
 only as they are true, and that truth is itself the fullest con- 
 futation of error. 
 
 How impossible it is to avoid errors in travelling over so 
 wide a field, those will best know who have labored in it; 
 and those who detect most easily the errors, from which I 
 cannot hope to be free, will, I believe, be most ready to par- 
 don them. but besides the fear of errors in detail, there is 
 another consideration which must be deeply felt by every one 
 who writes on Holy Scripture. The infinite greatness of the 
 subject imparts an influence for good or for evil to all that 
 bears upon it. The “winged word” leaves its trace, though 
 the first effect may be, in the old Hebrew image, transient as 
 the shadow of a flying bird. Yet I would humbly pray that 
 by His blessing, who is perfect Wisdom and perfect Light, 
 what has been written with candor and reverence may con- 
 tribute, however little, to further the cause of Truth and 
 Haith, the twin messengers of earth and heaven. In His 
 HAND ARE BOTH WE AND OUR WORDS. 
 
 BF. W: 
 
 Harrow, Lent, 1860. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The connection of Philosophy and Religion in regard to the progressive 
 development and the essential need of revelation; and the special 
 objections brought against it, : 
 
 The general effects of the course of Modern Philosophy on the popular 
 views of Christianity, and Holy Scripture specially, as regards, 
 
 I. Its InsprraTion. 11, Its ComPLrETENEsS. III. Its INTERPRETATION, 
 
 I. INSPIRATION. 
 
 The contrast of the Calvinistic and Modern views — General objec- 
 tions to both— The possibility of a mean, 
 
 1. THE GENERAL IDEA OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 Compared with Revelation — Believed in universally — In- 
 
 volves no special difficulties incapable of analysis, 
 
 2. THE FORM OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 Pagan — Biblical — Various, yet always twofold, 
 
 The personality of the teacher preserved — This is an essen- 
 tial part of the conception, the expression, the record, 
 
 Thus the inspiration of Scripture is plenary, and yet progres- 
 
 sive, 
 
 8. THE RELATION OF INSPIRED WRITINGS TO CHRISTIAN LIFE, 
 
 PAGE 
 
 27—29 
 
 80 
 
 31—33 
 
 34—36 
 
 36—38 
 
 39, 40 
 
 4] 
 
 42, 43 
 
XVI CONDE N's. 
 
 PAGE 
 4. THE PROOFS OF THE INSPIRATION OF WRITINGS, 
 (a) External. 
 i. Supernatural commission of Apostles. 
 ii. Analogy of Apostolic use of Old Testament. 
 iii. Testimony of the Church, ᾿ Ξ Ξ : - . 48, 44 
 (δ) Internal. 
 . How far a proof is possible, ; : : - 2 . 44, 45 
 6. g., Gospels. 
 i. Negative Character — Fragmentary: Unchronolog- 
 ical: Simple, . : : :- : : 1 4 . 46, 47 
 ii. Subject, 5 : : 5 Ξ A 3 : : 48 
 iii. Social teaching — Miracles: Parables: Prophecies, . 49—53 
 IL COMPLETENESS. 
 DIFFICULTIES — Analogous to those in Individual: Society: Na- 
 ture — Their solution to be found in the idea of Providence — 
 History and Criticism suggest the idea of completeness, or at 
 least a tendency towardsit, . : 5 : 5 5 . 53—59 
 11. INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE TWOFOLD: 
 1. LITERAL. 
 Strictly grammatical: importance of this in New Testament 
 — Objections met, . : - : - - : - . 59—63 
 2. SPIRITUAL. 
 Flows from literal: sanctioned by universal testimony. 
 The spiritual sense the primary sense, a : : : 65 
 Interpretation realized in the visible Church, Sena NS 65 
 THE PROVINCE OF CRITICISM, . ; . 5 « 65, 66 
 
 GENERAL PLAN, . : ἃ ᾿ : ‘ : : . - 66, 67 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAP TE B 1: 
 
 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 The true idea of History —The coming of Christ the centre of human 
 history, and the record of the Gospel impressed with results of a 
 world-wide training, the outlines of which are 
 
 J. PARTLY PRESERVED IN THE OLD TESTAMENT, and 
 
 II. PARTLY TO BE SOUGHT IN THE POST-BIBLICAL HISTORY OF THE 
 JEWS, which is pregnant with important issues, ‘both from outward 
 vicissitudes and inward revolutions, during the (1) Persian and (2) 
 Grecian periods; and here especially the foundations of Christian 
 
 thought and writing were laid silently and slowly, 
 
 1. THE PERSIAN PERIOD; as to 
 
 ‘(a) National hopes. 
 The loss of independence gave to the Jews a truer 
 spiritual union, and higher aspirations, 
 (Ὁ) Spiritual position. 
 
 As a consequence the prophetic work ceased, and the 
 Scriptures were collected — Meanwhile religion as- 
 sumed a more spiritual character, and the view of 
 
 the spiritual world was widened, 
 
 (c) Social organization. 
 
 The hierarchical element prevailed from the growing 
 regard to the Law and the Synagogue-service, . 
 
 The dangers of the period —Its character impressed on the 
 literature and traditions of the time, 
 
 2. THE GRECIAN PERIOD. 
 
 The Dispersion, military and commercial, reconciled with 
 
 unity by the Syrian persecution, . 
 
 "ὦ 
 
 XVII 
 
 PAGE 
 
 74, 75 
 
 80—82 
 
 82—86 
 
XVIII CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 The internal history of the Jews. 
 (a) In Palestine ; during 
 i. The Grecian supremacy. 
 Rise of speculation — Sadducees; Pharisees; Es- 
 senes, . 3 : : : : ; : . 86—90 
 The prevalent Legalism to be traced in EKcclesias- 
 ticus and the traditional sayings of the doctors, 91, 92 
 ii. The Hasmonzan supremacy. 
 , Impulse given to thought and writing (Baruch). 
 Revelation : 
 The Book of Henoch —IV. Esdras, : “ΣΟ: 
 
 Didactic narrative : 
 Tobit— Judith, . : ; : : : . 94, 95 
 History: I. Maccabees, . : - ἥ . ; 95 
 
 (b) In Egypt. 
 i. The LXX., 5 : - : ξ ‘ : 5 Shey 
 
 ii. The growth of Hellenism. 
 Aristobulus — Jewish Sibyl — Philo—The Thera- 
 peute —Wisdom, . : 3 : : c . 98--101 
 
 General characteristics of the period; positive and nega- 
 
 tive, - 5 : : - : are - - . 101—107 
 
 ΝΌΤΕ. — Synopsis of Early Jewish Literature, 5 : - Ἴ - 108, 109 
 
 CHAP TER. AT. 
 
 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF THE MESSIAH. 
 
 In the patriarchal age—In the time of Moses; the Kingdom; 
 the Captivity — The general forms which it assumed, » 110--112 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 The Apocryphal books contain no mention of Messiah, but anticipate 
 a national restoration, 
 
 I. THE MESSIANIC DOCTRINE AS FURTHER DEVELOPED. 
 
 1. In THE APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE. 
 (a) The Sibylline writings (Egypt), : . . ‘ 
 (δ) The Book of Henoch (Palestine), 
 
 (c) The fourth Book of Esdras (Egypt), 
 
 (d) The Book of Jubilees (Palestine), 
 
 2. IN THE EXEGETIC LITERATURE. 
 
 (a) The LXX. (Egypt), 
 
 (6) The Targums (Palestine) — Onkelos; Jonathan — The 
 later Targums on the Pentateuch; Hagiographa— 
 The Psalms of Solomon, 
 
 II. THE MESSIANIC DOCTRINE AS DESCRIBED IN HIS- 
 TORIC RECORDS OF THE FIRST CENTURY. 
 
 1. THE NEW TESTAMENT, 
 
 2. CONTEMPORARY WRITERS. 
 (a) Philo, 
 (b) Josephus, 
 
 (c) Classical writers, 
 
 III. THE LATER MESSIANIC DOCTRINE OF THE JEWS. 
 
 1. THE ΜΙΒΗΝΑ, 
 2. THE GEMARA, 
 3. LATER JEWISH Books, 
 
 4. MysTicaL Books, : : ; ° 
 
 XIX 
 
 PAGE 
 
 112—114 
 
 114—117 
 117—126 
 126—132 
 
 132—134 
 
 134 
 
 135—140 
 
 140—147 
 
 148, 149 
 150, 151 
 
 151, 152 
 
 152 
 158—155 
 155, 156 
 
 156—161 
 
XX CONT EN TS. 
 
 PAGE 
 1V. THE DOCTRINE OF THE WORD. 
 1. In PALESTINE: the Targums, . Ρ - 4 2 ς = 10. ἸῸΣ 
 2. In Eaypr: Philo, : . : ( . - Ξ ὸ . 162—166 
 General result, . Ξ Ξ : : > Ξ - - : . 166—168 
 
 Norte I.— Messianic prophecies in the New Testament compared with 
 the corresponding interpretations of Jewish commentators, 168—171 
 
 Nore II.— The Christology of the Samaritans, . A : : . 111-118 
 
 CHA P THR we P:: 
 
 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 The first Christian teachers entertained no design of handing down a 
 written record of the Gospel—Such a design would have been 
 wholly foreign to their national feeling, for the ‘‘ literature” of Pal- 
 estine was essentially traditionary, and the social position of the 
 Apostles offered no advantages for the work —On the other hand, 
 an oral Gospel was the natural result of their labors, : : . 1i4—177 
 
 I. THE ORAL GOSPEL. 
 
 1. PREACHING was itself a necessary preliminary to the historic 
 Gospel, and the means by which it was formed, . : . 11τ|---119 
 
 In this work all the Apostles joined; and it was regarded as 
 the characteristic of the Christian dispensation and of the 
 
 Apostolic mission, . ‘ : ᾿ Ῥ : : : : 179 
 
 Thus ‘“‘ the Gospel” was the substance, and not the record, of 
 the life of Christ—The Old Testament was the written 
 word, . 5 : i ‘ : ; : νόμον : : 181 
 
CONTENTS. XXI 
 
 PAGE 
 This feeling survived even to the close of the Second Cen- 
 
 tury, ἧ- . Ἶ = . . : . - - : Ξ 181 
 
 2. THE ORAL GOSPEL OF THE APOSTLES WAS Historic. This 
 appears from 
 
 (a) The description given of the Apostolic work, 5 ᾿ 182 
 (Ὁ) The account of the Apostolic preaching, : : . 183, 184 
 (c) The contents of the Apostolic letters - : : . 185—191 
 
 II. THE WRITTEN GOSPELS. 
 
 1. DISTINCTLY CONNECTED WITH THE APOSTOLIC PREACHING. 
 
 (a) St. Mark, . 5 . . : . : : 5 . 191-198 
 (Ὁ) St. Matthew, Oe See ees & ΤῊ 7. Ὁ: ere it Ie 
 (c) St. Luke, Σ Ξ ° : A . = . . ᾿ 195 
 
 The evidence of St. Luke’s Preface, . ᾿ A . 196—198 
 
 2. THe INTERNAL CHARACTER OF THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS 
 FAVORS THE BELIEF THAT THEY AROSE FROM A COMMON 
 ORAL SOURCE. 
 
 (a) The nature of the problem which they present, ᾿ 198 
 
 i. Their concordances threefold. 
 a. In general plan. ὃ. In incident. ὁ. In Jan- 
 guage, re watt woe oo ON: See 
 
 ii. Their corresponding differences, ‘ Ξ . ° 205 
 
 (b) The solutions proposed, 
 i. Mutual dependence, . . . . 5 ° : 206 
 
 ii. Common sources. 
 a. Written. ὃ. Oral and written. c. Oral, . 207—212 
 In relation to the form and substance of the 
 Gospels: to their specific characters; to 
 their language, : . : ἐ ὶ . 212—215 
 2 
 
 Tradition not necessarily a source of myths, 215, 
 
XXIT CONT ENTS., 
 
 CHAPTER ITY. 
 
 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 PAGE 
 Times of calm belief unfavorable to the study of the Bible, . 217 
 The characteristics of the Gospels brought out by modern controversy, 217 
 I. THE INDIVIDUAL CHARACTER OF THE GOSPELS implied 
 in the idea of inspired history ; and even necessary in their first 
 form, from 
 1. THE NATURE OF THE SUBJECT. Divine: Human, 218—222 
 2. THE ELEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE APOSTOLIC TEACHING 
 St. James, St. Paul, St. Peter, 222—225 
 3. THE FORMS OF THOUGHT CURRENT IN THE APOSTOLIC AGE 
 Jew; Past— Roman; Present — Hellenist; Future — Alex- 
 andrine; Eternal relations —By which it was adapted 
 to the wants of later times, - - 3 “Ὁ 5 ἢ τ ἢ) 
 II. THE EVANGELISTS were fitted to preserve these original types 
 of Christian faith, 
 1. THouGH not Conspicuous IN HISTORY OR TRADITION, 229, 280 
 St. Matthew — St. Mark (St. Peter) — St. Luke (St. Paul) — 
 St. John, : ; : ‘ 230—243 
 The general result of the position of the Evangelists, . . 243 
 
 2. THE DISTINCTNESS OF THE GOSPELS ATTESTED BY 
 
 (a) The practice of separate sects. 
 Ebionites (St. Matthew) —[Docete] (St. Mark) — 
 Marcionites (St. Luke) — Valentinians (St. John,) 244—~—250 
 
CeNTIENTS. XXIIT 
 
 PAGE 
 
 (δ) The judgment of the Church. 
 
 The Evangelic symbols. Augustine, . 3 ; . 250—252 
 The consequences of the view, : : μον; : . 252, 253 
 CAPT EBV. 
 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 The contrast between St. John and the Synoptists, 254 
 CHARACTERISTICS OF ST. JOHN. 
 I. THE GOSPEL IN ITSELF, : Ξ - : - : . 255 
 1. Irs SPECIAL HisTory, 255 
 (a) The life of St. John. 
 Later legends — His typical character, : : . 267, 258 
 (L) The authenticity of the Gospel, 258 
 Its late date— The testimony of the Apostolic Fa- 
 thers; of the Fathers of the second century; of 
 heretical writers — The skepticism of the Alogi, 259—263 
 2. Irs INTERNAL CHARACTER, 264 
 (a) Language. 
 i. Words. 
 ii. Composition. 
 Φ a, General characteristics: Directness; Circumstan- 
 tiality; Repetition; Individuality of narra- 
 tive; Personality of action, ‘ . 268—271 
 
 b. Combination of sentences: Particles; Key- 
 
 words; Parallelism, . : εν . 272-210 
 
XXIV CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 (Ὁ) Plan. 
 An Epic. 7 
 The object of the Gospel. 
 Its great divisions: 
 i. The Manifestation of Christ. 
 ii. The issue of the Manifestation, .  . : . 275—281 
 
 (c) Substance, . Ἢ 4 ἢ 5 δ ὃ ξ Σ . 281-288 
 
 Wl. THE RELATION OF ST. JOHN TO THE SYNOPTISTS, . 284 
 1. Pornts oF DIFFERENCE, . : = ὦ Ξ 5 ae οὐ τῷ 285 
 
 (a) As to locality and teaching, . - : ° : . 286—291 
 
 (6) As to our Lord’s Person, - A 5 τ oe 4 5 291 
 
 2. POINTS OF COINCIDENCE, . ὃ : : : . - Ξ 291 
 
 (a) In fact, 5 : - - 4 : - - - . 292—294 
 
 (δ) In teaching, : ; ; - ; 5 : : - 294—296 
 
 (c) In character. 
 The Lord. St. Peter. St. John, PE ὃ β . 296—3804 
 
 The Relation of St. John’s Gospel to a new world; Christian doc- 
 
 trine; Human Thought, mere ἥν: 3 »  .  « 804—808 
 
 CHA PTE =v: 
 
 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL OF THE SYNOPTIC 
 EVANGELISTS. 
 
 The differences of the Synoptists as to 
 
 ΤῊΝ Av ey et ees tes tan nae eg 810 
 Il. THe Baptism, AnD III. ΤΈΜΡΤΑΤΙΟΝ, meee. ihe .  »« 814—818 
 
 LY, Gan TRANSTIGUEA TION) ((-0) "ut oe ee ee ee oe 
 
CONTENTS. XXV 
 
 PAGE 
 
 V. THE Passion, . Β : ὃ Ἵ “ : - ; . 821—326 
 
 VI. THE RESURRECTION, ἢ ; : - 3 ‘ : . 827—333 
 Conclusions from these characteristic differences, . : . . . 899-935 
 Norte. — On the Day of the Crucifixion, . 5 Ξ 5 : : . 98530--ῶ42 
 
 CHAP Tt he VEE 
 
 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT OF THE 
 SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 
 
 Few traces of a chronological arrangement in the Gospels, . 5 - 848—347 
 
 I. THE GOSPEL ΟΕ St. MATTHEW in its internal development, 347—360 
 
 II. THE GOSPEL oF ST. Mark, - : - 861—370 
 1Π. THE GOSPEL oF ST. LUKE, ‘ : : Ἶ - . . 370—383 
 General Summary, ΩΣ Ξ ἈΠ ΟΥΤΩΣ eae ele le. me, O88, GOD 
 
 CHAPTER VERE. 
 
 THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 Difficulties arise from errors as to the character, the purpose, the his- 
 
 torical authority of the Gospels, and from antecedent prejudices, . 386—3891 
 They are useful intellectually, morally, and in connection with the 
 whole scheme of Nature, ee NE hs eg se + SOG 
 
 3 
 
XXVI CONS EN DS 
 
 APPENDICES. 
 
 APPENDIX A. ON THE QUOTATIONS IN THE GOSPELS, 
 
 APPENDIX B. ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION, 
 
 § 1. The Sub-Apostolic Fathers, 4083—407. § 2. The Apologists, 
 407—411. § 3. The Church of Asia Minor, 412—416. § 4. 
 The Roman Church, 416—419. § 5. The North African 
 Church, 419—424. § 6. The Church of Alexandria, 424—440. 
 § 7. The Clementines, 440—445. 
 
 APPENDIX C. ON THE APOCRYPHAL TRADITIONS OF THE LORD'S 
 
 WorRDS AND WORKS, 
 
 APPENDIX D. ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS, 
 
 The Gospel according to the Hebrews, 454—457 The Gospel of 
 the Ebionites, 457—460. The Gospel of the Clementines, 460— 
 462. The Gospel of Marcion, 462—466. 
 
 APPENDIX E. A CLASSIFICATION OF THE MIRACLES OF THE GOS- 
 
 PELS, 
 
 APPENDIX F. A CLASSIFICATION OF THE PARABLES OF THE GOS- 
 
 PELS, 
 
 ADDITIONAL NOTES, (AMERICAN EDITION), . 3 4 
 
 ΤΉΝ Briagt PR? ae 
 
 PAGE 
 
 399—402 
 
 402—445 
 
 445—453 
 
 454—466 
 
 466—469 
 
 469—471 
 
 478—476 
 
fet khODUCTION 
 
 TO THE 
 
 STUDY OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 ᾿ INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER. 
 
 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND INTERPRETATION OF 
 SCRIPTURE. 
 
 Ἔοικεν 6 τὴν Ἶριν Θαύμαντος ἔκγονον φήσας οὐ κακῶς γενεαλογεῖν. 
 ς PLATO. 
 
 Every one who has paid any attention to the history 
 of the Church must have felt the want of a 
 clear and comprehensive view of the mutual ,; nepal aa 
 relations and influences of speculation and Mor παρ 
 religion, as they have been gradually un- Marie to cnuac 
 folded by reason and revelation. In The- 
 ology and Philosophy we insensibly leave the positions 
 of our Fathers, and rarely examine the origin and primary 
 import of the doctrines which we have inherited or ab- 
 jured. Words and formulas survive as silent witnesses or 
 accusers, but we do not interrogate or heed them. Still 
 it would be a noble and worthy task to determine the 
 meeting-points and common advances of faith and science, 
 and to discover how far each has been modified by the 
 other, either in combination or in conflict. 
 We might then follow the progress of man’s 
 material and spiritual life, from the begin- 
 ning to the end of the Bible, from the mysteries of the 
 Creation and the Fall to the dark foreshadowing of the 
 final consummation of the world in the last chapters of 
 
 the progressive de- 
 velopment, 
 
28 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 the Apocalypse. We might be able to mark the rise and 
 growth of error, as well as its full and fatal development, 
 and to learn under what guise of truth it gained accept- 
 ance among men. We might see how far the expression 
 of the doctrine of the Church was re-shaped to meet the 
 requirements of successive ages, and how far the language 
 of its formularies was suggested by the opinions of the 
 times in which they were composed. 
 
 Nor is this all: we might find in philosophy not only 
 the handmaid, but also the herald of revelation. We 
 
 might trace in the writings of the heathen 
 the exential need, World the tendency of man’s spontaneous 
 
 impulses, and the limits of his innate pow- 
 ers. We might compare the natural view of our destiny 
 in Plato or Aristotle with its fulfilment in the Gospel. 
 We might be taught by them to value the privileges of a 
 divine law, and a definite covenant, when they tell us, in 
 the language of doubt and dependence, that there is some- 
 thing infinitely greater for which our mind still longs at 
 the moment of its noblest triumphs; that the wants which 
 modern skepticism would deny are-real and enduring; 
 that the doctrines which Natural Religion has assumed 
 are not the proper heritage of thought; that the crowning 
 mystery of the Incarnation is an idea as true to reason as 
 it is welcome to the heart. 
 
 Yet more, by such a view of the scheme of revelation 
 we should be able to fix the source of the special objec- 
 Pisa se o tions which are brought against it, and to 
 pects of divine Cetermine their proper relation to the whole. 
 ΠΝ Men are always inclined to exaggerate the 
 importance of a conflict in which they .are themselves 
 engaged, and to judge of everything as it affects their own 
 position. A general change in the religious character of 
 an age often: leads to the disregard of some element, or 
 the abandonment of some outwork, which is really essen- 
 tial to the perfection and integrity of revealed religion.) 
 
 1 Cf. an eloquent article by Quinet in the Revue des deux Mondes, 1888. 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 29 
 
 And if it be the first duty of an impartial student to esti- 
 mate the exact force of his personal bias, that he may 
 eliminate its influence before he determines a result, it is 
 no less important for those who would judge rightly of 
 the absolute value of current opinions to consider how 
 much they owe to the characteristics of the present age, 
 before they are assigned to their proper place as fresh 
 steps in the progressive development of human wisdom. 
 During the last two centuries, to speak generally, there 
 has been a steady advance from one extreme in philoso- 
 phy to the other, — from naturalism to tran- apoE sc 
 scendentalism, —- and the successive assaults — ofthe course of mo- 
 on Christianity have exhibited a correspond- “°° 
 ing change. Religion and metaphysics are now contem- 
 plated from within, and not from without: the world has 
 been absorbed in man. In spite of partial reiictions, the 
 idea of the society, whether in the State or in the Church, 
 has yielded to that of the individual; and whatever may 
 be thought of the true precedence and relation of the 
 two, it is evident that theology cannot have been unat- 
 fected by the new point of sight from which it is contem- 
 plated. Those who press the claims of the individual to 
 the utmost, find in Christianity itself a sys- hay pinta. 
 tem of necessary truth, independent of any φ' Ciristianity, ana 
 Gospel histories, and unsupported by any Betas 
 true redemption. They abandon the “letter” to secure the 
 “spirit,” and in exchange for the mysteries of our faith they 
 offer us a law without types, a theocracy without prophe- 
 cies, a Gospel without miracles, a cluster of definite wants 
 with no reality to supply them; for the mythic and critical 
 theories, as if in bitter irony, concede every craving which 
 the Gospel satisfies, and only account for the wide spread 
 of orthodox error by the intensity of man’s need. Chiris- 
 tian apologists have exhibited the influence of the same 
 change. They have been naturally led to connect the 
 teaching of revelation with the instincts of man, and to 
 show that even the mysteries of faith have some analogy 
 3% 
 
30 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 with natural feeling or action. Meanwhile the power of 
 Christianity, as embodied in a permanent society, — the 
 depository and witness of the truth,—has grown less, 
 and so it is now a common thing to depreciate the out- 
 ward evidences of religion, which are not, however, essen- 
 tially the less important because they appear inconclusive 
 to some minds. Upon the widest view, history perhaps 
 offers the fullest and most philosophical proof of the claims 
 of Christianity; but however this may be, historical evi- 
 dence necessarily demands attention even where it cannot 
 convince; and as aforetime many who did not believe for 
 Jesus’ words, believed for His very works’ sake, so still the 
 external array of Christian evidences may kindle the true 
 inner faith, and in turn reflect its glory. 
 
 The doctrine of Holy Scripture is specially liable to the 
 et oh ee ten influence of this transition from an objective 
 Holy Scripture as to a subjective philosophy. The Written 
 affecting its : Ξ . 
 
 Word, by its manifold relations to the action 
 of Providence, and the growth of Christian society, no less 
 than by its combination of Divine and human elements, 
 offers points of contact with every system, and furnishes 
 infinite materials for speculation. A variety of questions 
 arise at the outset of all intelligent study of the Bible which 
 involve the solution of some of the most difficult prob- 
 lems of mental or critical science, and which consequently 
 receive answers in accordance with the existing forms of 
 thought. In what sense, it may be asked, is a writing of 
 By eee HN man God’s message? How can we be rea- 
 aE Cenrletestie’s sonably assured that the record is exact and 
 
 complete? In what way are the ordinary 
 rules of criticism affected by the subject matter to which 
 they are applied? It is evidently impossible to discuss 
 such questions at present in detail: probably they do not 
 admit of any abstract discussion; but it may be allowable 
 to suggest some general principles affecting the Inspira- 
 tion, the Completeness, and the Interpretation of Holy 
 Seripture which may serve to open an approach to the 
 study of it. 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE, 31 
 
 When the first act of the Reformation was closed, and 
 the great men had passed away whose pres- 
 ence seemed to supply the strength which  %. te Mspiration 
 
 yf Scripture. 
 
 was found before in the recognition of the 
 one living Body of Christ, their followers invested the 
 Bible as a whole with all the attributes of 
 mechanical infallibility which the Romanists evans Caieiase 
 had claimed for the Church. Pressed by the “““ 
 necessities of their position, the disciples of Calvin were 
 contented to maintain the direct and supernatural action 
 of a guiding power on the very words of the inspired 
 writer, without any regard to his personal or national posi- 
 tion. Every part of Scripture was held to be not only 
 pregnant with instruction, but with instruction of the same 
 kind, and in the same sense. Nor could it be otherwise, 
 while men considered the Divine agency of Inspiration as 
 acting externally, and not internally, as acting on man, 
 and not through man. The idea of a vital energy was 
 thus lost in that of a passive state, and growth was reduced 
 to existence; for what is highest in a purely spiritual 
 world becomes lowest in the complex and limited life of 
 man. The rude but sincere violence of fanaticism, and the 
 rapid advance of physical science, did much to shake this 
 arbitrary theory; and those who were captivated by the 
 first vigorous achievements of historical criticism and men- 
 tal analysis hastened to the other extreme. The Bible, 
 they said, is merely the book of the legends 
 of the Hebrews, which will yield to the skil- re δ οι 
 fal inquirer their residuum of truth, like those 
 of the Greeks and Romans. Inspiration is but another 
 name for that poetic faculty which embodies whatever is 
 of typical and permanent import in things Around, and 
 invests with a lasting form the transitory growths of time. 
 
 It is easy to state the fatal objections sil ae 
 which a candid reader of Scripture must feel tions 1 me otjec- 
 to both these views; and ina general sense mit 
 it is not less easy to show how the partial forms of truth, 
 
32 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 in virtue of which they gained acceptance, may be harmo- 
 niously combined. The purely organic theory of Inspira- 
 tion rests on no Scriptural authority, and, if we except a 
 few ambiguous metaphors, is supported by no historical 
 testimony. It is at variance with the whole form and 
 fashion of the Bible, and is destructive of all that is holiest 
 in man and highest in religion, which seeks the coérdinate 
 elevation of all our faculties, and not the destruction of 
 any one of them. If we look exclusively at the objective 
 side of inspiration, the prophet becomes a mere soulless 
 machine, mechanically answering the force which moves 
 it, the pen and not the penman of the Holy Spirit. He 
 ceases to be a man while he is affected by the frenzy 
 (μανία) of the heathen seers,’ and in a momentary influence 
 gives up his whole spiritual growth. But, on 
 the other hand, if we regard inspiration only 
 subjectively, we lose all sense of a fresh and 
 living connection of the prophet with God. 
 indeed a man, but he is nothing more. He appears only 
 to develop naturally a germ of truth which lies within 
 him, and to draw no new supplies of grace and wisdom 
 from without. There is no reiinion of the divine and 
 human in his soul on which a Church may rest its faith. 
 He may deduce, interpret, combine truth, but in the ab- 
 sence of a creative power he is deficient in that which an 
 instinct of our being declares to be the essential attribute 
 
 subjective theories 
 of Inspiration. 
 
 He remains 
 
 1 Cf. Plat. Phedr. 248 p. It will be 
 seen from his position in the scale that 
 
 of ‘‘eestasy ’ in Scriptural records, cf. 
 Del Zyl. 
 
 the prophet is regarded as one in 
 whom all human powers are neutral- 
 ized. Tim. 71 τ᾿, οὐδεὶς ἔννους ἐφάπ- 
 τεται μαντικῆς ἐνϑΊιέου καὶ ἀληϑοῦς, 
 ἀλλ᾽ ἢ κα ὕπνον... ἢ διὰ νόσον ἢ 
 διά τινα ἐνδουσιασμὸν παραλλάξας. 
 This idea of an “" Ecstasy ” was applied 
 to the Prophets by the Alexandrian 
 Jews, and adopted by the Montanists, 
 but rejected by the Catholic Church. 
 Cf. App. A,§2. As to the occurrence 
 
 Plato’s idea of a possible inspiration 
 is interesting; cf. Phaed. 85 Ὁ; Phedr. 
 244 A; 256 B; and in reference to ora- 
 cles [Ion], 584 ©; ‘lim. 71 p. In the 
 passage which I have taken as a motto 
 (Theeet. 155 Ὁ), he has expressed admi- 
 rably the true relation of wonder to 
 wisdom, faith to philosophy. The anal- 
 ogy is more striking when we call to 
 mind the office of Iris—&pw, εἴρω, 
 *Ipis, the messenger. 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 99 
 
 of the highest teacher... Such a theory removes all that is 
 divine in our faith, and destroys the title-deeds of the 
 Church’s inheritance. It is opposed to the universal tenor 
 of Scripture and tradition, and leaves our wants unsatisfied 
 and our doubts unanswered by God. If it be true, man is 
 after all alone in the world, abandoned to the blind issues 
 of fate or reason or circumstance. His teachers are merely 
 his fellow-men, and their words claim his hearing only so far 
 as they find a response in a heart already influenced by 
 personal and social life. And who then shall answer him 
 that their promises are more than echoes of his own crav- 
 ings; and that the ready acceptance which their doctrine 
 has found is anything but a natural rege a of the wants 
 and wishes of men ? 
 
 Happily, however, we are not confined to the two ex- 
 treme theories: the elements of truth on 
 
 The possibility 
 which they are respectively based are oppo- ον gaining a true 
 site indeed, but not contrary. If we com. ™“"“™entem 
 bine the outward and the inward — God and man — the 
 moving power and the living instrument — we have a 
 great and noble doctrine, to which our inmost nature bears 
 its witness. We have a Bible competent to calm our 
 doubts, and able to speak to our weakness. It then be- 
 comes, not an utterance in strange tongues, but in the 
 words of wisdom and knowledge. It is authoritative, for 
 it is the voice of God; it is intelligible, for it is in the 
 language of men. 
 
 The possibility of such a combination seems to follow 
 directly from a consideration of the nature 
 
 3 : in respect to the 
 
 and form of Inspiration; and the same reflec- teacher and the 
 tions which establish a necessary connection πο 
 between inspired thoughts and inspired words, point out 
 the natural transition from the notion of an inspired 
 
 cr a / 
 1 Ποιητής. Cf. Plat. Conv. 205 ο. ἀπὸ δὲ πάσης τῆς ποιήσεως Ev μόριον 
 7) a ~ at.’ f 
 ἢ ἐκ Tov μὴ ὄντος εἰς τὸ ὃν ἰόντι ἀφορισϑὲν.. .. τῷ TOV ὕλου ὀνόματι 
 ὁτῳοῦν αἰτία πᾶσά ἐστι ποίησις... . προσαγορεύεται. 
 
34 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 teacher to that of an inspired book, and justify the appli- 
 cation of the epithet at once to the impulse and the result, 
 an ambiguity which at first sight creates only confusion 
 and embarrassment. 
 
 Inspiration may be regarded in one aspect as the correl- 
 ative of Revelation. Both operations imply 
 a supernatural extension of the field of man’s 
 spiritual vision, but in different ways. By 
 Inspiration we conceive that his natural powers are quick- 
 ened, so that he contemplates with a divine 
 intuition the truth as it exists still among 
 the ruins of the moral and physical worlds. 
 By Revelation we see, as it were, the dark veil removed 
 from the face of things, so that the true springs and issues 
 of life stand disclosed in their eternal nature. 
 This idea of Revelation which regards power 
 and truth and beauty as veiled, and yet 
 essentially existing beneath the suffering and sin and dis- 
 order which are spread over the world within us and with- 
 out, — over man and nature, — seems to be peculiarly 
 Christian. Probably nothing but the belief in the Incar- 
 nation could give reality and distinctness to the conception 
 of a “restitution of all things;” and St. Paul describes the 
 possibility of a clear vision and transforming reflection of 
 the divine glory as the especial privilege of believers. 
 The change wrought in philosophy by the vital recogni- 
 tion of this idea penetrates to the very foundations of 
 knowledge and hope. The “recollection” of Plato be- 
 comes intuition, and we can now by faith reverse the 
 words of Plotinus, who thanked God that “he was not 
 tied to an immortal body.” ! 
 
 1. The idea of 
 Inspiration. 
 
 The contrast be- 
 tween Inspiration 
 and Revelation. 
 
 The idea of Rev- 
 elation peculiarly 
 Christian. 
 
 1 The usage of the word ἀποκάλυψις 
 and ἀποκαλύπτειν in the New Testa- 
 ment is full of interest, as illustrating 
 the Apostolic view of the objects of 
 Revelation. The passages in which the 
 words occur are the following: 
 
 ᾿Αποκάλυψις. i. The substantive oc- 
 
 curs only once in the Gospels, when 
 Simeon describes our Lord as “a light 
 to dispel the darkness under which the 
 heathen were veiled * (Luke ii. 32, φῶς 
 eis amon. ἐδνῶν). Elsewhere Chris- 
 tianity itself, the very centre of all rev- 
 elation, is described by St. Paul as “8 
 
INTERPRETATION 
 
 But while the idea of Revelation in its 
 
 OF SCRIPTURE. 
 
 fullest sense 
 
 appears to be essentially Christian, every 
 
 religion presupposes the reality of Inspira- 
 tion, of a direct, intelligible communication 
 of the Divine will to chosen messengers. The 
 
 The belief in In- 
 spiration universal ; 
 and the difficulties 
 which it involves 
 common to all spir- 
 ἐμαὶ phenomena, 
 
 belief in such a gift is in fact instinctive, 
 and equally at least with the belief in a Supreme Being 
 
 revelation of a mystery ” (Rom. xvi. 25, 
 amok. μυστ.)ὴ; and so especially the 
 great fact that the Gentiles should share 
 equally with God’s ancient people in 
 the New Covenant was made known 
 “by revelation” (Eph. iii. 8, κατὰ 
 amok.). ‘Through revelation of Jesus 
 Christ”? St. Paul received the Gospel 
 which he preached (Gal. i 12, δ ἀποκ. 
 I. X ). The visions of St. John were 
 “a revelation of Jesus Christ” (Apoc. 
 j. 1). And even in details of action it 
 was ‘‘ by revelation” that St. Paul went 
 up the second time to Jerusalem (Gal. 
 ii. 2, κατ᾽ ἀποκ.). 
 
 ii. Revelation also serves to express 
 that insight into divine truth which 
 God gives to his servants, and which 
 all Christians are encouraged and 
 bound to seek (Eph. i. 17, δῴη ὑμῖν 
 πνεῦμα σοφίας Kal ἀποκαλύψεως ἐν 
 ἐπιγνώσει αὐτοῦ). Hence “- Revela- 
 tions’’— peculiar manifestations of this 
 general gift—are disclosed in the 
 Christian assemblies (1 Cor. xiv. 6, 26); 
 and St. Paul dwells particularly on the 
 number of them which were granted 
 to him (2 Cor. xii. 1, 7). 
 
 iii. But as the eye of the Christian is 
 naturally turned to the coming con- 
 summation of the ages, ‘‘ the revelation 
 of Jesus Christ’ in an especial sense is 
 that second coming of the Lord, when 
 all shall know Him (1 Pet. i. 7, 18, 
 &zox. I. X. 2 Thess.i.7. 1 Cor. i- 7, 
 ἡ @rox. τοῦ Kup.). In this we look 
 forward to ‘the revelation of His 
 g:ory’’ when the robe of sorrow shall 
 at last be thrown aside (1 Pet. iv. 13); 
 and God’s righteous judgment of the 
 world made known (Rom. ii. 5, ἀποκ. 
 δι catoxpicias τοῦ Θεοῦ); and then the 
 
 sons of God shall be revealed in their 
 full majesty, and creation shall rejoice 
 in the sight (Rom. viii. 19, ἀποκ. τῶν 
 υἱῶν τοῦ Θεοῦ.). 
 
 ᾿Αποκαλύπτειν. i. The verb occurs 
 more frequently than the substantive, 
 but exactly in the same varieties of con- 
 nection. By Revelation the prophets 
 in old time gained an understanding 
 of the glad tidings which they pro- 
 claimed (1 Vet. i. 12, οἷς ἀπεκαλ. 
 k.T. A.) By Revelation ‘‘ the faith” 
 was made known (Gal. 111. 23), and its 
 fulness declared ‘in the spirit to the 
 holy apostles and prophets” (Eph. iii. 
 5), in whom God was pleased to reveal 
 His Son (Gal. i. 16, ἄποκ. ἐν éuol). 
 
 ii. Then, again, by Revelation the per- 
 sonal knowledge of the truth is gained 
 (Matt. xi. 25,27. Luke x. 21, 22. Matt. 
 xvi. 17); by Revelation God supplies 
 what is yet defective in us (Phil. iii. 15), 
 by special teaching (1 Cor. xiv. 30), or 
 in general hope (1 Cor. ii. 10). 
 
 iii. And while a continuous Revela 
 tion of God’s righteousness and wrath 
 is still ever being made (Rom. i. 17, 18, 
 ἀποκαλύπτεται), the Christian looks to 
 that final manifestation of His infinite 
 holiness, when the power of evil shall 
 be at last ‘“‘ revealed’ (2 Thess. ii. 3, 6, 
 8) in due time, and also ‘‘the Son of 
 Man” (Luke xvii. 30). before whom he 
 shall perish. Then shall be fulfilled the 
 purpose of Christ’s coming, when thie 
 thoughts of many hearts are unveiled 
 (Luke ii. 35), as they were partially un- 
 veiled during His earthly work: then 
 everything secret shall be revealed 
 (Matt. x. 26. Luke xii. 2); for “the 
 day is revealed” in fire to try men’s 
 works (1 Cor. iii. 18); then shall Ilis 
 
6 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 9 
 
 possesses the testimony of universal acceptance. Even 
 intellectually the idea of Inspiration offers no extraordi- 
 nary difticulties. To enlarge or inform any faculty 1s 
 evidently a secondary operation of the same power by 
 which it was first given and quickened. The intercourse 
 between the Creator and the creature must, 1n common 
 with all spiritual manifestations, remain a mystery; but 
 that it does take place in some form or other is a matter 
 of constant experience. And if we may venture to regard 
 Inspiration merely as a mental phenomenon, it 15 not more 
 remarkable that man’s spirit should be brought into direct 
 connection with the Spirit of God, than that one mind 
 should be able to exercise a sympathetic influence upon 
 another. That man is complex and finite introduces no 
 difficulty which is not present in the ordinary processes of 
 
 thought and life. 
 consideration fixes a limit to the extent of 
 our inguiry; for all abstract analysis of In- 
 spiration is impossible, since the Divine ele- 
 
 It is impossible to 
 contemplate the Di- 
 vine and human 
 apart ; hence we 
 are limited to the 
 examination of 
 
 And, on the contrary, this 
 
 ment is already in combination with the 
 human when we are first able to observe its presence. 
 Our inquiry is thus limited strictly to the character of 
 
 servants enter into the glory which 
 even now is prepared for them (Rom. 
 viii. 18. 1 Pet. v. 1; i. 5, σωτηρίαν 
 ἑτοίμην ἂποκ.). 
 
 To neglect any one of these aspects 
 of Revelation, which sets forth its fun- 
 damental, continuous, and final opera- 
 tion, is to mutilate the completeness of 
 the Divine truth. The ‘great work of 
 Revelation, so to speak, yet remains. 
 
 The words do not occur in St. Mark, 
 St. James, St. Jude, nor in the writings 
 of St. John, except Apoc. i. 1, and 
 John xii. 38 (from LXX.) And con- 
 versely pavepow occurs very frequently 
 in St. John, and also in St. Mark, but 
 does not occur in St. Matt. or St. Luke. 
 On the connection of γνωρίζω, pave- 
 pow, ἀποταλύπτω, cf. Eph. iii. 8--ὅ. 
 Reomexya 2620-1 tie 2) 1 ῬΡον. 
 
 1, 4. The first regards the individual 
 knowledge, the second the outward 
 manifestation, the third the essential 
 permanence, of that which is set forth. 
 
 In the LXX. the metaphor of ἀποκα- 
 λύπτειν is clearly brought out in its 
 personal form in the phrases ἄποκ. τοὺς 
 opdsardpuovs (Num. xxii. 31), and Grok. 
 τὸ οὖς (Ruth iv. 4. ᾿Αποκαλυψις first 
 occurs in Sirac. xi. 27, but Jerome re- 
 marked (Comm. ad Galat. i. 12; Lib. 
 i. p. 887) that the word ‘‘ was used by 
 none of the wise of the world among 
 the Greeks.” It is found in Plutarch. 
 Cf. Plat. Gorg. 460 a, ete. (amora- 
 λύπτω). In like manner the Latin 
 Christians, beginning with Tertullian, 
 seem to have been the first, if not the 
 only writers, who employed revelatio 
 and the cognate words metaphorically. 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. OT 
 
 Inspiration. The real existence of such an influence is 
 proved at once by common belief and personal experi- 
 ence. The nature of its operation § tran- 
 scends the power of our thought; but it Pts ap 
 remains to examine the form which this Di- κα ἀπά 
 vine teaching bears when presented to men. And here 
 a characteristic difference may be observed. In heathen 
 nations the Sibyl or the Pythoness was the type of an in- 
 spired teacher; and Plato consequently places the prophet 
 low in the scale of men, as one in whom all human powers 
 of body and soul were neutralized.'| The dream, the 
 vision, the ecstasy, seemed to be the only means whereby 
 the Deity could come into contact with man, and thus all 
 personal consciousness was destroyed by the supernatural 
 influence. . In the records of the Bible, on 
 the other hand, the teaching of Inspiration 
 appears as one great element in the education of the world, 
 and therefore it has an essential connection with the age 
 and people to whom it is addressed, while its form varies 
 according to the needs of men. 
 
 Like every gift of God, inspiration is bestowed for some 
 special end to which it is exactly propor- 
 tioned. At one time we may picture to ee teak 
 ourselves the Lawgiver recording the letter. “πάν; μέ in any 
 of the Divine Law which he had received 
 directly from God, “inscribed upon tables of stone,” or 
 spoken “face to face.” At another we may watch the 
 sacred Historian, unconsciously it may be and yet freely, 
 seizing on those facts in the history of the past which were 
 the turning-points of a nation’s spiritual progress, gather- 
 ing the details which combine to give the truest picture of 
 each crisis, and grouping all according to the laws of a 
 
 Biblical records. 
 
 marvellous symmetry, which in after-times might symbol- 
 ize their hidden meaning. Or we may see the Prophet 
 gazing intently on the great struggle going on around him, 
 
 1 Cf. p. 82, n..1. 
 1 
 
38 | INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 discerning the spirits of men, and the springs of national 
 life, till the relations of time no longer exist in his vision, 
 till all strife is referred to the final conflict of good and 
 evil, foreshadowed in the great judgments of the world, 
 and all hope is centred in the coming of the Saviour, and 
 in the certainty of His future triumph. Another, perhaps, 
 looks within his own heart, and as a new light is poured 
 over its inmost depths, his devotion finds expression in 
 songs of personal penitence and thanksgiving; in confes- 
 sions of sin and declarations of righteousness, which go 
 far to reconcile the mysterious contradictions of our nature. 
 To another is given the task of building up the Church. 
 By divine instinct he sees in scattered congregations types 
 of the great forms of society in coming ages, and addresses 
 to them not systems of doctrine, but doctrine embodied 
 in deed, which applies to all time, because it expresses 
 eternal truths, and yet specially to each time, because it 
 is connected with the realities of daily life. 
 But however various the forms of inspired teaching may 
 be, in one respect they are all similar. In 
 ton ee "every case the same twofold character is pre- 
 served which arises from the combination 
 of the divine influence with the human utterance. The 
 language of the Lawgiver, the Historian, the Prophet, the 
 Psalmist, the Apostle, is characteristic of the positions 
 which they severally occupied. Even when they speak 
 most emphatically “the words of the Lord,” they speak 
 still as men living among men; and the eternal truths 
 which they declare receive the coloring of the minds 
 through which they pass. Nor can it be said that it is 
 2asy to eliminate the variable quantity in each case; for 
 the distinguishing peculiarities of the several writers are 
 not confined to marked features, but extend also to a mul- 
 titude of subtle differences which are only felt after careful 
 study. Everywhere there are’ traces of a personality, 
 not destroyed, but even quickened by the action of the 
 divine power, — of an individual consciousness, not sus- 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 39 
 
 pended, but employed at every stage of the heavenly 
 commission. 
 
 Inspiration, then, according to its manifestation in Scrip- 
 ture, is Dynamical,’ and not Mechanical, — 
 the human powers of the divine messenger πα δου ιοεο βοᾷ 
 act according to their natural laws even “"“ 
 when these powers are supernaturally strengthened. Man 
 is not converted into a mere machine, even in the hand 
 of God. But it may be asked whether this combination 
 of letter and spirit be perfect or partial; whether the 
 special human form be essential to the right apprehension 
 of the divine idea; whether the shell be absolutely needed 
 to preserve the kernel; or, whether the impress of per- 
 sonal character must be effaced before we can see the 
 godlike image, and the outward covering be removed in 
 order that the inner germ may grow and fructify.® 
 
 It might, perhaps, be a sufficient answer to such inquiries 
 to point out the absolute impossibility of 
 separating the two elements, the external we sunt ret of 
 and the internal, the historical and the doc- “°°”? 
 trinal, the objective and the subjective, however we choose 
 to name them. But the truth of this general statement 
 becomes more clearly apparent if regard be had to the 
 
 1 The cases of spiritual ecstasy men- acters of Balaam and Caiaphas remain 
 tioned in Scripture are obviously ex- unchanged when they utter unwil- 
 ceptional and distinct from prophetic lingly or unconsciously Divine truths. 
 inspiration. The second rapture of Saul 
 is easily intelligible from the circum- 
 stances of the narrative; and on the 
 former occasion it is expressly men- 
 tioned that God gave him another heart 
 before he prophesied (1 Sam. x. 6, 
 9—15). When St. Paul was carried up 
 to Paradise, the words which he heard 
 were not for the instruction of the 
 Church, but wispeakable words, which 
 it is not lawful (ἐξόν) for aman to utter 
 (2 Cor. xii. 4). The outpouring of 
 “tongues” was addressed to God, and 
 not to man (1 Cor. xiv. 2). 8 Cf. Tholuck, Glaubwiird. der Evang. 
 
 On the other hand, the personal char- Gesch 8. 429 ff. 
 
 2The word is open to many objec- 
 tions on cther grounds, and not least 
 from its technical application; but I 
 ean think of no better one which may 
 be conveniently used to describe an 
 influence acting upon living powers, 
 and manifesting itself through them 
 according to their natural laws, as dis- 
 tinguished from that influence which 
 merely uses human organs for its out- 
 ward expression, as, for instance, in 
 the accounts of the Demoniacs. 
 
40 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 conception, the expression, and the communication of 
 thought. The slightest consideration -will show that 
 words are as essential to intellectual processes as they 
 are to mutual intercourse. For man the purely spiritual 
 _ and absolute is but an aspiration or a dream. Thoughts 
 are wedded to words as necessarily as soul to body. 
 Language is a condition of our being, determining the 
 conception as well as the communication of ideas, as 
 in the first record of our race we read that Adam, while 
 still in solitude, gave names to all the creatures which 
 passed before him." Without it the mysteries unveiled 
 before the eyes of the seer would be confused shadows; 
 with it they are made clear lessons for human life. 
 
 But, even if it were possible for the prophet to realize 
 truth otherwise than according to the capac- 
 ity of his finite mind, still something would 
 be wanting. It is not enough that the sacred teacher 
 should gaze upon the eternal truths of religion, like the 
 disembodied spirits in the Platonic Pheedrus,? he must be 
 able to represent them fitly to other men. And when ad- 
 dressed to man, the human element becomes part of the 
 message from heaven; for the divine can be grasped by 
 him only when defined and monlded according to the laws 
 of his own nature. The book is thus rightly 
 said to be inspired no less than the prophet. 
 The book reflects and perpetuates the per- 
 sonal characteristics of the prophet, but it does not create 
 them. Writing introduces no limitation into the repre- 
 sentation of truth which does not already exist in the first 
 conception and expression of it. The isolated writing 
 bears the same relation to the whole work of the prophet 
 as the prophet himself to the world from which he is 
 chosen. The partial and incomplete record preserves the 
 clear outline of such features in his character and mission as 
 were of importance for the guidance of the future Church. 
 
 the expression, and 
 
 the record of the 
 Divine truth. 
 
 1 Cf. Donaldson's New Cratylus, p. 62. 2 Phedr. 247 Ὁ; 249 c. 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 41 
 
 On following out the lines of thought thus lightly 
 sketched, it will appear, I think, that, from es 
 a Christian point of view, the notion of a af Sertpture te ple 
 perfect Dynamical Inspiration is alone sim- τ “ 
 ple, sufficient, and natural. It presupposes that the same 
 providential Power which gave the message selected 
 the messenger; and implies that the traits of individual 
 character, and the peculiarities of manner and _ purpose, 
 which are displayed in the composition and language of 
 the sacred writings, are essential to the perfect exhibition 
 of their meaning. It combines harmoniously the two 
 terms in that relation of the finite to the infinite which 
 is involved in the very idea of revelation. It preserves 
 absolute truthfulness with perfect humanity, so that the 
 nature of man is not neutralized, if we may thus speak, by 
 the divine agency, and the truth of God is not impaired, 
 but exactly expressed in one of its several aspects by the 
 individual mind. Each element performs its perfect work; 
 and in religion, as well as in philosophy, a glorious reality 
 is based upon a true antithesis. The letter becomes as 
 perfect as the spirit; and it may well seem that the image 
 of the Incarnation is reflected in the Christian Scriptures, 
 which, as I believe, exhibit the human and divine in the 
 highest form, and in the most perfect union. 
 
 For when it is said that the Scriptures are everywhere 
 quickened by a principle of spiritual life, it 
 is already implied that they exhibit an out- 
 ward development. The Divine teaching, 
 though one, is not uniform. Truth is indeed immutable, 
 but humanity is progressive; and thus the form in which 
 truth is presented must be examined in relation to the age 
 in which the revelation was made. At one time it is to be 
 sought in the simple relations of the patriarchal household ; 
 at another, in the more complicated interests of national 
 existence; at another, in the still deeper mysteries of indi- 
 vidual life; at another, in the infinite fulness of the Sa- 
 viour’s work, or in the perplexing difficulties which beset 
 
 4* 
 
 adapted to a pro- 
 gressive humanity. 
 
42 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 the infant Churches. But each form has its proper and 
 enduring lesson: each record constitutes a link in the 
 golden ehain which, to use the Homeric allegory, has again 
 bound the earth with all its varied interests to the throne 
 of God. 
 
 The personal consequences which flow from this view 
 ᾿ of the Inspiration of Scripture are too im- 
 Ramenunnicised portant not to find a passing notice here. 
 πο Truth is brought into a connection with life 
 by the recognition of the human element in its expression 
 which it could not otherwise have. The several parts of 
 the Bible are thus united, not only by the presence of a 
 common object, but also by the impress of a common 
 nature. The history of Christ Jesus is concrete doctrine, 
 as doctrine is abstract history. The Christian finds in the 
 records of the Lord’s life a perfect pattern for his own 
 guidance, as well as the realization of the Apostolic teach- 
 ing. However wonderful each action of the Saviour may 
 be as a manifestation of power, providence, and love, he 
 seeks yet further for its personal relation to himself; for 
 he knows that the Evangelists, men even as he is, felt 
 truly the inner meaning of the events which they record, 
 and truly told their outward details. All the holy writings, 
 as we read, have but one end, that we may be thoroughly 
 furnished to all good works, and this is obtained by their 
 entire adaptation to our complex nature. Nor will any 
 one who is conversant with the history of ancient systems 
 be inclined to think lightly of the use thus made of the 
 simplest instincts and powers of humanity in the revela- 
 tion of the highest mysteries. The fundamental error of 
 the most pious of the ancient philosophers lay in their 
 misapprehension of the relation of the finite to the in- 
 finite. They sought a system of absolute truth, indepen- 
 dent of the specific laws of human life, and vainly labored 
 to raise men out of the world. They had no gospel for 
 the siniple and poor, for the mechanic¢ and the slave. In | 
 the pursuit of wisdom they disparaged common duties, 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 43 
 
 and deferred the business of social life and of explanation 
 of the popular faith till they should have solved the riddle 
 of seli-knowledge.!| They cherished and set forward one 
 part of man’s nature to the destruction of the others. The 
 end of philosophy was declared to be the isolation of the 
 soul: the work of life only the contemplation of death. 
 Christ, on the contrary, finally uniting in one person God 
 and man, fixed the idea of spiritual life in the harmonious 
 combination of faith and works, and left His disciples in 
 the world, though not of it. The tree which symbolizes 
 the Christian faith springs from earth and is a resting- 
 place for the birds of heaven ;? the leaven spreads through 
 the whole * man; for humanity is not removed by the gos- 
 pel doctrine, but clothed with a spiritual dress. 
 
 The various proofs which may be adduced in support 
 of the doctrine of the plenary inspiration of 
 Holy Scripture, according to the sense in 
 which it has been already explained, are va- 
 rious in kind, and will necessarily appear more or less 
 forcible at different times and to different minds. On the 
 
 4. The proofs of 
 the Inspiration of 
 writings. 
 
 one hand, assuming that the writings of the 
 New Testament are, in part at least, the 
 works of men whose Divine commission was 
 attested by sensible miracles, we may appeal 
 to the fact that they claim to speak in the name and by 
 the authority of Him by whom their mighty works were 
 Or we may collect the passages which the 
 
 (a) External. 
 
 i. The supernat- 
 ural commission of 
 the Apostles. 
 
 wrought.? 
 
 1 Cf. Plat. Gorg. 527 Ὁ; Pheedr. 229 5. ti. The Acts. Ch. viii. 26, 29; x. 19; 
 
 2 Orig. Tom. x11I. in Matt. § 5. Οὐδὲν 
 μὲν τῶν ἀπτέρων, τὰ δὲ ἐπτερωμένα 
 πνευματικῶς. 
 
 8 Cf. Trench, Notes on the Parables, 
 p. 115. Olsh. in /. 
 
 4 Cf. Plat. Phed. 64 A; 67D. 
 
 5 The reality of an objective Inspira- 
 tion of the Apostles is clearly assumed 
 in the New Testament. 
 
 i. The Gospels. Matt. xvi.17; x. 19, 
 20; Mark xiii. 11; John xiy. 26; xvi. 
 12—15. 
 
 xi. 12, 28; xiii. 2; xv. 28; xvi. 6,7; xxi. 
 11: 
 
 iii. The Catholic Epistles. 1 Pet. i. 
 10—12; 2 Pet. i. 19—21; 1 John ii. 20. 
 
 iv. The Pauline Epistles. 1 Thess, 
 iv. 2 (ἃ Thess. iii. 6); 1 Cor. ii. 10; xiv. 
 37 (2 Cor. iii. 18); Gal. i. 11, 12; Rom. 
 viii. 16; xvi. 26; Eph. iii. 3—6; 1 Tim. 
 τὺ 1 Ὁ. LAM, Is LO ke 
 
 The same doctrine is implied in the 
 Pauline phrase Kat’ ἐπιταγήν, Rom. 
 xvi. 26; 1 Cor. vii. 6 (25); 2 Cor. viii. 8; 
 
44 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 apostolic writers have quoted from the Old Testament, and 
 comparing the spiritual lessons which they 
 draw from them with the simplest mean- 
 ing of the text, form some general conclu- 
 sions as to the sense in which they regarded 
 the words of the prophets, as indeed the Word of God? 
 Or, descending still lower, we may show that 
 the Christian Fathers with one consent af- 
 firmed in the most complete manner the 
 inspiration of the Scriptures, placing the writings of the 
 New Testament on the same footing with those of the 
 Old, as soon as it was possible that the apostolic records 
 could rise with clear preéminence above the oral tradition 
 of the apostolic teaching.2. On the other hand, we may 
 examine the character and objects of the 
 books themselves, and put together the vari- 
 ous facts which appear to indicate in them the presence 
 
 ti. The analogy 
 -of the apostolic use 
 of the Old Testa- 
 ment. 
 
 vii. The testimony 
 of the Church. 
 
 (b) Internal. 
 
 of more than human authority and wisdom, no less in the 
 simplicity and apparent rudeness of their general form 
 than in the subtle harmony and marvellous connection of 
 
 their various elements. 
 
 1 Tim. i.1; Tit. i.3. And on the other 
 hand the corresponding change in the 
 believer—‘‘ the revelation of eye and 
 ear ??—is vividly set forth; 2 Cor. iii. 
 18; Col. iii. 10. This change extends to 
 each element of man’s complex nature. 
 His spirit (πνεῦμα) is aided by the 
 Spirit of God that it may know the 
 blessings of the Gospel (1 Cor. ii. 12). 
 His reason (vovs) is furnished with 
 new intuitional principles by which to 
 test the Divine counsels (Rom. xii. 2, 
 ἀνακαίνωσις τοῦ vods). His under- 
 standing (διάνοια, Eph. iv. 18) is en- 
 lightened so as to recognize the True 
 One (1 John v. 20. Cf. Eph. 1. 18, 
 πεφωτισμένους τοὺς ὀφϑαλμοὺς τῆς 
 καρδία“. al. διανοίας). And according 
 to the measure of this change Inspira- 
 tion is a blessing of all ages and all 
 Christians. 
 
 The distinction of τὸ ῥῆμα τοῦ Θεοῦ 
 
 And if this method of proof is 
 
 and 6 λόγος Tov Θεοῦ, which are both 
 rendered the Word of God in the Eng- 
 lish version, and Verbum Dei in the 
 Vulgate, is important in relation to the 
 doctrine of the Inspiration of Scripture. 
 The former phrase occurs: Matt. iv. 4 
 (= Deut. viii. 8); Luke (ii. 29); iii. 2; 
 John iii. 84; viii. 47; Rom. x. 17; Eph. 
 vi. 17; Heb. vi. 5; xi.3; 1 Pet. i. 25 (= 18. 
 x1.8). The latter is more frequent: Mark 
 vii. 18; Luke v. 1, etc.; John x. 35, etc. ; 
 Acts iv. 31, etc.; Rom. ix. 6; Col. 1. 25; 
 Heb. iv. 12, ete.; 1 Pet. i. 23, ete. The 
 distinction is lost also in the Syriac and 
 Gothic Versions. In Eph. vi. 17, Ter- 
 tullian (i. p. 152) strangely reads Sermo 
 Dei. 
 
 1 Cf. App. A. On the Quotations in 
 the Gospels. 
 
 2 Cf. App. B. On the Primitive Doe- 
 trine of Inspiration. 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 45 
 
 less direct and definite than the other; if it calls for calm 
 patience and compels thought in each inquirer; it is also 
 broader and more elastic, capable of infinite extensions 
 and applications. Nor is it less powerful even while it is 
 cogent. ΤῸ many, perhaps, the inward assurance which it 
 creates is more satisfactory than the rigid deductions of 
 direct argument. The unlimited multiplication of con- 
 vergent presumptions and analogies builds up a strong 
 and sure conviction possessing a moral force which can 
 never belong to a mere formal proof, even where the 
 premises are necessary truths. 
 
 To speak of the proof of the Inspiration of the Scrip- 
 tures involves, indeed, an unworthy limitation 
 
 : ; In what sense a 
 
 of the idea itself. In the fullest sense of the — proofey mspiration 
 word we cannot prove the presence of life, ‘eat 
 but are simply conscious of it; and Inspiration is the man- 
 ifestation of a higher life. The words of Scripture are 
 spiritual words, and as such are spiritually discerned.’ The 
 ultimate test of the reality of Inspiration lies in the intu- 
 ition of that personal faculty (πνεῦμα) by which inspired 
 men once recorded the words of God, and are still able to 
 hold communion with Him. Everything short of this 
 leaves the great truth still without us; and that which 
 should be a source of life is in danger of becoming a mere 
 dogma. At the same time, it is as unfair and dangerous 
 to reject the teaching of a formal proof as it is to rely upon 
 it exclusively. It cannot be an indifferent matter to us to 
 bring into harmonious combination the work and the writ- 
 ings of the Apostles; to follow and faithfully continue the 
 clear outlines of scriptural criticism as traced in the writ- 
 ings of the New Testament; to recognize the power which 
 the Bible has hitherto exercised upon the heart of the 
 Church, and the depths which others have found in it. 
 Such investigations will necessarily lead to other and more 
 personal questions. We shall ask naturally whether we 
 have any clear conception of the position which the first 
 
 11 Coz. vii. 12—136. 
 
46 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 Christian teachers occupied, and the results which they 
 accomplished? Whether we have ever fairly estimated 
 the extent to which the different Books of Scripture are 
 penetrated by a common spirit? Whether the fault be 
 not in ourselves, if occasional difficulties are allowed to 
 destroy the effect of those divine words which have been 
 for ages a spring of life? And thus a new field will be 
 opened before us; and in this case ever-deepening convic- 
 tion is the result and the reward of labor. For there is 
 this essential difference between an outward and an inward 
 —a logical and a moral — proof, that while the one can 
 be handed down from one generation to another, in all its 
 formal completeness, gaining no fresh force and admitting 
 of no wider application, the latter only exercises its full 
 influence by the personal appreciation of each element of 
 which it consists, and adapts itself to every shifting phase 
 of thought from which it draws its strength. 
 To examine at length the details which suggest this 
 internal proof of inspiration is at once use- 
 dence af Iepva. ess and impossible. Their effect lies in the 
 oN aa individual point of sight from which they are 
 regarded, and their weight in their infinite 
 variety. But one or two remarks on the Gospels may serve 
 to illustrate different lines of thought which will furnish 
 abundant materials for private study; and it is by this only 
 that their real value can be estimated. 
 In the first place, the negative character of the Gospels, 
 the absence of certain features which we 
 Ἐπ grace should have expected to find in them, is too 
 1 eee striking not to arrest attention. They are 
 mentariness; while fragmentary in form. Their writers make no 
 attempt to relate all the actions or discourses 
 of our Lord, and show no wish to select the most marvel- 
 lous series of his mighty works; and probably no impartial 
 judge will find in any one of them a conscious attempt to 
 form a narrative supplementary to those of the others. 
 But if we know by the ordinary laws of criticism that our 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 47 
 
 Gospels are the only authentic records of the Saviour’s life, 
 while we believe that Providence regards the well-being 
 of the Christian Church, are we not necessarily led to 
 conclude that some divine power overruled their composi- 
 tion, so that what must otherwise seem a meagre and in- 
 complete record should contain all that is fittest histori- 
 cally to aid our progress and determine our faith? Nor 
 can it be unworthy of notice that while the ee 
 hey contain nearly 
 Gospels evidently contain so small a selection «ll hat we know of 
 from the works and words of Christ, so few Gece 
 details unrecorded by the Evangelists should have been 
 preserved in other ways. The interval between the Gos- 
 pel of St. John and the Synoptists indicates the existence 
 of many intermediate forms of doctrine of which tradition 
 has preserved no trace. The numerous witnesses of our 
 Lord’s works and teaching must have treasured up with 
 affection each recollection of their past intercourse ; but 
 the cycle of the Evangelic narrative is clearly marked ; and 
 it cannot but seem that the same Power which so definitely 
 circumscribed its limits determined its contents." 
 
 Again, the Gospels are unchronological in order. We 
 are at once cautioned against regarding them 
 as mere history, and encouraged to look for 
 some new law of arrangement in their con- 
 tents, which, as I shall endeavor to prove, must result from 
 a higher power than an unaided instinct or an enlightened 
 consciousness. 
 
 Once more, the Gospels are brief and apparently con- 
 fused in style. There is no trace in them of 
 the anxious care or ostentatious zeal which 
 mark the ordinary productions of curiosity 
 or devotion. The Evangelists write as men who see 
 through all time, and only contemplate the events which 
 they record in their spiritual relations. But, at the same 
 time, there is an originality and vigor in every part of the 
 
 ὃ. Their deficiency 
 in chronology. 
 
 ς. Their simplicity 
 of style. 
 
 1 Cf. App. C. On the Apocryphal Traditions of the Lord’s Words and Works 
 
48 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 Gospels which become a divine energy in the Gospel of 
 St. John. As mere compositions they stand out from all 
 other histories with the noble impress of simplicity and 
 power; and it is as if the faithful reflection of the Image 
 of God shed a clear light on the whole narrative. The an- 
 swer was once given to the Pharisees when they sought to 
 take Jesus, that never man spake like that 
 man, and those who assail the authority of 
 the Gospels have been constrained to confess that never 
 was history written as in them.! 
 If we regard the subject of the Gospels it would indeed 
 be strange if this were not so. The New 
 theGoms ~~ Testament does not contain a mere record 
 of ordinary facts, or a collection of indiffer- 
 ent conclusions, but lays the historic groundwork of man’s 
 redemption, and builds up his practical faith. In narrative, 
 in doctrine, and in prophecy, the same great truths are 
 brought forth under different relations of time. And thus 
 the connection of events, the arrangement of arguments, 
 and the choice of symbols, may serve to exhibit in clearer 
 and more varied outline the whole structure of Christianity. 
 For nothing can be immaterial which is able to influence 
 our idea of the Saviour’s life, or to alter the application 
 of Christ’s teaching. The history must be not only true 
 to the outward form, but true to the inward spirit; the 
 proof must be not only convincing, but effectual; the pre- 
 diction must not only answer to the event, but cohere with 
 the whole scope of prophetic revelation. It may, indeed, 
 be easy to quote passages in which we do not see the im- 
 portance of the minuter details of the Scriptures; for we 
 cannot know the secret experience of all Christians; but 
 it would be equally easy to prove that there is no singu- 
 larity in expression or detail, no trait of personal fecling 
 or individual conception, in the Gospels, which does not in 
 some one place greatly affect our notion of Christ’s teach- 
 ing. And thus, unless the peculiarities of each writer were 
 
 John7: 46. 
 
 1 Cf. Gaussen, Theopneustia, pp. 288 ff. (Eng. Tr.) 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 49 
 
 chosen to exhibit a special aspect of truth, they must in 
 some degree distort it. 
 
 But though we shall dwell frequently in the course of 
 the following pages on the characteristic dif- ὌΞΟΥΣ 
 ferences of the Evangelists, we must not for- teaching of the Gos- 
 get that, while they work separately for the ar: 
 instruction of individuals, they have a common service to 
 perform in the edification of the Church. Their writings 
 must be combined as well as analyzed, and we must care- 
 fully construct the general doctrines which they teach us 
 by a comparison of scattered passages. All true sense of 
 the absolute unity of the Diatessaron, as distinguished 
 from its unity of form, is commonly lost by separating mir- 
 acles, prophecies, and parables, instead of combining them. 
 We regard them, as a child might regard the stars, as 
 chance sparks of heavenly light, because we have not ob- 
 served the law which rules their order. Yet it is in the 
 perfection and oneness of their social teaching, so to speak, 
 that the strongest internal proof of the plenary inspiration 
 of the Gospels is to be found. The office of the apostles 
 was not only personal, but public. They had not merely 
 to appropriate subjectively the truths of salvation, but to 
 set them forth for the instruction of the whole Christian 
 Society. Their inspiration is to the Church what enlight- 
 enment is to the believer. For as we hold that there are 
 rights which belong to the state rather than to the citizen, 
 so there are doctrines which pertain to the whole body of 
 the faithful rather than to its several members. Such doc- 
 trines are the great mysteries of nature — foreknowledge 
 and providence — which find their proper 
 centre in the social, and not in the personal ed a 
 existence. But, nevertheless, their truest res- 
 olutions must be sought in the life of Him, by whom the 
 whole world was reiinited to God. We must consider how 
 far each miracle and prophecy helps us to complete our 
 idea of the power and foresight of God, in reference to the 
 wants and works of man; and how far each parable sug- 
 
 ~ 
 
 v 
 
50 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 gests the glorious truth of the inner harmony of the uni- 
 verse. The manner in which these questions — the foun- 
 dation-doctrines of a Christian community — are treated 
 by the Evangelists is such as to exclude the idea of a mere 
 personal intuition, for that leaves no room for those com- 
 binations in which the fulness of the Gospel lies. How- 
 ever far one Evangelist might have been led by the laws 
 of his own mind, it requires the introduction of a higher 
 power that. four should unconsciously combine to rear 
 from different sides a harmonious and perfect fabric of 
 Christian truth. 
 
 1. In order to understand the full force of miracles we 
 must bear in mind their double aspect — out- 
 ward as well as inward — as works of power 
 
 and works of redemption. The former view, which was 
 almost exclusively studied in the last two centuries, is now 
 well-nigh forgotten,! through that spirit of our own times, 
 to which we have already alluded; but still the miracles 
 are as important to the Christian faith providentially as 
 morally. And as their redemptive significance is deep and 
 varied, so is their outward manifestation perfect in extent 
 and glory. It has been well observed that there is nothing 
 in them contrary to nature, while all is above nature ; that 
 the laws of existences around us are not broken, but resolved 
 into higher laws; that there is no creation out of nothing, 
 but a freeing of the primitive order (κόσμος, mundus’) from 
 the lets and limitations of sin. 
 though less observed, that they penetrate into every class 
 
 a. Miracles. 
 
 Again, it is equally true, — 
 
 1 Pascal rises far beyond his own age 
 when he says, ‘‘ Les figures de Evan- 
 gile pour |’état de 1’4me malade sont des 
 corps malades.” (Pensées, li. 872, Fau- 
 gere). ; 
 
 2 The word κόσμος in this sense was 
 first used by Pythagoras (Plut. de Plac. 
 Phil. 17.1). A/undus oecurs in Ennius 
 (celi mundus), and yet Cicero evidently 
 speaks of the word as strange and un- 
 usual even in his time (de Uniy. x. 
 
 lucens mundus). It will not fail to strike 
 the attention, that while the Greeks and 
 Romans regarded the outward beauty 
 and order of creation as giving the tru- 
 est name to the world, the Hebraizing 
 Greek and Rabbinical writers should 
 have regarded “the ages” (αἰῶνες, 
 ΘΠ Ξὴ 9) as the right denomination ot 
 that where interest centres rather in the 
 moral than in the physical order. 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 51 
 
 of being with which we are connected — material, animal, 
 and spiritual; that they now involve and again exclude 
 natural means; that they alike give life and destroy it; 
 that they rise above the laws of matter and change its ac- 
 cidents. ‘The constancy and harmony of nature have been 
 converted into an argument against an almighty Provi- 
 dence ;' and in miracles we find the proper vindication of 
 the perpetuity and extent of the Creator’s power. They 
 prove His presence in all things against those philosophers 
 who, from the time of Epicurus,? confound the law and him 
 who works according to the law ; and, by a strange confu- 
 sion, substitute, as it were, a theory of motion for a living 
 force. There is, as I trust to show,.at once a perfect dis- 
 tinctness in the practical and doctrinal import of each 
 miracle, and a perfect unity in their final aim; so that 
 the completeness of their cycle and the variety of their 
 applications suggest to us the influence of a higher power 
 on the Evangelists than a mere “intuitional conscious- 
 ness.” 
 
 2. While the miracles show that a sustaining power is 
 everywhere present in nature, the parables 
 reveal no less clearly the divine harmonies 
 by which it is penetrated. For parables are more than 
 arbitrary similitudes. In part they explain those higher 
 relations of our existence to which the common events of 
 life should Jead us, and realize in religion the Socratic ex- 
 They connect the principles of action with the 
 
 b. Parables. 
 
 ample. 
 
 1 Cf. Galen. de usu Part. x1. 14 (quo- 2 Cic. de Nat. Deor. i. 25. Epicurus 
 
 Ct ie 
 
 ted by Pearson, On the Creed, p. 540 1). 
 The following passage of Goethe (Tho- 
 luck, Glaubwird, s. xiv.) expresses 
 plainly the assumption which lies at the 
 basis of much criticism at present: Du 
 hiltst das Evangelium, wie es steht, fir 
 die géttlichste Wahrheit; mich wiirde 
 eine yernehmliche Stimme vom Him- 
 mel nicht iberzeugen, dass das Wasser 
 brennt . . . Vielmehr halt’ ich dies fiir 
 eine Listerung gegen den grossen Gott 
 uid seine Offenbarung in cer Natur. 
 
 atomum, quum pondere et gray- 
 itate directo deorsum feratur, declinare 
 paullulum. It is remarkable that a 
 change of motion did not supply the 
 idea of some external power. ‘ Attrac- 
 tion’? is but a name to describe the ac- 
 tion of force, and assumes the existence 
 of that of which it cannot explain the 
 origin. 
 
 3 Cf. Rogers, Reason and Faith, Ed 
 
 tev. Oct. 1849, pp. 344-6. 
 
52 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 principles of faith, and appeal to the heart of man as a 
 witness of his true duties to God and his fellow. In part, 
 they connect the natural with the spiritual world, and 
 show how the laws of natural progress correspond to the 
 course of spiritual development. And at the same time 
 they give us some glimpses of the union of man with 
 higher and lower intelligences, and explain that mutual 
 dependence of all things which the Manichzan and Gnostic 
 failed to recognize, and thence fell into the most fatal and 
 blasphemous errors, — till we are led to real- 
 ize the glorious words of St. Paul, that αὐ 
 creation (κτίσις) waiteth for the manifesta- 
 tion of the Sons of God, groaning and tra- 
 vailing in pain until now. | 
 
 3. Again, we are taught to recognize the working of 
 Providence not only in the outer world of 
 nature, but also in the inner world of action; 
 while experience shows that the control of the general 
 result is reconciled with individual freedom.’ To this end 
 the reality and depth of prophecy is set before us in the 
 records of Judaism, of which Christianity is, in the highest 
 sense, the proof and fulfilment.’ In the various events 
 detailed in the Old Testament Scriptures, 
 which were written for our learning, the 
 Jews became fiyures of us. The private fortunes of their 
 monarchs, and the national revolutions of their race; the 
 general import of their history, and the wider significance 
 of their prophecies, as well as the more explicit predic- 
 tions, all receive their complete accomplishment in Messiah 
 
 Rom. viii. 19—22. 
 Cf. Eph. i. 10, 20— 
 8; Col. ἡ. 20; Phii. 
 ti. 9, 10. 
 
 c. Prophecies. 
 
 1 Cor. x. 6, 11. 
 
 1 The confirmation of this great doc- 
 trine by statistics is one of the most 
 striking results of modern science. Cf. 
 atable from M. Quetelet in Mrs. Somer- 
 ville’s Physical Geography, ii. pp. 383-4. 
 
 2 Le Vieux Testament est un chiffre. 
 Pascal. Pensées, ii. 247; οἵ. pp. 242 ff. 
 The Jews had a proverb: Vana lex 
 donee venerit Messias. Cf. Orig. de 
 Prince. iv. 6, quoted in App. B. What 
 
 is needed to interpret this cipher is 
 shortly expressed in the words of our 
 Lord (Luke xxiv. 25), ὦ ἀνόητοι (vows) 
 καὶ βραδεῖς TH καρδίᾳ (διάνοια. ef. Eph. 
 1. 18, varr. lectt.). Compare also Rom. Ϊ. 
 21, ἐματαιώϑησαν ἐν τοῖς διαλογισμοῖς 
 
 . καὶ ἐσκοτίσϑη ἢ ἀσύνετος αὐτῶν 
 καρδία. Eph. iv. 17, 18, ἐν ματαιότητι 
 τοῦ νοὺς αὐτῶν ἐσκοτισμένοι τῇ 
 διανοίᾳ. 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 53 
 
 and His kingdom. It is then through the Evangelists that 
 the Holy Spirit has afforded us a true insight into the 
 inner meaning of the Prophets, who were the historians 
 of the elder dispensation, as in the Epistles He has set 
 forth the antitypes of the ancient law. That is surely a 
 meagre theology and unscholarlike criticism which finds 
 nothing more than a fanciful adaptation in the Scriptures 
 quoted in the opening chapter of St. Matthew, and nothing 
 deeper than an arbitrary variation in the different words 
 by which each passage is introduced. On the contrary, it 
 seems as if, from verse to verse, the full glory and wisdom 
 of the past were gradually disclosed to. us, as we are 
 directed to regard the types of the Messiah in the crises 
 of personal or national history; and then to acknowledge 
 the fulness of the more distant Christian analogies in 
 the outward fortunes of the Jews; and, lastly, to accept 
 the reality of the minuter deductions from their prophetic 
 teaching.’ 
 
 But if we admit the Inspiration of Scripture as suffi- 
 ciently proved by external and internal evi- 
 dence, a difficulty still remains, — for how, it as ea ein ag 
 may be asked, can it be shown that the col- Statement of the 
 lection of inspired writings forms a complete 
 record of the revelation which it commemorates? There 
 was a time when the Bible, which we regard as one volume 
 and call by one name, existed only in its separate parts, 
 
 1 (a) Matt. i. 22, τοῦτο ὅλον γέγονεν (δ) Matt. ii. 23, ὅπως mAnpwSH τὸ 
 
 ἵνα πληρωδῇ. pnvev διὰ τῶν προφητῶν. 
 A personal historic type, Is. vii. 44. A deduction from prophetic Jan- 
 Immanuel (ef. viii. 1) — Jesus. guage. Psalm xxii. 6. Is, liii. 3. 
 (8) Matt. ii. 15, jv ἐκεῖ---[ἧἶ"να πλη- It is very remarkable that the final 
 pwan- conjunctions (iva, bmws) never occur 
 A national historic type, Hos. xi.1. with the optative in the New Testament, 
 Israe] — Messiah. unless Eph. i. 17, iii. 16, may possibly 
 (y) Matt. ii. 17, τότε ἐπληρώϑδε τὸ De exceptions. Is the explanation to 
 pnver. be sought for in the fact that the truest 
 
 An analogy in Jewish history, Jer. instinct leads us to regard every issue 
 Χ]. 1. The mother of Israel weeping as still working and waiting for a pres- 
 for her children taken from her. ent accomplishment? 
 
 5* 
 
54 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 till at length it gained its present form after long and 
 anxious questionings. And though we believe that history 
 bears clear witness to our canonical books, and to no 
 others, still history, it may be said, cannot assure us that 
 they contain all the points of divine truth which it is 
 needful for us to know. Whatever is taught by Inspira- 
 tion is authoritative; but how can we learn that all neces- 
 sary elements of inspired teaching have been committed 
 to writing? At the first glance the several books appear 
 to be disconnected and incidental. In many cases they 
 were composed to meet the wants of a special crisis, — to 
 instruct, to correct, to confirm individuals or churches. 
 There is nothing to show that the Apostles, if we regard 
 only the New Testament, entertained any design of 
 delivering to future ages a full written account of the 
 Christian faith, or a perfect system of Christian doctrine. 
 On the contrary, there is a marked difference in the points 
 of sight from which they regard the Christian dispensa- 
 tion; and they all seem to shrink in common from claim- 
 ing for their own writings a rank coérdinate with that of 
 the Old Testament Scriptures. 
 
 The slightest thought will show that such inquiries will 
 not admit of one peremptory answer, though 
 the traditional view οἵ Holy Scripture, by 
 which we regard the several books as neces- 
 sarily connected, renders us to a great extent insensible to 
 many of the difficulties which they really involve. This 
 traditional belief has, indeed, practically its proper use and 
 reward; but where investigation is possible, belief must 
 be the goal and not the starting-point, the conclusion and 
 not the premiss of our reasoning. 
 
 But while we allow that the difficulties thus raised are 
 sg Ne ταν real, they are still not singular or exceptional, 
 which are fomdin Dut:analogous to those common mysteries of 
 Seiko our being which are rarely felt, only because 
 they are universal. The action of Providence in every 
 case is lost ina mystery. In one aspect most things in the 
 
 The difficulties are 
 real, and yet 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 55 
 
 life of an individual seem to be casual and unimportant; 
 and yet, when we observe from time to time indications 
 of a providential plan in its general course, we practically 
 admit that the same superintending power penetrates into 
 those apparently trivial details which really mould the 
 character of the whole. So, again, in the history of nations: 
 it is at first difficult to recognize how the 
 feuds of party and the confusion of popular 
 cries can form any part of a divine scheme for the govern- 
 ment of the world; and yet, when we discover on a wide 
 survey traces of such a controlling influence, we are forced 
 to allow that it extends to common things, and works by 
 means which antecedently seem totally inadequate to the 
 issue. Or, to take yet another example: the 
 vast and various convulsions which have 
 broken up the surface of the earth, and covered it with 
 sears and ruins, seem little like the manifestations of 
 infinite wisdom; and still, when it is known that they were 
 needed to fashion the fair diversity of woods and waters, 
 and to bring within the reach of man the treasures stored 
 up by certain laws in the depths below, we acknowledge 
 that Providence not only inspires the general law, but acts 
 equally by those changes and outbreaks which interrupt 
 its ordinary working. 
 
 These examples of the action of Providence in the indi- 
 vidual, in society, in nature, will illustrate 
 the form in which we may expect it to be. en μος 
 shown in securing the completeness of the "fen w% Prove 
 records of revelation; for, in relation to 
 Holy Seripture, the belief in Providence is the neces- 
 sary supplement to the belief in Inspiration. And if we 
 find that God works concurrently with the exercise of 
 man’s free agency; that He finds even in the weak- 
 nesses and imperfections of His creatures efficient ser- 
 vice; that the traces of a plan and purpose which are dis- 
 closed by a comprehensive view of His dealings, suggest 
 the existence of order and completeness throughout, and 
 
 in society, 
 
 in nature. 
 
56 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 reconcile us to the presence of disturbing influences, — we 
 may reasonably expect to meet with similar phenomena in 
 the relation of Providence to Scripture ; so that it will 
 be no fatal objection to the completeness of the Bible, that 
 it is composed of writings not only occasional and per- 
 sonal, but also beset with various conflicting difficulties, if 
 there are clear signs of a consistent historical recognition 
 of this completeness, and also traces of a mutual de- 
 pendence and general unity in the books themselves. 
 For though it is true that history cannot prove directly 
 the completeness of the Scriptures, it can 
 Universal story furnish strong presumptions that they are 
 complete. The same divine messengers who 
 committed to writing the original records of revelation, 
 embodied their teaching in a visible society. The Bible 
 and the Church trace back their claims to the same source, 
 and each can appeal to the other to bear witness to its per- 
 manent integrity. If then it appear, to take one example, 
 that the earliest description of the Christian body recog- 
 nizes exactly those elements which are found in the apos- 
 tolic writings; if the Articles of Belief: and the forms of 
 worship are exactly those which are either suggested or 
 prescribed in them; if Christians with a common consent 
 appealed to the New Testament, as soon as its constituent 
 books were collected into one volume, as an adequate and 
 final source of Christian doctrine; and if the same be 
 true of the Old Testament,—no one who believes that 
 the lessons of Providence are legibly written in the in- 
 stinctive judgments of society will doubt that the Bible 
 was intended to be that for which the Church has received 
 it — a complete record of all that was of permanent import 
 in successive revelations. That the proposed conditions 
 are satisfied by the mutual relations of the Scriptures and 
 the Church from age to age, history can show most clearly. 
 The indistinetness which hangs over isolated details arises 
 commonly from the narrowness of the field of sight. On 
 a wide view nothing can be more striking than the inde- 
 
 4 
 res 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 5T 
 
 pendence and unity of the written Word and the organized 
 Body. And this independence and unity offer the clear- 
 est proof of their individual symmetry and completeness. 
 Nor is this all: it is possible that some outward sym- 
 metry may be found to exist in the mutual 
 relations of the different fragments of which νεῖν confirm 
 the Bible consists; and the argument from anges Sertp- 
 design is proportionately more convincing as 
 the elements in which the design is traced are more nu- 
 merous and naturally less connected. That this is so, 
 seems indeed to be indicated by the very form of the 
 Bible. To take an illustration again from the New Testa- 
 ment : the obvious analogy between the quadriform Gospel 
 and the four classes of Epistles, the peculiar fitness of the 
 Acts as a mediative element to connect them together 
 doctrinally and _ historically, the lasting significance of the 
 Apocalypse as a prophetic and typical view of the fortunes 
 of the Church to the end of time, create an impression οἱ 
 original unity among the component parts which thus pro- 
 duce a well-proportioned whole. And if, on a further ex- 
 amination of the books, it appear that the different char- 
 acters of their writers, the variety of styles in which they 
 are composed, the manifold circumstances by which they 
 were called forth, contribute, in each case, some distinctive 
 feature to the image of truth which they combine to pro- 
 duce, is not the idea of completeness a natural conse- 
 quence of a combination as marvellous as it is unexpected? 
 But the subtle organization of Scripture, no less than that 
 of nature, is only revealed to a watchful and attentive eye. 
 A passing hint may arouse inquiry, but nothing less than 
 a patient and candid study of the Bible can convey any 
 notion of the intimate relations which exist between its 
 several parts. Each fresh point of sight presents to the 
 eye new harmonies of detail and form. On a full survey 
 contrasts are successively exposed and subdued; irreg- 
 ularities are brought within the general plan; ornaments 
 gain a constructive importance; and, as in some noble 
 
58 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 monument, each well-wrought fragment is stamped with 
 the marks of independence and design. The circum- 
 stances under which each workman wrought, no less than 
 the peculiarities of his work, prove his real independence ; 
 and the manner in which every peculiarity contributes to 
 the whole effect, shows that all alike were obedient to the 
 design of one great architect. 
 If it be still said that there are gaps and chasms in the 
 Canon; that the structure does not, in-all 
 a tendency tosym-' yespects, correspond to the plan; that much 
 metry and order is é ; ; 
 all that we can yet appears unfinished and insecure, — it may be 
 see in the other . 
 works of God. enough to reply, that there is at least a clear 
 tendency towards unity in its different parts, 
 not discernible at first, but growing ever clearer to those 
 who look most closely into it; and that such a tendency 
 towards order and perfection is all that can as yet be 
 found in the worlds of nature and man, though these are 
 confessedly complete in design, as being the immediate 
 works of God. The distinctness of this first revelation is 
 obscured by the existence of evil in a thousand forms, 
 which seems to contradict our notions of almighty power 
 and love; and it is likely that the same kind of difficulties 
 should reiippear, however God makes himself known. If, 
 then, we acknowledge in nature a perfection of plan, 
 though we cannot make it out in all its details, and com- 
 plete by faith the order which we see commenced at inter- 
 vals, it 1s reasonable to regard the completeness of Scrip- 
 ture in the same way, and to submit patiently to the ex- 
 istence of uncertainties and difticulties in the Bible, which 
 we find also in the only other manifestations of God’s 
 working with which we can compare it. They may, 
 indeed, be necessarily introduced by the narrow range of 
 our observation and experience, or be absolutely necessary 
 for our probation and discipline. And though this mode 
 of arguing may perhaps seem weak and inconclusive to 
 those who have scarcely felt the difficulties which it is 
 intended to meet, yet it may be remarked that we can 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 59 
 
 have nothing to guide us but analogies and presumptions, 
 ideas of fitness and order, gathered from the outward goy- 
 ernment of the world, when we endeavor to reason on 
 God’s dealings with man. Nor can it be said again that 
 such analogies only exist between the revela- 
 tion in nature and the revelation to men; Guibas Ba attlie 
 for what is true of the original revelation is “""“"”" 
 true also of the permanent record. The individual char- 
 acter, as has been already shown, is an essential part of 
 both, as far as man is concerned. The finiteness and im- 
 perfection of human nature must everywhere be felt in 
 Divine things; and the supposition that a complete record 
 of revelation may be found in writings apparently casual 
 and fragmentary, introduces no difficulty which is not 
 already found in another form in the primary conception 
 of revelation, and in the first expression of its truths. In 
 all alike, God works through man according to the natural 
 laws of thought and action; and thus the One becomes 
 manifold, and the whole can be contemplated only in its 
 component parts. 
 
 From what has been said, it follows that the personal 
 conviction of the Inspiration and Complete- 
 ness of Scripture depends, in a great meas- UI. The | Inter- 
 
 pretation of Scrip- 
 
 sure, upon the accurate study of the Sacred hae τᾷ 
 Writings themselves; and thus it is im-  jfold—to secure 
 portant to fix within certain limits the great 
 
 principles by which they must be interpreted. Nor is this 
 difticult in a general sense, however many difficulties may 
 be involved in the application of the principles to every 
 detail. Two great objects appear to be in- | eth Ais 
 cluded in the work of the interpreter: the δ. the spiritual 
 strict investigation of the simple meaning of “"~ 
 
 the text, and the development of the religious teaching 
 which lies beneath it. The first regards the form, and the 
 second the spirit of Scripture. The one rests on the ac- 
 knowledged permanence of the essential relations between 
 thought and language; the other, on the Providential pur- 
 
60 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 pose which is seen to exist in the successive records of the 
 Divine history of the world. The religious truth is con-- 
 veyed through the medium of human conceptions; and 
 human conceptions are used for the expression of religious 
 truth. The essence of Inspiration does not lie in the form 
 alone, or in the spirit alone, but in their combination. If 
 the form be the result of direct Inspiration, it follows ‘that 
 Scripture contains a revelation of pure physical truth, 
 which is contrary to experience ; if, on the other hand, the 
 action of Inspiration be limited to the spiritual element, 
 it follows that this must be separable from the form, which 
 has been shown to be impossible. 
 At a time when extended criticism has proved that the 
 very inflections of words have a mental sig- 
 piétatinn sel 4p, wificance, and answer to some peculiarity of 
 on strict grammat- yace, 10 seems almost superfluous to remark, 
 that idioms of language are but the embodi- 
 ments of national character; that an idiom is the start- 
 ing-point and not the end of inquiry. Yet long tradition 
 has sanctioned the application of principles to Biblical 
 criticism which are abandoned in all other subjects; and 
 it has been held to be a final answer in difficulties of 
 expression in the Old and New Testaments that they 
 are “QOrientalisms.” If this be true, it is evident that 
 the difficulty is only removed one step further back: why, 
 it must be asked, was the Eastern phrase so turned? of 
 what mental condition is it asymptom? Surely we may 
 believe that the Hebrew spirit still lives in the character- 
 istics of the Hebrew language; and if so, the close analysis 
 of each Hebrew idiom will lay open something of the 
 inner workings of that mind through which the world was 
 prepared for “the kingdom of God.” 
 
 ΕΠ τὶ Bere The theory of “ Orientalisms” has exercised 
 of accurate analy- its most fatal influence on the interpreta- 
 ine New Teaament, tion of the New Testament. The presence 
 COREE of a foreign coloring in the Greek writings 
 of the Apostles is so striking, that we may be inclined 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 61 
 
 to smile at the labors of the purists of the last century. 
 But to one who looks beneath the surface, this combi- 
 nation of Hebrew idiom with Greek words is a fact of 
 the utmost significance. The Hebrews realized more viy- 
 idly than any nation the present working of God in the 
 world, and contemplated even nature from a theocratic 
 standing-point. The Greeks, again, scrutinized with the 
 nicest discrimination the powers of man and the objects 
 of sense; and, by a vocabulary of infinite fulness, per- 
 petuated the knowledge which they gained. And what 
 more fitting vehicle can we conceive for the 
 enunciation of the highest truth than that rer o te 
 Hebraizing Greek which unites all that was 
 noblest in the forms of Hebrew thought with all that was 
 richest in the stores of Greek expression ? 
 
 But it is said that the Alexandrine Greek was a mixed 
 and degenerate dialect, and that it therefore 
 offers no sure ground for minute criticism. Qn 
 With equal reason the student of Euripides ἔμ /r ee 
 might complain of the arbitrary license of 
 Homer or Theocritus, because they do not conform to the 
 Attic standard; and yet the most startling anomalies of 
 the earliest and latest authors can be reduced to an ar- 
 rangement in harmony with the general principles of 
 language. The transition from the Greek of Aristotle to 
 that of St. Paul is in fact less abrupt than might have been 
 expected; but even if it were as great as it is commonly 
 supposed to be, the real state of the case would remain 
 unchanged. The laws of syntax and the 
 sense of words may be modified in the lapse sues ΡΥ ιν 
 of time, or by external influences; but the mvc ναγίῶ 
 great law, by which words are the living ex- 
 ponents of thought, remains unchanged, and the modifica- 
 tions are themselves necessarily subject to some law. It 
 is reasonable to expect that the grammar of the New 
 Testament may not in every point coincide with the gram- 
 mar of Homer, or Herodotus, or Xenophon. The style of 
 
 6 
 
62 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 St. Paul or St. John may differ as much from that of each 
 of these as they differ severally from one another. But it 
 is the work of the scholar to determine the specific char- 
 acter of the writer before him, and to explain in what 
 way he has been led to diverge from the normal type of 
 Rectits cha expression. And, further, the laws which 
 est revolutions in Cetermine the continuity of language are not 
 eae broken by the infusion of foreign elements, 
 as long as the language retains a living energy. The 
 history of our own literature proves that it is a mere 
 assumption that a language loses even in precision by the 
 incorporation of new forms and words. On the contrary, 
 increased facility of expression gives occasion for the fixing 
 of minute differences of conception which would other- 
 wise be evanescent. And when the Apostolic writers use 
 a Greek dialect, variously modified by Eastern thought, 
 they are not removed from the pale of strict criticism, but 
 rather present a problem of unusual interest from the vari- 
 ous relations of the elements which it combines. 
 
 Nor can it be urged against this view that the Apostles 
 
 And this ic tue “Cl Wnlettered men, and consequently un- 
 of rude dialectsas likely to speak with exactness; for it is cer- 
 meee πὸ tain that the use of provincial dialects is no 
 less strict than that of the purest idiom. The very power 
 of language lies in the fact that it is the spontaneous ex- 
 pression of thought. Education may extend the range of 
 knowledge, but experience is an adequate teacher of that 
 which lies before us. Even, naturally, Galilean fishermen 
 were no less qualified than others to watch the processes 
 of the spiritual life, and adapt to their own needs the 
 words which the Septuagint had already consecrated to a 
 divine use. 
 
 All intelligent interpretation of Scripture must then be 
 Lei based upon a strict analysis of its idioms and 
 erat words. To suppose that words and cases are 
 
 convertible, that tenses have no absolute 
 meaning, that forms of expression are accidental, is to 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 63 
 
 betray the fundamental principles on which all intercourse 
 between men is based. A disbelief in the exactness of’ lan- 
 guage is the prelude to all philosophical skepticism. And 
 it will probably be found that the same tendency of mind 
 which discredits the fullest teaching of words, leads, how- 
 ever little we may see it, to the disparagement of all out- 
 ward revelation. 
 
 But when the interpreter of Scripture has availed him- 
 self of every help which historical criticism 
 can furnish for the elucidation of the text, — 
 when, by the exact investigation of every 
 word, the most diligent attention to every 
 variation of tense and even of order, the clearest recollec- 
 tion of the associations of every phrase, he has obtained a 
 sense of the whole, perfect in its finer shades and local 
 
 2. Spiritual In- 
 terpretation based 
 on the Literal In- 
 terpretation. 
 
 coloring, no less than in its general outline and effect, —his 
 work is as yet only half done. The literal sense is but 
 the source from which the spiritual sense is to be derived ; 
 but exactly in proportion as a clear view is gained of all 
 that is special in the immediate object and position of each 
 writer, it will be found that the simple record appears to be 
 instinct with Divine life; for, as has been already noticed, 
 the external circumstances and mental characteristics of 
 the writer are not mere accidents; but, inasmuch as they 
 influence his apprehension and expression of the truth, 
 they become a part of his Divine message. And the 
 typical speciality which springs from this is the condition 
 at once of the usefulness and of the universality of 
 Scripture. 
 
 The existence of an abiding spiritual sense underlying 
 the literal text of the Old Testament is suf μά νν μμο 
 ficiently attested by the quotations in the mange of the Apo: 
 New. Unless it be recognized, many of the 
 interpretations of the Evangelists and Apostles must ap- 
 pear forced and arbitrary; but if we assume that it exists, 
 their usage appears to furnish an adequate clew to the in- 
 vestigation of its most intricate mazes. It must always be 
 
64 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 a difficult task to appreciate rightly the spiritual lessons of 
 history, to detect the real analogy between past and — 
 present, to understand the fleeting symptoms of good and 
 evil, to compare the several sides of truth and error; but 
 the task is one which is ever assigned to men. Mere me- 
 chanical infallibility is but a poor substitute for a plenary 
 inspiration, which finds its expression in the right relation 
 between partial human knowledge and absolute Divine 
 Teo. truth. And if this view imposes upon the 
 the primary sense interpreter of Scripture a work of endless 
 rae ee labor, at least it clears from his way formida- 
 ble difficulties which would otherwise beset him, and that 
 not by any arbitrary division of the contents of the Bible, 
 but in virtue of its essential character. The inspired 
 truthfulness of the prophet does not lie in the view which 
 he takes of natural phenomena, but in the relation in 
 which this partial conception stands to some spiritual 
 lesson. It is a noble and glorious task to follow into their 
 remotest results, and reduce to their simplest forms, the 
 laws which govern the world in relation to ourselves; but 
 this is not the work of the messenger of revelation. It is 
 enough that he should view nature as his contemporaries 
 view it, while at the same time he adopts exactly so much 
 of the popular belief as serves to illustrate and explain 
 his message. The “days” of creation, the “windows of 
 heaven,” the “steadfastness of the round world,” the “hand 
 of God,” and the like, are expressions which, while they 
 are intelligible to the simplest minds, perpetuate at the 
 same time great facts which the highest culture can 
 scarcely realize. No part of human knowledge is absolute, 
 except such as follows directly from the laws by which the 
 mind of man is limited; and probably it will be found that 
 elements of permanent truth lie hid in the various aspects 
 of nature preserved in the Bible, as in the doctrines of 
 the Apostles there are certainly traces of the anticipation 
 of wants which have scarcely yet been fully realized after 
 the course of ages. 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 65 
 
 Meanwhile the Interpretation of Scripture no less than 
 its true Completeness is being ever set forth 
 in the history of the Church. The Christian 7% Iiterpretation 
 
 yf Scripture  out- 
 is not even outwardly alone in the endeavor pl dl a an 
 to gain the manifold lessons of revelation. 
 The same Providence who guided the composition of the 
 Bible, has also furnished a Commentary on it in the for- 
 tunes of mankind. And it will easily be seen that there 
 is a perfect analogy between the Church and the Scriptures 
 in their relation to the private Christian. When united 
 they complete the circle of his external defences; but if 
 they be separated, he is led either into superstition or into 
 doubt. Both contain and convey mediately the grace 
 necessary for his support, and yet only so far as the 
 Holy Spirit works with and through them. The out- 
 ward form in each case brings the essence within the 
 reach of man, and places within our grasp that which 
 is otherwise too subtle for our present senses. The enun- 
 ciation and the embodiment of truth are adapted to our 
 finite nature; and it is alike unreasonable to say that we 
 do not need a true Bible and to maintain that a definite 
 Christian society is unnecessary for the full unfolding of 
 the spiritual life. 
 
 Yet there are difficulties in detail which must be brought 
 before the individual judgment. Careless- 
 ness, we allow, has given currency to false 
 readings in the text of Scripture; but the 
 number and variety of the authorities which may be used 
 to correct them is not only unequalled but unapproached 
 in tlie range of ancient literature. The laws of criticism 
 are absolute, and the Christian may confide with implicit 
 reverence in their issues. Heresy, again, may draw its 
 doctrine from the Bible; but what does that show, except 
 that Seripture has many sides, which must be combined 
 and harmonized, and not severed and distorted according 
 to the bent of our private will? The laws of language, 
 as those of criticism, are absolute, and the Christian may 
 
 ΟἿ 
 
 The province of 
 criticism. 
 
66 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND 
 
 trust in them as the certain outward expression of the 
 deepest truths. 
 
 Nor can the existence of these final difficulties appear 
 
 strange and unnatural. We have no reason 
 
 Criticism — hal- = 
 lowed by a spiritual to conc] ude, from our knowledge of the whole 
 Bee character of God’s dealings, that He might 
 be expected to preserve ever inviolate what He has once 
 given. The world, which was at first good, is now full of 
 evil; man, who was at first blessed, has fallen under the 
 curse of sin; and such contingencies seem to be involved 
 necessarily in the idea of a finite existence. But a redemp- 
 tion has been wrought for both; and so too, on the histori- 
 eal side of our religion, an uncorrupted Bible lies before us, 
 if we patiently and candidly search for it, and a true per- 
 sonal interpretation may be gained by sincere and faithful 
 study. In both cases, however, the task 15 something more 
 than a merely mechanical or intellectual process. Who- 
 ever has watched attentively the workings of his own 
 mind, will feel that in criticism and philology there is still 
 room for the operation of that Spirit of God which is 
 promised to the Christian scholar. Variations may exist 
 on the one side, and ambiguities on the other, which dis- 
 appear when brought before the scrutiny of the spiritual 
 judgment. 
 
 It will be my object in the following Essay to determine 
 in what way the principles thus indicated 
 may be applied to the study of the Gospels; 
 to determine how far their origin and con- 
 tents fall in with the general order of Providence, and 
 suggest the presence of that deep and hidden wisdom in 
 which we have found the characteristic of Inspiration. 
 And if it can be shown that the Gospel sums up in the 
 record of the Incarnation all that was evolved of spiritual 
 import in the long discipline from the Captivity to the 
 Advent; if it can be shown that the time at which they 
 were written was at once most suited to their publication, 
 and yet least likely to have given birth to them; if it can 
 
 Summary of the 
 plan of the Essay. 
 
INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 6 
 
 =] 
 
 be shown that they grew up as it were spontaneously in 
 the Church without effort and without design, and yet 
 have a distinct relation in their four-fold diversity to the 
 past and future wants of the Church; if it can be shown 
 that in the difference of letter there is a perfect unity of 
 spirit; that there is a special tendency and plan in the 
 writing of each Evangelist, arising out of the position 
 which he held in the Catholic Church ; that the varieties of 
 detail and the succession of incidents converge to one com- 
 mon point, and conduce to one common end; if it can be 
 shown that in particular parts the teaching of the different 
 Gospels may be combined into a whole of marvellous sym- 
 metry and completeness, — the residuum of difficulties and 
 alleged discrepancies will seem of little weight. We shall 
 see a noble view opened of the relation of the Gospel to 
 the former and future history of the world, and of the 
 Gospels to the Gospel itself. We shall feel that deep 
 sense of the continunl presence of the divine influence, and 
 that firm conviction of the unerring truthfulness of the 
 ‘sacred writers, which can only be gained by a comprehen- 
 sive view of the complete subordination ‘of every part of 
 Scripture to the training of man and the realization of his 
 hopes. We shall then find nothing superfluous in the 
 repetitions of the Gospels, and nothing inconsistent in 
 their variety, any more than in the fresh groupings and 
 different prospects of some earthly scene. We shall un- 
 derstand, with the great master of Alexandria, that “every 
 word, if rightly viewed, effects a special purpose ;” for 
 revelation is not a vain thing for us ; it is our life. 
 
CHAP PER sk 
 
 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 Αὐτομάτη ἣ γῆ καρποφορεῖ, πρῶτον χόρτον, εἶτα στάχυν, εἶτα πλήρης 
 
 σῖτος ἐν τῷ oTaxui. —ST. MARK iv. 28. 
 
 ΤῊΝ Bible is the oldest and truest vindication of the 
 dignity of history. When the Jewish Church 
 numbered the ancient records of their state 
 among the works of the prophets, they ac- 
 knowledged that insight and foresight are only varieties of 
 the same faculty, differing in their objects and not in their 
 essence. The present, if we could read it rightly, contains: 
 the past and future, though that which is real and abiding is 
 enveloped in a mass of confused details, so that it is visible 
 only to the eye of the true seer. This follows indeed from 
 the nature of the case; for truth in itself is absolutely one. 
 But though it is one in itself it can only be manifested 
 partially; and human history, in the highest sense, is the 
 record of its successive manifestations in the life of men 
 and man. In this respect History may be likened to the 
 eradual unveiling of some godlike figure. The imagina- 
 tion of the inspired artist can divine its perfect form 
 from the contemplation of the first fragment, but to the 
 common sight it passes slowly from stage to stage to the 
 fulness of its finished beauty. But-each part which is re- 
 vealed remains open forever. History is not only progres- 
 sive in its course, but also progressive in the form of its 
 teaching. All its records are held together by a real har- 
 mony, and instinct with one design. Each fresh convul- 
 
 The true idea of 
 History. 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 69 
 
 sion leaves the earth further advanced towards its final 
 purpose, though for the time it is covered with ruins. 
 And in this sense History is a nobler Biography, the tale 
 of a nobler life than man’s; for even if at present we can 
 but see it dimly, there appears to be a common life not 
 only in nations, but in the world, if the best conception of 
 life which we can form is that of activity combined with 
 organization, the permanence of the whole reconciled with 
 the change of the parts, a power of assimilation and a 
 power of progress. 
 
 Any real appreciation of Christianity, in its world-wide 
 relations, must rest upon some such view of 
 History as this. Christianity cannot be sep- J” coming of 
 arated from the past any more than from the 97 unan Mstory:; 
 future. If we may venture so to speak, it 
 Was not an accident or an after-thonght, but foreknown 
 “before the foundation of the world.” The Incarnation, 
 as it is seen now, is the central point of all History. And 
 more than this, if we regard the great issues of life, all 
 past history, as far as it has any permanent significance, 
 appears to be the preparation for that great mystery, and 
 all subsequent history the gradual appropriation of its 
 results. Isolated efforts were made in ancient times to 
 anticipate the truth for which men were waiting; and op- 
 posing powers sought to check its influence when it was 
 set forth in the lite of Christ; but premature development 
 and open antagonism served in the end to display the 
 supremacy and consolidate the power of revelation. The 
 Gospel was no sudden or solitary message. The legend of 
 Pallas is the very converse of the Nativity. Christianity 
 is, in one sense, as ancient as the Creation, resting on a 
 foundation wide as the world and old as time. Step by 
 step the ground-work of the Church was laid in the silent 
 depths, and at last, when all was now ready, it rose above 
 the earth, that all men might consciously combine to rear 
 the spiritual temple of the living God. 
 
 What is true of the subject of the Gospel is true, in a 
 
70 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 less complete degree, of the record. The writings of the 
 Re ee New Testament are not a separate and οχ- 
 alah nae ceptional erowth, but the ripe fruit of minds 
 world-wide tran- Which had been matured through long ages 
 Be of various fortunes and manifold influences. 
 The very language in which they are written is In some 
 sense an epitome of ancient history. For it was the will 
 of Providence that the people whom He destined to be- 
 come the special depository of His revelations should 
 not only develop their individual character, but also, by: 
 contact with Egypt, Persia, Greece and Rome, assimilate 
 the foreign elements necessary to the perfection of their 
 work. The history of the Jews thus becomes, as it were, 
 the key to the history ef the world; and, by regarding the 
 various stages through which it passed, it is possible to 
 distinguish the various constituents which combined to 
 form the character of the Apostles and to prepare men for 
 their teaching. 
 It follows, as a necessary consequence, that the Old 
 Testament is itself the divine introduction 
 thisatining nv, tothe New. In the records of the religious 
 Tame mt life of the Jews, in the settling of worship, 
 | and the widening of hope, it is possible to 
 see the foreshadowings of apostolic doctrine, while the 
 vicissitudes of their national history exhibit most clearly 
 the growing purposes of God. A kingdom was reared on 
 the ruins of the theocracy. A hierarchy succeeded to the 
 place of the vanquished kingdom. When the Law of 
 Moses had lost its power under the complicated forces of 
 advancing civilization, it was quickened with a new life by 
 the zeal of the prophets; and the labors of priests and 
 scribes in after-time formulized what the prophets had 
 taught, that a conquered and tributary people might yet 
 find a definite support for their ancient belief. 
 But the records of the Old Testament deal only with 
 the central periods of the history of Israel, the times of 
 direct spiritual instruction, of the Law, and the Prophets; 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 71 
 
 and the last period of preparation which followed the 
 Captivity, like the first preparation in Egypt, 
 is too often regarded asa blank. Yet it is 
 in this especially that we must trace the (hint pnt 
 growth of that spirit which fixed the limits τρῶς mpertane ow 
 of Judaism and prepared the way for the ad- 
 vance of Christianity. Even in the absence of a continuous 
 literature the progress of the people is marked clearly by 
 definite events, fruitful in lessons on the course of national 
 life. 
 
 The mission of Ezra, “the second Moses” as he was 
 called, like that of the first, was followed by 
 a period of silence. It was needful that the js punun mess 
 law which was written on tables should be 
 realized in life. Meanwhile Persia had a work to accom- 
 plish for Israel no less than Egypt; and till this was done, 
 the wisdom of the East was not yet exhausted. After- 
 wards the work of Persia was transmitted, in due time, to 
 Greece and Rome; and the Jew gained suppleness and 
 strength from a literature and an empire as wide as his 
 “own faith. His faith also was tried by the most varied 
 alternations of fortune. At one time a line of native 
 heroes gave unity and independence to a subject race ; at 
 another, a foreign despot attempted to found a wide do- 
 minion upon the basis of the ancient creed. Hope fol- 
 lowed hope; and the last form of Jewish nationality was 
 shaped under the heavy pressure of critical vicissitudes. 
 The rivalry of the Samaritans, the rise of the Hellenistic 
 Church, the tyranny of the Syrian kings, the fall of the 
 Maccabeean dynasty, the subjection of Palestine to an 
 Idumzean dependent of Rome, disciplined the people for 
 the coming of Messiah. 
 
 And while the outward fortunes of the Jews after the 
 Captivity were thus varied with progressive ἜΠΟΣ 
 phases of one growing purpose, the changes τίονα, during tie 
 
 Persian and 
 
 partly to be sought 
 in the past-nblical 
 
 in their inner life were not less remarkable. 
 The century after Ezra was a time of silence, but it was 
 
2 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 also a time of activity. New faculties were called out by 
 a new order of things. An age of reflection followed an 
 age of inspiration. The guidance of prophets had _ fol- 
 lowed the close of the theocracy; and in turn the prophets 
 were replaced by doctors (Sopherim). Schools of learn- 
 ing methodized the study of the law. The scribe and the 
 lawyer succeeded to the authority of the priest; and, in 
 the words of the Talmud, “the crown of learning was 
 nobler than that of empire.”? The definite collection of 
 Holy Scriptures marked, indeed, formally, as well as prac- 
 tically, the cessation of the immediate teaching of the 
 Spuit. The Canon, regarded as a whole, demanded inter- 
 pretation, and defined the range of learning. Vernacular 
 paraphrases of the sacred Writings satisfied the wants of 
 the congregation, and deeper investigations into their 
 meaning occupied the place of philosophy. 
 The conquest of the East by Alexander inter- 
 rupted the course of this national development, and intro- 
 duced a new element into Jewish life. The Hebrew and 
 the Hellenist stood side by side, at one time in strange 
 combination, and again in angry rivalry. It seemed as if — 
 a new Israel were rising on the banks of the Nile, not only 
 trained in the wisdom of Egypt, but courting its favor. 
 And even in Palestine there were clearer signs of the 
 coming close of the Jewish dispensation than the existence 
 of Sadducees or Herodians. The unity of the nation was 
 still symbolized in the Temple, but the Synagogue recog- 
 nized the existence of its component parts. The people 
 looked backward or forward for the manifestation of God’s 
 Power, but for the moment they rested on the ordinary 
 protection of His Providence. They were, no less than 
 before, God’s heritage, but they were also numbered among 
 the kingdoms of the earth. 
 
 It is in the great changes thus roughly sketched that we 
 must look for the true connection of the two Testaments. 
 
 Grecian periods. 
 
 1 Steinschneider, Jidische Literatur, p. 359 (Ersch u. Gruber, Encykl. 1850). 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. le 
 - 
 
 Unless they are taken into account, the very language and 
 form of the Apostolic writings must be unin- ΡΝ 
 telligible; for every page of the New Τθβ- γοῦν ἐμίαν ἐλονρῆν 
 tament bears witness to the depth and per- pals then perk 
 manence of the effects which they produced. Bi 
 
 Nor is there anything unnatural in regarding a period un- 
 marked by any direct impress of Divine interposition, as 
 cherishing in darkness germs of spiritual life to be quick- 
 ened in due time. On the contrary, the great epochs of 
 revelation are widely separated by ages, which serve at 
 once for harvest and seed-time. Such were 
 the intervals of silence before the call of 
 Abraham, during the Egyptian captivity, and before the 
 mission of Samuel; and it may not be a mere fancy if we 
 discover some analogy between the period of natural de- 
 velopment in the Jewish nation which preceded the birth 
 of our Lord, and that period of natural and silent growth 
 
 silently and 
 
 which ushered in His ministry. The inward conflict was 
 completed before the outward manifestation was begun. 
 Even when the Divine power was withdrawn from visible 
 operation, it was no less certainly engaged in bringing 
 within its control new powers, and opening new fields for 
 its future work. The end itself came only with the “ ful- 
 ness of time.” 
 
 Slowly, and almost imperceptibly, this measure of time 
 was filled. The interval between the Cap- 
 tivity and the birth of Christ was not only 
 fertile in critical combinations of different elements, but 
 
 slowly. 
 
 ample space was given for each to work its full effect. For 
 two centuries after the Captivity the Jews! grew up under 
 the dominion of Persia; for about a century and a halt 
 they were under Greek rulers; for a century they enjoyed 
 independence under the Hasmonean princes; and for 
 
 11 the word had been current, 1 the people of Israel — Judeans — Jews , 
 should have preferred to say Judwans. the first name marking their providen- 
 In this way a threefold name would tial, the second their local, the third 
 significantly mark a threefold history: their sectarian position. 
 
 » 
 { 
 
1: THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL, 
 
 more than half a century Rome was supreme through the 
 government of her instruments. Or, if we include the Cap- 
 tivity, it may be said that for three hundred years the 
 spirit of the East was dominant in Judea, to be followed, 
 for a like period, by the spirit of the West.! 
 What then, to define more clearly the out- 
 line which has been already drawn, were the 
 characteristic infiuences of these two great periods? How 
 can we best represent their effects upon the “ people of 
 God?” ? 
 
 The Captivity in Babylon, as has been already noticed, 
 is In some’ respects analogous to that in 
 Egypt, in its relation to the history of the 
 Jews. In both cases the Jews were brought 
 into contact with a nation whose material power was 
 scarcely greater than its intellectual culture. In both cases 
 important changes were wrought in the organization of the 
 people which clearly represented the influence of their 
 But the two exiles were distinguished essen- 
 The oppression in Egypt was 
 
 This follows from 
 a general survey of 
 the effects of 
 
 I. The Persian 
 period, as to 
 
 conquerors. 
 tially in their character. 
 manifested in the personal bondage of individuals; the 
 captivity in Babylon was the political subjection of the 
 nation, In Egypt.we can see a people trained to patient 
 endurance and ready submission among masters whose idol 
 was science, and whose watchword was changelessness. In 
 Persia we can see the same people exhausted by vain hopes, 
 and, lamenting a fallen kingdom, led to contemplate the 
 sublime truths of a spiritual world among teachers whose 
 
 Ezra’s und der Heiligherrschafi, Got- 
 tingen, 1852). The smaller work of 
 Jost (Allgemeine Geschichte, ἃ. 5. w. 
 
 1 The division of the periods corre- 
 sponds to that of the first two schools 
 into which the Hebrew writers are di- 
 
 vided. The age of the Soprerim began 
 with Ezra, and ended with Simon the 
 Just. The age of the Tanaim began 
 after the death of Simon, and extended 
 to the close of the secoud century. 
 
 2 For the history of the Jews during 
 the Persian period Ewald is by far the 
 most important authority (Geschichte 
 
 1832) isa valuable summary. Raphall’s 
 History of the Jews (vol. i. ii., Londen, 
 1856) contains much useful matter, but 
 in a very uncritical form. For the 
 Jater period Jost’s longer work is avail- 
 able. Herzfeld’s Geschichte des Volkes 
 Israel, τι. 8. w., 1 have not been able to 
 see. 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. Td 
 perception of the antagonism of good and evil, even amidst 
 the worst corruptions, seems to have been only less clear 
 than that of their Persian conquerors. The Jews came up 
 out of Egypt an entire people, bound together by common 
 descent and common sufferings; the voice of Sinai was still 
 sounding in their ears when they approached the borders of 
 Canaan; the miracles of release were but a prelude to mir- 
 acles of conquest. They returned from Babylon no longer 
 as a separate nation, but as a colony, to form the cen- 
 tral point of a religious commonwealth ; they returned to 
 hear the last words of prophecy from those who had guided 
 their course, and to recognize in the writings of the past the 
 abiding lessons of God; they returned as tributaries to a 
 foreign power, and yet with a freedom for hierarchical de- 
 velopment which hitherto had been denied them. The 
 revolution in their national hopes, in their spiritual posi- 
 tion, in their social organization, was distinct and critical.! 
 
 The return from Babylon was partial, and not general. 
 The people of Israel passed from Egypt, one , 
 united tribe, to take possession of a promised 
 kingdom, and to assert their national inde- 
 pendence. From Persia only a small band 
 of exiles came back to the home of their 
 fathers, while the mass of their countrymen still lingered 
 in the land of their captivity, and were content to retain 
 their faith while they sacrificed their patriotism. Hence- 
 forth the Jews ceased to form one people in a political 
 sense, though they had found a spiritual bond which could 
 transcend all national differences. While they fought for 
 different masters, and even met face to face in adverse 
 lines, they could still serve one God with undivided 
 
 (a) National hopes. 
 The Jews by losing 
 their independence 
 gained a truer spir- 
 itual union and 
 higher hopes. 
 
 1 Outwardly the annals of the Jews 
 from the time of Nehemiah (3B. c. 445) 
 to the invasion of Alexander (B. C. 332) 
 are indeed brief. One evei.t only is 
 ο mentioned — the murder of his brother 
 by a high priest in the temple: Joseph. 
 AM, αν 7. 1. 
 
 But there are traces of 
 
 oppression on one side, and heroic en- 
 durance on the other: Hecat. ap. Jo- 
 seph. ec. Apion. 1. 22. 
 
 The chronological errors of the Rab- 
 bins, in consequence of this silence of 
 history, which introduce a difference 
 of 240 years, are nuted by Raphall, i. 98, 
 
τ THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 worship. But however insignificant the returning exiles 
 may have been in numbers and wealth, yet the return was 
 necessary ; and from being the centre of a kingdom Jerusa- 
 jem became the centre of a creed. But the difference was 
 most significant. The growth of a Church succeeded to 
 the growth of a people, and the sympathies by which its 
 members were united grew wider, as the sources from 
 which they rose became more truly spiritual. In losing 
 their independence the Jews lost also something of the nar- 
 rowness of their first views.1. No longer needing the close 
 limits of Canaan to shut them off from foreign influences, 
 they were prepared to maintain their faith in whatever 
 land they visited. Deprived of their hereditary dominion, 
 they were led to look forward to a more glorious period of 
 power, when a Son of David should found an eternal and 
 boundless kingdom. Under the presence of foreign rule 
 they clung to the sure promises of their higher destiny ; 
 and, with higher hopes than they had ever realized before, 
 a few poor exiles went forth to conquer the world.? 
 
 When once the people was inspired with this new prin- 
 Wed. ciple of life, the prophetic work was ended. 
 tion, As a conse- Jt remained only to ponder over the teach- 
 quence of this the, ; 
 prophetic work ing of the old prophets, and to read their 
 has words in the light of a new faith. The 
 promises were already given, and only asuspension of crea- 
 tive energy was needed that it might be possible to con- 
 template with steady and undiverted eye the treasures of 
 the past. In this sense the Jews were stationary during 
 the Persian period; but stationary only so far as they 
 entered on no new ground, while they were busy in master- 
 ing every position in that which had been already occupied. 
 And, as if to prepare them for such a period of repose and 
 silence, the last words of Malachi pointed to no new prophet, 
 
 1 It cannot, however, be determined Peuple dIsrael, Ὁ. 121; a brilliant 
 when the court of the Gentiles was ad- sketch of Jewish history from Ewald’s 
 ded to the Temple. Ewald, iv. 197. point of view. 
 
 "Of, Renan, Etudes L’histoire du 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. TT 
 
 but to Elias himself as the herald of the last and great- 
 est crisis in their history. To some the very name of Mal- 
 achi — the Messenger' — seemed to announce a new epoch, 
 and the later tradition which identified him with Ezra was 
 only a bolder expression of the same idea. 
 
 But when the personal work of the prophet was finished, 
 the need of the collective prophetic teaching 
 was deeper than ever; and the warnings of 
 ancient history were then sought for most 
 earnestly, when the records which contained them were, 
 for the mass of the people, as sealed books. 
 tion which grew up in exile adopted the Aramaic dialect 
 (Chaldee), which had been already introduced into Pales- 
 tine by the Chaldean invaders, and thenceforth Hebrew 
 ceased to exist as the national language. But the want 
 and the difficulty mutually relieved each other. The provi- 
 dential change of language suggested a general limit within 
 which the voice of inspiration might be heard, as the fear- 
 ful chastisements of the captivity turned men’s minds to 
 
 the prophetic writ- 
 mgs were collected. 
 
 The genera- 
 
 the old Scriptures with a devotion unknown before. 
 
 1 Cf. Ewald, p. 201, n. 
 
 2 The history of the Jewish Canon is 
 necessarily obscure. The books of Mo- 
 ses appear to have been united under 
 the title of the Law from a very early 
 period (2 Kings xxii. 8; cf. Josh. xxiv. 
 26, 1 Sam. x. 25?); but though the 
 later prophets exhibit a familiar ac- 
 quaintance with the works of their pre- 
 decessors, there is no evidence to show 
 that the prophetic writings were either 
 formed into a definite collection, or 
 connected with the law before the ex- 
 ile. The earliest trace of such a col- 
 lection of the prophets (omitting the 
 questionable passage, Dan. ix. 2) occurs 
 in Ecclesiasticus (xlviii., xlix), where 
 the writings of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and 
 Ezekiel are mentioned in detail, and 
 ‘*the memorial of the twelve prophets” 
 blessed. The book of Daniel seems 
 thus not to have been reckoned among 
 the prephets at that time, though from 
 
 2 
 
 the absence of authentic evidence it is 
 impossible to mark the successive steps 
 by which the present Canon was deter- 
 mined. Prescriptive usage, as in the 
 case of the New Testament, is the clear- 
 est witness of its early history, till the 
 persecution of Antiochus, like that of 
 Diocletian, definitely separated the holy 
 writings of the suffering Church from 
 its remaining literature. But the fact 
 that the Hebrew book of Sirach was 
 not admitted into the Palestinian Canon 
 is a sufficient proof that the distinction 
 existed practically long before; and it 
 is generally allowed that the contents 
 of the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagi- 
 ographa were determined by “ the great 
 Synagogue,” which, according to a 
 Jewish tradition, first added the books 
 of Proverbs, Canticles and Ecclesiastes 
 to the last division. Zunz, Die Gottes- 
 dienstlichen Vortrage der Juden, Berlin, 
 1832, p. 14, n. Ὁ. Cf. Kehl, §§ 156 ff 
 7* 
 
18 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 The cessation of prophecy and the formation of the 
 Canon were accompanied by other changes 
 in the personal life of the Jews, not less im- 
 portant than these, and closely connected 
 with them. The Prophets had spoken of a 
 “new Covenant,” and of an inward worship of the heart, 
 The position of the peo- 
 In exile, far from 
 
 Meanwhile reli- 
 gion assumed a 
 more personal char- 
 acter, and 
 
 with ever-increasing clearness. 
 ple helped them to accept the lesson. 
 the sanctuary, they had learnt, as never before, the power 
 of prayer+ The simple religion of Moses had become 
 impossible; and, on the other hand, contact with Persia, 
 which stands out from all ancient nations in the simplicity 
 of a spiritual worship, naturally led them to realize the 
 purity of their faith, and idolatry passed away forever 
 from among them. The removal of this peril 
 opened the way to a further extension of 
 their divine knowledge. The time was come 
 when they could contemplate without peril the contending 
 powers of an unseen world; and the doctrine of spirits of 
 good and evil took shape, not as a foreign accretion, but as 
 a seasonable development of their first faith.’ 
 
 Outwardly, however, the great change in the Jewish 
 nation after the return was the predominance 
 of the hierarchical element in the state. But 
 it was a hierarchy of education, and not of 
 caste. The records and the institutions of 
 Judaism were regarded as the hallowing power, and not 
 the class to whom the administration of them was commit- 
 ted. In the absence of direct prophetic teaching public 
 worship became the witness of God’s presence, and the 
 
 the view.of the spi- 
 ritual world was 
 widened. 
 
 (c) Social oryani- 
 zation. The hierar- 
 chical element pre- 
 wailed from 
 
 The famous tradition of the restoration 
 of the lost books by Ezra is but an ex- 
 aggerated version of the work of col- 
 lection which really dates from him. 
 4 Ezra xiv. Iren. adv. Har. iii. 21, 2 
 (25), ete. 
 
 The existence of the great Synagogue 
 itself has been called in question on 
 
 insufficient grounds. Cf. Jost, Gesch. 
 i. 438-50; Ewald, iv. 191; and p 54,n. 1. 
 
 1 Ewald, iv. 80; and on the removal 
 of the ark, p. 197, n. The great assem- 
 bly introduced daily prayers: Zunz, a. 
 a.O.p.3l. Etheridge, Hebrew Litera- 
 ture, Ὁ. 93 ff. ; 
 
 2 Cf. Ewald, iv. 207 f. 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL, 79 
 
 requirements of the Law were extended with scrupulous 
 exactness to the details of private life. Two important 
 - changes in ritual signalized the new order of things. The 
 “dispersion” was recognized by the creation of syna- 
 gogues:' the close of the prophetic era by the stated read- 
 ing of the Law.? 
 results flowed, which exercised an important influence upon 
 the character of the people. 
 and excessive zeal which led men to limit 
 and overlay the freedom of daily conduct by 
 religious observances, tended to invest a select body of 
 teachers with almost absolute power. Thus the “scribes” 
 soon rose above the priests, and with them 
 tradition supplied the place of literature. 
 The same result was further strengthened by 
 the services of the Synagogue. The reading of the sacred 
 text was necessarily attended by a vernacular paraphrase 
 (Targum), oral, indeed, yet formed according to strict 
 rules, and handed down in regular succession.2 Thus 
 schools of biblical learning grew up around the synagogues, . 
 and the members of these passed naturally into the great 
 council of the nation (συνέδριον, γερουσία), or into the provin- 
 cial assemblies which were framed upon the same model.‘ 
 
 From these necessary innovations other 
 
 The anxious 
 the growing regard 
 to the Law, and 
 
 the character of the 
 service ofthe Syna- 
 goyue. 
 
 1 The exact date of the institution 
 of synagogues cannot be determined. 
 Possibly Ps. lxxivy.8 may be a refer- 
 ence to them, and in that case their 
 existence shortly after the return would 
 be established; and this is on many 
 grounds the most reasonable belief. 
 
 The importaiice of the institution as 
 marking the new stage of tradition is 
 recognized in the use of the Synagogue 
 (as opposed to Church) for the whole 
 outward constitution of Judaism (Lut- 
 terbeck, Die Neutestamentlichen Lehr- 
 begriffe, Mainz, 1852, 1. 159). 
 
 2 The traces of the public reading of 
 the Law are as obscure as those of the 
 existence of a primitive Canon. The 
 custom was attributed in part to Moses, 
 and having existed partially at least 
 
 under the kings, was established on a 
 firm basis by Ezra. Lessons from the 
 prophets were added in the time of the 
 Maccabees; and at a much later period 
 passages from the Hagiographa were 
 introduced into special services of the 
 Babylonian Synagogue. Zunz,a.a. O., 
 pp- 3—7. 
 
 3 Zunz. a. a. O. pp. 7, 8. Cf. Chap. 
 αι (ii) (B). 
 
 4The Sanhedrin probably existed 
 from the time of the return, and seems 
 to have been formed on the model of 
 the Mosaic council (Numb. xi. 16). 
 During the Persian period the atten- 
 tion of its members would be naturally 
 turned to internal affairs; and Ewald’s 
 conjecture (iv. 191) seems most just that 
 the traditions of ‘the great assembly” 
 
80 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 But the very zeal with which the people sought to fulfil 
 the Law, contained the germ of that noxious 
 growth by which it was finally overpowered. 
 For there was a darker side to the prospects 
 of the Jews though their old perils were conquered. Not 
 only was the integrity of their national character endan- 
 gered, but they were exposed to the subtle temptation of 
 substituting formulas for life. Hence arose the necessary 
 reactions of dogmatism and skepticism ; hope strengthened 
 into affirmation, doubt descending to denial. Meanwhile 
 the fresh joy of life was sinking under the pressure of su- 
 perstition; and as the saddest symbol of the direction in 
 which they were turning, the people of God shrank from 
 naming Him who was their strength.! 
 
 The scanty remains of the literature? which may be re- 
 ferred to the Persian period reflect in frag- 
 mentary images the characteristic features 
 which have been noticed in it. The latest 
 writings which were received into the Hebrew Canon are 
 rather results of the former teaching of the nation by the 
 Law and the Prophets than new elements in its progress. 
 They were essentially Holy Writings (ἁγιόγραφα, Hethu- 
 vim), and not fundamental or constructive, the expression . 
 and not the spring of a Divine life. In the books of Chron- 
 ‘cles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, it is possible to trace a special 
 purpose in the prominence given to ritual observances. In 
 Esther it might seem that we have a simply human narrative, 
 
 The dangers of 
 the period. 
 
 The general char- 
 acter impressed on 
 the Literature, and 
 
 really refer tothe first Sanhedrin. The Geschichte andert (Hcbraer; Israel; Ju- 
 
 greater political activity of the council 
 in the Grecian period is a sufficient 
 cause for the adoption of the Greek 
 title and the separation of the two 
 councils. The earliest allusion to the 
 Sanhedrin has been found in a frag- 
 ment of Hecatzus (Joseph. ¢. Apion. 
 i. 22) referring to c. B. c. 312 (Raphall, 
 Hist. of Jews, i. p. 86, fr. Frankel’s 
 Monatschrifi, Nov. 1851, p 48). 
 
 1 Wie der Volksname sich mit jeder 
 der drei grossen Wendungen dieser 
 
 dier) und jeder als kurzes Merkmal des 
 ganzen Wesens der besondern Wen- 
 dung gelten kann, ebenso und noch 
 mehr der Name Gottes; aber nichts ist 
 bezeicbnender als dass auf dem ein- 
 fachen aber hocherhabenen Jahve der 
 prachtvolle Jahve der Heere mit dem 
 sehr frei gebrauchten Jahve, auf diesen 
 endlichein ... . folgt. Ewald, iv. 224. 
 
 2 Though the remains of the literature 
 are small, the wise man complains of 
 the multitude of books. Eccles. xii. 12. 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 51 
 
 were it not for that under-current of faith which refers all 
 to the Providence of Him whose name is never mentioned. 
 The later Psalms are a softened echo of the strains of 
 David, and not new songs; hymns for the ordinary service 
 of the Temple, and not deep searchings of the heart. In 
 Ecclesiastes, again, the sublime questionings of Job «pass 
 into rhetorical arguments, directed to calm the bitterness 
 of outward suffering rather than to fathom the deep rid- 
 dles of humanity.’ 
 
 The spirit of the period was rightly appreciated by those 
 who ruled it, and finds its true expression in 
 the three principles which are attributed to 
 the men of “the Great Assembly :” “ Be dis- 
 creet in judging; train up many scholars; make a hedge 
 around the Law.”? The difficulties of social and national 
 life, the conflicting interests of ruler and subject, the anx- 
 ious effort to realize in practice the integrity of state and 
 citizen, when both were imperilled by foreign supremacy, 
 are attested by the first command, which could never have 
 occupied such a place in a land of settled government and 
 certain independence. The second command. points to 
 the true source of strength in an age of transition and con- 
 flict. The evils of doubt and dissension are best removed 
 by the extended knowledge of the principles embodied in 
 the state. In proportion as the different classes of the 
 Jewish people were instructed in the writings of Moses and 
 the prophets, priestly usurpation on the one hand, and 
 popular defection on the other, became impossible. The 
 third command alone contains the warning of the coming 
 The fence was necessary, because the Law was not 
 
 the traditional esti- 
 mate of the time. 
 
 end. 
 
 1 Ewald places the composition of 
 Baruch and Tobit at the close of the 
 Persian period (pp. 230, 233), but they 
 seem to belong to a later time. 
 
 2 Aboth, i. 1. Cf. Ewald, iv. 219. 
 Raphall, Hist. of Jews, i. 118 ff., where 
 a somewhat different explanation of the 
 three commands is quoted from Fran- 
 kel’s Monatschrift, vi. 
 
 The Pirke Aboth has been published 
 with a German translation and com- 
 mentary by Dr. A. Adler, Fiirth, 1851 
 (2 Pts.), and also by R. Young, Edinb. 
 1852. It is the most important record 
 of Jewish thought during the whole 
 period, and the short maxims which it 
 contains, if written at length, are his« 
 tory 
 
82 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 only fixed, but dying. Religion already seemed capable of 
 being defined by rule; duty had ceased to be infinite. 
 Stern uprightness, devotion to the law, scrupulous ritual- 
 ism, — all springing from a heroic faith and tending to a life- 
 less superstition, — such were the characteristics of the city 
 which on the frontier of the East awaited with undaunted 
 courage the approach of the conquering hosts of Alexander. 
 Inwardly as well as outwardly the Jewish nation was at 
 » The Grecian vat time prepared to support the antagon- 
 period. ism of Greece. The people had comprehen- 
 The Jews were pre- : . 
 pared for the con ed their relation to the world, and the bold 
 MCW GE exnvession of the national faith was the 
 motto of the last teacher of the great assembly. Simon 
 the Just said, “The world ( Olam) hangs on three things: 
 the law, worship,’ the practice of philanthropy.”? And 
 it was by the strength of this faith that Jerusalem stood 
 unshaken when Tyre fell.’ In addition to the lively con- 
 sciousness of a spiritual mission yet to be fulfilled, the Jews 
 found ready defences against the special dangers which 
 were involved in Grecian rule. The belief in the abso- 
 lute unity of God was so firm that the subtlest form of 
 polytheistic worship could no longer endanger its integrity. 
 The theocratic aspect of nature was so universal that the 
 refinements of pantheism could scarcely make their charms 
 felt. Ritualism was so deeply inwrought into common 
 life that the teaching of philosophy could at best only gain 
 a hearing in the schools. The work of the Eastern world 
 in training a chosen people was perfected; and it was re- 
 served for Greece to bring the bold teaching of reason and 
 nature into contact with the rigid forms of truth which 
 constituted the centre of the old Dispensation, as it re- 
 mained for Rome in after time to present the image of a 
 
 1 Avodah, i. e. service, worship, work. —Jife in its fullest development — rests 
 The old commentators agree in refer- on (1) Doctrine, that is spiritual re- 
 ring it here to the Temple worship of ligion; on (2) the service of God, that 
 sacrifice. is practical religion; on (3) love, as the 
 
 2 Aboth, ἃ. Adler gives a generalin- spring of action. 
 terpretation to the maxim. The world 3 Ewald, p. 250. 
 
THE PREPARATION FORK THE GOSPEL. §3 
 
 kingdom of the world raised upon the foundation of civil 
 law and social freedom, in significant contrast with that 
 kingdom of God, of which the children of the prophets 
 failed to recognize the extent and comprehensiveness. 
 
 The introduction of this new element into Jewish life 
 brings with it, in part at least, a change of 
 scene. The storm of conquest and the vision Renciocssaet Mie 
 of empire passed away, but the true work of “πα 
 Alexander was perpetuated in the city which he chose to 
 bear his name; and which remains after two thousand 
 years the common portal of the East and West. Greek, 
 Roman, Byzantine, Arab, ruled in turn, but Alexandria 
 retained under every dynasty that same catholic character 
 which its founder symbolized by placing the temple of Isis 
 side by side with the temples of the gods of Greece. 
 Alexander prepared a stage in which ample scope and op- 
 portunity was given for every combination of thought and 
 feeling; and men were found to occupy it. The teaching 
 of Philo, Origen, and Plotinus was able to leave its individ- 
 ual impress on the three greatest forms of religious faith. 
 
 A large colony of Jews formed a part of the original 
 population of the new city; and, after more 
 ‘than a thousand years, the descendants of 
 “Pharaoh’s bondmen” returned to the land 
 of their bondage. A second time, according to the old 
 conceit, Israel was preparing to spoil Egypt, now of her 
 intellectual as before of her spiritual heritage, while the 
 colony grew up in the enjoyment of perfect freedom, under 
 the continued influence of the Greek language and litera- 
 ture. For some time the mutual influence of the Churches 
 of Jerusalem and Alexandria was intimate and powerful. 
 Afterwards, from political and social causes, the separation 
 grew wider, till the foundation of the temple at Leontopo- 
 lis completed the schism. Yet even thus the ancient inter- 
 course was not broken off. No beacon-fires announced in 
 Egypt the due time of celebrating the new moons,’ as 
 
 A new centre of 
 Judaism. 
 
 1 Arrian, iii. 1. 2 Cf. Mishna, Rosh Hash. ii. 234. 
 
84 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 determined by the Sanhedrin, but still the great body of 
 the Alexandrine Jews paid the tribute to the Temple. 
 Jerusalem was still regarded as their mother-city ; 1 and 
 when the famous synagogue at Alexandria was destroyed 
 in the reign of Trajan, it was said that “the glory of Israel 
 was extinguished.” From this time Judaism acknowledged 
 another centre; and three great streams flowed from Alex- 
 andria, Babylon and Jerusalem, which carried the name 
 and faith of the God of Israel through Africa, Asia, and 
 Europe. 
 
 The return from Persia was in itself, as has been shown 
 already, the beginning and the preparation of a dispersion : 
 the Greek invasion opened the way to its fulfilment, and 
 Greek rule neutralized the evils by which it was attended. 
 
 The liberal policy of Alexander towards the Jews was 
 
 imitated by his successors, and the progress 
 once politcal ad Of their dispersion was consequently acceler- 
 
 ated Ptolemy, it is said, placed Jewish 
 soldiers in occupation of Egyptian and African strong- 
 holds, in addition to those whom he carried with him after 
 his conquest of Jerusalem, and more particularly founded 
 the Jewish colony at Cyrene. Seleucus Nicator about 
 the same time adinitted Jews to the full citizenship of the 
 numerous towns which he founded throughout Asia Minor 
 and Syria, and Antioch became the seat of an important 
 Jewish settlement. Ata later period, Antiochus the Great 
 transferred two thousand Jewish families from Babylon 
 and Mesopotamia to the disturbed districts of Lydia and 
 Phrygia to secure their loyalty. On the shores of the 
 Caspian and in the highlands of Armenia the Jews increased 
 in number and influence under the protection of the Par- 
 thian dynasty. From Egypt they penetrated into Abys- 
 sinia, and probably into Arabia; and at last — to antici- 
 pate one detail —the work of dispersion was completed 
 
 1 Philo, 6, Flace. § 7. schrift. Dec. 1858. Merivale, Romans 
 2 Cf. Ewald, pp. 267 ff; Raphall, ii. wnder the Empire, iii. 361 ff. 
 64 ff., who quotes Frankel, Jonat- 
 
4“ 
 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 85 
 
 ‘when Pompey carried with him to Rome a train of Jewish 
 captives. 
 
 Meanwhile the influence of commerce was not less pow- 
 erful than the constraint of policy in scatter- 
 ing the Jews wherever civilization had pene- 
 trated. The power of the Greek arms and the Greek lan- 
 guage laid open new paths on every side, and Jews followed 
 the conquerors not only as soldiers but as merchants. 
 Energy characterized their efforts in the one case no less 
 than fidelity in the other, and the wealth which rewarded 
 their industry secured them independence and respect. 
 But the tendency of this dispersion of commerce was more 
 perilous than the dispersion of war. The forces which 
 were sufficient to support the people in their first conflict 
 were weakened by subdivision. Everywhere they were 
 mingled with the heathen population, and yet they were 
 doubly isolated; for as their religion divided them from 
 their follow-citizens, so the ties of their common nationality 
 were weakened by foreign habits. The political divisions 
 which followed the captivity were multiplied a thousand- 
 fold, and Judzea itself was gradually yielding to the influ- 
 ence of Greece when the precipitate fury of a persecutor 
 finally concentrated the spirit of the people in absolute 
 and heroic devotion to the law of Moses. 
 The persecution of Antiochus averted the 
 great outward peril by which the Jewish peo- 
 ple were threatened from the West. Sympathy was quick- 
 ened throughout the whole body, and directed to one centre. 
 The dispersion was reconciled with a real unity when 
 the Law was felt to supply the want of a fatherland. The 
 lesson which was first taught at the return was completed ; 
 and the Church finally assumed the place of the nation. 
 
 The independence, not only popular but personal, which 
 was in the end the result of the Greek con- 
 quest, deeply affected the whole internal con- Pay ies ἣν 
 dition of Palestine. The law became the 
 vital centre of a wide-spread Church, but the Church 
 
 8 
 
 commercial, 
 
 Reconciled witha 
 true unity. 
 
Ὁ 
 
 86 THE PREPARATION FOR’ THE GOSPEL. 
 
 itself was no longer absolutely one. Distinct sects were 
 
 formed when the example of Greece had pre- 
 (a) The Jews in pared ἃ new way to speculation; and ac- 
 ἐπ τὴ τοι ae cording to tradition terrible portents pre- 
 the rise of sects, ceded the change. After the death of Simon 
 
 the Just, it is said, the scape-goat no longer 
 perished among the rocks, but escaped into the wilder- 
 ness. The western light of the golden candlestick, which 
 had always burned brightly, was now sometimes extin- 
 guished. The fire upon the altar languished. The bles- 
 sing upon the show-bread ceased.’ Antigonus of Socho, 
 the first among the doctors who bears a Greek name,? 
 marks the beginning of this era, and tradition describes — 
 him as the first of the Tanaim. The motto in which his 
 doctrine is summed up is, as it were, an epitome of the 
 coming controversy, combining the antithetical principles 
 which were afterwards dissevered. “Be ye not as ser- 
 vants who serve their Lord for the sake of a reward, but 
 as servants who serve their Lord without looking for a 
 reward ; and let the fear of Heaven be upon you.”? The 
 first clause offers a protest against the unworthy supersti- 
 tion of a ceremonial righteousness; the second reproves 
 that proud confidence in self which follows on the first lib- 
 eration from legal service. The two distinct truths which 
 lay at the root of Pharisaism and Sadduceism are recog- 
 nized together, and each excludes the exaggeration of the 
 other. The historical position assigned to Antigonus is in 
 exact harmony with his teaching. He is said to have been 
 the scholar of Simon the Just, the last member of the great 
 Synagogue, and the master of Sadoc and Boethus, the 
 founders of Jewish rationalism.t The teacher now rises 
 from the Church. Hitherto there had been no schools of 
 
 1 Prideaux, Connewxion, ii. 2, fr. Jerus. 4 The story (from the Aboth of R. Na- 
 Talm. than) is given by Raphall, i. 161. Soc- 
 2 Zunz, p. 36. rates, it will be remembered, numbered 
 
 3 Aboth, 3. This is said (Adler, p. 82) both Antisthenes and Aristippus among 
 to ke the first instance of the use of his scholars. 
 heaven for God. 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 87 
 faith, no famous men; but at length individual feeling 
 found its peculiar expression no less in thought than in 
 action. 
 
 Sadduexism was the first and boldest expression of the 
 growing passion for freedom. But the type 
 of freedom was sought in Greece, corrupted by 
 luxury and skepticism, and not in the prophetic 
 pictures of the spiritual Israel. After the first assertion of 
 man’s absolute independence, a doctrine tvhich contained 
 implicitly all the subsequent tenets of the school, the influ- 
 ence of the Sadducees on Judaism was purely negative. 
 Their existence was a protest against the sufficiency of the 
 Pharisaic system; but they offered nothing to replace it. 
 
 While some sought freedom, others, as is always the case, 
 strove to exclude the possibility of its opera- 
 tion. The rise of Sadduceism was coincident 
 with a reiiction in favor of tradition. The 
 Pharisees claimed to possess exclusively the full perfection 
 of the Law; and though the spirit by which the ancient writ- 
 ings were dictated passed away, the form in which they were 
 cast still moulded the oral supplements’ which were added 
 to complete them. The Halaka and the Zlaggada—the 
 Rule and the Word —represented in their general scope 
 the Law and the Prophets; and the primary Jidrash 
 (Interpretation) united precept and exhortation at once 
 with one another and with Holy Scripture.? But no claim 
 
 Sadducees ¢ free- 
 dom), 
 
 Pharisees (ritual- 
 ésni). 
 
 Cf. note at the end of the 
 
 1 The best authorities for early He- 
 brew literature are: Zunz’s Gottesd. 
 Vortr. d. Juden, already quoted, which 
 stands alone for critical accuracy and 
 completeness within its peculiar range; 
 Steinschneider’s article Judische Liter- 
 atur, in Ersch and Gruber’s Encyclo- 
 peedie (which has been revised and pub- 
 lished in English by the author); Eth- 
 ridge’s Hebrew Literature, London, 
 1855, a very unpretending and useful 
 summary. Ilirschfeld’s Geist der Tal- 
 mudischen Auslegung der Bibel, Berlin, 
 1840, is very diffuse and deficient in 
 
 clearness. 
 chapter. 
 
 2 As these words are of frequent oc- 
 currence, it may be well to trace their 
 meaning once for all, 
 
 (1) The general word for Biblical in- 
 terpretation in its widest (cf. 
 Aben Ezra ap. Buxt?. s. v.) is Midrash 
 (fr. darash, to investigate and inter- 
 
 sense 
 
 pret). Hence also an exposition or al- 
 legorical interpretation is called Da- 
 rash (the result of inquiry): the teacher 
 generally Doresh, Darshan (interpre 
 
 ter); and the school baith hammidrash. 
 
FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 88 THE PREPARATION 
 
 was made to original divine legislation. It was said that 
 an oral Law had been given on Sinai, and that this which 
 had been handed down in due succession from the time of 
 Moses, when explained by the sayings of the great teachers, 
 constituted the necessary supplement to the written Law, 
 and completed a perfect code of life, of equal and paramount 
 authority in allits parts. It was the work of the Sopherim to 
 collect, of the Tanaim to arrange the substance of this oral 
 Law. Nor was this done hastily. The first formal classi- 
 fication of the contents of the Torah shebeal Peh—the 
 Law that is upon the li —is attributed to Hillel; and the 
 six Orders (Sedarim) which he distinguished formed the 
 basis of the work of Akiva and Jehuda, when at length, at 
 
 the end of the second century, the Mishna 
 
 the repetition 
 
 of the Law — was committed to writing.! 
 
 The word occurs 2 Chron. xiii. 22; 
 xxiv. 27. Gesenius gives fo rub as the 
 radical meaning of the verb: cf. Ges. 
 Thes. 8 v. 
 
 (2) The practical precept is Halaka, a 
 step, a rule, from halak, to go, hence to 
 spend one’s life, to live. Vhe compari- 
 son of derek (via, vita, cultus) shows 
 clearly how a step would naturally ex- 
 press a detached principle of life. The 
 cognate form halikah (only in pl.) oc- 
 curs trop. Prov. xxxi. 27. 
 
 (8) The narrative, extending from the 
 legend to the homily, is Haggada, Ag- 
 gada, from nagad, Hiph. Higgid, to 
 tell, relate. 
 
 Hirschfeld (Der Geist der Talmud. 
 Auslegung, p. 13) gives a different, and, 
 I think, an erroneous, explanation of 
 the words: halaukah, iteratio, yon ha- 
 lak, das Nachgehen, Folgen einer Vor- 
 schrift, Mithalten, und ‘‘der Varthei 
 
 sein.” Haggadah, dicta, sermones, 
 von nagad sprechen, erzahlen, meinen, 
 — Meinung. 
 
 1 The precepts of this oral law, in 
 allusion to their supposed source, were 
 called halacoth leMosheh meSinai (pre- 
 cepts of Moses from Sinai). This was 
 the original kabbala (tradition), a name 
 applied to the writings of the prophets 
 
 (Steinschn. ]. 6. p. 351). For centuries 
 this law was preserved by memory or 
 in secret rolls (megillath setharim). At 
 the end of the second century, when 
 the consequences of the defeat of Bar- 
 kokeba threatened the utter dismember- 
 ment of the Jewish nation, it was com- 
 mitted to writing by R. Jehuda (7191 
 A. C.), and, being embodied with other 
 materials, in six Sedarim (orders) under 
 the name of the Mishna (shanah, to 
 double, repeat; the word mishneh oc- 
 curs for a copy (of the law), Deut. xvii. 
 18; Josh. viii. 32), has remained the 
 central point of all later tradition. 
 Round the Sedarim of the Mishna a 
 complement of discussions (Gemara ; 
 Gamar, to complete) was gradually 
 formed, and the whole was completed 
 at Babylon in 498 a.c. The study of. 
 the Mishna and Gemara was properly 
 called Talmud (lomad, to teach), and 
 this name was applied to the works 
 themselves. A second Gemara(extend- 
 ing to four of the six orders) was fo1med 
 in Palestine, about the end of the fourth 
 century ; and this, in combination with 
 a text of the Mishna, slightly differing 
 from the Babylonian, forms the Jeru 
 salem Talmud. 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. RQ 
 
 The popular influence of this secondary Law is every- 
 where visible in the Gospels. It is absolutely 
 authoritative, and yet absolutely definite. 
 The tradition of the elders claims the obedi- 
 ence of the faithful; and “to teach with authority” — with 
 
 The influence of 
 tradition. 
 
 independent power—is contrasted with the teaching of 
 the βου] θα. 
 marks a crisis of religious feeling. 
 
 But in itself the recognition of such a code 
 As long as the charter 
 of faith is felt to consist in living principles, capable of 
 being clothed in ever-varying forms, no change can render 
 it obsolete or inadequate. If, however, its terms are once 
 fixed by some temporary interpretation, at the first revolu- 
 tion of thought or position it is found antiquated and 
 insufficient, and that help is sought from tradition which 
 really can be found only in the vitality of the original Law. 
 To invoke tradition as an independent authority is to 
 proclaim that the first Law is dead. 
 
 Between the false freedom of the Sadducee and the 
 ritualism of the Pharisee a third course lay 
 open. The Essenes sought rest in a mystic 
 asceticism Which promised freedom by the 
 conquest of sense, and true worship in the substitution of 
 the spiritual for the material. 
 every age, they began by asserting the sovereignty of God 
 
 Essenes (asceti- 
 cism). 
 
 Like similar reformers in 
 
 to the exclusion of man’s freedom.’ Jews by race, they 
 
 1 R. Eliezer boasted that he had never 
 said anything which he had not heard 
 from his teacher. (Steinschneider, a. a. 
 O. 364.) 
 
 2The relation in which the three 
 parties stand to another is a suffi- 
 cient proof that it is unnecessary to 
 seek the origin of the Essenes in any 
 foreign society. The triple tendency 
 ever exists in men, and in times of 
 strong religious feeling will find an 
 outward expression, in each case par- 
 tial and exaggerated, and approaching 
 more ΟΥ̓ 658 closely to the correspond- 
 ing developments of other periods. 
 
 8* 
 
 The Palestinian origin of the Essenes 
 is rightly asserted by Hilgenfeld, Die 
 Jud. Apok. 245 ff. Alexandrine and 
 Pythagorean influences may have modi- 
 fied the details of the society in the 
 course of time; but the resemblance of 
 the Essenes, Therapeute, and Neo- 
 Pythagoreans, are explicable on other 
 grounds. 
 
 The derivation of the name 
 certain. Many deduce it from asa, to 
 heal. Hilgenteld proposes Hazin, Ho- 
 zim, seers, Which is supported by Sui 
 das s. ν. 
 
 3 Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 5, 9. 
 
 is un- 
 
fie “ 
 
 “5 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 found their chief bond of union in mutual love, as members — 
 of a society rather than citizens of a nation.’ The institution 
 of celibacy and the community of goods reduced the rela- 
 tions of their domestic life to the simplest form ; but each 
 detail assumed something of the solemnity of worship. 
 Though ascetics, they did not wholly fly from the business 
 and society of men, but, living in scattered communities, 
 they offered a public testimony to truth, justice, and purity.” 
 At the same time, by varied fastings and lustrations, and by 
 the study of the sacred books,’ they aspired towards a closer 
 communion with the unseen world, and claimed to retain 
 among them the gift of prophecy; and “it is rarely,” 
 Josephus adds, “that they are found to err in their predic- 
 tions.” ὦ 
 
 The school of the Essenes, however different in its final 
 shape from that of the Pharisees, yet sprang 
 from the same causes. <A feeling of distrust 
 in life, a faithless unwillingness to tread in 
 the old paths, a craving after the protection 
 of astern discipline, at the same time a zeal 
 prepared for any sacrifice, found satisfaction in the minute- 
 ness of an oral law, or in the self-devotion of a religious 
 rule? 
 
 The Pharisees 
 and Essenes con- 
 nected by an ana- 
 cous legalism, which 
 appears in 
 
 1 Joseph. Bell. Jud. ii. 8; ([Hippol.] 
 Philos. ix. 18 ff.). Cf. Antiq. xviii. 2; 
 xv. 10, 4. Philo, Quod omnis probus 
 liber, §§ 12 f.; Apol. ἔν. ἂρ. Euseb. Prep. 
 Εν στ, 20; Plin ἘΠ. Nave vel: Lhe 
 first passage contains the authorities 
 for what I have stated, unless a direct 
 reference be given. 
 
 2 Hilgenfeld (a. a. O. p. 259 anm.) 
 seems to give rightly the sense of Jo- 
 seph. B. J. ii. 8, 4: ‘“‘ They have not one 
 city, but many dwell together in each 
 ‘of their communities]? (as below ἐν 
 ἑκάστῃ πόλει τοῦ τάγματος). The 
 words thus become consistent with 
 those of Philo and Pliny; but the read- 
 ing in Hippolytus, μετοικοῦσι, om. τοῦ 
 τάγματος is more favorable to the com- 
 mon reading. Some Essenes even re- 
 
 garded marriage as a duty (Joseph. B. 
 Js 1.8, he): 
 
 3 Βίβλοις iepais.... καὶ προφητῶν 
 ἀποφδϑέγμασιν. The τὰ τῶν παλαίων 
 συγγράμματα (§ 6) seem to have in- 
 cluded more than the books of Scrip- 
 ture. (Cf. Hippol. ix. 22.) The Essenes 
 had also private books: τὰ τῆς αἱρέσεως 
 βιβλία (5 7). 
 
 4 He quotes three examples: Antiq. 
 Χχυ Nos Bell Jud 1.138; ΘΠ 7.9 
 
 5 The Essenes “‘reverenced the Law- 
 giver next to God,” and their ob- 
 servance of the Sabbath was most seru- 
 pulous (Joseph. 1. ¢.). They offered 
 sacrifices (ϑυσίας ἐπιτελοῦσι) also ; 
 but not at Jerusalem (Joseph. Antiq. 
 Xvili. 2). Philo, however, sas (p. 457 
 M.), ϑεραπευταὶ ϑεοῦ γεγόνασιν ov 
 ζῶα καταϑύοντες...... 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 91 
 
 The Book of Ecclesiasticus, the sole relic of the Palestinian 
 literature during the Greek supremacy, is 
 marked by the traces of this anxious legal-  Pevtssissticus, and 
 ism.’ Life appears imprisoned in endless 
 rules, and the teacher strives to restore its cheer t@inaas. 
 Subjection and humility are among the first virtues.’ 
 Knowledge is hidden in proverbs and confined in schools. 
 To unriddle dark sayings is the duty of the wise man, 
 though it be “a wearisome labor of the mind.” He whio 
 “sees aman of understanding will get betimes unto him, 
 and wear the steps of his door.”® The renown of the scribe 
 is of all the most brilliant and the most enduring.? To give 
 glory to the priest is coupled with the showing fear 
 towards God. 
 
 The sayings of the later doctors are still more impressed 
 with the spirit of dependence. The stored 
 mind of the teacher is the source of wisdom, fe rediiontaur 
 and hope seems surest when it can be referred 
 to old belief.° “Jose, the son of Joezer, of Zereda, said: 
 Let thine house be the gathering-place of the wise. Dust 
 thyself with the dust of their feet; and drink their words 
 as a thirsty man.” “Joshua, the son of Perachja.... said: 
 Get for thyself a teacher; win for thyself a companion.” 
 .... “Abtalion said: Ye wise men, be careful in your 
 discourse, lest ye be ..... cast into a place of bitter 
 waters, and the scholars who come after you drink of them 
 and die.” .... “Hillel said: He who will make himself 
 a great name, loses his name; he who increases not, 
 
 1 There can, I think, be no reasona- 3 Ecclus. xiii. 2, 6; vi. 35. 
 ble doubt that the translation was made f 
 6. 130 B. C., and that consequently the 4 Ecclus. XXXvVili, 24; XXXIX. 11. 
 Hebrew original was written about 180 With this compare the corresponding 
 Ρ. c. Itseems probable that old mate- praise of the Law: xxiv. 23—29. 
 rials were included in the original book, 
 but I see nothing which may not be of 
 purely Palestinian origin. Cf. Ewald, 
 pp. 298 ff. 
 
 2 Ecclus. iv. 7; viii. 1, 8, 14; ix. 13; 
 xiii. 2. 6 Aboth, 4, 6, 11. 
 
 5 Ecclus. vii. 29—31. At the same time 
 the writer takes a wider view than com- 
 mon of the extent of God’s providence: 
 xviii. 19. 
 
92 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 decreases; he who learns not, is worthy of death; and he 
 who makes use of the Crown [of the law for his own end] 
 is lost.”' “Shammai said: Make thy doctrine sure. Speak 
 little and do much.” ...... “Gamaliel said: Make to thyself 
 a teacher. Relinquish doubtful points; and give not tithes 
 often according to conjecture [but with strict accuracy ].” 
 For a time, however, the resuscitation of the national 
 spirit supplied the loss of the ancient spirit of 
 ii. The Hasmo- the prophets. The Maccaban struggles, 
 
 nean supremacy. 
 
 iad ee ard which averted the danger of a general 
 and writing. assimilation of the people to their Grecian 
 
 rulers, at the same time gave real life to the 
 study of Scripture, and called out new forms of thought 
 and writing. Hitherto the Law had concentrated upon 
 itself the affection and hope of the Jews. Since the return 
 they had been content to find in this the pledge and 
 foundation of their national stability, anticipating a future 
 which should only confirm and complete the character of 
 the present. But now again, in the heat of contest and 
 under the immediate consciousness of divine help, they felt 
 that the end could not be consummated in a mere “judg- 
 ment of the heathen,” but fixed their eyes again upon the 
 faded image of Messiah, and saw their fullest hope only 
 through the strife and trials which should accompany His 
 advent. In the moment of victory they knew that its issue 
 was transient. The temporal glory of a conqueror was 
 insufficient to satisfy the hopes of the nation, and Simon 
 was appointed “ruler and high-priest forever until there 
 arose a faithful prophet.”? A corresponding change passed 
 over their literature. The last echo of the prophets passed 
 away in the Book of Baruch, the writer of which, after 
 confession and reproof, describes in the magnificent imagery 
 of Isaiah the future triumphs of Jerusalem.2 But now 
 
 1 Aboth, 13, according to the transla- Yet it is προφήτης, not & προφήτης 
 
 tion of Adler: the Latin version of (John i. 21). 
 Surenhusius cannot be correct. 3 It is extremely difficult to determine 
 21 Mace. xiv. 41. Cf. iv. 46; ix 27. the date of the Book of Baruch. Possi- 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 93 
 
 Revelation succeeded to the place of Prophecy. It seemed 
 that the time was come when the veil might be raised from 
 the counsels of God; and the seer pointed to all things 
 working together for the immediate and final crisis.2 
 In addition to the “ Revelations” of Daniel,’ two Jewish 
 Apocalypses still remain, the Book of Henoch 
 and the so-called fourth Book of Esdras, 
 which show with singular clearness in what 
 way the writings of Daniel served as the foundation for 
 later dreams. Both exist only in translations, but other- 
 Wise, as it appears, with few deviations from their original 
 form. The former is evidently of Eastern, and probably 
 of Palestinian origin, while the latter with equal certainty 
 
 a. Apocalypses. 
 Tlenoch. 
 4 Esdras, 
 
 may be ascribed to Egypt. 
 
 bly it was written shortly before or after 
 the war of liberation; but on some 
 accountsI should prefer an earlier date. 
 The first part (i.—iii. 8) is evidently de- 
 rived from a Hebrew original; and the 
 Greek translator of this part probably 
 added the conclusion (iii. 9—end). 
 
 1 A revelation (ἀποικάλυψι5). withits 
 specific purpose, its artificial plan, its 
 symbolic imagery, its angelic ministra- 
 tions, possessing at once the unity of a 
 poem and the gorgeousness of a dream, 
 is in itself the last step in the develop- 
 ment of prophecy. It is also the most 
 attractive form in which hope can be 
 offered to a people which has learnt to 
 feel even in the deepest afflictions that 
 they form the turning-point of the 
 world’s history. But revelation differs 
 from prophecy not only in the details 
 of composition, but also in the point 
 from which it contemplates the future, 
 or rather the eternal. The Seer takes 
 his stand in the future rather than inthe 
 present; and while the Pi ophet seizes on 
 the prominent e!ements of good and evil 
 which he sees around him, as seeds of 
 fhe great ‘“‘age to come,” the Seer is 
 filled first with visions of ‘the Jast 
 days,” and so passes from those to the 
 trials of his time. In prophecy the 
 
 Both contain numerous data 
 
 divine and human—intuitive pre- 
 science and fragmentary utterance — 
 are interwoven in one marvellous web. 
 In ‘‘ revelation”? the two elements can 
 be contemplated separately, each in its 
 most active vigor, distinet predictions 
 and elaborate art. As a natural conse- 
 quence, ‘“‘ revelation” invites imitation 
 as well by its artificiality as by its de- 
 finiteness: its form is human, and its 
 subject-matter limited and uniform. 
 And thus, while few have ventured to 
 affect the style of the ancient prophets, 
 ‘“« Apocalypses”’ have rarely been want- 
 ing to embody the popular belief of 
 those enthusiasts who, in all ages, ante- 
 date the final judgment of the world, 
 and see in passing events nothing but 
 certain signs of its near approach. 
 
 2 This is not the place to enter on the 
 question of the date of the Book of 
 Daniel in its present form; but I may 
 be allowed to remark that the canon- 
 icity of the book depends on the judg- 
 ment of the Jewish church, and not on 
 the date of its composition. If it can 
 be demonstrated that it belongs to the 
 Maceabiean era, it remains just as much 
 as before a part of Scripture, and a di- 
 vine comment on history, 
 
04 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 which seem to point to the period of their composition, 
 but, at the same time, these are so ambiguous as to have 
 received the most various explanations. Without entering 
 into the details of the question, it appears most probabie 
 that the books were written at periods separated by about 
 a century — Henoch during the later times of the Greco- 
 Syrian empire, and Esdras when the power of Rome was 
 everywhere dominant in the East, and Octavian undisputed 
 master of the empire... But however this may be, there 
 can be no doubt that both Apocalypses represent purely 
 Jewish notions; and dealing with the problems which 
 Christianity solved, at no great interval from the time when 
 the great answer was given, they yield in strange interest 
 to few records ‘of antiquity. Even in respect of style, as 
 well as of substance, they repay careful study. The spirit 
 of God’s ancient people is indeed no longer clothed in the 
 utterance of divine prophets, but it is not yet shrouded in 
 -a dress of idle fables. There are symptoms of increasing 
 degeneracy and faithlessness in the later book; but when 
 Henoch and Esdras were written, the words of inspiration 
 were still powerful to rein the fancy and shape the visions 
 of seers, and the wildest imaginings which they contain 
 make little approach to the trifling of the Talmudists.? 
 
 At the same time that prophetic hopes reiippeared under 
 the form of Revelations, prophetic history 
 gave rise to those striking narratives of 
 individual life, Tobit and Judith, which 
 present the popular ideal of virtue, courage, and patience. 
 For these the Book of Esther offered a Scriptural model, as 
 that of Daniel for the Apocalypses and Ecclesiastes for the 
 
 b. Didactic nar- 
 ratives. 
 
 1 The general character of the book 
 at first sight suggests a date shortly 
 after the destruction of Jerusalem, and 
 this has been adopted by Gfrorer, Wie- 
 seler, and Bauer; but the description 
 of the ‘“‘three heads” (ὁ. xi.) appears 
 to point to the times of the Triumvi- 
 rates. Cf. Hilgenf. 218 ff. 
 
 2 Compare, for instance, the allusion 
 
 to Leviathanand Behemoth in Henoch 
 Ix. 7, with the well-known Talmudic 
 legend. The Book of Esdras contains 
 the Jezend in a transition state, vi. 
 49—52. 
 
 The Apocalypses of Henoch and Es- 
 dras will come under notice more par- 
 ticularly in the next chapter. 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 95 
 
 Books of Wisdom. Nor can it be unworthy of notice that 
 the latest books in the Canon offer a complete parallel in 
 theme and manner to the works which followed, while 
 they are clearly distinguished from them even by outward 
 marks of power and originality. As time advanced imagi- 
 nation supplied the place of vision, and fiction was sub- 
 stituted for history. 
 
 The Book of Tobit is at once the oldest, the most natural, 
 and the most beautiful of the scenes of later 
 Jewish life. The legalism of Jerusalem is 
 softened down in the regions of the far East, and it would 
 be impossible to find a more touching image of holiness 
 and piety, according to the current type, than that of the 
 Israelite captives of Nineveh. The various ties of family 
 are hallowed by the presence of pure love. The righteous- 
 
 Tobit. 
 
 ness of works appears in deeds of affection and merey 
 rather than in forms of simple ritual. The power of 
 private prayer is exalted by its manifold success. The 
 belief in the eternal purposes of God is firm and constant : 
 and hope is proportionately clear and strong. The Book 
 of Judith is conceived in a far different strain. 
 
 The ordinary relations of a household are 
 
 changed for the most terrible dangers of war; holiness in 
 living for valor in daring. It was written apparently when 
 a season of conflict was still impending, and the memory 
 of deliverance still fresh. A woman, and she a widow, 
 is able to overcome the captain of “the king of all the 
 -earth” by the power of the God of her fathers. ‘* There is 
 none that may gainsay her words” or her confidence ; and 
 why should Israel tremble before Syria? Faith can yet 
 do what faith has done.? 
 
 The first book of the Maccabees is the ΣΙ Maccabees. 
 
 only Palestinian record of the heroic struggle 
 
 which was inspired by such a hope, and is simple, natural, 
 
 “τ Judith. 
 
 1 The numerous recensions in which which they enjoyed. Cf. Fritzsche, 
 the Books of Tobit and Judith—like Το. Handb. Bint. Tob. §§ 83-8; Jud 
 those of Esther and Daniel—exist,is §§ 2—6. 
 
 a sufficient proof of the wide popularity 
 
96 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 and accurate. The second book, of African origin, is more 
 ambitious, and at times legendary ; but both 
 are destitute of that prophetic insight which 
 elsewhere makes the chronicles of the Jews a commentary 
 on the fulfilment of the Divine counsels. 
 
 The relics of the ante-Christian literature of Palestine 
 terminate’ with the first Book of Mac- 
 cabees; but meanwhile, the Jewish spirit in 
 Egypt had not been inactive. The Greek 
 Bible had preserved that real union with ancient Israel 
 which the disuse of the Temple-service had threatened to 
 destroy; and from the first the growth of independence 
 and thought was more rapid among the Jews of Alexandria 
 than among those of Palestine. The city itself was stamped 
 with the impress of no distinct nationality, and controversy 
 was inevitable in a place where every system found its 
 representatives. But the Law and the prophets still con: 
 tinued to guide the philosophy of the Dispersion; and the 
 Greek dress in which they were clothed prepared for after 
 times the means of expressing intelligibly the principles of 
 Christianity. The history of the LXX is obscure and 
 perplexed.?,- So much, however, at least, is clear, that the 
 Pentateuch was translated first, no long time after the first 
 settlement of the Jews, and that the other books were 
 added at various intervals before the middle of the second 
 The character of the Alexandrine Church 
 
 2 Maccabecs. 
 
 (b) The Jews in 
 Egypt. 
 The Septuagint 
 
 century B. ὁ. 
 
 1 The Book of Jubilees perhaps may 
 *be added, cf. Ch. ii. 1.(d). The Tar- 
 gums were rather the gradual embodi- 
 ments of tradition than spontaneous 
 literary works. 
 
 2 The work of Hody, De Bibliorum 
 Text. Orig., Oxon. 1705, is still the most 
 important original investigation of the 
 LXX. Frankel (Vorstudien zu der 
 LXX., Leipz., 1841) deals well with de- 
 tails of Janguage and orthography. 
 Grinfield (Apology for the LXX. Lon- 
 don, 1850) pleads for the authority of 
 the translation. 
 
 83 It is a coincidence too remarkable | 
 to be left unnoticed, that about the 
 same time at which the translation of 
 the Pentateuch was completed, Man- 
 etho, an Egyptian priest, published in 
 Greek the first authentic account of the 
 Egyptian history and religion, based 
 upon the original records. Once again 
 Egypt and Israel came in conflict. The 
 writings of Callimachus illustrative of 
 Greek mythology, and of Aratus on 
 natural phenomena, belong to the same 
 period. Cf. Carové, Vorhalle des Chris« 
 tenthums, Jena, 1851, p. 176. 
 
THE PREFARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 97 
 
 has not failed to influence the translation; and, in some 
 respects, it is rather an adaptation than a reproduction of 
 the original. Even in the Pentateuch the traces of a 
 growing refinement are discernible. The most remarkable 
 anthropomorphic phrases are softened, and 
 “the glory of the Lord” is substituted for τοίη the origi- 
 His personal presence. Some preparation, 
 at least, is made for the distinction of the Creator 
 from Jehovah; and the narrative of the creation is 
 moulded according to the current conceptions of a 
 primary ideal world and of the constitution of man’s 
 nature. The variations in the prophets are still more 
 remarkable; and it seems difficult to explain the omissions 
 which occur, except by the supposition of some intentional 
 reserve in publishing the expected glories of Messiah.? 
 But the LXX performed a still greater work than that 
 of extending a knowledge of Judaism to the 
 heathen world: it wedded Greek language 471 @ Meological 
 to Hebrew thought, the most exact form of 
 expression with the most spiritual mode of conception. 
 The intellectual vocabulary of the civilized world was 
 claimed for religious use, and theology became a science. 
 Active speculation followed as a necessary result. The 
 gifts and promises of Revelation were compared with the 
 faculties and wants of man. Traditional faith and new 
 philosophy were examined and combined with various suc- 
 cess; and the two events which mark the widest diver- 
 gence of the Alexandrine from the Palestinian Jews 
 belong to the same generation, and synchro- 
 nize with the Maccabzean struggles. About ,,/” growth of 
 the same time that the temple of Leontop- 
 olis was built, Aristobulus, a Jewish follower of Aristotle,’ 
 
 1Cf. Gfrérer, a. a. O. ii. ff. 8 ff; Jewish thought at Alexandria, it is im- 
 
 Diehine, ii. i. ff. Frankel, 176 ff. portant to remember that the pursuit 
 2 Grinfie.d, p. 74, with reference to of philosophy was of late introduction, 
 Isai. ix. 6. and that the form first current was the 
 
 3 With regard to the development of Peripatetic. VPlatonism was only a re- 
 
 Hy) 
 
98 ΤῊΣ PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 gave the first real impulse to that mystical and Hellenizing 
 tendency which was afterwards supposed to characterize 
 the synagogue and church of Alexandria. The two facts 
 mutually explain one another; for the growth of wider 
 views of the purposes of the Law, and a more spiritual 
 perception of its precepts, might seem to justify the aban- 
 donment of the literal Zion. The time was come, it was 
 said, when there should “be an altar to the Lord in the 
 midst of the land of Egypt,” as the prophet had spoken; 
 and when Egypt should be “blessed as God’s people.” ? 
 The voice of Paganism itself was now boldly used to 
 attest the supremacy of the faith of Israel. 
 In his commentary on the books of Moses, 
 Aristobulus introduced a long Orphice quotation, which 
 must have been cast in a Jewish shape either by himself 
 or by some one of his countrymen. The adaptation — for 
 it seems to have been an adaptation rather than a forgery 
 — was not without excuse, and found abundant parallels. 
 Orpheus seemed to stand apart from the later forms of 
 polytheism in the depths of a mysterious antiquity, and 
 thus the reminiscences of a patriarchal tradition could be 
 attributed to him without unnatural violence. 
 In like manner the Sibyl occupied an inde- 
 pendent position in the religion of Greece and Rome. 
 If Orpheus represented the recipient of a primeval reve- 
 lation, the Sibyl was an embodiment of the teaching of 
 nature. The writings of a Jewish or Chaldaic Sibyl con- 
 tain probably the earliest fragments among the Sibyilline 
 
 Aristobulus. 
 
 The Jewish Sibyl. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria recur in Euse- 
 bius. The objections to the authen- 
 ticity of the fragments are quite insuf- 
 ficient. Cf. Gfrérer, Philo, ii. pp. 71 ff; 
 
 action against skepticism, which springs 
 naturally from an exclusive study of 
 the abstract or useful sciences. Cf. 
 Matter, Hist. de V Ecole Alex. iii. 158 ff. 
 
 1 Isai. xix. 18, 19, 25. Joseph. Antiq. 
 xiii. 8. Cf. Hieron. Comm. in Isai. 
 Vienlence 
 
 2 Βίβλους ἐξηγητικὰς τοῦ Μωῦσέως 
 νόμου, Euseb. H. E. vii. 89. The frag- 
 ments of Aristobulus are preserved in 
 Euseb. Prep. Evang. vii. 18, 14; viii. (8) 
 9,10; xiii. 12. The passages quoted by 
 
 Dachne, ii. 78 ff; Ewald, iv. p. 294 n. 
 
 3 Oracula Sibyllina ... . recensuit 
 .... I.H. Friedlieb, Lipsiz, 1852. Cf. 
 Hilgenfeld, Die Judische Apokalyptik, 
 Jena, 1857, pp. 53—90. The text, how- 
 ever, is still extremely corrupt. I have 
 not seen Didot’s ed., Paris, 1856. 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 00 
 
 verses; and the very fact of their existence and currency 
 is a proof of the growing sympathy between Jew and 
 Greek. “God,” it is said, “dwells in all men, the test of 
 truth in common light.” Ὁ 
 ministers of His vengeance, — this office is reserved for 
 the “barbarian rule” of Rome,? — but “they shall be guides 
 to all men unto life.”* The corruptions of heathendom are 
 traced to their first source in the confusion of tongues; 
 and the triumphs of the true faith are pursued till it be- 
 comes the religion of the whole earth, till “prophets are 
 kings and judges of the world,” and a heavenly peace is 
 restored to nature and man.* In this respect the Sibylline 
 writings stand alone as an attempt to embrace all history, 
 even in its details, in one great theocratic view, and to 
 regard the kingdom of the world as destined to form proy- 
 inces in a future kingdom of God. 
 
 The writings of Philo exhibit the maturity of Alexan- 
 drine thought, which was thus early directed 
 to subtle allegory and wide hope. They bear 
 few marks of originality or order, and must be regarded as 
 the epitome and not the source of a system. Their char- 
 acteristic is meditation and not thought; their source the 
 accumulated treasures of the past, and not the opening of 
 any new mine; their issue eclecticism, and not discovery. 
 They may show how far men had advanced, but they open 
 no way for future progress. Filled with the most profound 
 belief in the divinity of the Jewish law, and not unin- 
 structed in the philosophy of Greece, Philo endeavors to 
 show the real unity of both, or rather to find in Moses the 
 true source of the teaching of Plato and Aristotle. The 
 spiritual instinct which had softened down the anthropo- 
 morphic language of the Pentateuch in the LXX transla- 
 tion, led Philo to explain away the traces of it which still 
 remained, The divine Logos, at once the Reason and the 
 
 His people are no longer only 
 
 Philo. 
 
 1 Prol.18. Cf. iii. 262. 4 iii. 781; 367 ff. ; 784 ff. Cf c. ii 
 2 iii. 638, 520. pp. 89 ff. 
 8 iii. 195. 
 
a 
 
 100 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 Word of God, is brought into close and manifold connec- 
 tion with the world, while Jehovah (τὸ ὄν, rarely 6 ὦν) is 
 farther withdrawn from it. With the fullest consciousness 
 of the work which the Jews had to discharge as teachers 
 of mankind, Philo saw no way in which the work could be 
 accomplished but by the perpetuation of the ordinances of 
 the Law. He felt that the details of ritual were more than 
 symbols of abstract ideas, but he found no antitype to sub- 
 stitute in their place. And thus while his spiritualism re- 
 ‘tained the restrictions of the old faith, it removed it from 
 the reach of the simple. So far from “ preaching a Gospel 
 to the poor,” it took away from them the outward pledge 
 of it in which they trusted. Its tendency was to exalt 
 knowledge in the place of action; its home was in the 
 cells of the recluse, and not in the field or the market; its 
 truest disciples were visionary Therapeute, and not apos- 
 tles charged with a gospel for the world, debtors alike to 
 Jew and Greek. 
 
 The society of the Therapeutz ' was indeed the practical 
 corollary of Alexandrianism. The same ten- 
 deney which had produced the society of the 
 Essenes in Palestine found a new development on the 
 borders of Lake Meeris. The discipline and occupation of 
 these ascetics seemed to offer so clear an image of later 
 monastic life that Eusebius claims them as Christians, and 
 probably they furnished the model on which the first 
 Egyptian communities were framed. They differed from 
 the Essenes both in the objects of their pursuit and in the 
 austerity of their rule. The examination of the deeper 
 symbolism of Scripture was a congenial subject to those 
 whose external position had long shut them out from the 
 literal observance of the Law; and the open corruption of 
 the court of the Ptolemies naturally called out the antag- 
 onism of an excessive self-denial. The active work which 
 formed an essential part of the system of the Essenes, 
 found no place in the cells of these Alexandrian devotees. 
 
 The Therapeute. 
 
 1 Philo, De Vita contemplativa, throughout. 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 101 
 
 For them the “ whole day from sunrise to sunset was spent 
 in mental discipline;” their one study was to investigate 
 the inner meaning of their national philosophy contained 
 in the “holy writings.” The use of hyssop to give flavor 
 to the ordinary diet of bread and salt and water was re- 
 garded as a delicate luxury. They sought only to appease 
 the appetites, and not to gratify them. But the satisfaction 
 of bodily wants was often forgotten in the pursuit of wis- 
 dom, and at all times “meat and drink” were held unwor- 
 thy of the light. In one respect only they shared in com- 
 mon pleasures, when on their weekly vigil they recalled in 
 sacred hymns and dances the great song of Moses and 
 Miriam, adapting the rich resources of Grecian poetry and 
 music to their divine themes. 
 
 The Book of Wisdom is the noble expression of a mind 
 which might have sought rest and joy in this 
 meditative life; nor need it be a matter of 
 wonder if the clearest foreshadowing of 
 some of the truths of Christianity proceeded from such a 
 source, if the attributes of the Divine Wisdom were gath- 
 ered to something of a personal shape, and the workings 
 of its powers extended to the whole world, by men who 
 lived in the contemplation of God’s dealings with mankind. 
 Yet it is Wisdom, not the Word, and much less Messiah, 
 which is exalted by the poet as “the creative, preserving, 
 guiding power.” To the recluse, far from the rude struggles 
 of life, — from “the publicans and sinners” of a suffering 
 world, — it might seem enough to paint the glories of wis- 
 dom and gaze forever on the picture, but Wisdom, cold 
 and partial, could not be the truth for which creation was 
 looking. 
 
 For this last growth of Judaism, if the fairest, was still 
 premature and fruitless. In its essence it 0 
 was the ideal of heathen religion, and the acter of Alexan- 
 negation of Christianity, because it raised 
 the soul in isolation from the earth, and excluded all re- 
 gard to the outer work of life and redemption. It was 
 
 Q* 
 
 The Book of Wis- 
 dom. 
 
102 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 equally partial in its application and in its scope. It ad 
 dressed only one part of men’s nature, and one class of 
 men. It suppressed the instincts of civil and domestic 
 society, which Christianity ennobled; it perpetuated the 
 barriers which Christianity removed; it abandoned the 
 conflict which Christianity carries ont to victory. Yet 
 even thus the mystics of Egypt and Palestine maintained 
 a practical belief in the necessity of a spiritual faith. 
 Their own existence was a sign of “the last times,” but 
 they could not interpret it. They witnessed that Judaism 
 in its literal acceptation was insufficient to fulfil the desires 
 of men; but they could not, like John the Baptist, proclaim 
 the near approach of a coming kingdom. 
 The spirit of the Law and the Prophets had been em- 
 ΤΩ ΣΝ ΩΣ bodied in every great typical form. The 
 one hy He several phases of partial and independent 
 development were now completed. Judaism 
 had existed in the face of the most varied nationalities, 
 and had gained an elasticity of shape without losing its 
 distinctness of principle. But each concrete system which 
 was substituted for the faithful anticipation of the Messi- 
 anic times, led in the end to disappointment and confusion, 
 and the scattered exiles were unable to spiritualize the na- 
 tions among whom they sojourned. The hierarchy which 
 seemed so full of life in the age of Ezra degenerated into 
 a mere sect. The kingdom which had been thought to 
 herald the final triumph of the nation ended in a foreign 
 usurpation. The alliance with Greek philosophy had led, 
 on the one hand, to an epicurean indifference, on the other, 
 to an unpractical mysticism. But, meanwhile, the princi- 
 ples which lay at the basis of these partial efforts had 
 gained a substantive existence, and were silently working 
 in the whole people. The truths which had been felt once 
 still lived even under the ruins of the systems which had 
 been reared upon them. Law, freedom, thought, an intense 
 national pride and a world-wide dispersion, a past bright 
 with the glories of a Divine Presence, a present lost in 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 103 
 
 humiliation, a future crowded with pictures of certain tri- 
 umphs, combined to fashion a people ready to receive and 
 propagate a universal Gospel. A missionary nation was 
 waiting to be charged with the heavenly commission, and 
 a world was unconsciously prepared to welcome it. 
 
 The influences which had moulded the Jewish people 
 during the last three centuries before the 
 Christian era were not confined within that — mecorresponding 
 narrow circle. The age of Alexander was oe os 
 the culminating point of Greek thought as Pi Ne a 
 well as of Greek power. Afterwards the 
 scholar occupied the place of the poet, and a period of criti- 
 cism followed a period of creation. Aristotle, Pyrrhon, and 
 Epicurus brought the last new elements into the system of 
 ancient philosophy, and their successors combined, arranged, 
 methodized, but opened no new ways of knowledge. The 
 same interval which matured the falness of Jewish hope 
 served for the development of the final issues of Greek wis- 
 dom. And yet more than this: as the Jewish - 
 nationality was broken up by their wide dis- 
 persion, so the great tides of Western con- 
 quest swept away gradually the barriers by which the world 
 had been divided, and colonization followed in the train of 
 conquest. The citizen of Rome passed from province to 
 province, and, if he borrowed the Greek language, it was 
 to assert the Roman supremacy. As a neces- 
 sary consequence, the power of paganism 
 everywhere gave way. If philosophy had 
 undermined its theoretical basis, national intercourse had 
 weakened its practical effects. The life of paganism lay 
 in its speciality. Pagan belief was in each case the reli- 
 gious expression of the particular spot, bound up with its 
 character and history. Beyond its native limits its true 
 vitality ceased, and all that remained was a spasmodic ac- 
 tion. At the time when the Jew had discovered in his faith 
 a germ of universality unknown before the dispersion, 
 other religions were proved vain by their narrowness. 
 
 The dissolution of 
 nationalities and 
 
 of national reli- 
 gions. 
 
104 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 The gods of Greece had faded away into dim shadows, 
 and Rome, when once she left the borders of Italy, had no 
 true gods, but admitted to a comprehensive Pantheon the 
 deities of each conquered race. Throughout the West 
 the religion of the state and the religion of the citizen 
 were divorced. Faith was dying, and yet the desire of 
 faith was evident: the old temples were deserted, and the 
 wildest mysteries found eager votaries. 
 But if Greece and Rome failed alike to found a univer- 
 _ sal religion, they showed its possibility. Each 
 Meanvhite ire in its turn had exerted a power capable of 
 
 Catholic ;,owers sur- 
 
 vive: Greck litera- uniting all men bya moral influence. Greece 
 i em Nad left a universal literature and language 
 by seizing the general laws of beauty and 
 thought. Rome had founded a universal empire by assert- 
 ing with instinctive justice the great principles of right in 
 her dependent provinces. The idea of a common human- 
 ity, transcending the differences of race and time, was out- 
 wardly established by the help of thought and law.! 
 For the universal powers of Greek language and Roman 
 right were not all which heathendom laid at 
 And philosophy, the foundation of Christianity. The great 
 
 by analyzing man’s 
 
 powers and in- work of Greek philosophy had been to dis- 
 
 stincts, prepared 
 the way for their tinguish the various elements which were 
 harmonious combi- - . come 
 nation. confused in the popular idea of religion, that 
 they might be prepared for a harmonious 
 combination. Theology, morality, law, worship, have been 
 so long and so clearly apprehended in their separate scopes, 
 that it is often forgotten that they were once entangled in 
 one complex notion. Step by step the great masters of 
 antiquity advanced towards the truth which they divined. 
 From the study of the universe they passed to the study 
 of man, marking his varied relations, analyzing his distinct 
 faculties, and asserting the manifold instincts by which he 
 1 Compare the marvellous description quoted from Cicero by Lactantius, 
 
 of the power of universal law (quam JInstit. vi. 8 (Cic. de Rep. iii. 22). 
 M. Tullius pene divina voce depinzit) 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 105 
 
 is impelled, while it remained impossible to reconcile them. 
 Partial truths obtained their boldest expression, freedom 
 and fate, a life purely sensuous and a life purely intellectual, 
 man’s body enthroned and imprisoned, Epicureanism and 
 Stoicism: such was the final contrast which St. Paul found 
 at Athens, and which Christianity harmonized. 
 
 Even in their negative aspect the results of systems, 
 varied as the elements of human nature, were 
 an important preparation for the Gospel, and 77,2 
 were in themselves an exhaustive commentary eek si oeilies 
 on Natural Religion, defining the extent of 
 its domain and the nature of its independence. The 
 ~ central principle which should bind all men into one 
 family and unite earth to heaven —if heaven indeed were 
 —had been sought in nature, in individual reason, in civil 
 life, and all that magians, philosophers, statesmen, had 
 found were fair shadows, noble and bright at first, but 
 which were changed into terrible spectres. The religions 
 of the East had sunk into degrading superstitions and 
 strange sorceries. The speculations of Greece had been 
 directed into countless channels, all leading to blank 
 skepticism. The organization of Rome was on the point 
 of becoming the mere machinery of a military despotism. 
 Everywhere idolatry had wrought out its fearful issues, 
 and shameless wickedness had corrupted the streams of 
 social life. 
 
 Nor can it be urged with justice that this picture of the 
 exhaustion of ancient life ceases to be true if 
 we look beyond the limits of the Roman prrpbaicrgb ict 3 
 Empire. The religions of India and Seandi- oes of 
 nayia contained no element capable of reno- 
 vating a world; and as far as it is possible to penetrate 
 the darkness in which their beginnings are shrouded, they 
 appear to have fostered forms of corruption and barbarism 
 more desolating than the paganism of the West. The 
 
 1 Let any one compare, for instance, Arist. de Anima, iii. 5, with 1 Cor. xy. 
 
106 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 Northmen were gathering strength for a contest yet 
 distant: the masses of Eastern Asia were in some sense 
 condemned by nature to slavery. In one ease civilization 
 was not yet possible, in the other it was essentially 
 defective. And in estimating the nature of an epoch it is 
 sufficient to regard the great centres of civilization. The 
 drama of history is ever enacted upon a narrow stage. 
 Fresh characters enter and play their parts in due course, 
 but till then they have no influence except through others. 
 The world has its representative nations to whom its 
 fortunes are entrusted, and who justly express its condi- 
 tion; and in this sense the Roman Empire at the beginning 
 of the Christian era was no less truly than popularly 
 identical with the civilized world.’ 
 But in the midst of disappointment and exhaustion hope 
 tetra ἫΝ still lived. There was a vague presentiment 
 in the Roman Em- abroad that a new period was drawing near; 
 eT Se and the triumph of material power appeared 
 to offer the blessings which Christianity realized. The 
 birth of Augustus is said to have been accompanied by 
 prodigies which declared him to be the future master of 
 the earth, and old legends revived in his person.” Time 
 appeared to fulfil the auguries. The beginnings of the 
 empire gave promise of a government able to maintain the 
 welfare of the world; and the lull of general peace by 
 which it was ushered in was welcomed as the inauguration 
 of the new era. The nations were gathered into one, and 
 a ruler, such as the world had not seen, claimed them as 
 his inheritance. At such a time even outward unity might 
 well seem to promise secure happiness. The state, which 
 was always the real object of a Roman’s devotion, had 
 found a personal embodiment; and the people were willing 
 to concede to the emperor the divine titles which he 
 claimed” The stern image of might was decorated with 
 
 1‘H οἰκουμένη. 8 The climax was reached by Do- 
 2 Suet. Oct. c. 94. The whole chapter mitian, whose edicts ran: Dominus ei 
 is very curious. Deus noster sic fieri jubet (Suet. Domit. 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 107 
 
 something of oriental splendor. The verses of the sibyl 
 had already passed from Alexandria to Rome; and in 
 painting the future the legends of the golden age were 
 combined with the prophetic expectations of the East. 
 
 For it was in the East that hope rested. The strange 
 traditions of India and China are well known; 
 but in their present form they seem to have 
 received something of a Christian coloring, 
 though the Jews must have carried with them in their 
 dispersion the great outlines of their national faith.’ In 
 Palestine these outlines had been filled up in times of 
 spiritual trial. The Messianic promises had grown purer 
 and clearer by the ordeal of persecution and suffering ; and 
 the people which was of all the most despised cherished 
 the noblest belief in the time of its distress. The Jew 
 knew that a spiritual kingdom would come, of which the 
 Roman Empire was but a faint and partial image; and by 
 certain signs he felt its near approach. His view might be 
 imperfect or distorted, colored by the hope of material 
 triumph, or clouded by thoughts of vengeance, yet his eye 
 was fixed heavenward, and he stood ready for the conflict. 
 The spectacle is one of sublime interest ; and to understand 
 the fulness of the Jewish faith it is necessary to go back 
 once more and trace the outlines,of the Messianic hope as 
 it was shaped, through long ages of discipline, after the 
 age of the prophets had closed. 
 
 Hope still looked 
 to the East. 
 
 6. 135). Cf. Tac. Ann.i.10. Salvador, Ρ. 11. Schlegel’s Philosophy of His 
 Hist. de la dom. Rom. i. 384 ff. tory, p. 190 (Eng. trans.). 
 1 Cf. Hue’s Christianity in China, i. 
 
108 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 
 
 NOTE ON CHAPTER I. 
 
 The following slight synopsis of Jewish literature will serve as a clew 
 to much that will be said afterwards. (Alexandrine writers and works 
 are distinguished by Italics.) 
 
 3d Cent. B. c. ANTIGONUS of Socho. 
 The Pentateuch translated into Greek; the other books of 
 the Old Testament at various times afterwards. 
 Baruch i.—iii. 8. 
 The Septuagint completed. 
 
 2d Cent. Βα. ARISTOBULUS (fragments). 
 Jesus the son of Sirach (Ecclesiasticus); Sepher Ben Sira 
 perhaps contains fragments of the original book. 
 Tobit. 
 170 The Psalms of Solomon. (Greek: Fabr. Cod. Pseud. V. 
 T’. i. 914 ff.) 
 150 Additions to Daniel and Esther. 
 (?) Judith. . 
 (?) Baruch, the present recension. 
 Jewish Sibylline Oracles. 
 120 The Apocalypse of Henoch. (£thiop. trans.) 
 Ecclesiasticus translated into Greek. 
 (3) The Wisdom of Solomon. 
 EZECHIEL (fragments). 
 The elder PHILO. 
 The Book of Jason, on which 2 Macc. was based. 
 
 1st Cent. B. c. i. Maccabees (Greek trans.) 
 
 90 ii. Maccabees. 
 The Letter of Jeremiah. 
 
 (?) iii. Hera, translation and revision of the Hebrew book. 
 iv. Book of Maccabees. 
 iv. Hera (Athiop. Ar. Lat. trans.) 
 
 (?) Prayer of Manasses (cf. Fritzsche, Exeg. Hand. 158). 
 iii. Maccabees (perhaps later). 
 HILEBL: 
 SHAMMAT. 
 
 ist Cent. Pp. c. Targum of Onkelos on the Pentateuch (Zunz, p. 62). 
 Targum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel on the Prophets (id. p. 62). 
 GAMALIEL. 
 PHILO (c. 20 B. c.—d0 A. C.). 
 The Book of Jubilees (Ethiop. trans.). 
 JOSEPHUS (37—c. 100 A. C.). 
 AKIVA (Τ 122 or 135). 
 R. MEIR. 
 
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 109 
 
 2d Cent. Pp. c. xxxii. Middoth of R. Eliezer (Zunz, p. 86). 
 Megillath Taanith (fragm.) (id. p. 127). 
 Simon Ben Jochai. 
 JEHUDA Hannasi, or Hakkodesh, or Rabbi ({ 190). 
 Elements of the Books Jetzira and Zohar. 
 
 3d Cent. Ρ. c. Mishna. 
 Sifra debe Rab (on Leviticus), (Rab 1 243). 
 Sifri debe Rab (on Numbers and Deuteronomy). 
 Toseftas (addenda) of R. Chija and R. Hoschaja. 
 Seder Olam (Zunz, p. 86). 
 
 4th Cent. p.c. Mechilta (on part of Exodus), (Zunz, p. 47). 
 Sifri Sutta (fragm. on Numbers), (Zunz, p. 48). 
 Malacath Hamashecan (id. p. 87). 
 Bereshith Rabba (= last five chapters, Zunz, pp. 174 ff.). 
 Jerusalem Gemara (Talmud). 
 
 5th Cent. Ρ. σ. Babylonian Gemara (Talmud). 
 498 
 10 
 
CHAP PAR At. 
 
 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 Οὐχ ἑαυτοῖς ἡμῖν δὲ διηκόνουν αὐτά. ---1 Sr. PeTERi 12. 
 
 ‘Yur Book of Genesis connects the promise of Redemp- 
 
 tion with the narrative of the Fall. 
 each crisis in the providential history of the 
 world this promise was brought within nar- 
 rower limits, and illustrated by fresh details. 
 
 Zhe Biblical doc- 
 trine of Messiah in 
 the patriarchal, 
 
 At 
 
 After the 
 
 Flood, one of the sons of Noah was especially connected 
 
 1 The various works on the growth 
 and form of the Jewish doctrine of the 
 Messiah, particularly after the close of 
 the prophetic era, seem to me to con- 
 tain materials for a history of the doc- 
 trine rather than the history itseif. 
 Schéttgen (Hore Hebraice et Tal- 
 mudice, Dresd. 1733-42) has accumu- 
 lated a most valuable collection of 
 Jewish traditions, but apart from minor 
 inconsistencies, he exhibits no critical 
 perception whatever of the relative 
 value of the authorities which he 
 quotes, and often seems to me to mis- 
 interpret the real tenor of their tes- 
 timony. The writers who have followed 
 him have for the most part confirmed 
 his errors. Nork (Rabbinische Quellen 
 τι. 5. w. Leipzig, 1839), who has collected 
 with fair accuracy the sum of Hebrew 
 tradition, is most offensive and un- 
 just in the use which he makes of it. 
 Gfrorer (Das Jahrhundert des Heils, 
 Stuttg. 1838) has given the best general 
 view of the subject, but he is not free 
 from the great faults of Schottgen, 
 which found their natural issue in 
 
 Strauss’s Leben Jesu. As a correction 
 to these exaggerated pictures of the 
 completeness of the Jewish doctrine of 
 Messiah the remarks of Br. Bauer 
 (Kritik der Evang. Gesch. Leipzig, 1846, 
 i. 391 ff.) on the non-existence of any 
 such elear doctrine, however exagger- 
 ated they may be on the other side, 
 are worthy of consideration. Ebrard’s 
 answer (Aritik der Evang. Gesch. 
 Erlangen, 1850, pp. 651 ff.) seems to me 
 partial and inadequate. 
 
 Bertholdt’s Christologia Judeorwm 
 (Erlang, 1811) possesses no distinctive 
 or ciitical value, and Bp. Blomfield un- 
 fortunately relied upon him in his 
 Dissertation upon the traditional knowl- 
 edge of a promised Redeemer (Cambr. 
 1819) for the state of Jewish belief in our 
 Lord’s time. Hengstenberg’s Christol- 
 ogy (Eng. Tr. Edinb., 1856, vols. i. ii.) 
 is rather a collection of criticisms on 
 the Messianic passages of the Old Testa- 
 ment than a connected view of the doc- 
 trine; and the same remark applies to 
 Pye Smith’s Scripture Doctrine of Mes- 
 siah. Lond., 1887. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAI. lil 
 
 with the future triumph of God.'| Abraham was called, 
 and the assurance was given to him that the blessing of the 
 earth should spring from his seed. The fortunes of the 
 twelve patriarchs were prophetically foreshadowed, and the 
 sceptre was assigned to Judah. But up to this point no 
 personal trait of a Redeemer was given Hope was 
 turned from mankind generally to a race, a nation, a tribe; 
 but, in accordance with the simplicity of early faith, it was 
 left otherwise vague and distant. 
 
 The legislation of Moses contained the next revelation of 
 “the great age to come,” and the first descrip- 
 tion of the prophet by whom it should be 
 inaugurated. The Law from the first exhibited the image 
 of a nobler Law; and that which was permanent and 
 essential in the relation which it established between God 
 and man was transferred to a future Lawgiver. At the 
 same time the hope of the world was definitely fixed in 
 Palestine by the witness of a heathen seer. The promise 
 of Moses was confirmed by the unwilling testimony of 
 Balaam, who looked forward to the triumph of the Jewish 
 race and the Jewish King, and condemned himself; just 
 as, in after-times, Caiaphas admitted the necessity of Christ’s 
 sacrifice, and condemned his nation. 
 
 The establishment of the kingdom gave an occasion for 
 a further enlargement of the conception of 
 Messiah’s person and work, and a narrower 
 limitation of the stock from which he was to spring. One 
 family was selected from the chosen tribe; and the 
 “sceptre” was now reserved for the Son of David. The 
 later period of the kingdom saw the gradual unfolding of 
 the idea of this future king. Human tyranny served to 
 place in clearer light the fulness of Messiah’s love; the 
 idolatrous faithlessness of the people, the irresistible per- 
 
 Mosaic, and 
 
 Regal periods, 
 
 1Gen. ix. 27. The rendering of ciat gloriam suam ὧν tabernaculis 
 Onkelos, whatever may be thought of Sem. 
 its correctness, makes this more clear: 2 The doubtful term Shi/oh (Gen. xlix. 
 Dilatet Deus Japheth; et habitare fa- 10) cannot be urged against this view. 
 
112 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 suasiveness of His teaching; the growing consciousness of 
 sin, the efficiency of His priestly intercession. 
 
 The Captivity completed the circle of the Messianic 
 hopes, by turning the eyes of the people to 
 the divine glory of the coming King, and the 
 universal extent of His dominion. The Son of David was 
 recognized under the wider title of the Son of Man; and 
 His kingdom appeared as the last and mightiest of the 
 monarchies of the world. 
 
 In this way the earliest hope of mankind was centred 
 in a Person; and the image of the future 
 Saviour was drawn from the varied forms in 
 which God made Himself known in the history of the 
 chosen people. The same discipline which shaped their 
 character chastened and ennobled their hopes. The old 
 hope gave birth to a new one, and yet survived the trans- 
 formation, because it was true, though partial; and at the 
 close of the prophetic era three great Messianic types 
 remained —the Mosaic, the Prophetic, the Apocalyptic — 
 representative in some degree of the three periods of 
 inspired teaching; and according as these different types 
 were adopted exclusively or variously combined, the faith 
 of later generations was dwarfed or enlarged. 
 
 The Apocryphal books, as is well known, contain no 
 
 reference to a personal Saviour. The first 
 
 The Apocrauphal ον 
 books silent as to book of Maccabees records the decision of 
 i ay “the Jews and the priests, that Simon be 
 ruler and high-priest forever (εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα) 
 till a faithful prophet arise ;” but it seems doubtful whether 
 there is any reference in these words to the great Prophet 
 of whom Moses spoke, or to the forerunner of Messiah. The 
 omission 15 probably due to the character of the books, and 
 not to the absence of the hope, which is clearly expressed 
 in other contemporary writings. Similar writings in the 
 Old Testament (6. g. Ezra, Nehemiah) contain no Mes- 
 sianic predictions; and the Book of Baruch, the only echo 
 of the prophets which remained in the Maccabean age, 
 
 In the Captivity. 
 
 Gencral results. 
 
 1 Mace. xiv. 41. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 113 
 
 announces in ancient words the restoration and triumph of 
 the chosen people.’ “I will cause them to 
 
 return [saith the Lord] to the land which I ¢entenpiate a na 
 sware to their fathers, to Abraham, and 
 
 to Isaac, and to Jacob, and they shall be lords over it; and 
 I will multiply them, and they shall not be diminished; 
 .... and I will no more move my people Israel from the 
 land that I gave them.”? “Take a good heart, O Jerusa- 
 lem.2 He that named thee shall comfort thee. Wretched 
 are they that afflicted thee, and rejoiced over thy fall. 
 Wretched are the cities to which thy children were in 
 bondage. Wretched is the land that received thy sons. 
 . .... For fire shall come upon her from the Eternal for 
 Jong days, and she shall be inhabited by evil spirits for the 
 longer time. Look round to the East, O Jerusalem, and 
 behold the joy which is coming to thee from the Lord. 
 Behold thy sons are coming, whom thou sentest forth : they 
 are coming, gathered together from the Kast to the West 
 by the word of the Holy One, rejoicing in the glory 
 of God. .....For God shall show thy brightness to 
 every country under heaven. ..... They went out from 
 thee on foot, led by enemies, but God is leading them to 
 thee, lifted up on high with glory, as children of the king- 
 dom.”* The same ideas recur in the Book of Tobit. The 
 God who scattered them shall gather His people together 
 again, “and bring them to their own land. And they 
 shall build His house, not such as was the former house, 
 until the seasons of the age (καιροὶ τοῦ αἰῶνος) be fulfilled ;° 
 and afterwards they shall return from the places of their 
 captivity, and build Jerusalem gloriously.”°..... “Je- 
 rusalem shall be built with sapphire and emerald,’ and her 
 walls with precious stone, and her towers and battlements 
 
 1 But the language used of the Law 4 The other reading, ὡς ϑρόνον βασι- 
 as eternal and life-giving (iv. 1), and in λείας» gives the same general sense, but 
 an especial sense a revelation of God’s the metaphor is very harsh. 
 
 person (iii. 37 f.), is particularly worthy 5 Quoadusque repleatur tempus male- 
 of notice. dictionum. Vet. Lat. 
 2 ii. 34, 35. 3 iy. 30 ff. 6 xiv. 5. 7 xiii. 9 ff. 
 
 10* 
 
114 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 in pure gold; and the streets of Jerusalem shall be paved 
 with beryl, and carbuncle, and stone of Ophir.” ..... 
 « And all nations shall turn truly to fear the Lord God, and 
 bury their idols; and all nations shall bless the Lord; and 
 His people shall confess God, and the Lord shall exalt His 
 people; and all who love the Lord God in truth and 
 righteousness shall rejoice, doing mercy to our brethren.” 
 But these wide anticipations of coming glory appear 
 vague and incomplete when compared with 
 The Messianic the clear-drawn visions of that Apocalyptic 
 
 idea further de- 
 
 veloped, 1. i the literature’ in which we must next trace the 
 ie Cat progress of the Messianic faith. 
 
 The earliest fragments of the Sibylline 
 writings*® which belong to the beginning of the Maccabean 
 ΕἸΠΕ ΑΕ τς period, complete the picture of the national 
 Oracles. triumph by the recognition of the great Con- 
 160—149 B.C. 3 : 
 
 queror When the need of man is sorest, 
 and pestilence and war are spread over the world; when 
 king seizes king, and nation ravages nation, and rulers fly, 
 and the earth is changed, and a barbarian power desolates 
 all Greece; when the earth is unsown and unploughed, 
 covered with the unburied dead,*—then it is said,’ “God 
 shall send from the sun a King, who shall cause every land 
 to cease from evil war, slaying some, and fulfilling a faith- 
 ful covenant with others. Nor shall He do all this by His 
 own counsels, but obeying the high decrees of the mighty 
 God. Then, again, the people of the mighty God shall be 
 laden with noble wealth, with gold and silver, and with 
 array of purple; and the earth shall bring forth to perfec- 
 tion, and the sea teeming with blessings..... But, again, 
 the kings of the Gentiles with gathered might shall assail 
 this land, bringing fate upon themselves; for they shall 
 
 MCL p98, Mel: the Apocalyptic writings are by Liicke 
 
 2 Lib. iii. with the exception of vv. (Versuch einer vollstandigen Hinleitung 
 1—96, 818—828, and one or two smaller in die Offenbarung des Johannes, 2te 
 interpolations. Cf. Hilgenfeld,a.a.O. Aufl. Bonn, 1852), and Hilgenfeld (Die 
 58 ff. Gfrorer, Philo, τι. 5. w. ii. 121 ff. Judische Apokalyptik, Jena, 1857). 
 
 * The best general introductions to 4 Vy. 682—651. 5 Vv. 652 ff. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 115 
 
 wish to ravage the fold of the mighty God, and to destroy 
 the noblest men..... But swords of fire shall fall from 
 heaven, and on earth great flames shall come..... and 
 every soul of man and every sea shall shudder before the 
 face of the Immortal. .... And then shall [the foes of His 
 people] recognize the Immortal God, who brings these 
 judgments to pass, and there shall be wailing and crying 
 over the boundless earth, as men perish..... But the sons 
 of the mighty God? around His temple all shall live in 
 quiet..... forthe Immortal is their defender, and the hand 
 of the Holy One. And then shall all the islands and cities 
 say: How does the Immortal love these men, for all things 
 strive with them and help them... .. Come, let us all fall on 
 the ground and entreat the Immortal King..... Let us 
 send to His temple, .... and all heed the Law of the Most 
 High God..... And then? shall God raise up a kingdom for- 
 ever (εἰς αἰῶνας) over all men..... And from every land 
 men shall bear frankincense and gifts to the house of God. 
 .... And prophets of the mighty God shall take away the 
 sword, for they shall be judges of mortals and righteous 
 kings. Rejoice, then, O Virgin, and exult; for to thee 
 hath He given gladness forever who created heaven and 
 earth. In thee [O Sion] shall He dwell; and for thee 
 shall He be an Immortal Light.” 
 
 But even in these oracles the glory of the king is lost 
 in the glory of the nation. The house of OY FED 
 David is forgotten in the recollection of the — te siryltine con- 
 theocracy.’ The permanent establishment of ΠῚ 
 the Law as the rule of the whole earth is the object of 
 highest hope,’ or second only to that final consummation 
 of the world, when a fiery flood shall destroy all that is 
 
 1 Vv. 702 ff. appears to be to Zerubbabel; and the 
 2 Vv. 766 ff. king whom “God shall send from 
 3 The remainder of this passage (787— heaven, who shall judge each man in 
 794) is a close imitation of Is. xi. 6—8. blood and flash of fire’ (vv. 286-7), 
 Cf. 367—380. though he appears with the attributes 
 
 4 The only reference to the family of οἵ Messiah, can be no other than Cyrus. 
 David is vy. 288-90, but the reference 5 Cf. vv. 573 ff. 
 
110 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 corrupt and perishable in man and nature, and leave the 
 good in eternal purity. “The people,” it is said, “shall be 
 guides of life to all mortals;'” but there is no mention of 
 a spiritual covenant. There are no glimpses of a Gospel 
 or of an Incarnation. The blessings of the future are 
 drawn after the types in Deuteronomy, and the plagues 
 which are denounced against the wicked recall the scenes 
 of the Exodus and the conquest of Palestine. 
 
 Still the belief in a Messiah is recognized, and the glori- 
 ous future is connected with His advent. 
 Nor is His descent from the Sun — the seat 
 of the empire of light—the only sign of His 
 divine nature. In a later fragment, which dates from the 
 time of the last triumvirate, Messiah appears in contrast 
 with Beliar, the great manifestation of the power of evil? 
 “ A holy king shall come to hold the sceptre of every land, 
 for all ages, as time hastes on... .. But forth from the peo- 
 ple of Sebaste® shall Beliar come afterwards; and he shall 
 plant the lofty mountains [in the valleys], and stay the sea, 
 the mighty fiery sun, and the bright moon, and wake the 
 dead, and perform many signs among men; but they shall 
 not bring their promised end in him, but they shall be 
 deceptive, and in truth they shall deceive many men 
 (€poras), both faithful and chosen Hebrews, and also other 
 lawless men, who have not yet heard the word of God. 
 But when the threats of the mighty God draw near, a 
 flaming power shall come in a billowy flood (δι οἴδματος) 
 upon the earth, and consume Beliar and all the haughty 
 men who placed their trust in him..... God shall roll the 
 heaven as a book is rolled, and the whole spangled firma- 
 ment shall fall on the glorious earth and ocean. A torrent 
 of devouring fire shall flow unwearied, and consume the 
 land, and consume the sea, and the firmament of heaven, 
 and days; and creation itself it shall melt together, and 
 
 Its further en- 
 largement. 
 
 1 Ver. 195. 2 Vv. 49 ff. Magus, Sebaste = Samaria? or to Nero); 
 3 This name must have been inserted for it could not have been used of the 
 afterwards (with a reference to Simon Romans before the death of Antony. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 117 
 refine it and purify it (és καϑαρὸν διαλέξει). And no longer 
 shall the laughing globes of’ the [heavenly] lights [roll on. 
 There shall be] no night, no dawn, no many days of care, 
 no spring, no summer, no winter, no autumn. And then 
 shall the judgment of the mighty God come in the midst 
 of the mighty age when all these things come to pass.”! 
 Shortly after the first collection of Sibylline oracles was 
 formed at Alexandria, the hopes of the Pales- 
 tinian Jews were raised to the highest pitch 
 by the successes of John Hyrcanus, only to 
 be lost again in the rising conflict of sects, 
 and the weakness and crimes of his successors. These al- 
 ternations of joy and sorrow found their expression in the 
 Apocalypse of Henoch.? No apocryphal book is more re- 
 markable for eloquence and poetic vigor; and the range 
 of subjects which it includes is as noble as its style. In 
 its present form, the book aims at little less than a compre- 
 hensive vindication of the action of Providence, both in 
 the physical and in the moral world. At one time it en- 
 courages men quailing before outward enemies; at another, 
 it rebukes a people torn by inward divisions: now it offers 
 an explanation of the mysteries of creation; and now it 
 seeks the type of present dangers in the catastrophe of 
 primeval history. It is probable that these different parts 
 owe their origin to distinct authors, and that they were 
 interwoven into the present book by a later compiler. But 
 the distinction of the constituent elements is of compara- 
 tively little importance at present, since the book assumed 
 a certain unity during its last revision, and offers a gen- 
 
 (b) The Book of 
 Henoch. 
 
 ¢ 107 Β. c. 
 
 1 It is sufficient to refer generally to 
 Matthew xxiv., 2 Thess. ii., Apoc. xx., 
 for striking parallels to many of the 
 thoughts in this passage. 
 
 2 Liber Henoch, Acthiopice. A. Dill- 
 mann, Lipsiw, 1851. Das Buch Henoch. 
 Ubersetzt und erklart von Dr. A. Dill- 
 mann, Leipzig, 1883. These two edi- 
 tions supersede those of Bishop Lau- 
 
 rence: The Book of Enoch, ete., Oxford, 
 1821, 33,38, and Libri Enoch versia 
 Ethiopica, Oxon., 18388. Where the 
 difference appeared to require notice 1 
 have given Laurence’s rendering in 
 brackets [L.] or in the notes. The edi- 
 tions of Hoffmann and Gfrérer have no 
 independent value. Cf. Dillm. Lindeit, 
 pp. Ivii. ff. 
 
118 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 erally consistent view of the office of Messiah.’ But while 
 the whole book is thus impressed with a certain stamp 
 of uniformity, the central portion, round which the other 
 prophecies are grouped, glows beyond the other parts with 
 a spiritual fervor, pure, intense, and passionate. If the 
 deeper mysticism and colder speculations of the Apocrypha 
 leave no place for the doctrine of Messiah; if the priestly 
 and prophetic office of the great king was merged by the 
 Sibyl in the prophetic office of the nation, in Henoch the 
 Advent of Messiah is contemplated with a joyful and cer- 
 tain hope. The might and tyranny of heathen oppressors 
 serve only to suggest the certain retribution and just ven- 
 geance which hangs over them; the victories which have 
 been gained by the people of God are but a prelude to 
 wider conquests. A judgment is reserved for sinners; a 
 triumph is prepared for the righteous: and Messiah is the 
 divine instrument of this twofold issue. Such is the mes- 
 sage of “faith and truth”? which the voice of the ancient 
 patriarch proclaims to a people conscious of their heav- 
 
 1 Ewald, in an admirable essay on 
 the book (Ueber d. A’thiop. B. Henoch 
 Entstehung, Sinn wu. Zusammensetz. 
 Transact. of the Royal Soc. of Géttin- 
 gen, 1856, pp. 107 ff.), supposes that it 
 consists of fragments of four books. 
 
 i. The first book, the original proph- 
 ecy, written in a period of outward 
 trouble and danger, during the first 
 years of John Hyrcanus, c. B. c. 144, 
 represented by capp. XxXXvii.—lxxi. 
 with some interpretations. 
 
 ii. The second book, written a few 
 years later, when prosperity had given 
 rise to internal schisms, c. B. Cc. 135, of 
 which fragments occur i.—v.; vi. 1, 2; 
 vill. 4; ix. 1—6, 8—11; x. 4—10, 12; xi. 
 2; xXii.—xvi.; 1xxxi. 1—4; Ixxxiv.; xci. 
 4: ev. 
 
 iii. The third book, written a little 
 Jater, ὁ. B. C. 128, philosophical in char- 
 acter, as the first is poetical and the 
 second rhetorical. Fragments of this 
 
 occur, XX.—XXXvVi.; ]xxii.—IJ]xxxil. ; 
 Ixxxili. 1—9; Ixxxv.—xe; cevi.—[eviii.] 
 
 iv. The Book of Noah, occurring in 
 scattered fragments, vi. 3—8; ix. 7; x. 
 1—3, 11; xi. 22; Ixix. 2. ; xvii.—xix.; 
 xxxix. 1, 27; Ix. 1—10, 24 f.; Ixiv— 
 Ixix. 16. This book was written some 
 years after the last. 
 
 The whole book of Henoch assumed 
 its present shape, according to Ewald, 
 during the first half of the century 
 before Christ. I have given these de- 
 tails, not because I think it possible to 
 accept a result so complicated, but be- 
 cause the divisions throw considerable 
 light upon the internal structure of the 
 book. Other theories of its composi- 
 tion may be seen in Hilgenfeld, a. a. O. 
 pp. 95 ff. Perhaps all that can be 
 affirmed with certainty is the later 
 origin of the Noachian portions. 
 
 2 Cf. Dillm. p. 82; Ewald, p. 128. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 119 
 
 enly mission and fresh from brilliant struggles, and yet 
 trembling and divided.' 
 
 The first introduction of the Messianic subject is marked 
 by several peculiarities, which at once call 
 attention to its importance. The Vision of the Messianic 
 which contains the most complete portrait- ©” “"" 
 ure of the coming Kingdom is emphatically the Vision 
 of Wisdom; and this “ beginning of Wisdom” is addressed 
 to all “the dwellers on the earth, both those of old time, 
 and those who shall come after.” Even God Himself is 
 addressed by a new title in connection with these Messi- 
 anic revelations, as “the Lord of Spirits,” the Supreme Soy- 
 ereign who establishes, by His spiritual hosts, order and 
 righteousness in the various realms of creation. 
 
 The vividness of the prophecy is already foreshadowed 
 by the form which it assumes. In one pas- 
 sage the Seer is represented as approaching 
 the Divine presence, and contemplating the 
 person of Messiah. “I saw,” he says, “in heaven One, 
 Ancient of days,? and His head was white as wool; and 
 with Him was another, whose countenance was as the ap- 
 pearance of a man, and full of grace, like to one of the 
 holy Angels. And I asked one of the Angels, who went 
 with me and showed me all hidden things, of that Son of 
 Man, who He was, and whence He was, and wherefore He 
 went with the Ancient of days? And he answered me and 
 spake to me: This is the Son of Man, to whom righteous- 
 ness belongeth, with whom righteousness dwelleth (hath 
 dwelt, L.), and who revealeth all the treasures of that 
 
 The general con- 
 ception. 
 
 1In giving a general view of the 
 Messianic descriptions of Henoch, I 
 have quoted the book in its final shape, 
 not only because it is most convenient 
 to do so, but because the book was 
 current in this form at the Christian 
 era, for the arguments of Hoffmann 
 (Schriftb. i. 871) in favor of a later 
 origin are quite unsatisfactory. It will 
 be seen that the great mass belongs to 
 
 Ewald’s “‘ First Book.” Inthe‘ Second 
 Book” the righteousness of Messiah is 
 His characteristic attribute, just as the 
 people of God are described as “the 
 righteous” more usually than “ the 
 elect.” 
 
 2 Dillm., cin Haupt der Tage, betagtes 
 Haupt. The allusion to Dan, vii. 18, 
 justifies the translation. 
 
120 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAIL. 
 
 which is concealed, because the Lord of Spirits hath 
 chosen Him; whose lot before the Lord of Spirits hath 
 surpassed all through His uprightness forever (in everlast- 
 ing righteousness, L.). And this Son of Man whom thou 
 hast seen shall raise the kings and the mighty men from 
 their beds, and the powerful even from their thrones; and 
 shall unloose the bands of the powerful [with which they 
 bind God’s people], and break in pieces the teeth of sinners. 
 And He shall hurl the kings from their thrones and their 
 kingdoms, because they magnify Him not, nor praise Him, 
 nor acknowledge with thankfulness whence the kingdom 
 is lent to them. .... And they shall be driven from the 
 dwellings of the assembly of His Church, and of the faith- 
 TT ecenpagee 
 The attributes of majesty and humanity, of dominion 
 Messign’e cnarae. «Ud righteousness, with which Messias is 
 terarddivineater- here clothed, continually reappear throughout 
 tie the Visions, and the manifestation of these in 
 the deliverance of the faithful and the final retribution of 
 the wicked, forms the general object of His work. With- 
 out adding any new element to the fulness of the old 
 prophets. the writer of Henoch endeavors to combine into 
 one grand image the scattered traits in which they had 
 foretold the working of their great king; and if he only 
 dwells on the resistless might and certain triumph which 
 should attend His advent, he differs from later zealots in 
 retaining the essential character of superhuman glory with 
 which Daniel had portrayed Him. He appears in several 
 places to recognize the preéxistence of Messiah, while, at 
 the same time, he describes Him as very man ; and, though 
 the interpretation of these passages has been questioned,? 
 the clearness with which the eternal predestination of Mes- 
 siah, and the intimate relation in which He stands at once 
 to God and to the whole world of spirits, is one of the 
 most conspicuous points in the teaching of the book. 
 
 1 ¢. xlvi. 2 Wrongly, I believe. Cf. Laurence, Prel. Diss. 11. f. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 121 
 “Before the sun and the signs of heaven were created, 
 before the stars were made, the name [of the Son of Man] 
 was named (invoked, L.) before the Lord of Spirits.”? 
 “He was chosen and hidden in the sight of God before the 
 world was created, and He shall be to eternity in His 
 sight.”? At the day of His appearance, “the kings and 
 mighty men and dwellers on the earth shall laud and 
 praise and magnify Him who ruleth over all, who was hid- 
 den. For aforetime He, the Son of Man, was hidden, 
 whom the Most High kept in the presence of His power, 
 and revealed to the elect.”* And thus it is said that 
 Henoch, in his life time, was “translated from among the 
 dwellers on the earth to that Son of Man, to the Lord of 
 Spirits.”4 Even before His manifestation, the Messias was 
 the joy of men and angels; for “the Wisdom of the Lord 
 of Spirits revealed Him to the Holy and the Righteous... 
 for in His name are they delivered, and He is the avenger 
 of their life.’> And Henoch heard “the voice of the 
 Angel Rufael praise the Elect One and the elect people” 
 before the throne of the majesty of God.’ The very stars 
 and elements and powers of nature “rejoiced greatly, prais- 
 ing and magnifving [God], because that to them was 
 revealed the name of that Son of Man.” 7 | 
 
 1 Compare the Rabbinical saying, 
 that ‘‘the name of Messiah existed be- 
 fore the foundation of the world.” 
 
 2 Cap. xlviii. 3,6. ‘The e:ect and 
 the concealed one existed in His pres- 
 ence before the world was created and 
 forever.”? (Laur.) 
 
 3 Cap. Ixii. 6, 7; δ. xi. 10, Laur. 
 
 4 Cap. Ixx.1. This difficult passage, 
 which is the clearest testimony to the 
 preéxistence of Messiah, belongs, ac- 
 cording to Dillmann, tothe  Noachian”’ 
 additions to the original book, and so 
 dates from the first century B. c.(Dillm. 
 pp. ΧΙ. 1.). Laurence’s translation is 
 quite different: ‘‘ After this the name 
 of the Son of Man, living with the 
 Lord of Spirits, was exalted by the 
 
 inhabitants of the earth.” Cf. Dillm. 
 ].c. Ewald (p. 124 ἢ) gives another 
 translation: ‘“* Afterwards was Henoch 
 celebrated among men as living with 
 Messias, and with God.” .... 
 
 5 Cap. xlviii. 7. ‘‘ He revealed the 
 wisdom.” ... .— Laur. 
 
 Ὁ Cap. xl. 5, 9. 
 
 7 Cap. )xix. 26 (Iviii. 88, Laur.) From 
 this passage it appears natural to con- 
 clude that the unutterable name — ‘‘the 
 oath * —by which the whole world was 
 ruled (c. ]xix. 14 ff.) was the name of 
 Messiah. Cf. Apoc. ii. 17. According 
 to the present text, the title ‘“‘ Lord of 
 Spirits’? is once applied to Messiah, 
 c. Ixii. 2, but there is probably some 
 corruption. 
 
 11 
 
192 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 In contrast with this Divine aspect of Messiah are the 
 many titles which declare His humanity and 
 essential subordination to God. He is “the 
 Righteous One,” chosen by God for his uprightness; “the 
 Elect One”? “according to God’s good pleasure;” “the 
 Anointed,” * “the Son of Man,” “the Son of woman,” # 
 while still also “the Son of God.”* And though these 
 titles belong in a peculiar sense to Messiah, as the type 
 and head of His Church, they are extended also to all be- 
 llevers, who are called “the righteous,” “the elect,” “the 
 children of God.” Even the form under which Messiah 
 was first described is applied in a lower scale to Henoch, 
 who is addressed by an angel as “the Son of Man who is 
 born to righteousness, and on whom righteousness dwell- 
 eth, and whom the righteousness of the Ancient of days 
 leaves πο." ὁ In the imagery of one of the Visions, Mes- 
 sias is “born as a white bullock,” 7 and all the beasts of the 
 field, and all the birds of the air, feared Him, and prayed 
 to Him always. “And I looked,” the Seer continues, “ till 
 all their races were changed, and they all became white 
 bullocks.”.... And when the judgment is accomplished, 
 it is said: “The whole host of heaven and all the Saints 
 who are above, and the host of God, the Cherubim and 
 Seraphim and Ophanim, and all the angels of might, and 
 all the angels of dominion, and the Elect One, and the 
 other powers which are on the land above the water, shall 
 cry on that day, and with one voice exalt and praise and 
 laud and magnify [God] in the spirit of faith, in the spirit 
 of wisdom and of patience, and in the spirit of mercy, and 
 in the spirit of right and of peace, and in the spirit of 
 
 His humanity. 
 
 1 Capp. xxxviii. 2; liii. 6. 5 Cap. ev. 2 (only). 
 2 Cap. xlv. 8, 4, ete. This is the most 
 usual title of Messiah. Si€ap. bcxia 14. (box. 17. aun). Gt. 
 8 Capp. xlviii. 10; lii. 4 (only). ΟΕἿΣ. 10: 
 4 Cap. Ixii. 5 (only). The form of the 
 title appears to be suggested by the con- 7 (Ixxxix. 45, Laur.). By this figure 
 
 text. There is, I believe, no reference He is likened to the Patriarchs. Cf. 
 to Gen. iii. 15. Dillm. p. 286. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 123 
 goodness, and shall all say with one voice, Praise be to 
 Him, and praised be the name of the Lord of Spirits, for- 
 ever and ever.” ! 
 
 But while Messiah is thus represented as man, and, per- 
 haps, classed among created things, He stands 
 far above all in the greatness of His gifts. 
 Not only is He placed by God on the throne of His maj- 
 esty to execute judgment in the world, but “wisdom is 
 poured out like water, and there is no end of His majesty. 
 He is mighty in all the secrets of righteousness, and un 
 righteousness passes away before Him like a shadow. . . . 
 In Him dwells the spirit of wisdom, and the spirit of Him 
 who giveth knowledge (the spirit of intellectual wisdom, 
 L.), and the spirit of teaching and power, and the spirit 
 of those who have fallen asleep in righteousness. And He 
 shall judge the hidden things; and no man shall be able to 
 utter an idle speech before Him, for He is chosen before the 
 face of the Lord of Spirits according to His good pleasure.”? 
 
 The effect of the manifestation of Messias follows im- 
 mediately from His character. “In those 
 days shall a change be wrought for the holy 
 and the elect; the light of day shall dwell 
 upon them, and majesty and honor shall turn to them. 
 And on the day of distress ruin shall be heaped upon sin- 
 ners. .... And in those days the earth shall give back 
 that which has been entrusted to it, and the kingdom of 
 death shall give back that which has been entrusted to it, 
 and Hell (Scheol) shall give back that which it owes. And 
 [Messias] shall choose the righteous and holy among them, 
 for the day is come that they should be delivered.” ® 
 
 His excellent gifts. 
 
 The effect of Ihs 
 coming. 
 
 1 Cap.1xi.10, 11. From the position that day ” (Ix. 13); yet he defends it as 
 
 in which the words ‘‘ the Elect” occur, 
 and from a comparison of the context, 
 a question may perhaps arise whether 
 the reading is correct. Laurence’s 
 translation is not very probable: “And 
 all the angels of the Lord, namely of 
 the Elect one, and of the other Power, 
 who was upon earth over the water on 
 
 containing ‘‘an obvious reference to 
 Gen. i. 1,” and “the declaration of a 
 .... precise and distinct Trinity of 
 Percons under the supreme appellation 
 of God and Lord.” Prel. Diss. Ὁ. lii. 
 
 2 Cap. xlix. (c. xlviii. Laur.) 
 
 8 Capp. 1. li. The doctrine of the 
 resurrection is again described with 
 
124 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 But the final establishment of Messiah’s kingdom? is 
 preceded by a time of devastation and con- 
 quest on earth —a “period of the sword.” 
 “f saw, and a great sword was given to the 
 sheep — the long oppressed people of God; then the sheep 
 went forth against the beasts of the field, — their ancient 
 oppressors, — and all the beasts and the fowls of heaven 
 fled before their face,” 2 and turned too late to prayer and 
 repentance. This occupies the eighth of the ten “ weeks” 
 into which the history of the world is divided; “and the 
 sword is given that judgment and righteousness might be 
 executed on them who act with violence, and the sinners 
 given over into the hands of the righteous.”* “ And the 
 hearts of the saints were full of joy that the number of 
 righteousness was fulfilled, and the prayer of the righteous 
 
 The wars which 
 precede it; and 
 
 singular force and detail, c. 1xi. 5, 6. 
 One point is particularly deserving of 
 notice: in speaking of the future state 
 of the wicked, the writer always speaks 
 of their spirits only (Dillm. p. 165). 
 The reiinion with the body — the condi- 
 tion of sharing Messiah’s kingdom — is 
 reserved for the righteous. Cf. Hom. 
 Odyss. xi. 487 ff.; Plato, Resp. 386 c. 
 The same doctrine occupies a prom- 
 inent place in the Mormonite system. 
 Spencer's Letters, pp. 154 ff. 
 
 1 The mutual relation of the different 
 parts of the “end of the world” is 
 naturally obscure, and the obscurity is 
 increased by much confusion both in 
 the language and in the text of the book. 
 The general interpretation which 1 have 
 given appears to be intelligible and con- 
 sistent; but two difficulties remain, as 
 to the times of the appearance of Mes- 
 siah, and of the great judgment. In 
 6. xc. 87, the birth of ‘“‘ the white bul- 
 lock, with great horns” (Messiah) is 
 described as taking place after the 
 period of the sword, and before the 
 great conversion of the world (§ 38), 
 though all men were already collected 
 at the Holy City (é.e., in the ninth 
 week), and this, I believe, is the opinion 
 
 of the writer. And, correspondingly, 
 it appears to be his intention to place 
 the great judgment at the end of the 
 tenth week, after the peaceful reign 
 over the converted world, though in 
 c. xc. 20—27 it is described immediately 
 after the period of the sword, probably 
 as being its final consummation and 
 spiritual antitype (ef. xIvii. 4; xlviii. 2). 
 The character of Messiah as the resist- 
 less and righteous Judge requires that 
 all judgments, even the period of the 
 sword (c. xlviii. 4 ff.), should ultimately 
 be referred to Him. The clearer state- 
 ments must interpret the more general. 
 
 2 Cap. xc. 19(Ixxxix. 27, Laur.). But 
 even the most terrible calamities are 
 regarded as a judgment on sinners 
 (and not a trial for the elect, cf. cap. 
 Gol afte): 
 
 8 Capp. Ixili. xx xviii. 6. 
 
 4 Cap. xci. 12 (xcii. 18, 14, Laur.), cf. 
 ¢. xxxviii.5. ven in this chapter the 
 different stages of the great end of all 
 things seem to be distinguished: ‘the 
 period of the sword,” ὁ 4—6; ‘‘ the rev- 
 elation of the secrets of the righteous,” 
 88; “the manifestation of Messiah,” 
 § 2. See, also, c. ΧΟΥ͂Σ, 12; xevi. 1. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 125 
 
 heard, and the blood of the righteous required before the 
 Lord of Spirits.”? At the end of this week 
 the people of God have reared houses for 
 themselves “in their own pleasant land,” and built “a 
 new temple for the great King,” “greater and nobler than 
 the first,” and “all the sheep are therein.” “ And in that 
 place I saw a fountain of righteousness which was in- 
 exhaustible; many fountains of wisdom encircled it, and 
 all that were thirsty drank thereof, and were full of wis- 
 dom, and had their dwelling with the holy and righteous 
 and elect.”” In the ninth week “the righteous judgment 
 is rendered, ....and all men look to the way of upright- 
 ness;” “and all the beasts of the field and all the fowls 
 of heaven gathered themselves to the house [of God], and 
 tHe Lord of the sheep had great joy that they were all 
 good and returned to His house. And I looked till the 
 sheep laid down the sword that was given to them, and 
 brought it back to His house, and it was sealed before the 
 face of the Lord. ... And the eyes of all were opened 
 that they should see that which is good (the good one, L.), 
 and there was not one among them who saw not.”* And 
 after this, at the end of the tenth week, shall be the eternal 
 judgment over the angels. . . . . “ And the former heaven 
 shall vanish and pass away, and a new heaven shall appear, 
 and all the powers of heaven shall give light forever 
 sevenfold. And after that shall be many weeks without 
 number in goodness and righteousness, and sin shall be no 
 more named forever and ever.”* “And it shall come to 
 pass in these days that the elect and holy children [of God, 
 the Angels] shall descend from the heights of heaven, and 
 join their Lord with the children of men.”* “And from 
 henceforth there will be nothing that corrupts (transitory, 
 Dillm.) any more, for He, the Son of Man, has appeared, 
 and sits upon the throne of His majesty, and all evil shall 
 
 its final blessedness. 
 
 J Cap. xlvii. 4. 4 Cap. xci. 17 (xcii. 16, Laur.) Cf 
 2 Cap. xviii. 1. 6. xcii. 4, 5. 
 8 Cap. xc. 33 f. 5 Cap. xxxix. 1. Cf. Dillm. 1. ¢ 
 
 Lie 
 
126 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 vanish and pass away before His face.”?... “And the 
 chosen One shall dwell among His chosen people.” ? “And 
 they shall be arrayed in the robe of life; ... and the Lord 
 
 of Spirits shall dwell over them, and they 
 
 «ρος. iii. 20. 
 
 shall dwell with that Son of Man, and eat 
 
 with Him, and lie down and rise up forever and ever.’” # 
 The interval between the dates of the Books of Henoch 
 and Esdras” was one of humiliation and trial 
 
 (c) The Fourth 
 
 (second) Book of for the faithful Jew. 
 
 Esdras. 
 
 The kingdoms of the 
 
 world grew stronger, and he was gradually 
 
 brought again under their dominion. 
 
 The very forms in 
 
 which the revelations are clothed furnish apt symbols of 
 the times in which they were respectively written, and of 
 
 IC apelixix. 29. 
 
 2 Cap. xiv. 4. 
 
 5 Cap. Ixii. 16, 14. 
 
 4 The traces of “‘mysticism” in the 
 Book of Enoch are very rare; but they 
 tend to show that the personification 
 of JVisdom and the Word was entirely 
 unconnected with the doctrine of Mes- 
 siah. ‘‘ Wisdom found no place where 
 she should dwell; then had she a dwell- 
 ing in heaven. Wisdom came to dwell 
 among the children of men, and found 
 no dwelling-place ; then Wisdom re- 
 turned to her place, and took up her 
 abode among the angels. And unright- 
 eousness (Folly) came forth from her 
 abode [the indefinitencess of the phrase 
 is worthy of notice]: she found those 
 whom she sought not and dwelt among 
 them, [welcomed] as the rain in the 
 wilderness, and as the dew on the 
 thirsty land” (c. xlii). In another 
 place it is said: ‘‘The Righteous One 
 [Messiah] shall arise fiom sleep, and 
 Wisdom shall arise and be given to 
 them [the elect]” (c. xci. 10). Once 
 more: **The wisdom of the Lord of 
 Spirits revealed [the Son of Man] to 
 the holy and the righteous” (6. xlviii.7). 
 Again, Henoch is described as bidding 
 his son collect all his househo'd to- 
 gether, ‘‘for,” he says, ‘‘ the Word 
 calls me, and the Spirit is poured out 
 
 upon me.” .... (xci. 1). So, agafh, 
 c. xiv. 24: “ΤῸ Lord called me and 
 spake to me; Come hither, Henoch, 
 and to my Holy Word.” The passage 
 xc. 88 (Ixxxix. 47, Laur.) is, I believe, 
 in spite of Ewald’s authority (p. 159 n.), 
 an interpolation; and Dillmann’s ex- 
 planation is at Jeast very ingenious. 
 The literal rendering as it stands is: 
 ‘the first in the midst of them became 
 [a word, and that word became] a large 
 beast.” Nor can I think that 6. lii. 1, 
 ‘When he brings His Word upon you 
 shall ye not be destroyed,” refers to 
 Messiah personally. Cf. Dillm. 1]. ce. 
 
 5 Liicke, Hinleitung, u. 8. w. ὃ 12. 
 Hilgenfe'd, Jud. Apok. 187 ff. The best 
 edition is that of Gfrérer, Prophete 
 veteres Pseudepigraphi, Stuttgard, 1840, 
 pp. 66 ff., who gives Laurence’s Latin 
 version of the Ethiopic (Oxon. 1820) 
 with a collation of the old Latin, and 
 the Arabic version (by Ockley in Whis- 
 ton’s Primitive Christianity, vol. iv., 
 1711). The Dissertatio Critica of Van 
 der Vlis (Amsterd., 1889) I have not 
 been able to use. The quotations are 
 given according to the divisions in 
 the English version; the references in 
 brackets are to Gfrérer’s divisions. The 
 Ethiopic text is followed, unless the 
 contrary is stated. The English ver- 
 sion follows the Latin. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 127 
 
 the general feelings by which they are pervaded. <A 
 patriarch translated from earth to heaven, and admitted to 
 gaze face to face on the hosts of the spiritual world, is the 
 fitting herald of wisdom, righteousness, and judgment to a 
 people who, even in suffering, see in their tyrants only the 
 objects of coming vengeance. A prince in exile with an 
 exiled nation, the witness of heathen wickedness and the 
 victim of tormenting doubts, pleads with significant energy 
 the cause of a people whom their God seems to have 
 forsaken and given up to the oppression of an alien.) The 
 mysteries of the physical creation are as nothing to one 
 who is bewildered by “the counsels of the Most High,” 
 though he is referred back to the lessons of 
 nature that he may acknowledge his weak- 
 ness.” 
 
 This fundamental difference of tone between the two 
 Apocalypses appears to explain their diver- 
 gences in detail. The burden of Esdras 15. οἱ ji, em 
 throughout, “How long, Ὁ Lord?”? The 
 present world is utterly corrupt; a few only shall share in 
 the promised redemption. Fasting and tears are the pre- 
 paration for his visions; and the seer no longer looks upon 
 the mysteries of heaven, but listens to them as they are 
 revealed by the ministry of angels.‘ Everywhere the 
 language is that of an exile among the foul corruptions of 
 Egypt, to whom the promised land is: no longer the 
 gathering field of nations, “the joy of the whole earth.” 
 The “woes of Messiah” are described with a terrible 
 fulness, which is hardly exceeded by the despairing 
 traditions of the Talmud.’ “ Behold, the days shall come 
 that ..... the way of truth shall be hidden, and the 
 land of faith shall be barren (sterilis a fide V.L.). But 
 iniquity shall be increased, ..... and the land shall be 
 wasted utterly... ... The sun shall shine suddenly in the 
 
 Distinguished 
 Jrom Henoch by 
 
 1 Cf. ὁ. vi. 9 (iv. 15). Esau appears 2 iv. 5 ff. (ii. 7 ff.) 
 to represent the Idumzan Herod. Hil- 8 Cf. iv. 35 (ii. 44), etc. 
 genf. p. 195, 4 Cf. iy. 21 (ii. 30). 5 Cf. pp. 127, 8 
 
128 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 night and the moon in the day, and blood shall drop from 
 wood, and the stone shall give his voice and the people 
 
 shall be troubled. ........ There shall be a sound (Chaos 
 V.L.) also in many places; ..... and friends shall destroy 
 
 one another. Then shall wit hide itself, and understanding 
 withdraw into his secret chamber, and shall be sought of 
 many and yet not be found. Then shall unrighteousness 
 and incontinency be multiplied upon earth. One land 
 shall ask another and say, Is righteousness gone through 
 thee, or one doing righteousness (justum faciens V.L.)? 
 And it shall say, No. At that time shall men hope, and 
 obtain nothing; they shall marry, and not rejoice; they 
 shall labor, but their ways shall not prosper.”? And these 
 woes and evils are supposed to follow by an inevitable law 
 from the working of nature. “For the world hath lost his 
 youth, and the times begin to wax old. For the world 
 is divided into twelve parts, and the ten parts of it are 
 gone already and half of a tenth part...... And look 
 how much the world shall be weaker through age, so much 
 the more shall evils increase upon them that dwell there- 
 
 Ale te) etm “For the grain of evil was sown in the heart 
 of Adam from the beginning, and the fruit of ungodliness 
 
 hath been brought forth and multiplied up to this time, 
 and shall yet be brought forth until the time of harvest 
 come.”® So “when commotion shall be seen in the world 
 between several nations, and nations shall be disturbed, 
 and the people shall be polluted, and princes shall hasten 
 to mutual slaughter, and leaders shall be struck with 
 consternation, then understand that of these the Most 
 High hath spoken as coming before his appointed time.” ὁ 
 The stern spirit of exclusiveness through 
 
 «(2 Resemexc ~ which the blessings ushered in by these ter- 
 rible signs are reserved for the Jewish na- 
 
 tion alone, is another sign of the overwhelming sorrows 
 
 1 Ch. v. (Sii.). 8 iv. 80 (ii. 38). 
 2 xiv. 10 ff. (xiv. 8 ff.). Cf. v. 54, 55 ; 
 iy. 50. 4ix. 3 ff. (ix. 2 ff}. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 129 
 
 under which the writer of the book was bowed down. 
 “ And now, O Lord, .... . if the world (ὁ αἰών) be made 
 for our sakes,! why do we not possess an inheritance with 
 the world? how long shall this endure?”2)> And when he 
 inquires as to the end of all things and the terrible issues 
 of Adams sin, the answer is given: “The Most High hath 
 made this world for many, but the world to come for few.” 
 ..... “There be many created, but few shall be saved.” 3 
 “For you is Paradise opened, the tree of life is planted, the 
 time to come is prepared: .. .. . and, therefore, ask no 
 more questions concerning the multitude of them that 
 perish ;”* nay, rather “inquire how the righteous shall be 
 saved, whose the world is and for whom the world is 
 created.” ὃ 
 
 At length, when deceit and oppression and terror have 
 filled the world, Messiah shall come, “even 
 He whom (Unctus V. L.) the Highest hath 
 kept for the end of days of the seed of David,” 
 (Om. V. L.), like “a lion from a wood,” “rebuking the 
 eagle for her unrighteousness and utterly consuming her.” 
 “The rest of my people shall He (7 A‘th.) deliver with 
 mercy, them that have been preserved in my judgment,” 
 and “He shall make them joyful until the coming of the 
 day of judgment, whereof I have spoken unto thee from the 
 beginning.”® Under another image Messiah is described 
 as a man rising from the mysterious sea, into whose depth 
 none can look;’ for “no man upon earth can see my son 
 [saith the Lord], or those that be with Him, but in the day 
 [of His appearing].” “And afterwards, that man flew 
 
 The coming of 
 Messiah. 
 
 1 Cf. vi. 55 (iv. 63): ‘All this have I 
 spoken before thee, O Lord, because 
 thou madest the world for our sakes; ” 
 and vii. 10, 11 (v. 10). 
 
 4 viii. 1, 3, 52—55. 
 
 5 ix. 13. The searceness of the good 
 is given as areason for God’s delight in 
 
 2 vi. 57—59. 
 
 3 The entrance to the fair city was 
 made “one only path, even between 
 fire and water, sosmall that there could 
 but one man go there at once” at the 
 time of Adam’s transgression, while 
 before it was wide and sure, ο. vii. 1—13. 
 
 them (vi. 35, A&th.). 
 
 6 Ce. xi. 37 ff. (xi. 41 ff.); xii. 8, 31—34 
 (xii. 36 ff). 
 
 7 ¢. xiii. 51, 52. 
 
 8 0. xiii. 1—18. Convalescebat cum 
 millibus celi. V. I. 
 
130 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 with the clouds of heaven, and wheresoever He turned 
 His countenance and looked, all things forthwith vanished 
 Detores him; 7 erie. and there was gathered together a 
 multitude of men out of number, from the four winds of 
 the heaven, to subdue the Man that came out of the sea. 
 But I beheld, and lo, He had raised for Himself a great 
 mountain and flew up upon it. ..... And as the multi- 
 tude came against Him, He neither lifted up His hand, nor 
 took his sword, nor any instrument of war, but only there 
 went forth out of his mouth a billow of fire. .... and 
 burned them up every one, until nothing was left of them, 
 but only the dust of their ashes and the smoke of their 
 cenloeration,”. - τ .*. Afterwards I saw the same Man 
 come down from the mountain and eall unto Him a 
 peaceable multitude; and there came much people unto 
 Him. Then was I struck with great fear, and I awaked. 
 ..... And this is the meaning of the vision:! The man 
 whom thou sawest coming up from the heart of the sea, 
 the same is He whom God the Highest hath kept a great 
 season, to redeem the world unto Himself (qui per semet 
 ipsum liberabit creaturam suam V.L:)..... And the 
 Most High shall begin to deliver those that dwell on the 
 earth. [And He shall come to their astonishment (V. L.).] 
 And one shall undertake to fight against another, one city 
 against another, one place against another, one people 
 against another, and one realm against another. And 
 when these things shall come to pass, and the signs shall 
 happen which I have showed thee before, then shall that 
 Man (filius meus V. L. et Ar.) be declared, whom thou 
 sawest (μέ virum V. L.) ascending. And when all the 
 people hear His voice they shall leave the battles they 
 have in their own land one against another. And an 
 innumerable multitude shall be gathered together desiring 
 to slay Him. But He shall stand upon the 
 top of Mount Sion. And Sion shall come, 
 and shall be showed to all men, prepared and built, like 
 
 Apoce, xxi. 10, 
 
 1 ¢. xiii. 25—47. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 131 
 
 as thou sawest that mountain to come forth and be formed 
 without hands. And this is my Son, who shall rebuke the 
 nations for their sins, ..... and He shall destroy them 
 without labor like coals of fire (per ignem que igni 
 assimilata est V. L.). And whereas thou sawest that 
 another peaceable multitude was gathered wnto Him; 
 ‘these are the nine (decem V. L.; novem et dimidia Ar.) 
 tribes which were carried away prisoners out of their own 
 land...... But they took this counsel among them- 
 selves, that they would leave the stock of their people 
 (multitudinem gentium V. 1.) and go forth into a country 
 where never mankind dwelt, that they might keep their 
 statutes which they had never kept in their own land. 
 And they entered through the narrow passages of the 
 Euphrates. ..... Forthe Most High held still the flood 
 till they were passed over;.... . .and now the Highest 
 shall stay the springs of the stream again that they may 
 go through ;* therefore sawest thou the multitude come 
 together.” ..... . 
 
 The reign thus commenced in terrible and overwhelming 
 desolation shall last for four hundred years.* 
 “After these years,” it is said, “shall my son 77cm of Mew 
 Christ die, and all men that have breath. 
 And the world shall be turned into the old silence seven 
 days, like as in the first beginning, and no man shall 
 remain. And after seven days [the world that yet awaketh 
 not, V. L.] shall be raised up; and the corruptible world 
 shall retire afar. And the earth shall restore those that 
 are asleep in her, and so shall the dust those that are in 
 silence, and the secret places shall deliver those souls that 
 were committed unto them. And the Most High shall 
 appear upon the seat of judgment; and His mercy shall 
 coine (7. 6.. to the distressed faithful. Pertransibunt miseria, 
 
 1 Cf. Baruch, Ep. Syr. init. sias meus cum his qui cum eo [sunt], et 
 2 Cf. Apoc. xvi. 12. letificabit eos qui resuscitabuntur. 
 3 ¢. vii. 23—85. The clause iswanting Filius meus Jesus V L. Filius meus 
 ‘in 2th. y. 29. Revelabitur enim Mes- Messias Ar. 
 
132 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 V.L.), and His clemency shall cease, and his long-suffering 
 shall have an end, but judgment only shall remain, and 
 truth shall stand, and faith shall bud, and the work shall 
 follow, and the reward shall be showed, and justice shall 
 watch, and injustice shall not slumber.” For “the day of 
 doom shall be the end of this time and the beginning of 
 immortality for to come, wherein corruption is past.”!.... 
 The great outlines of these apocalyptic visions offer a 
 striking parallel to the teaching of the apos- 
 ee oe. ‘tles. The times of war and tumult which 
 i portend the coming of Messiah, His sudden 
 appearance with a heavenly host, the destruction of the 
 wicked by the breath of His mouth, the reign of triumph, 
 the general resurrection and last judgment, are brought out 
 with distinct clearness. Nor is this all; in spite of the im- 
 portance attached to the “good works laid up in heaven,” 
 faith is required as a condition of salvation, Legalism is 
 spiritualized by the recognition of a higher energy. Buta 
 sorrowful gloom is over all. Messiah Himself dies. Chaos 
 resumes its old sway. The earth is not quickened with a 
 new life, but passes away in a second creation. 
 Errors such as these were the natural result of times of 
 oppression; and we may believe that the 
 of banner author of the Book of Ezra would have wel- 
 cmt mtarr eomed Christianity as glad tidings; and that 
 not Bokof even if he had asked, with others, Are there a 
 Sew that be saved? he would probably have 
 acquiesced in the answer. But there was a yet narrower 
 and sterner form of Jewish hope in which exclusiveness 
 degenerated into the wildest intolerance, and the observ- 
 ance of the Law into the most passionate formalism. 
 This spirit was evoked in its full energy by the rise of 
 Christianity, and distinctly animates the Book of Jubilees? 
 
 1 vii. 48 (vii. 12). The book is mentioned under this title 
 2 Translated by A. Dillmann in_ by Epiphanius adv. Her. xxxix. § 6. ἐν 
 Ewald’s Jahrbicher der Biblischen Tots ᾿Ιωβηλαίοις εὑρίσκεται, τῇ καὶ 
 Wissenschaft, 1849, pp. 280 ff.; 1850, 1ff. Δεπτογενέσει καλουμένῃ... .. Τὸ 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 133 
 
 which is one of the strangest relics of early Jewish litera- 
 ture. This remarkable narrative may be called a “haga- 
 dical” commentary on Genesis, and it derives its name from 
 - the fact that its entire arrangement is based on the festal 
 cycle of forty-nine years. The object of the writer is to 
 methodize the chronology of primeval history, to explain 
 its difficulties, to enforce its lessons. In connection with 
 the Apostolic writings, the chief importance of the book 
 lies in the fierce severity with which it inculeates the ritual 
 of the Law, and in the haughty pride with which it limits 
 the special privileges of Israel. The Sabbath appears as 
 no earthly institution, but as ordained first for angels, and 
 observed in heaven before the creation of man,!_ The very 
 object for which the people of Israel was chosen was that 
 they might keep it. The eating of blood is an offence on 
 the same level as the shedding of blood.2. The cruel deed 
 of Simeon and Levi is blessed 3? and precedence over all 
 men is given to Levi and his seed, and that they should 
 “be as the Angels of the presence.” It is taught that the 
 Mosaic ordinances were not only observed by the patri- 
 archs, but written in heavenly tables and binding forever 
 And nothing less than the successful claims of Christianity 
 to have fulfilled and spiritualized the precepts of the Law, 
 can explain the stress which is laid upon its permanent 
 force, and the hopeless penalties which are attached to the 
 neglect of it. In the presence of ritualism such as this the 
 vision of Messiah almost fades away. The personal char- 
 
 Ixxviii. 18, 24. Cf. Ed. Bened. 1. c.; 
 
 Dillm. pp. 88 ff. 
 1 ¢. ii. pp. 235-6. 
 2 Pp. 245, 248. 
 
 also called ἡ τοῦ Μωὔΐὔσεως ἀποκάλυψις, 
 μικρογένεσις, τὰ λεπτὰ Γενέσεως 
 (Dillmann, pp. 74,76). Its date is some 
 time in the first century (id. p. 88), later 
 
 Cf. c. 50. 
 
 than the Book of Henoch (id. p. 90) 
 and earlier than the Testaments of 
 the twelve Patriarchs (id. p. 91). The 
 Ethiopic version was made from a 
 Greek text: whether this was the origi- 
 nal text is uncertain from internal evi- 
 dence, and Jerome evidently alludes to 
 a Hebrew original of the book. Zp. 
 
 8 Pp. 37—39. 
 
 4 Pp. 245, 12 (the 
 nacles celebrated by Abraham), 4 
 (Tithes), 9 (Circumcision), 49 (Pass 
 over). In the face of this stern ritual- 
 ism it is strange that a tradition should 
 exist which derives Gal. vi. 15 from the 
 ἀποκάλυψις Mwicews. Cf. Meyer,].c 
 
 feast of Taber. 
 
 12 
 
134 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 acter of the Redeemer is lost in the vague anticipation of 
 a general return from the dispersion.’ The transition from 
 “this world” to “the world to come” is found in a gradual 
 progress of moral and physical evil, “till the children are 
 gray-headed,” followed by a period of deepening repen- 
 tance and increasing strength, which culminates in an age 
 when men shall enjoy a thousand years of perpetual youth, 
 and no Satan or destroyer disturb their happiness.” ὃ 
 
 At the same time that the attempt was made to furnish 
 a supplement to Scripture in the Apocalyptic 
 writings, the books of Scripture themselves 
 were submitted to a formal interpretation. 
 Egypt and Palestine shared alike in the work of transla- 
 tion, as they joined in completing the image of Messiah’s 
 triumph; and the Septuagint and the Tar- 
 gums remain as the monuments of their la- 
 bors. Regarding only their present form, the 
 LXX. is the most ancient version; and it is perhaps char- 
 acteristic of the time and place at which it was made? that 
 it contains scarcely any passages which bring forward the 
 person of Messiah in a clearer light than the original text.’ 
 In some places the original ambiguity between a race and 
 a person is decided by the selection of the race as the 
 source of the Divine blessings; in others the future hope 
 appears to be lost in the present which served as the type 
 of it; in others the fulness of the original prediction is 
 lowered and compressed; but generally the words of the 
 
 2. The doctrine of 
 Messiah in the exe- 
 getic literature. 
 
 (a) The Septua- 
 gint. 
 
 1 No mention is made of the promise ec. iii. 18—21. Cf. Clem. Hom. iii. 20. 
 
 to Eve, p. 288. 
 
 2 Ce. i. exxiii.; pp. 282, 23, 24. 
 
 8 The Ascensio Esaie (Gfrorer, Pro- 
 phete veteres Pseudepigraphi, pp.1ff.), 
 though a Christian Apocalypse, con- 
 tains some peculiar elements of Jewish 
 tradition. The description of the sue- 
 cessive descents of Messiah through 
 the seven heavens preparatory to His 
 incarnation is well worthy of notice, 
 
 Nero is directly identified with Anti- 
 christ, ο. iv. 1 
 
 4 Cf. p. 96. 
 
 5 Of these the most remarkable is 
 Numb. xxiv. 7 (quoted by Philo, ii. p. 
 423 M.). Isai. xxxviii. 11 is very ques 
 tionable; and even in the first passage 
 there is no distinct reference to Mes- 
 siah. Compare also Amos ix. 12 (Acts 
 xv. 17). 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 135 
 original are reproduced without any 
 elucidate them.’ 
 
 But the case is far different with the Targums; and next 
 to the writings of the New Testament the 
 Targums of Onkelos? and Jonathan furnish 
 the best contemporary evidence as to the nature of the 
 received view of the Messiah at the commencement of the 
 Christian era. This testimony, however, is not only 
 authentic expression of the current belief, but rather 
 embodiment of traditional teaching. The introduction of 
 oral Chaldaic paraphrases in the public reading of the 
 Scriptures dates from the time of Ezra; and there is every 
 reason to believe that written translations existed as early 
 as the first century before Christ, though for a long time 
 interpreters would naturally shrink from committing their 
 versions to writing. Passing by the scanty notices of these 
 first versions, the paraphrase of the Law by Onkelos, and 
 that of the Prophets by Jonathan ben Usiel, are at once 
 the oldest and the most important. 
 to the first half of the first century, though the evidence 
 by which their date is determined is scanty and incomplete.’ 
 The first, as was required by the nature of the subject, is 
 strictly accurate and clear, rarely departing from the origi- 
 nal text except to avoid the semblance of anthropomor- 
 phic doctrine. In the latter, wider scope was offered to 
 the translator, as well through the greater freedom allowed 
 in the treatment of the prophetic books, as by the necessity 
 
 attempt to apply or 
 
 (Ὁ) The Targums. 
 
 an 
 an 
 
 Both appear to belong 
 
 a 
 
 1Cf. Gen. iii. 15, αὐτός σον τη- 
 ρήσει κ΄ LXX. (ef. Philo i. p. 124), 
 συντρίψει Rom. xvi 20; but probably 
 Typ. is an old mistake for τειρήσει. 
 Gen. xlix. 8—10, Ta ἀποκείμενα αὐτῷ 
 LXX. ᾧ ἀποκεῖται, 5. οὗ ἐστίν all. (ef. 
 Just. Dial. c. Tryph. § 190 : Creduer, 
 Beitr. ii. 51 ff.) Num. xxiv. 17—19; 
 LXX. = ἡγούμενος y.19 (Cf. Credner, 
 a.a. 0. 64). Isai. iv. 2, Jost in LXX. 
 Tsai. ix. 6, τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ. Μεγάλης 
 βουλῆς ἄγγελος 1ΧΧ). Isai. Χ]. 1 11 
 LXX. of Israel and not of Messiah ; 
 
 vv. 2, 8,in Matt. xii. 18—21 * LXX 
 Isai. xlix. 1 ff. is ambiguous, apparently 
 of Israel. Ps. ii. 6, ἐγὼ δὲ κατεστάδϑην 
 LXX. Ps. ex. (cix.) 5, συνέϑλασεν 
 LXX. Hagg. ii. 7, τὰ ἔκλεκτα LXX. 
 
 21 have not been able to make use 
 of Luzzato’s Rabbinical Essay on Onke- 
 los: Philoxenus, ete. Vienne, 1880. 
 
 ® The arguments of Gfrérer are, on 
 the whole, sufficient to prove that they 
 were made before the final overthrow 
 of Jerusalem (Jahrh. d. Heils, i. 36—88) 
 
136 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 of giving distinctness to the sublime predictions which 
 they contained. It is probable that both have been inter- 
 polated in some degree by later hands; but the attempts to 
 show that they have been modified with a polemical object 
 against the Christians must be considered to have failed." 
 The Targum of Onkelos, from its literal exactness, could 
 not contain many explicit references to the 
 Messiah. Two passages only are quoted in 
 which he introduces the title, but those are 
 of the utmost importance, as recognizing generally the 
 period of Messiah’s coming, and the majesty of His king- 
 dom. In translating the well-known words of Jacob’s 
 
 ἡ. The Targum of 
 Onkelos. 
 
 blessing till Shiloh come, he says till Messiah 
 
 Gen. «lix. 10. 
 
 Num. xxiv. 17. 
 
 comes, whose is the kingdom, and to whom is 
 the gathering of the nations. 
 ing rendering of the prophecy of Balaam: A 
 king shall rise from Jacob, and a Messiah 
 shall be anointed from Israel. 
 
 And he gives a correspond- 
 
 The last words are perhaps 
 
 in themselves ambiguous, but when taken in connection 
 with constant Jewish tradition their meaning cannot be 
 
 doubtful. 
 
 1 Zunz, Gottesd. Vortrige, pp. 61 ff. 
 The Messianic passages from the Tar- 
 gums are collected by Buxtorf, Lex. 
 Talmud, p. 1268 ff., with some slight 
 errors; and in a convenient form, with 
 the Hebrew text aud double English 
 translation, by R. Young, Phe Chris- 
 tology of the Targums, Eding., 1853. 
 In addition to the Targum of Onkelos 
 on the Pentateuch, there is a second, 
 originally known as the Palestine Tar- 
 gum, which exists at present in a 
 double recension on the Jerusalem 
 Targum and the Targum of the 
 Pseudo-Jonathan. Yn its present form 
 this probably dates from the second 
 half of the seventh century (Zunz, 77), 
 though based on older materials. Its 
 character is rather that of /nterpreta- 
 tion (Midrash) than of Translation. 
 Fragments exist of a Jerusalem Tar- 
 
 gum on the Prophets(Zunz, 77 ff.) The 
 Targums on the Hagiographa are per. 
 haps later. That on the Psalms, Prov- 
 erbs, and Job is assigned by Zunz te 
 the same country (Syria) and date, 
 without determining what this is: the 
 Targum on the Psalms speaks of Con- 
 stantinople(Zunz, p 64n.). Theauthor 
 of the Targum of the five Migilloth 
 (Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Es- 
 ther, Canticles) lived probably “ zem- 
 lich lange nach der talmudischen 
 Epoche” (id. p. 65). No Targum of 
 Wzra, Nehemiah, or Daniel exists. 
 That on Chronicles is of very late date. 
 The account of the Targums by Zunz 
 (ch. v.)is most masterly and exact, and 
 contains in a brief space and ascholar- 
 like form all, I believe, that is yet 
 known certainly as to their history. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 137 
 
 The Messianic interpretations of Jonathan are numerous 
 and interesting, agreeing in most-cases with ᾿ς ye paremm 
 the current of later teaching. Thus, he says, of Jonathan ben 
 A king shall come forth from the sons of iri. 
 Jesse, and Messiah shall arise from his sons’ οὐ 2 οι 
 sons. This is the branch of the Lord, the son 4 Tritt. & 
 given to the house of David, who shall endure 
 Forever, in whose time shall be much peace ; 
 yet He shall execute a terrible vengeance on the enemies 
 of His people, like a fiery flying serpent. By x xiv. 2, 
 fim shall the nations be broken in pieces: ts.x.%. 
 and they shall bring offerings to Him, because — B® *vi-1,5- 
 fle shall be established in goodness, and be seated on 1118 
 throne in truth ; and He shall be fora crown 
 of joy. At the same time the Messiah appears 
 not only as a conquering and triumphant 
 king, but also as the servant of the Lord, the 
 servant whom He had chosen, who should 
 prosper. And though Jonathan sees in the description of 
 Christ’s sufferings only the chastisement of the Jewish na- 
 tion, yet he connects this period of distress with Messiah’s 
 coming. Lecause God hath cleansed their souls from sins, 
 they shall see the kingdom of their Messiah, they shall 
 have many sons and daughters, they shall prolong their 
 days, and keeping the Law of the Lord they shall be happy 
 according to His good pleasure. 
 
 So also in the other prophets Messiah is that second 
 David, the king of Israel, whom the Lord κα πὶ δ. 
 should raise up; who should go forth from σεν xrx.9;xxxiit. 
 them, and be revealed from the midst of them, a 
 and teach them the worship of the Lord, as the mystical 
 shepherd to whom the flock should be re- 
 stored, in whom all the just should trust, and o& τυραν Ἂν 
 all the humble dwell under the shadow of His 
 kingdom. And as He was to be the son of David, and 
 Himself the spiritual David, so was He to come forth 
 from Bethlehem, David’s city, being named from the be 
 
 155 
 
 Is. ix. 6, 
 
 15. raviii. 5. 
 
 Ts. xlii.1. Cf. Zech. 
 iii. 8. 
 
 Ts, xliti. τὸς 
 
 Js, tii, 18. 
 
138 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 ginning, and destined to rule over all the 
 kingdoms of the earth? 
 The later Targums on the Pentateuch exhibit a striking 
 contrast to the rigid simplicity of Onkelos, 
 and in their Messianic passages show clearly 
 the hopes and influence of a later age. In 
 addition to the two passages which he applies to Messiah,” 
 they explain fifteen others as referring to His 
 time. Moses came forth from the desert, 
 Messiah, it is said, shall come out of Rome [the Roman 
 Empire ?], in the great paschal night of the second deliv- 
 erance of Israel. Then, though the people be 
 scattered to the uttermost parts of heaven, the 
 Word of the Lord shall gather them thence by the hand of 
 Elias the great priest, and bring them thence by the hand 
 of Messiah the King. The idea of the terrible conflict of 
 good and evil “in the last days” had assumed a form and 
 consistency not found in the earlier writings. Then shall 
 the serpent strive to sting men in the heel, but 
 
 Zech. vi. 15. 
 
 ili. The later Tar- 
 aums on the Penta- 
 teuch. 
 
 Ex. xii. 42. 
 
 Deut. xxx. 4. 
 
 Gen. tii. 15. 
 Weak 19. the sons of the-woman shall secure their de- 
 Ex, avi. 10. liverance in “the heel of time,” the days of 
 
 Numb. xxiv. 20. 
 
 Messiah. All the sons of the Hast, in league 
 with Amalek, whose sin shall never be forgot. 
 ten, shall then join battle with the house of Israel, and fall 
 forever, for the cry of Messiah is among His people. Al- 
 ready a second Messiah —the son of Ephraim — appears 
 in contrast with Messiah the King, and they 
 are compared respectively to the laver in the 
 court of the tabernacle and the vessels in the tabernacle 
 
 itself. But still Eder, a watch-tower near 
 
 Bethlehem, is spoken of as the place from 
 which Messiah shall be revealed in the end of days.’ 
 
 — 
 
 Numb. xxiii. 21. 
 
 Hie, at, 9) 1. 
 
 Gen. xxxv. 21. 
 
 1 The references to 1 Sam. ii 10, and 
 2 Sam. xxiii. 3, are at least uncertain; 
 that to Isai xlv. 1 obviously incorrect. 
 
 2 Both Targums extend the applica- 
 tion of Gen. xlix. 11,12 expressly to 
 Messiah. 
 
 8 The same interpretation appears 
 also in a passage contained in the Tar- 
 gum of Jonathan on Mic. iv. 8 (And 
 thou tower of Eder), which, however, 
 seems to be an interpolation: Et tu 
 Messia Israelis, gui occultaris propter 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 139 
 
 The Targums on the Hagiographa contain but few dis- 
 tinct Messianic allusions. The only Psalms 
 which are directly applied to the Messiah 
 are Ps. xxi., xlv., Ixi., xxii. The six measures 
 of barley which Ruth received from Boaz are 
 interpreted to symbolize the six righteous men who should 
 spring from her... .. David, Daniel with his companions, 
 and King Messias. In the paraphrase of 
 Lamentations, it is said: Zhow [Ὁ Lord] 
 shalt proclaim freedom to thy people, the house of Israel, 
 by the hand of Messiah, as thou didst by the hand of Mo- 
 ses and Aaron, in the time of the Passover ; 
 and thou Zion shalt be freed by the hand of 
 Messiah, and of Elias the High Priest. In Ecclesiastes 
 it is expressly said that the day of the coming 
 of King Messiah is a mystery, as the day of « 
 death , and who is he who shall discover it 
 by wisdom? Several passages in Canticles are referred to 
 the Messiah ; and special mention is made of the two deliv- 
 erers who should arise, Messias the son of 
 David, and Messias the son of Ephraim. 
 
 But while the Apocalyptic and Interpretative literature 
 of the Jews shows the form which the Mes- 
 sianic hope had assumed as a theological 720 Mirae 
 dogma at the beginning of the Christian era, 7e0h fe 416 pope 
 it conveys little information as to the hold 
 which the doctrine retained on the mass of the people. 
 The teaching of the schools could scarcely touch the sym- 
 pathies or influence the character of “the multitude who 
 knew not the law;” and the literature which 
 survives in after generations is generally that 
 which was in advance of the age in which it appeared. 
 
 One important fragment, however, of what may be 
 called the popular literature has been preserved. The 
 “Psalms of Solomon”! appear to belong to the times of 
 
 iv. The Targum 
 on the Hagiogra- 
 pha. 
 
 Ruth tii. 15. 
 
 Lam. ti. 22. 
 
 Lam. iv. 22. 
 
 Eccles, vii. 25. 
 Γι 1}. 
 
 Cant. iv. 5. 
 
 John vii. 49. 
 
 peccata Ecclesiw Zionis,ad te regnum 1 The Greek translation, which alone 
 venturum est. remains, is given by Fabricius, Cod. 
 
140 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 the Antiochean persecution,’ and to express the deep peni- 
 tence and the devout hope of a pious Jew 
 Sone Pealmsof at that crisis. They are distinguished from 
 the Apocalyptic writings by a clearer rec- 
 ognition of the sins of the people, and from the books 
 of the Apocrypha by a greater simplicity and a closer 
 adherence to the language of the Old Testament. The 
 view which they give of Messiah is proportionately distinct 
 and full, especially in the exhibition of the spiritual character 
 of His reign. After general prayers for mercy and resto- 
 ration (vii., x1.), and beyond the anticipation of a divine 
 visitation for judgment (xv.), the recollection of the 
 promise “to David and his seed forever” rises in marked 
 preéminence (xvii.). Though His throne be cast down, yet 
 shall it be raised up. A king, it is said,? a Son of David, 
 shall be girded with strength to bruise unjust rulers, to 
 cleanse Jerusalem, to remove sinners, to gather together 
 the just from all the places in which they have been 
 scattered. He shall shake the earth with His word, the 
 writer adds, and bless His people, and the Gentiles shall 
 serve Him. He shall be “free from sin” (καϑαρὸς ἀπὸ 
 ἁμαρτίας), “an anointed Lord” (χριστὸς κύριος ), and “shall 
 not be weak” through the strength of God. And “happy 
 are those who are born in His days, to see the blessings of 
 Israel, which God shall bring to pass in the congregation 
 II. The Messianic a ΤΩ 
 hope of the Jews as The language of these Psalms offers a near 
 pra el approximation to the tone of those who first 
 Wal ok welcomed the Messiah; but the various de- 
 tails gathered from a scanty literature are first combined 
 
 Pseudep. V. T. i. 914 ff. The Psalms 2 Psalm xvii. 5, 8, 28 ff. 
 
 are translated, and assigned to asecond 
 
 Solomon of the time of the Return, 3 Psalm xvii. 36. Ewald (iv. 344 π.) 
 
 by Whiston, Authentic Records, ete, conjectures that this may be an error 
 
 i. pp. 117 ff. Cf. Ewald, iv. 348 f. of translation for Xp. κυρίου. Cf. Lue. 
 1 Cf. Ewald, iv. 348 n. The language ii. 11 (varr. lectt.), 26. 
 
 of Psalm viii. seems decisive on this 
 point. 4 Psalms xvii. 50; xviii. 7. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. ~ 141 
 
 into a living picture in the records of the New Testament. 
 Without the historical narrative the sum 
 
 of the theological teaching is confused and 4}. The New Tex 
 often unintelligible. But in a few scattered 
 
 phrases the Apostolic writers have preserved a striking 
 outline of the different forms which the national hope of 
 the Jews assumed at the time and on the scene of Christ’s 
 appearance. The variety and distinctness of the traits 
 which they have marked, their simplicity and naturalness, 
 their vital connection with existing circumstances, and the 
 confirmation which they receive from subsequent history, 
 are alike worthy of careful study; and taken together they 
 combine to give a vivid and life-like image of the popular 
 creed as it was apprehended by men who were ready to die 
 for it. 
 
 The early literature of the Jews recognized the existence 
 of very different ideas of the Messianic work. 
 The difference which was thus admitted in 
 theory was embodied in life. The faith and spirit of the be- 
 liever in this case, as in every other, moulded the substance 
 of his belief; and Holy Scripture seemed to promise to each 
 in the coming deliverance exactly that freedom for which 
 he longed most ardently. Atonement, independence, resto- 
 ration, dominion, union—such were the manifold ideas 
 included in the glorious prospect of Messiah’s kingdom. 
 
 But while the form of the hope was indefinite, its 
 presence was universal. In some form or 
 other general expectation was quickened in Wile spread afte 
 Judza, and in Samaria, and among the Jews ; 
 of the dispersion ;! “ Jerusalem and all Judea, and all the 
 region round about Jordan went out” to John’s Baptism, 
 without distinction of rank or sect, “musing whether he 
 were Christ.”? In the most different stations were those 
 who “waited for the kingdom of God.” “To this the 
 
 The variety and 
 
 1 Jobn i. 41; iv. 25; Acts xxvi. 7. mon people seem to have heard him 
 2 Matt. iii. 5; Luke iii. 15; John 1.20; most gladly: Matt. xxi. 23-27; Mark 
 iii. 28. Yet here,aselsewhere,thecom- xi. 27—33; Luke xx. 6. 
 
142 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hoped 
 to come.” And at a later time Simon the 
 mystic and Barkokeba the zealot found mul- 
 titudes ready to welcome in them either the “ great power 
 of God” or the “star which should rise out of Israel.” 
 Even in the great diversity of opinion which existed as 
 to Messiah, some points seem to have been 
 settled by general tradition or consent. It 
 was held that the time of His advent, though 
 fixed in the Divine counsels, was unknown by men, who 
 meanwhile were looking anxiously in “the distress of 
 nations” for those “signs” which they had been taught to 
 expect as the first announcement of “the fulness of the 
 time.” General belief pointed to an appearance startling 
 and sudden, in the “ wilderness” or in the “secret cham- 
 ber.” Even the Pharisees asked Christ “when the kingdom 
 of God should come.”* And here, too, special blessings 
 were reserved for such as looked for them. In the capital 
 of Herod there was one “just and devout, 
 waiting for the consolation of Israel, to whom 
 it was revealed that he should not see death till he had 
 seen the Lord’s Anointed.” And others shared the hope 
 and assurance of Simeon, since Anna could speak freely 
 of Jesus “to those who were waiting for the 
 redemption of Jerusalem.” ? 
 The uncertainty which attached to the time extended 
 also to the manner of Messiah’s appearance. 
 The question of the Magi when they inquired 
 for Him “who was Jorn King of the Jews,” showed a faith 
 not general at the period. In recognizing a child as King 
 their spiritual insight may be conipared with that of 
 Simeon and Anna. By others it was made 
 an objection to the claims of our Lord, espe- 
 cially by His own countrymen, that His family was known 
 
 Acts xxvi. 7. 
 
 The Time of Mes- 
 siah’s coming. 
 
 Luke ii. 25, 26. 
 
 Luke ii. 88, 
 
 The Manner. 
 
 Matt. xiti. 54—58. 
 
 1 Luke xvii. 20. 
 2 All. 6. ADLX., ete., ἐν Ἱερουσαλήμ. All. τοῦ Ἰσραήλ, 5. ἐν τῷ “Ia. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 143 
 
 to them and dwelt among them. “ We know this man 
 whence he is,” said the people of Jerusalem, 
 “but when Christ cometh no man knoweth 
 whence He 18.) “How can this man, whose father and 
 mother we know,” asked the multitudes at Capernaum, say, 
 “I came down from heaven?” They expected to hear 
 the ery, “Lo, here is Christ, or lo there,” and to see him 
 declared at once in the fulness of power and strength as 
 the deliverer of His people. ἢ 
 
 As the star in the East was to be the physical emblem 
 of Christ’s coming, so was it universally 
 believed that Elijah would prepare His way 
 at once, by restoring the ancient faith of the people, and 
 by consecrating Him to His office. ‘This belief was already 
 part of the popular teaching, and even the disciples seemed 
 to have looked for its literal accomplishment, when they 
 suggested the difficulty: How say the scribes 
 that Elias must first come? Nor was this 
 all; as Elijah represented the majesty of the prophets, so 
 Jeremiah symbolized their devotion; and he who had 
 “prayed much for his people and the Holy 
 City,” was specially named among the com- 
 pany of Messiah at his appearance.’ 
 
 Such being among the acknowledged signs of the 
 Messiah, it was determined with equal 
 agreement that He should spring from Beth- 
 lehem, the city of David. The answer of the 
 priests to Herod is confirmed by the doubts 
 of those who at a later time questioned the Messiahship of 
 one whom they supposed to be a Galilean, for they asked, 
 Did not the Scripture say that Christ cometh 
 of the seed of David, and from Bethlehem, 
 whence David was ? 
 
 And not only was the Messiah to spring 7” Pavitic 7. 
 from David’s city; He was emphatically David’s son.’ 
 
 John vii. 27. 
 
 The signs. 
 
 Matt. xvii. 10 ||. 
 
 2 Macc. xv. 14. 
 
 The Birthplace. 
 
 Matt. ti. 5, 
 
 John vii. 41, 42. 
 
 1 Matt. xvi. 14. Cf. 4 Esdr. ii. 15 2 The title itself does not oceur in 
 (Isaiah). the writings of St Joln,and yet yn the 
 
144 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 Such was the answer which the Pharisees made to the ques- 
 tion of our Lord; and when the multitudes 
 were amazed at the miracles of Jesus they 
 said, Zs not this the Son of David? evi- 
 dently understanding by the words the prom- 
 ised King. The blind on two occasions addressed Him by 
 the same title, Have mercy on us, thou Son 
 of David. And the name was spread abroad 
 even among strangers: “A woman of Canaan 
 .... cried unto Him, saying, Have mercy on me, Lord, 
 thou Son of David.” So when the pilgrim multitude led 
 Him in triumph, the song was still, “/Zosanna 
 to the Son of David,” “blessed be the king- 
 dom of our father David, which cometh in the name of the 
 Lord ,”! and when the triumph was over the 
 children in the temple once more caught up 
 
 Matt. xxii. 42 ||. 
 
 Mati. xii. 23. 
 
 Matt. ix. 27. 
 Matt. xx. 30 ||. 
 Hatt. xv. 22. 
 
 Matt. xxi, 9. 
 
 Matt. xxi. 15. 
 
 the words. 
 
 The type of royal power was naturally that on which 
 the mass of the Jews dwelt with the liveliest 
 hope, but the image and promise of Moses 
 moulded the expectations of some among 
 them. These looked for a prophet rather than for a king,? 
 though they entertained no clear conception of the scope 
 of his teaching; and the “likeness” of which Moses spoke, 
 led them to anticipate an outward resemblance in life 
 rather than in work between the lawgivers of the Old and 
 New, which attained in later times a fabulous minuteness.® 
 A trace of this tendency occurs in the Gospels: when the 
 multitudes said, This ts of a truth that 
 
 The Mosaic type. 
 
 Deut. xviit. 15. 
 
 John vi. 31 ff. 
 
 prophet which 
 
 should come into the world, 
 
 they soon called to mind the manna in the wilderness, and 
 
 passage just quoted he implicitly recog- 
 nizes it. Cf. Apoc. v. 5; xxii. 16, n ῥίζα 
 Δαυΐδ. In the Epistles the Davidic 
 descent of Christ is only twice alluded 
 to: Rom. i. 3; 2 Tim. ii. 8. 
 1 Mark xi. 10. Cf. Luke i. 32, 69. 
 2John vi. 14. Elsewhere ‘the 
 
 Prophet’? and “the Messiah” are 
 distinguished: John i. 21; vii. 40. Cf. 
 John i. 46. Perhaps the expressive 
 title, ‘‘ He that cometh ” (Matt. xi. 3]|). 
 is to be referred to this source. 
 
 3 Cf Gfrérer, ii. 899 #. Infr. p. 150. 
 
THE JEWISII DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 145 
 
 asked for a sign like this through which they might be- 
 lieve. But the Mosaic type of Messiah was first capable 
 of a full realization on the foundation of a Christian 
 Church, and consequently it appears prominently in the 
 Acts of the Apostles. Before that time the woman of 
 Samaria, who might be supposed to feel most deeply the 
 need of a second Moses, expressed most truly the belief in 
 His advent.’ In the later books of the New Testament 
 the completeness of the mutual relation between Moses 
 and Christ is perfected by the allusions to a spiritual 
 Balaam; and in the imagery of the Apocalypse a second 
 song of Moses celebrates the final triumph of the new 
 Deliverer.® 
 
 At the same time the higher side of Messiah’s nature 
 was not denied or forgotten. The tempta- 
 tion turned upon the assumption of the title 
 of “Son of God;”* and during our Lord’s 
 ministry the evil spirits sought to precipitate and so to 
 mar His work by proclaiming His divine character. The 
 mystery, however, which was hidden from the eyes of the 
 multitude, to whom it seemed blasphemy, was proclaimed 
 or acknowledged at solemn crises. Thus John the Bap- 
 tist, Nathanael, Peter, and Mary, bore witness to Christ as 
 the Son of God; and the Sanhedrin recognized the title 
 as belonging to Messiah when the High Priest, in the 
 presence of the assembly, solemnly adjured Jesus, saying: 
 
 The Divine char- 
 acter. 
 
 1 Acts iii. 19 ff. ; vii. 37 ff i. By our Lord Himself: John iii. 17, 
 18(?); v. 25; ix. 85(?); x. 36; xi. 4. 
 
 2 John iy. 25. The Messianic doc- jj, By believers: Matt. xvi. 16 (St. 
 
 trine of the Essenes probably assumed peter not in ||, but ef. John vi. 69); 
 
 chi form. [Mark i. 1]; John i. 84, 50; xi. 27; 
 
 81Pet. ii. 15; Jude 11; Apoc. ii. 14 [ΧΧ- 811. aa a 
 (ii. 15). There is no trace of this ‘‘Anti- iil. By Jews’: Matt. peril τ caraidicce 
 christ” in early Jewish writings. Ar- 40, 48; ¢f John xix. 7 Ui δι; Luke 
 millus belongs toa much later period. xxii. 70. 
 
 iv. By evil spirits: Matt. iv. 3, 6 |); 
 
 4 The following table gives, I think, viii. 29 ||; Mark iii. 11; Luke iy. 41. 
 
 a correct summary of the usage of The sailors (Matt. xiv. 33) and the 
 Messiah’s title, ‘Son of God” ([6] vids centurion (Matt. xxvii. 54; Mark xy. 
 τοῦ Jeov), in the Gospels: 89) see in Christ vids ϑεοῦ, 
 
 15 
 
146 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 Tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son 
 of God. 
 The fatal error of the Jewish people lay in the opposite 
 Theme ttuman rection; for in the fond anticipations of a 
 
 character disree second David, as some divine champion, they 
 garded. i ἢ 
 
 disregarded the true humanity of the Mes- 
 siah. . Looking for a sign from heaven, they could not read 
 the signs on earth before them. The disci- 
 ples “were sorry” when Christ spoke to them 
 of His coming passion. St. Peter even began 
 to rebuke Him for admitting that such humiliation was 
 possible. Till His death, some had hoped that it had 
 been He who should have redeemed Israel, 
 but then their hope was lost, till Christ 
 Himself showed them that the prophets had 
 foretold all these things; and by the help of this divine 
 
 teaching they set forth from that time the suf- 
 se iisp ferings of Messiah from the Scriptures. Such 
 
 being the feelings of those who were nearest 
 to Christ, it cannot but be strange that the people were 
 more perplexed by His lowliness.2,~ When He spoke of 
 Himself as the Son of man, the people answered: ..... 
 Who is this Son of Man?* Even when they were most 
 startled by His works or words of power, they generally 
 saw in Him no more than a prophet, or waited for some 
 more striking revelation of His majesty. “Jf thou be the 
 Christ, tell us plainly,” was the complaint at one time; and 
 at another, when they “wondered at His gracious words,” 
 “they said, Is not this Joseph’s son?” 
 A partial conception of Messiah’s work necessarily fol- 
 
 Hatt. xxvi. 63. 
 
 Matt. xvii. 25. 
 
 Matt. xvi. 22. 
 
 Luke xxiv. 21. 
 
 Luke xxiv. 46. 
 
 1The statements of Justin (Dial. 2 Cf. pp. 122, 129. 
 § 49) and Celsus (Orig. c. Cels. ii. 29) 
 cannot invalidate this evidence. The 
 forms which the Messianic hope assumed 
 among the Jews were various, and the 4 Cf. Matt. xxi. 11, 46; Mark ii. 12; 
 prevalence of one form among a par- vii. 37; xi. 18; Luke iv. 82, 87; v. 26; 
 ticular class, or ata time, cannot ex- vii. 16 [ix. 9; xxiii. 8]. See also John 
 clude the others. vii. 26, 81; viii. 53. 
 
 8 John xii. 84. Cf. John ix. 35, varr. 
 lectt. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 147 
 
 lowed from a partial conception of His nature. To the 
 Jews this appeared to be bounded by the 
 establishment of a glorious kingdom and the 
 confirmation of their law. A second and 
 spiritual birth of God’s people or God’s servants seemed 
 alike impossible and unnatural; and Nico- 
 demus, according to the spirit of his country- 
 men, might well find it difficult to understand how it 
 should be required of him to lay aside the opinions and 
 prejudices which had grown about him from his infancy, 
 before he could even see that kingdom for which he 
 sought. The brethren of Jesus, who saw His works, still 
 wished for an open manifestation of His power and oftice, 
 for they could not “ believe” in a Messiah who hid Himself 
 from the great world! Peter was eager to 
 pay for his Master the tribute to the Temple, 
 after his inspired confession. The fiery zeal 
 of the sons of Zebedee led them to seek places next to 
 their Saviour’s throne; and the Apostles inquired of the 
 risen Lord whether he would “at that time 
 
 restore the kingdom to Israel.” Some indeed 
 
 seem to have looked further for “a restitution of the 
 world;” but it was reserved for Samaritans, conscious of 
 doubt and sin, to feel that Messiah? would “ announce all 
 things,” — even the true forms of worship, — and be “ the 
 Saviour of the world.” ὃ 
 
 The partial con- 
 ception of Messiah's 
 work, 
 
 John iii, 2—4. 
 
 Matt. xvii. 24 fF. 
 
 Matt. ax. 21. 
 
 Acts i. 6. 
 
 Lord's examination before the San- 
 hedrin, it is evident that He had not 
 
 1 John iii. 2—4 ; vii. 3—5. In the 
 latter passage it is evident that the 
 
 brethren of the Lord sought only to 
 precipitate the declaration of this Mes- 
 siahship. They lacked that faith which 
 could rest wholly in Him and abide 
 His time. Cf. Jolin ii. 29, 24. 
 
 2 The title Messias occurs only in 
 John i. 42; iv. 25. Can it be without 
 meaning that the Hebrew word is pre- 
 served exactly in these two places, 
 where the simple faith in the ancient 
 promise seems liveliest ? 
 
 3 From the circumstances of our 
 
 openly proclaimed Himself as the Mes- 
 siah, or the adjuration of the High 
 Priest -had been unnecessary. In like 
 manner it is clear that the abrogation 
 of the Mosaic Law had not formed 
 part of His public teaching. The for- 
 mation of an outward Church neces- 
 sarily preceded the announcement of 
 this truth. It is also important to 
 notice, that in early Jewish writings 
 there is no trace of a belief in the sub- 
 stitution of a spiritual for a ritual law, 
 
148 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 But while the poor and simple “guileless Israelites,” 
 rude Galilezans, fiery zealots, clung severally to 
 
 eee | Ome peculiar Messianic hope, those Jews who 
 the Messianic had been brought into closer connection with 
 woe tase.’ Greek literature or Roman dominion seem to 
 have looked on the popular belief as exag- 
 
 gerated or groundless fanaticism. The “leaven of Herod”. 
 had penetrated the nation of God. Many thoughts were 
 working, though as yet unrevealed, at the time when 
 Simeon foresaw that the Saviour was set as 
 well “for the fall” as “for the tising of 
 many,” and “for a sign which should be spoken against.” 
 Hillel, “the second restorer of the Law,” said that there 
 would be no Messiah. According to him, the promise and 
 its fulfilment belonged to the time of Hezekiah; and 
 though, in fact, he may have rejected only the notion of a 
 temporal kingdom, his opinion gained extensive currency 
 ΤΠ in its literal sense." Philo speaks only in one 
 The tye of an place of the coming of a deliverer. “A man 
 
 “idealizing” party. 
 
 Luke τὶ. 34 ff. 
 
 shall come,” says the oracle, “leading a host, 
 and he shall subdue nations great and populous by the 
 aid of God, who shall send the help that befits the holy. 
 And this is an undaunted bravery of soul, and a most 
 mighty strength of body,? two things of which even one is 
 formidable, but if both meet they are wholly irresistible. 
 But some of the foes [the oracle says] are unworthy to be 
 defeated by men, against whom [God] will array swarms 
 of wasps for their most shameful destruction, warring in 
 
 which assumed a definite form after tainly to Messiah, yet the passage 
 the tenth century. claims attention: ἀλλά τις ἐπιφανεὶς 
 ἐξαπιναιῷς προφήτης Seopdpntos Seo- 
 πιεῖ καὶ προφητεύσει, λέγων μὲν 
 οἰκεῖον οὐδὲν, οὐδὲ γὰρ, εἰ λέγει, 
 δύναται καταλαβεῖν ὅ γε κατεχόμενος 
 ὕντως καὶ ἐνϑ)ουσιῶν, ὅσα δὲ ἐνηχεῖς- 
 
 2 Philo, de Prem. § 16 (page 428 M.), Tat διελεύσεται, καϑάπερ ὑποβάλλον- 
 (Numb. xxiv. 7, LXX.). The reference τὸς ἑτέρον. No description, perhaps, 
 to ‘‘aninspired prophet” (de Monarh. could offer a more instructive contrast 
 i. § 9) is too general to be applied cer- to the prophetic office of Christ. 
 
 1 Sanhedr. c. 98. Cf. Just. M. Dial. 
 68, 71, 77. Thus at a later time the 
 priesis and zealots were ranged on op- 
 posite sides: Gfrorer, ii. p. 439. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 149 
 
 defence of the holy ones. [It says] moreover, that this 
 Jhero] shall not only enjoy surely, without bloodshed, 
 victory in war, but also an unassailable right of sovereignty, 
 for the help of those who may become his subjects through 
 good-will, or fear, or reverence.” It is only necessary to 
 read the context to. feel how little importance Philo laid 
 on the presence or work of this victorious deliverer. The 
 hope which he cherished rested on the promises made to 
 the whole nation, and not on the predictions of a single 
 deliverer; and thus, while his expectation of a personal 
 Messiah was apparently feeble, he paints in glowing colors 
 the blessedness of a coming reign of virtue, when the ene- 
 mies of God shall be confounded, and His people gathered 
 from the utmost corners of the world to dwell in their own 
 land. Then, he says, wars shall cease among men, and 
 wild beasts shall forget their fierceness. And the scattered 
 children of God shall return under the guidance “of a 
 form (ὄψεως) more divine than that of man, unseen by 
 others, and visible only to those who are being saved; and 
 they shall find three advocates (παρακλήτους) of their 
 reconciliation (καταλλαγῶν) with the Father :— Firstly, the 
 kindness and goodness of [God] who invites them; .... 
 secondly, the holiness of the patriarchs of their race; ... . 
 and thirdly, that, through which especially the favor of 
 those things which have been mentioned prevents them, 
 the reformation of those who are being led to a [new] truce 
 and covenant, who have been able with difficulty to come 
 from a pathless wandering to that path whose end is no 
 other than to please God —as sons a father. Then shall 
 the ruins of their cities be repaired ; the prosperity of their 
 fathers shall seem but little in comparison with the peren- 
 nial springs of God’s favor by: which they will be cheered ; 
 and their enemies shall be filled with dismay and sorrow 
 when they see the sure and unchangeable prosperity of 
 God’s people.” * 
 
 1 Philo, de Execrat. §5 8,9. Philo quotes, in his Messianic descriptions, 
 19» 
 
150 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 While Philo cherished in this way a sure belief that his 
 nation was destined to take the foremost 
 
 Che te oa Place in the world, Josephus appears to 
 pa ee ᾿ abandon the trust in a national restoration, 
 as well as that in a personal Saviour. Rome 
 
 is acknowledged as the mistress of the world: Vespasian 
 is proclaimed to be the king who should rise from the 
 East. In a narrative of the early history and final struggle 
 of the Jews, which become inexplicable without the recog- 
 nition of the one central hope by which they were 
 quickened, he never once betrays any personal interest, 
 much less belief, in the doctrine of Messiah. Yet even 
 thus he bears ample testimony to the powerful hold which 
 it maintained on the nation. “ When Fadus was procu- 
 rator of Judea,” he relates, “a certain sor- 
 cerer (γόης), by name Theudas, persuaded 
 the great mass of the people (τὸν πλεῖστον ὄχλον) (Ὁ 
 take up their property and follow him to the river 
 Jordan, for he announced that he was a prophet, and 
 said that he would divide the river by his command, 
 and give them an easy passage; and saying this he deceived 
 many 3”? so faithfully did the nation cherish the recollec- 
 tion of their first deliverance as the image of that which 
 should come. The same characteristic marks the history 
 of “the Egyptian false prophet, who came into the country, 
 being a sorcerer, and having persuaded men that he was a 
 prophet, collected about thirty thousand of those whom he 
 had deceived. And these he led from the wilderness to 
 the Mount of Olives;”? .... “for he said that he wished 
 to show them how at his bidding the walls of Jerusalem 
 would fall, through which he promised that he would afford 
 
 Popular risings. 
 
 Levit. xxvi.; Deut. xxviii.; Numb. was present, but it by no means sup- 
 xxiv. 7; and also Isai. liv. 1; Ps.cxx. 8. ports the identification of the Word 
 Cf. Gfrérer, Philo, i. 882. Dihne, 1.482 and the Messiah, but rather distin- 
 ff. Possibly the “divine vision” may guishes them. 
 
 be an idealized antitype of the “ pillar 
 of fire”? which attended the Jews on 
 their first Exodus, in which the Word 2 Joseph. B. J. ii. 18, δ. 
 
 1 Joseph. Antig. xx. 4,1. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 151 
 
 them an entrance into the city.”' And these impostors 
 
 were but specimens of a class of “vagabond men and 
 deceivers, who, under the pretence of divine inspiration 
 (ϑειασμοῦ), compassed revolutions and changes, and _per- 
 suaded the multitude to indulge in mad hopes (δαιμονᾶν), 
 and led them forth into the wilderness, as though God 
 would show (? δείξοντος) them there signs of freedom,” or, 
 as it is expressed in the parallel passage, promising “to 
 show evident prodigies and signs, wrought according to the 
 foreknowledge of God.”? The final insurrection is the 
 clearest proof of the general spread of this Messianic 
 enthusiasm, for Josephus allows that “that which especially 
 incited the Jews to the war was an ambiguous oracle found 
 in their sacred writings, to the effect ‘that at that time 
 one out of their country should rule the world (τῆς 
 oixovpevys).”® And even in the last extremity of the siege, 
 “many prophets were sent by the chiefs among the com- 
 mon people, charging them to wait for the help of God;” 
 and these found ready credence, so that six thousand fell 
 in the porch of the temple, whither they had fled “ expect- 
 ing to receive the signs of safety.” * 
 
 The hope entertained by the Jews was indeed so 
 notorious that it did not escape the notice 
 of Roman historians; and they attached so 
 much importance to the predictions on which 
 it was based, as to find their fulfilment in the elevation of 
 Vespasian to the imperial throne. “A few,” says Tacitus, 
 
 (c) Classical writ- 
 "8s. 
 
 1 Joseph. Antig. xx. 7, 6. In the schneider supposes, Theolog. Fl. Josephi, 
 
 other passage there is no allusion to 
 this promised miracle. 
 
 2 Joseph. 1. ce. Josephus contrasts 
 these fanatics with the zealots (λῃσταί, 
 sicarii) as being “in hand more pure, 
 but in purpose more impious.” JB. J. 
 ii. 13, 4. 
 
 8 B. J. vi. 5, 4. The reference is 
 « Probably to the prophecy of Daniel, 
 aud not to that of Balaam, as Bret- 
 
 §10. Cf. Antig. x. 11, 7. 
 
 4 B. J. vi. 6, 2. 
 
 The paraphrase which Josephus gives 
 of the promise to Abraham is charac- 
 teristic : προεδήλου τὸ γένος [τὸ] 
 αὐτῶν εἰς ἔϑνη πολλὰ καὶ πλοῦτον 
 ἐπιδώσειν, καὶ μνήμην αἰώνιον αὐτῶν 
 ἔσεσϑαι τοῖς γενάρχαις (Antig. i. 
 14, ΑἿΣ But it is to be remembered that 
 neither Philo nor the Targum under- 
 stood this of Messiah. 
 
152 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 in speaking of the prodigies which preceded the destruction 
 of Jerusalem, “turned these events into a cause of alarm ; 
 the greater number were possessed with a belief that it was 
 written in the ancient writings of the priests that it would 
 come to pass at that very time, that the East would grow 
 mighty, and that men proceeding from Juda would gain 
 the empire of the world. An ambiguous oracle, which had 
 foretold [the fortunes of 7 Vespasian and Titus.”?..... 
 Suetonius relates the same circumstance almost in the 
 same words, adding, however, that the belief was ancient, 
 uniform, and universally current throughout the East. 
 But however strong the hope was, even after the 
 destruction of Jerusalem, it was quenched, 
 ἘΠ ἘΠΕ ne. at no distant time, in the blood of the noblest 
 ie eh er’ Jews. The disastrous rising of Barkokeba 
 was the last public profession of the earlier 
 ereed. Afterwards a gloom settled over the image of 
 Messiah, and increasing sorrows were described as the 
 sure signs of His approach. 
 
 c 
 
 9 
 
 The Eliezer, surnamed the Great, said :? “ A little before 
 the advent of Messiah® shamelessness shall 
 be increased ; and there shall be great dearth 
 
 of corn; the vine shall bear fruit, but [from the excess of 
 revellers} wine shall be sold dear. The mightiest empire 
 in the world shall be overwhelmed with evil judgments, 
 
 1. The Mishna. 
 
 and no chastisement shall have place. The synagogues. 
 shall be converted into houses of shame; the borders of 
 Judea shall be laid waste, and all the region shall be made 
 desolate. Noble men shall go round from town to town 
 and meet with no offices of mercy. The wisdom of 
 teachers shall seem of ill-savor; the innocent shall be 
 
 1 Tac. Hist. v.18; Suet. Vesp.4. Per- multuantes urbe expulit, may refer to 
 crebuerat oriente toto vétus οἱ constans the intrigues of some fanatics. 
 opinio, esse in fatis, ut eo tempore 2 Sota, § 15 (iii. pp. 808-9, ed. Suren- 
 Judza profecti rerum potirentur. The hus). Cf. Edzard, Avoda Sara, pp. 248 f. 
 well-known passage, Suet. Claud. 25, 3 Ὦ ΓΞ 3 In calcaneis M? Cf 
 Judzos impulsore Chresto assidue tu- Buxtf. Lex. Rabb. 5. ν. Wagenseil, 1. c.» 
 
 4 ae ν 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 153 
 
 despised ; and the failing of truth shall be great. Young 
 men shall confound the face of the old; the old shall rise 
 before the young. The son shall provoke the father; the 
 daughter shall rise against her mother, and the daughter- 
 in-law against her mother-in-law ; in fine, every one shall 
 have for his foes those of his own household. In truth, 
 that age shall have the face of a dog, and the son shall not 
 reverence his parent. On whom, then, must we trust? On 
 our heavenly Father.” 1 
 
 This remarkable passage stands, I believe, alone in the 
 Mishna;* but in the Gemara many other 
 strange and inconsistent traditions occur, pm cay 
 which seem at times more like the expression 
 of despair than of faith. The « birth-pangs of Messias” 
 passed into a proverb;* and some Rabbis declared that 
 they wished not to behold His coming! Drought, famine, 
 thunder, and wars, were among the signs which should 
 precede Him; and it was said that the sight of men should 
 fail for anguish and sorrow. Nor was the moral state of 
 the world expected to be better than the material. The 
 divine teaching was to fail, and all men were to become 
 Sadducees: “when men grow fewer and fewer,” so the 
 tradition runs, “expect Messias;* when the world is over- 
 whelmed with evils as with a flood; when the last supply 
 is consumed and the last hope gone.” 
 
 The prevailing tone of these traditions is due in all 
 probability to the disappointment of earlier 
 dreams. Various limits had been fixed for 
 the coming of Messiah, and, as Raf’confessed, 
 al were passed. Some had likened the duration of the 
 
 The time of Mes- 
 
 δια) coming. 
 
 1 Cf. Lactant. Instit. vii. 15 Ὁ. however seem to be accurate. The 
 2 Various Opinions as to the coming Messianic interpretations of the Old 
 and work of Elias are given: Edaj.s. Test. common to the New Test. and 
 
 f. (iv. p. 362). Jewish writers are given in Note (1) at 
 8 Ὦ ἘΦ "53 (ὠδῖνες, Matt. xxiv.8; {πὸ end of the chapter. 
 Mark xiii. 8). 5 Sanhedr. 91,1 (referring to 2 Sam 
 
 4 Schéttg. ii. 546-7; 971. I have not xxii. 28): Schottg. ii. 154; 968. 
 verified Schéttgen’s references, which 6 Schittg. ii. 966. 
 
154 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 world to a week of heavenly days, six thousand years of 
 trial and labor followed by a millennial sabbath. Two 
 thousand years, it was thought, elapsed before the Law, 
 two thousand were to pass under the Law, and two 
 thousand years were reserved for the victories of Messiah, 
 Others thought that the world would last eighty-five years 
 of Jubilee (4165 or 4250 years), and that Messiah would 
 come in the last.2. The Romans, it was said at one time, 
 shall oppress Israel for nine months.’ Others again meas- 
 ured four hundred years from the last desolation of the 
 Holy City as the utmost limit of delay; but the time went 
 by, and then men cried in despair, “Let his bones be 
 broken who computes the limits of Messiah’s coming.” 4 
 Different explanations were proposed for the delay. The 
 strangest fancy perhaps was that it was occasioned by the 
 necessity for all the souls in the receptacle of spirits 
 (Guph) to be embodied first 3° but in some form or other 
 it was generally referred to the sins of the people. “If 
 Israel keep but one sabbath, or one fast duly, Messiah at 
 length will come.”® He came, according to another wild 
 legend, on the day of the destruction of the Temple, but 
 was suddenly carried away to be revealed at His proper 
 time.” And with strange and tragic irony others said, He 
 is even now sitting among the poor and wounded at the 
 gates of Rome, and men know Hin not.® 
 
 The twofold description of Messiah’s advent was ex- 
 plained by the different circumstances under 
 which He might come. He would come, it 
 was said, if the people were wholly good or wholly 
 wicked; if good, then He would appear, according to the 
 words of Daniel, on the clouds of heaven; if evil, then 
 
 The manner. 
 
 i Edzard, 1. c. p. 66. This idea was 5 Edzard, p. 28. Cf. pp. 224 ff, 
 popular with the Christian Fathers: 6 Edzard, p. 247. 
 cf. Barn. Ep. 15; Tren. v. 28, 8. Lac- 7 Midr. Echa. 59, and Jer. Berach. 
 
 tant. Znstit. vii. 14, and nott. 5,1. Cf. Jost, Gesch. ἃ. Judenth. 404 n. 
 2 Schottg. ii. 963. Cf. Targ. Mic. iv. 8. 
 3 Id. 970. 8 Schottg. ii. 969. Edzard, p. 254, or, 
 
 4 Id. 965. as Others said, in £den (id. }. c.). 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 155 
 
 meek and lowly, as foretold by Zechariah. As to the 
 nature of His kingdom, the later tradition in one respect 
 was uniform. There will be no difference, it was said, 
 between these days and the days of Messias, except in the 
 subjugation of the Gentiles? But as to its duration 
 opinions widely differed. Passages were quoted from the 
 Prophets which appeared to fix forty or seventy years, or 
 three generations, or a thousand, or seven thousand years 
 for its continuance And “in those days the Nazarites 
 shall drink wine;” 
 lytes ;” but “all the Gentiles of their own accord shall be 
 brought to Messiah,” and “all shall be clean.”* Thus some 
 said, “in the days of Messiah there will be thirteen tribes, 
 and the thirteenth will be Messiah’s;” but others again 
 doubted whether the ten tribes would be restored.* 
 
 The later Jewish books contribute some further details 
 as to the expectation of Messiah, though 
 perhaps little stress can be laid upon their ori- 
 ginality.® It is said that anew Elias, born, like 
 the first, of barren parents, will herald His approach by a 
 preaching of repentance, according to some only three days 
 before Messiah.’ Messiah Himself will appear in the 
 North, and His advent will be marked by a βίαν. ὃ Moses 
 and Elias will attend Him, and He “will stand upon the 
 roof of the Temple;” and the Shekinah will continue 
 with men for three years and a Πα] 1 The same Passover 
 night which witnessed the chief crises in the fortunes of 
 the human race will also witness Messiah’s coming.” And 
 
 and “there shall be no more prose- 
 
 8. Other Jewish 
 works. 
 
 1 Schéttg. ii. 969. In this connec- 19). Cf. Sanhedr.c. xi.3. Targ. Zech. 
 tion (Zech. xii. 10—12) the idea of a x. 4.4, Esdr. xiii.; supr. p. 131. 
 Messiah, “the son of Joseph,” was 6The preéxistence of Messiah is 
 first entertained: Succa Bab. 52. Cf. taught in the later writings. It was 
 Gfiérer, ii. 258 ff. Infr. p. 160, n.9. ‘the Spirit of Messiah which brooded 
 The death of Messias is admitted in 4 over the waters at the creation.” Cf. 
 
 Esdr. vii.; supr. p. 107. Nork, p. ix. and nott. 
 2 Edzard, p. 208. Cf. Gfrérer, Juhrh. 7 Schittg. ii. p. 533. 
 d. Heils, i. 219. Bertholdt, p. 41. 8 Id. pp. 588, 531. 
 
 3 Schittg. ii. p.973. 41d. pp. 613 ff 914. pp. 544, 188, 548. 
 5 Schottg. ii. p. 207 (fr. Ezek. xviii. 10 Jerome mentions this ‘ Jewish 
 
156 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 some speak of a mediatorial death and exaltation, of a res- 
 urrection of the patriarchs and of the just, of the removal 
 of the Redeemer (Goel) to heaven?’ Then all the feast-days 
 will be abolished except the day of atonement, and sacri- 
 fices shall cease, and there will be no distinction of clean 
 and unclean.2, The kingdom of Messiah will be strong in 
 spite of the banded heathen. The oppressors of Israel 
 will be destroyed, and all others made to do service to 
 God’s chosen people. Then the blessings of Eden will be 
 restored; all creation will be relieved from the consequen- 
 ces of man’s sin; and God will walk as in old times among 
 His people, and man will not fly from the presence of His 
 Maker.’ 
 
 There is still another form of Jewish literature which 
 has exerted a powerful influence upon the 
 later doctrine of Messiah, but it is uncertain 
 whether the mystic teaching of the Kabbala 
 was directed in any degree towards the subject at the be- 
 ginning of the Christian era. Mysticism and philosophy 
 looked first within rather than without for the fulfilment 
 of the aspirations which they cherished ; and they probably 
 received from Christianity the impulse by which their later 
 course was shaped.* 
 
 4. The mystic lit- 
 erature of the Jews. 
 
 tradition” as the ground of the 2 Schottg. ii. pp 612 ff. 
 
 “ Apostolic tradition’ of the watch- 
 
 ings of Easter-eve — the nox vigiliarum 
 (Comm. in Matt. xxv. 6). The passages 
 referring to this usage are given by 
 Bingham, dntig. xxi. 1, 82. Schottg. 
 li. pp. 531, 563. 
 
 1 Schittg. ii. pp. 566, 578 ff , 595. The 
 notion of ἃ “" suffering Messiah ”’ belongs 
 exclusively to a late period. He ap- 
 pears as the son of Joseph or Ephraim, 
 as opposed to the son of David; but the 
 earliest trace of this belief occurs in 
 the Babyl. Gemara. Cf. Targ. Cant. 
 iv. 5; (Jerus.) Ex. x]. 11. Pearson On 
 the Creed, 164 nofe ; Strauss, Leben 
 Jesu, ii. 324; Gfrorer, ii. 262; 270-1. 
 Cf. infr. p. 160, on Zohar. 
 
 8 Gfrérer, Jahrh. d. Heils, i. pp. 418 f. 
 
 Buxtorf’s essay, De Messia venture 
 (de Synag. Jud. c. 1. Ugolini, Thes. iv.), 
 contains very little of importance, but 
 gives a curious description of the ten 
 expected signs of Messiah (pp. 1154 ff.), 
 of the ten consolations (pp. 1160 ff.), 
 and of the great feast which should 
 mark His advent (pp. 1162 ff.). 
 
 I have collected in a note at the end 
 of the chapter the Messianic passages 
 quoted in the New Testament, which 
 are interpreted in the same manner in 
 Jewish writings. 
 
 4 Cf. Zunz, cap ix. xxi. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 157 
 Like other Eastern nations, the Jews were naturally in- 
 clined to theosophic speculation, and though 
 this tendency may have been repressed by 
 the definite teaching of revelation as long as 
 they were confined within the sacred boundaries of Pales- 
 tine, it found a freer scope after the exile. The prophecies 
 of Ezekiel suggested a congenial subject for mystical inter- 
 pretation. In their general imagery they appeared to 
 reflect the symbols of a strange nation, and to invite the 
 study of Eastern wisdom. The Vision of 
 the Divine glory — the chariot-throne on 
 which the Lord was seen by the river of Chebar — formed 
 the text for the inquiry into the essence and majesty of 
 God; as the narrative of Genesis seemed to contain under 
 a veil the secrets of creation. ound these 
 two centres — the manifestation of God’s 
 glory in Himself and in Creation —Theology 
 and Nature — fancies and thoughts clustered, and at length 
 gained consistency. Enthusiasts saw the shadows of their 
 own dreams in the divine history of their nation, and fan- 
 cied that the patriarchs were their teachers. Whatever 
 they felt to be true in foreign systems was found latent in 
 some symbolic word or number. All inward and outward 
 experience was held to be only a commentary on the fulness 
 of the Law and the Prophets. 
 
 The progress of mysticism is generally the same: a 
 vague aspiration, a pregnant word, a tradi- 
 tion, gathering form and fulness in the lapse 
 of time, an incongruous system, treasured in the secret 
 discipline of schools, and at length committed to writing. 
 And such was the history of the Kabbala.t Already, in 
 the Apocryphal books of the Old Testament, there are 
 
 T he origin of this 
 literature. 
 
 Ezek. i. 
 
 Its great subdivis- 
 ions. 
 
 Its growth. 
 
 (Zunz, 44 n.; ef. ed. 402, n.); and even 
 
 after the technical sense of the word 
 
 1 The name belongs to a much later 
 period. The root is kabal, to receive 
 
 {by tradition], and the word was origi- 
 nally Applied to all the books of the 
 Old Testament besides the Pentateuch 
 
 was established, it was still commonly 
 used for ‘oral tradition” in the 18th 
 and 14th centuries (Zunz, 1. c.). 
 
 14 
 
158 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 traces of the recognition of esoteric wisdom in the 
 “ Chariot” and the “Creation;” and at Alexandria the 
 new theory found a rapid and natural development.’ In 
 Palestine and Babylon the same teaching spread, but 
 under close restrictions. It was forbidden for any one 
 under thirty years of age to read the Vision of Ezekiel. 
 The public exposition of the “ works of creation” or of the 
 “chariot” was unlawful,’ and single hearers were selected 
 with special care. The very form of instruction was enig- 
 matic. The truth was expressed in short “sentences for 
 thinking men;” principles only were given, and not the 
 application of them. 
 As long as the Kabbala remained in this form, it is evi- 
 dent that it must have continued subject to 
 ioe ier specu, external influences. Its teaching included 
 ἐλ our the knowledge of all mysteries ; and as Chris- 
 tianity most truly purified the speculations 
 of the Neo-Platonists and the polytheism of Julian, so 
 also it must have modified the secrets of Jewish tradition. 
 The philosopher, the statesman, and the mystic, would 
 have shrunk equally from the conscious appropriation of 
 Christian doctrine; but some principles, when once enun- 
 ciated, approve themselves so certainly to the heart and 
 reason, that it becomes a question afterwards whether they 
 spring from revelation or from intuition. Thus open on 
 one side to the Persian doctrine of emanation, and on 
 the other to the Christian doctrine of the Incarnation, the 
 Kabbala grew in silence, till at last, in the seventh or 
 eighth centuries, the traditionary dogmas were embodied 
 in written commentaries.’ Of these, two remain widely 
 separated in the times of their redaction, but both probably 
 were based on traditions of equal antiquity. The Sepher 
 
 1 Zunz, pp. 162,163. Sérac.xlix.10. There are in the Talmud traces ox the 
 2 Mishna, Chagiga, α. ii.,§ 1. Non existence of secret interpretations of 
 exponunt .... opera creationis cum the Mercaba and Bereshith, Zuuz, 104, 
 duobus neque currum cum uno, nisi 
 fuerit sapiens qui sensum intelligit. 5 Zunz, 165. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH, 159 
 Jetsira, or Book of the Creation, dates, in its present form, 
 from about the eighth century:!' the Sepher ha Zohar, or 
 Book of Splendor, owes its existence to R. Moses of Leon 
 in the thirteenth century.’ 
 
 It follows, from what has been already said, that little 
 stress can be laid on the passing coincidences 
 between the Kabbalistic books and the New 
 Testament. In their fundamental principles, 
 the two present a total contrast. The Jetsira develops a 
 system of pantheism utterly at variance with Christianity ; 
 and the same pantheism lies at the basis of Zohar, At 
 the same time speculations on the Divine Nature are 
 necessarily so vague, that recent theologians have found 
 in Zohar the whole of Christianity. ‘The two natures of 
 Messiah, and His threefold office, are said to be symbolized 
 in the tree of the ten Sephiroth, and in the Chariot ;* and 
 those more abstruse questions as to the Person of Christ, 
 which agitated and divided the Church, are said to be 
 
 anticipated and decided in the mystical dogmas of Simeon 
 
 False interpreta- 
 tions of Zohar. 
 
 ben Jochai. 
 
 1 Zunz, 165, who gives numerous ex- 
 amples of later idioms and words. The 
 Talmud contains a reference to a Sepher 
 Jetsira, which Zunz supposes to be an 
 error for Halcoth Jetsira mentioned 
 elsewhere(p. 464n.). Popular tradition 
 ascribes its authorship to R. Akiba, or 
 even to Abraham. In the absence of 
 an exact criticism of its composition it 
 is impossible to fix the date of its first 
 elements. Cf. Jellinek, Beitrage zur 
 Gesch. d. Kabbala, i. Leipsic, 1852. 
 
 2 This has been satisfactorily estab- 
 lished by Jellinek in his tract, JJoses 
 ben Schemtob de Leon und sein verhalt- 
 niss zum Sohar, Leipsic, 1851. The 
 warm approval of Jost is sufficient to 
 remove any lingering doubt as to the 
 vorrectness of Jellinek’s conclusion : 
 A. Jellinek und die Kabbala, Leipsie, 
 1852. Cf. Zunz, pp. 404 ἢ. Jellinek 
 detects the presence of nine different 
 authors in the present work (Jost, 
 
 p. 10); and it is impossible not to hope 
 for some clear results from his later 
 studies. 
 
 The other opinions as to the origin 
 of Zohar are given by Joel, Die Jeli- 
 gions-philosophie des Sohar, 1849, pp. 
 61 ff. 
 
 3 Schottg. ii. pp. 294 ff. ; 350 ff 866 ©. 
 His arguments rest on the convertibility 
 of the terms Shekinah, Metatron, etc., 
 with Messiah, which seems to be un- 
 warranted. Messiah is comparatively 
 rarely mentioned by name, and where 
 the title occurs there is little to justify 
 the identification. Cf. Schéttg. ii. pp. 
 267, 278, 289, 412, 418. The most re- 
 markable passage (p. 341) seems to have 
 but little of aChristian tone. The pas- 
 sages here referred to maintain ex- 
 pressly the twofold Messias—the Son 
 of David and the Son of Ephraim : 
 cf. p. 360. 
 
160 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 The direct and unquestionable traditions as to Messiah, 
 which are embodied in Zohar, are more inter- 
 esting. He is to be revealed first in Galilee} 
 coming from the garden of Eden; and a star 
 in the East is to herald His approach: the land which was 
 first laid waste by invaders is to receive first its consolation 
 He is to spring from the race of Boaz and David ;? and the 
 dove which brought to Noah the tidings that the flood had 
 abated shall hover over Him, and place a crown upon His 
 head Τὸ Him the little ones shall be gathered, and He 
 shall collect the captives from all the corners of the earth.’ 
 He shall enter Jerusalem, according to the prophet, riding 
 on an ass;° and “drink the cup” of suffering as men;’ and 
 Messias, the son of Joseph (or Ephraim), shall die, and rise 
 again; and the dead shall be raised. 
 
 But while it is impossible to show that the mysticism 
 which gave this form to the doctrine of Mes- 
 siah after the Christian era had led to any 
 clear conception of a suffering Saviour before 
 His Advent,’ it unconsciously prepared the way for a true 
 recognition of His Divine nature. Even in the Pentateuch 
 there are traces of arevealed as well as of a hidden God, 
 of one on whom man may look and still live, of an angel 
 (Maleach) who exercises the functions of deity. This con- 
 ception of the external manifestation of the Deity was 
 
 Authentic Messi- 
 anic traditions. 
 
 The indirect influ- 
 ence of these specu- 
 lations. 
 
 1The reason alleged is given by 
 Jerome (Comm. in Matt. v. 16) ut ubi 
 Israelis fuerat ab Assyriis prima cap- 
 tivitas, ibi redemptoris preeconium nas- 
 ceretur. 
 
 2 Schottg. 11. 524, 525; i. ii. 
 
 3 Id. ii. 525. 41d. p. 587. 
 
 5 Id. pp. 541, 542. 
 
 6 Id. p. 548. 
 
 7 Id. pp. 112, 550. 
 
 8 Id. pp. 557, 565, 572. 
 
 Schottgen in his Lectiones Rabbinicw 
 ji. δὲ 8 ff. endeavors to establish that 
 Rk. Simeon Ὁ. Jochai—the reputed 
 author of Zohar,— must have been a 
 
 Christian, from the summary of his 
 teaching. An answer of Glessner is ap- 
 pended, with a rejoinder of Schottgen, 
 but nevertheless his case seems quite 
 insufficient. 
 
 In note (2) at the end of the chapter 
 some account of the later Samaritan 
 Christology is given. 
 
 9 Friedrich’s refutation of Bertholdt’s 
 argument in support of the ante- 
 Christian doctrine of a suffering Mes- 
 siah, may be added to the other refer- 
 ences which have been given on this 
 subject: Discuss. de Christol. Samar. 
 Lib, Lips. 1821, pp. 12 ff. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 161 
 
 followed in the later books by a corresponding representa- 
 tion of His invisible energy. In the Book of Proverbs, 
 Wisdom (Ahokma, σοφία) appears in some degree to fill 
 up the chasm between God and the world; and in the 
 Apocryphal writings this mediative element is apprehended 
 with greater distinctness, but at the same time only par- 
 tially, and with a tendency to pantheistic error, Mean- 
 while the growing belief in an angel-world, composed of 
 beings of the most different natures and offices, gave con- 
 sistency to the idea of a Power standing closer to God 
 than the mightiest among the created hosts. The doctrine 
 thus grounded fell in exactly with the desire of the philo- 
 sophic interpreters of Scripture to remove from the text the 
 anthropomorphic representations of the Supreme Being; 
 and with varied ingenuity and deep insight into the rela- 
 tions of the creature and the Creator, the finite and the In- 
 finite, they constructed the doctrine of the Word (Memra, 
 λόγος). 
 
 The belief in a divine Word, a mediating Power by 
 which God makes Himself known to men in 
 action and teaching, was not confined to any ΕΣ ent te 
 one school at the time of Christ’s coming. It 
 found acceptance alike at Jerusalem and Alexandria, and 
 moulded the language of the Targums as well as the specu- 
 lations of Philo. But there was a characteristic difference 
 in the form which the belief assumed. In Palestine the 
 Word appears, like the Angel of the Pentateuch, as the 
 medium of the outward communication of God with men; 
 in Egypt, as the inner power by which such communica- 
 tion is rendered possible. The one doctrine tends towards 
 the recognition of a divine Person subordinate to God;' 
 the other, to the recognition of a twofold personality in the 
 divine essence, 
 
 The earliest Palestinian view of the Word 
 is given in the Targum of Onkelos. In this it is said 
 
 1. Jn Palestine. 
 
 1 Yet the personal Metatron was created. Cf. Dorner, i. 60. 
 
 14* 
 
162 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 the Lord protected Noah by His Word when he entered 
 the Ark: that He made a covenant between 
 Abraham and His Word: that the Word of 
 the Lord was with Ishmael in the wilderness; 
 with Abraham at Beersheba; with Isaae when 
 he went among the Philistines; with Jo- 
 seph in Egypt. At Bethel, Jacob made a covenant that 
 the Word of the Lord should be his God. 
 Moses, at Sinai, brought forth the people to 
 meet the Word of God. In the Book of Den- 
 teronomy, again, the Word of the Lord appears as @ con- 
 suming fire, talking to His people from the midst of the 
 mount, and fighting for them against their enemies; and 
 the same image recurs in the Targum of Jonathan on the 
 books of Joshua and Samuel. 
 
 The Targun of 
 Onkelos. 
 
 Gen. vii. 10. 
 Gen. xv.1; xvii. 2. 
 
 Gen. xxi. 20. 
 
 Gen. xxviit. 20. 
 
 Exod. xix. 11. 
 
 Deut. tii. 2; iv. 24. 
 
 In the later Targums on the Pentateuch, the works of the 
 
 Word are brought out more plainly. 
 creates man, and blesses him, and detects his 
 By lim Enoch is translated, and Hagar 
 He appears to Abraham in the plains of 
 Mamre, and provides the ram for him on Moriah. 
 
 The later Tar- 
 gums. 
 
 fall. 
 
 comforted. 
 
 He 
 
 He is 
 
 present with Jacob at Bethel, in Haran, and in the going 
 
 down to Egypt. 
 
 At the Exodus He destroys the first-born 
 
 of the Egyptians, and delivers His people with mighty signs, 
 
 and becomes their king." 
 
 1 In due connection with the Wemra 
 is the Shekinah, the one regarding the 
 active operation of God, the other His 
 visible presence. The Shekinah, how- 
 ever, is rarely mentioned in the Tar- 
 FUMS 16... HOC NOV 8... ΝΗ ν. Ὁ; 
 “the Shekinah of the Lord 5 (Onkelos); 
 and more frequently in the later Tar- 
 gums. Cf. Buxtf. Lex. Rabb. s.v. Gen. 
 ix. 27, already quoted, p.111n. 1 offers 
 the most remarkable example of the 
 introduction of the Shekinah], but fre- 
 quently in Zohar ; while the title Wemra 
 is exclusively confined to the Targums, 
 or immediately derived from it. In 
 some parallel passages of the Targum 
 
 both terms occur. Thus in Num. xxiii. 
 21, Onkelos paraphrases: The Word of 
 the Lord shall be their help, and the 
 Shekinah of their King among them; 
 and Pseudo-Jonathan : The Word of 
 the Lord shall be their help, and the 
 triumphal strain of King Messias shall 
 sound amongthem. Again, in Ex. xx. 
 24, the Shekinah in Onkelos replaces 
 the Word of the Lord in Pseudo-Jona- 
 than. And conversely in Ex. xix. 17; 
 Deut. xxiii. 14, Shekinah in the Pseudo- 
 Jonathan answers to the Word of the 
 Lord in Onkelos. 
 
 The first of the passages just quoted 
 has been brought forward to establish 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 163 
 
 The representation of the nature and functions of the 
 
 Word in Philo is far removed from the sim- 
 plicity of this recognition of an outward Me- | 2 ἐν 
 diator. Various influences combined to mod- Τῆς variety and 
 ify his doctrine, and the enunciation of it is ni 
 perplexed and inconsistent. The very title, 
 Logos, with its twofold meaning, speech and reason, was a 
 fruitful source of ambiguity ;' and this first confusion was 
 increased by the tempting analogies of Greek philosophy 
 in conflict with the Hebrew faith in the absolute unity of 
 God. As a necessary consequence, the Logos is described 
 under the most varied forms. At one time it is the mind 
 of God in which the archetypal world exists, as the design 
 of an earthly fabric in the mind of the architect? At an- 
 other time it is the inspirer of holy men, the spring and 
 food of virtue. At another time it is the Son of God, the 
 First-born, all-pervading, all-sustaining, and yet personally 
 distinct from God. At another time the conception of two 
 distinct divine personalities yields to the ancient dogma, 
 and the Logos, while retaining its divine attributes, is re- 
 garded only as a special conception of God, as reasoning, 
 acting, creating. 
 
 The contrast between the wavering con- 
 ceptions of Philo and the simple statement 
 of the Targumists is seen clearly in the pas- 
 sages where they recognize in common the presence of 
 
 Egypt. 
 
 inconsistency 
 Philo's views. 
 
 Philo’s interpre- 
 tations 
 with those in 
 Targums. 
 
 compared 
 
 the 
 
 the identity of the Word of the Lord 
 with Messiah, [Schottgen iii. 5,6; Ber- 
 thoidt § 24. The passage quoted by the 
 latter (note 3) from Targ. Jon. Is. xlii.1, 
 is differently given by Schottgen iii. 
 
 cent.) on the authority of R. Huna 
 (1290 A.D.) contain nothing to identify 
 Him with the Word or Shekinah. 
 Compare the names given by Philo 
 de confus. ling. § 28. The union of the 
 
 431; in quo Verbum meum (majestas Shekinah with Messiah is taught in 
 mea) sibi complacet]; butevenifit were Zohar. Cf. Bertholdt, § 24, n. 3. 
 
 less equivocal it could have but little 1The distinction is recognized in 
 
 weight against the whole tenor of early 
 Jewish writings. Not only is the pro- 
 pesed interpretation doubtful, but else- 
 wlere unparalleled. It is worthy of 
 Lotice that the eight names of Messiah 
 given in the Midrash Mischle (xiith 
 
 the contrast of the λόγος προφοριικός 
 and the λόγος ἐνδιάϑετος, de vita Mos 
 iii. 12 (ii. p. 154). 
 
 2 De mund. opif.§ 4 ff. (i. pp. 4 ff) 
 The whole passage is most characteristic 
 aud instructive. 
 
164 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 the Logos in the narrative of the Pentateuch. Phila 
 speaks of the Logos as that through which the world was 
 created, but at the same time as an “instrument ” (dpyavov),” 
 “which still, in after time, the pilot of the universe handles 
 as a rudder, and so steers the course of all things.”’ The 
 angel which met Hagar was “the divine Word,” but 
 Hagar is said to be “routine learning” (ἡ μέση καὶ ἐγκύκλιος 
 παιδεία), Which twice flying from the presence of sovereign 
 virtue (Sarah) is brought back by the divine Word to the 
 house of her Lord. Jacob met the Word of God at 
 Bethel, even one of those “ Words which God sends to 
 bring help to the lovers of virtue.’ “An angel, a servant 
 of God, the Word, changed the name of Jacob, but the 
 unalterable God changed the name of Abraham.”®... The 
 Word was the cloud which separated the hosts of Israel 
 and Egypt, to whom “the Father who created (γεννήσας) 
 the universe assigned the special gift, that standing on the 
 confines He should separate the created (τὸ γενόμενον) from 
 Him that made it. The same is at once the suppliant of 
 the mortal ever pining (κηραίνοντος) for the incorruptible, 
 and the envoy of the prince to the subject. Moreover, he 
 rejoices in the gift, and, magnifying himself, sets it forth, 
 saying: And I stood between the Lord and you, being 
 neither unbegotten as God, nor begotten as you, but a 
 mean between the extremes, in contact (ὁμηρεύων) with 
 both.”? 
 
 Even from these examples —and they might be multi- 
 plied indefinitely — it is evident that Philo had no uniform 
 
 1 De Monard. § 5 (i. p. 225). ὥν. The treatise de post. Cain. §§ 6, 
 2 Leg. Alleg. i. § 9(i. p. 47); iii. § 81 25, 26 (i. pp. 229 241, 242) contains a 
 (i. p. 106). De Cherub. § 35 (i. p. 162). very interesting series of examples of 
 3 De Migr. Abr. § 1 (i. p. 487). its usage. 
 4 De Cherub. § i. (i. p. 188) Cf. de 6 De mut. nom. ὃ 18 (i. p. 591). 
 Prof. § 37 (i. p. 576). 7 Quis rer. div. her. § 42 (i. p. 501). 
 
 5 De Somn. § 12, i. p.631. The plural With the language here used compare 
 form (λόγοι) is worthy of notice. It the title δεύτερος Seds quoted from 
 occurs in the simplest sense in Leg. Philo by Eusebius, Prep. Ev. vii. 18. 
 Alleg. § 62, i. p. 122, where οἱ ἄγγελοι This title is indeed implied in Leg. 
 kal Advot aie contrasted with αὐτὸς 6 Alleg. § 18 (i. p. 128). 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 165 
 
 and distinct doctrine of the Logos. The term in its man- 
 ifold senses continually rules his thoughts, 
 and he deals with this more frequently than peaindairaiek 
 with the great idea to which it was properly risa cin fini Pais 
 . ogee general tendency 
 
 applied. An apparent analogy, a striking — may te traceu. 
 incident, a passing phrase is sufficient to . 
 modify his statement and direct the course of his reason- 
 ing. With him speculation had arrived at that stage 
 in which language domineers over thought. But though 
 it is impossible to decide absolutely that Philo attrib- 
 uted to the Word a personal and divine essence, and still 
 more to bring all his statements into harmony with one 
 dogmatic scheme, there is, nevertheless, a general ten- 
 dency towards one issue among the conflicting details 
 which his writings contain, one great current of thought 
 which can be traced throughout them in spite of the mani- 
 fold eddies by which it is disturbed. When he writes 
 most independently he assigns to the Logos divine 
 attributes! and personal action ;” and at the same time he 
 affirms, in the most decided manner, the absolute indivisi- 
 bility of the divine nature? The Word is neither an 
 emanation nor a created being, but rather God Himself 
 under a particular form, conceived as the source and centre 
 of vital energy. Combined with his other teaching, this 
 view naturally leads to the conception of a twofold 
 personality in the Godhead. Even while he shrinks from 
 the recognition of such a doctrine, his arguments must 
 have led men to reflect upon it; and in this way, without 
 laying the actual foundation for the truth, he prepared the 
 ground on which it might be laid. 
 
 But the preparation which Philo made for the Gospel 
 
 1 As the creation de Monarch. § 5, 1. 658; εἰκὼν δεοῦ, de mund. opif. ξ 8, 
 ii. 225, and preservation of the Universe, 1. 6, ete. ; ἡμῶν τῶν ἀτελῶν Seds, Ley 
 Frag. ii. p. 655. ὁ ϑεῖος λόγος περιές  Alleg. § 73, 1. 128; ὕπαρχος de Somn 
 χει τὰ πάντα καὶ πεπλήρωκεν. Cf. § 41, i. 656; ef. 1. 308. 
 
 Quis rer. div. her. § 38, i. p. 499, de Pro- 
 Jugis, § 20, i. p. 562. 
 2As the ἀρχιερεύς, de Somn. § 37, 4 De Somn. ὃ 389, i. 655. 
 
 3 Quod det. potiori. insid. § 24, i. 209 
 
166 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH, 
 
 was purely theological and speculative. His idea of the 
 Logos was wholly disconnected from all 
 Yet the doctrine Messianic hopes.’ It was in fact, to a great 
 
 of the Word vre- ᾿ d ; 
 mained wholly un- (degree, a philosophical substitute for them. 
 
 of tie Mewiah, Philo may have conceived of the Word as 
 acting through Messiah, but not as one with 
 Him. The lines of thought which pointed to the action 
 of a second Person in the Godhead, and the victories of 
 some future human conqueror, were not even parallel, but 
 divergent. It was reserved for St. John to combine the 
 antithetic truths in one short divine phrase. Then, for the 
 first time, God, Man, Shekinah, Word, were placed to- 
 gether in the most simple and sublime union: Zhe Word 
 was God, and the Word was made man and 
 tabernacled among us? 
 Little still remains to be said as to the relation which 
 the Messianic hope, which has been now 
 traced in its various forms and bearings, bore 
 to its fulfilment. One or two points, however, which are 
 is Dak often overlooked in a mass of detail, may 
 ness of the Jewish Ceserve some notice. And the first thing 
 me which must strike any one who has observed 
 the manifold sources from which the several traits of 
 Messiah’s person have been drawn, is the fragmentariness 
 of the special conceptions formed of Him. Most of the 
 separate elements, of which the whole truth consisted, 
 were known, but they were kept distinct. One feature 
 was taken for the complete image; and the only temper 
 which excluded all error was that of simple and devout 
 expectation. 
 Yet while the results of the long and anxious thought 
 of the people were thus partial and uncombined, each suc- 
 
 John i. 14. 
 
 General summary. 
 
 1 On this point the testimony of Ori- λόγον εἶναι τὸν υἱὸν Tod Seod, ὡς ὃ 
 gen is most important, 6. Cels. ii. 81, Κέλσος εἴρηκε. . . .. 
 ἐγὼ δὲ Kal πολλοῖς ᾿ἸΙουδαίοις καὶ 
 σοφοῖς γε ἐπαγγελομένοις εἶναι συμ. 2 Cf. Apoc. xxi. 8 (shakan, habitavit 
 βαλὼν οὐδενὸς ἀκήκοα ἐπαινοῦντος τὸ =aKnvdw, Jud. viii. 11, ete. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 167 
 
 ceeding generation added something to the heritage of 
 the past, and made a wider faith possible. 
 
 Step by step the majesty of Messiah was 7% Prosressive- 
 traced in nobler lines, in Henoch and Esdras; 
 
 and if the subtle speculations of the Hellenists on the 
 action and revelation of God had no direct Messianic 
 application, they familiarized the minds of men with 
 thoughts essential to the apprehension of the doctrine of 
 an Incarnation. 
 
 “Everything was ready” for the work, but the work of 
 the Spirit was not yet done. The essentially 
 divine nature of Messiah was not acknowl- 
 edged. The import of His human nature was not felt. 
 The full character of His work with regard to man, to the 
 nation, to the world, was not apprehended. The con- 
 sciousness of personal sin, turning the mind of the believer 
 to the thought of a new birth, was hardly awakened, The 
 adoption of the nations to be joint-heirs with Israel to a 
 spiritual kingdom must have seemed impossible till man’s 
 personal relation to God was fully recognized. And the 
 wider effects of redemption could be regarded only as 
 material blessings till the full bearing of redemption on 
 mankind was realized. Yet men were everywhere “ feeling 
 after” the truth which lay near to them. And as it 15 
 impossible to conceive that any Jew could have pictured 
 to himself Christ as He really came, so it is equally impos- 
 sible to imagine any other Saviour, who could have 
 satisfied all the wants which were felt at the time of His 
 coming. 
 
 Times of triumph and sorrow, the government of judges, 
 kings, and priests, the open manifestation of 
 divine power and the brilliant display of 
 human courage, the teaching of prophets and 
 the teaching of experience, the concentration of Eastern 
 meditation and the activity of Western thought, the skepti- 
 cism of learning and the enthusiasm of hope, each form of 
 discipline and each phase of speculation, had contributed 
 
 Its defects. 
 
 Yet the prepara- 
 tian was completed. 
 
168 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 to bring out into clear forms upon one narrow stage the 
 spiritual capacities and aspirations of men. Everything 
 was ready, and a brief space was sufficient for the prophetic 
 work of Messiah. Disciples were waiting to recognize 
 Him; enemies had already rejected Him. His words 
 found everywhere a direct and characteristic application. 
 His presence was an instantaneous test of all that was 
 partial or transitory. The simple announcement of His 
 Advent was the Gospel; the record of His works and 
 words in various scenes and before various classes, the ful- 
 ness of its special adaptations, not for one time only, but 
 for all times. For the manifoldness of the elements which 
 were combined in the Jewish people at Christ’s coming 
 provided not only for the rapidity of its comprehension, 
 but also for the typical completeness of its history. And 
 the narratives of this history, in their origin and growth, in 
 their common harmony and special differences, in their 
 fruitfal combinations and distinet individuality, will now 
 claim our attention. The voice and power of the Saviour 
 lives in them, and it is no false reverence which bids us 
 “fly to the Gospels as unto the Body” (capxi) — the very 
 outward manifestation — “ of Christ.” ἢ 
 
 1 Ign. ad Philad. 5. 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 169 
 
 NOTES ON CHAPTER II. 
 
 NOTE I. — MESSIANIC PROPHECIES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT COM- 
 PARED WITH THE CORRESPONDING INTERPRETATIONS OF 
 
 JEWISH COMMENTATORS. 
 
 Of the ninety-four passages from the Old Testament which are quoted 
 in a Messianic sense by the Apostolic writers, I have not been able to trace 
 more than forty-four which are interpreted in the same manner in Jewish 
 
 writings. 
 
 Many of these, however, are important, and all are interesting 
 
 as throwing a general light upon the system of Jewish interpretation. 
 
 Isai. vii. 14; Matt. i. 23, 24. 
 
 MIE; V2; — ii. 6. 
 Jer. XXXi. 15; — ii. 18. 
 Isai. xl. 3; — iii. 3. 
 
 sao 10» — iv. 15, 16. 
 
 — liii. 4; — viii. 17. 
 
 Mal. iii. 1; — xi. 10. 
 
 Not applied to Messiah. by the Jews: 
 Schottg. ii. 159; nor yet the name 
 Immanuel. The words were referred 
 at an early time to Hezekiah: Cf. 
 Just. M. Dial. δὲ 68, 71,77. Sanhedr. 
 98. Pearson On the Creed, pp. 323— 
 324 (ed. Cambr.). Hengstenberg, 
 Christology, i. p. 63 (Eng. Tr.). 
 Explained in the same way in Tar- 
 gum (ad loc.). Pirke R. Eliezer. So 
 also Kimchi and Abarbanel (Schotte. 
 ne .213)> Cf. ΡΥ]. Ὁ Jud. ΣΙ: 
 Just. M. Apol. i. § 34. It is doubtful 
 whether any other interpretation was 
 ever current: Hengstenberg, i. 187. 
 |Cf. Zohar, ad Gen. 100 (Schottg. ii. 
 448); and ad Exod. 3 (Schottg. i. 4) |. 
 [Cf. Pesikta Sotarta, 58, ad Num. 
 xxiv. 17 (Schottg. ii. 97; 141).] 
 
 Not till Jalkut Sim. ii. 182 (Schottg. 
 ii. 160.) 
 
 Sanhedr. 98. Schotte. ii. 188. For 
 the history of the interpretation, 
 compare Hengstenberg, ii. 311 ff. 
 Tanchuma, 66 (Schottg. i. 111): God 
 said: As there were spies in the Old 
 Testament, so shall there be in the 
 times of the New Testament, a mes- 
 senger to prepare my way before me, 
 as it is written. Cf. Schemoth R. 131. 
 Debarim R. 256, in connection with 
 Is. xl. 4 (Schottg. ii. 224). 
 
 15 
 
170 
 
 Isai. xlii, 1—4; 
 
 Zech. ix. 9; 
 
 Pscexvil. 22% 
 
 — cix. 1; 
 
 — xxi. 1, 18; 
 
 Isai. liv. 13; 
 
 — li. 1; 
 Zech. xii. 10; 
 Joel ii. 283-32; 
 Gen. xxii. 18; 
 BS liv; 2s 
 
 = ie 
 
 Isai. xlix. 6; 
 
 Amos ix. 11 a2; 
 
 Isai. viii. 14; 
 e— 1,07; 
 
 Ps. xvili. 4; 
 
 Isai. lix. 20, 21; 
 
 Matt. xii. 18—21.S0 Targum. 
 
 — xxi. 5. 
 
 — xxi. 42. 
 
 — xxii. 44. 
 
 —- xxvii. 35, 46. 
 John vi. 45. 
 
 — Xi. oo: 
 
 — xix. 37. 
 Acts ii. 17—21. 
 — iii. 25. 
 
 — iv. 25, 26. 
 — xiii. 33. 
 
 -- 47. 
 — xv. 16, 17. 
 
 Rom. ix. 32, Bo: 
 
 ‘— x. L. 
 
 — x. 18. 
 
 — xi. 26, 27. 
 
 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 Kimchi, Abarbanel. 
 Cf. Midrash Tehillim, 23 (Schottg. ii. 
 113), Pesikta R. (Schottg. ii. 130). 
 Cf. Hengstenbersg, ii. 197. 
 
 Sanhedr. 98; Berachoth, 56; Pirke R. 
 Eliezer, 31 (Schottg. ii. 220). In 
 Midr. Scham. 66, there is a compari- 
 son of the first Goel (Moses: Ex. iy. 
 20) with the second (Schottg. 1. ¢.). 
 Cf. Bereshith R. 98 (Schottg. ii. 1045) ; 
 Schottg. i. 169; ii. 136, 139. 
 
 No trace in old writers (Schottg. i. 
 173, 174), but so applied in Zohar and 
 later commentators: Schottg. ii. 87, 
 88, 106, 107, 140, 290, 334, 407, 609. 
 Midr. Tehil. ad loc. (Schottg. i. 192; 
 ii. 246). Bereshith R. 83, ad Gen. 
 xXxxviii. 18, quotes v. 3 of Messiah 
 (Schottg. i. 192). 
 
 The Psalm generally was so applied 
 in later writings: Pestkta R. Midr. 
 Tehil. 
 
 Pesikta R.; Bereshith R.; Schemoth 
 R.; Debarim R. (Schottg. ii. 185, 65, 
 67). : 
 
 No trace; but see Sanhedr. 98, quoted 
 above. 
 
 Sucea 52, of Messiah the son of Jo- 
 seph. So Kimchi. 
 
 Siphri (Schottg. ii, 210). 
 bar R. 231. Tanchuma, 14. 
 Bammidbar R. 181 (Schottg. ii. 67) 
 gives a different interpretation. 
 Mechilta 3. Pirke R. Eliezer, 28. 
 Avoda Sara, 3 (Schottg. ii. 227, 228). 
 Midr. Tehil.; Bereshith R. (Schottg. 
 ii. 228, 104). 
 
 Bereshith R. (Schottg. ii. 102). 
 Sanhedr. 96. The name of Messiah 
 is said to be filius cadentis. 
 
 Sanhedr. 38 (Schottg. ii. 160). 
 Pesikta R. Vajikra R. Bereshith R. 
 (Schottg. ii. 179, 100). 
 
 No trace in early writings. 
 (Schorte. ii. 239). 
 
 Sanhedr. 98. Bereshith R.37 (Schottg. 
 ii. 187, 181). 
 
 Bammid- 
 
 Zohar 
 
THE 
 
 15]. χὶ. 10; 
 
 — Ixiv. 4; 
 
 Ps. cix. 1; 
 Levit. =xvi. 11, 12; 
 
 Deut. xxi. 23; 
 Isai. liv. 1; 
 
 — lvii. 19; 
 Pee xiv: 6. 73 
 
 Isai. viii. 17, 18. 
 Ps. xciv. 7—11. 
 
 — cix. 4; 
 
 Jer. xxxi. 31—34, 
 Hab. ii. 3, 4; 
 Hagg. ii. 7; 
 
 Isai. xxviii. 16; 
 
 — liii. 9, 4; 
 Dan. vii. 13; 
 Zech. xii. 10—12. 
 Pa. i. 9; 
 
 JEWISH DOCTRINE OF 
 
 Rom. xy. 12. 
 — 1 Cor. ii. 9. 
 
 —x.4. 
 — xy. 95. 
 2Cor. vi. 16. 
 
 Gal. iii. 13. 
 
 — iv. 27. 
 
 Eph. ii. 17. 
 Hebr. i. 8, 9. 
 
 — ii. 13. 
 — iii. 7—11. 
 
 —vy.6. 
 
 — viii. 8—12. 
 ~ #9 
 
 τ ahi 37, vd. 
 — xii. 26. 
 
 1 Pets 1: 9: 
 
 — ii. 22, 24. 
 Apoe. 1.7, 13. 
 
 ᾿ὰ 
 — ii. 27. 
 
 —— 1. 
 
 MESSIAH. 171 
 Targum. Sanhedr. 93. Rashe. Kim. 
 chi. Abarbanel (Schottg. ii. 161). 
 Pesikta R. Schemoth R. (Schottg. ii. 
 195). 
 
 Cf. Targ. Isai. xvi. 1. 
 Cf. supra. 
 
 Pesikta Sotarta, 34. 
 (Schotte. ii. 150). 
 
 Cf. Schottg. ad loc. 
 Gibborim, 49 (Schotte. i. 749). 
 shith R. 37 (Schottg. ii. 384). 
 Only in Zohar: Schottg. ii. 115. 
 Targum. So Aben Ezra (Schott. i. 
 924). 
 
 Cf. Schottg. i. 933? from Isai. xlii. 1. 
 Midr. Tehil. 36. Shir hashirim, 25 
 (Schotte. ii. 243). 
 
 No Jewish writer regarded Melchiz- 
 edek as a type of Christ (Schottg. i. 
 949). Cf. Schottg. ii. 645 for a spu- 
 rious passage from Bereshith R. 
 Pesikta R. (Schottg. i. 970). 
 
 Sanhedr. 97 (Schottg. ii. 215). 
 Debarim FR, 250 (Schottg. ii. 217; ef. 
 75). 
 Targum 2 
 Rashe. 
 Cf. supra. 
 Sanhedr. 98 (Schottg, i. 1151). 
 Cf. supra. 
 
 Cf. supra. 
 
 Tanchuma 
 
 Bere- 
 
 Cf. Schottg. ii. 170. So 
 
 The above list is derived almost exclusively from Schottgen, and not 
 from the original authorities, nor have I verified the references, but it will 
 be found, I trust, sufficiently accurate to serve as the basis of further in- 
 vestigations. The history of the later Jewish doctrine of the Messiah is 
 at present as confused and unsatisfactory as that of earlier date. 
 
 Since the preceding chapter was written I have read Jost’s later history 
 ( Geschichte des Judenthums, i. Leipsic, 1857). The account which he gives 
 of the Jewish Messianic hope at the time of our Lord (pp. 394—402) seems 
 to me to omit several important features; and while the Christian scholar 
 will gratefully acknowledge his candor and largeness of view, yet his con- 
 ception of the rise of Christianity is necessarily imperfect in its essence, 
 His arguments have not induced me to change any of my conclusions; 
 and, in spite of his criticism, I still think that Ewald has apprehended 
 most fully the nature of the elements in Judaism, which contributed to 
 form the foundation of a Catholic Church, 
 
112 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 
 
 NOTE IJ. —THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THE SAMARITANS. 
 
 The narrative of St. John (c. iv.), and the ready welcome which was 
 afterwards given by the people of Samaria to the teaching of the Apostles 
 (Acts viii. 4 ff.), combine to invest the Messianic expectations of the 
 Samaritans with great interest. And this interest is further increased by 
 the fact that Simon Magus, the most influential fulse teacher of the first 
 age, was himself a native of a village of Samaria (Just. M.-Apol. i. 26; 
 Clem. Hom. ii. 22), and found the readiest acceptance of his prophetic 
 claims among the Samaritans (Acts viii. 9,10; Just. 1. ¢.). Little remains, 
 however, of the scanty Samaritan literature, and that only in an imperfect 
 and altered form (Gesenius, Anal. Oriental. i. 1824; Jost, Gesch. d. Juden- 
 thums, i. 83 ff.). But the same causes which confined the literary activity 
 of an isolated people, tended to preserve their traditions and usages un- 
 altered; and at an early period an attempt was made to derive some clear 
 knowledge of the opinions of the Church from the testimony of its priests. 
 The correspondence was opened by J. C. Sealiger in 1589, and was con- 
 tinued by some English scholars in 1672—1689, by Ludolf, 1585, and by 
 Sylyv. de Sacy in the present century. The whole correspondence has been 
 collected and edited by Sylv. de Sacy in an essay in JWotices et extraits des 
 MSS. de la Biblioth. du Roi, xii. 1 ff. 1831, which still remains the classical 
 authority upon the subject. (Cf. Sylv. de Sacy, Mémoire sur (état actuel 
 des Samaritains, Paris, 1812) 
 
 In the English correspondence the doctrine of Messiah — H/ashab or 
 Hathab, i. e., the Converter, at present Hl Muhdy, 7. e., the Guide (Robins. 
 ii. 278), in the Samaritan nomenclature — forms a prominent subject. In 
 a letter written to the English in 1672 the Samaritans ask, ‘‘ What is the 
 name of Hashab who shall appear? and when shall we have consolation, 
 and come from under the hands of the sons of Ishmael?” (Sylv. de Sacy, 
 pp. 181, 191.) In the reply reference is made to Gen. iii. 15; xlix. 10; 
 Deut. xviii. 15; Numb. xxiv. 17. The Samaritans in answer express sur- 
 prise that no mention is made of Gerizim (p. 209); but they recognize the 
 application of the prophecies, with the exception of Gen. iii. 15; xlix.10, 
 and speak of the expected Deliverer as “ἃ flaming furnace, and a lamp 
 of fire (Gen. xy. 17), to whom the nations shall be subjected.’’ Our doc- 
 tors have taught us, they add, that “this prophet will arise, and that all 
 people will be subdued unto Him, and believe on Him, and on the holy 
 law, and on Mount Gerizim; and that the religion of Moses will appear 
 with glory; and that the first name of this prophet who shall rise will be 
 [M.], that he will die and be buried near to Joseph the son of Phorath 
 (¢. e., M*D 13, Gen. xlix. 22); and that the tabernacle will be brought to 
 sight by his ministry (which was supposed to be hidden on Mount Geri- 
 zim. Cf. Friedrich, de Christol. Samar. p.76), and be established on Mount 
 Gerizim.” In the later correspondence with Sylv. de Sacy (1808) it is said: 
 ‘“The doctrine of Hathab, who will come and manifest His spirit, is a 
 great mystery. We shall be happy when He comes. We have prodigies 
 
THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. ἘΠῚ 
 
 by which we shall recognize them, and we know His name [Messiah] 
 according to the Rabbis. That which you say of Shiloh is true; he hated 
 the law of Moses” (p. 30). On this last point the Samaritan doctrine is 
 especially worthy of notice. The allusion to Shiloh (Gen. xlix. 10) is not 
 applied to the Messiah, but to an enemy of the Law, perhaps, it is said, to 
 Solomon (p. 29). These particulars, derived from letters, are confirmed in 
 detail by a conversation which Dr. Wilson held with De Sacy’s correspond- 
 ent on the Samaritan Christology, but the conversation furnished no 
 fresh information on the subject (Lands of the Bible, ii. 51 ff.). 
 
 It must be allowed, however, that beyond the mere general expectation 
 of a deliverer to restore the glory of the Law upon Gerizim, based ap- 
 parently on Deut. xviii. 15, little else is certainly established by this evi- 
 dence. The form in which the inquiries were suggested may be supposed 
 in several cases to have modified the answers. On the other hand, nothing 
 can be more arbitrary than the statement of Br. Bauer, who supposes that 
 the Samaritans borrowed the notion of Messiah entirely from the later 
 Jews. Cf. Friedrich, Discussionum de Christologia Samar. liber, Lipsiz, 1821. 
 Gesenius, de Samar. Theologia, Halle, 1824. 
 
 At present, the miserable remnant of the Samaritans who still occupy 
 a few houses at Nablous appears to be fast hastening to extinction, perse- 
 cuted and demoralized (Barges, Les Samar. de Naplouse, Paris, 1855. Jost, 
 Gesch. ἃ. Judenth., pp. 79 ff. Robinson, Biblical Researches, ii. 275 ff.; iii. 
 
 ‘9 ff. Ed. 2). 
 
 15* 
 
ΟΣ Blas il Oeics ie ie ie 
 
 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 'H τῶν πρεσβυτέρων παρακαταϑήκη διὰ τῆς γραφῆς λαλοῦσα ὑπουργῷ χρῆται 
 
 τῷ γράφοντι πρὸς τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἐντευξομένων..- — CLEM. ALEX. 
 
 A DISTINCT conception of the spirit of the Apostolic age 
 is necessary for a right understanding of the 
 
 The spiritual 
 position of the 
 Apostles incompati- 
 ble with the design 
 of forming a per- 
 manent Christian 
 literature, and yet 
 
 relation of the Gospel to the Gospels — of 
 the divine message to the lasting record — 
 at the rise of Christianity.} 
 placed in so clear a light the fulness and 
 
 Experience has 
 
 comprehensiveness of the Christian Scrip- 
 tures, that it is natural to suppose that they must have oc- 
 cupied from the first the position which the Church has 
 
 assigned to them. 
 in fact and in thought. 
 
 But this idea is an anachronism both 
 The men who were enabled to 
 
 penetrate most deeply into the mysteries of the new reve- 
 lation, and to apprehend with the most vigorous energy 
 the change which it was destined to make in the world, 
 seem to have placed little value upon the written witness 
 
 1 The literature of the subject is so 
 extensive that it would be impossible 
 to give even a general summary of it. 
 Many of the most important essays will 
 be mentioned in the course of the 
 chapter. Those of Gieseler ( Historisch- 
 kritischer Versuch uber die Enstehung 
 - .. . der Schriftlichen Evangelien, 
 Leipzig, 1818) and Ewald (Jahrbicher, 
 1848, ff.) represent with the greatest 
 power the extreme form of the 
 “oral” and ‘documentary’ hypoth- 
 eses. Thiersch has some good general 
 
 remarks in his Versuch zur Herstellung 
 des historischen Standpunkts fir die 
 Kritik. d. Neutest. Schrift. (Erlangen, 
 1845), and the tract by which it was fol- 
 lowed, EHinige Worte iiber εἰ. Aechth. εἰ. 
 Neutest. Schrift. (Erlangen, 1846), but 
 with many exaggerations. The object 
 of the present chapter is rather to ex- 
 cite and guide inquiry than to discuss 
 fully the question of the origin of the 
 Gospels in all its bearings —a subject 
 far too vast for the space which can be 
 given to it 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. ira 
 
 to words and acts which still, as it were, lived among them 
 They felt as none else ever can feel the greatness of the 
 crisis in which they were placed, and the calm progress of 
 common life appeared to be forever interrupted by the 
 spiritual revolution in which they were called to take part. 
 The “coming age” to which they looked was not one of 
 arduous conflict, but of completed triumph. The close of 
 the old dispensation and the consummation of the new 
 were combined in one vision. The outward “fashion of 
 the world ” —the transitory veil which alone remained — 
 was “passing away.” The long development of a vast 
 future was concentrated in the glory of its certain issue. 
 But while everything shows that the Apostles made no 
 conscious provision for the requirements of after times, in 
 which the life of the Lord would be the subject of remote 
 tradition, they were enabled to satisfy a want which they 
 did not anticipate. The same circumstances 
 which obscured their view of the immediate 
 future gave to the time in which they lived 
 its true significance. They pierced beneath the temporal 
 and earthly to the spiritual and eternal. Men wrote his- 
 tory as it had never been written, whose present seemed 
 to have no natural sequel, and unfolded doctrine with far- 
 seeing wisdom, while they looked eagerly for that divine 
 presence in which all partial knowledge should be done 
 away, That which was in origin most casual became in 
 effect most permanent by the presence of a divine energy; 
 and the most striking marvel in the scattered writings of 
 the New Testament is the perfect fitness which they ex- 
 hibit for fulfilling an office of which their authors appear 
 themselves to have had no conception. 
 
 The intensity of the hope cherished by —7renationaclor: 
 the first Christian teachers was not more asia slim 
 unfavorable to conscious literary efforts on fron Meratue; 
 their part than their original national char- 
 acter. It was most unlikely that men who had been ac- 
 customed to a system of training generally, if not exclu- 
 
 favorable to its 
 Jormation. 
 
176 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 sively oral, should have formed any design to commit to 
 writing a complete account of the history or of the doc- 
 trines of the Gospel. The whole influence of Palestinian 
 habits was most adverse to such an undertaking. The 
 rules of Scriptural interpretation, the varied extensions 
 of the Law, and the sayings of the elders, were preserved 
 either by oral tradition, or perhaps, in some degree, in 
 secret rolls, till the final dispersion of the Jewish nation 
 led to the compilation of the Mishna. Nothing less than 
 the threatened destruction of the traditional faith occa- 
 sioned the abandonment of the great rule of the schools. 
 “Commit nothing to writing”! was the characteristic prin- 
 ciple of the earlier Rabbins, and even those who, like 
 Gamaliel, were familiar with Greek learning, faithfully ob- 
 served it. Nor could it be otherwise. The Old Testament 
 was held to be the single and sufficient source of truth and 
 wisdom, the reflection of divine knowledge, and the em- 
 bodiment of human feeling. The voice of the teacher 
 might enforce or apply its precepts, but it admitted no 
 definite additions. The various avenues to an independent 
 literature were closed by the engrossing study of the Law; 
 and an elaborate ritualism occupied the place of a popular 
 exposition of its precepts. The learned had no need for 
 writing, and the people had no need for books. The Scrip- 
 tures contained infinite subjects for meditation in their 
 secret depths; and the practice of Judaism furnished an 
 orthodox commentary upon their general purport, open 
 alike to all, clearly intelligible and absolutely authoritative. 
 Tradition was dominant in the schools, and from the 
 schools it passed to the nation; for the same ~ 
 
 Ca es influence which affected the character of the 
 vomit! “* teachers must have been felt still more pow- 
 erfully by the great mass of the Jews. In 
 
 their case the want of means was added to the want of 
 inclination. In the remoter regions of the north, the im- 
 pediments to the simplest learning were still greater than 
 
 1 Cf. Jost. Geschichte des Judenthuims, 1. 567. 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 177 
 
 those which prevailed at Jerusalem. The school of Ti- 
 berias grew up only after the fall of the Temple; and the 
 faithful zeal of the Galileans may be rightly connected 
 with their intellectual simplicity. To descend one step 
 further: the art of writing itself was necessarily rare 
 among the peasantry, and the instinct of composition pro- 
 portionately rarer. From all these circumstances, from 
 their nation, their class, their province, their education, the 
 first Christians were primarily unfitted for forming any 
 plan of a comprehensive religious literature. If they were 
 writers, it could only have been by the providential influ- 
 ence of circumstances, while they were oral teachers by 
 inclination and habit. 
 But it may be rightly said, that such obstacles as these 
 are only important when they fall in with 
 = - 1. These generat 
 others which he deeper; for men become _ otstacies to the con- 
 great writers, even in common life, not so « ’Cnsanun tinny 
 much by discipline as by instinct. In the case pds δ τιν 
 of the Apostles, however, these further ob- ea en 
 stacles were not wanting; their external dis- 
 inclination for literature was unremoved, if not increased, 
 by their special work. Both from the nature of their 
 charge and the character of their hearers, they sought 
 other means of fulfilling their great commission than such 
 as books afforded. Their Master enjoined on them during 
 His presence, and at the moment of His departure, to 
 “preach the Gospel.” And while they fulfilled the office 
 for which they were fitted, no less by habit than by the 
 effusion of the Holy Spirit, they could not have felt that 
 more was needed for the permanent establishment of the 
 Christian society. “How shall men believe without a 
 preacher” (κηρύσσων) ? is the truest expression of the feel- 
 ing and hope of the Apostles. They cherished the lively 
 image of the Lord’s life and teaching without any written 
 outline from His hand; and they might well hope that the 
 Spirit which preserved the likeness in their hearts might 
 fix it in the hearts of others. Christianity was contrasted 
 
178 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 with Tudaism as a dispensation of the Spirit and not of 
 the letter; the laws of which were written not on tables 
 of stone, but on the souls of believers. The sad experience 
 of ages has alone shown the necessity that an unchanging 
 record should coéxist with a living body: in the first gen- 
 eration, the witness of word and the embodiment of the 
 word in practice belonged to the same men. 
 It must not, however, be supposed that this tendency 
 to preach rather than to write was any 
 inn dua te nue drawback to the final completeness of the 
 AS aa wte Apostolic Gospel. It was, in fact, the very 
 condition and pledge of its completeness. 
 Naturally speaking, the experience of oral teaching was 
 required in order to bring within the reach of writing the 
 vast subject of the Life of Christ; and it cannot be urged 
 that any extraordinary provision was made for the fulfil- 
 ment of a task which is now rightly felt to have been of 
 the utmost importanee. The Gospel was a growth, and 
 not an instantaneous creation. The Gospels’ were the 
 results, and not the foundation of the Apostolic preaching. 
 Without presuming to decide how far it would have been 
 possible, according to the laws of divine action, to produce 
 in the Apostles an immediate gense of the relation which 
 the history of the Life of Christ occupied towards the 
 future Church, it is evident that the occasion and manner 
 in which they wrote were the results of time and previous 
 labor. The wide growth of the Church furnished them 
 with an adequate motive for adding a written record to 
 the testimony of their living words; and the very form 
 of the Gospels was only determined by the experience of 
 teaching. The work of an Evangelist was thus not the 
 simple result of divine inspiration or of human thought, 
 but rather the complex issue of both when applied to such 
 
 1 By the Gospels in this connection I respects, as exhibiting the result of the 
 understand the first three ‘‘Synoptie” peculiar experience of one Apostle, 
 Gospels. The Gospel of St. John and not the first and common experi- 
 stands on a different footing in some ence of all. 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 179 
 
 a selection of Christ’s words and works as the varied 
 phases of the Apostolic preaching had shown to be best 
 suited to the wants of men. The primary Gospel was 
 proved, so to speak, in life, before it was fixed in writing. 
 Out of the countless multitude of Christ’s acts, those were 
 gathered, in the ministry of twenty years, which were seen 
 to have the fullest representative significance for the exhi- 
 bition of His divine Life. The oral collection thus formed 
 became in every sense coincident with the “Gospel ;” and 
 our Gospels are the permanent compendium of its contents. 
 This, then, was the first great stage in the Apostles’ 
 work —the first step in the composition of |, 
 
 3 importance 
 the Gospels —to adapt the lessons which pegs 
 they learned with Christ to the requirements ——— | 
 of the growing Church. Every detail of their conduct tends 
 to indicate the clearness with which they apprehended the 
 requirements of their office, and fulfilled them by the guid- 
 ance of the promised Spirit. They remained together at 
 Jerusalem in close communion for a period long enough 
 to shape a common narrative, and to fix it with requisite 
 consistency. They recognized that their message was 
 popular and historic. The place of instruction was the 
 synagogue and the market-place, and not the student’s 
 chamber. The qualification for the Apostolate was per- 
 sonal acquaintance with Christ; and St. Paul admitted 
 the condition, and affirmed that he had fulfilled it. Of the 
 great majority of the Apostles, all that we know certainly 
 is, that they were engaged in this first charge of instruct- 
 ing orally the multitudes who were waiting to welcome 
 their tidings. The common work of “the 
 twelve” was prayer, and the ministry of the 
 word, though the labors of all are summed 
 up in the acts of two or three. The rest of the Apostles 
 were engaged with St. Peter on the day of 
 Pentecost, and guided by their teaching (δι- 
 δαχή) the new converts. Signs were wrought 
 by their hands to arrest the attention of their hearers 
 
 Acts vi. 4. 
 
 Acts ii. 37. 
 
 Acts ii. 42. 
 
 Acts ti. 48; v. 12. 
 
180 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 (τέρατα) and symbolize the purport of their message 
 (onpeta) — the testimony of the resurrection. 
 pred ta δὴ The Apostles, in a body, were brought be- 
 ony fore the council and beaten and forbidden ¢o 
 ae ae speak in the name of Jesus. And when all 
 others were scattered, they remained stead- 
 fastly at Jerusalem, watching the progress of the Church, 
 supplying its wants, and regulating its discipline. Zhe 
 twelve foundations of the wall of the city of 
 God bore the names of the twelve Apostles. 
 The earliest fathers saw in this energy of teaching the 
 τος right fulfilment of the mission of the Apos- 
 Para θα ρος, They were likened to the twelve gems 
 upon the robes of the great High Priest, 
 which should give light to the Church.' “ The elders re- 
 frained from writing,” it is said, “ because they would not 
 interrupt the care which they bestowed in teaching orally 
 by the care of composition, nor expend in writing the time 
 required for the preparation of their addresses.” “ Perhaps 
 they felt,” it is added, “that the functions of the speaker 
 and writer were incompatible ; and saw in books only the 
 written confirmation for after time of the instruction which 
 they conveyed at present.”? 
 Common language bears unequivocal witness to the 
 general prevalence of the same view. Tull 
 gua men om the end of the first century, and probably 
 till the time of Justin Martyr, the “Gospel” 
 uniformly signifies the substance and not the records of 
 the Life of Christ. The evangelist was not the compiler 
 of a history, but the missionary who carried the good 
 tidings to fresh countries; the bearer, and not the author 
 of the message. Timothy was charged to “fulfil the work 
 of an evangelist ;” and evangelists are enumerated by St. 
 Paul with apostles and prophets and teachers among the 
 ministers of the Church.’ 
 
 Apoc. xxi. 14. 
 
 1 Tertull. adv. Mare. iv. 18, p. 229. 8 Eph. iv. 11; 2 Tim.iv.5. Cf. Euseb. 
 2Clem. Alex. Eclog. Proph. § 27, H. E. iii. 37. Neander, Pflanz. u. Leit. 
 p. 996 P. i. 205 n. 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 181 
 
 In the mean time, if any written evidence for the facts 
 of the Gospel were needed, it was found νῶς SE 
 already in the deep words of the prophets. — ment the written 
 In passing over to Christianity, the Jew did pe 
 not lay aside his reverence for the Scriptures, but rather 
 seemed to have gained the clew to their meaning which 
 he had before wanted. “All the prophets” 
 spoke of Christ, and to this central subject 
 everything was referred. Nor was this conviction, how- 
 ever difficult it may be for us to apprehend its intensity, 
 partial either in its acceptance or in its action. The same 
 appeals are made to the fulness of the Scriptures in the 
 teaching of St. Paul and of the'twelve, before the assem- 
 blies of Jews and of Gentiles. The written Gospel of the 
 first period of the Apostolic age was the Old Testament, 
 interpreted by the vivid recollection of the Saviour’s 
 ministry. The preaching of the Apostles 
 was the unfolding “of the Law and the 
 prophets.” 1 
 
 Even in the sub-apostolic age the same general feeling 
 survived, though it was modified by the grow- 
 
 Acts iii. 21, 24. 
 
 Acts xxviii. 23. 
 
 This conviction 
 
 ing organization of the Christian Church. με practically 
 The knowledge of the teaching of Christ and 2? "cls of le 
 of the details of His life were generally de- 
 
 rived from tradition, and not from writings. The Gospels 
 were not yet distinguished by this, their prophetic title. 
 The Old Testament was still the great storehouse from 
 which the Christian teacher derived the sources of consola- 
 tion and conviction. And at the close of the second century, 
 Irenzeus, after speaking of the Scriptures — the sum of the 
 Apostolic teaching —as “the foundation and pillar of our 
 faith,” speaks of a “tradition manifested in the whole 
 world,” and “kept in the several churches through the 
 succession of the presbyters.” ° 
 
 1 Compare Acts ii. 16, 25, 34 ; iii. 18, 2 The substance of this paragraph is 
 21, 22, 24; iv. 11; viii. 82 ff.; ix. 22; xiii. wrought out in detail in The History of 
 27, 88; xvii. 2,3; xviii. 28. the Canon of the N. Testament, pp. #0 δὲ 
 
 16 
 
182 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 In one respect the testimony of Irenzeus — the connect- 
 ee ing link of the east and west — is extremely 
 ΠΣ important, as distinctly recognizing the his- 
 toric element in the Apostolic tradition. 
 The great outlines of the life of Christ were received, he 
 says,’ by barbarous nations without history (sine literis) by 
 ancient tradition; and this combination of facts and 
 doctrine existed from the first. “The Gospel,” —the sum, 
 that is, of the oral teaching, — in the language of Ignatius, 
 represents “the flesh (σάρξ) of Jesus.”? The Saviour’s 
 personal presence was perpetuated in the living voice of 
 His Church. At a still earlier time the writings of the 
 New Testament contain abundant proof that the “Gospel” 
 of the first age was not an abstract statement of dogmas, 
 but a vivid representation of the truth, as seen in the 
 details of the Saviour’s life. The Acts of the Apostles and 
 the Apostolic letters —the first preaching and the subse- 
 quent instruction of the Churche at the facts of 
 the life of Christ were the rule by which the work of the 
 Christian teacher was measured. : | 
 The first common act of the Apostolic body affirms in 
 the most striking manner the position which 
 
 (a) The descrip- i : 
 tion of the Apostol- they claimed to fill with regard to the Sa- 
 ae ρα viour’s ministry. Not only was it necessary 
 that the Apostles should be “a witness of the resurrection,” 
 but the qualification to give this testimony 
 was to be derived from a continuous inter- 
 course with the constant companions of the Lord “from 
 the baptism of John to the Ascension.” The Resurrection 
 was the victory which the preacher had to proclaim; but 
 the victory was the issue of a long battle, and found its 
 outward completion in a triumph. Each event in the life 
 of Christ contributed to the final issue; and as the busy 
 prelude of word and work first introduced the closing 
 scenes of suffering and glory, so was it in after times. The 
 ministry of the Saviour was felt to be the necessary prepa- 
 
 Acts i. 21, 22. 
 
 1 χρη. c. her. iii. 4, 2. 2 Ignat. ad Phil. 5. 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 183 
 
 ration for His Passion. The Apostles could not but speak 
 the things which they had seen and heard! 
 The teaching and the acts of Christ were a 
 necessary part of the message of men who were specially 
 charged with the witness to his resurrection? 
 
 The special records of the preaching of the Apostles 
 confirm the impression which is produced fs πόθ 
 by the general description of their office. of the Apostotic 
 The Gospel was felt to contain not only Paster 
 a doctrine (διδάξαι) but an announcement 
 (ἀναγγεῖλαι) ; and the simplest expression of its contents was 
 “the testimony of the resurrection of the 
 Lord Jesus,’ or, in two words only, “the 
 Lord Jesus.” When Philip preached at Samaria he spoke 
 of “the things concerning the kingdom of 
 God, and the name of Jesus Christ,’ of the 
 outward establishment of the Church, and of 
 the personal work of the Saviour; and the same twofold 
 
 Acts iv, 20. 
 
 Acts xx. 20, © 
 Acis tv. 33. 
 
 Acts xi. 20. 
 
 Acts viii. 12. 
 
 subject was the substance of St. Paul’s preaching at Rome, 
 when he “veceived for two whole years all 
 that came unto him.’ Nor are examples 
 wanting to show in what way the historic groundwork of 
 the faith was laid. In the two cases in the Acts where 
 the message of Christianity is delivered in detail to those 
 who were waiting for instruction, the great announcement 
 is conveyed by the outline of the ministry of Christ. St. 
 Peter before Cornelius, and St. Paul in the 
 
 Synagogue at Antioch, sketch shortly the i ee 
 significant traits of the Saviour’s life within 
 
 the very limits which were marked from the first, “the 
 Baptism of John,” and the Ascension. There is, however, 
 a difference between the two addresses, which is of con- 
 siderable moment towards the appreciation of the form in 
 
 Acts raviti. 31, 
 
 1 In this passage “Peter and John” in which passage St. Paul specially no 
 are represented as speaking, and it is tices the office of the Apostles to wit 
 impossible not to recall 1 John i. 1—3. ness ‘‘ to the people.” 
 
 2 Acts ii. 32; iii. 16; iv. 88; xiii. 81, 
 
184 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 which the Apostolic teaching was conveyed “pudlicly, and 
 Srom house to house.” The address of St. 
 Paul was public, and, so to speak, ecclesiasti- 
 eal; that of St. Peter was private and catechetical. The 
 one appears to lead to further inquiry, the other is crowned 
 directly by baptism. The words of St. Peter convey, in 
 fact, a short gospel, and in this, not only the substance but 
 also the evidence of the later creed. He marks the date 
 of Christ’s appearance (after the Baptism which John 
 preached ), the place from which He came, and the inau- 
 euration of His work (how God anointed Jesus of 
 Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power), the point 
 from which His ministry commenced, and the extent to 
 which it spread (beginning from Galilee... . throughout 
 all Judea), the signs by which His presence was attended, 
 and the different localities in which they were shown (é 
 the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem), His crucifixion, 
 His resurrection on the third day, His manifestation to His 
 chosen witnesses, His great charge, His coming to judg- 
 ment. But while the personal instruction of individuals 
 appears to have embraced the whole ministry of Christ, 
 the public testimony of the Apostles was centred in the 
 | facts of the Passion and Resurrection. These 
 form the prominent subjects of the message 
 
 Acts xx. 90. 
 
 Acts ti. 22 ff. ; iit, 
 
 13 ff; iv. 8 f.; ὡς 
 ay av. 2,3; ar. which they delivered to the general gather- 
 
 ing of the Jews and to the council, in the 
 synagogues and before the judgment-seat; and the same 
 cardinal events which are described with the greatest 
 fulness in the written Gospels are noticed with the most 
 minute details in the speeches of the Acts." 
 
 1 The betrayal (Aets 11. 23); the con- 
 demnation by the Sanhedrin (xiii. 27); 
 the failure of the charge (xiii. 28); the 
 conduct of Pilate (iii. 13), and of Herod 
 (iv. 27); the choice of Barabbas (iv. 14); 
 the urgency of the people and rulers at 
 Jerusalem (xiii. 27, 28); the crucifixion 
 (iv. 10; v. 30; xi. 39) by Gentile hands 
 
 (ii. 28); the burial (xiii. 29); the resur- 
 rection on the third day (x. 40); the 
 manifestation to chosen witnesses (x. 
 41) “ΤῸ many days” (xiii. 31), ‘‘ who 
 did eat and drink with Him after He 
 rose’ {x. 41); the charge to the Apos- 
 tles (x. 42); the ascension to the “" right 
 hand of God” (ii. 38; iii. 21). 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 185 
 
 The letters of the Apostles are the sequel to their 
 preaching, called out in most cases by special 
 circumstances, and dealing rather with the 
 superstructure than with the basis of Christi- 
 anity. The common groundwork of facts is assumed as 
 lying at the bottom of all reasoning, but as a natural con- 
 sequence it is not noticed, except by implication or allusion. 
 Christ was set before the eyes of the Galatians 
 as crucified, with the clearness of a vivid 
 picture (zpoeypady κατ᾽ ὀφϑαλμούς). The “ Gos- 
 pel” which St. Paul proclaimed to the Corinthians was 
 the story of the death and resurrection of Christ. In 
 speaking to the Thessalonians it is evident that he had 
 dwelt upon the great issue of the Resurrection, the second 
 coming of the Lord. And everything tends to show that 
 “the traditions”! which formed an important part of the 
 Apostolic teaching included the details of the Lord’s minis- 
 try, which were committed to the Evangelist as the rule of 
 his work. But the Epistles themselves were not designed 
 for primary instruction, but for the further instruction of 
 those who were familiar with the great outlines of the 
 “revelation of godliness” which were embod- 
 ied in the baptismal confession. This confes- 
 sion, however, was the standard of Christian thought; and 
 in spite of the character which was necessitated by their des- 
 tination, the Epistles contain in scattered notices a fairly 
 complete sketch of the life of Christ, such as might be 
 
 (c) The contents 
 of the Apostolic let- 
 ters. 
 
 Gal. iii. 1, 
 
 1 Cor. xv. 1—4. 
 
 1 Tim. wii. 16. 
 
 1 This follows from the usage of the 
 correlative words παραδιδόναι παράδο- 
 σις, παραλαμβάνειν. Luke i. 2, καϑδὼς 
 παρέδοσαν ἡμῖν of aw ἀρχῆς αὐτόπται 
 καὶ ὑπηρέται. . . . (the events of the 
 ministry of Christ.). 1 Cor. xi. 328, 
 Ἐγὼ yap παρέλαβον ἀπὸ (not παρά) 
 τοῦ Κυρίου ὃ καὶ παρέδωκα ὑμῖν... .. 
 (the details of the Last Supper). 1 Cor. 
 xv. 8, παρέδωκα... . ὃ καὶ παρέλα- 
 Boy (the details of the Passion and 
 Resurrection). These unequivocal ex- 
 amples of a historical tradition illus- 
 
 trate the other passages in which the 
 words are used in a more general sense: 
 Rom. vi. 17, εἰς bv παρεδόϑητε τύπον 
 διδαχῆθπ. 1 Cor. xi. 2; Jud. 3, τῇ 
 ἅπαξ παραδοδείσῃ τοῖς ἁγίοις πίστει; 
 2 Thess. ii. 15; (iii. 6}; Gal. i. 9; 1 Thess. 
 ii. 18. Compare also παρακαταδϑήκη, 
 παραδήκη, 1 Tim. vi. 20; 2 Tim. i. 12, 14, 
 with Clem. Eel. Proph. § 27, ἢ yap τῶν 
 πρεσβυτέρων παρακαταδήκη διὰ τῆς 
 γραφῆς λαλοῦσα ὑπουργῷ χρῆται τῷ 
 γράφοντι πρὸς τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἐν" 
 τευξομένων. 
 
 16* 
 
186 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 gathered from the letters of a missionary of the present 
 day thoroughly familiar with the substance of the Gospels. 
 The Epistles of St. James and St. Jude are in this re- 
 spect distinguished from the other Apostolic 
 Seo ees"? writings, for, with the exception of the allu-_ 
 sions to the “ presence” of the “ Lord Jesus 
 Christ,” they contain no allusions to the details of His 
 work.' But even thus they bear indirect testimony to the 
 existence of a traditional Gospel. The language of St. 
 James offers the most striking coincidences with the Jan- 
 guage of our Lord’s discourses ;? and St. Jude speaks of 
 “the most holy faith,” the basis of the Christian life, not as 
 a simple principle, but as a sum of facts.’ 
 The first Epistle of St. Peter bears in every chapter the 
 vivid image of Christ’s sufferings (i. 213 11. 21 
 Pains FETE dt ths a. LAs ied bossy. 4). It-séemes ac iiahe 
 Apostle delighted to turn back with penitent 
 and faithful gaze to the scene of his own fall and his Mas- 
 ter’s love, as he pictures Him silent and uncomplaining 
 before His accusers, and bears witness to others of what he 
 had himself seen (v. 1). But St. Peter does not confine 
 his allusions to the humiliation of Christ, to His rejection 
 (ii. 4, 7, 8), His crucifixion (ii. 24), His death (i. 2, 19): he 
 speaks of His eternal election (i. 20), and records with con- 
 fident hope His resurrection (1. ὃ, 21 ; iii. 21) and exaltation 
 to the right hand of God (ili. 225 cf.1. 21). The scenes of 
 suffering are connected with corresponding scenes of glory 
 (1. 11, ai μετὰ ταῦτα δόξαι); and while the Apostles allude 
 with apparent distinctness to the last charge of Christ (v. 
 2.3) and the descent of the Holy Spirit (i. 12), he looks 
 forward to the glorious coming of the great Judge as the 
 consummation of His work (i. 5, 7, 135 iv. 5). 
 The second Epistle is chiefly remarkable for the detailed 
 
 1 James ν. 8; Jude 24. Credner Fini. § 321, p. 608. In James 
 2 James i. 5,6 || Matt. vii. 7; xxi. 22; v.12 || Matt. v. 36, 37, there is a coin- 
 James i. 22 || Matt. vii. 21; James ii. 18 cidence with the Clementine reading 
 || Matt. v. 7; James iii. 1} Matt. xxiii. (Hom. iii. 65; xix. 2). 
 8; James iii. 12 || Matt. vii. 16. Cf. 8 Jude 20. 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 187 
 
 reference to the Transfiguration (i. 16 ff), which, in the 
 midst of marked peculiarities of language, 
 offers a most interesting parallel to the evan- 
 gelic narrative. The words of the heavenly voice are to 
 a great extent coincident with those recorded by St. 
 Matthew, with the natural omission of the last clause ;! 
 but the comparative elaborateness of the description seems 
 to offer an instructive contrast to the simplicity of the 
 earlier Gospel. 
 
 St. Paul says, in writing to the Corinthians, that his 
 single determination was to proclaim to them 
 Christ crucified; and the “cross of Christ” 
 is the centre and sign of his Epistles. The 
 phrase, “the cross” (1 Cor. 1. 18; Gal. v.11), “the cross of 
 our Lord Jesus Christ” (Gal. vi. 14), “the cross of Christ” 
 (1 Cor.i.17; Gal. vi. 12; Phil. i. 18), is peculiar to his 
 writings, for the single additional passage in the Epistle to 
 the Hebrews (Heb. xii. 2, @ cross of shame) is purely his- 
 toric, and it cannot but appear characteristic of the view 
 which he took of the Christian faith.’ In various places 
 he marks the supreme judge (1 Tim. vi. 13, under Pontius 
 Pilate*), the time (1 Cor. v. 7, Christ our Passover is 
 slain), the instruments (1 Thess. 11. 15, the Jews who killed 
 the Lord Jesus) of the Lord’s death. But the death of 
 Christ was, as it were, only the way to the resurrection ; 
 and in the writings of St. Paul the two events are put for- 
 ward as forming the very substance of “the Gospel” 
 (1 Cor. xv. 1 ff.),? and as such are constantly combined 
 
 2nd Epistle. 
 
 ili. St. PAUL. 
 
 Ei Gor toe: 
 
 1 The reading εἰς ὃν εὐδόκησα for 
 ἐν @ εὐδ. (which some good MSS. read) 
 is found also in Hom. Clem. iii. 53. 
 
 The recurrence of the word ἔξοδος 
 in a metaphorical sense is remarkable 
 in 2 Pet. i. 15 || Luke ix. 31. 
 
 2.6. g. φωνῆς ἐνεχϑείσης ὑπὸ τῆς 
 μεγαλοπρεποῦς δόξης ---- ἐν τῷ ὕρει τῷ 
 ἁγίῳ. 
 
 8 In connection with this it may be 
 observed that the metaphorical sense of 
 
 σταυρόω (Gal. v. 24; vi. 14) is peculiar 
 to St. Paul. 
 
 4 The mention of Pontius Pilate is 
 remarkable, according to the common 
 translation, as the reference in that 
 case must be rather to the event of 
 John xviii. 36 ff. than of Matt. xxvii. 
 11. It is better, however, to take ἐπί, 
 as in the Creed, simply as marking the 
 date. 
 
 5It is very important to notice 
 
188 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 (Rom. iv. 24, 25; xiv. 9). Yet even thus the completeness — 
 of the narrative is preserved. “Christ died ..... and 
 was buried..... and rose again on the third day” (1 Cor. 
 xv. 4 ff). Afterwards the reality of the resurrection 15 
 attested by the subsequent appearances to Cephas, to the 
 twelve, to above five hundred brethren, to James, to all 
 the Apostles, to St. Paul himself (1 Cor. xv. 5—8). In 
 several places the Apostle assumes the fact of the Ascen- 
 sion (Rom. viii..24; Eph. i. 20; Col. iii. 1), and in one 
 phrase he clearly alludes to it (1 Tim. iii. 16, ἀνελήφϑη. 
 Cf Mark x viol 9<Acts a)2): 
 
 In respect to the prominence thus given to the last 
 scenes of our Lord’s life, the Epistles of St. Paul are in 
 harmony with the narrative of the Gospels. It was felt 
 that the whole life of Christ was outwardly summed up in 
 its crowning issue, in the depth of shame and in the fulness - 
 of triumph; but the preparation is not unnoticed by St. 
 Paul. At the first, “Christ made Himself of no reputa- 
 tion, and took upon Him the form of a servant” (Phil. 
 1.5 ff), “being rich, for our sakes He became poor” (2 Cor. 
 vil. 9), “born of a woman” (Gal. iv. 4), sprung from the 
 Jews “according to the flesh” (Rom. ix. 5), “the seed of 
 Abraham” (Gal. 1]. 16), “of the seed of David” (Rom. 
 1.3; 2 Tim. il. 8), brought in subjection to the law (Gal. 
 iv. 4, ὑπὸ νόμον). circumcised (Col. ii. 11), associated with 
 others as His brethren (Gal.i.19). In His life “He pleased 
 not Himself” (Rom. xv. 3), but left an image of “meek- 
 ness and gentleness” (2 Cor. x. 1) in the midst of afflictions 
 (Col. 1. 24; 2 Cor. 1. ὅ; 1 Thess. i. 6); and the pattern of 
 the life of Christ is that to which the Christian must aspire, 
 and to which he will at last attain (Eph. iv. 13). One 
 scene only, the institution of the Last Supper, is described 
 
 that St. Paul speaks of this Gospel ἀπὸ τοῦ K.not παρὰ Tov K.) the 
 as “handed down” (xv. 1, 8. He account of the institution of the Eu- 
 first received (παρέλαβε) and in turn charist (1 Cor. xi. 28). Cf. Neander, 
 transmitted (παρέδωκε) the Gospel. In Gesch. d. Pflanz. u. s. w. i. 180 ff 
 the same way he speaks of “receiving Supr. p. 185, n. 1. 
 ‘mediately) from the Lord” (taped. ea oe ae 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 189 
 
 in detail, and in that the language is almost coincident 
 with that of the narrative in the Gospels (1 Cor. x. 16; 
 xi. 23 —26).' 
 
 The Epistle to the Hebrews touches on each of the great 
 features in the Saviour’s life, as His incarna- 
 tion (ii. 9 ff.), His descent from Judah (vii. 376 fpistle tome 
 14), His temptation (il. 18; iv. 15), His 
 consecration to His ministry (v. 5), His humiliation (ii. 9 
 ff.) and sufferings (v.8), His agony (v. 7, with peculiar de- 
 tails), and crucifixion (vi. 6) outside the walls (xiii. 12), and 
 His exaltation to the right hand of God (vill. 1; ix. 24 ff)? 
 
 The references which St. John makes in his epistles to 
 the circumstances of the life of Christ are 
 exactly accordant with the character of his 
 Gospel. He dwells on the preéxistence of the Son of God 
 (iv. 9), and, at the same time, affirms with the most 
 complete distinctness His real incarnation (iv. 2), and 
 bodily presence (i. 1, ai χεῖρες Hu. ἐψηλάφησαν), and death 
 (i. 7; ii. 2). In the same way, without noticing the 
 resurrection expressly, he speaks of the mediatorial work 
 of Christ in the presence of the Father (ii. 1), and His 
 future “coming in the flesh” (2 Ep. 7, ἐρχόμενον). The 
 beginning and close of the Lord’s ministry, His baptism 
 and death, are shown to be mysteriously united, inwardly 
 in the completion of a divine testimony, and outwardly in 
 one of the last incidents of the Passion (vy. 6). In St. 
 John the spiritual significance is extended over the literal, 
 but a foundation of historic details lies at the foundation 
 of the higher lesson. 
 
 The connection of the Evangelic narra- he substance of 
 tive with the Apostolic Epistles is not, how- iS ee 
 ever, confined to mere allusions. The spirit % 7?" 
 and tone of the letters presuppose some such record as 
 
 iv. St. Joun. 
 
 1 If the text of Luke xxii. 19, 20, be that an interpolation has been made 
 correct, the coincidence is verbal, but from 1 Cor. xi. 25 ff 
 the confusion which exists in these 2 Cf. Stanley, Ep to Corinthians, pp 
 verses renders it more than probable 580 ff. 2 Ed. 
 
190 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 that which is contained in the histories. The substance 
 of the Gospels is an adequate explanation of the form of 
 the first Christian teaching, and it is impossible to con- 
 ceive of any other. If it be true that scarcely any clear 
 references to the recorded discourses of the Lord are con- 
 tained in the Kpistles, for the parallels to 1 Cor. vii. 10 
 (Matt. v. 32) and 1 Cor. 1x. 14 (Luke x. 4, 7, cf. 1 Tim, v. 
 18) are at best uncertain, it is no less true that the life and 
 words of Christ are everywhere assumed as the basis of all 
 doctrine. He is Himself wisdom (1 Cor. i. 80), the centre 
 of truth (Eph. iv. 21), “the true” (1 John v. 20); His 
 commandments are absolute (1 Cor. xiv. 27); His words 
 are the decisive rule of “sound” doctrine (1 Tim. vi. 3); 
 His example the one perfect model (1 Pet. ii. 21; Phil. ii. 
 53; 1 John 11. 6). It is everywhere assumed that the 
 Christian is familiar with the portraiture of his Master, 
 and each of the traits which are preserved in these passing 
 notices is seen in its full expression in the Gospels. The 
 New Testament, as a whole, is a key to the sub-apostolic 
 history; the Gospels, not perhaps in their writtea but in 
 their oral form, are the key to the Epistles.! 
 
 Thus far, then, it has been shown that the characteristic 
 work of the Apostles was preaching, and not 
 writing ; that they were inclined to this form 
 of teaching by character and training, no less than by their 
 special commission; that the first “Gospel” was conse- 
 quently an oral message, and not a written record; that 
 the books of the Old Testament were the sufficient 
 Apostolic Scriptures (cf. 2 Tim. iti. 15). It has been 
 further shown that this oral Gospel of the Apostles was 
 
 Summary, 
 
 1 It is remarkable that there is (as far 
 as I know) no direct allusion to the 
 miracles of our Lord in the Epistles; 
 
 often brought out in the Lord’s life in 
 His ‘ casting out devils.” Itisa similar 
 fact, that in the writings of the apostolic 
 
 but it is possible (Stanley, 1. c.) that the 
 word δαιμόνια in 1 Cor. x. 20, 21, which 
 occurs elsewhere in St. Paul only in 
 1 Tim. iv. 1, may be chosen with a dis- 
 tinct reference to the antagonism so 
 
 fathers there are(I believe) no allusions 
 to the miracles of the Apostles. The 
 omission in both eases arises from the 
 nature of the writings. 
 
THE ORIGIN OF 191 
 
 THE GOSPELS. 
 
 historic; that the Apostles were expressly declared to be 
 witnesses of the whole ministry of Christ; that their 
 preaching rested on the details of His life; that their 
 letters presuppose an acquaintance with the facts of the 
 Gospel, and preserve such an outline of its contents as is 
 filled up in our Gospels. It remains still to inquire 
 whether there is any direct evidence for connecting our 
 present Gospels with the oral cycle of evangelic facts 
 which is thus seen to have existed; and whether the 
 theory of a common oral origin is consistent with the 
 peculiarities of form which they exhibit. 
 
 On the first point early testimony is explicit and uniform, 
 Each of the first three Gospels is distinctly 
 
 = Il. The “itt 
 connected by adequate evidence with the goss ΠῚ 
 ν 4 7A ry τῇ Ξ Ν / a . I. Distinctly von 
 previous preaching of Apostles, as being ρον δον 
 intended to supply a permanent reeord ot Sonne preach- 
 NY. 
 
 that which was betore only traditional. The 
 
 written Gospels are acknowledged in history to be the last 
 stage of the Apostolic preaching, the preparation for the 
 passage into a new age. 
 
 The earliest account of the origin of a “Gospel” is that 
 which Papias has given on the authority of 
 the elder John.’ Papias was himself a “ di- 
 rect hearer” of this John, and John was “a 
 disciple of the Lord,” if the text of Papias be correct, and, 
 at any rate, contemporary with the later period of the 
 Apostolic age. ‘ This also, then, was the statement of the 
 elder. Mark having become Peter’s interpreter, wrote 
 accurately all that he (Peter) mentioned (ἐμνημόνευσε) ;* 
 
 (a) St. MARK 3 on 
 the evidence of 
 Papias ; and 
 
 1 Euseb. H. Δ. iii. 39. 
 
 Routh, Πρ]. 
 Sacr. i. pp. 13 ff. 
 
 2 This word is ambiguous, like ἀπε- 
 μνημόνευσε below, and may mean * 7'e- 
 membered,” or mentioned.” Itis used 
 in both senses in the chapter of Euse- 
 bius in which the quotation occurs. 
 The first sense is that in which it is 
 commonly taken here, but after further 
 consideration I am inclined now to 
 
 prefer the second rendering as more 
 consistent with the other forms in’ 
 which the tradition is preserved. A 
 passage of Eusebius (Dem. Lv. iii. 5), 
 however, seems to favor the other ren- 
 dering in the second ease: Πέτρος οὐδὲ 
 καϑῆκεν ἐπὶ τὴν εὐαγγελίου γραφὴν 
 50 εὐλαβείας ὑπεροχήν" τούτου Μάρκος 
 γνώριμος καὶ φοιτητὴς γεγονὼς ἄπο- 
 μνημονεῦσαι λέγεται τὰς τοῦ Πέτροι 
 
192 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 though he did not [record] in order that which was either 
 said or done by Christ (od μέντοι τάξει τὰ ὑπὸ -τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἢ 
 λεχϑέντα ἢ πραχϑέντα). For he neither heard the Lord nor 
 followed (παρηκολούϑησεν) Him; but subsequently, as I said 
 [attached himself to] Peter, who used to frame his teach- 
 ing to meet the wants [of his hearers], but not as making a 
 connected narrative of the Lord’s discourses (ὥσπερ σύνταξιν 
 τῶν Κυριακῶν ποιούμενος λόγων. All. λογίων). So Mark com- 
 mitted no error, as he wrote down some particulars (ἔνια 
 γράψας) as he narrated them (ἀπεμνημόνευσεν) ; for he took 
 heed to one thing, to omit nothing of things he heard, and 
 to make no false statement in [his account of] them.” 
 
 This most important testimony notices the three points 
 on which stress has been already laid, the historic charac- 
 ter of the oral Gospel, the special purpose with which it 
 was framed, the fragmentariness of its contents; and it was 
 on such an oral basis that our present Gospel of St. Mark 
 is said to have been founded, according to the evidence of 
 one who must have known the Apostles. 
 
 Later writers, partly as it seems from an independent 
 tradition, and partly from this statement of 
 Papias, repeat the same general statement of 
 the relation of St. Mark to St. Peter with various differ- 
 ences of detail. Irenzeus defines more exactly the time of 
 the publication of the Gospel, though the reading is 
 uncertain. “ After the decease (ἔξοδον, cf. 2 Ῥοί. 1. 15) of 
 these (Peter and Paul), Mark, the disciple and interpreter 
 of Peter, himself also handed down to us in writing 
 the things which were preached by Peter.”! Clement of 
 Alexandria records, as “a tradition of the elders of former 
 
 later writers. 
 
 περὶ τῶν πράξεων τοῦ Ἰησοῦ Siadé- H. E. vy. 8. The reading, μετὰ τὴν 
 gers .... πάντα yap τὰ παρὰ Μάρκῳ τούτου (sc. τοῦ κατὰ Ματϑαῖον evay- 
 τοῦ Πέτρου διαλέξεων εἶναι λέγεται γελίου) ἔκδοσιν (Cramer, Cat. in Mare. 
 ἀπομνημονεύματα. Comp. also Clem. p. 264) is worthy of notice, as the date 
 
 Alex. ap. Euseb. H. E. vi. 14. ....7bv jis not consistent with the other ac- 
 Μάρκον μεμνημένον τῶν λεχϑέντων counts. Elsewhere Ireneus calls Mark 
 ἀναγράψαι τὰ eipnueva..... interpres et sectator (1. 6. ἀκόλουδο5) 
 
 1Jren. adv. Her, iii. 1. Cf. Euseb. Petri (iii. 10, 6). 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE 
 
 GOSPELS. 193 
 
 time” (παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνέκαϑεν πρεσβυτέρων), an account, 
 which, though very similar to that of Papias, appears to be 
 distinct from it. “[It is said] that when Peter had 
 publicly preached (xypvgavros) the word in Rome, and 
 declared the Gospel by inspiration (πνεύματι ἐξειπόντος τὸν 
 λόγον), those who were present, being many, urged Mark, 
 as one who had followed him from a distant time, and 
 remembered what he said, to record (ἀναγράψαι) what he 
 stated (τὰ εἰρημένα) ; and that he, having made his Gospel, 
 gave it to those who requested him; and that Peter, when 
 he was aware of this, took pains neither to hinder him nor 
 to encourage him in the work (προτρεπτικῶς μήτε κωλῦσαι 
 ”1 Origen says still more expressly that 
 “ Mark made his Gospel as Peter guided him (i¢yyjoaro).”? 
 Tertullian, in like manner, remarks that “the Gospel of 
 Mark is maintained to be Peter’s, whose interpreter he 
 was, .... for it is possible that that which scholars 
 publish should be regarded as their master’s work.” * 
 
 The tradition was repeated in later times, but generally 
 in the later form which Eusebius gave to it, according to 
 which St. Peter expressly “sanctioned the writing [of 
 Mark] for the use of the Church,” in accordance with a 
 divine revelation; a statement which is at direct variance 
 with the authority which Eusebius quotes, and internally 
 improbable.* 
 
 μήτε προτρέψασϑαι). 
 
 1 Clem. Alex. Fragm. Hypotyp. p. 
 1016 P. Euseb. H. £. vi. 14. So also 
 Adumbr. in Pet. Ep. 1. p. 1007; Marcus 
 Petri sectator palam pradicente Petro 
 evangeiium Rome coram quibusdam 
 Cesareanis equitibus et multa Christi 
 
 revelation, are evidently later embellish- 
 ments of the tradition. 
 
 2 Comm.in Matt.i. Euseb. 1.2. yi. 25. 
 
 3 Contr. Marc. iv. 5. 
 
 To these writers Justin 
 added, who speaks of ‘‘the memoirs 
 
 M. may be 
 
 testimonia proferente, penitus ut pos- 
 sent que dicebantur memoriz com- 
 mendari, scripsit ex his que Petro dicta 
 sunt evangelium quod secundum Mar- 
 cum vocitatur. 
 
 The false references which Eusebius 
 (ΠΗ. £.ii. 15)and Jerome (de virr. illustr. 
 8) make to this passage, as though St. 
 Peter did confirm the Gospel by special 
 
 (ἀπομνημονεύματα) of Peter” with an 
 obvious reference to St. Mark; Dial. ο’ 
 106. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 130 f. 
 
 4 The later writers are quoted by 
 Credner, Zinl. p. 113 ff. 
 
 In another place Eusebius (H. £. ii. 
 16) represents St. Mark as δ preaching’ 
 himself in Egypt the Gospel which he 
 composed.” 
 
 17 
 
194 
 
 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 The history of the present Gospel of St. Matthew is 
 beset with peculiar difficulties, and the earli- 
 est writers are silent as to the circumstances 
 which attended its composition. While using the Greek 
 text as unquestionably authentic, they recognize unani- 
 mously the existence of a Hebrew archetype, of which 
 they seem to regard the canonical book as an authoritative 
 translation or representative, but still without offering any 
 explanation of the manner in which this substitution was 
 made. Papias, probably on the testimony of the elder 
 John, though this is not clear, states simply that “Matthew 
 composed the oracles in the Hebrew language; but each 
 interpreted them as he could.”! This evidence then 
 carries us back to a time when no Greek Gospel bearing 
 the name of St. Matthew was generally current, though a 
 Hebrew Gospel, —for λόγια, “ oracles,” can mean no less, — 
 of which he was the author, was known and used. In the 
 next generation the Greek Gospel was used most commonly 
 by Justin, though he is silent as to the authorship ;? and in 
 the time of Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian! and Ire- 
 neus,’ the present Gospel was recognized by the Church as 
 the authentic work of St. Matthew. But the reception of 
 the Greek text did not interfere with the earlier belief. 
 The existence of a Hebrew original is confirmed by the 
 statements of Irenzus® and Origen,’ on the authority of 
 “tradition” (as ἐν παραδόσει μαϑών), and by the general 
 consent of later opinion, as well as by the story of Pante- 
 nus, who is said to have found in “India” “the Hebrew 
 
 (0) St. MATTHEW. 
 
 1 Papias ap. Eusebius, H. Ε. iii. 39. 
 Matdaios μὲν οὖν Ἕβραϊΐδι δια- 
 . λέκτῳ τὰ λόγια συνεγράψατο, ἢ ρ- 
 μήνευσε δ᾽ αὐτὰ ὡς ἠδύνατο ἕκασ- 
 Tos. The form of the sentence is 
 remarkable, and the aorist. marks a 
 change before Papias’ (or John’s) time. 
 Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, 79. 
 
 2 Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 154 ff. 
 
 3 Clem. Alex. Hypotyp. 1. ¢. Cf. 
 Euseb. H. Ε-. vi. 14. 
 
 4 Tert. c’ Marc: iv. 2 τ. fidem ex 
 apostolis Joannes et Matthzus insinu- 
 ant. 
 
 5 tren. adv. Her. iii. 11,8... 6 Λόγος 
 
 . ἔδωκεν ἡμῖν τετράμορφον τὸ εὐ- 
 αγγέλιον, ἑνὶ δὲ πνεύματι συνεχόμε- 
 νον. 
 
 6 Iren. adv. Her. τ. 1. Cf. Euseb. 
 JER ION 3.8: 
 
 7 Orig. Comm. in Matt.i. Cf. Euseb 
 Η. E. vi. 25. 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 195 
 
 writing of Matthew,” which was left there by the Apostle 
 
 Bartholomew.’ But none of these writers allude to the 
 origin of the Gospel. This is first described by Eusebius, 
 in a passage which bears strong internal marks of proba- 
 bility, though it is impossible to point out the authorities 
 on which it rests. “Matthew,” he says, “having formerly 
 preached to Hebrews, when he was about to go to others 
 also, having committed to writing in his native tongue the 
 Gospel according to him, filled up by his writing what was 
 wanting in his presence (τὸ λεῖπον τῇ αὐτοῦ παρουσίᾳ, ἡ. 6., the 
 loss they felt as he was no longer with them) to those from 
 whom he set out.”? This may be a mere conjecture by 
 which Eusebius explains the earliér tradition, but in the 
 absence of all opposing evidence it must be allowed to have 
 some weight. 
 
 The early accounts of the origin of the Gospel of St. 
 Luke were strictly parallel to those of the 
 origin of St. Mark, but less detailed. “ Luke, 
 the follower of Paul,” says Irenzus,’ “set down in a book 
 the Gospel which he (Paul) used to preach (τὸ ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνου 
 κηρυσσόμενον evayy.).” Tertullian speaks of St. Paul as 
 “the idluminator of Luke,” and says that “the summary 
 (digestum) of Luke was generally assigned to Paul.”* 
 The allusions which St. Paul makes to “his Gospel” 
 (om: 11. 16; xvi. 25; 2 Tim.ii. 8. Cf..2 Cor.-viii. 18) and 
 to St. Luke, soon gave occasion to suppose that he himself 
 used the Gospel of St. Luke. Even Origen speaks of “the 
 Gospel of Luke as that praised by Paul;”° and the tra- 
 dition assumed a more definite shape in the writings of 
 Jerome® and the Pseudo-Athanasius. It is remarkable, 
 however, that Eusebius refers to the conjecture (φασι) 
 
 (c) St. LUKE. 
 
 1 Kuseb. H. &. v.10. Cf. Hieron. de 
 virr. illustr. 36. 
 
 ἐν gee 
 predicavit.... 
 
 qui semper cum Paulo 
 et cum eco evyangeli- 
 
 2 Euseb. H. £. iii. 24 
 
 5 Tien. adv. Her. iii. 1.1. Cf. Euseb. 
 IT. E. y. 8. Elsewhere Irenzus calls 
 Luke “inseparabilis a Paulo et coéper- 
 alius cjus in evangelio” (adv. Her. iii. 
 
 zavit et creditus est nobis referre evan- 
 gelium. (1. 6.). 
 4 Tert. adv. Marc. iv. 2; iv. 5. 
 5 Orig. ap. Euseb. H. E vi. 25 
 6 Hieron. de virr. illustr. Τ. 
 
196 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 without trace of approval, though the corresponding tra- 
 dition, which confers the direct authority of St. Peter on 
 the Gospel of St. Mark, rests on his authority. 
 But, apart from tradition, the preface with which St. 
 Luke opens his Gospel throws a striking 
 Ge Lines Peehie. light upon its composition. The words have 
 ares es been made the subject of the most varied 
 controversy, though the true sense seems to lie upon their 
 surface. Both in the description which he gives of other 
 “ Gospels,” and in the peculiar character which he claims 
 for his own, St. Luke appears to confirm the views already 
 given of the prevalence and nature of the unwritten Gos- 
 pel of the first age. The common basis of the Evangelic 
 narratives is said to be the oral “tradition of those who 
 from the beginning (cf. Acts i. 21, 22) were eye-witnesses 
 and ministers of the word.” The two elements in the 
 Apostolic character which have been already pointed out, 
 personal knowledge (αὐτόπται) and practical experience 
 (ὑπηρέται), are recognized by St. Luke as present in those 
 who originally “handed down” (παρέδοσαν) the history 
 which many attempted to draw up and arrange afresh 
 (ἀνατάξασϑαι) in a connected shape (dvar. διήγησιν. .. 
 καϑὼς π.). The work of these first unknown Evangelists 
 was new only in form, and not in substance. The tradition 
 which they incorporated in a narrative was not peculiar to 
 themselves, but common to all (xa3. παρ. ἡμῖν) 1: for the 
 common belief was independent of these written records. 
 St. Luke speaks of the “attempts” as of something which 
 had no influence at the present.2 The “facts” were “fully 
 believed” (πεπληροφορημένων, not πληροφορηϑέντων, Rom. iv. 
 21) apart from the evidence of such documents. Theophi- 
 
 1 Euseb. H. £. iii. 4. “have attempted.” Possibly some 
 feeling of this difference influenced 
 Origen’s judgment, when he saw in 
 the word ‘attempt’ itself a reproof 
 of unauthorized temerity (Hom. in 
 3 -Emexeipnoayv, “ attempted,” not Luc. 1.). 
 
 2 Bp. Marsh justly insists on the im- 
 portance of the phrase: The origin of 
 the first three Gospels, Ὁ. 364. 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 197 
 
 lus was already “instructed” in “the words”! of the exact 
 truth of which St. Luke wished to assure him; and _ his 
 instruction was derived not from books, but from that oral 
 teaching (κατηχήϑης). Which is described by the same term 
 from the first foundation of the Church (Acts xviii. 25; 
 Gal. vi. 6). So far, then, the statements of St. Luke cor- 
 roborate in the fullest manner the view which has been 
 taken of the origin of written Gospels. The narrative 
 was the embodiment of the oral accounts; the “facts” 
 (πράγματα) were coordinate with “the word ;” the work of 
 the Evangelist was arrangement rather than fresh compo- 
 sition; the subjects with which he dealt were at once 
 matters of firm conviction and ordinary instruction. The 
 grounds on which St. Luke rests his own narrative involve 
 the same principles. It is evident at first that he repre- 
 sents his Gospel as a faithful embodiment of the “ Evan- 
 gelic tradition.” He finds no fault with the basis on which 
 the earlier writers rested. His own determination is placed 
 on an equal footing with theirs (ἔδοξε κἀμοί) ; but he claims 
 for himself a knowledge of the Apostolic preaching con- 
 tinuous from the first, complete, exact, and for his writing 
 a due order (Luke 1. ὃ, παρηκολονθηκότι ἄνωϑεν πᾶσιν ἀκριβῶς 
 καϑεξῆς σοι γράψαι). Kach word in the’ sentence contrib- 
 utes an important element to the completeness of the 
 whole idea. St. Luke appears to speak of a gradual un- 
 folding of the whole Gospel in the course of the Apostolic 
 work which he had watched from the first step throughout 
 in every detail. The same term (παρακολουϑεῖν) describes 
 the personal attendance on a teacher (Papias, |. ¢. ap. Euseb. 
 Hf, F. iii. 39), and the careful following of a doctrine 
 (1 Tim. iv. 6; 2 Tim. iii. 10). The long companionship 
 seems to be the criterion of the complete knowledge. And 
 this view of the notion implied in “ following” 
 the meaning of the next words. St. Luke’s “continuous 
 
 illustrates 
 
 / 
 1“The words” (οἱ λόγοι) being the constituent elements of ‘the word” (6 
 λόγος). Cf. 1 Tim. iv. 6. 
 
 ΤΣ 
 
198 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 familiarity ” with the subject gave him a knowledge of the 
 whole cycle of the “tradition,” and not only of particular 
 periods or of particular parts of it. His knowledge started 
 from the first, and extended to every point; and the 
 peculiar advantages of the Evangelist are enforced by the 
 notice of his special care (ἀκριβῶς) and plan. But the 
 notion of order (καϑεξῆς) does not necessarily involve that 
 of time, but rather that of moral or logical sequence 
 (cf. Acts xi. 4). The two may coincide, and in the exhi- 
 bition of a perfect life they will in the main, but chronology 
 is not paramount in the Gospels, and the language of St. 
 Luke does not imply that he designed to follow it. Like 
 the teaching on which it was first based, the record is 
 subservient to special requirements. It is complete in 
 regard to its object, but not absolutely ; a message of good 
 tidings, and not a biography; united in its several parts by 
 a spiritual law, and not by a table of dates. 
 
 Hitherto all the evidence which can be gathered from 
 
 Biabis i tT the circumstances of the early Church, and 
 character of the the traditions of the origin-of the Gospels, 
 ee has tended to establish the existence of an 
 original oral Gospel, definite in general outline and even 
 in language, which was committed to writing in the lapse 
 of time in various special shapes, according to the typical 
 forms which it assumed in the preaching of different 
 Apostles. It is probable that this oral Gospel existed 
 from the first in Aramaic and Greek, as would naturally 
 be the case in a country where two languages were gener- 
 ally current. The teaching of St. Matthew “among his 
 own countrymen” is expressly said to have been in 
 “ Hebrew,” and it is not less certain that Greek must have 
 been the common medium of intercourse with the Hel- 
 lenists. The step from these oral narratives to written 
 records in Hebrew and Greek is simple and natural; but 
 nothing has been said yet of the internal evidence to be 
 derived from the Gospels themselves; and still it is on this 
 that the decision of the question of their origin mainly 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 199 
 depends. General indications and_ beliefs, probabilities 
 and seeming coincidences, must be abandoned if they are 
 clearly opposed to the internal character of the books — to 
 the peculiarities of their mutual relations, to the extent 
 and limit of their similarity and difference, to the general 
 unity by which they are held together, and to the special 
 characteristics by which they are distin- 
 guished. It may be asked whether there is 
 any intimate external connection between 
 the Gospels? Whether the resemblances which exist 
 point to the existence of a common source or to mutual 
 dependence? Whether, in the latter case, it 1s possible 
 to determine the order of precedence, or in the former 
 the nature —oral or written —of the original records? 
 Various answers have been given to these questions, but 
 the first, at least, may be regarded as definitely settled. 
 No one at present would maintain, with some of the older 
 scholars of the Reformation, that the coincidences between 
 the Gospels are due simply to the direct and independent 
 action of the same Spirit upon the several writers. The 
 explanation of the phenomena which they present is sought 
 by universal consent in the presence of a common element, 
 though opinions are still divided as to its nature. The 
 original source of the resemblance may lie in the influence 
 of an original tradition, or of a popular narrative, or in the 
 earliest written Gospel itself; but the existence of some 
 such source is admitted on all sides. The merits of the 
 different hypotheses must be decided by their fitness to 
 satisfy the various conditions of the question; and before 
 attempting to decide their claims, it will be necessary to 
 gain a distinct notion of the nature and extent of the 
 concordances of which an explanation is required.’ 
 
 (a) The nature of 
 the problem which 
 they present. 
 
 1 For the study of the parallelisms 
 of the Gospels abundant helps are pro- 
 vided. Greswell’s Harmonia Evan- 
 gelica (Ed. 4ta. Oxon., 1845) is perfect 
 in respect of typography, but the text 
 
 is bad and altogether unprovided with 
 critical apparatus, so that it cannot be 
 safely used alone. Stroud’s New Greek 
 Harmony (Lond., 1853) is second only 
 to Greswell in the convenience of its 
 
200 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 The concordances of the synoptic Gospels may be classed 
 under three heads: — general agreement in 
 the plan and arrangement of the materials; 
 constant identity of narrative in form and 
 substance; and verbal coincidences. With these concord- 
 ances are combined differences in detail and expression, 
 large interpolations of peculiar matter, distinct revisions, 
 so to speak, of the same record, so that the points of 
 meeting between the different writers are scarcely more 
 numerous than the points of divergence, and the theory 
 which explains the existence of the former must not leave 
 the existence of the latter unnoticed or unexplained. 
 
 The general plan of the first three Gospels exhibits a 
 remarkable correspondence. The history of 
 the Infancy contained in St. Matthew and 
 St. Luke finds no parallel in St. Mark, but afterwards the 
 main course of the three narratives is throughout coinci- 
 The preparation for the Ministry, John the Baptist, 
 the Baptism, the Temptation, the return to Galilee, the 
 preaching in Galilee, the journey to Jerusalem, the en- 
 trance into Jerusalem and the preaching there, the Passion, 
 the Resurrection — such is the common outline which they 
 all present, and the same relative order of the subordinate 
 incidents is always preserved by St. Mark and St. Luke, 
 and also by St. Matthew, with the exception of some of 
 the earlier sections. The most remarkable differences lie 
 in the presence of a long series of events connected with 
 the Galilean ministry, which are peculiar to St. Matthew 
 and St. Mark,! and a second series of events connected 
 with the journey to Jerusalem, which is peculiar to St. 
 Luke. 
 
 i. The concord- 
 ances between them 
 threefold. 
 
 a. In general plan. 
 
 dent. 
 
 typographical arrangement, and it has 
 a fair apparatus criticus. Anger’s 
 Synopsis Evangeliorum Matt. Mare. 
 Luc... . . (Lipsiz, 1851) contains a 
 most complete and elaborate summary 
 of all the early evangelic fragments 
 and quotations in addition to the can- 
 onical text and critical apparatus, but 
 
 the arrangement is not so distinct as that 
 in Greswell and Stroud. For practical 
 purposes, Anger, combined with Stroud 
 or Greswell, will furnish all the student 
 can require. 
 
 1 Matt. xiv. 22—xvi. 12.=Mark yi. 45 
 —viii. 26. 
 
 2 Luke ix. 51—xviii. 14. 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 201 
 
 Nor is the obvious similarity of the synoptic Gospels 
 confined to their broad outlines. The inci- 
 dents with which their outlines are filled up 
 are often identical and always similar. The absolute 
 extent of this coincidence of incident admits of a simple 
 representation by numbers; and though the relations 
 which are given are only approximately true, they convey 
 a clearer notion of the nature of the phenomenon than any 
 general description. The proportion may be exhibited in 
 several modes, and each method places the truth in a new 
 light. 
 
 If the total contents of the several Gospels be repre- 
 sented by 100, the following table is obtained :' 
 
 ὃ. In incident. 
 
 Peculiarities. Concordances, 
 St. Mark, : : , 7 93 
 St. Matthew, : : ς 7 ...Ὁ 58 
 St. Luke, i : ; : 59 41 
 [St. John, : 3 ; 480 8] 
 
 From this it appears that the several Gospels bear 
 almost exactly an inverse relation to one another, St. Mark 
 and St. John occupying the extreme positions, the propor- 
 tion of original passages in one balancing the coincident 
 passages in the other. If again the extent of all the 
 coincidences be represented by 100, their proportionate 
 distribution will be : 3 
 
 St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, : ‘ 3 53 
 St. Matthew, St. Luke, : : - ; oe UN 
 St. Matthew, St. Mark, . , ‘ . ; 20 
 St. Mark, St. Luke, . ; : ‘ ‘ , 6 
 
 Or, if we follow another principle of comparison, and 
 take the whole number of distinct sections in the synoptic 
 Evangelists as 150 approximately, the peculiarities and 
 concordances of the Gospels may be thus exhibited : 
 
 1 Stroud, Harmony of the Gospels, p. 2 Compare Norton’s Genuineness of 
 117. the Gospels, i. 373 ff. 
 
202 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 Peculiarities. Concordances. 
 St. Luke, . : te toe ) τὰ 
 St. Matthew, . ‘ 14 65 ts 15 δ 
 St. Mark, 2 
 o3 97 
 
 The relations thus obtained harmonize on the whole 
 with the former, but it appears that in regard to their 
 mutual connections the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. 
 Mark have ἃ much greater similarity of subject, and those 
 of St. Matthew and St. Luke a somewhat greater similarity 
 in the mere extent of coincidence, than conversely. Other 
 interesting combinations might be obtained from an ex- 
 amination of the range of greatest coincidence and most 
 distinctive peculiarities; but, looking only at the general 
 result, it may be said that of the contents of the synoptic 
 Gospels about two-fifths are common to the three, and that 
 the parts peculiar to one or other of them are little more 
 than one-third of the whole. In St. Mark there are not 
 more than four and twenty verses to which parallels do 
 not exist in St. Matthew or St.. Luke, though St. Mark 
 exhibits everywhere traits of vivid detail, which are 
 peculiar to his narrative. 
 
 It is not, however, enough to consider general coinci- 
 dences of substance and subject. Such a 
 view conveys a false and exaggerated idea 
 
 of the likeness between the Gospels. In spite of their 
 general resemblance they are severally distinct in style and 
 effect. The identity of range is combined with difference 
 of treatment, peculiarities of language with unity of scope. 
 The verbal coincidences between the different Gospels, 
 while in themselves sufficiently remarkable, are yet consid- 
 erably Jess than might appear from the popular statement 
 of the facts. The passages common to St. Matthew and 
 some other of the Synoptic Gospels form a little more than 
 four-sevenths of the whole, but the corresponding verbal 
 coincidences are less than one-sixth. In the other Gospels 
 the proportion of verbal coincidences is still less. Those in 
 
 6. In language. 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 203 
 St. Luke form about one-tenth, and in St. Mark about one- 
 sixth of the whole Gospels, while the general coincidences 
 form respectively about two-fifths and thirteen-fourteenths.’ 
 Thus the approximate relation between the general and 
 verbal coincidences of the Gospels may be represented 
 tabularly : 
 
 St. Matthew. St. Luke. 
 ἵν a | 1 5 ἢ 
 
 St. Mark. 
 99 εἶ 
 
 Nor is this all: in the distribution of the verbal co- 
 incidences a very simple law is observable. 
 They occur most commonly in the recital of 
 the words of our Lord or of others, and are 
 comparatively 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 record of the 
 words of others. 
 
 If, again, these verbal coincidences are further analyzed, 
 several interesting results are obtained. In the passages 
 common to all these Evangelists about one-sixth consists 
 of verbal coincidences, and of these one-fifth occurs in the 
 narrative, and four-fifths in the recitative parts. In the 
 same sections the additions common to St. Matthew and 
 St. Mark contain five-sixths of their verbal coincidences in 
 the recitative portions; and those common to St. Mark 
 and St. Luke,? and St. Matthew and St. Luke, with two 
 unimportant exceptions, present no verbal coincidence 
 except in such portions.? In the sections common to two 
 Evangelists a similar law prevails. The verbal coinci- 
 dences between St. Matthew and St. Luke are very 
 
 The distribution 
 of verbal coinci- 
 dences peculiar. 
 
 1 Forthese proportionsIamindebted New Testament, y. 317), that when St. 
 
 to Mr. Norton, /. 6. 
 
 2 The most remarkable similarities of 
 fact and differences of language occur 
 in Mark y. 3 ff. ||; Luke viii. 27 ff. 
 
 8 One important observation was 
 made by Marsh (Michaelis, /ntrod. to 
 
 Matthew and St. Luke verbally agree 
 in the common sections, St. Mark al- 
 ways agrees with them also. There is 
 not a single instance of a verbal agree- 
 ment in these sections between St. 
 
 Matthew and St. Luke only. 
 
204 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 numerous in the recital of our Lord’s words, but the 
 coincidences in the narrative cannot be rated at more than 
 one-hundredth part of the others. Only one instance of 
 verbal coincidence occurs in the numerous sections com- 
 mon only to St. Mark and St. Luke, and ‘in this the 
 coincidences in the narrative to those in the recitative part 
 are as five to one. In the sections common to St. Matthew 
 and St. Mark alone a different proportion obtains. In 
 these the verbal coincidences in the narrative part are 
 somewhat more than one-third of the whole number; but 
 it is remarkable that in one important section (Mark vi. 
 17—29; Matt. xiv. 3—12) the only trace of a verbal 
 coincidence occurs in the words ascribed to John the 
 Baptist. 
 
 But in order to give these proportions only their due 
 force, account must be taken of the proportion which the 
 narrative and recitative parts of the Gospels bear to one 
 another. Roughly, then, it may be said that the narrative 
 in St. Matthew forms about one-fourth of the Gospel, in 
 St. Mark about one-half, in St. Luke about one-third. If 
 these proportions are combined with the aggregate of 
 coincidences in the several Gospels, and the contents of 
 each Gospel represented by 100, the following table is 
 obtained : 
 
 (a) (B) (y) (5) 
 Narrative. Recitative. Coincidences. Coincidences 
 in (@). in (B). 
 St. Matthew, 4 25 9 2.08 14 56 
 St. Mark, . F Ba 50 pee) 1333 
 St. Luke, 3 , 34 66 «90 9.50 
 
 Or, in other words, verbal coincidences are more fre- 
 quent in the recitative than in the narrative portions of 
 St. Matthew, in the proportion (nearly) of 12:5, of St. 
 
 _ Mark, of 4: 1, and of St. Luke, of 9:1. 
 of theconmontances The general harmony and distinctness of 
 Maik dietthin” the results which have been obtained by these 
 various analyses shows that they must be 
 taken into account in considering the general problem of 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 205 
 
 the concordances of the Synoptists. There is a marked 
 difference between the composition of the recitative and 
 narrative parts of the Gospels. In the former there is a 
 prevailing unity, in the latter an individual style. The 
 transition from the one to the other is often clear and de- 
 cided, and the most remarkable coincidences are, in sev- 
 eral instances, prefaced by the most characteristic differ- 
 ences, It is evident then that the problem involves two 
 distinct conditions, and a satisfactory solution must account 
 not only for the general similarity which the Gospels ex- 
 hibit in their construction and contents, but also for the 
 peculiar distribution of their verbal coincidences. Any 
 theory which leaves one or other of: these points unex- 
 plained must be considered inadequate and untrue. 
 
 The difference in language between the narrative and’ 
 recitative parts of the Gospels points the 
 way to those characteristic peculiarities by i: 'nc een 
 which they are respectively marked, which 772m! with Meir 
 are, as has been already said, scarcely less ; 
 striking than their general likeness. The three records 
 are distinct, as well as similar, in plan and incident and 
 style. Each presents the form of a complete whole, whose 
 several parts are subordinated to the production of one 
 great effect. Each contains additions to the common mat- 
 ter, which are not distinguishable externally from tiie other 
 parts; and the Gospel of St. Mark, which contains the 
 fewest substantive additions, presents the greatest number 
 of fresh details in the account of common incidents. Each 
 is marked by peculiarities of language, which, notwith- 
 standing the limits within which they are confined, pene- 
 trate throughout its contents. In many cases, as in the 
 genealogies, and in the narratives of the Passion and the 
 Resurrection, these differences amount to serious difficul- 
 tics, from our ignorance of all the circumstances on which 
 the accounts depend; and even where it is not so, they 
 are distinct and numerous, and offer as clear a proof of 
 
 18 
 
206 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 the actual independence of the Gospels as the concord- 
 ances offer of their original connection.! 
 
 Such, in a brief summary, are the peculiarities which 
 the Synoptic Gospels present, and which the 
 true account of their origin must explain. 
 This explanation has been sought in the 
 application of two distinct principles. One class of solu- 
 tions rests upon the assumption that the later Evangelists 
 made use of the writings of their predecessors; another 
 supposes that the similarity is to be traced to the use of 
 common sources, either written or oral. To these distinct 
 methods of solution a third class may be added, which 
 consists of various combinations of modified forms of the 
 two others. 
 
 The first class of solutions contains every possible com- 
 bination of the Gospels. Each in turn has 
 been supposed to furnish the basis of the 
 others; each to occupy the mean position 5 
 each_to represent the final narrative. This variety of 
 vpinion is in itself an objection to the hypothesis, for it is 
 a case where it might seem reasonable to expect a clear 
 and unquestionable proof of dependence. But it is further 
 evident that the assumption of a mutual dependence, 
 while it may explain the general coincidences between the 
 Gospels, offers no explanation of the peculiar distribution 
 of the coincidences, or of the differences between the 
 several narratives. It appears to be inconsistent with the 
 results of a careful analysis of the language and of the 
 contents of the Gospels. Every attempt to show on this 
 
 (6) The solutions 
 proposed. 
 
 i. Mutual depen- 
 dence. 
 
 1 The peculiarities of plan, incident, 
 and language, which characterize the 
 different Gospels, will come under no- 
 tice subsequently; at present, it is 
 enough to state the results which will 
 be then established. The most minute 
 and valuable contribution to the criti- 
 cism of the verbal characteristics of the 
 evangelists is that of Gersdorf, Beitrage 
 zur Sprach-Characteristik der Schrift- 
 
 steller des Neuen Testaments, Leipzig, 
 1816, which at the same time offers the 
 most striking confirmation of the text 
 of the oldest family of MSS., but it 
 treats the subject grammatically rather 
 than linguistically. 
 
 2 Compare Marsh’s Dissertation, etc. 
 pp. 172 ff. The exceptions which he 
 notices have been removed. Cf. Reuss, 
 Die Gesch. d. Neuen Testamenés, ς 180. 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 207 
 
 hypothesis why a later Evangelist has omitted details which 
 are noted by an earlier one; why he adopted his language 
 up to a certain point, and then suddenly abandoned it; 
 why he retained in some sentences nothing more than a 
 remarkable word, and in others the fulness of an entire 
 answer, has always failed. Nor is this an inconsiderable 
 objection. If the coincidences of the Gospels are due to 
 mutual use, the divergences cannot but be designed. Such 
 a design, however, as would satisfy this hypothesis is not 
 discoverable in the Gospels. The true purpose which may 
 be traced in the writing of each Evangelist is naturally 
 explicable on very different principles from those which 
 are involved in the minute criticism and elaborate recon- 
 struction of former works. The superficial incongruities 
 and apparent contradictions which are found in the differ- 
 ent Gospels are inconsistent with the close connection 
 which the hypothesis requires; and the general notion is 
 as foreign to the spirit of the Apostolic age as it is to the 
 current of ecclesiastical tradition. In its simple form, the 
 “supplemental” or “dependent” theory is at once inade- 
 quate for the solution of the difficulties of the relation of 
 the synoptic Gospels and inconsistent with many of its 
 details; and, as a natural consequence of the deeper study 
 of the Gospels, it is now generally abandoned, except in 
 combination with the other principle of solution. 
 
 This second principle consists in the recognition of one 
 or more common sources from which our 
 present Gospels are supposed to have been 
 derived. But the principle admits of very 
 varied application. The common sources may have been 
 
 ii. Common sour- 
 ces, 
 
 1 This principle is stated by Epipha- 
 nius in general terms: Her. li.6. οὐχὶ 
 ἑκάστῳ ἐμέρισεν 6 eds ἵνα of τέσσα- 
 pes εὐαγγελισταὶ... τὰ μὲν συμφώ- 
 νω5 καὶ ἴσως κηρύξωσιν, ἵνα δειχϑῶσιν 
 ὅτι ἐξ αὐτῆς τῆς πηγῆς ὥρμηνται, τὰ 
 δὲ ἑκάστῳ παραληφϑέντα (Ἰ. παραλειφ- 
 
 ϑέντα), ἄλλος διηγήσεται (I. -ηται) 
 ὃς ἔλαβε παρὰ τοῦ πνεύματος μέρος 
 cod > / . 
 715 ἀναλογίας. But he does not fur- 
 ther explain what he understands by 
 ““the same source,” though his words 
 evidently suit better an oral than a 
 written source. 
 
208 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 written or oral, and thus two distinct theories arise, which 
 have in turn been subjected to various modifications. 
 
 The simplest form in which the hypothesis was first dis- 
 tinctly brought forward consisted in the rec- 
 ognition of certain original Greek documents, 
 which were supposed to have furnished the foundation of 
 the synoptic Gospels, and then to have passed out of use.’ 
 A closer examination of the synoptic Gospels showed the 
 inadequacy of this supposition to explain the phenomena 
 which they present; and the historical difficulties which it 
 involved were even greater than those of the “supplemen- 
 tal” hypothesis. The changing limits of coincidence and 
 variation, together with a general identity of plan, remained 
 still unexplained; and the loss of a Greek Protevangelium 
 necessarily appeared inconceivable. In ἃ short time anew 
 theory was proposed. An Aramaic document was substi- 
 tuted for the Greek one; and it was argued that the various 
 Greek translations of this original text might be expected 
 to combine resemblances and differences like those which 
 exist In the Gospels.2. This opinion Was not exposed to 
 some of the most obvious objections which were urged 
 against a Greek original, and it carried the explanation of 
 the partial coincidences of the Evangelists one step fur- 
 ther; but it was in detail scarcely more tenable. Though 
 the loss of an Aramaic text is in itself not unlikely, yet 
 the absence of all mention of the existence of such a doc- 
 ument is a serious objection to its reality ;* and the trans- 
 lation of a common original would not explain the peculiar 
 distribution of the verbal coincidences of the Gospels 
 which has been pointed out. In addition to this, the exist- 
 ence of any single written source would leave the phe- 
 
 a. Written. 
 
 1J. D. Michaelis (Jntrod. 4th Ed.). 2 Lessing (1778); Semler (1783); Nie- 
 
 The idea was first cursorily expressed meyer (1790), ete. Cf. Marsh, p. 186 ff. 
 
 by Le Clere (1716). Cf. Marsh, pp. 184 8 Some endeavored to obviate this 
 
 ff. Schleiermacher afterwards revived objection by identifying the Aramaic 
 
 the opinion in his Essay on St. Luke, Gospel with “ the Gospel according to 
 
 1817. the Hebrews,” οὐ the Hebrew St. Mat- 
 thew. Cf. De Wette, inl. § 84 a. 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 209 
 
 nomena of the differences of the Gospels still unaccounted 
 for. To explain these, fresh and more complex hypotheses 
 were devised. It was at last argued that the original 
 Aramaic Gospel, which formed the basis of the common 
 parts of the three Gospels, was used by the three Evangel- 
 ists after it had been variously increased by new additions. 
 It was further supposed that St. Mark and St. Luke used 
 a Greek translation of the original Aramaic Gospel free 
 from interpolation ; and that the Greek translator of the 
 Hebrew St. Matthew made use in the first instance of 
 St. Mark, where he had matter in common with St. Mat- 
 thew, and in other places, where St. Mark failed him, of 
 St. Luke.’ This hypothesis is certainly capable of being 
 so adapted as to explain all the coincidences and differ- 
 ences of the Gospels, as, in fact, it is little more than the 
 complement of an analysis of them; but the extreme arti- 
 ficiality by which it is characterized renders it wholly im- 
 probable as a true solution of the problem. Such a com- 
 bination of research and mechanical skill in composition 
 as it involves is wholly alien from the circumstances of the 
 apostolic age, and at variance with the prevailing power 
 of a wide-spread tradition. In dealing with this elaborate 
 scheme the instinct of criticism at once anticipated the 
 result of closer inquiry. In spite of the acuteness and in- 
 genuity by which it was supported, it found little favor, 
 and served to bring into discredit the belief in common 
 written sources of the Gospels, by showing that any com- 
 bination less subtle and varied was unable to satisfy all the 
 conditions of the case. 
 
 In the meantime a clearer light had been thrown upon 
 
 1 Kichhorn’s first hypothesis natu- ory of Gratz. Cf. Meyer, Comm. ii. d. 
 rally intervenes, but it is needless to WN. 7. i. 1. p. 22. 
 criticize this, or his later and still more 
 elaborate one. The first is examined 2 Marsh, Essay on the Origin of the 
 by Marsh (1. ο. infr.), and the latter first three Gospels, appended to his 
 described by De Wette, Fin/. § 84 p. translation of Michaelis’ /nfroduction, 
 The same remark will apply to the the- Ed. 2. Vol. iii. part 2, Lond. 1802. 
 
 18* 
 
210 THE- ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 the existence and character of the traditional Gospel,! ana 
 the recognition of its general influence was 
 combined with former hypotheses. It was 
 supposed that the Aramaic record of St. 
 Matthew and the memoirs which St. Mark framed from 
 the preaching of St. Peter were the written basis on which 
 the present Gospels were formed by the help of the current 
 tradition? But the same arguments which established the 
 independence of the written Gospels when their similarity 
 was deduced from their mutual dependence, equally estab- 
 lish it when they are referred to a current tradition as their 
 original source. And, on the other hand, while it is certain 
 from the testimony of St. Luke that various narratives of 
 the whole or of parts of the Apostolic tradition were cur- 
 rent, yet these unauthoritative or partial documents, as has 
 been already shown, are incapable of giving an explanation 
 of the complicated phenomena of the Gospels, to whatever 
 source they are themselves referred. At the same time 
 they may have exercised a considerable influence upon the 
 
 b. Written and 
 oral. 
 
 mass of Christians, preserving among them the general 
 form and substance of the tradition; and while they 
 satisfied the want of the Church at large, they may have 
 contributed to confine our knowledge of the Lord’s life 
 within the present narrow limits by discouraging the 
 search for further information. But the existence and use 
 of these isolated narratives, like the corresponding records 
 of the Jewish tradition, were signs, and not causes, of the 
 presence of an oral history; and, as long as the Apostles 
 survived, the pure tradition must have been still preserved 
 among them, independent of such helps. ΤῸ seek for such 
 fragments in our existing Gospels is simply to open the 
 way to mere conjecture. In default of all external evi- 
 dence, it is impossible to separate the present Gospels, on 
 
 1 Especially by Gieseler, Historisch- (Hinl. §§ 86 ff.), and with somewhat 
 Kritischer Versuch u. s. w. Leipzig, different details by Reuss (Gesch. d. NV. 
 1818. T. § 185 ff.). 
 
 2 This view is supported by Credner 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 211 
 
 internal grounds, into any distinct constituent parts. Each 
 is a separate organic whole, simple and uniform, even 
 where it has the closest resemblance to the parallel record. 
 
 A fresh attempt, however, has been made lately! to 
 dissect the Gospels into their original com- 
 ponents, which claims notice from its bold- 
 ness, and serves at the same time as an 
 example of the arbitrary results of subjective criticism. 
 An original Greek Gospel, containing the records of the 
 Baptism, the Temptation in its simplest form, and the 
 Passion, is taken as the substruction; and it is further 
 conjectured that this was used by St. Paul, and perhaps 
 composed by the Evangelist, St. Philip. This document 
 was followed by the Hebrew “collection of sayings” (λόγια) 
 of St. Matthew, which included the greater part of the 
 Lord’s discourses with introductory narratives. Then fol- 
 lowed the narrative of St. Mark, which, though an inde- 
 pendent work, was yet written by one who was acquainted 
 with the two furmer records. These three elements, to- 
 gether with new additions and passages from “a book of 
 higher history,” were wrought up into the present Gospel 
 of St. Matthew. Afterwards, three anonymous Evangelists 
 are supposed to have revised the narrative, which received 
 its last form at the hands of St. Luke. Such a hypothesis 
 can scarcely claim much attention as an explanation of the 
 actual origin of the Gospels, though it may throw some 
 light on the growth of the tradition of which they are the 
 records. It is as a whole inconsistent with the unity of 
 
 The Gospels are 
 organic wholes. 
 
 plan and the unity of language by which the Gospels are 
 marked. If they were really the mere mosaic which 
 would result from such a combination, it would be im- 
 possible that they should be so distinctly individualized 
 by peculiarities of form and construction which penetrate. 
 through every part of them. Above all, and this remark 
 applies to all the explanations which depend on the use of 
 common documents, such a hypothesis is inconsistent with 
 
 1 By Ewald, Jahrbwucher, 1848, 1849. 
 
212 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 the language of St. Luke’s preface, which points clearly to 
 an oral tradition as the source of his own Gospel, and by 
 implication of the corresponding parts in the other Gospels; 
 and this last alternative of a common oral source of the 
 synoptic Gospels is, perhaps, alone able to satisfy, simply 
 and completely, the different conditions of the problem 
 which the Gospels present. 
 
 It has been shown already that the hypothesis of an 
 oral Gospel is most consistent with the gen- 
 eral habit of the Jews! and the peculiar 
 position of the Apostles: that it is supported by the 
 earliest direct testimony, and in some degree implied in 
 the Apostolic writings. The result of the examination of 
 the internal character of the Gospels is not less favorable 
 to its adoption than the weight of external evidence. 
 The general form of the Gospels points to an 
 oral source. 
 
 c. Oral. 
 
 εἰ . J . e 5 
 In relation to the A minute biography or a series 
 
 Jorm and sub- 
 et of the Gos of annals, which are the simplest and most 
 
 natural forms of writing, are the least natu- 
 ral forms of tradition, and the farthest removed from the 
 Evangelic narratives, which consist of striking scenes and 
 discourses, such as must have lived long in the memories 
 of those who witnessed them. Nor are the Gospels fash- 
 ioned only on an oral type; they are fashioned also upon 
 that type which is preserved in the other Apostolic writings. 
 The oral Gospel, as far as it can be traced in the Acts and 
 the Epistles, centred in the crowning facts of the Passion 
 and the Resurrection, while the earlier ministry of the 
 Lord was regarded chiefly in relation to its final issue. In 
 a narrative composed on such a plan, it is evident that the 
 
 1 At a later period, Eusebius says of ready quoted. In later times it has 
 
 Hegesippus, that ἄλλα ὡς ἂν ἐξ ᾿Ιουδαϊ- 
 κῆς ἀγράφου παραδόσεως μνημονεύει, 
 characterizing at once the man and the 
 nation. (ΗΠ. £. iv. 22.) 
 
 2 The hypothesis was first proposed 
 in detail by Gieseler in the work al- 
 
 been supported by Guericke, Hinl. § 19, 
 Thiersch, Versuch zur Herstellung, wu. 
 s. w. 119 ff., and Norton, Genuineness 
 of the Gospels, i.note D. Dr. Davidson 
 (Introd. i. 404 ff.) allows considerable 
 weight to tradition, while he admits 
 the use of written documents. 
 
THE ORIGiN OF THE GOSPELS. 213 
 
 record of the last stage of Christ’s work would be con- 
 spicuous for detail and fulness, and that the events chosen 
 to represent the salient features of its earlier course would 
 be combined together without special reference to date or 
 even to sequence. Viewed in the light of its end, the 
 whole period was one in essence, undivided by years or 
 festivals, and the record would be marked not so much by 
 divisions of time as by groups of events.’ In all these 
 respects the synoptic Gospels exactly represent the proba- 
 ble form of the first oral Gospel. They seem to have been 
 shaped by the pressure of recurring needs, and not by the 
 deliberate forethought of their authors. In their common 
 features they seem to be that which the earliest history 
 declares they are, the summary of the Apostolic preaching, 
 the historic groundwork of the Church. 
 
 The transition from the earliest oral Gospel to the 
 “specific forms which it afterwards assumed is 
 capable of being easily realized. The great 
 steps in the process are still marked in the 
 Gospels themselves. The Gospel of St. Mark, conspicuous 
 for its vivid simplicity, seems to be the most direct repre- 
 sentation of the first evangelic tradition, the common 
 foundation on which the others were reared. In essence, 
 if not in composition, it is the oldest; and the absence of 
 the history of the Infancy brings its contents within the 
 limits laid down by St. Peter for the extent of the Apos- 
 tolic testimony. The great outline thus drawn admitted 
 of the introduction of large groups of facts or discourses 
 combined to illustrate or enforce some special lesson. In 
 this way the common tradition gained its special charac- 
 ters, but still remained a tradition, gaining fixity and 
 distinctness, till it was at last embodied in writing. For 
 the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke represent the 
 
 and to their subse- 
 quent modifications. 
 
 1 Such groups of events occur inthe the healing of the withered hand; of 
 constant connection of the healing of the fear of Herod, the feeding of the 
 the Paralytic and the call of Matthew; five thousand, and the confession of 
 of the plucking the ears of corn and Peter. 
 
Peg THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 two great types of recension to which it may be supposed 
 that the simple narrative was subjected. St. Luke presents 
 the Hellenic, and St. Matthew (Greek) the later Hebraic 
 form of the tradition, and in its present shape the latter 
 seems to give the last authentic record of the primitive 
 Gospel.’ Yet in both these a common tradition furnished 
 the centre and basis on which the after works were built 
 up. The original principles of combination regulated the 
 later additions, and a clear resemblance of shape remained 
 in the fuller narrative. 
 
 In this way the successive remoulding of the oral Gospel 
 according to the peculiar requirements of 
 different classes of hearers, furnishes a natu- 
 ral explanation of the general similarity in 
 form and substance between the several Gospels, combined 
 with peculiarities and differences in arrangement and 
 contents. The assumption of a common oral source is 
 equally capable of explaining the phenomena of the 
 language of the Gospels. The words of the Lord and the 
 questions proposed to Him would necessarily first be fixed, 
 while the narrative by which they were introduced re- 
 Single phrases would be impressed 
 with peculiar force; and the recurrence of strange words 
 in the same connection, in the different Evangelists, even 
 when the construction of the sentence is changed, seems 
 scarcely to admit of a simple explanation, except on the 
 admission of a traditional record.2. And while the free 
 
 In relation to the 
 language of the 
 Gospels. 
 
 mained more free. 
 
 1 The order thus given, St. Mark, St. μου ἐλϑεῖν, Matt. xvi. 24 || ||; γεύσων- 
 Luke, St. Matthew (Greek), represents Tat ϑανάτου, Matt. xvi. 28 || ||; δυσκό- 
 the probable order of precedence of Aws, Matt. xix. 23 || ||; Matt. iv. 5 = 
 
 the forms of the narrative which they 
 give. It may or may not coincide with 
 the order of writing; for it is of course 
 possible that an earlier form of the 
 apostolic tradition may have been com- 
 mitted to writing at a later period. 
 This is an important fact which seems 
 to have been wholly overlooked by 
 critics. 
 
 2 E.g.,dmapon, Matt. ix. 151}; ὀπίσω 
 
 Luke iv. 9, πτερύγιον ; Matt. vii. 5 = 
 Luke vi. 42, διαβλέψεις ; Matt. xi. 11 
 = Luke vii. 28, ἐν γεννητοῖς γυναικῶν ; 
 Matt. xxi. 44 = Luke xx. 18, συνῦλασ- 
 ϑήσεται, λικμήσει ; Mark vi. 41 = Luke 
 ix. 16, κατέκλασε; Mark xiv. 15 = 
 Luke xxii. 12, @vdyatov; Matt. xxiv. 
 22 — Mark xiii. 20, κολοβοῦν ; Matt. 
 xxvi. 55= Mark xiy. 48, συλλαβεῖν. 
 Compare also Matt. iii. 3 || ||. τὰς τρί: 
 
THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 215 
 
 development of common materials gave full scope for 
 variations in detail, as well as for interpolations of fresh 
 matter, it includes the preservation of language hallowed 
 by long use in its well-known shape. Nor is it an unim- 
 portant fact, that in this respect also St. Mark occupies 
 the mean position between the other Evangelists, as would 
 naturally be the case if he represents most closely the 
 original from which they started. 
 
 But while it is allowed that the prevalence of an oral 
 tradition, varied by the influence of circum- 
 stances, might furnish an adequate explana- ων ign’ re 
 tion of the concordances and differences of 
 the Gospels, the very plasticity of tradition is turned into 
 an argument against the hypothesis. It has been argued 
 that tradition is the parent of fable, and that to admit a 
 traditional source for the Gospels is to sacri- 
 fice their historic value. The objection Ea aie gt am: 
 appears to rest upon two misconceptions. 
 It disregards, so to speak, the traditional education of the 
 period, and arbitrarily extends the period during which the 
 tradition was paramount. It bas been shown already that 
 the Jews preserved with strict accuracy the interpretations 
 of the Law and the sayings of the great teachers; and even 
 if it had not been so, it would have been sufficient to point 
 to the difference between an age of hearing and an age of 
 reading to remove the suspicion raised against the tradition 
 of the first age from the uncertainty of tradition now. But, 
 more than this, the Evangelic tradition existed as such 
 alone only during the lifetime of those who were the 
 authors of it. No period was left for any mythic embel- 
 lishment. As long as the first witnesses survived, so long 
 the tradition was confined within the bounds of their 
 testimony ; when they passed away, it was already fixed in 
 writing. 
 
 βους αὐτοῦ ; Matt. iv. 10 = Luke iy. 8, coincidences are all noted by Bp. Marsh 
 προσκυνήσεις, where the Evangelists in his Comment. pp. 211 ff. 
 agree in differing from the LXX. These 
 
216 THE ORIGIN OF TIE GOSPELS. 
 
 Other objections may perhaps be urged against the 
 hypothesis of a definite oral Gospel,! chiefly from a misun- 
 derstanding of the spirit and work of the Apostolic times; 
 but, without affecting to say that it removes every difficulty 
 in the mutual relations of the written Gospels, it explains 
 so much with perfect simplicity and naturalness, that it 
 would be unreasonable not to acquiesce readily in the 
 existence of some doubts. Parts of the tradition may 
 have been committed to writing from time to time; many, 
 as St. Luke says, may have attempted to arrange the whole 
 in a continuous narrative, but still it remained essentially 
 a tradition in the first age, and as such found its authorita- 
 tive expression in our Gospels. Under what characteristic 
 forms and with what various shades of feeling the common 
 materials were moulded, remains a subject for future 
 inquiry. 
 
 1 Hug, Einl. 95 ff. Wiesse, Die Evan- gives a good outline and criticism of 
 
 gelienfrage, 141 ff. Comparealso Baur, the different schemes of the origin of 
 Die Kanon Evangelien, pp. 82 f., who the Gospels. 
 
ΓΙ ΑΡΤΡΠΝΗ a 
 
 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 Willst du ins Unendliche schreiten, 
 Geh nur im Endlichen nach allen Seiten. — GOETHE. 
 
 TuHE Bible, like the Church, gains fresh force and strength 
 in times of trial. As long as it is unassailed, 
 it is also in a great measure unstudied. It ΠΡ ics icant 
 is received as a whole with unquestioning ‘sy οὐ θὲ 
 reverence, but the characteristics of its com- 
 ponent elements are undistinguished. A vague sense of 
 the general unity of the books of which it is composed 
 takes the place of a clear view of their organic union. 
 Their independence and variety, their vital connection 
 with periods widely separated in time and thought, their 
 individual traits and original objects, are neglected in that 
 traditional view which sees in all one uniform and change- 
 less revelation, neither special in its destination nor 
 progressive in its course. 
 
 These remarks, which apply with more or less force to 
 all the books of Scripture, are especially 
 applicable to the Gospels. The assaults gee cn 
 which have been made in late times upon PoWwit ou ty mod: 
 their historic truth have brought out with 
 the most striking clearness their separate characteristics, 
 and it has even been argued that they were composed 
 designedly to further particular views. This exaggeration 
 of the truth, though wholly inconsistent with their perfect 
 simplicity, is yet a valuable protest against that theory 
 
 19 
 
218 e« THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 which represents them as casual collections of evangelic 
 fragments, and opens the way to a true appreciation of 
 their claims. Together they bear the same relation to the 
 whole apostolic tradition as they bear severally to one 
 another. The common record and the sepa- 
 rate records have a representative value. 
 The three synoptic Gospels are not mere 
 repetitions of one narrative, but distinct views of a complex 
 whole. They are the same, and yet they are tresh. The 
 great landmarks of the history are unchanged; the same 
 salient points reappear in all, but they are found in 
 -new combinations and with new details, as the features of 
 a landscape or the outlines of a figure when viewed from 
 various points. 
 
 Outwardly, the Gospels are the reflex of individual 
 impressions. We never find, even in the 
 prophets, that the personal character of the 
 divine messenger is neutralized; and much 
 more may we expect to find a distinct per- 
 sonality, so to speak, in the writing of the 
 Evangelists, whose inspiration was no ecstatic impulse, but 
 the consecration of a whole life, the conversion of an entire 
 being into a divine agency. For the Gospels, like the 
 Gospel, are most divine because they are most human. As 
 the clear expression of that which individual men seized 
 and treasured up as the image of their Saviour’s life, they 
 convey to other men the same living picture in the 
 freshness of its local coloring. And this coloring is of the 
 
 The general char- 
 acter of their dif- 
 JSerence. 
 
 1. This individual- 
 ized character is 
 implied in the idea 
 of an inspired his- 
 tory. 
 
 1 A curious trace of the recognition the authority and source (e.g., κατὰ 
 
 of the representative character of the 
 written Gospels is found in the inscrip- 
 tions of the Gospels in Codd. 69 (Cod. 
 Leicestr.), 178: ἐκ τοῦ κατὰ Ματϑαῖον 
 ἁγίου εὐαγγελίου κ. τ. A. A similar 
 inscription occurs in two of Matthaei’s 
 MSS. 
 
 It may be observed that the force of 
 the preposition in the phrase τὸ κατὰ 
 [ΚΜ] εὐαγγέλιον points primarily to 
 
 Θουκυδίδην), ‘the Gospel of Christ 
 according to [the arrangement and 
 teaching of] M.,” though it may, ina 
 secondary sense, include authorship. 
 
 From Mr. Scrivener’s admirable col- 
 lation, I find that the reading in Cod. ᾿ 
 Leicestr. is ἐκ Tov κατὰ [M] εὐαγγέ- 
 λιον. In St. John, εὐαγγέλιον ἐκ τοῦ 
 κατὰ Ἰωάννην. 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 219 
 
 essence of the picture. The only conception which we 
 can form of the inspiration of a historic record lies in the 
 divine fitness of the outward dress in which the facts are 
 at once embodied and veiled. No record of any fact can 
 be complete. The relations of the most trivial occurrence 
 transcend all power of observation; and the truthfulness 
 of special details is no pledge of the truthfulness of the 
 whole impression. The connection and relation and subor- 
 dination of the various parts, the description and suppres- 
 sion of particular incidents, the choice of language and 
 style, combine to make a history true or false in its higher 
 significance, and belong to that “poetic” power which is 
 the highest and rarest gift of the historian. This power 
 the Evangelists possessed in the fact that they were 
 penetrated with the truths of which they spoke. The 
 Spirit which was in them searched the deep things of God, 
 and led them to realize the mysteries of the faith, not 
 indeed in their infinite essence, but as finite conceptions, 
 Aud would not such writers above all others compose in an 
 unconscious order? would not the great facts of the Gospel 
 assume in grouping and detail the subjective impress of 
 their minds, as they selected and arranged them with all 
 truthfulness and divine enlightenment? Popular history 
 is universally the truest reflex of popular opinion; and 
 where distortion and embellishment are excluded by the 
 multiplicity of the record, the human interest of the 
 narrative is one of the most powerful means for the 
 propagation of the divine message. The Gospel em- 
 phatically speaks to men by men, and recognizes their 
 intellectual differences, which it converts in different ways 
 to God’s glory. In like manner the Evangelists wrote the 
 story of man’s salvation, each as the type of one mighty 
 section of mankind, as they personally felt the need of a 
 Saviour, and acknowledged His power. The truth on 
 which this statement rests lies at the very foundation of 
 the Christian faith, for as the Son of God was made man 
 for our redemption, so the Spirit of God spoke through 
 men for our instruction. 
 
aN) THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 The contrast between the Gospel of St. John and the 
 Synoptic Gospels, both in substance and in 
 Leda το individual character, is obvious at first sight ; 
 not only natural, but the characteristic differences of the syn- 
 but even necessary, : ἐ 
 rom optic Gospels, which are formed on the same 
 foundation and with common materials, are 
 less observed. Yet these differences are not less important 
 than the former, and belong equally to the complete 
 portraiture of the Saviour, which comprised the fulness of 
 an outward presence, as well as the depth of a secret life. 
 In this respect the records correspond to the subjects. 
 The first record is manifold; the second is one; the first is 
 based on the experience of a society, the second on the 
 intuition of a loved disciple. Even in date they arise out 
 of distinct periods. The spiritual Gospel belonged to a 
 late stage in the growth of the Church, when Christianity 
 was seen clearly to rise above the ruins of an “old world ;” 
 the “fleshly” Gospels were contemporaneous in essence 
 with the origin of the Church itself, and were shaped by 
 the providential course of its early. history. But this 
 natural and social growth, so to speak, invested the synop- 
 tic Gospels with a permanent and special power, which 
 must continue to work its effects as long as human 
 character remains the same. Each narrative, in which the 
 common facts were moulded, was in this way the sponta- 
 neous expression of a distinct form of thought, springing 
 out of peculiar circumstances, governed by special laws 
 of combination, destined at first to meet the wants of a 
 marked class, and adapted to satisfy in after times the 
 requirements of those who embody from time to time, in 
 changing shapes, the feeling by which it was first inspired. 
 In whatever view we regard the origin of the Gospels, this 
 multiformity appears to be as necessary as it was natural. 
 On the one side the separate aspects of the subject and the 
 various elements combined in the early Church, on the 
 other the recurrent phases of the human mind, which are 
 found in every age, seem to call for some distinct recogni 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 221 
 
 tion, and to suggest the belief that each Gospel may fulfil 
 a representative function in the exhibition of the Divine 
 Life. Nor can such a belief be dismissed at once as resting 
 on mere fanciful analogies, though it is as difficult to 
 express in their full force the arguments by which it is 
 supported as it is to resolve a general impression into the 
 various elements by which it is produced. The proper 
 proof of the fact that each Gospel has its distinctive worth 
 springs from personal investigation; but such at least was 
 the conviction in which the great students of former times 
 applied themselves to the examination of the Gospels; 
 and the fuller materials and surer criticism which are now 
 the inheritance of the scholar, promise proportionately 
 larger results to that labor which is most truthful, because 
 it is also most patient and most reverent. 
 
 _ Thé subject of the Gospel—the history of the new 
 creation —the manifestation of perfect hu- 
 manity — “the prophetic image of the glori- 
 fied life” !— transcends, according to the 
 analogy of the earlier Messianic types, the scope of one 
 narrator. The first creation was the creation of a harmo- 
 nious world, the second was the reunion of the elements 
 which sin had divided. Step by step in the progress of 
 Jewish history, successive features of the coming Saviour 
 were embodied in the Law, —-the kingdom, the prophets, 
 the seers; and the record of the fulfilment of that to which 
 these all pointed could scarcely have been less varied. 
 The twofold nature and complete manhood of Christ seem 
 to require a representation at least as distinct as the 
 prophetic teaching of the Law from the visions of Daniel. 
 In earlier times patriarchs and kings and prophets fore- 
 shadowed in their lives fragments of the work of Messiah ; 
 and so when He came, His work contained implicitly the 
 fulness of that which they prefigured. The archetypal life 
 
 1. The nature of 
 the subject. 
 
 ! Εὐαγγέλιον  --- τοῦ ἐξ ἀναστάσεως definition of Basil (De sp. S. xy. ap. 
 Biov προδιατύπωσις is the pregnant Suic. Thes.s. vy. €evayy-). 
 
 19* 
 
piles THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 which summed up the fragmentary teaching of the pss 
 embraced the various separate developments of the future. 
 On the one side we see the many forms of the humanity 
 of Christ; on the other the unchanging immanence of His 
 Godhead. The bearings of each act, and the teaching of 
 each discourse, are necessarily infinite, for He spoke and 
 acted as the representative of men.’ Variety in the record 
 is necessary to the completeness of the portraiture; the 
 manifoldness even of the outward life of the Lord exceeds 
 the limits of one historic type? The written memorial is 
 necessarily partial, and, to borrow the language of geome- 
 try, superficial; while the living fact is entire and solid. 
 To the simple believer the whole becomes intelligible by 
 the separate contemplation of the parts. 
 And if Christ be our Pattern, as well as our 
 Redeemer: if we must realize the fulness of His manhood 
 for the direction of our energies, as well as truthfulness 
 of His Godhead for the assurance of our faith : —it must be 
 by comparing the distinct outlines of His life, taken from 
 the different centres of human thought and feeling; for it 
 is with the spiritual. as with the natural vision, the truest 
 picture is presented to the mind, not by the absolute 
 coincidence of several images, but by the harmonious 
 combination of their diversities. 
 The varied fulness of Christian truth is seen from the 
 first in the constitution of the Church. The 
 αι conn, first circle of its human teachers represents, 
 aching. 2” in characteristic distinctness, the different as- 
 pects under which it may be viewed, develop- 
 ing in harmonious completeness the outlines which the 
 prophets had drawn before.’ It seems, indeed, at first 
 
 Eph. iv. 15. 
 
 1 = Μ “pp 4 . 5» / Ἐν » \ , > 
 1 Compare Neander’s Life of Christ, ovK ἤρκει εἷς εὐαγγελιστὴς πάντα εἰ- 
 
 6 ΤΙ (E. Tr.); Church History, ii. pp. 1 πεῖν; ---ἤρκει μὲν ἀλλὰ... [ἐκ τεσ- 
 —5 (E. Tr.); Olshausen’s Commentar. σάρων] μεγίστη τῆς ἀληϑείας ἀπόδειξις 
 Einl. § 2. γίγνεται. 
 
 2 The judgment of Chrysostominthis 3. Neander( Gesch.d. Pflanz. d.Christl. 
 respect appears to fall short of the full Kirche, 564—795) has followed out the 
 truth (Hom. i. in Matt. ap. Suicer 4. 6.) various forms of carly Christian teach- 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 223 
 sight, when we picture the apostolic age as a living scene, 
 as if all unity of doctrine were lost in the diversities of 
 the Apostles, as they appropriated and embodied each in a 
 finite form the infinite principles of their common Master. 
 With some the mysterious glories of the ancient creed 
 were mingled with the purer light of Chris- 
 tianity ; and they transferred the majesty of 
 the Mosaic law, which they had observed with reverent 
 or even ascetic devotion,’ to the new and spiritual faith. 
 St James? sets before us this form of Christianity. He 
 contemplates it from the side of Judaism, as the final end 
 and aim of the earlier training. Standing, 
 lieve, in a close natural relation with the Saviour, he puts 
 aside all remembrance of that connection, and even of the 
 personal presence of the Lord,’ that he may dwell with the 
 freedom and vigor of a prophet on the principles which He 
 had established. His view of Christianity, to use a popu- 
 lar word, is objective. In this aspect “faith” is an intellec- 
 tual belief in a fact, while “works” are the only outward 
 proof of spiritual vitality. The Gospel is contemplated as a 
 Law, though it is “a royal Law,” and “a Law of freedom.” 
 
 St. JAMES. 
 
 as we may be- 
 
 The essence of external religion (ϑρησκεία), 
 which the ancient ritual regarded, is laid open 
 in the practice of Christian virtue. Christian- 
 ity is thus like a flower, which is fuller indeed and more per- 
 fect than the bud from which it opens, while it still rests 
 upon the same support and”is confined within the same 
 circle. 
 
 James ti. 8: t. 25; 
 ti. 12. 
 
 ing with equal judgment and sagacity. 
 In times of inward discord no truth 
 can be more precious than ** the mani- 
 foldness of Christ in its oneness; and 
 nowhere is it more distinctly seen than 
 in the Scriptures. 
 
 1 Cf. Hegesippus ap. Euseb. ἢ]. L. ii. 
 23. 
 
 2 Cf. Gal. ii. 12; Actsxyv.138. Though 
 St. Peter was “the apostle of the cir- 
 cumcision,” he does not personify the 
 
 Jewish party, but rather, as the repre- 
 sentation of the Catholic Church, me- 
 diates between them and St. Paul. Cf. 
 Neander, Gesch. d. Pflanz. 507. 
 
 3 The name Jesus Christ only occurs 
 twice; i. 1; ii. 1; and the epistle con- 
 tains no allusion to the Passion and 
 Resurrection of Christ, though it pre- 
 sents some of the closest parallels to 
 the language of the Gospels. Cf. p. 
 186 7. 2. 
 
224 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 The antithesis to this view is found in that of one who 
 was called to believe in a glorified Lord, and 
 not to follow a suffering Teacher. St. Paul 
 was separated from the other apostles by the widest differ- 
 ences of habit and training, and the change which attended 
 his acceptance of the Gospel was as violent as it was sud- 
 den. With him Christianity was not so much a _ prepared 
 result as a new creation; and when the Church chose his 
 conversion for special commemoration, it can hardly have 
 been without the instinctive feeling that this was to him 
 what death was to the other saints, —the entrance into a 
 higher life. ‘Old things had passed away ;” 
 and only “faith”—the willing surrender of 
 the whole being to a supreme power—was 
 felt to furnish the entrance into the heavenly kingdom.’ 
 In such a connection “ works,” which might proceed from 
 the spirit of servile obedience, sunk into the rank of a 
 mere symptom, instead of being the central fact. Yet these 
 antithetical views of “faith” and “works” —the outer and 
 the inner—are not contradictory, but supplementary. 
 They can be no more set in opposition than the convexity 
 and concavity of a curve. The common terms must be 
 interpreted in accordance with the position of the writers 
 before they are compared. And at last the teaching of the 
 Apostles must be combined and not identified, for we lose 
 the fulness of the truth if we attempt to make out their 
 literal accordance. They wrought differently for the estab- 
 lishment of the Christian society, and they wrote differ- 
 ently to direct its future development. 
 
 But there was yet another side of Chris- 
 tianity which was exhibited in the apostolic 
 teaching It was not only a system of practical religion 
 
 St. PAuL. 
 
 2° Cor. τ. 17 
 (τὰ apxaia). 
 
 St. PETER. 
 
 1Cf. Acts xiv. 27, ϑύραν πίστεως, 1.0. ἀπάγγειλον ἡμῖν τίς ἡ δύρα τοῦ 
 which stands in close relation with the Ἰησοῦ τοῦ σταυρωϑέντος. 
 words of our Lord (John x. 7), and the 2The teaching of St. John, as has 
 remarkable phrase which occurs in the been remarked already, belonged to a 
 history of St. James: Heges. ap. Euseb. later period. See Chap. vy. 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 225 
 and a form of spiritual growth, but it was also a fresh ele- 
 ment in the social world. St. Peter exhibited this organ- 
 izing power of the new faith. According to the significant 
 promise which was expressed in his name,! he laid the 
 foundations of the Jewish and the heathen 
 churches, while the task of fixing or complet- 
 ing their future structure was left to others. 
 His activity was not directed by a review of the conditions 
 of man’s outward piety, or the requirements 
 of his spiritual instincts, but sprung from his 
 lively hope in a sovereign Lord. 
 
 Each of the great aspects of human life, outward and 
 inward, in the individual and in society, are thus repre- 
 sented in the forms of apostolic teaching. The external 
 service of God by works of charity, the internal sanctifi- 
 cation of man’s powers by faith, and the perpetual main- 
 tenance of the rights and blessings of a Church, combine 
 to complete the idea of Christianity as exhibited by the 
 first circle of the Apostles; and we are naturally inclined 
 to look for some analogous variety in the form of the 
 inspired records of His life from whence the apostolic 
 wisdom came. 
 
 If we extend our view yet further beyond the limits of 
 the Jewish people, these different tenden- 
 cies which existed among the Apostles will 
 be found exhibited on a much larger scale 
 and in more distinct clearness. The universality of the 
 Gospel was attested from the first by the fact that it was 
 
 Acts ii. 
 x. 44—48. 
 
 87—41; 
 
 1 Pet. ¢. 3. 
 
 3. The forms of 
 thought current in 
 the Apostolic age. 
 
 1 Cf. Pearson On the Creed, p. 336 n. 
 Yet it is of importance to bear in mind 
 the distinction between πέτρος and 
 πέτρα (Matt. xvi. 18), between the iso- 
 lated mass and the living rock. The 
 oue is the representation of, and sug- 
 gests the existence of, the other (ef. 
 Donaldson, New Cratylus, § 15). Cypr. 
 De unit. Eccles. 4; Hoe erant utique et 
 ceteri aposto!i quod fuit Petrus, pari 
 consortio prediti et honoris et potesta- 
 
 tis, sed exordium ab unitate proficisci- 
 tur [et primatus Petro datur, ut una 
 Christi Ecclesia et cathedra una mon- 
 stretur. Et pastores sunt omnes, et 
 grex unus ostenditur, qui ab apostolis 
 unanimi consensione pascatur], ut ec- 
 clesia Christi una monstretur. The in- 
 terpolation of this passage shows what 
 Cyprian would have written if he had 
 acknowledged any such claims as the 
 Bishop of Rome makes now. 
 
226 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 welcomed by representatives of every class; and without 
 leaving the records of the New Testament we read that it 
 found reception with the earnest Jew who 
 was waiting jor the consolation of Israel, 
 and served God in the Temple with prayers and fasi- 
 Inket os, ings day and night; with the retainer of 
 
 Roman. Cesar’s household (Cf. Tae. Ann. xv. 44: 
 
 SEG xiii. 32), removed alike from the influence of 
 tradition, feeling, or philosophy; with the outeast publi- 
 
 αὐ δε ο ἊΝ can, who stood afar off, as unworthy to ap- 
 oh a a proach his God; with the Areopagite, 
 
 nehe wosti BA, awakened to a sense of a future judgment; 
 Avexanvnins. and, finally, with the cultivated disciple of 
 few’ the Alexandrine Schools, fervent in spirit 
 and mighty in the Scriptures.'_ And these are not merely 
 individuals, but just types of the various 
 classes into which the Roman world was 
 divided in its religious aspect. The characteristic feelings 
 which they embodied express the cardinal tendencies of 
 men, and mark the great divisions of the apostolic work. 
 The Apostles had to unfold and declare the significance’ 
 of the Past. They had to point out the 
 substance of Christianity as shadowed forth 
 in the earlier dispensation. They had to make known the 
 mighty Lawgiver of a new covenant, the divine King of a 
 spiritual Israel, the Prophet of a universal Church. They 
 had to connect Christianity with Judaism. 
 
 Yet more: they had to vindicate the claims of the 
 Present. hey had to set forth the activity 
 and energy of the Lord’s life, apart from the 
 traditions of Moriah and Sinai; to exhibit the Gospel as a 
 simple revelation from heaven ; to follow the details of its 
 announcement as they were apprehended in their living 
 power by those who followed most closely on the steps of 
 Christ. They had to connect Christianity with History. 
 
 JEW. 
 
 As looking to the 
 
 Past, 
 
 Present, 
 
 1 The phrase ἀνὴρ λόγιος (Acts xviii. to earlier notices of Egypt. Herod 
 24)—a learned man—carries us back ii. 3. 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 227 
 
 From another point of view they had to proclaim the 
 hopetulness of the Puture. They had to 
 show that the Gospel fully satisfies the in- 
 most wants of man’s nature; that it not only removes 
 “the leprosy of castes and the blindness of pagan sensu- 
 
 Future, * 
 
 ality,” but gives help and strength to the hopeless sufferer, 
 who has no one to put him in the healing 
 waters, while it confers pardon on the return- 7,707" τοῖα 
 ing prodigal and happiness on the believing 
 robber. They had to connect Christianity with man. 
 
 Nor was this all: many there were whom their deep 
 searching of the human heart had taught to 
 feel the want of a present God. These longed ρα [lations 
 to see their ardent aspirations realized in the 
 life of the Saviour whom they had embraced, and to find 
 their hopes confirmed and directed by His own words. 
 For such a spiritual history was needed; and the Christian 
 teachers had to exhibit our Lord in His 
 eternal relations to the Father, alike mani- ne ον 8. ce 
 fested in the past, the present, and the 
 future, as the Creator, the Redeemer, and the Judge. 
 They had to connect Christianity with God. 
 
 This variety in the forms of the Apostolic preaching, 
 which was directed to meet the hope of the 
 Jew and the energy of the Roman, to satisfy ,,,00 7 7" 
 the cravings of our moral nature and the aed 9 Αἱ 
 wants of our speculative reason, could not 
 fail to infiuence the form in which the facts of the life of 
 Christ were apprehended and grouped. These facts were 
 the groundwork of all Christian teaching, and in virtue of 
 their infinite bearings admitted of being variously com- 
 bined. In this way the common evangelic narrative was 
 modified in the special labors of the different apostles, and 
 that which was designed to meet the requirements of one 
 period was fitted to meet the requirements of all. For it 
 is not enough to acknowledge the marvellous adaptation 
 of the Gospel to the apostolic age. It was equally destined 
 
228 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 for all times; and in this sense our present Gospels, the 
 records of the apostolic preaching, combine to form a holy 
 τετρακτύς, “a fountain of eternal truth,” in a deeper sense 
 than any mystic harmony of the ancient sage. 
 
 There are many whose thoughts still linger in the past, 
 Peel τᾶν and who delight to trace with a vain regret 
 thought are repro- “the glories which have passed from earth.” 
 ra To them St. Matthew speaks, as he did to 
 the Jew of old, while he teaches that all which was great 
 and good in former days was contained in the spirit, and 
 not in the outward shape, and exhibits the working of 
 Providence in the course of national history. There are 
 many, again, whose sympathies are entirely with the 
 present, who delight in the activity and warmth of daily 
 life, who are occupied with things around them, without 
 looking far beyond their own age and circle. To them 
 St. Mark addresses a brief and pregnant narrative of the 
 ministry of Christ, unconnected with any special recital of 
 His birth and preparation for His work, and unconnected, 
 at least in its present shape, with the mysterious history 
 of the Ascension. Many, also, there must be in every age 
 who dwell with peculiar affection on the Gospel of St. 
 Luke, who delight to recognize the universality of our 
 faith, whose thoughts anticipate the time when all shall 
 hear the message of Christianity, who know no difference 
 of class and acknowledge no claims of  self-righteous- 
 ness, but admit the bonds of a common humanity, and 
 feel the necessity of a common Saviour. And, lastly, are 
 there not those, even in an era of restless excitement, who 
 love to retire from the busy scenes of action to dwell 
 on the eternal mysteries which St. John opened for silent 
 contemplation: men of divine eloquence and mighty in the 
 understanding of the word, who water the 
 churches which others have planted? No 
 period of life, no variety of temperament, is left without 
 its Gospel. The zealous and the pensive, the active and 
 the thoughtful, may draw their peculiar support from the 
 
 1 Cor. iit. 6. 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 229 
 
 different Evangelists, and find in them their proper end 
 and road. 
 
 These reflections, however, anticipate in some degree 
 the answer to the question which arises more 
 directly from the previous remarks. The Ἐ’ Τῆς Evanget- 
 varieties of opinion and feeling which dis- oY Catia 
 tinguished the apostolic age and the body of 
 the Apostles themselves, which were indeed only special 
 forms of unchanging instincts of man’s nature, suggest 
 with more or less probability the antecedent likelihood of 
 a manifold — even of a fourfold — Gospel. How far then, 
 it may be asked, are our present Gospels fitted to represent 
 the influence of these typical differences? How far are 
 these differences implied in the character and position of 
 our Evangelists? How far have they been historically 
 recognized, either in the arbitrary conclusions of heretics 
 or in the catholic teaching of the Church ? 
 
 On applying these questions to the Gospels the first 
 feeling probably will be one of disappoint- 
 
 ment. It must appear strange that only one, 7 Zrangel 
 
 ists generally not 
 
 bears the name of an Apostle who is dis-  @muictom it is 
 tinctly individualized in the events of the 
 
 narrative itself. Nor is the obscurity of the early history 
 of the Gospels relieved by the clearness of later records. 
 With the exception of St. John, no one of the Evangelists 
 rises into any prominence in the memorials of the first age, 
 and tradition adds little to the few casual notices in which 
 their names are found. But if we look deeper, this circum- 
 stance is itself a testimony to the simple truthfulness of the 
 Keclesiastical belief, when the names of the Gospels are 
 contrasted with the more conspicuous titles of the Gospels 
 of St. James and Nicodemus, and the preaching of St. 
 Peter and St. Paul; and, on the other hand, all that can be 
 gathered from external sources as to the position occupied 
 by the authors of the books points to their representative 
 character. In the broadest features of time and position 
 there can be no doubt but that the Evangelists were widely 
 
 20 
 
230 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 separated from one another. Whatever may have been 
 the exact dates of the several books, they 
 were certainly composed at long intervals, 
 still longer if measured by the course of 
 events and not by the lapse of years. The first probably 
 was composed in its original form while the disciples went 
 daily to the Temple at the hours of prayer ; the last when 
 Jerusalem was trodden under foot of Gentiles and her 
 house left unto her desolate. The fundamen- 
 ~ tal difterence which is involved in this change 
 of national position was further increased by 
 the personal characteristics of the Evangelists. The pub- 
 lican of the Galilean lake, the companion of 
 St. Paul, and the “son” and interpreter of 
 St. Peter, are severally distinguished from one another no 
 less than from the prophet of the Apocalypse; and the 
 differences which thus lie upon the surface gain additional 
 clearness in proportion as they are traced in detail as far 
 as the meagre memorials of the first age enable us to 
 
 yet widely separated 
 in date and char- 
 acter. Acts wi. 1. 
 
 Luke σαὶ. 24. 
 Luke xiii. 35. 
 
 1 Pet. v. 13. 
 
 follow them. 
 
 Tradition is constant in affirming that St. Matthew 
 
 St. MATTHEW. 
 
 wrote his Gospel in Judea,— “while Peter 
 
 and Paul were founding the Church at 
 Rome,” as Irenzeus adds,!—for the use of Jewish converts, 
 and in their national language.” “Having formerly preached 
 
 1 Adv. Her. vi. 25 (ap. Euseb. H. £. 
 y. 8). 
 
 2 The original language of the Gos- 
 pel of St. Matthew and the claims of 
 the present Gospel to Apostolic au- 
 thority have been made the subject of 
 considerable discussion; yet an impar- 
 tial view of the evidence which bears 
 upon the question seems to point toa 
 clear result. All early writers agree in 
 affirming that St. Matthew wrote in 
 ‘‘ Hebrew”? (Aramaic), and from them 
 this belief gained universal currency 
 till the era of the Reformation (Eras- 
 mus). At the same time all equally 
 agree in accepting the Greek Gospel as 
 
 the Gospel of St. Matthew, without 
 noticing the existence of any doubt as 
 to its authenticity. The earliest wit- 
 ness is Papias. ‘ Matthew,’ he says, 
 on the authority, as it appears, of the 
 elder John, “composed the oracles (τὰ 
 λόγια) in the Hebrew dialect; but each 
 interpreted them as he could” (cf. p. 
 194 η 1). One point in this testimony 
 which seems to have been overlooked 
 is of importance. The tenses mark two 
 periods of the circulation of the He- 
 brew Gospel: one during which the 
 Hebrew alone was current, and an- 
 other in which the original authority 
 of Papias lived, when individual trans- 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 251 
 to the Hebrews, when he was about to go to others also, 
 he committed to writing in his native tongue his Gospel 
 (τὸ κατ᾽ αὐτὸν εὐαγγέλιον), and so filled up by his writing 
 that which was lacking in his presence.” This testimony, 
 it is true, refers to the Aramaic archetype, and not to our 
 present Greek Gospel, but that Aramaic record furnished 
 at once the substance and the characteristics of the Greek 
 revision. 
 form in plan and style that it cannot have suffered any 
 considerable change in the transition from one language 
 to the other; and there is no sufficient reason to depart 
 
 The existing narrative is so complete and uni- 
 
 jJation was no longer needed (ἡρμή- 
 vevoe not ἑρμηνεύει). In other words, 
 an authorized Greek representative of 
 the Hebrew St. Matthew must have ex- 
 isted in the generation after the Apos- 
 tles. The next witness is Irenaus, who 
 says that “‘ Matthew published a writ- 
 ten Gospel in the Hebrew dialect ” (ap. 
 Euseb. H EZ. y. 8}, while he everywhere 
 accepts the present text as an authentic 
 work of the Apostle. The evidence of 
 Origen is to the same effect (ap. Euseb. 
 H. E. vi. 25); and it is unnecessary to 
 extend the inquiry lower down, for all 
 external evidenée is absolutely uniform 
 
 in attesting the existence of a Hebrew - 
 
 archetype, and the authority of the 
 present Gospel as the work of St. Mat- 
 thew. But on the other side it is ar- 
 gued from internal evidence that the 
 present Gospel bears no marks of being 
 a translation, that several details in it 
 point to alate and not to an early date, 
 and that there is no evidence to show 
 that any one who mentious the Hebrew 
 original hadseen it. The last objection 
 is evidently unreasonable. Till it can 
 be shown that the writers quoted are 
 untrustworthy generally, it is purely 
 arbitrary to reject their statement be- 
 cause it is not sufficiently explicit. The 
 two other facts are perfectly consistent 
 with a belief in the Hebrew original 
 and in the Greek St. Matthew. It has 
 been shown that the oral Gospel prob- 
 ably existed from the first, both in 
 
 Aramaic and in Greek, and in this way 
 a preparation for a Greek representa- 
 tive of the Hebrew Gospel was at once 
 found. The parts of the Aramaic oral 
 Gospei which were adopted by St. 
 Matthew already existed in the Greek 
 counterpart. The change was not so 
 much a version as a substitution; and 
 frequent coincidence with common 
 parts of St. Mark and St. Luke, which 
 were derived from the same oral Greek 
 Gospel, was a necessary consequence. 
 Yet it may have happened that as long 
 as the Hebrew and Greek Churches 
 were in close conncction, perhaps till 
 the destruction of Jerusalem, no au- 
 thoritative Greek Gospel of St. Mat- 
 thew, ὁ. e., such a revision of the Greek 
 oral Gospel as would exactly answer 
 to St. Matthew’s revision of the Ara- 
 maic, wascommitted to writing. When, 
 however, the separation between the 
 two sections grew more marked, the 
 Greek Gospel was written, not, indeed, 
 as a translation, but as a representation 
 of the original, as a Greek oral coun- 
 terpart was already current; and at 
 the same time those few additional 
 notes were added which imply a later 
 date than the substance of the book 
 (Matt. xxviii. 15). By whose hand the 
 Greek Gospel was drawn up is wholly 
 unknown. The traditions which assign 
 it to St. John or St. James are without 
 any foundation in early writers. 
 
O32, THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 from the unhesitating habit of the earliest writers who 
 notice the subject in practically identifying the revised 
 version with the original text, though, indeed, it was not 
 so much an independent version as an adaptation of the 
 
 oral Greek Gospel to the “preaching” of St. Matthew. 
 
 The details of St. Matthew’ 
 ed are very scanty. 
 little doubt that the “Matthew” of the first 
 Gospel is the same as the “ Levi” of the second 
 
 St. MATTHEW. 
 Matt. ix. 9. 
 Mark ii. 14. 
 Luke v. £7. 
 
 s lite which have been preserv- 
 
 There can, however, be 
 
 and third, though the persons were distin- 
 
 guished even in very early times? 
 
 The change of name, 
 
 which seems to have coincided with the crisis in the life of 
 the Apostle, and probably bore some reference to it,” finds a 
 
 1 The view which has been given of 
 the relation of the present Gospel of 
 St. Matthew to the original Aramaic 
 text and the oral Greek Gospels, which 
 was the common basis of the two other 
 Synoptists, receives a remarkable con- 
 firmation from the peculiarities of the 
 Old Testament citations which it con- 
 tains. These may be divided into two 
 distinct classes: the first consisting of 
 such passages as are quoted by the 
 Evangelist himself, as fulfilled in the 
 events of the life of Christ; the second, 
 of such as are inwoven into the dis- 
 course of the different characters, and 
 form an integral part of the narrative 
 itself. Of these the first cass belongs 
 to the distinctive peculiarities of the 
 Gospel; the second to its general found- 
 ation. The one may be supposed to 
 have had no representative in the cur- 
 rent Greek tradition; the other to have 
 existed in a Greek form from the first. 
 Exactly in accordance with this suppo- 
 sition it is found that the first class is 
 made up of original rendeiings of the 
 Hebrew text, while the second is, in 
 the main, in close accordance with the 
 LXX., even where it deviates from the 
 Hebrew. This will appear from an ex- 
 amination of the passages in question: 
 
 (i) Peculiar quotations: i. 23 (καλέ- 
 govowy); ii. 15, 18; iv. 15, 16; viii. 17; 
 
 xii. 18-ff.; xiii. 85; xxi. 5; xxvii. 9, 10. 
 Ci. iG: 
 
 (ii) Cyclic quotations: iii. 3; iv. 4, 6, 
 7, 10 (προσκυνήσει5); xv. 4, 8, 9; xix. 
 5 (18 f.); xxi. 42; (xxii. 32); xxii. 89, 44 
 (ὑποκάτω), xxiii. 89; xxiv. 15; xxvii 
 46. 
 
 In all these cases (ii) parallels occur 
 in the other Synoptic Gospels agreeing 
 (as St. Matthew) with the LXX. Some- 
 times, however, quotations in St. Mat- 
 thew coincide with synoptic parallels, 
 where both differ from the LXX.: xxi. 
 18; xxvi. 81. In other cases a coinci- 
 dence with the LXX. is found where 
 the same quotation is not preserved in 
 the context of the Synoptists, though 
 there is evidence that it formed part of 
 the oral narrative: xiii. 14; xi. 10 (ex 
 Mark i. 2). Cf. ix. 18 = xii. 7 (καὶ od); 
 xxi. 16. Matt. xxii. 24, 37, are quota- 
 tions of the substance rather than of 
 the words, and differs equally from 
 the LXX. and parallels. 
 
 Bleek (quoted by De Wette, Lindl. ὃ 
 976) called attention to this difference in 
 the text of St. Matthew’s quotations, 
 but did not rightly apprehend its bear- 
 ing. 
 
 2 Heracleon ap. Clem. Al. Strom. 
 iv. 9. 
 
 8 Matthew, i. e. 77772 = Θεόδωρος. 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 233 
 complete parallel in the corresponding changes in the cases 
 of St. Peter and St. Paul, even if it appear strange that, no 
 passing notice of the identification occurs in the catalogues 
 of the Apostles. According to the present text of St. 
 Mark, Levi (Matthew) is called “the son of Alpheus ;”! 
 and in the absence of any further mark of distinction, it 
 has been usual to identify this Alpheus with the father of 
 James; in which case St. Matthew would have been 
 nearly related by birth to our Lord. His occupation was 
 that of a collector of dues (6 τελώνης) on the sea of Galilee ; 
 and this alone shows that he cannot have observed the 
 traditions of the Pharisaic school.? At a later time he is 
 described as a rigorous ascetic, living “on seeds and fruits 
 and herbs, without flesh,” * as if} by a natural reaction, he 
 had exchanged the license of his former life for the sternest 
 self-denial; but this austerity, which was rather that of an 
 Essene than of a Pharisee, appears as part of his practice, 
 and not of his teaching; nor can it have been without 
 influence on the progress of the Christian faith that the 
 Hebrew Evangelist was one who, if it was only on the 
 narrow scene of a Galilean town, had yet ventured beyond 
 the strict limits of national hope. St. Paul, who was 
 trained in “the straitest sect of his religion,’ when once 
 convinced, hastened to the opposite pole of truth; St. 
 Matthew, passing to the new faith by a less violent 
 transition, naturally retained a firmer hold on his earlier 
 belief. His apostolic commission tended to strengthen this 
 feeling; for, according to a very early tradition, he re- 
 mained at Jerusalem with the other Apostles for twelve 
 
 8 Clem. Al. Ped. ii. 1. This trait 
 again brings him into connection with 
 James ‘the Just.”? Euseb. ἢ. Z. 22. 
 The same tradition throws some light 
 
 1 Mark ii. 14. In this place D and 
 some other MSS. read Ἰάκωβον τὸν 
 Tov ᾿Αλφαίου. The position which St. 
 Matthew occupies in the catalogues of 
 
 the Apostles throws no light upon this upon a singular passage quoted from 
 
 relationship (Matt. x. 3; Mark iii. 18; 
 Luke vi. 15; Acts i. 18). In these his 
 connection with Thomas appears to be 
 more clearly marked. 
 
 2 Cf. Lange, Leben Jesu, i. 238. 
 
 the ‘‘ Gospel of the Ebionites:” ἦλδον 
 καταλῦσαι τὰς Svolas, καὶ ἐὰν μὴ 
 παύσησϑε τοῦ ϑύειν οὐ παύσεται ἀφ᾽ 
 ὑμῶν ἡ ὀργή (Epiph. Her. xxx. 16). 
 
 20" 
 
934 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 years after the death of the Lord, busy among his own 
 countrymen.’ When this work was ended, he preached 
 the Gospel “to others;” but no trustworthy authority 
 mentions the scene of his missionary labors, which in later 
 times were popularly placed in “ Ethiopia.”? The mention 
 of his martyrdom is found only in legendary narratives, 
 and is opposed to the best evidence, which represents him 
 to have died a natural death.’ 
 
 These notices, however slight, yet contribute in some 
 measure to mark the fitness of St. Matthew for fulfilling a 
 special part in the representation of the Gospel. The time 
 and place at which he wrote further impress upon his work 
 its distinctive character. The Hebrew Christians, during 
 a succession of fifteen bishops, outwardly observed the 
 customs of their fathers, and for them he was inspired to 
 exhibit in the teaching of Christ the antitypes of the 
 Mosaic Law, to portray the earthly form and theocratic 
 glory of the new dispensation, and to unfold the glorious 
 consummation of “the kingdom of heaven,” faintly typitied 
 in the history of his countrymen. 
 
 The history of St. Mark is somewhat more distinctly 
 known than that of St. Matthew; but a 
 double name, as in the case of St. Matthew, 
 has given rise to the conjecture that two persons —John 
 Mark,* the companion of St. Paul, and Mark the Evangelist 
 
 St. Mark. 
 
 1 Predic. Petri ap. Clem. Al. Strom. 
 vi. 5, § 58, μετὰ δώδεκα ἔτη ἐξέλϑετε 
 εἰς τὸν κόσμον μή Tis εἴπῃ, οὐκ ἢκού- 
 σαμεν. This belief was already “a 
 tradition”? in the time of Apollonius 
 (c. 180 a. D.): ἔτι δὲ ὡς ἐκ παραδόσεως 
 τὸν σωτῆρα φησὶ προστεταχέναι τοῖς 
 αὑτοῦ ἀποστόλοις ἐπὶ δώδεκα ἔτεσι 
 μὴ χωρισϑῆναι τῆς Ἱερουσαλήμ (Eu- 
 seb. HW. FE. vy. 18). Cf. Routh, Pell. Sacr. 
 i. p. 484. 
 
 2 Eusebius says simply (1. c.) when he 
 went ἐφ ἑτέρους. The later tradition 
 is given by Socrates, H. £.i.19. Cf 
 Credner, Hinl. § 35. 
 
 3 Heracleon, ap. Clem. Al. Strom. iy. 
 9, § 73. The apocryphal ‘Acts and 
 
 Martyrdom of Matthew,” which relatcs, 
 in extravagant terms, his miracles and 
 death in the country of the Anthropo- 
 phagi, contain no fragment of any gen- 
 uine tradition, unless it be in the men- 
 tion of his Hebrew prayer (Act. Matt. 
 § 22, p. 182, ed. Tischdf.). The names 
 Mardatos and Matdias are constantly 
 confounded: e. g. [Hippol.] Philos. vii. 
 20, where Miller has wrongly intro- 
 duced Matdaioy into the text. 
 
 4 Acts xii. 12, Ἰωάννης 6 ἐπικαλού- 
 μενος Μάρκος; xii. 25, 1. τὸν ἐπικλη- 
 ϑέντα M ; xv, 87, 1. τὸν καλούμενον 
 M. Sometimes simply “John: Acts 
 xiii, 5, 13. 
 
.) > od 
 
 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. “γ.) 
 and “son of St. Peter” —are to be distinguished.’ The 
 
 general voice of tradition is against this distinction ;? and 
 the close connection in which St. Peter stood to the 
 former Mark, offers a sufficient explanation of the origin of 
 the title-applied to him. When the Apostle was delivered 
 from prison, after the martyrdom of St. James, he went to 
 the house of “ Mary the mother of Jobn, surnamed Mark, 
 
 where many were gathered 
 
 birth St. Mark was a Jew, and a cousin 
 (ἀνεψιός) of Barnabas, himself a Levite of 
 
 together.” By 
 Col. tv. 10, 11. 
 
 Acts iv. 36. 
 
 Cyprus, from which some concluded that St. 
 Mark was of priestly descent.’ He appears at an early time 
 in connection with Paul and Barnabas,.before 
 their special commission to the Gentiles ; and 
 when this was given, he accompanied them 
 on their first missionary journey as their “minister” 
 
 (ὑπηρετής). 
 
 Acts ati. 95. 
 
 Acts xiii. δ. 
 
 But after visiting Cyprus, with which he may 
 be supposed to have been previously ac- 
 
 Acts xiit. 13; xv. 38. 
 
 quainted, he left them, and returned to Jeru- 
 salem, being unprepared, as it would seem, for the more 
 
 arduous work of the mission.’ 
 
 It is perhaps a mark of the 
 
 same hasty temperament that he was ready, not long 
 
 1 The Jate list of the *‘ seventy disci- 
 ples”? contained in the works of Hip- 
 polytus distinguishes three, — the Evan- 
 gelist, the cousin of Barnabas, and 
 John Mark (pp. 953 f. ed. Migne). 
 
 The title vids (1 Pet. v. 18) certainly 
 seems to mark a natural, and not a 
 spiritual, relationship. 
 
 2 It must, however, be admitted that 
 the tradition first appears at a later 
 time. Itis not, as far as I know, men- 
 tioned by Eusebius, or any earlier 
 writer; but occurs first in the preface 
 to the Commentary on St. Mark, which 
 is generally attributed to Victor of An- 
 tioch (Cramer, Cat. i. p. 263): Μάρκος 
 
 . ἐκαλεῖτο δὲ ὁ Iwavyns; andina 
 note of Ammonius (cf. Cramer, Cat. ii. 
 p. 4) on Acts xii. 15, though with some 
 
 doubt (τάχα οὗτός ἐστι Μάρκος 6 εὐ- 
 αγγελιστήῆς. .. πιϑανὸς δὲ ὁ λόγος 
 Kk. Τ,, Δ). Yet cf. Hieron. Comm. 
 Philem. 24. 
 
 in 
 
 8 Prol.in Marc.(Vulg.). 
 in Marc. ap. Credner, § 48. 
 
 Bede, Prol. 
 
 4 Chrysost. ap. Cram. Cat. in loc. 
 ἅτε ἐπὶ μακροτέραν λοιπὸν στελλομέ- 
 νων ὅδον. It has been conjectured that 
 the singular epithet ‘‘ stump-fingered ”’ 
 (κολοβοδάκτυλοϑΞ), applied to St. Mark 
 in the Philosophumena (vii. 80), may 
 refer to this as marking him as a δ de- 
 
 ‘serter’ (pollice truncus, poltroon), the 
 
 physical idea being substituted iu the 
 course of time for the moral one (Tre- 
 gelles, Journ. of Philology, 1855, pp. 
 224 ff.). 
 
236 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 afterwards, to take part in the second journey of St. Paul; 
 
 and when St. aul refused to allow this, in 
 
 consequence of his former desertion, he went 
 again with Barnabas to Cyprus. The next notice of St. 
 Mark, which occurs after an interval of some years, speaks 
 of steady work and endurance. St. Paul 
 mentions him among those few “fellow- 
 workers who had proved a consolation to 
 him ;” and in a contemporary epistle he again 
 At a still later period St. Paul 
 tome; and it was at 
 
 Acts xv. 36—389. 
 
 Col. iv. 10, 11. 
 
 Philem. 24. 
 
 names him with St. Luke. 
 desires his help at 
 tome, according to the popular belief, that 
 he specially attached himself to St. Peter; but this belief 
 may have arisen from the opinion, which was common in 
 early times, that St. Peter spoke of Rome 
 under the mystical name of Babylon, though 
 it is more natural to suppose that St. Mark accompanied 
 him on some unrecorded Eastern journey. However this 
 may be, his close connection with St. Peter as his “inter- 
 preter” (ἑρμηνευτής, ὁ. ¢., secretary) -is well established 57 
 and it was in this relation that he composed his Gospel 
 from the oral teaching of his master.2 After the death of 
 St. Peter he is said to have visited Alexandria, where he 
 gained, according to the strange notion of later times, the 
 admiration of Philo, and died by martyrdom, according to- 
 the common legend? 
 
 It is, perhaps, a mere fancy, but it seems natural to find 
 in St. Mark a characteristic fitness for his special work. 
 
 2 Tim. iv. 11. 
 
 1 Pet. v. 13. 
 
 1 Papias (Johannes Presb.) ap. Euseb. 
 H. E. iii. 89 (Μάρκος ἑρμηνευτὴς Πέ- 
 Tpov "yevouevos), Ireneus, adv. Her. 
 [1.1 (M. 6 μαϑητὴς καὶ ἑρμηνευτὴς 
 Πέτρου) Tertullian, adv. Mare. iv. 5 
 iMareus quod edidit Evangelium Petri 
 affirmatur, cujus interpres Marcus). 
 The sense of €punvevths is fixed by 
 Jerome (ad Hedib. ii.): Divinorum sen- 
 suum majestatem digno non poterat 
 {B. Paulus) Greci eloquii explicare ser- 
 
 mone; habebat ergo Titum interpre- 
 tem, sicut et B. Petrus Marcum, cujus 
 evangelium, Petro narrante et illo scri- 
 bente, compositum est. 
 
 2 Cf. pp. 191 ff. 
 
 3 Hieron. de Vir. I/lustr. 8 (mortuus 
 est octavo Neronisanno). The detailed 
 traditions of his martyrdom are worth: 
 less: [Hippol.] 1. 6. Chronic. Alex. ap. 
 Credner, p. 100. 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 237 
 One whose course appears to have been marked through- 
 out by a restless and impetuous energy,’ was not unsuited 
 for tracing the life of the Lord in the fresh vigor of its 
 outward power. The friend alike of St. Paul and St. 
 Peter, working in turn in each of the great centres of the 
 Jewish world, at first timidly sensitive of danger, and after- 
 wards a comforter of an imprisoned Apostle; himself “ of 
 the circumcision,” and yet writing to Gentiles,’ St. Mark 
 _ stands out as one whom the facts of the Gospel had moved 
 by their simple force to look over and beyond varieties of 
 doctrine in the vivid realization of the actions of “the Son 
 of God.” For him, teaching was subordinate to action; 
 and every trait which St. Peter preserved in his narrative 
 would find a faithful recorder in one equally 
 suited to apprehend and to treasure it. The 
 want of personal knowledge was made up 
 by the liveliness of attention with which the Evangelist 
 recorded, “without omission or misrepresentation,” the 
 words of his master. The requirements of a Roman audi- 
 
 His connection 
 with St. PETER. 
 
 ence (πρὸς τὰς χρείας ἐποιεῖτο τὰς διδασκαλίας | 6 Heérpos*]) fixed 
 the outlines of the narrative; and the keen memory of a 
 devoted Apostle filled up the picture with details which 
 might well remain in all their freshness on such a mind as 
 his. For St. Peter himself was of a kindred nature with 
 
 1 This same trait appears even in an 
 early incident of his life, if Townson 
 (followed by Olshausen, Greswell, and 
 Lange) is right in identifying him with 
 “the young man” who followed Jesus 
 at His betrayal with hasty zeal {(περι- 
 βεβλημένος σινδόνα) and afterwards 
 fled with equal precipitancy (Mark xiy. 
 51, 52). 
 
 Can there also be any basis for the 
 singular tradition which represents him 
 as one of the seventy disciples who was 
 offended by the hard saying of the Lord 
 at Capernaum (John vi. 54), and left 
 Him till brought back by St. Peter? 
 (Epiph. Her. li. 6). The same story 
 
 occurs in [Hippolytus] (1. 6.), but there 
 St. Luke also is joined with him. 
 
 2 This follows from the explanation 
 of Jewish customs (ii. 18; vii. 1—4; 
 xiv. 14; xv. 6), opinions (xii. 18), local- 
 ities (xiii. 8), no less than from the 
 general character of the Gospel. 
 
 The idea that the Gospel was orig- 
 inally written in Latin (subscriptions 
 to Syr. and Syr. Philox., and some 
 MSS. cf. Tischdf. p. 325), was a mere 
 conjecture from the belief that it was 
 “preached” at Rome. The story of 
 the autograph at Venice and Prague is 
 well known, Credner, § 55. 
 
 8 Papias, ap. Euseb. H. Z£. iii. 39. 
 
 4 Papias, /. ¢. 
 
238 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 St. Mark. He, too, could recall scenes of inconsiderate — 
 zeal and failing faith; while in his later years he still dwelt 
 on each look and word! of his heavenly Lord, whom he 
 had early loved with more than a disciple’s affection.? 
 Thus it was that the master and the disciple were bound 
 together by the closest sympathy. The spirit of the 
 Apostle animates the work of the Evangelist: the spirit 
 of his completed life. For St. Peter’s work was already 
 done when he had vanquished at Rome, as before in Pales- 
 tine, the great Antichrist of the first age ;° and it remained 
 only that he should be united in martyrdom with St. Paul, 
 
 with whom he had been before united by the 
 
 1 Pet. v. 12. 
 Phil, 24. 
 2 Tim. iv. 11. 
 
 speak to all ages. 
 
 ministry of common disciples, through whom 
 the Apostles of the Jew and Gentile yet 
 
 The doubts which attach to the details of the history of 
 St. Matthew and St. Mark recur also in the 
 
 St. LuKE. 
 
 history of St. Luke.* 
 
 It has been argued 
 
 from the language of St. Paul that he was of Gentile de- 
 scent ;° and in later times he was commonly supposed to 
 
 1 A remarkable instance of this oc- 
 curs in his Epistle (1 Pet. v. 2), ποιμά- 
 vate τὸ ἐν ὑμῖν ποίμνιον τοῦ Θεοῦ, 
 which points significantly to John xxi. 
 16. The metaphor does not occur in 
 the Pauline Epistles [οἷ Eph. iv. 11; 
 Heb. xiii. 20; Acts xx. 28, 29]. In v. 8, 
 τῶν κλήρων should not be translated 
 (as E. V ) God’s heritage; but the sense 
 is rather: ‘‘ Be not lords over (Psa. ix. 
 31, LXX.) those assigned to your au- 
 thority, but ensamples to the flock com- 
 mitted to your love.” There is one 
 flock, but many /ots; and thus again 
 we are recalled to John x. 16, in which 
 we are told of one flock (ποίμνη) and 
 many folds (αὐλή). ᾿ 
 
 2 John xxi. 15 (ἀγαπῶ, φιλῶ). 
 3 Simon Magus (Euseb. H. E. ii. 14). 
 The true historical relation of this 
 
 ‘“* sorcerer’ to the apostclic work is too 
 often neglected, though, indeed, it has 
 
 not yet been sufficiently explained. 
 Cf. History of N. T. Canon, pp. 300 ff. 
 
 4 The original form of the name Lu- 
 canus (Aovkas) is preserved in some 
 Latin MSS. (a, ὃ, 7.2 for. Cf. Tischdf. 
 pp. 826, 546). Similar contractions oc- 
 cur in Epaphras and Silas. 
 
 The identification of Silas with St. 
 Luke, which was proposed by Evanson 
 (Dissonance, ete , pp. 106 ff.), and has 
 been lately revived, seems to be incon- 
 sistent with the narrative of Acts xvi, 
 and to rest on no sound arguments. 
 The same may be said of the identifica- 
 tion of Luke with Lucius, cf. p. 239, n. 
 5. Such conjectures spring from sim- 
 ple impatience to acquiesce in the frag- 
 mentariness of Scripture. 
 
 5 Col. iv. 14,11. The phrase of ὄντες 
 ἐκ περιτομῆς might be used fitly in 
 contrast with a Gentile proselyte; and 
 it was the general opinion in Jerome’s 
 time that St. Luke was a proselyte: 
 
ἐγ} 51 
 
 al” PR, 
 
 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 have been a native of Antioch,! the centre of the Gentile 
 Church, and the birth-place of the Christian name, But 
 this belief, though natural in itself; rests on no conclusive 
 evidence; and the further details which are given as to 
 the mode and place of the Evangelist’s conversion,’ and 
 as to his original social? and religious position, can be 
 regarded only as conjectures. So much, however, at least, 
 can be set down with certainty, that he was the friend and 
 companion of St. Paul; and, from a comparison of Col. iv. 
 14, with Philem. 24, 2 Tim. iv. 10,11, there remains no 
 reasonable doubt that the Evangelist is the same as “the 
 beloved physician” who continued alone in faithful attend- 
 ance on the Apostle in his last imprisonment.!. Nor can 
 the recent theories as to the composition of the Acts be 
 considered to have set aside the natural interpretation of 
 the change of person which marks St. Luke as the com- 
 panion of St. Paul’s second journey. From 
 
 the narrative it appears that he joined St. 
 
 Paul at Troas on the eve of his entrance into Macedonia ;° 
 
 Acts xvi. 8—10. 
 
 Licet plerique tradant Lucam Evan- 
 gelistam, ut proselytum, Hebreas lit- 
 teras ignorasse (Hieron, Quest. in Gen. 
 c. xlyi.). The name seems to have been 
 referred to the Evangelist by all the 
 early commentators: [Ambr.]; Pela- 
 gius; Chrysost. ad loc., Adamant. 
 Dial. c. Mare. § 1, Ὁ. 260, ed. Lomm. 
 Cf. Can. Murat. init. Lucas iste medi- 
 
 1 This is stated first by Eusebius (7. 
 E. iii. 4, τὸ μὲν γένος ὧν τῶν am ᾽Αν- 
 τιοχεία5), and copied from him by Je- 
 rome (De virr. Illustr. 7, Antiochensis. 
 Comm. in Matt. Pref. natione Syrus 
 Antiochensis), and later writers (The- 
 ophylact, Euthymius). It is instructive 
 to notice how the tradition grows more 
 definite in time. Chrysostom, on the 
 other hand, while dwe:!ing constantly 
 on the associations of Antioch, takes 
 no notice of such a connection (Lard- 
 ner, Credibility, v. 133). 
 
 2In addition to the tradition of St. 
 
 Luke’s gentile descent and conversion 
 by St. Paul (cf. p. 238 nn.), was another 
 that he was one of theseventy disciples 
 (cf. p. 237, n.1). This first appears in 
 the Dialogue against the Marcionites, 
 appended to Origen’s works, and seems 
 from the context to have been suggested 
 by doctrinal reasons (Dial. 6. Mare. ὃ 
 1, p. 259, ed. Lomm.). It is repeated 
 by Epiphanius ( Her. 11. 11, p. 433), with 
 the addition that he preached in Gaul; 
 but Eusebius was unacquainted with 
 the legend. Euseb. H. ΚΕ. i. 12. The 
 identification of St. Luke with one of 
 the two disciples at Emmaus is equally 
 unsupported. 
 
 3 The legend that he was an artist, 
 which became very popular in later 
 times, is not found before Nicephorus 
 Callistus (+1450). Lardner, Credibility, 
 vi. 112. 
 
 4 Cf. p. 288, n. 5. 
 
 5 1 the reading of D and Augustine 
 (De Serm. Dom. ii. 17 (57), in Acts xi 
 
240 
 
 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 and when Paul and Silas left Philippi, after their impris- 
 onment, he seems to have remained there, 
 
 Acts xvi. 16—40. 
 
 and not to have 
 
 accompanied St. Paul on his 
 
 later journeys till after the uproar at Ephesus, when St. 
 Paul met him again at Philippi before his 
 
 Acts xx. 6, 
 
 return to Palestine. 
 
 From this time St. Luke 
 
 zemained in constant attendance (συνεργός) on the Apostle, 
 during his journey to Jerusalem, and on his 
 
 Philem. 4. 
 Acts xxi. 1, 17. 
 Acts xxvii. 1. 
 
 2 Tim. iv. 11. 
 
 voyage to Rome, where he appears to have 
 remained till the latest period of St. Paul’s 
 
 life. Of the later history of St. Luke nothing 
 is known;' but he is generally supposed to have written his 
 Gospel and the Acts in Greece; though even on this point 
 
 tradition is not uniform. 
 
 The distinctive characteristic of St. Luke’s life lies in 
 ‘the one certain fact of his long companion- 
 
 His connection 
 with St. PAUL. 
 
 ship with St. Paul. 
 
 The earliest writers insist 
 
 on this with uniform and emphatic distinet- 
 ness.2> It became a custom to speak of St. Luke as “the 
 
 28 (συνεστραμμένων δὲ HuG@v), rests 
 on any early tradition, St. Luke would 
 appear to have been in connection with 
 St. Paul at a much earlier period. This 
 reading may perhaps hang together 
 with the identification of St. Luke with 
 Lucius of Cyrene (Acts xiii. 1), a no- 
 tion which was current in Origen’s 
 time, unless it is assumed that the Lu- 
 cius in Rom. xvi. 21, was a different 
 person (Orig. ad Rom xvi. § 89). This 
 identification has found favor among 
 many modern scholars (lardner, Cred- 
 ibility, vi. 124 f.), though it has very 
 little in its favor. On this supposition 
 St. Luke would be a kinsman (συγγε- 
 vis) of St. Paul; a fact which could 
 hardly have failed to’ be preserved by 
 tradition. Ireneus (adv. Heer. iii. 14, 
 1) points out accurately the companion- 
 ship of St. Luke with St. Paul, as 
 shown in the Acts. 
 
 1 In the absence of all early evidence 
 to the contrary, it may be supposed 
 
 that he died a natural death. Cf. Lard- 
 ner, Credibility, vi. 129. 
 
 2In Achaie Beeotieque (alii Bithy- 
 nieque) partibus: Hieron. Comm. in 
 Matt. Pref. Compare the various sub- 
 scriptions given by Tischendorf, p. 546. 
 Some of the copies of the Peshito 
 (Jones, p. 159) place its writing at 
 Alexandria, an opinion which recurs 
 in Ebed Jesu’s Catalogue, Assem. Bibl. 
 Orient. ili. p. 3, probably from a con- 
 fusion with St. Mark. 
 
 The history of the Acts is generally 
 taken to fix the date of the writing of 
 the Gospel], which is supposed to fall 
 shortly before the close of the period 
 of ‘‘two years”? (Acts xxviii. 30), 1. 6. 
 before a. ἢ. 68. All that can be cer- 
 tainly affirmed is, that it preceded the 
 Acts (Acts i. 1); for it seems rash te 
 conclude that the Acts necessarily con- 
 tains the history up to the point of its 
 publication. 
 
 3 Cf. pp. 195 f. 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 241 
 
 brother whose praise in the Gospel is throughout all 
 churches ;”! and, as soon as the time of Ori- 
 gen, it was supposed that St. Paul spoke in 
 his Epistles of the written Gospel of St. Luke, when he re- 
 ferred to that oral teaching which probably itself furnished 
 its substance and character.2. Such companionship at once 
 bespeaks natural sympathy, and increases it; and whether 
 the allusion to “the beloved physician” points 
 to any special service which St. Luke had ren- 
 dered to the Apostle, or not, the epithet specially arrests 
 attention in the connection in which it occurs. Nor can it 
 be without influence upon our estimate of St. Luke’s char- 
 acter that he wrote the Acts. The:very design of such a 
 history, if considered in relation to the Apostolic age, was 
 remarkable; and the form in which it is cast, portraying 
 the development of the Church, “from Jerusalem to 
 Rome,” through each stage of its growth, bears witness to 
 a mind in which the future of Christianity was more dis- 
 tinctly imaged even than in the visions of St. John. The 
 book seems in its prophetic fulness to be a true “ philoso- 
 phy of the history” of the Church. It closes only when 
 the Gospel had encountered and conquered a typical cycle 
 of dangers. The universal promulgation and gradual ac- 
 ceptance of the Christian faith is there already prefigured 
 in its critical moments; and the Evangelist who dwelt on 
 such a picture must have been naturally fitted to trace the 
 life of Christ in its wide comprehensiveness, as the Gospel 
 of the nations, full of mercy and hope, assured to a whole 
 world by the love of a suffering Saviour.’ 
 
 St. John survived to see the outward establishment of 
 
 2 Cor. viii. 18, 
 
 Col, iv. 14. 
 
 1E. g. Hieron. Comm. in Matt. 1. α. 
 Lucus Medicus, natione Syrus Anti- 
 ochensis, cujus Jaus in Evangelio, qui 
 et ipse discipulus apostoli Pauli... . 
 
 2 Euseb. H. £. vi. 25. Cf. p. 195. On 
 the possible use of some written records 
 of the life of Christ by St. Paul, com- 
 pare Neander, Gesch. εἰ. Pflanz. 131 f. 
 
 3 The special inscription to Theophi- 
 
 lus (Luke i. 8) may seem to be an objec- 
 tion to this universality of character 
 assigned to St. Luke’s Gospel, but 
 really it seems to support it. Theophi- 
 lus is evidently represented as a man 
 of rank (KpaTioros) and intelligence: 
 and the true scholar (if I may so speak) 
 is essentially the man of the widest 
 sympathies. 
 
 21 
 
242 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 that Catholic Church which St. Luke foreshadowed. In 
 him two eras met, so that the mysterious 
 promise of his Master was fulfilled,’ as he 
 “tarried till the Lord came” in power and judgment, to 
 sweep away the ensigns of the old theocracy, and appear 
 in the Christian body. “The world” might well seem to be 
 “passing away,” as the shifting scene in some great tragedy, 
 or rather as the veil which is cast over the Eternal,” to one 
 who had passed through the crisis of the first age. He 
 who had anxiously followed Jesus into the 
 judgment-hall, lived to know that His name 
 was preached from India to Spain; he who had frequented 
 the Temple, even after he was filled with the might of 
 Christ, survived its ruin, and died in a city consecrated to 
 the service of a heathen deity ; he who would 
 have called fire on the heads of the Samari- 
 tans, at last speaks in our ears only the words 
 of love in a Christian assembly.’ Indeed the 
 differences between St. John and the Synoptists— may we 
 not say between the Son of Thunder and the Christian 
 
 bishop ?—are so striking that they must be 
 og ees = veserved for further examination; yet who 
 
 does not feel that the Apostle “who leaned 
 upon the breast of Jesus,”* was naturally most qualified 
 
 St. JOHN. 
 
 John xviii. 15. 
 
 Acts xix. 35. 
 
 Luke ix. 54, 
 
 1 John xxi. 22, Ἐὰν αὐτὸν ϑέλω μέ- 
 νειν ἕως ἔρχομαι, τί πρὸς σέ: The 
 stress lies on the idea of an extended 
 interval (ἕως ἔρχομαι Πὰν 118; 
 Vulg. dum venio], donec venio, as Cod. 
 Fuld. in vy. 23, and Aug. once, 111. 2466 
 D.), and not an indefinite and single 
 limit (ews ἂν ἔλϑω. Vulg. quoad usque 
 veniat, 1 Cor. iv. 5). The famous 
 legend of St. John’s grave at Ephesus 
 is well told by Augustine, T’ract.in Joh. 
 CXXiv. 2. 
 
 21 John ii. 17, 6 κόσμος παράγεται 
 compared with 1 Cor. vii. 31, παράγει 
 τὸ σχῆμα τοῦ κόσμου. The double 
 change appears to be significant. For 
 the image of παράγεσϑαι compare 1 
 
 John ii. 8, ard perhaps App. Mithr. 
 117, etc. SpiauBov παράγειν. 
 
 3 Jerome (Comm. in Ep. ad Galat. 
 Lib. iii. vi. 10, p. 528) gives the noble 
 story, which cannot be too often quoted. 
 It is remarkable that it is not found in 
 any earlier writer. 
 
 4 Augustine has along and eloquent 
 passage on the active and contempla- 
 tive lives which he finds symbolized in 
 St. Peter and St. John, Tract. in Joh. 
 exxiv. 5, which he briefly sums up: 
 Perfecta me sequatur actio, informata 
 mez passionis exemplo; inchoata vero 
 contemplatio manent donee yenio, 
 complenda cum venero 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 243 
 to record the deepest mysteries of His doctrines? that he 
 to whom the mother of the Lord was entrusted was most 
 fitted to guard “ the inheritance of the universe?” that he 
 who had outlived the first earthly forms in which Christi- 
 anity was clothed must have been able to see most clearly, 
 and set forth most fully, its unchanging essence, “as he 
 soared like an eagle above the clouds of human infirmity, 
 and contemplated with keen and steady gaze the light of 
 eternal truth.”? 
 
 Without exaggerating the importance of such details of 
 the lives of the Evangelists as have been just 
 collected, it may be said that, as far as they 
 throw any light upon their character and po- 
 sition, they show them to have represented different types 
 of Christian doctrine, and to have written under circum- 
 stances favorable for the expression of their distinctive 
 views. The places at which the Gospels were probably 
 written — Judea, Italy, Greece, Asin, — and the persons for 
 whom they were immediately designed, harmonize with 
 what may be regarded as the individual bias of the writers. 
 So far as any likelihood exists that each Gospel will bear 
 the marks of personal feeling and outward influence, this 
 individuality is seen to be no accidental admixture of a 
 human element, by which the divine truth was marred, 
 
 The general result 
 of the position of 
 the Evangelists. 
 
 1 August. De Cons. Ev. i. 6, 9. Cf. 
 Tract.in Joh. xxxvi.5. Restat aquila: 
 ipse est Joannes, sublimium predicator, 
 et lucis internx atque xterne fixis ocu- 
 lis contemplator. By the side of these 
 passages must be placed another, not 
 less true nor less needful to be remem- 
 bered: Audeo dicere fratres mei, forsi- 
 tun nec ipse Joannes dixit ut est,-sed 
 ut ipse potuit; quia de Deo homo dixit: 
 et quidem inspiratus a Deo, sed tamen 
 homo. Quia inspiratus, dixit aliquid; 
 si non-inspiratus esset, dixisset nihil: 
 quia vero homo inspiratus, non totum 
 quod est dixit; sed quod potuit homo, 
 dixit (Tract. in Joh. i. 1). The whole 
 context, in spite of the strangeness of 
 the imagery, is well worthy of study, 
 
 Early tradition is uniform in repre- 
 senting the Gospel as written at Ephe- 
 sus: Iren. adv. Her. ii. 1; Hieron. De 
 virr. Illustr. 9. Cf. Can. Murat. sub. 
 init. Compare also the subscriptions 
 of the Oriental versions, Tischdf. N. 7. 
 p. 696. The notion that it was written 
 at Patmos seems to rest on the unsup- 
 ported statement of Pseudo-Hippol. 
 De XII Apost. p. 952. 
 
 The date at which it was written 
 cannot be determined with accuracy. 
 The earliest writers, rightly, I believe, 
 place it last in time: [Can. Murat.}; 
 Iren. 1. c.; Clem. Alex. ap. Euseb. Ηα 
 E. vi. 14; (Orig. ap. Euseb. H. £. vi 
 25) Jerome, |. ο. 
 
244 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 but, on the contrary, a trace of the working of God’s Spirit, 
 by which such persons were moved to write as would best 
 represent to the Church the manifold forms of the life of 
 Christ. We may detect in every picture of the Saviour 
 the unchanging Deity; but at the same time the Absolute, 
 so to speak, is clothed in each case with special attributes, 
 which are determined by the sacred writers as they dwelt 
 on the several sides of Christ’s human nature. Each gives 
 a true image, but not a complete one; and if in old times 
 Messiah was variously represented as the second Lawgiver, 
 the mighty King, and the great High Priest, we need feel 
 no wonder that three Evangelists portrayed His presence 
 in the fashion of a man, while the fourth revealed that 
 crowning doctrine of the Christian faith, which, if it existed 
 in the depths of the ancient Scriptures, had been unob- 
 served by the ον The same Spirit worked in all, — the 
 Spirit of wisdom and knowledge, of practical and spiritual 
 judgment, — and enabled them to find the perfected ten- 
 dency and plenary development of their own hopes and en- 
 ergies in the teaching and life of Him in whom all the pow- 
 ers of man were united with the fulness of the Godhead. 
 The reality of the distinctive characteristics of the Gos- 
 | pels will appear yet more clearly, if we con- 
 δος ead sider their relation to the different sects 
 uttested. by which exhibited the exclusive development 
 ofeparatewes, Of the several elements which the Catholic 
 Church recognized and united in her teach- 
 ing.? It has been seen that variety of feeling existed even 
 in the apostolic body ;° and when this was reproduced in 
 the Christian society, it soon gave rise to those “ divisions ” 
 which lie at the bottom of the great parties into which 
 Christendom has been since severed. One said, “I am of 
 Paul ;” and another, “I am of Apollos;” and another, “I 
 
 1 Just. Mart. Dial c. Tryph.§ 49, p. lowing paragraph in connection with 
 
 268 A. various sects, will be given in App. D 
 ~ The chief fragments of the ‘‘Apoc- 3 Pp. 228 ff. 
 
 ryphal” Gospels noticed in the fol 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 945 
 
 am of Cephas;” and another, “I am of Christ;”! when 
 
 the first tidings of the Gospel had hardly died away on 
 their ears? The inward tendency had already become a 
 conscious feeling, and was rapidly hastening towards a 
 Men were no longer content to find 
 that for which they were seeking in the life of Christ; 
 they wished to isolate it. The logical exhibition of 
 Christianity, its mystic depths, its outward and _ ritual 
 aspect, its historic power, were thus separated and substi- 
 tuted for its complex essence; just as the Sadducee, the 
 Essene, the Pharisee, and the Herodian, had already found 
 in the Law a basis for their discordant and exclusive 
 systems.’ Yet it would be an anachronism to suppose that 
 the Corinthian Church exhibited at once definite and cir- 
 cumscribed parties. The spirit of party was not immedi- 
 ately embodied; but in the course of time the fundamental 
 differences which it represented were boldly and clearly 
 systematized. Some were not content to cherish the ancient 
 Law with natural reverence and pride (Nazarenes), but 
 
 dogmatic decision. 
 
 insisted on the universal reception of the 
 
 Mosaic ritual (/’dionites). 
 
 EBIONITES. 
 
 ἐντὸς ak es wages 
 
 Jesus nothing but the human Messiah, coér- 
 dinate with Adam and Moses,‘ and in the Christian faith 
 
 1It is worthy of notice that the 
 phrase is ἐγὼ δὲ Χριστοῦ, and not ἐγὼ 
 δὲ Ἰησοῦ. The personal name, which 
 is universal in the Gospels and common 
 in the Acts and the Apocalypse, is nat- 
 urally rare in the Epistles, unless the 
 human nature of the Lord requires to 
 be brought into clear prominence. Cf. 
 2 Cor. iv. 5, 10,11; Hebr. ii. 9; xii. 24, 
 and often. 
 
 21Cor.i.12. Cf. Neander, Gesch. d. 
 Pyhlanz, 834 ff. After all that has been 
 written on “the Christ-party,” I still 
 believe that the words of St. Paul refer 
 to those who preferred to cling to 
 Christ alone, without accepting the 
 Christian doctrine mediately through 
 the Apostles. The present century has 
 
 seen such a sect formed in America. 
 It is impossible not to feel that the 
 many essays on these ‘‘ parties” are 
 conceived wholly in the spirit of our 
 own time, without any realization of 
 the life of the first age. 
 
 8 Cf. Neander, Church History, i. 
 52 ff. 
 
 4 Cf. Clem. Hom. iii. 21 (Adam); ii 
 38 (Moses). Cf. Hom. iii. 20; xviii. 18; 
 and iii. 20, [ὁ ὑπὸ χειρῶν ϑεοῦ Kvopo- 
 ρηϑεὶς &vSpwros| ὃς am ἀρχῆς αἰῶνος 
 ἅμα τοῖς ὀνόμασιν μορφὰς ἀλλάσσων 
 τὸν αἰῶνα τρέχει, μέχρις ὅτε ἰδίων 
 χρόνων τυχών, διὰ τοὺς καμάτους 
 Seod ἐλέει χρισϑείς, εἰσαεὶ ἕξει τὴν 
 ἀνάπαυσιν. Cf Uhlhorn, Die Hom τ 
 Recogn. d. Clem. Rom, 164 ff. 
 
 21* 
 
246 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 nothing but the perfection of Judaism,' whether they 
 regarded this from the practical (4dionites proper) or 
 mystical point of sight (Gnostic Lbionites.”) St. Paul was 
 emphatically “their enemy,’ and the universal Gospel 
 which he preached “a lawless and idle doctrine.”? By the 
 common consent of early witnesses, the various sects which 
 arose from the embodiment of these principles agreed in 
 taking the “Gospel” of St. Matthew as the basis of their 
 evangelic record, This appears to have existed among 
 the Nazarenes in a comparatively pure Hebrew (Aramaic) 
 form; and even in Jerome’s time the copy which they used 
 preserved a very clear resemblance to the Canonical Gospel, 
 differing chiefly by interpolations, which were rendered at 
 once easy and natural from the isolation of the Jewish 
 Christians.*. The two other parties included under the 
 common title of A’bionites seem to have preserved peculiar 
 Greek recensions of the same fundamental narrative. The 
 Ebionites in a stricter sense had nothing in their Gospel 
 to answer to the first two chapters of our present text, and 
 Epiphanius describes the book generally as “incomplete, 
 adulterated and mutilated.”*® The fragments which he 
 quotes point also the further conclusion that it was de- 
 
 1 Either as identifying Christianity 
 with the real essence of Judaism (the 
 Homilies); or as recognizing in Juda- 
 ism the preparation for Christianity 
 (the Recognitions). Cf. Uhlhorn, a. a. 
 O. 258 ff. 
 
 2 On the twofold distinction in rela- 
 tion to the Person of Christ, see Euseb. 
 HA. E. iii. 27 (vi. 17); Epiph. Her. xxx. 
 16. 
 
 8 Ep. Petri {Hom. Clem) ec. 2. τινὲς 
 yap τῶν ἀπὸ édvav τὸ δι’ ἐμοῦ νόμι- 
 μον ἀπεδοκίμασαν κήρυγμα, τοῦ ἐχ- 
 ϑροῦ ἀνϑιρώπου ἄνομόν τινα καὶ 
 φλυαρώδη προσηκάμενοι διδασκαλίαν, 
 καὶ ταῦτα ἔτι μου περιόντος ἐπεχει- 
 ρησάν τινες ποικίλαις τισὶν ἑρμηνείαις 
 τοὺς ἐμοὺς λόγους μετασχηματίζειν εἰς 
 τὴν τοῦ νόμου κατάλυσιν. ὡς καὶ ἐμοῦ 
 αὐτοῦ οὕτω μὲν φρονοῦντος μὴ ἐκ 
 
 παῤῥησίας δὲ κηρύσσοντος" ὅπερ ἀπείη. 
 The whole passage is most instructive, 
 and the allusion to Gal. ii. 12, ὑπέστελ- 
 Aev καὶ ἀφώριζεν ἑαυτὸν κ. τ. A. une 
 mistakable. Compare also Hom. xvii. 
 19, where St. Paul is assailed under the 
 person of Simon Magus, with a verbal 
 reference to Gal. ii. 11 (εἰ κατεγνωσμέ- 
 νον με A€yels) 
 
 4 Cf. Hieron. ad. Matt. xii. 138; De 
 virr. Illustr. 3. 
 
 5 Epiph. Her. xxx. 18, οὐχ ὅλον 
 πληρέστατον ἀλλὰ νενοϑευμένον καὶ 
 ἠκρωτηριασμένον. On the other hand, 
 the Nazarenes ἔχουσι τὸ κατὰ Ματ- 
 ϑαῖον εὐαγγέλιον πληρέστατον' EBpa- 
 ἐστί (Her. xxix.9), though Epiphanius, 
 in the next sentence, says that he does 
 not know whether ‘‘ they removed the 
 genealogy.” Yet cf. Her. xxx. 14. 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 247 
 rived from the Aramaic, and not from the Greek text. But 
 it was otherwise with the Gnostic-Ebionite Gospel. The 
 
 text of this’ presents the most constant coincidence with 
 the language of the Greek St. Matthew, and it can hardly 
 have been derived from any other source. The variations 
 which it presents are generally such as admit of explanation 
 from polemical motives, and where it is not so, allowance 
 must still be made for freedom of quotation, and for the 
 influence of tradition.? One fact, however, is clearly prom- 
 inent throughout these intelligible varieties of recension, 
 that the Gospel of St. Matthew was felt to be distinctively 
 the Jewish Gospel. The life of the second Lawgiver was 
 the common foundation which Judaizing Christians of 
 every shade of opinion used for the construction of their 
 distinctive records, 
 
 The special history of the Gospel of St. Mark is more 
 obscure. Even at the beginning of the fifth 
 century no distinct commentary upon it was 
 yet written® The “preaching of Peter,” 
 which enjoyed a wide popularity in the second and third 
 centuries, has nothing but the name in common with St. 
 Mark;* and the accounts of “the Gospel according to 
 Peter” are so meagre that no satisfactory conclusion can 
 be drawn as to its origin and characteristics.” Yet there is 
 one clear and decided statement that some sectarians paid a 
 peculiar regard to the Gospel of St. Mark. After noticing 
 the exclusive reverence which the Ebionites and Marcion- 
 ites paid respectively to the Gospels of St. Matthew and 
 
 DocEeTs. 
 (St. Mark.) 
 
 1 As gathered specially from the 5. It is, however, worthy of notice 
 Clementines. that St. Peter is represented as urging 
 2 Passages occur which show clearly his hearers in the same terms to avoid 
 that the writer of the Homilies was the Pagan and Jewish forms of worship 
 acquainted with the contents of the Cf Credner, Beifrage, i. 851 ff. Schwe- 
 three other canonical Gospels. Cf. gler, Nachapost. Zeit. ii. 80 1. 
 Canon of N. T. p. 317. 
 
 8 Cramer, Cat. in Mare. Hypoth. p. 
 263 ( Victor Ant.). 
 
 4 See particularly the passages quoted 
 by Clement of Alexandria, Strom. vi. 
 
 5 Cf. Serapion, ap. Euseb. H. 2. vi. 
 12. Routh, Rell. Sacr. i. pp. 452 ἢ. 
 Serapion connects the Gospel with 
 Marcianus (? Marcus) and the Docete. 
 
248 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 St. Luke, Irenzeus adds that those who separated Jesus 
 from Christ, —the human instrument from the divine 
 Spirit, — maintaining that Jesus suffered, while Christ con- 
 tinued always impassible, preferred the Gospel according 
 to St. Mark.’ It might seem that they dwelt more partic- 
 ularly on the works of Messiah’s power, and not on the 
 mystery of His incarnation; and found their Gospel in 
 the recital of miracles and mighty acts, which bore the 
 impress of God, rather than in words and discourses which 
 might seem like those of man. 
 
 It has been seen that the Gospel of St. Matthew under- 
 went several recensions. The developments 
 of the Judaizing tendency were various, for 
 it was the spirit of a people and not of an 
 individual. But the doctrine of St. Paul, which bore 
 the clear image of one mind, was made the basis of a 
 single marked system. In the first half of the second 
 century, Marcion, the son of a Bishop of Sinope,? gave his 
 name and talents to a sect which proposed to hold the 
 pertected doctrines of the Gentile Apostle. So far from 
 finding any right of perpetuity in the Jewish Law, he 
 ascribed its origin to the Demiurge, from whose evil rule 
 men were set free by the Saviour. In Christianity, accord- 
 ing to his view, all was sudden and unprepared :? a new 
 and spiritual religion was revealed immediately from 
 heaven to supplant the earthly kingdom which had been pro- 
 
 MARCIONITES. 
 (St. Luke.) 
 
 2 Epiph. Her. xiii. 1 [Tertull.] de 
 Prescr. Her. 11. The statement, how- 
 ever, has been doubted, for Tertullian 
 takes no notice of it. The writer un- 
 
 iirens iad; eler= ti. ley Out 
 autem Jesum separant a Christo, et 
 impassibilem perseverasse Christum, 
 passum vero Jesum dicunt, id quod se- 
 
 cundum Marcum est preferentes Evan- 
 gelium, cum amore veritatis legentes 
 illud corrigi possunt. Olshausen (Echth. 
 d. Evang. 97) rejects this statement, but 
 without sufficient ground. The de- 
 scription which Irenzeus gives agrees 
 with a form of Docetism which (ef. p. 
 247 n. 4) was actually connected with 
 the Gospel according to Peter. Cf. 
 [Hippol.] adv. Her. viii. 10, p. 267. 
 
 der the name of Tertullian attributes 
 to Cerdo the Canon which is eisewhere 
 assigned to Marcion. 
 
 8 Tertull. adv. Mare. iv. 11; Subito 
 Christus; subito et Johannes. Sic sunt 
 omnia apud Marcionem, que suum et 
 plenum ordinem habent apud creato 
 rem... Cf, iii,.6, 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 949 
 
 mised to the people of Israel by their God. As a necessary 
 consequence of his principles, Marcion could not accept the 
 Catholic Canon of the Scriptures, but formed a new one 
 suited to the limits of his belief. His “ Apostolicon” was 
 confined to ten Epistles of St. Paul, and his Gospel was a 
 mutilated recension of St. Luke. For him the Pauline 
 narrative was the truest picture of the life of Christ, though 
 even this required to be modified by a process which was 
 easily practicable at a time when the Evangelic text was 
 not yet fixed beyond the influence of tradition. 
 
 The peculiar characteristics of St. John’s Gospel could 
 not fail to attract some of the early mystic ee 
 
 7 The VALENTIN- 
 schools. The deep significance ofits lan- ss. 
 
 . ° (St. John.) 
 
 guage, the symbolic use of the words “light ” 
 and “darkness,” “life” and “death,” “the world,” “the 
 word,” and “the truth,” furnished the Eastern speculator 
 with a foundation for his favorite theories. If we may 
 trust Irenzeus,? the terminology of the Valentinians was 
 chiefly derived from that of St. John; and, conversely, in 
 recent times many have supposed that the Gospel itself 
 was due to Gnostic sources. The affinity which it has 
 with part of the Gnostic scheme is at least undoubted ; and 
 Heracleon, the most famous scholar of Valentinus, wrote 
 the first commentary upon it,’ following, according to 
 Tertullian, his master’s example, in using “the pen instead 
 of the knife to bring the Scriptures into agreement with 
 his tenets.” * 
 
 This severance of the Gospel-histories by different sects 
 exhibits most distinctly the reality and nature of their 
 difference. For if they have no special character, on what 
 hypothesis can we explain their connection with partial 
 
 1 After long discussion even the Ti- εἴρηκεν [6 ᾿Ιωάννης] καὶ Χάριν καὶ 
 bingen critics appear to have acquiesced Μονογενῆ καὶ ᾿Αλήϑειαν καὶ Δόγον Kad 
 in the belief that the Gospel of St. Luke Ζωὴν καὶ ΓΑνϑρωπον kal ᾿Εκκλησίαν. 
 ye ee Bae ae eae ae Ein- 3 Cf. Orig. in Joh. x. § 21. Hist. of 
 a = .v.). Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, N. T. Canon, 884 ff. 
 
 2 Iren. adv. Her. i.8,5: πατέρα yap 4 Tertull. de Preser. Her. 88. 
 
250 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 exhibitions of Christian truth? How were the separate 
 books adopted by peculiar schools, which pursued to an 
 excess the idea which we have supposed to predominate in 
 them? Those who admitted only one Gospel, even if they 
 mutilated and altered it, must have found in it some pecu- 
 liar points of contact with their own position; and rightly 
 found them, for heresy is but the inordinate desire to 
 define, distinguish, and isolate those manifold elements 
 which are combined in the perfect truth. 
 
 Sectaries divided the Gospels as being separately com- 
 plete; the Church united them, as constitu- 
 ents of a harmonious whole. The first 
 distinct recognition of the four Gospels 
 presents them also as one. “The Creator Word, who sits 
 upon the Cherubim, when manifested to men, gave us the 
 Gospel in a fourfold form, while it is held together by one 
 Spirit ;” and in the same place Irenzeus labors to prove, by 
 various analogies, that the Gospels could not be more or 
 fewer than four, the number of the faces of the Cherubim, 
 which were “images of the life and work of the Son of 
 God.”! The same mysterious emblem of 
 Ezekiel was constantly applied to the Evan- 
 gelists in later times throughout the Christian 
 world, but generally as modified in the Apocalypse, where 
 the idea of individual life prevails over that of a common 
 being. Yet, while the early fathers agreed in the general 
 explanation of the vision, they differed widely in details. 
 
 (Ὁ) The judgment 
 of the Church. 
 
 The 
 symbols. 
 
 Evangelic 
 
 1 Tren. adv. Her. iii. 11, 8: ὁ τῶν 
 ἁπάντων τεχνίτης λόγος, ὃ καϑήμενος 
 ἐπὶ τῶν Χερουβὶμ. καὶ συνέχων τὰ πάν- 
 τα, φανερωὺ εὶς τοῖς ἀνωρώποις, ἔδωκεν 
 ἡμῖν τετράμορφον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, ἑνὶ 
 δὲ πνεύματι συνεχόμενον ... καὶ yap 
 τὰ Χερουβὶμ τετραπρόσωπα' καὶ γὰρ 
 τὰ πρόσωπα αὐτῶν εἰκόνες τῆς πραγ- 
 ματείας τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ. 
 
 2 Irenzeus (1. 6.) regarding, as Augus- 
 tine remarks (De Cons. Ev. i. 9 [6}), 
 
 only the commencement, and not the 
 scope, of the books, assigns the ‘‘ man’? 
 to St. Matthew, the ‘‘eagle” to St. 
 Mark, the ‘‘ dion” to St. John, and the 
 or” to St. Luke. This opinion is 
 repeated by Juvencus, Lv. Hist. Pref. 
 The opinion of Jerome is followed by 
 Ambrose (in Luc. Pref. §§ 7, 8; ef. 
 Comm. in Luc. x. 117, 118); Sedulius, 
 Carm. Pasch. i. 355 ff., and generally 
 in later times. All writers agree in 
 assigning the “ὁ ox” to St. Luke. 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 251 
 In the West, the interpretation of Jerome gained almost 
 universal currency, and in Jater times he has been confirm- 
 ed by the usage of art." According to this the “man” is 
 assigned to St. Matthew, the “lion” to St. Mark, the “ox” 
 to St. Luke, and the “eagle” to St. John, as typifying 
 respectively the human, active, sacrificial, and spiritual 
 sides of the Gospel. Augustine, who inverts the order of 
 the first two symbols, and probably with justice, agrees 
 with Jerome in drawing a line between the creatures of 
 the earth and of the sky;? and a trace of this distinction is 
 found at a still earlier period. Clement of Alexandria 
 relates it as a current tradition in his time, that “St. John, 
 when he found in the writings of the other Evangelists the 
 bodily history of the Lord, composed a spiritual Gospel,” * 
 and such language is not an inapt description of the relation 
 of the Synoptists to St. John. 
 
 But though the early Church apprehended with distinct- 
 ness the characteristics of the Gospels, Au- 
 gustine seems to have been the first who 
 endeavored to explain their minute differ- 
 ences by a reference to their general aim; and his work 15 
 better in conception than in execution. The age was 
 hardly ripe for the task; and Augustine had not the critical 
 tact for performing it. The mass of Christians too gladly 
 welcomed the inspired histories on their apostolic claims to 
 submit their composition and arrangement to internal 
 scrutiny. It was enough for them that they were written 
 by holy men of God, without attempting to determine 
 their mutual relations. And even the scholars among 
 them were better qualified to discuss the manifold bearings 
 of an isolated passage, than to form a general idea of the 
 
 The Essay of St. 
 Augustine. 
 
 1 These emblems of the Evangelists terwards they appear as four streams 
 
 are not, however, found before the 
 Mosaics of the 15th century (Minter, 
 Sinnbilder d. Alten Christen, i. pp. 44 
 ff.). The earliest symbols are four rolls 
 round a representation of the feeding 
 of the 4000 (Minter, i. 44, Pl..13.) Af- 
 
 issuing from a rock, on which Christ, 
 or the Lamb, or the Cross, stands (ef. 
 Cypr. Ep. 78, 10). 
 
 2 Hieron. in Ezek. i. 7 ff Aug. De 
 Cons, Ev. |. ο. 
 
 $ Clem. Al. ap. Euseb. H. £. vi. 14. 
 
oe THE CIIARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 historic features of a whole book. On the other hand, we 
 must remember that a rich inheritance of tradition was 
 treasured up in the early Church; and the attempt of 
 Augustine, combined with the general statements of former 
 writers, sufficiently shows the method in which these would 
 have sought for an explanation of the variations of the 
 Evangelists. His essay is the formal expression of their 
 silently-recognized belief. 
 
 The view which has just been sketched of the relation 
 
 ses es, of the canonical Gospels to the varieties of 
 of this view of the Opinion existing in the apostolic age, and to 
 Sey the great principles from which they spring, 
 which are as permanent as human nature itself, suggest 
 necessarily various reflections as to their relation to our- 
 selves, Above all, it will remove that dead conception of 
 a verbal harmony between them which is fatal to their 
 true understanding. Their real harmony is essentially 
 moral, and not mechanical. It is not to be found in an 
 Ingenious mosaic, composed of their disjointed fragments, 
 but in the contemplation of each narrative from its proper 
 point of sight. The threefold portrait of Charles I. which 
 Vandyke prepared for the sculptor is an emblem of the 
 work of the first Evangelists: the complete outward shape is 
 fashioned, and then, at last, another kindles the figure with 
 a spiritual life. Nor are the separate portraitures less 
 pregnant with instruction than when they were originally 
 drawn. If we study the records in their simple individu- 
 ality, forgetting for the time the other traits which fill up 
 the picture, we shall probably find more in this view of 
 their distinctness than a mere speculation; it will show us 
 the life of Christ in relation to the master-spirit of our 
 own constitution. The Gospel will be seen to be particu- 
 lar, as well as universal. We shall gain a conception of 
 the multiform aspects of Christianity in the many-sided 
 presence of its Founder. We shall see its manifoldness, as 
 well as its unity. We shall no longer regard it as a phil- 
 osophic ideal of religion, but as a living revelation, devel- 
 
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 253 
 
 oped and perfected among men. We shall recall the 
 period when the several Gospels satisfied the various moral 
 and spiritual wants which must remain the same to the 
 end of time, and trace the divine sanction which they give 
 to the different tendencies of human thought and action. 
 We shall rise upwards from the perception of individuality 
 to that of variety; from variety to catholicity. The vari- 
 ous outward forms of Evangelic teaching, recognized by 
 the Apostles and ratified by the Church, will teach us to 
 look for some higher harmony in faith than simple unison. 
 We shall ackrswledge that it is now as in days of old, 
 when the same unchanging scheme of redemption proceed- 
 ing from one God, “seeking the weal of men through 
 divers ways by one Lord,” was seen under changeful 
 varieties of external shape.t The lesson of experience 
 and history, the lesson of reason and life, will be found 
 written on the very titles of the Gospels, where we shall 
 read with growing hope and love that “God fulfils Himself 
 in many ways.” 
 
 1Clem. Alex. Strom. vi. 13, § 106: ληφϑεῖσα. ἀκόλουδον γὰρ εἶναι μίαν 
 μία yap τῷ ὄντι διαϑήκη ἣ σωτήριος ἀμετάϑετον σωτηρίας δόσιν παρ᾽ ἑνὸς 
 ἀπὸ μεταβολῆς κόσμου εἰς ἡμᾶς διή- Θεοῦ SC ἑνὸς κυρίου πολυτρόπως ὧφε- 
 κουσα κατὰ διαφόρους γενέας τε καὶ λοῦσαν. . . . Cf. Lib. vii. 17, § 107. 
 χρόνους διάφορος εἶναι τὴν δόσιν ὕπο- : 
 
 22 
 
CHEAP TE iV. 
 
 THE GOSPEL OF ST, JOHN. 
 
 Two worlds are ours: ’tis only Sin 
 Forbids us to desery 
 
 The mystic heaven and earth within, 
 Plain as the sea and sky. — KEBLE. 
 
 Ir is impossible to pass from the Synoptic Gospels to_ 
 that of St. John without feeling that the 
 
 rat, ener’ transition involves the passage from one 
 oe world of thought to another. No familiarity 
 with the general teaching of the Gospels, no 
 
 wide conception of the character of the Saviour, is suffici- 
 ent to destroy the contrast which exists in form and spirit 
 between the earlier and later narratives; and a full recog- 
 nition of this-contrast is the first requisite for the under- 
 standing of their essential harmony. The Synoptic Gos- 
 pels contain the Gospel of the infant Church; that of St. 
 John the Gospel of its maturity. The first combine to 
 give the wide experience of the many; the last embraces 
 the deep mysteries treasured up by the one. All alike are 
 consciously based on the same great facts; but yet it is 
 possible, in a more limited sense, to describe the first as 
 historical, and the last as ideal; though the history neces- 
 sarily points to truths which lie beyond all human experi- 
 ence, and the “ideas” only connect that which was once 
 for all realized on earth with the eternal of which it was 
 the revelation. This broad distinction renders it necessary 
 to notice several points in the Gospel of St. John, both in 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 itself and in its relation to the Synoptic Gospels, which 
 seem to be of the greatest importance to- 
 wards the right study of it. No writing, per- 
 haps, if we view it simply as a writing, com- 
 bines greater simplicity with more profound depths. At 
 first all seems clear in the child-like language which is so 
 often the chosen vehicle of the treasures of Eastern medi- 
 tation; and then again the utmost subtlety of Western 
 thought is found to lie under abrupt and apparently frag- 
 mentary utterances. The combination was as natural in 
 the case of St. John, as it was needful to complete the 
 cycle of the Gospels. The special character of the Gospel 
 was at once the result and the cause of its special history ; 
 and when we have gained a general conception of the 
 Gospel in itself, the relations of difference or agreement in 
 which it stands to the other narratives will at once become 
 intelligible. . 
 
 The facts bearing on the lite of St. John which are 
 recorded in the Gospels are soon told. He 
 was the son, apparently the younger son,’ of 
 Zebedee and Salome? His father was a 
 Galilzean fisherman, sufficiently prosperous to 
 have hired servants,’ and, at a later time, his 
 mother was one of the women who followed the Lord, and 
 “ministered to Him of their substance.”* Nothing is 
 recorded which throws any light upon the character of 
 Zebedee, except the simple fact that he interposed no 
 
 Characteristics of 
 
 St. John. 
 
 I. The Gospel in 
 itself. 
 
 1. Its history. 
 
 (a) The life of St. 
 John. 
 
 1 That he was the younger son ap- 
 pears to follow from the order in which 
 the “James and John the 
 
 of the last passage with John xix. 26, 
 it has been concluded that Salome was 
 
 lames the sister of ** the mother of the Lord,” 
 
 brother of James” are generally given 
 in the Gospels; Matt. iv. 21, etc.; 
 Mark i. 21, etce.; Luke v. 10, etc. The 
 names occur in the other order, * Pe- 
 ter, John, and James,” in Luke viii. 51; 
 ix. 28, though the reading is doubtful. 
 In Acts xii. 2, James is styled “ the 
 brother of John.” 
 
 2 Mark xv. 40; xvi. 1, compared with 
 Matt. xxvii. 56. From the comparison 
 
 but the interpretation of the passage is 
 uncertain. Later traditions suppose 
 various other relationships between the 
 families of Joseph and Mary and Zebe- 
 dee. Cf. Winer, RWB. Salome ; Thilo, 
 Cod. Apoer. 362 ff. 
 
 8 Mark i. 20. Cf. John xix. 27. 
 
 4 Mark xvi. 1, compared with Luke 
 viii, 3. 
 
256 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 obstacle to his sons’ apostleship; but Salome herself went 
 with Christ even to His death, and the very greatness of 
 her request? is the sign of a faith living and fervent, how- 
 ever unchastened. St. John, influenced it may be by his 
 mother’s hopes, and sharing them, although “simple and 
 unlettered,”? first attached himself to the Baptist, and was 
 one of those to whom Jesus was revealed by him as “the 
 Lamb of God.”? Henceforth he accompanied his new 
 Master, and, together with his brother and St. Peter, was 
 admitted into a closer relationship with Him than the 
 other Apostles. In this nearer connection St. John was 
 still nearest,®> and as he followed Christ to judgment and 
 death,® he received from the Cross the charge to receive 
 the mother of the Lord as her own son.’ After the Ascen- 
 sion St. John remained at Jerusalem with the other Apos- 
 tles. He was with St. Peter at the working of his first 
 miracle; and afterwards he went with him to Samaria.’ 
 At the time of St. Paul’s first visit to Jerusalem he was 
 absent from the city; but on a later occasion St. Paul de- 
 scribes him as one of “the pillars of .the Church.”? At 
 what time, and under what circumstances, he left Jerusalem 
 is wholly unknown; but tradition is unanimous in placing 
 the scene of his after-labors at Ephesus.’ His residence 
 there must have taken place after St. Paul’s departure, but 
 this is all that can be affirmed with certainty. It is gene- 
 rally agreed that he was banished to Patmos during his 
 stay at Ephesus, but the time of his exile is very variously 
 given." The legend of his sufferings at Rome, which was 
 
 1 Matt. xx. 20 ff. Cf. Mark x. 35 ff. rus); ix. 28 (at the Transfiguration), 
 The same characteristic appears under Mark xiv. 33 (at Gethsemane). 
 a different form in the wish of her two 5 John xiii. 28; xxi. 7, 20 (M- ov 
 sons, Luke ix. 54; and in spite of other ἠγάπα 6 Ἰησοῦ). 
 interpretations, it is best to refer the 6 John xviii. 15; xix. 26. 
 surname, Boanerges (Mark iii. 16), 7 John xix. 27. 
 which is applied to them, to a natural 8 Acts i. 18; iii. 1 ff.; viii. 14 
 
 warmth of temperament. 9 Gal. i. 18 ff.; ii. 9. 
 2 Acts iy. 19: 10 Iren. adv. Heer. iii. 1, 1. 
 3 John i. 35 ff. 11 Iren. v. 30,3(Euseb. H. Ε. v. 8) (Do 
 
 4 Luke viii. 51 (at the house of Jai- métian); Epiph. Her. 51, 38 (Claudius) 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 257 
 soon embellished and widely circulated, is quite untrustwor- 
 thy ;' and the details of his death at Ephesus are equally 
 fabulous, though it is allowed on all hands that he lived to 
 extreme old age.’ 
 
 But while no sufficient materials remain for constructing 
 a life of the Apostle, the most authentic tra- 
 ditions which are connected with his name 
 contribute something to the distinctness of his portraiture.’ 
 The lessons of his Epistles and Gospel are embodied in 
 legends which characterize him as the zealous champion of 
 purity of faith and practice within the Christian body, and 
 in one legend, at least, the symbolism of the Jewish 
 dispensation is transferred to the service of Christianity, as 
 in the visions of the Apocalypse. On the one hand St. 
 John proclaims with startling severity the claims of 
 doctrinal truth,* and the duties of the teacher;’ on the 
 other he stands out in the majesty of a sacred office, 
 clothed in something of the dress of the old theocracy$ 
 The two views involve no contradiction, but rather exhibit 
 the wide range of that divine love which cherishes every 
 element of truth with the most watchful care, because it is 
 of infinite moment for the well-being of man. The associ- 
 
 Later legends. 
 
 μεν, μὴ καὶ τὸ βαλανεῖον συμπέσῃ, 
 
 in oleum igneum demersus nihil passus 
 est. Hieron. ad Matt. xx. 28. 
 
 2 Tren. ii. 22,5: μέχρι τῶν Τραϊάνου 
 χρόνων. Hieron. ad Galat. vi.10. For 
 the traditions which describe him as 
 still living in his tomb at Ephesus, com- 
 pare Credner, Hinl. 220 f. The passage 
 of Augustine (Jr Ev. Johann. Tract. 
 124, 2) is perhaps the most interesting 
 notice of the belief. 
 
 3 These traditions have been collected 
 and discussed by Stanley, Sermons and 
 Essays on the Apostolic Age, pp. 275 ff. 
 
 4 Tren. iii. 8,4 (on the authority of 
 Polycarp. Euseb. H. #. iv. 14).... 
 
 Ἰωάννης, 6 τοῦ κυρίου padnrhs, ἐν TH. 
 
 ᾿Εφέσῳ πορευδϑεὶς λούσασϑαι καὶ ἰδὼν 
 ἔσω Kipwaov, ἐξήλατο τοῦ βαλανείου 
 μὴ λουσάμενος ἀλλ᾽ ἐπειπών" Φύγω- 
 
 ἔνδον ὄντος KnpivSou, τοῦ τῆς ἀλε. 
 elas ἐχϑροῦ. Cf. Epiph. Her. xxx. 
 24, where a similar legend is told of St. 
 John and “ Ebion.”’ 
 
 5 In the beautiful story of the young 
 Robber — μῦϑος οὐ puxsos— which is 
 tco long to quote: Euseb. H. £. iii. 23 
 (on the authority of Clement of Alex- 
 andria). 
 
 6 Polyerates, ap. Euseb. H. Ε΄. iii. 31 
 (v.24): ἔτι δὲ καὶ Ἰωάννης ὁ ἐπὶ τὸ 
 στῆδος τοῦ κυρίου ἀναπεσών, ὃς ἐγε- 
 νήϑη ἱερεὺς τὸ πέταλον πεφορεκὼς 
 καὶ μάρτυς καὶ διδάσκαλος οὗτος ἐν 
 Ἐφέσῳ κεκοίμηται. For the use of τὸ 
 πέταλον compare EX. xxviii. 82; xxix. 
 6; Levit. viii. 9(LXX.). Cf. Bingham, 
 Antiquities, li. 9, ὁ ὃ. 
 
 - ΟΣ 
 
258 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 ations of the past are not rudely cast aside when they can 
 no longer betray. To a Christian among Christians the 
 perils and supports of faith appear in new lights; and the 
 one famous phrase, “ Little children, love one another,” 
 becomes a complete rule of life, when it is based upon the 
 perception of Christian brotherhood and received as the 
 charge of a father in Christ.’ As compared 
 with the other representative Apostles, — St. 
 Peter, St. James, and St. Paul, — the position 
 of St. John is clearly marked. He belongs rather to the 
 history of the Church, if the distinction may be drawn, 
 than to the history of the Apostles, and is the living link 
 which unites the two great ages. He is the guardian of a 
 faith already established, and not, like St. Peter, the 
 founder of an outward Church. His antagonist is Cerin- 
 thus, the founder of a false representation of Christianity, 
 and not Simon Magus, who appears in the position of an 
 Antichrist. In his teaching “the faith” is contemplated in 
 its fandamental facts, which include all there is of special 
 application in the reasoning of St. Paul and in the pro- 
 phetic exhortations of St. James. In the language of the 
 last chapter of his Gospel, which itself is the meeting-point 
 of inspiration and tradition, he “abode till the Lord came,” 
 and speaks in the presence of a Catholic Church, which 
 rose out of the conflicts which had been guided to the 
 noblest issue by the labors of those who preceded him. 
 This last chapter of his Gospel is in every 
 way a most remarkable testimony to the in- 
 fluence of St. John’s person and writings. 
 Differences of language,? no less than the abruptness of 
 
 The typical char- 
 acter of St. John. 
 
 (b) The authenti- 
 city of the Gospel. 
 
 1 Hieron. Comm. in Ep. ad Galat. vi. 
 10; Beatus Joannes Evangelista cum 
 Ephesi moraretur usque ad ultimam 
 senectutem et vix inter discipulorum 
 manus ad ecclesiam deponetur, nec 
 possit in plura vocem verba contexere, 
 nihil aliud per singulas solebat proferre 
 collectas, nisi hoc: Filioli, diligite alte- 
 
 rutrum. Tandem discipuli et patres qui 
 aderant, tedio affecti quod eadem sem- 
 per audirent, dixerunt: Magister quare 
 semper hoc loqueris? Qui respondit 
 dignam Joanne sententiam: Quia pre- 
 ceptum Domini est, et si solum fiat, 
 sufficit. 
 
 2 Yet these differences by no means 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 259 
 
 its introduction and its substance, seem to mark it clearly 
 as an addition to the original narrative; and 
 the universal concurrence of all outward evi- 
 dence no less certainly establishes its claim 
 to a place in the canonical book. It is a ratification of the 
 Gospel, and yet from the lips of him who wrote it; it al- 
 lows time for the circulation of a wide-spread error, and 
 yet corrects the error by the authoritative explanation of 
 its origin. The testimony, though upon the extreme verge 
 of the Apostolic period, yet falls within it, and the Apostle, 
 in the consciousness (as 1t seems) of approaching death, 
 confirms again his earlier record, and corrects the mistaken 
 notion which might have cast doubt upon the words of the 
 Lord. 
 
 The earliest account of the origin of the Gospel is already 
 legendary,’ but the mention which it contains 
 of a subsequent revision may rest upon the 
 facts which are seen to be indicated by the 
 concluding chapter. So much, however, is attested by 
 competent authority, that St. John composed his Gospel at 
 a later time than the other Evangelists ;* and it can scarcely 
 be wrong to refer the book to the last quarter of the first 
 
 The testimony of 
 the last chapter. 
 
 The late date 6, 
 the Gospel. 
 
 amount to a proof of difference of 
 authorship, but only of a difference of 
 date. The last verse of the chapter 
 (xxi, 25) is open to more serious objec- 
 tions, both internal and external. 
 
 1 This seems to be the object of xxi. 
 23. The danger and the correction of 
 such an error as is noticed belong 
 equally to the period of the extreme 
 age of the Apostle. 
 
 2 Can. Murat. (Hist. of N. T. Canon, 
 p 559): Cohortantibus condiscipulis et 
 episcopis suis dixit (se. Johannes): 
 Conjejunate mihi hodie triduum, et 
 Guid cuique fucrit revelatum alteru- 
 trum nobis cnarremus. Eadem nocte 
 reyvelatum Andree ex apostolis, ut re- 
 (oznoreentibus cunctis, Johannes suo 
 Lomine cuncta describeret. Jerome 
 probab:y alludes to this tradition when 
 
 he says: Ecclesiastica narrat historia, 
 cum a patribus [Johannes] cogeretur 
 ut scriberet, ita facturum se respondisse, 
 si indicto jejunio in commune omnes 
 Deum precarentur; quo expleto, reve- 
 latione saturatus, in illud procemium 
 celo veniens eructavit: Jn principio 
 erat Verbum... (Hieron. Comm. in 
 Matt. Proem. p. 5). Cf. Clem. ap. 
 Euseb. H. Z. vi. 14. 
 
 3 Clem. Alex. ap. Euseb. Π. Ε. vi.14: 
 ὁ Κλήμης . .. παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνέκα- 
 Sev πρεσβυτέρων τέϑειται. .. τὸν 
 Ἰωάννην ἔσχατον συνιδόντα ὅτι τὰ 
 σωματικὰ ἐν τοῖς εὐαγγελίοις δεδήλω- 
 ται, προτραπέντα ὑπὸ τῶν yvwpluwr, 
 πνεύματι δεοφορηδέντα, πνευματικὸν 
 ποιῆσαι εὐαγγέλιον. Irenwus (Adv. 
 Her. iii. 1, 1; ap. Euseb. H. E. v. 8); 
 Origen (ap. Euseb. H. L. vi. 25). 
 
260 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 century, and in its present form probably to the last 
 decennium of the period. This late date of the writing is 
 scarcely of less importance than its peculiarly personal 
 character, if we would form a correct estimate of the 
 evidence which establishes its early use and authority. It 
 passed into circulation when the first oral Gospel was 
 widely current in three authoritative forms, and it bore 
 upon its surface, no less than in its inmost depths, a stamp 
 of individuality, by which it was distinguished from the 
 type of recognized tradition. Yet these facts, which must 
 at first have limited the use of the book, contribute to the 
 clearness of the testimonies by which the use is evinced. 
 There is not in this case the same ambiguity as to the 
 origin of a striking coincidence of language, as in the early 
 parallels with the Synoptic Gospels, since there 1s no trace 
 of any definite tradition similar to the record of St. John. 
 The record was itself a creative source, and not a summary; 
 the opening of a new field of thought, and not the gathered 
 harvest. Clear parallelism of words or ideas with St. 
 John’s Gospel in later writers attests the use of the book, 
 and cannot be referred to the influence of a common 
 original. 
 
 The earliest Christian writers exhibit more or less dis- 
 
 Pec et a tinetly the marks of St. John’s teaching." 
 of the Apostolic This 15 most clearly seen in Ignatius, who, 
 "τιν perhaps, more than any other among the 
 sub-apostolic fathers, resembled him in natural character. 
 Without an acquaintance with St. John’s writings, it is 
 difficult to understand that he could have spoken in some 
 cases as he does; but if he were acquainted with them, the 
 subtle resemblance which exists is at once intelligible’ 
 Polycarp, in like manner, obviously refers to a passage in 
 the first Epistle of St. John ;° and Papias, according to 
 
 1 Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 31,48, 8 Polyc. ad Smyrn.7: πᾶς γὰρ ὃς ἂν 
 100, 225. μὴ ὁμολογῇ Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐν σαρκὶ 
 
 2 Cf. Ign. ad Smyrn. 8, ὅ, 12; ad Eph. ἐληλυϑέναι, ἀντίχριστός ἐστι (1 John 
 7; ad Magn.1; ad Rom. 7. iv. 8. Cf. Nott. critt. ad loc.). 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 261 
 
 Eusebius, “made use of testimonies” out of it. The im- 
 portance of this evidence is the greater, because it proceeds 
 from a quarter in which we might naturally look for the 
 most certain information. Polycarp was himself a disciple 
 of the Apostle, and Papias conversed with those who had 
 been. Nor is it an objection that the coincidences are with 
 the Epistle rather than with the Gospel, for the two writings 
 are so essentially united that their apostolical authority 
 must be decided by one inguiry. 
 
 In the next generation the traces of the use of the 
 Gospel, and not only of the general infin- ως 
 ence of St. John’s writings, are indisputable. me Farmers of the 
 The “elders,” who are quoted by Ineneus, “°" ““““* 
 interpret a saying of our Lord recorded by St. John,? and 
 the Asiatic source of the reference contributes something 
 to its weight. Though the question has been keenly de- 
 bated, with some exaggeration on both sides, there can be 
 no reasonable doubt that Justin Martyr was acquainted 
 with St. John’s Gospel, and referred to it as one of those 
 written by apostles, as contrasted with those which were 
 written by their followers Quotations from the book 
 occur shortly afterwards in the writings of Apollinaris,* 
 Tatian,’ Athenagoras,’ Polycrates,’ and in the Epistle of 
 the Church of Vienne’ The first direct quotation of the 
 
 1 Papias ap. Euseb. H. E. iii. 24. ὕπ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ ΧΩΡῚΣ αὑτοῦ γέγονεν 
 
 2Ίνοη, v. 85, 2: ὡς οἱ πρεσβύτεροι οὐδὲ ἕν. Cf. capp. 5. 18 
 λέγουσι. .. καὶ διὰ τοῦτο εἰρηκέναι 6 Athenagoras, Supplic. pro Christ. 
 τὸν Κύριον, ἐν τοῖς τοῦ πατρός μου 10; ἄλλ rue vids ΤΟΥ Θεοῦ λόγος 
 μονὰς εἶναι πολλάς (John xiv. 2, ἐν τῇ Τοῦ πατρὸς at ἰδέᾳ καὶ ἘΡΕΠΎΕΙΟ “πρὸς 
 οἰκίᾳ τοῦ πατρός μὸν μοναὶ πολλαί αὐτοῦ γὰρ καὶ δι αὐτοῦ πάντα ἐγένετο, 
 εἰσιν). The use of the phrase of St. ἑνὸς ὄντος τοῦ πατρὸς Kal τοῦ υἱοῦ 
 Luke (ii 49, ἐν τοῖς τοῦ πατρός pov) is (John 1. 8; xvii. 21---29). 
 worthy of notice 4 Polyer. ap. Euseb. Η. Ε. ν. 24: ἔτι 
 
 3 Hist of N. T. Canon, 178, 201. : καὶ Ιωάννης ὁ ἐπὶ τὸ στῆ ΡΝ τοῦ 
 
 υρίου ἀναπεσὼν .. . (John xiii. 25). 
 
 4 Claud. Apollin, ap. Routh, Pell. 8 Routh. Rell. Sacre, 1. 300: τὸ ὑπὸ 
 Sacre, i. 161: 6 τὴν ἁγὶαν πλευρὰν χοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν εἰρημένον ὅτι Ἐλεύ- 
 ἐκκεντηδείς, ὁ ἐκχέας ἐκ τῆς πλευρᾶς σεται καιρὸς ἐν ᾧ πᾶς ὁ ἀποκτεί- 
 αὐτοῦ τὰ δύο πάλιν καϑάρσια, ὕδωρ καὶ yas ὑμᾶς δόξει λατρείαν 
 αἷμα, λόγον καὶ πνεύμα (John xix. 34). προσφέρειν τῷ O€@ (John xiv 
 
 5Tatian, Urat.ad Grec. 19: πάντα 2.), 
 
262 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 Gospel by name oceurs in Theophilus;? and in the last 
 quarter of the second century it was universally received 
 as an authentic and unquestioned work of the Apostle. 
 As such, it is included in the early Eastern Canon of the 
 Peshito, and in the Western Canon of Muratori; and from 
 this time all the great fathers of every section of the 
 Church argue on the basis of its universal reception an:l 
 Divine authority. 
 
 The reception of the Gospel among heretical teachers 
 was scarcely less general than its reception 
 in the Catholic Church. Its individuality 
 
 preserved it from the conflict which the 
 Synoptic Gospels supported with other versions of the 
 same fundamental narrative. There is an apparent allu- 
 sion to it in the “great announcement” which was attrib- 
 uted to Simon Magus;? and it is evidently referred to in 
 the writings of the early Ophites® and Peratici.* It is still 
 more worthy of notice that it is quoted in the Clementine 
 Homilies, which are the production of another school. 
 Basilides, “who lived not long after the times of the 
 Apostles,” and Valentinus distinctly refer to it;° and 
 Heracleon, the scholar of Valentinus, made it the subject 
 of a commentary.’ 
 
 The testumony of 
 heretical writers. 
 
 5 Clem. Hom. xix. 22: ὅϑεν καὶ 6 
 διδάσκαλος ἡμῶν περὶ τοῦ ἐκ γεν ε- 
 THS πηροῦ καὶ ἀναβλέψαντος παρ᾽ 
 αὐτοῦ ἐξετάζουσι τοῖς μαϑηταῖς, εἰ 
 
 i Theophilus, ad Autol. ii. 22: ὅϑεν 
 διδάσκουσιν ἡμᾶς αἱ ἁγίαι “γραφαὶ καὶ 
 πάντες οἱ πνευματοφόροι, ἐξ ὧν ᾿Ιωάν- 
 ns λέγει: ἐν ἀρχῇ ἣν ὃ λόγο“. . -. 
 
 2 [Hipp.] adv. Her. vi. 9: οἰκητήριον 
 δὲ λέγει εἶναι [ὁ Siuov| τὸν ἄνϑρω- 
 Tov τοῦτον τὸν ἐξ αἱμάτων γεγενημέ- 
 vov... (Johni. 18). 
 
 8 [Hipp ] adv. Her. vy. 9: περὶ οὗ, 
 φησίν, εἴρηκεν 6 Σωτήρ᾽' Ei ἤδει- 
 τίς ἐστιν ὃ αἰτῶν, σὺ ἂν ἤτη- 
 σὰς παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἔδωκεν ἄν 
 σοι πιεῖν ζῶν ὕδωρ ἁλλόμενον 
 (John iv.10); and many other passages. 
 
 4 [Hipp.] adv. Her. vy. 12: τοῦτό ἐστι, 
 φησί, τὸ εἰρημένον, Οὐ yap ἦλϑεν ὁ 
 υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνδρώπου εἰς τὸν κόσ- 
 μον; ἀπολέσαι τὸν κόσμον, ἀλλ᾽ 
 ἵνα σωδῇ ὃ κόσμος BV αὐτοῦ. 
 
 οὗτος ἥμαρτεν ἢἣ οἱ γονεῖς 
 αὐτοῦ ἵνα τυφλὸς γεννηδ ἢ, 
 ἀπεκρίνατο. οὔτε οὗτός Te ἥμαρ- 
 τεν οὔτε οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ, 
 GAN ἵνα 8 αὐτοῦ φανερωδῇ 
 ἢ δύναμις τοῦ Θεοῦ τῆς ἀγνοίας 
 ἰωμένη τὰ ἁμαρτήματα (John ix. 1 ff.) 
 Cf. Uhlhorn, Die Homilien w. 8. το. 122 ff. 
 
 6[Hipp.] adv. Her.: τοῦτο, φησὶν 
 [ὁ βασιλείδης]), ἐστὶ τὸ λεγόμενον ἐν 
 τοῖς εὐαγγελίοι' ἣν τὸ φῶς τὸ 
 ἀληϑινὸν ὃ φωτίζει πάντα 
 ἄνϑρωπον ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν 
 κόσμον (John i. 9). 
 
 7 Origen. in Joann. Tom. xii. §§ 10 ff. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 963 
 
 The chain of evidence in support of the authenticity of 
 the Gospel is, indeed, complete and contin- ts 
 uous, as far as it falls under our observation, τ κλερεήῆδης χαρά 
 Not one historical doubt is raised from any “"”"* 
 quarter, and the lines of evidence converge towards the 
 point where the Gospel was written, and from which it was 
 delivered to the Churches. On the other side one fact 
 only can be brought forward. [10 is said, on the authority 
 of Epiphanius, that the Gospel, as well as the other writings 
 of St. John, were attributed to Cerinthus by 
 a sect called Alogi Their name indicates eo ae ν 
 the ground on which they proceeded. Their 
 objections to the apostolic origin of the book. were, as far 
 as can be ascertained, purely internal; and it is not difficult 
 to trace the course which the objectors may have followed, 
 till they reached their final result. Such internal objec- 
 tions can always be strengthened by pointing out the 
 defects which, from the nature of the case, must necessarily 
 exist in the outward proof of the origin of a book im an 
 age and in a society almost without literary instinct. But 
 the true historic view, which regards the whole growth of 
 Christianity within and without, furnishes a convincing 
 answer to such skepticism, which is essentially partial. 
 The development of later speculation becomes first ex- 
 plicable when it is traced out as the result of one definite 
 impulse. The general tendency of all casual testimony is 
 found to coincide with the conclusion which is assumed on 
 all sides without hesitation when Christian literature first 
 rose into importance. And a deeper study of the internal 
 features of the Gospel will show that what appear to be 
 difficulties and divergences from other parts of Scripture, 
 belong to the fulness of its personal character,’and con- 
 tribute equally to the completeness of the teaching which 
 it conveys, and to the perfection of that image of the 
 Saviour which it presents, in combination with the records 
 of the other Evangelists. 
 
 1 Epiph. Her. li. 3. Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 1805 ff. 
 
264 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 Ὁ: 
 The internal character of St. John’s Gospel offers in fact 
 an almost boundless field for inguiry. It pre- 
 sents the results of the most consummate art 
 as springing from the most perfect simplicity. 
 The general effect of its distinct individuality is heightened 
 by a careful examination of the various details by which 
 the whole impression is produced. In language, substance, 
 and plan the narrative differs from the Synoptic Gospels; 
 and each of the points thus offered to investigation will 
 require some notice. 
 
 The language of St. John presents pecniiarities both 
 in words and constructions which mutually 
 illustrate one another. In both an extreme 
 
 simplicity and an apparent sameness cover a depth of 
 meaning, which upon a nearer view is felt to be inexhaust- 
 ible. The simplicity springs from the contemplation of 
 Christianity in its most fundamental relations; the same- 
 ness, from the distinct regard of the subject in each sepa- 
 rate light, by which every step in the narrative is, as it 
 were, isolated, instead of being merged .in one complex 
 
 2. The internal 
 character of the 
 Gospel. 
 
 (a) Its language. 
 
 whole. 
 
 The Introduction to the Gospel furnishes the most com-_ 
 plete illustration of its characteristic vocabu- 
 lary.. “The Word,” “the Life,” “the Light,” 
 “the - Darkness,” “the “Truth,” “the Wond.722*Glory.” 
 
 i. The vocabulary. 
 
 ᾿Αλλὰ μὴν Kal τὴν πρώτην ἐμήνυσε 
 τετράδα... . Πατέρα εἰπὼν καὶ Χάριν 
 καὶ τὸν Μονογενῆ καὶ ᾿Αλήϑειαν), is 
 full of interest. 
 
 The term the Word (ὃ Adyos), abso- 
 lutely as a title of the Son of God, is 
 found only in the Preface to the Gos- 
 pel (i. 1; 14), where it occurs four times. 
 It occurs in the cognate phrase the 
 Word of God in the Apocalypse (Apoc. 
 xix. 18); and in a passage in the Epis- 
 
 1JIn examining the language of St. 
 John I have derived very considerable 
 help from the valuable work of Lu- 
 thardt, Das Johanneische Evangelium. 
 Niirnberg, 1852. Throughout I have 
 compared and corrected my own con- 
 clusions by his, with the greatest ad- 
 vantage. 
 
 2 The use and meaning-of these words, 
 which were applied in very early times 
 to strange and mystical schemes (Iren. 
 
 1. 8.5 ff σαφῶς οὖν δεδήλωκεν ὃ ᾿ΙἸωάν- 
 νης διὰ τῶν λόγων ταύτων τά τε ἄλλα 
 καὶ τὴν τετράδα τὴν δευτέραν, Λόγον 
 καὶ Ζωήν, “AvSpwmrov καὶ Ἐκκλησίαν" 
 
 tle to the Hebrews (iv. 12, 13), the sim 
 ple and derived meanings of the term, 
 as the Revelation, and the Person in 
 whom the revelation centres, are com- 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 265 
 
 “Grace,” are terms which at once place the reader beyond 
 the scene οἵα limited, earthly conflict, and raise his thoughts 
 
 bined with the notion of an account to 
 be rendered. Inthe LXX. λόγος is the 
 usual representative of “27, and oc- 
 curs in those passages in which later 
 interpreters have found the traces of 
 a fuller revelation of the Divine na- 
 ture: e.g., Ps xxxii. 6; cvi.20. Isa. 
 XXxviii. 4, etc. In the Latin Versions 
 of the New Testament, as represented 
 by MSS. of every class, λόγος is trans- 
 lated by Verbum, which falls very far 
 short even of a partial rendering of the 
 Greek. There is, however, evidence 
 that in the second century sermo.was 
 also current, which is, in some respects, 
 a preferable rendering (Tertull. adv. 
 Hermog. xx. etc. and constantly); and 
 Tertullian seems to prefer ratio, though 
 he implies that that had not been 
 adopted in any version (adv. Prax. v. 
 Ideoque jam in usu est nostrorum, per 
 simplicitatem interpretationis, sermo- 
 mem dicere in primordio apud Deum 
 Suisse, cum magis rationem competat 
 antiquiorem haberi, quia non sermona- 
 lis a principio sed rationalis Deus. . . . 
 In de Carne Chr. xviii. he reads verbum 
 caro factum esf). 
 
 The Life (7 ζωή) is a term of much 
 wider application. It occurs not only 
 in the preface of the Evangelist, but 
 also in the discourses of our Lord, and 
 in one phrase full of deep meaning — 
 “to enter into life” (εἰσελϑεῖν εἰς THY 
 (whv)—it is found in the Gospels of 
 St. Matthew and St. Mark (Matt. xviii. 
 8, 9; xix. 17. Mark ix. 43, 45. Cf. 
 Matt. vii. 14). In the Epistles of St. 
 Paul the word is only less important 
 than in St. John (Cf. Rom. v. 10; viii. 
 10. Col. iii. 4. 2 Tim. i. 1); and it is 
 tound, though rarely, in the other 
 Epistles (Cf. Hebr. vii. 16. Jac. i. 12. 
 1 Pet. iii 7. 2 Pet. i. 8). In the writ- 
 angs of St. John; Christ is presented as 
 the Life under various aspects. At one 
 time He proclaims Himself to be ‘‘ the 
 Resurrection and the Life” (ἐγώ ᾿εἰμι ἡ 
 ἀνάστασις καὶ 7 ζωή) in the presence 
 
 of material death (John xi. 25), and 
 again as * the Way, the Truth, and the 
 Life” (ἐγώ εἰμι 7 ὁδὸς καὶ ἡ ἀλήδεια 
 καὶ ἡ ζωή) in the presence of religious 
 doubt (xiv. 6). In this latter sense 
 St. John says, *‘ The Life was the Light 
 of men” (καὶ ἣ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν αν- 
 δρώπων. i. 4), that ** Light of Life’ (τὸ 
 φῶς τῆς (wijs), as it is elsewhere called 
 (viil. 12), which he shall have who fol- 
 lows Christ. **The Life’ QO. John i. 2; 
 v. 20) lies beneath all physical and 
 spiritual being and action, absolutely 
 one, and universally pervading. At 
 other times the single gift aud source 
 of life is contemplated in the separate 
 parts or modes in which it is presented. 
 “JT am the bread of Life” (ἐγώ εἰμι ὃ 
 ἄρτος τ. ζωῆς. vi. 35,48); “the words 
 (ῥήματα) which I have spoken unto 
 you, they are spirit and they are life” 
 (vi. 68, ef. v. 68); “1 will give to him 
 that thirsteth of the fountain of the 
 water of life’? (Apoc. xxi. 6. Cf. xxii. 
 1, 17; vii 19. John iv. 14); “to him 
 that overcometh will I give to eat of 
 the tree of life’ (τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς. 
 Apoe: τ (Ch ΧΕΙ 2) 14. 0)» “ois 
 [the Father’s] commandment is life 
 eternal ” (xii. 50); ‘* this is life eternal, 
 that they know thee (ἵνα γινώσκωσιν) 
 the only true God, and Jesus Christ 
 whom thou hast sent” (améoTeAas 
 xvii. 8); ‘‘ these things have been writ- 
 ten .... that ye may have life in His 
 (Christ’s) name” (xx. 31). Elsewhere 
 it is regarded as something present in 
 the Father (v. 25), in the Son (v 26, 
 ζωὴν ἔχειν ἐν ἑαυτῷ), and in those 
 united in fellowship with Christ (vi. 58, 
 54; v.40; iii 15, 16. 8°). varying in de- 
 gree (x. 10, va ζωὴν ἔχωσιν kal πε- 
 ρισσὸν ἔχωσιν), present in one sense (v 
 24). and yet future (xii. 25. Cf. vi. 27; 
 iv. 86). personal (1 John v 12, 16), and 
 yet extending to ὁ the world” (vi. 51). 
 [Compare the use of ζωοποιέω ν. 21; 
 vi. 63, and in St. Paul, and 1 Pet. iii 
 18.] 
 
 23 
 
266 THE GOSPEL ΟΕ. 51. JOHN. 
 to the unseen and the eternal. The conflict of good and 
 evil is presented in an image which conveys in final distinet- 
 ness the idea of absolute antagonism. The Incarnation it- 
 self is regarded as the great climax of the revelations of 
 Him in whom all things “were” and by whom all things 
 “became.” Yet the Life and the Light and the Truth, are 
 no mere abstractions, but centre in a person. The one pre- 
 dominating idea, partial and yet true, passes into the other 
 in the consideration of new relations. The Life, which, in 
 its fullest sense, is the most noble expression of creative 
 power, becomes the Light in regard to men; and the sum 
 of that which the Light reveals is the Truth. From stage to 
 stage the whole is laid open which was contained implicitly 
 in the first prophetic announcement. For nowhere is the 
 
 spiritual depth of St. John’s Gospel more clearly imaged 
 
 The grand notion of ‘ Life” as the 
 divine basis of all being, is limited in 
 that of ‘“‘ Light,” which is one of the 
 forms in which it is presented to men 
 (1.4) ‘God is light” (1 John i. 5), even 
 as Christ is light (i. 4—9; iii. 19; xii. 
 46), ‘the light of the world ” (viii. 12), 
 during His presence (xii. 35, 86; ix. 5), 
 and after His bodily withdrawal (1 
 John ii.8), in which the believer abides 
 (1 John ii. 10) and walks (1 John i. 7). 
 The opposite to this heavenly light (ef. 
 xi. 9, 10), is “the Durkness” (σκοτία 
 metaph. only in St. Jolin, σκότος only 
 jij. 19. 1 John i. 6), in which others 
 walk (viii. 12; xii. 85. 1 John ii 11) 
 and abide (xii. 46) and are (1 John i. 9), 
 and which overwhelms them (xii. 35), 
 and blinds them (1 John ii. 11), though 
 it cannot overwhelm the Light (i. 5). 
 [Compare the use of φαίνειν, φανεροῦν, 
 φωτίζειν. 
 
 In another aspect the revelation which 
 brings life and Jight, and in one seise 
 is life and light, is the Truth. In the 
 use of this word St. John, standing in 
 marked contrast with the synoptists, 
 offers a close parallel with St. Paul. 
 Christ Himself is the truth (xiv. 6), 
 even as the revelation (Adyos) of God 
 
 (xvii. 17); and the Holy Spirit as the 
 Guide of the future Church, is essen- 
 tially ‘‘the Spirit of truth” (xiv. 17; 
 xv. 26; xvi.13. 1 Jolin iv. 6), and ‘the 
 Spirit is the ‘Truth’ (1 John v. 6). But 
 while the Truth is expressed in Jan- 
 guage (viii. 40), it extends to action (iii. 
 21. lJohn i. 6, ποιεῖν THY ἀλήδειαν) 
 and brings with it freedom (viii. 32) 
 and holiness (xvii. 17, 19). [Compare 
 the use of ἀληϑής, ἀληϑινός.] 
 
 The sphere to which this all-embrac- 
 ing revelation is addressed is ‘the 
 world”? (ὃ κόσμος), a word which, 
 while it occurs in this application in 
 St. Matthew (xiii. 88; xxvi. 13), and 
 St. Mark (xvi. 15), and more frequently 
 in St. Paul, is yet so common in its 
 ethical sense in St. John as to be highly 
 characteristic of his writings. Christ 
 “takes the sin of the world” (i. 29. 1 
 John ii. 2), ‘gives life to the world” 
 (vi. 385. Cf. v. 51. 1 John iv. 9), came 
 “to save the world” (xii. 47; iii. 17. 
 1 John iv. 14. Cf. iv. 42), is “the light 
 of the world *’ (viii. 12; ix. 5); and 
 conversely. ‘‘the world could not re- 
 ceive’ Him (xiv. 17), but hated Him 
 (xy. 38). 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 267 
 
 than in the one term which is most commonly and most 
 rightly associated with it. When St. John surveys in his 
 own person, in a few sentences, the great facts of the In- 
 carnation in their connection with all the past and all the 
 future, and as they reach beyond the very bounds of time, 
 he speaks of the Lord under a title (Adyos) which is only 
 faintly and partially imaged by “the Word.” The render- 
 ing, even on the one side which it approaches, limits and 
 confines that which in the original is wide and discursive. 
 As far as the term Logos expresses a revelation, it is not 
 an isolated utterance, but a connected story, a whoie and 
 not a part, perfect in itself, and including the notions of 
 design and completion. But the meaning of Logos is only 
 halfembraced by the most full recognition of the idea of a 
 given revelation, conveyed by one who is at once the Mes- 
 senger and the Message, speaking from the beginning in 
 the hearts of men, of whom He was the Life and Light, 
 and by the mouth of those who were His prophets: it in- 
 cludes also that yet higher idea, which we cannot conceive 
 except by the help of the language which declares it, accord- 
 ing to’which the revelation is, in human language, as 
 thought, and the Revealer as reason, in relation to the 
 Deity. In this sense the title lifts us beyond the clouds of 
 earth and time, and shows that that which has been real- 
 ized among men in the slow progress of the world’s history, 
 was, towards God, in the depths of the Divine Being before 
 creation. These vast truths, which are included in the one 
 term by which St. John describes the Lord, had been dimly 
 seen, from one side or the other, by many who had studied 
 the records of the Old Testament. Now they brought for- 
 ward the notion of a divine Reason;in which the typical 
 “ideas” of the world were supposed to reside: now of a 
 divine Word, by which God held converse with created 
 beings; but at this point the boldest pansed.!. No one had 
 dared to form such a sentence as that which, with almost 
 awful simplicity, declares the central fact of Redemption, 
 
 1 Cf. pp. 161—166. 
 
268 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 in connection with time and eternity, with action and with 
 being: “ The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,” 
 and it may well seem that the light of a divine presence 
 still ever burns in that heavenly message, thus written for 
 us, as clearly as it burnt of old on the breastplate of priest, 
 or among the company of the first disciples. If any one 
 utterance can bear the clear stamp of God’s signature, 
 surely that does which announces the fulfilment of the 
 hopes of a whole world with the bolduess of simple aftir- 
 
 mation, and in language which elevates the soul which 
 
 embraces it.! 
 
 If we pass from the vocabulary of ὃ 
 
 t. John to the form 
 
 of his sentences, what has been said of the 
 
 ii. Zhe composi- 
 tion. 
 Simplicity. 
 
 former 
 
 still holds good in 
 The characteristics which mark the elements 
 of his language, mark also his style of composition. 
 
 new relations. 
 
 There 
 
 is the same simplicity and depth in the formation of his 
 
 1In addition to the characteristic 
 words of St. John, which have been 
 already noticed (p. 241, n. 2), there are 
 many others which illustrate in a re- 
 markable way the spirit of his Gospel. 
 Among these may be mentioned: 
 
 Sdvaros (in 1 Ep. and Apoc.), 
 
 μαρτυρία, μαρτυρεῖν (Gosp. Epp. 
 Apoc.), 
 
 κρίσις, κρίνειν (Gosp. Apoc.), 
 
 ἔργον, τὰ ἔργα (Gosp.), 
 
 πιστεύω εἰς (Gosp. 1 Epp. πίστις 
 
 only 1 John, v. 4, ἢ πίστις not in 
 Gosp.), 
 ὄνομα (Gosp. Epp. Apoc.), 
 γινώσκω (Gosp. Epp. Apoc.), 
 σημεῖον (Gosp. Apoc.), 
 ἁμαρτία (Gosp.1 Ep.), 
 σάρξ (Gosp.), 
 ἀγαπᾶν, ἀγάπη (Gosp. Epp.), 
 εᾶσδϑαι, Sewpety (Gosp. 1 Ep.), 
 ἐρωτᾶν (Gogp. Epp.), 
 ὁ πατήρ (Gosp. Epp. Apoc.), 
 πρόβατα, τεκνία (605. 1 Ep.), 
 παροιμία (Gosp. also 2 Pet. ii. 22), 
 ἀμήν, ἀμήν (Gosp.), 
 πιάζειν (Gosp. Apoc.), 
 
 ὄχλος (sing.), in pl. only vii. 12, with 
 var. lect. 
 
 τὰ ἴδια (also Acts xxi. 6). 
 
 The amount of words peculiar to St. 
 John is very large. In the Gospel I 
 have counted sixty-five, and there are 
 possibly more. In the main these 
 spring out of the peculiar details of 
 his narrative: 6. g. ἀντλεῖν, ἀποσυνά- 
 γωγος, γλωσσόκομον, κλῆμα, σκέλος, 
 τίτλος, ὑδρία, ψωμίον. Some are 
 characteristic: Δίδυμος, Ἑβραϊστί, 
 ἀρνίον, σκηνοῦν. Many words occur 
 with remarkable frequency in St. John, 
 as οὖν, ἵνα, μέντοι, ἴδε, οὔπω», πώποτε, 
 ἐγώ, ἐμός, and their usage is full of 
 meaning. 
 
 The absence of some words is equally 
 worthy of notice, as, for instance, δύ- 
 ναμις, δυνάμεις, ἐπιτιμᾶν εὐαγγέλιον 
 (and derivatives), παραβολή, παραγ- 
 έλλειν, πίστις, σοφία, σοφός. In 
 this connection it may be noticed that 
 St. John speaks of John the Baptist 
 simply as John; the title does not oc- 
 cur in the Gospel — a small trait which 
 would not have been preserved by a 
 later writer. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 269 
 
 recurrent constructions as in the choice of his familiar 
 words; and these qualities bring with them, in each sepa- 
 Like the key-words of 
 his language, his constructions are almost without excep- 
 tion most obvious and plain.’ The effect which they 
 produce is not gained by any startling or subtle form of 
 expression, but only by a calm and impressive emphasis. 
 Clauses are rather appended than subordinated. Every 
 thing is placed before the reader in a direct 
 form, even in the record of the words of 
 others, when the oblique narration is most natural; ‘“ Many 
 of the people, therefore, when they heard this saying, said, 
 Of a truth this is the Prophet. Others said, This is the 
 Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee ?”? 
 If remarks are added either to bring out more strongly the 
 features of the scene, or to connect the history with the 
 immediate time, they are added for the most part in abrupt 
 parentheses: “Jesus, therefore, being wearied with His 
 journey, sat thus on the well. It was about the sixth hour. 
 
 rate sentence, clearness and force. 
 
 Directness. 
 
 There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water.” ® 
 
 One result of this form of writing is circumstantiality. 
 The different details which are included in 
 an action are given with individual care. 
 Word is added to word, when it might have been thought 
 that the new feature was already included in the picture; 
 and yet in such sentences as “Jesus cried out in the 
 Temple, teaching and saying,” “they questioned Him, and 
 said to Him,” and the like, it will be found that there is 
 something gained by the distinct expression of each mo- 
 
 Circumstantiality. 
 
 In John 
 
 1 A remarkable sign of this is found 
 in the singular fact that St. John never 
 uses the optative (Credner, Fini. § 96). 
 In xiii. 24, the reading καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ 
 Εἰπὲ τίς ἐστιν is certainly correct. 
 
 In like manner the particle ἄν is only 
 found in the construction with the in- 
 dicative (iv. 10, ete.), except in the 
 connection ὃς ἄν, ὅστις ἄν, ὅσος ἄν. 
 
 2 John vii. 40,41. Cf. i. 19—27; ix. 
 
 Sifts) ville 225 1x. 471 ΣΙ; 90. 
 iv. 51, the authorities are divided, and 
 if ὁ παῖς αὐτοῦ be the right reading, it 
 probably stands alone as an example 
 of oblique construction (cf. Luthardt, 
 p.37). The common reading in xiii. 
 24, πυϑέσϑαι Tis εἴη, is incorrect. Cf. 
 supr. n. 1. 
 3 iv. 6. 
 Xviii. 40. 
 
 Cf. x. 22; xii. 90;, yi. 10: 
 
 2a” 
 
970 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 ment in the narrative which might otherwise have been 
 overlooked.! 
 
 Another mode in which this fundamental character of 
 St. John’s style shows itself is repetition. 
 The subject, or chief word of the whole 
 sentence, is constantly repeated, both in the narrative and 
 in the recital of our Lord’s discourses. “In the beginning 
 was the Word; and the Word was with God; and the 
 Word was God.” “Jesus then, when he saw her weeping, 
 and the Jews that were with her weeping.” .... “If I 
 bear witness of myself; my witness is not true. There is 
 another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the 
 witness which he witnesseth of me is true.” ? 
 
 This tendency to emphatic repetition may be seen again 
 in the way in which the persons involved in 
 the dialogue are brought out into clear an- 
 tagonism. Sentence after sentence opens 
 with the clauses, “ Jesus said,” “the Jews said,” so that the 
 characters engaged in the great conflict are never absent 
 from the mind of the reader;* and a similar emphasis is 
 gained in other sentences by the introduction of a demon- 
 strative pronoun, when an important clause has intervened 
 between the subject and the verb: “He that seeketh His 
 glory that sent him, the same (otros) is true.” 4 
 
 It is to be referred to the same instinctive desire to 
 
 Repetition. 
 
 -Individuality of 
 narrative. 
 
 11. 25; vii. 28. Compare i. 15, 82; 24.1; xi. 33; ν. 91. 32: Compare ὁ. 
 viii. 12; xii. 44, etc. A very simple 10; v. 46, 47; xv. 4 ff.; xvii. 25. 
 and common example of this charac- 
 teristic occurs in the constant use of 
 ἀπεκρίϑη Kat εἶπεν for the usual ἀπο- 
 Kpivels εἶπεν or ἀπεκρίδη λέγων of 
 the other Evangelists. The two ideas 4 vii. 18. Compare vi. 46; xv. 5. 
 are coérdinated, and not subordinated. 2John 9; i. 31; iii. 82; v. 88; x. 25 
 The phrase occurs. if I have noticed (οὗτος). i. 18,833 -¥5 E1883. Sie) 
 rightly, thirty-three timesin St. John, x. 1; xii. 48; xiv. 21, 26; xv. 26 (ἐκεῖ- 
 and elsewhere only Mark vii. 28; Luke 0s). The former pronoun occurs in 
 xiii. 15; xvii. 20. the other Gospels in this kind of con- 
 
 It is a consequence of the same struction several times (Matt. xiii. 20 
 principle that we find such phrases as_ ἢ; Mark vi. 16; Luke ix. 48): the lat- 
 ἐγὼ... ἐξῆλϑον καὶ ἥκω οὐδὲ ter, as far as I know, only twice: Mark 
 nee €CAHAVAG (viii. 42). vii. 15, 20. 
 
 3 FE. g. viii. 49 ff.; x. 23 ff. It is, how- 
 ever, to be remarked that in these cases 
 the verb is put first: iv. 7 ff. ete. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 71 
 
 realize the full personality of the action, so to speak, that 
 St. John frequently uses the participle and 
 
 substantive verb for the more natural finite ,7e"™ αἱ 
 verb. The distinction between the two 
 
 forms of expression is capable only of a rude representation 
 in English; yet even so, it is possible to appreciate the 
 difference between the phrases “I bear witness,” and “I 
 am one who bears witness,” and to feel that the idea of the 
 action predominates in the one, and that of the person in the 
 other." Elsewhere the force of the clause is heightened, in 
 a way which the English idiom cannot express, by the 
 position of the verb at the beginning of the sentence. The 
 central idea of the whole is given first, and the remainder 
 of the sentence is made dependent upon it.? 
 
 All these peculiarities converge to the same point. The 
 simplicity, the directness, the particularity, | paar: 
 the emphasis of St. John’s style, give his sets of these char 
 writings a marvellous power, which is not, Bibra 
 perhaps, felt at first. Yet his words seem to hang about 
 the reader till he is forced to remember them. Each great 
 truth sounds like the burden of a strain, ever falling upon 
 the ear with a calm persistency which secures attention. 
 And apart from forms of expression with which all are 
 early familiarized, there is no book in the Bible which has 
 furnished so many figures of the Person and Work of 
 Christ which have passed into the common use of Chris- 
 tians, as the Gospel of St. John. “I am the bread of life ;” 
 “T am the light of the world ;” “I am the good shepherd ;” 
 “T am the vine;” are words which have guided the 
 thoughts of believers from the first ages.’ 
 
 LV. 80° Vins 16> xi. Le xvi, 19, 23: 2 EF. q. iv. 28, 30, 52, 53; vi. 7—11; 
 If i. 9, ἦν τὸ φῶς---ἐρχόμενον, isanin- vii. 45f. This is specially the case in 
 stance of this construction, the words the phrases λέγει αὐτῷ, ἀπεκρίϑη αὐτῷ 
 must be explained not of one act, but ὁ Ἴ. Cf. p. 270, n. 3. 
 of a series; not of the Incarnation 3 vi. 48, ἐγώ εἶμι ὁ ἄρτος Te 
 only, but of a continuous manfestation. ζω ἢ 5. vi. 51, ἐγώ εἰμι ἄρτος ὁ 
 This construction occurs also in the ζῶν. viii. 12, ἐγώ εἶμι τὸ φῶς τοῦ 
 other Gospels, Cf. Winer, Gramm. κόσμου. x. 7, ἐγώ εἶμι ἡ Supa τῶν 
 § 45, 5. προβάτων. y.9, ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ Svpa. x. 
 
972 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 The combination of the sentences in St. John offers a 
 complete analogy to the construction of 
 them. What has been said.of the words and 
 the constituent members of his sentences, 
 applies equally to entire paragraphs. There is the same 
 circumstantiality in the picture, as a whole, as in the 
 details. Words, clauses, paragraphs, follow one another, in 
 what may be taken for needless repetition, till the mind 
 grows sensible of the varied light in which the object is 
 placed, and grasps the complete image. The final effect of 
 the entire narrative is inartificial, and yet intense and 
 powerful. The multiplication of simple elements issues in 
 a result of acknowledged grandeur; and the mode in which 
 the result is produced leads the mind to dwell upon it with 
 patient study. Sentences are added one to another rather 
 than connected. Only the simplest conjunctions! are used, 
 even when the dependence of the successive clauses is 
 subtle and hidden. Equally often the narrative or dis- 
 course is continued without the help of any conjunctions, 
 especially when the deepest feeling is roused, and the full 
 heart embraces the whole scene, without distinguishing the 
 subordination or sequence of the details; “And He said, 
 Where have ye laid him? They say to Him, Come and 
 see. Jesus wept.”” Statement follows statement, and the 
 reader is left to work out for himself the law by which 
 they are bound together. It is as if St. John felt that each 
 truth involves all truth; and that the truth was to be | 
 described, as he had seen it, by the portraiture of its 
 
 The combination 
 of sentences. 
 Simplicity. 
 
 11, 14, ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ποιμὴν ὃ καλός. xi. 
 25, ἐγώ εἰμι ἣ ἀνάστασις καὶ ἣ ζωή. 
 xiv. 6, ἐγώ εἰμι ἣ 650s καὶ ἡ ἀλήδεια 
 καὶ ἣ ζωή. χν. 1, ὅ, ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ἄμπε- 
 λος. 
 
 The frequency of the pronoun ἔγώ in 
 St. John’s Gospel, compared with the 
 Synoptists, points to the fulness of this 
 personal revelation of our Lord. The 
 simple phrase ἐγώ εἰμι occurs in all 
 the Gospels. 
 
 1 The most common are Καί and δέ, 
 though both occur much less frequently 
 in St. John than in the other Evangel- 
 ists. The conjunction τέ, which is 
 rare in the Gospels, occurs only ii. 15 
 (τέ --- kal); iv. 42; vi. 18. In the two 
 latter cases there is a various reading, 
 δέ, supported by important evidence. 
 
 2xi 34. 33. 
 A τ τὺ 
 
 Gf, 13: Ὁ, 8. Ἧι τ, 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 273 
 several aspects, and not as it were discovered or displayed 
 by any process of argument. For him knowledge was 
 sight.’ 
 
 But while the particles in St. John occupy generally a 
 very subordinate place, two which express a 
 designed object (iva) and a natural result 
 (οὖν), however much these ideas may be 
 hidden from the ordinary sight, are singularly frequent and 
 important. The view which they open of the continuous 
 working of a divine Providence, and of the sequence of 
 human actions, is exactly that in which St. John may be 
 supposed to have specially dwelt, and which he brings out 
 with the greatest distinctness. “The Jews said unto him, 
 It is not lawful for us to put any man to death; that (ἵνα) 
 the saying of Jesus may be fulfilled, which he spake signi- 
 fying what death he should die.” “When he had heard, 
 therefore (οὖν), that he was sick, he abode two days still in 
 the same place where he was.” ὅ 
 
 Characteristic 
 particles, 
 
 11 John i. 1. The frequency of the 
 words ϑεωροῦν, ϑεᾶσϑαι, ἑωρακέναι, 
 which has been already noticed, is an 
 indication of this characteristic of St. 
 Jolin. It is worthy of notice that in 
 the Gospel and first Epistle he uses only 
 the perfect of δρᾶν (ἑώρακα), which 
 occurs twenty-six times. There can be 
 no doubt that ἐθεώρουν is the true 
 reading in vi. 2. 
 
 2 xviii. 92. This form of expression, 
 iva TAnpws7, is even more frequent in 
 St. John than in St. Matthew, and it is 
 found not only in the narrative of the 
 Evangelist (xii. 88; xviii. 9, 32; xix. 
 24, 36), but also in the discourses of our 
 Lord (xiii. 18; xv. 25; xvii. 12). The 
 elliptical phrase, ἄλλ᾽ ἵνα, which oe- 
 curs Mark xiy. 49, is also worthy of 
 particular notice: i. 8; ix. 8; (xi. 52;) 
 xiii. 18; xiv. 381; xv. 25. 1 John ii. 19. 
 Other examples of the use of ἵνα are 
 juteresting. In many cases it is used 
 where in classieal Greek a combina- 
 tion of the article with the infinitive 
 would be the natural construction: iy. 
 
 84, ἐμὸν βρῶμά ἐστιν ἵνα ποιήσω τὸ 
 Sed. vi. 29; (40;) xii. 28, ἐλήλυϑεν 7 
 ὥρα ἵνα δοξασϑῇἢ. xiii. 1; xv. 8; xvi. 
 80; xvii. 8. 1 John i. 9; ii. 27; iv. 17. 
 Cf. xiii. 2, 34; xv. 12, 18,17. 1 John 
 iii. 11, 23; v. 3. At other times it takes 
 the place of a simple infinitive: xvii. 24, 
 SéAw va.... @ow; iv. 47; xvii. 15; 
 xix. 31, 38; xi. 50; xvi. 7. 1 John iii. 
 1; v.20. In both these cases the idea 
 of purpose and design seems to have 
 led to the change of expression, and 
 this notion is very apparent in some 
 simpler examples: xvi. 2, ἔρχεται ὥρα 
 iva was .... 8d&. x.17. Cf. iii. 17; 
 xii. 47; v. 7. 1John v. 16. 
 
 8 Examples of the various character- 
 istic uses of οὖν in St. John will be 
 found in the following passages: ii. 
 22; iii. 25, 29; iv. 1, 6,46; vi. δ; vii. 25, 
 28 ff.; viii. 12, 21, ff., 31, 38; x.7; xii. 1, 
 8, 9, 17, 21; xi. 31 ff. ete. The word is 
 almost confined to narrative, and oc- 
 curs very rarely in the discourses. The 
 sequence which it marks-is one of fact 
 and not of thought. In the Epistles 
 
974 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 Another form of connection is equally characteristic of 
 St. John, and equally instructive. Successive 
 sentences, no less than the parts of a single 
 sentence, are combined by the recurrence of 
 a common word. The repetition of the key-words of the 
 former sentence in that which follows, unites the new 
 statement with that which preceded, and yet invests it, at 
 the same time, with an individual worth. Sometimes the 
 subject is repeated: “I am the good shepherd. The good 
 shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.”' Sometimes 
 what appears a subordinate word is transferred to the first 
 place: “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay 
 down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends.”?.... 
 Sometimes a clause is repeated which gives the theme 
 of ‘the passage: 6 1 am ‘the (true vies). 06 Ὁ sam 
 the vine: ye are the branches;”*.... and again, one 
 which repeats its closing cadence:* “The world hated 
 them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not 
 of the world. .... They are not of the world, as I am 
 
 Connection by a 
 key-word. 
 
 not o1 tae world... 7.3 
 
 Sanctify them in the truth .... 
 
 that they may be sanctified in the truth.” ? 
 This repetition is connected with another peculiarity of 
 
 Parallelism. 
 
 St. John’s style, which is observable both in 
 
 the simple sentences and in the connected 
 record —the spirit of parallelism — the informing power 
 
 it occurs only 8John 8. In 1 John ii. 
 24; iv. 19, it is wrongly inserted in 
 some copies. 
 
 1x.11. In referring here and else- 
 where to our Lord’s discourses as re- 
 corded by St. John for illustrations of St. 
 John’s style, I may repeat (to avoid mis- 
 construction) what has been said before 
 of the relation of the Evangelist to the 
 words which he records. Nothing can 
 be further from my wish than to question 
 the Divine authority of the Evangelic 
 records of the Lord’s teaching. But 
 few can suppose that the Evangelists 
 have preserved generally either the 
 exact or the entire words of the dis- 
 
 course recorded. St. John in particu- 
 lar, from the individual character of 
 his Gospel, appears to present exactly 
 so much of each discourse as his natu-: 
 ral peculiarities of conception and lan- 
 guage fitted him to preserve, fulfilling 
 in this way his providential function 
 in the instruction of the Church. The 
 record is absolutely true, and yet not 
 complete. 
 
 2 xv. 18, 14. 
 
 3 xv. 1, 5. 
 
 4 xvii. 14—19. 
 
 ὃ This remarkable characteristic finds 
 a place even in the history; xviii. 18, 
 25. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. Sto 
 
 of Hebrew poetry — which runs through 10. It would not 
 be possible to find a more perfect example of parallelism 
 than the blessing of the Lord: “Peace I leave unto you; 
 iy peace I give unto you; not as the world giveth, give I 
 unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it 
 be afraid.”! .... But such instances are naturally very 
 rare, as they are essentially poetical, though simpler forms 
 both of direct? and antithetic® parallelism occur throughout 
 the book. That parallelism, however, which is most 
 characteristic of St. John, is a progressive or constructive 
 parallelism,’ or rather a symmetrical progression. The 
 subject is stated and pursued to a definite result ; it is then 
 stated again, with the addition of the new conclusion, and 
 earried to another limit. In this way the truth is pre- 
 sented, as it were, in a series of concentric circles, ever 
 widening; each one in succession includes all that have 
 gone before, and is in part determined by them.’ 
 
 This characteristic parallelism in thought and language, 
 which is found in the narrative and dis- 
 courses of St. John, leads the way to the yim δες, 
 truest appreciation of the entire Gospel. It Ji αν a 
 is, in fact, the divine Hebrew Epic. Every 
 part is impressed with the noblest features of Hebrew 
 poetry, and the treatment of the subject satisfies the con- 
 ditions of variety, progress, and completeness, which, when 
 combined with the essential nature of the subject itself, 
 make up the notion of a true Epic. The history is not only 
 of national, but of universal interest. The development of 
 faith and unbelief in the course of the Saviout’s life, up to 
 the last agony of the Passion and the last charge of the 
 
 1 xiv. 27. 18, 25. ἦν δὲ [Πέτρος] ἐστὼς καὶ dep- 
 2 ΚΟ. g. viii. 28. μαινόμενος ---ΟΥ as the theme: e.g. Χ. 
 8 E. g. vii. 6; viii. 14, 35, 88; xvi. 16, 7, 9, ἐγώ εἰμι ἣ Spa; x. 11, 14, ἔγώ 
 28. εἶμι 6 ποιμὴν ὃ καλός. Cf. xvii. 14— 
 4 One simple formin whichthisshows 10. 
 itself is the repetition of a clause either 5 The discourses in chaps. X. XvVii. 
 as the burden: ὁ. g. vi. 39, 40, 44, ἐγὼ will furnish a sufficient illustration of 
 ἀναστήσω ἐν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ; xviii. this method of arrangement. 
 
276 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 risen Lord, presents a moral picture of unapproachable 
 grandeur. The separate incidents subserve to the exhibi- 
 tion of the one central idea of “the Word made flesh 
 > and everything is contemplated in 
 its truly poetic, that is, in its permanent and typical, 
 
 dwelling among men; 
 
 aspect. Outward magnitude alone is wanting; and if the 
 narrative falls short in mere extent, this secondary acci- 
 dent cannot neutralize all the other details in which the 
 Gospel fulfils the requirements of an Epic. 
 
 But the fact that the Gospel is in the highest sense a 
 
 per seen POEM is not to be so interpreted as to bring 
 in virtue of itssw- into a prominent light the notion of art or 
 it composition, The Gospel is a poem, because 
 it is the simple utterance of a mind which received into 
 itself most deeply, and reproduced most simply, absolute 
 truth. It is an Epic, because it is the divine reflection of 
 the Life of the Son of God, not taken in a special aspect, 
 but as the Word manifested to men. This circumstance 
 alone distinguishes it from the other Gospels, which are 
 memoirs rather than poems, because they present the Life 
 of Christ under limited relations, and not chiefly or uni- 
 formly in its relation to the Infinite. And if that be a true 
 definition of poetry which describes it as the power of 
 giving “Infinity” to things, that is no less truly poetry 
 which preserves, in a peculiar sense, the idea of its “In- 
 finity” in the record of the Divine Life. 
 
 This view of St. John’s Gospel will be of considerable 
 
 Ee ave help in understanding its plan; for while it 
 orject of the Gos- δ the most natural outpouring of a soul full 
 ea of the life of Christ,’ the idea which was 
 foremost in the Apostle’s mind regulates the order of his 
 narrative. The idea clothes itself in facts; and the sym- 
 metry, which elsewhere is the effect of purpose, is here the 
 result, as it were, of an inner law. The subject which is 
 announced in the opening verses is realized, step by step, 
 in the course of the narrative. The Word “came to His 
 
 DG aN OU se Oils XT. 50. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. Ait 
 
 own,” and they “ received Him not;” but others “ received 
 Him,” and thereby became “sons of God.” This is the 
 theme, which requires for its complete treatment, not a true 
 record of events or teaching, but a view of the working 
 of both on the hearts of men. The ethical element is 
 coordinate with the historical; and the end which the 
 Evangelist proposes to himself answers to this double cur- 
 rent of his Gospel. He wrote that men might believe the 
 fact that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and believing 
 — by spiritual fellowship — might have life in his name. 
 
 After the Introduction (i. 1—18), which includes within 
 a narrow compass an outline of the personal pie ΤῊ 
 being of the Word, of His Revelation to men, im, ese 
 and of His Incarnation, the main body of the é 
 Gospel falls into two great divisions, the first (i. 19—xii.) 
 containing the record of the Life of Christ, the second the 
 record of His Passion (xili.—xx.). The whole is then 
 closed by an epilogue, which carries forward the lessons 
 of the Gospel to the history of the Church (xxi.). The 
 division between the two great sections is marked by a 
 two-fold pause. The Evangelist sums up the faithlessness 
 of the Jews, and connects their final rejection of Messiah 
 with the declarations of prophecy; and then records the 
 words in which the Lord declared His relation to the 
 Father and the world, foreshadowing the judgment which 
 should follow on the rejection of His message. 
 
 The first section may be generally described as the mani- 
 festation of Christ to men. Throughout the _ 
 whole of it, and nowhere afterwards, Christ tion “vr ‘Guat 
 is described as the Light. Under this image "” 
 
 He is first presented by St. John in the Introduction, and 
 at the close of the twelfth chapter the Lord Himself, when 
 
 1 xx. 81, ταῦτα δὲ γέγραπται, ἵνα trast to the popular theories of a polem- 
 πιστεύητε ὅτι Ingots ἐστὶν ὃ Χριστὸς ical object in the Gospel. The Gospel is 
 ὁ vids τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ ἵνα πιστεύοντες indeed truly polemical so far as the Truth 
 ζωὴν ἔχητε ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι a’tod — is the only complete answer to al! error. 
 words which offer an instructive con- 2 xii. 36—48; 44—50. 
 
 24 
 
278 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 He surveys the course of His teaching, repeats it for the 
 last time.’ A second idea is scarcely less characteristic : 
 Christ is not only the Light, but He came to give Life? 
 “He that followeth Me,” to use the remarkable words 
 which he addressed to the Jews, “shall have the light of 
 life.” The manifestation of Christ centres in these truths, 
 and is exhibited under two distinct aspects. The first 
 conveys the announcement of the Gospel 
 (i. 19—vi.) ; the second, the conflict (v.—xii.). 
 At first, during a wide range of labor in 
 Judea, Samaria, and Galilee, among persons most widely 
 separated by position and character, the revelation is made 
 without exciting any direct antagonism. The elements of 
 the future conflict are present, but visible only to the eye 
 of Him who “knew what was in man.”? The Gospel is 
 laid before the world, and the reception which it was 
 destined to meet is shown in detail in the portraiture of 
 typical cases. The testimony of the Baptist and of signs 
 (1. 19—11. 25) is followed by personal revelation (iii—iv.). 
 The group of the first disciples, Nathanael, Nicodemus, 
 the Samaritan woman, the Galilean nobleman, exhibit 
 various forms of faith and unbelief, and behind these indi- 
 - vidual characters glimpses of the popular feeling are given, 
 which serve as a preparation for the next 
 stage of the history. In this, the conflict 
 between Christ and “the Jews” grows more and more 
 hopeless, till the “chief Priests and Pharisees” finally de- 
 termine to put Him to death. The desire “to kill Him” is 
 marked at the opening of the period, and traced out on 
 several successive occasions, till the feeling of the people 
 was ratified by the deliberate judgment of the Sanhedrin.‘ 
 In the mean time the same course of events which aroused 
 
 The Announce- 
 ment. 
 
 The Conflict. 
 
 1 The image occurs, i. 4—9; iii. 19; 81]. 25, ἐν τῷ AvSpoTw. 
 Vili. 12: ix. δ; xii. 35, 46. 
 
 2 The phrases ἔχειν ζωήν, ete. occur 4 v.18, ἐζήτουν ἀποκτεῖναι. vii. 1— 
 ‘thirty times in this section and only 25; viii. 87-40; xi. 58, συνεβουλεύ- 
 six times in the remainder of the Gos- σαντο ἵνα ἀποκτείνωσιν αὐτόν. Cf. 
 pel. vili. 59; x. 81; xi..8. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 279 
 
 the animosity of the Jews tried the spirit of the disciples. 
 There is a conflict within as well as without; and they 
 who had welcomed the first proclamation of the Gospet 
 advance or fall back in faith as Christ revealed more fully 
 His Person and Work.’ This revelation proceeds in a 
 three-fold order. In the first section, Christ is presented 
 as the support of action and life (v., vi.) ; in the second, in 
 amore special sense, as the Light (vil—x.) ; in the third, 
 as the giver of life in death (xi, xil.), Each of these ideas 
 is illustrated by miraculous working; and the miracle both 
 points the lesson, and serves as the centre and starting- 
 point of the discourses which are grouped about it. Now, 
 Christ gives strength to the impotent man, feeds the multi- 
 tude in the wilderness, triumphs over the power of nature 
 (v., vi.); now He gives sight to the man born blind 
 (ix.); now he calls Lazarus from the grave (xi.). Each 
 division is bound to that which precedes by the recollection 
 of earlier conflicts ;? and the whole finds its consummation 
 in the twelfth chapter, which presents, in the most striking 
 contrasts, the fruits of faith and unbelief in act (xu. 1—22) 
 and sign (28—30) and word (44—50). Then, at the close 
 of Christ’s open ministry, Greeks come to claim admittance 
 to Him, of whom the Pharisees said in anger, “ Behold, the 
 world is gone after Him” (xii. 19—22); and who said 
 Himself, speaking of His death, “If I be lifted up from the 
 earth, I will draw all men unto me” (xii. 82). 
 The second great division of the Gospel (xill.—xx.) 
 differs from the first, both in the unity of | 
 ii. The issues of 
 scene and the briefness of the period over Christ's manisesta- 
 which it extends, and in the general charac- pads 
 ter of its contents. The first describes the manifestation 
 of Christ to men; the second presents the varied issues of 
 that manifestation. In regard both of its substance and of 
 its style it falls into two parts, of which the first (xili— 
 
 1 The different working of the Lord’s 69; vii. 12, 43; ix. 16; x. 19. 
 words upon His hearers is constantly 2 vii. 19 ff compared with y. 16 τῶ; 
 brought out by the Evangelist, vi. G0— xi. 8, compared with x. 89, 
 
280 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 oo 
 
 xvii.) contains the record of the Saviour’s love as seen in 
 His unrestrained intercourse with His disciples in the im- 
 mediate prospect of His death; while the second exhibits 
 the narrative of the Passion, as the crowning point of faith 
 on one side and unbelief on the other, of humiliation and 
 victory, of rejection and confession. A Church is founded 
 on the cross; a ministry 1s commissioned in the chamber 
 where the Apostles were gathered together in “fear of the 
 Jews.” } | 
 The one great subject of the Lord’s last discourses is 
 the “new commandment,” the love of Chris- 
 oe tans’ springing’ “out. of His lovetand “ais 
 Father’s love for them.2 The point of de- 
 parture is a symbolic act, which places in the clearest light 
 the ministry of love; then, after the dismissal of the traitor 
 (xii. 81), the Christian law is proclaimed, with the warning 
 against St. Peter’s hasty assurance (xi. 34—88). First, 
 love is contemplated as it works in the absence of the Lord 
 (xiv.), then as it springs from vital union with Him, the 
 only source of love (xv.), then as it is fulfilled in the 
 strength of the promised Spirit (xvi). And last of all, the 
 priestly prayer of Christ (xvil.) is itself at once the fullest 
 outpouring of love, and the surest pledge of the support of 
 love among Christians. After the record of 
 the Passion, in which the glorified human 
 nature of the risen Saviour is specially brought out, follows, 
 as a last appendix, the promise and _ the 
 charge for the future. A last miracle con- 
 veys the lesson of encouragement to those who toil long: 
 a last commission distinguishes the work which Christ’s 
 servants have still to do for Him? 
 Even in this rapid outline it is impossible to overlook 
 the unity of purpose and plan which runs through St. 
 
 The Passion. 
 
 The Epilogue. 
 
 1 Cf. xix. 34. 1 John νυ. 6, 8—xx.19. xvii.) and only thirteen times besides 
 in the remainder of the Gospel. 
 
 2 The words ἀγαπᾶν and ἀγάπη occur 8 The following sketch of the con- 
 
 thirty times in these chapters (xiii— struction of St. John’s Gospel may be 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 981 
 
 John’s Gospel. It is not, as the other Gospels, an individ- 
 ual view of a common subject, but the sub- 
 ἈΜῊΝ Σ Ἵ (c) The substance 
 stance is itself peculiar. It is not only per- 4 St. John’s Gos- 
 Sale . . ; pel. 
 sonal in its conception and working out, but it 
 deals with the history of the Lord personally. It lays open 
 
 of use in completing some of the gaps in the summary which has been given, and 
 guiding the way to minuter inquiry. 
 
 THE INTRODUCTION. i. 1—18. 
 The Word in His own Nature. i. 1—5. 
 His Revelation to men. 6—18. 
 The Incarnation. 14—18. 
 
 I. THE MANIFESTATION OF CHRIST TO THE WORLD. i. 19—xii 
 
 1. THE PROCLAMATION. 1. 19—iv. 
 (a) The Testimony. 1. 19—1ii. 12. 
 a. The Testimony of John. 1: 19—37. 
 ὃ. The Testimony of disciples. i. 88—62. 
 6. The Testimony of signs (The water made wine), ii. 1—12. 
 (b) The Work. ii. 18—iv. 54. 
 a. With Jews. 11. 138—iii. 
 The people (ii. 18—25). 
 tepresentative men (iii). 
 Nicodemus, the teacher of the law (1—21). 
 John the Baptist, the last prophet (22—36). 
 6. With Samaritans. iv. 1—42. 
 The woman (iv. 5—380). 
 The people (iv. 99 ---42). 
 ec. With Galileans. iv. 48—54. 
 The people (iv. 48—45). 
 The nobleman (iv. 46—54). (Nobleman’s son healed). 
 
 2. THE CONFLICT. v.—xii. 
 (a) The Prelude. v.—vi. 
 Christ the support of action and life. 
 (The impotent man healed.) 
 (The feeding of the multitudes.) 
 (The walking on the sea.) 
 (b) The Contrast. vii.—x. 
 Christ the source of truth, light, guidance. 
 (The man blind from his birth healed.) 
 (c) The Separation. xi.—xii 
 Christ the giver of life to the dead. xi. 
 (Lazarus raised.) 
 The judgment of men (xii. 1—29); of the Evangelist (xii 
 387 —41); of Jesus (xii. 44—50). 
 11. THE ISSUES OF CHRIST’S MANIFESTATION  xiii.—xx. 
 1. THE CONSOLATION. xiii.—xvili. 
 (a) Types. xiii. 
 The true pattern. xiii. 1—17. 
 The traitor. 18—80. 
 
 24* 
 
282 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 to us the thoughts which lie beneath actions, and traces 
 the gradual revelation of character. But while it is thus, 
 in some sense, more complete than the other Gospels, in so 
 far as it contains the complete spiritual portraiture of the 
 Lord, which is the key to all His outward life, yet in fact 
 it is as incomplete as they are. It is a poem and not a 
 life ; the exhibition of the most divine truth of which the 
 world has been witness, and not the narrative of events 
 which externally considered were infinite. The Old Tes- 
 
 The charge. xiii. 31—385. 
 The unstable. 36—88. 
 (δ) Love to Christ in absence. xiv. 
 The union of Christ with the Father. xiy. 1—11. 
 This the source of the Christian’s strength. 12—é8l. 
 (c) Love to Christ the spring of love. xv. 
 The mutual love of Christians. xy. 1—17. 
 The hatred of the world. 18—27. 
 (4) The Promise. xvi. 
 The Comforter. xvi. 1—15. 
 The Return. 16—24. 
 The Interval. 25—88. 
 (e) The Prayer. xvii. 
 For Christ himself. xvii. 1—5. 
 For the apostles. 6—19. 
 For all believers. 20—26. 
 2. THE VICTORY. xviii.—xx. 
 (a) The betrayal. xviii. 1—18, 25—27. 
 Judas. xviii. 1—14. 
 St. Peter. 15—18, 25—27. 
 (Ὁ) The Judgment. xviii. 19—xix. 16. 
 The Jews. xviii. 19—24. 
 Pilate. xviii. 28—xix. 16. 
 (c) The End. xix. 17—42. 
 The elevation on the cross. xix. 17—27. 
 The death of Jesus. 28—387. 
 The burial. 38—42. 
 (d) The New Life. xx. 1—29. 
 The revelation. xx. 1—18. 
 The commission. 19—28. 
 The abiding blessing. 24—29. 
 Conclusion. 380—81. : 
 
 THE EPILOGUE. xxi. 
 The sign of the Future. xxi. 1—14 
 (The Miraculous draught of Fishes.) 
 The varied call of the disciples. 15—24 
 Conclusion. 25. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 283 
 
 tament prophecies,! the miracles,’ the discourses which it 
 notices are in one aspect confined in range, and yet they 
 open out a way for every thought, and point to the Incar- 
 nation as the solution of every doubt. The materials are 
 rather pregnant with varied instruction than copious, 
 
 1 The quotations from the Old Testa- changed from the original text; some 
 ment which occur in St. John are char- are deductions or adaptations based on 
 acteristic of his general manner. Some the inner meaning of the prophetic 
 are yerbal citations; some are slightly words. 
 
 I. VERBAL QUOTATIONS. 
 John x. 34 = Ps. Jxxxi. 6(LXX. ἐν τῷ νόμῳ ὑμῶν = Hebr.) 
 [— xii. 13] = Ps. exvii. 25, 26 (LXX. σῶσον δέ for ‘Qoavvd). 
 — xii. 38 = Is. iii. 1 (LXX. — Hebr. om. Κύριε). 
 — xix. 24 = Ps. xxi. 19 (LXX. = Hebr.) 
 — xiii. 18 = Ps. xli. 9 (Hebr. not LXX.): 
 — xix. 87 = Zech. xii. 10 (Hebr. not LXX.) 
 
 II. VARIED QUOTATIONS. 
 1. CHANGES OF EXPRESSION. 
 
 John i. 23 = Is. xl. ὃ (εὐϑύνατε for ἑτοιμάσατε --- eddelas 
 ποιεῖτε in LXX. and Hebr.). 
 
 — xii. 14,15 = Zech. ix.9(uh φοβοῦ — καδήμ. ἐπὶ πῶλον ὄνου 
 for χαῖρε σφόδρα --- emi BeB. ἐπὶ ὑπο- 
 ζύγιον in LXX. and Hebr.), 
 
 — xii. 39—41 = Is. vi.9, 10 (τετύφλωκεν --- πεπώρωκεν. Sense of 
 Hebr. Varies from LXX.). 
 
 2. CHANGES OF ForRM. 
 
 John ii.17 = Ps. Ixviii. 10 (καταφάγεται for κατέφαγεν). 
 — vi. 31 ff. = Ex. xvi. 4, 15; Ps. xxvii. 24. 
 — νἱ. 46 -- 15. liv. 13 (add. καὶ ἔσονται). 
 —viii.l17 = Deut. xix. 15. 
 —xv.25 =Ps. xxxiy. 19 (direct (as Hebr.) from participial 
 form). 
 
 III. ADAPTATIONS. 
 Jobn vii. 38. Cf. Is. xii. 8; xliv. 3, ete. 
 [-- xii. 84. Cf. Ps. 1xxxviii. 36]. 
 — xix. 66. Cf. Ex. xii. 46. Ps. xxxiii. 21. 
 SROs Of. ba Kv, 10s 
 From the form of these quotations it acles recorded by St. John occupy in 
 would appear that St. John was famil- his narrative has been already marked, 
 iar both with the Hebrew text and with Taken by themselves, they present a 
 the LXX. whole pregnant with instruction. 
 2 The general position which the mir= 
 I. THE MIRACLES OF OUR SAVIOUR DURING HIS MINISTRY. 
 1. SOVEREIGNTY OVER NATURE— ABSOLUTELY. 
 The water made wine (ii. 1—11). 
 
 A type of the independence (v. 4) and transmuting power of 
 the spiritual life. 
 
284 THE GOSPEL OF 8ST. JOHN. 
 
 exhaustive in their application rather than in their form; 
 but the more the student pauses upon what seem abrupt 
 transitions, fragmentary utterances, simple repetitions, the 
 more he will advance to a certain perception of the abso- 
 lute unity by which the whole Gospel is bound together, 
 and of the infinite fulness of the revelation which it 
 contains in the record of “the Word made flesh.” 
 
 These reflections, which affect the contents of the Gospel 
 as well as its style and form, lead to the 
 second great point of our inquiry, — the rela- 
 tion in which the Gospel of St. John stands to 
 the Synoptic narratives. The general features of difference 
 between them have been already noticed ;' but it remains 
 to examine somewhat more in detail the special points of 
 variation and coincidence, which stamp them with the 
 marks of a real independence and of an underlying unity. 
 
 II. The relation . 
 of St. John to the 
 Synoptic Gospels. 
 
 2. SOVEREIGNTY OVER NATURE— RELATIVELY TO MAN. 
 (a) Disease. 
 a. The ruler’s son (iv. 46—54). 
 Mediative faith: above nature (v. 50). 
 ὃ. The man at Bethesda (v. 1—9). > 
 Personal faith: above ritual (v. 9). 
 (b) Disorder. 
 a. Natural wants (Gen. iii. 17). 
 Feeding the jive thousand (vi. 5—59). 
 Leading to higher aims (v. 58). 
 ὃ. Outward impediments. 
 Walking on the sea (vi. 15—21). 
 Leading to higher faith (v. 20). 
 c. Personal defects. 
 The man born blind (ix. 1—7). 
 Leading to higher responsibility (v. 89). 
 τσ) Death. 
 The raising of Lazarus (xi.). 
 Christ the source of Life (v. 25). 
 Il. THE MIRACLE OF THE RISEN SAVIOUR. 
 The multitude of fishes (xxi. 1—8). 
 The type of the successful work of the Church. 
 
 It is not, I believe, fanciful to see a 
 significance even in the number of these — 
 
 tion. Seven, according to the early 
 
 miracles. Seven are included in the 
 record of Christ’s ministry, and an 
 eighth completes the typical represen- 
 tation of His work after the resurrec- 
 
 belief, was the figure of a completed 
 creation: eight, the figure of the resur- 
 rection, or new birth (Cf. Aug. Zp. lv. 
 23). 
 
 1 Pp. 241, 251, 258 ἢ 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 985 
 
 The points of difference between St. John and the 
 Synoptists are commonly classed under two 
 heads, — differences as to the place and form 
 of our Lord’s teaching, and differences as to 
 the view which is given of His Person. 
 
 The Synoptists, it is said, describe the public ministry 
 of Christ as extending only over one year, 
 and closing with a visit to Jerusalem, which 
 was at once the first and the last which He made. St. 
 John, on the other hand, records a visit to Jerusalem at the 
 very commencement of His work, and notices several visits 
 afterwards, which were spread over a period (apparently) 
 of three years. The Synoptists, again, combine to present 
 a picture of Christ’s teaching characterized by simplicity, 
 terseness and vigor, illustrated by frequent parables and 
 summed up in striking proverbs, while St. John attributes 
 to Him long and deep discourses, in which the argument is 
 almost hidden by unnatural repetitions, and in which 
 practical instruction is lost in the mazes of mystical specu- 
 lation. In the former our Lord is described as a great 
 moral reformer, laying open the fundamental principles of 
 the Law which he came to fulfil, speaking as a man among 
 men, though clothed with the dignity of a prophet; in the 
 latter, from first to last, He is invested with a divine glory, 
 claiming for Himself a relation with the Father which 
 aroused to the utmost the anger of His enemies, and 
 inspired His followers with hope, even in the prospect of 
 bereavement. And yet further, it is urged that the differ- 
 ences are not confined to general differences of time and 
 manner and character, but extend to important details of 
 fact, since the miracles, which are represented by St. John 
 as the turning-points of our Lord’s course (as the raising 
 of Lazarus) are unnoticed by the Synoptists. 
 
 One answer may be made in common to all these objec- 
 tions, and to the last no other is necessary. They proceed 
 upon the assumption that the Gospels are complete biogra- 
 phies. They would be of great weight if, on other grounds, 
 
 1. Points of dif- 
 JSerence 
 
 as objections, 
 
286 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 there were any reason to suppose that the Evangelists 
 either told all the facts which they knew, or 
 came phectiors entertained the idea of writing histories. It 
 pieteness of each has, however, been already shown that such 
 a view of their purpose is wholly untena- 
 ble. The historical framework of their writings subserved 
 to a doctrinal development. The form and extent of the 
 narrative was determined by ontward circumstances. The 
 omission of one or other series of events or discourses is 
 not equivalent to an exclusion of them, unless it can be 
 shown that the two supplementary records are inconsistent. 
 All truthful inquiry into the mutual relations of the Gospels 
 must be based upon the fullest recognition of the fragmen- 
 tariness. The question is not, Whether this fact is left 
 unnoticed by one? nor even, Why it is left unnoticed? 
 but, Is it actually set aside by some other record? Is it 
 irreconcilable, either in occurrence or in conception, with 
 what we learn from other sources? When the ground 
 is thus limited, few who have studied the manifold aspects 
 of the most common-place life will be prepared to affirm - 
 that differences of tone and style, however marked, are 
 necessarily inconsistent when they are attributed to the 
 same character; few who have been familiarized with the 
 wide divergences in detail of authentic narratives profess- 
 edly complete, will insist with excessive confidence on 
 different ranges of subject in narratives composed for a 
 special purpose, to which completeness was always sub- 
 ordinate. 
 But, besides this general answer, there are other pre- 
 sumptions which are sufficient to justify in 
 (a) The aiger- fact what has been urged only as a possibility. 
 
 ences as to locality 
 
 ant manner of The first objection that the locality and mode 
 emplaincach other; of our Lord’s teaching, as recorded by St. 
 
 John, are both different from those described 
 by the Synoptists, is as much an undesigned coincidence 
 
 as a difficulty. It would be natural to suppose that the 
 
 1 Pp. 176 ff 212. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF 51. JOHN. 287 
 
 one would be, so to speak, a function of the other. The 
 hearers and the doctrine are obviously connected by con- 
 siderations of fitness. If it were the case that the method 
 of instruction were the same while the persons were widely 
 varied, or the persons the same while the teaching was 
 changed, it might be fairly asked whether such differences 
 would be likely to exist within the narrow limits over 
 which the Lord’s ministry was extended. But, as it is, if 
 it appear that there is a clear propriety in the twofold 
 variation, answering alike to the immediate object and 
 to the permanent office of the books, then the ground of 
 objection becomes an indication of providential design. 
 The want of all ages is found to be satisfied in the record 
 of the Saviour’s labors in different countries and among 
 different men. 
 
 That there was such a division in the Jewish nation, as 
 is implied in the characteristics of the mass Ως την 
 of our Lord’s hearers in the Synoptists and essai) 
 St. John, is unquestionable. On the one side i 
 the peasantry of Galilee —that “warlike race,” as Jose- 
 phus describes them, who had in earlier times withstood 
 the chariots of Sisera, and were yet again to vindicate 
 their independence against the arms of Rome! —still clung 
 to the literal faith of their fathers in simplicity and zeal. 
 They wished to raise Jesus to an earthly throne,’ and led 
 Him in their Paschal train to the Holy City.’ Their relig- 
 ion lay in action and their faith in obedience. But far 
 different was the state of those Jews who had been brought 
 into contact with Greek intellect or Roman order. For 
 them new regions of thought were opened, which seemed 
 
 1 Compare Dr. Stanley’s Sermons on 8 John xii. 12—19. While St. John 
 
 the Apostolic Age. p.84, γι. 
 
 2 John vi. 15. The address which fol- 
 lowed in the synagogue at Capernaum 
 to those who were already partially in- 
 structed, may be compared with that in 
 the synagogue at Nazareth (Luke iy. 16 
 ff.), at the beginning of Christ’s miuis- 
 try, as to its tone and results. 
 
 recognizes the peculiar character of 
 this Galilean multitude, he does not 
 detail the teaching addressed to them, 
 which we find in the other Evangelists. 
 This clearly points to a difference of 
 scope and not to a divergence of tra- 
 dition. 
 
288 THE GOSPEL JF ST. JOHN. 
 
 to indicate that religion was only for the wise. They felt 
 the full difficulty of founding any universal earthly sway, 
 and either rejected the Messianic hopes as the result of 
 fanaticism, or saw in the course of things around them 
 the signs of some mighty spiritual change which should 
 more than fulfil the metaphors of the ancient prophets. 
 To the former class, whetlrer at Capernaum or at Jerusa- 
 lem, we find the truths of Christianity addressed in their 
 plainness and active power. Parables and maxims are 
 multiplied to enliven their apprehension and direct their 
 energy... And on this teaching the missionary Gospels 
 were naturally based, the Gospels of the Church’s infancy 
 and growth, because the same conditions which shaped 
 its form in the first instance called for its preservation 
 afterwards. But to those who were reared under other 
 influences, to the student of the law, “the teacher of Israel,” 
 to the Samaritan, perplexed with doubts about the traditions 
 of her fathers, to the cavillers who reposed in blind confi- 
 dence on the Law, which was daily presented to them in 
 the splendor of a noble ritual, to the disciples growing 
 in faith, and yet unable to bear all that a loving Teacher 
 would disclose, other modes of instruction were adapted. 
 Now an awakening dialogue, now a startling revelation, 
 now an outpouring of righteous zeal or gentle tenderness, 
 furnished the materials for that Gospel which penetrates 
 to the depths of individual life. Yet the popular and the 
 personal styles of thought and language are perfectly 
 harmonious. The histories which severally record them 
 are not contradictory but complementary. They do not 
 exclude but imply one another. They recognize generic 
 differences which, as we know, existed among the Jews at 
 the time; and itis no small proof of their authenticity 
 that they satisfy the requirements of those great national 
 parties in Judgea, which could scarcely have been realized 
 
 1 The parables addressed tothe rulers ence and (as it seems) for the instruc- 
 and Pharisees in Matt. xxi. 28; xxii.1 tion of the multitude. Cf. Matt. xxi. 
 ff. were addressed to them in the pres- 26, 46. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 289 
 
 by a writer whose ideas were drawn from a time when the 
 centre of Jewish life was destroyed. 
 
 Yet it may be said, that this general harmony between 
 the two forms of teaching and the two classes 
 of hearers is no answer to differences as to 
 the time and place of Christ’s ministry, as 
 given by the different Evangelists. Jf the 
 time were extended, if the place were varied, then the 
 change in style would be intelligible; but the narrative of 
 the Synoptists recognizes no such extension or movement. 
 Here the incompleteness of the records precludes the 
 possibility of a perfect answer; butit is enough that the 
 Synoptists at least allow that the ministry of our Lord may 
 have been as long and as diversified as St. John relates; 
 and, indeed, many old writers, in their anxiety to establish 
 a harmony between the Gospels, found in the fourth only 
 an appendix to the other three, designed to fix their chro- 
 
 the 
 allow 
 extended 
 
 Moreover 
 Synoptists 
 of an 
 ministry, 
 
 nology and supply details which they left unnoticed. 
 The very nature of the first promulgation of the Gospel, 
 if we apprehend it according to the com- 
 
 mon laws of history, demanded a lengthened 
 period for its accomplishment.’ 
 
 which is antecedent- 
 ly prodable, and 
 
 Apart from 
 
 any express data, it must seem incredible that the course 
 
 1 It is useful to call to mind constantly 
 the extreme uncertainty which hangs 
 over the exact length of our Lord’s min- 
 istry. The only certain limits within 
 which it must lie are the “ 15th year of 
 the reign of Tiberius ” (Luke iii. 1, a. Ὁ. 
 28) and the recall of Pilate, just before 
 the death of that emperor, A. D. 37, 
 which leaves room enough for the tra- 
 dition mentioned by Irenzus, on the 
 authority of Asiatic tradition, that our 
 Lord was at least 40 years old at the 
 time of His death (Iren. ii. 22,5). Even 
 in the time of Irenseus there was no sat- 
 isfactory information on the point; and 
 the uncertainty of the Jewish calendar 
 will not allow of any conclusion based 
 on the day of the Pascual festival. Al- 
 
 lowing that St. John only mentions 
 three passovers (excluding y. 1), 1 know 
 of no arguments which can prove that 
 he notices every passover in the course 
 of our Lord’s ministry; and in such a 
 case it seems by far the wisest course to 
 leave the question undecided, as the 
 Gospels leave it. 
 
 I ought to refer the reader to the strik- 
 ing arguments of Mr. Browne (Ordo Sa- 
 clorum) in support of the belief that the 
 Lord’s ministry was limited to one year. 
 If there were direct evidence in support 
 of the omission of τὸ πάσχα in John vi. 
 4, his case would be very strong. As it 
 is, the point, as it seems, must be left 
 wholly undetermined, 
 
 25 
 
290 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 of events which the Synoptists relate could have been 
 compressed into a single year. Such narrow limits leave 
 no adequate space for the development of faith in the 
 disciples ; for the transition from hope to hatred in the mass 
 of the people; for the varied journeys on both sides of 
 Jordan and to “the borders of Tyre and Sidon;” for the 
 missions of the Apostles and the Seventy, without suppos- 
 ing a haste — almost a precipitancy —in the consummation 
 of Christ’s personal work, which finds no parallel in the 
 history of His preparation or in the labors of the Apostles. 
 ~ But, in fact, the Synoptists imply, in rare 
 passages, the existence of a much more ex- 
 tended ministry than they have described. 
 St. Luke, in a casnal date, marks the occurrence of a pass- 
 over in the middle of his narrative;? and the various 
 allusions to Jerusalem which are scattered through the first 
 three Gospels show that the Lord must have been there 
 before the time of the Passion;? while St. John, on the 
 other hand, expressly notices that an earlier visit was made 
 purposely in such a way as to avoid popular notice, 
 “because the time (καιρός) was not yet fulfilled.” ® 
 The objection which is drawn from the variations in the 
 form of our Lord’s teaching admits also of a 
 The diversity is not only a 
 necessary result of the diversity of hearers, 
 as an extended scene was required by the 
 nature of the message, but is actually recognized as exist- 
 There are mutual coincidences 
 between St. John and the Synoptists which break the 
 abruptness of the transition from the one to the other 
 
 actually acknowl- 
 edged by them. 
 
 And in the form 
 of our Lord’s teach- 
 ing offer parallels 
 to St. John. 
 
 similar answer. 
 
 ing in our present records. 
 
 1 Luke vi.1, ἐν σαββάτῳ δευτερο- 
 πρώτῳ, yet it must be noticed that the 
 word is omitted by important authori- 
 ties. 
 
 2 Cf. Matt. iv. 25; xxiii. 37—89 (πο- 
 σάκις, ἄπαρτι); xxvii. 57. Luke x. 38 
 ff. (Cf. John xi. 5). See also Matt. xix. 
 1/Cf. John x. 40); viii. 18. 
 
 9 John vii. 6, 10. St. John himself 
 in this passage implies that Galilee was 
 the chief theatre of our Lord’s teach- 
 ing and works (vii. 3, 4), though he had 
 recorded two previous visits to Jerusa- 
 lem. In other places he leaves ample 
 room for the Galilzan ministry; ii. 12; 
 lV, 4355400 νι Υ Ds vale, 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 991 
 
 One fragment preserved by St. Matthew and St. Luke 
 presents the closest resemblance in tone and manner to 
 the discourses in St. John ;! and St. John, while he avoids 
 the exact type of the parable, has preserved the relation of 
 addresses and acts, which are only parables transformed.? 
 Tn this respect it might seem that the differences of teach- 
 ing lead us beyond the two great classes of hearers in 
 Galilee and Jerusalem, and offer a characteristic trait which 
 distinguishes the mass of Galilzean followers from the closer 
 circle of the Apostles. 
 
 It is not necessary to examine at length the last objection, 
 which rests on the twofold view of the Lord’s 
 
 (b) Differences as 
 
 Person given in the Gospels. So far as the το our Lords Per- 
 differences on which this is based have any ~" 
 real existence, they have been already noticed. They 
 belong to the essence of supplementary records of Christ’s 
 life. They are recognized in the Creeds as well as in the 
 Bible. And all the circumstances connected with the 
 fuller revelation of his glory were calculated to eall it 
 forth. The time, the persons, the occasion, were suited for 
 the teaching of the greater mysteries which must have 
 been taught if Christianity is true. And there is a propor- 
 tion preserved between the communication of the doctrine 
 and the record of it which harmonizes with the general 
 character of Scripture. The deeper truth was committed 
 not to the multitude, but to the few; and the writing in 
 which it is preserved was not the common witness of the 
 Church, but the testimony of a loved disciple. 
 
 The consideration of the differences be- Points ofcoin 
 tween the Synoptists and St. John has 
 already led to the notice of some of their coincidences. 
 
 1 Matt. xi. 25—30. Luke x. 21—24. tery of His death under symbolic lan- 
 guage bothin St. John and in the Syn- 
 2 John x. 1—13; xv. 1—6; xii. 24; optists: John iii, 14; Matt. xii. 49; 
 xvi. 51, John xiii. 4-12, Compare Jolin ii. 20; Luke xiii. 82. For a still 
 Jolin iii. 29 with Matt. ix. 15. earlier revelation of the same truth, 
 Itis worthy of notice that our Lord compare Jolin i. 29 with Luke ii. 35. 
 is represented as veiling the great mys- Compare p. 273 n. 5. 
 
292 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 These extend to facts, to teaching, and to character; and 
 contribute in no slight degree to invest the fourth Gospel 
 with those attributes of reality and life, which are too 
 commonly lost sight of in the discussion of its peculiar 
 characteristics. 
 
 The manner in which St. John alludes to some of the 
 cardinal points of our Lord’s life, illustrates 
 the usage of the Synoptists with regard to 
 the lapse of time which takes place in their history. He 
 assumes as known that which he nowhere specifies. His 
 full meaning is first perceived when contemplated in the 
 light of facts which are only recorded by others. Though 
 he does not relate in the course of his narrative the details 
 of the Incarnation, the Baptism, the Last Supper, or the 
 Ascension, yet he gives peculiar and unequivocal intima- 
 
 tions of each event. The first statement of 
 
 the Incarnation is absolute; it stands as a 
 vast truth apart from all relation to individuals.’ But at 
 the beginning of our Lord’s ministry, before He had 
 “manifested forth His glory,” “the mother of Jesus” 
 looked to Him in perfect dependence on His power, now 
 that He had commenced His public ministry and gathered 
 His disciples round Him. The life of “subjection,” which 
 was at length closed, explains the nature of her request; 
 and the critical character of the moment is brought out yet 
 more distinctly in the answer, “ Woman, what have I to 
 do with thee?” which places in the clearest contrast the 
 freedom of spiritual action and the claims of private duty. 
 The history of the Infancy and the first miracle at Cana 
 mutually explain each other. An act which is related by 
 one Evangelist carries out the thoughts which are noticed 
 by another.’ Perfect independence issues in perfect har- 
 
 (a) In fact. 
 
 The Incarnation. 
 
 1 John i. 14, 6 λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο. vat, with the corresponding words 
 2 John ii. 1 ff. St. John alone of the from the cross (xix. 26), Γύναι, ἴδε 6 
 Evangelists does not mention the name vids σου, as St. John stood by, ready to 
 of ‘‘the Mother of the Lord.” It is a ‘take her to his own home.” 
 yoint full of instruction to compare 
 the phrase (ii. 4). τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί yv- 3 Luke ii. 51. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 293 
 
 mony. In another aspect of the same great fact St. John 
 dwells on the doctrine, while the Synoptists detail the 
 events. St. Matthew and St. Luke narrate at length the 
 history of the Miraculous Conception, and St. John dwells 
 with especial fulness on the eternal Sonship of Christ, 
 which is its divine correlative. The two truths must stand 
 or fall together; for a Cerinthian mean can never express 
 that union of God and man, which is alone suflicient to 
 assure our hearts of redemption. 
 
 If we pass from the Incarnation to the Baptism, we find 
 in this also the same silence and the same 
 implied knowledge of the circumstances of 
 the occurrence. When John the Baptist first appears, his 
 The Christ is recognized. When 
 Jesus comes, as it appears, from the scene of the Tempta- 
 tion,! he revealed Him to others and witnessed, saying, “I 
 have seen the Holy Spirit descending as a dove from 
 
 The Baptism. 
 
 great work is done. 
 
 heaven, and it abode upon Him.” ? 
 
 The allusions to the Christian sacraments are equally 
 characteristic, though they are of a different 
 kind. Nothing is said of the institution of 
 the Eucharist or of Holy Baptism, and yet 
 the conversation with Nicodemus*® and the discourse at 
 Capernaum stand in the closest relation with them, and 
 unfold and enforce the inner meaning of rites with which 
 the Apostle must have been familiar as ordinances of 
 Christ. 
 
 The references to the Ascension are, perhaps, the most 
 remarkable example of the manner in which 
 St. John includes the historical fact in the 
 spiritual necessity of it. He gives at length the discourses 
 
 The Eucharist: 
 Holy Baptism. 
 
 The Ascension. 
 
 1 This seems to be the natural way of 
 connecting the narratives of St. John 
 and the Synoptists, and to involve no 
 difficulty. 
 
 2 The apparent discrepancy between 
 John i. 91 and Matt. iii, 14 disappears 
 when we remember that the fulfilment 
 
 of Joln’s public mission was to be 
 indicated by a definite sign (John i. 
 81—35), and thus his personal knowl- 
 edge (Matt. iii. 14, 15) was independent 
 of his power of prophetic recognition 
 (John i. 81). 
 
 3 iii. 5. Cf. [Mark] xvi. 16; Acts ii. 38. 
 
 25* 
 
294 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 in which the need and the consequences of the event are 
 explained at full; after the Resurrection, he records the 
 remarkable address of our Lord to Mary, in which it is 
 contemplated as an immediate occurrence; and yet he says 
 nothing of the fulfilment of the promise. It is enough 
 that the fact was a part of the divine order. As such for 
 him it was, and his readers knew from other sources how 
 it took? place.® 
 
 The marked distinction between the teaching of our 
 Lord in St. John and in the Synoptists has 
 been recognized most fully; but it has been 
 shown that there are points of connection by which the 
 two are in some degree united. 
 of being presented somewhat more in detail, in regard of 
 the substance as well as of the manner of the teaching. 
 There is, indeed, something of characteristic difference 
 
 (b) In teaching. 
 
 This connection admits 
 
 1 John xx 17. With this may be 
 compared the fact that while St. John 
 gives most fully the Discourse on the 
 Mission of the Comforter, St. Luke 
 records the descent of the Holy Spirit 
 (Acts ii.), though he does not notice 
 the antecedent promise. So again, St. 
 John alone notices the special commis- 
 sion of the Apostles (xx. 21,22. Cf. 
 Matt. xxviii. 19, 20), which is after- 
 wards seen to be realized in the history 
 of the Church. 
 
 In illustration of the usage of St. 
 Joln it may be remarked that St. Paul 
 presupposes the mystery of the Incar- 
 nation without expressly stating it: 
 Rom. i. 4; ix. 5. Gal. iy. 4, 5; and 
 includes the Ascension in the Resur- 
 rection: 1 Thess. i. 10. The Pauline 
 teaching of the second Adam (1 Cor. 
 Xv. 45) may also be compared with 
 John iii 6. 
 
 2 At the one meeting-point of all the 
 Gospels before the history of the Pas- 
 sion (John vi. 1 ff. and parallel ae- 
 counts) their harmony is perfect. The 
 recurrence of Κόφινος, which is only 
 used in the account of this miracle in 
 
 the New Testament, in all the narratives 
 is worthy of notice. 
 
 Among other facts which St. John 
 mentions incidentally as well-known 
 are the calling of “ the twelve” (ἐκλέ- 
 ξασϑαι, John vi. τὸ. Cf. Luke vi. 18): 
 the difference between our Lord’s birth- 
 place and place of abode (John vii. 42): 
 His relation to Joseph (i 46; vi. 42). 
 
 3 This clear presupposition of an ac- 
 curate acquaintance with the facts of 
 the life of Christ, which is shown in 
 these minute references, and penetrates 
 the whole Gospel, has two important 
 bearings, which, although necessarily 
 connected, yet refer to different lines 
 of thought In detail it tends to estab- 
 lish the minute truth of the events re- 
 corded by the Evangelists; and more 
 generally, by showing that the spiritual 
 aspect of the evangelic facts was re- 
 vealed at a time when the simple nar- 
 ratives were already current, it refutes 
 the theory of an imaginary history 
 invented to supply a mental want. 
 The truth lay in the facts; but the facts 
 were accepted in themselves before 
 their inner meaning was laid open. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 295 
 both in the conception and in the expression of the same 
 truths, but such that the difference contributes to the com- 
 pleteness of the final idea. Thus, in St. Matthew the 
 crowning doctrine of the Holy Trinity is expressed in the 
 formula of Baptism; in St. John it is contemplated in the 
 personal relation of the Christian to the Father and the 
 Son and the Comforter." The mystery of the Atonement 
 lies at the bottom of many of our Lord’s last words to His 
 disciples, but it nowhere is stated with such simple dis- 
 tinctness as in the phrase recorded by St. Matthew and 
 St. Mark, in which it is said that “the Son of man came 
 ..:. to give His life In the 
 Synoptists, no less than in St. John, Christ claims for 
 Himself the possession of “ all power,”® the forgiveness of 
 sins, the sole revelation of the Father.£. In both there are 
 traces of the same images, of the same thoughts, of the 
 same language.” And it is most important to observe that 
 St. John nowhere attributes to our Lord the key-words of 
 
 a ransom for many.”? 
 
 1 Matt. xxviii. 19; John xv. xvi. xvii. 
 
 2 Matt. xx. 28; Mark x. 45 (λύτρον 
 ἀντὶ πολλῶν). The word λύτρον is not 
 found elsewhere in the New Testament. 
 ᾿Αντίλυτρον occurs 1 Tim. ii. 6. 
 
 3 Matt. xxviii. 18. Cf. xxii. 41—46. 
 
 4 Matt. xi. 27. 
 
 5 The following examples will be suf- 
 ficient to justify what is said: 
 
 1. COINCIDENCES IN IMAGERY. 
 
 John iii. 3 (the new birth); Matt. 
 xviii. 3 (become as little children). 
 
 John iv. 35; Matt. ix. 87 (the great 
 harvest). 
 
 John xiii. 1 ff; Luke xii. 37 (the Mas- 
 ter serving). Cf. Luke xxii. 27. 
 
 John xiii. 16; Matt. x. 24, 25 (the 
 master and servant). 
 
 John iii. 29; Matt. xxii. 2 (the bride- 
 groom). 
 
 2. COINCIDENCES IN THOUGHT. 
 
 John y. 14; Matt. xii. 483—45 (the 
 worse thing). 
 
 John ix. 39; Matt. xiii. 13. 
 xii. 40 (the eyes blinded). 
 
 Cf. John 
 
 John xiii. 20; Matt. x. 40 (the Father 
 received by the faithful). 
 
 John v.30; Matt. xxvi. 39 (the Fa- 
 ther’s will done). 
 
 John iii. 17; Luke ix. 56 (the mission 
 to save). 
 
 John vii. 29; x. 15; Matt. xi. 27 (the 
 Father known to Christ). 
 
 8. COINCIDENCES 1N LANGUAGE. 
 
 John iy. 44; Matt. 
 prophet without honor). 
 
 John xii. 25; Luke xvii. 33 (the soul 
 loved and lost). 
 
 John y. 8; Mark ii. 9 (the words of 
 healing). 
 
 xiii. 57 (the 
 
 To these may be added the parallel 
 reports of the judgment of the people: 
 John iy. 19; Luke vii. 16—John vi. 42; 
 Matt. xiii. 55—John vii. 15; Matt. xiii. 
 54. And while the Synoptists (Matt. 
 xxvi. 61) mention the special charge 
 against the Lord of speaking against 
 the Temple, St. John alone gives the 
 words which led to the charge (John 
 ii. 19. Cf. Matt. xii. 6). 
 
296 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOIN. 
 
 his own terminology. In his Gospel, as in the others, 
 Christ speaks of Himself as “the Son” or “the Son of 
 man,” and never as “the Word.” ! 
 
 One other point of coincidence between the Synoptists 
 and St. John still remains to be noticed, — the 
 coincidence of the characters which they de- 
 scribe. The scene varies, the manner varies, the substance 
 (in some sense) varies, but the great figures who give life to 
 the picture are the same. This kind of resemblance, which 
 in fiction is one of the subtlest refinements of art, in such 
 writings as the Gospels is a clear sign of absolute truth. 
 Where it cannot spring from elaborate design, it must be 
 the result of faithful portraiture. 
 
 It has been often and most truly said that the character 
 of our Lord, as drawn by the Evangelists, is 
 in itself the one sufficient proof of their 
 veracity. No character could have been 
 further removed from the popular ideal of the time; none 
 more entirely beyond the conception of men reared amidst 
 dreams of national hope, and checked at every step by the 
 signs of foreign power. A natural awe commonly hinders 
 us from picturing to ourselves the Person of our blessed 
 
 (c) In character. 
 
 The character of 
 the Lord. 
 
 1 John iii. 10—21, and 27—35, might 
 at first sight seem exceptions to this 
 remark. Yet, on a careful reading of 
 the passages, it seems impossible not to 
 feel that the Evangelist is in part com- 
 menting on and explaining the testi- 
 mony which he records. The com- 
 ments seem to begin respectively at 
 verses 16 and 81. These additions will 
 seem less singular if we remember that 
 they set forth the spiritual essence of 
 Christianity in relation to the legal 
 righteousness and to the preparatory 
 mission of the Baptist. _ 
 
 These explanatory comments receive 
 a striking illustration from a single 
 phrase introduced into John xvii. 3. 
 The title Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς in such a 
 connection is wholly without parallel 
 jn the Gospels; and we must, I think, 
 
 regard Tov μ. GA. Θεὸν and I. Xp. as 
 explanations of the preceding, added 
 by the Evangelist, which do not modify 
 but enly define the sense. Cf. 1 John 
 v. 20. The title Jesus Christ is com- 
 monly given to our Lord in the Acts 
 and Epistles, but occurs only in the 
 introductions to the Gospels: Matt. i. 
 1, 16,18; Mark i. 1; John i. 17, or, in 
 other words, in those sections which 
 formed no part of the original tradi- 
 tion. This peculiarity is important, as 
 showing the two stages in the history 
 of the Gospels, though it will not bear 
 out the conclusion which Dr. Dobbin 
 (Davidson, Introd. i. 421 ff.) drew from 
 it, as to the priority of the Gospels in 
 their present form tothe Epistles. Cf. 
 pp. 211 ff. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 297 
 
 Lord with any individual distinctness. In one sense it is 
 true that He has no individuality, for the aspects of His 
 human nature are practically infinite; but we do not even 
 apprehend His character individually in the different lights 
 in which it is presented. The mind shrinks from analysis, 
 lest criticism should take the place of devotion; and yet 
 there is a sense in which even we may “see Christ in the 
 flesh,” and strengthen our faith by the contemplation of 
 those traits of a divine humanity, which furnish for all 
 ages the perfect type of life. Touching only on one small 
 border of this subject, we may notice some features in the 
 character of our Lord which are traced both in the Synop- 
 tists and St. John. The variety of the circumstances 
 establishes the truthfulness of the impression, and helps to 
 present the Saviour to us, not as a mere embodiment of an 
 idea, as some have taught, but moving in a world of action, 
 and influenced by the complex feelings to which we are 
 subject. At the beginning and the close of His work, St. 
 John, as we have already seen,' shows how He drew a line 
 between natural and spiritual claims; so in the Synoptists, 
 “He stretched forth His hand to His disciples, and said, 
 Behold my mother and my brethren,” when, for a moment, 
 His earthly kindred sought to interrupt His work of 
 mercy.?_ By the well at Sychar He sat down “ wearied,” 
 and then forgot His request and His fatigue in conversing 
 with the Samaritan, so that “His disciples prayed Him, 
 saying, Master, eat. But He said unto them, I have meat 
 to eat that ye know not of.”® And so again, after He had 
 retired into the wilderness with His disciples, for “they 
 had no leisure so much as to eat,” when He saw much 
 people, He “was moved with compassion toward them, 
 and began to teach them many things.”* In each case the 
 same bodily want is recognized, and in each ease it yields 
 to the pressure of a higher desire. The Jews, when they 
 1 p. 292, n. 2. 8 John iv. 6, 7, 31 ff 
 
 2 Matt. xii. 46 ff.; Mark iv. 82 ff; 
 Luke viii. 19. 4 Mark vi. 81 ff. Cf. Mark iii. 20. 
 
298 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 saw His acts of authority, said unto Him, “ What sign 
 showest Thou unto us, seeing that Thou doest these 
 things? Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this 
 temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” “An evil 
 and adulterous generation,” He said, in another place, 
 “seeketh after a sign; and there shall be no sign given to 
 it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas.”* In both cases the 
 manner, the thought, the lesson, is the same. We feel that 
 both are utterances of the same Person, and yet such that 
 no mere power of imitation could have passed from one to 
 the other. John, when in prison, sent to ask Christ, “Art 
 Thou He that should come, or do we look for another? 
 Jesus answered, ....Go and show John again those 
 things which ye do hear and see.” “If I had not come and 
 spoken unto them, they had not had sin... .. If I had 
 not done among them the works which none other man 
 did, they had not had sin.”? The testimony of word 
 and deed, that is enough to reassure the last prophet who 
 would have hastened, it may be, the glory of Christ’s 
 kingdom, and to condemn those who “had seen and hated 
 both Him and His Father.” A short sentence from the 
 lips of One who “knew what was in man” lays open the 
 whole inner life and brings to its final issue the struggle 
 which divides it, whether of faithful repentance, as, when 
 He said, “Go, call thy husband,” or of sad abandonment, 
 as, when He gave the command to him whom He loved, 
 “Go thy way, sell whatever thou hast, and give to the 
 poor.”® Nicodemus, when he seemed to claim for himself 
 the gift of wise discernment, was met by the answer, 
 “Except aman be born again, he cannot see the kingdom 
 of God.” When the disciples disputed “Who is the 
 greatest,” Jesus set a little child in the midst of them, and 
 said, “Except ye be converted, and become as little child- 
 ren, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” * The 
 
 1 John ii 19; Matt. xii. 39. 3 John. iv. 16; Mark x. 21. 
 4 John iii. 8 (οἴδαμεν, ver. 2); Matt. 
 2 Matt. xi. 4; John. xy. 24. xviii. 1 ἢ: 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 299 
 
 multitude crowded round Him in wild anger, and “ He hid 
 Hiinself, and going through the midst of them so passed 
 by,” if, perhaps, their sin might be yet averted." The same 
 simple words, “ Follow me,” mark the discipleship of Philip 
 in St. John, which elsewhere determine the call of Mat- 
 thew. The over-zealous request of St. Peter was antici- 
 pated by a question which reproved his zeal, and in the 
 same way the salutation of Nathanael seems to have 
 replied to the doubts with which his mind was filled’ In 
 St. John, as in the Synoptists, the dealing of our Lord with 
 those who came to Him is everywhere marked by the 
 same absolute insight, so that His words were the touch- 
 stone by which their thoughts were revealed. Love is 
 blended with judgment, and the voice of encouragement 
 with the call to faith, in a way which finds no parallel in 
 history. The image is divine, and bears witness to a 
 divine prototype. 
 
 The vastness of the character of the Lord is best seen 
 by contrast with any of the other characters 
 in the Gospels. These, however noble, are 4, pac” 
 yet limited, and capable of being realized in 
 a definite form. Every one has a distinct conception of 
 St. Peter and St. John. They have an individuality which, 
 in this sense, our Lord could not have; and St. Peter, 
 above all, is the one in whom this is most marked. Quick 
 in action even to rashness, and bold in word even to 
 presumption, he is yet the founder of the outward Church. 
 In St. John, and in the Synoptists, the essential outlines 
 of his character answer to the symbolic name which all the 
 Evangelists notice as given to him by Christ;* and several 
 
 1 John viii. 59; Luke iy. 80. (κληϑήσῃ) may have been repeated at 
 2 John i. 48 (cf. xxi. 19); Matt. ix.9 the commission of the Twelve, though 
 (cf. viii. 22). Compare also the δεῦτε there is nothing in the language used 
 ὀπίσω μου, Matt. iv. 19. in describing that event which neces- 
 8 Matt. xvii. 25; John i. 47, 48. sarily leads to that conclusion (Matt. 
 4 John i. 42, Σὺ ef Σίμων ὁ vids Ἰωά- x. 2, Σίμων ὁ λεγόμενος Πέτρος. Luke 
 you: σὺ κληϑήσῃ Κηφᾶς ὃ ἑρμηνεύε- iii. 16, καὶ ἐπέϑηκε ὄνομα τῷ Σ. Πέ’ 
 ται Πέτρος. This prophetic naming τρὸν. Luke vi. 14, ὃν καὶ ὠνόμασε 
 
300 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 corresponding traits may be placed together so as to show 
 the real unity which lies beneath the different narratives. 
 In the first two Gospels it is related that when our Lord 
 began to speak of His coming sufferings at Jerusalem, 
 “Peter took Him and began to rebuke Hin, saying, Be it 
 far from Thee, Lord: this shall not be unto Thee.” In St. 
 John, when at the last supper Christ served His disciples, 
 and girded Himself to wash their feet, “ Peter saith unto 
 Him, Thou shalt never wash my feet.”? He cannot for a 
 moment endure the thought of the humiliation of his Lord, 
 whether among His enemies or His own followers; and if 
 he adds afterwards with the overhaste of a natural reaction: 
 “Lord, not my feet only, but also my head and my hands ;” 
 it is, as when at the Transfiguration, he would have “ built 
 three tabernacles” for Christ and Moses and Khas, “not 
 knowing what he said,” but eager to realize to the full a 
 blessing of which he only half perceived the import, and 
 unable to wait in calm assurance on the will of His Master? 
 This impatient energy, which seems to be ever striving 
 after the issues of things, made him give expression in 
 many cases to the thoughts which others cherished, per- 
 haps vaguely.2 Thus it was in his noble confession of 
 Christ’s divine majesty, in which St. John has preserved 
 one trait of singular interest. According to the details 
 which he has recorded, the confession itself was connected 
 with action: “Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast 
 the words (ῥήματα) of eternal life,’* and in virtue of this 
 
 Πέτρον). St. Mark uses the same phrase 
 of the title of the sons of Zebedee: 
 καὶ ἐπέϑηκεν αὐτοῖς ὀνόματα Boavep- 
 yés, a title which evidently points to 
 some special fact, which can hardly 
 have been connected with their ap- 
 pointment to the Apostolate. The con- 
 trast between John i. 42, σὺ εἶ Σίμων 
 and the phrase preserved by St. Mat- 
 thew in the record of the confession is 
 very striking: Matt. xvi. 17, σὺ εἶ Πέ- 
 tpos. The prophecy was then ful- 
 filled. 
 
 1 Matt. xvi. 21 ff ; Mark viii. 31 ff; 
 John xiii. 8. 
 
 2 John xiii. 9; Matt. xvii. 4; Mark 
 ix. 5, 6; Luke ix. 88. 
 
 3 This is seen in several little traits: 
 Mark xi. 21, dvauynodels 6 Π. λέγει. 
 Matt xxi. 20, ἰδόντες of μαϑηταὶ édsav- 
 μασαν. Luke viii. 45, εἶπεν 6 ΤΙ. καὶ 
 oi σὺν αὐτῷ. Mark vy. 81, ἔλεγον ot 
 pasntal αὐτῷ. 
 
 4 John vi. 68, 69. The words are the 
 true complement of Luke v. 8. Cf. 
 Matt. xvi. 17; Mark viii. 29; Luke ix. 20. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 301 
 
 practical power he received the special charge: “Do thou 
 when thou art converted strengthen thy brethren.”! Else- 
 where he would know of the future of himself or others: 
 “ Behold, we forsook all and followed Thee, what shall we 
 have therefore?”? Lord, and what shall this man do?” 
 He cannot rest in uncertainty where knowledge might 
 prove the guide to deeds. If the Lord spoke of “blind 
 leaders,” he said, “Declare unto us this parable;” if of 
 watchful service, “ Lord, speakest Thou this parable unto 
 (πρός) us, or even unto all?” if of a traitor among the 
 Apostles, he beckoned to “the disciple who leaned on 
 Jesus’ bosom,” “Tell who it is of whom He speaks;” 1 of 
 a coming separation, “Lord, why cannot I follow Thee 
 now?”* Frequently the characteristics of St. Peter are 
 seen in action. Now he would pay the Temple tribute for 
 Christ, as jealous for His ritual “righteousness ;” now he 
 follows Him “with a sword” to Gethsemane.> We feel at 
 once that the walking on the waters and the failing faith 
 are a true figure of his following Christ to the place of 
 judgment and then denying Him.° Then follows the swift 
 
 1 Luke xxii. 82 f. σύ ποτε ἐπιστρέ- 
 
 Was. 
 
 2 Matt. xix. 27. 
 
 scene as it may be supposed to have 
 happened. 
 
 Cf. Mark x. 28. All the Evangelists fix the place 
 
 Luke xviii. 28. 
 
 3 John xxi. 21, Κύριε οὗτος δὲ τί. 
 
 4 Matt. xv. 15; Luke xii. 41; John 
 xiii. 24 (Cf. p. 269, n. 1): John xiii. 37. 
 Compare the question, Matt. xviii. 21: 
 “Lord, how oft shall my brother sin 
 against me, and I forgive him?” 
 
 5 Matt. xvii. 24; John xviii. 10. 
 
 6 Matt. xiv. 28; xxvi. 35, and paral- 
 lels. Much discussion has been raised 
 as to the narratives of the denial of St. 
 Peter, and the differences which occur 
 in them are generally insisted upon as 
 offering the clearest proof of the im- 
 possibility of maintaining the verbal 
 accuracy of the Evangelists. A com- 
 parison of the texts in question rather 
 creates surprise that difficulty should 
 have been felt by any who picture the 
 
 26 
 
 as the same, ‘‘the court of the High 
 Priest” (ἢ αὐλὴ τοῦ ἀρχιερέως, Matt. 
 xxvi. 58; Mark xiv. 54; Luke xxii. 54, 
 δῦ; John xviii. 16, 17). The narrative 
 of St. John, which distinguishes a ᾿ 
 hearing before Annas from the hearing 
 before Caiaphas, yet clearly implies 
 that all the denials were made in the 
 same spot (xviii. 18, 25). From this 
 fact, connected with Luke xxii. 61, 
 etc., it seems probable that “ the house 
 of the High Priest” included the offi- 
 cial apartments of Annas and Caia- 
 phas. (Cf. Strauss, § 127.) 
 
 But it is said, the persons who pro- 
 voke Peter to the denial are differently 
 given. This requires careful notice. 
 (1) All the Evangelists agree that the 
 first question was put by ἃ damsel” 
 
302 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 and complete reaction. St. John first looks into the empty 
 sepulchre, but St. Peter first enters it! St. John first 
 recognizes the risen Lord on the sea of Tiberias, but St. 
 Peter first casts himself into the water to be with Him. 
 Perfect truthfulness alone can account for the minute har- 
 mony of all the features in such a character, portrayed in 
 books most widely separated in origin and date. 
 
 More difficulty has been felt in combining into one 
 picture the various traits which have been 
 recorded of the person of St. John. He is 
 but rarely mentioned in the Synoptists, and 
 a mighty revolution was interposed between these earlier 
 notices and the testimonies of his own writings. Besides 
 this the character itself is one which almost eludes descrip- 
 tion. The intense concentration and power of an inner 
 life flashes out at some rare moments, but commonly the 
 
 The character of 
 St. John. 
 
 life flows on with deep and still course. 
 
 (Matt. xxvi. 69, μία παιδίσκη. Mark 
 xiv. 66, μία τῶν παιδισκῶν τοῦ ἀρχιε- 
 o€ws. Luke xxii. 56, παιδίσκη τις. 
 “ohn xviii. 17, ἢ παιδίσκη ἢ Supwpds). 
 St. John adds that she was ‘“ the por- 
 tress,” St. Luke that the question was 
 put as St. Peter ‘‘ sat by the fire; ” so 
 far all is perfectly harmonious, for I 
 do not notice the variations in the 
 words of the question, which are Greek 
 renderings of the Aramaic, and _ per- 
 fectly agree in sense. (2) In the nar- 
 rative of the second denial the persons 
 who assail St. Peter are variously given. 
 St. Matthew (71) says ‘another wo- 
 man” (ἄλλη); St. Mark (69) ‘the same 
 damsel” (ἢ παιδίσκη), St. Luke (58) 
 ‘another man” (€Tepos); St. John (25) 
 simply, “they said” (εἶπον) The 
 phrase of St. John brings the whole 
 scene before us as the others describe 
 it in detail. A crowd is gathered round 
 the fire (John xviii. 18); the portress 
 tells her suspicions to the bystanders 
 (Mark xiv. 69); the accusation is re- 
 peated by various persons, and St. 
 Peter left the group (Matt. xxvi. ΤΊ, 
 
 St. John was, 
 
 ἐξελϑόντα εἰς τὸν πυλῶνα), repeating 
 his hasty denial (Mark xiv. 70, ἠρνεῖτο. 
 No one uses the imperfect in the former 
 case). (8) This most natural concep- 
 tion of the event is further brought 
 out on the third denial. St. Luke (59) 
 says, ‘‘ another said, Of a truth this fel- 
 low also was with Him; for he is a 
 Galilean.’ St.John (26), ‘One of the 
 servants of the High Priest, being his 
 kinsman whose ear Peter cut off, saith, 
 Did not I see thee in the garden with 
 Him?” Here St. Matthew and St. Mark 
 notice the number of the assailants: 
 “they that stood by said’ (Matt. xxvi. 
 73, of ἑστῶτες εἶπον. Mark xiv. 70, 
 οἱ παρεστῶτες ἔλ εγο νὴ. Thenarra- 
 tives present us with three acts of de- 
 nial, as they may be most naturally 
 supposed to have taken place in a 
 crowded court, in the excitement of a 
 popular ferment. 
 
 On the conduct of St. Peter himself 
 Luthardt has some good remarks: ὦ. a, 
 O. 108 ff. 
 
 1 John xx. 6. 
 
 2 John xxi. 7. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 503 
 
 indeed, a “Son of Thunder,”! but the thunder is itself the 
 unfrequent witness of the might of elements long gather- 
 ing. There is a difference between the style of St. John 
 and that which we should assign to the Galilzean apostle, 
 but the style is only the reflection of his completed charac- 
 ter. There is the difference between a former and a latter 
 faith, such as we find also between the recorded acts and 
 epistles of St. Peter; but in the Apocalypse, and the Cath- 
 olic letters of St. John, we trace the identity of his nature 
 in the course of its development. The same zeal which 
 would have called fire from heaven on the inhospitable 
 Samaritans, though guided now to another end, denounces 
 plagues and destruction on him who takes from or adds to 
 the words of his prophecy? The same jealousy for Christ 
 which forbade the working of one who followed not with 
 them, though purified by a higher faith, warns the elect 
 lady not to bid God speed to him who ubideth not in the 
 doctrine The same fervent spirit in defence of truth is, 
 as has been seen, recognized by tradition, and that, too, 
 combined with the tenderest love.’ Nor is there any incon- 
 sistency in such a combination. The same deep teeling is 
 the source of both characteristics. And as the affectionate 
 letters to the Philippians and to Timothy, with their clearer 
 revelations of divine truth, only unfold to us another view 
 of the great Apostle, so the Gospel of St. John, in its ful- 
 ness of meditative devotion, helps us to realize the whole 
 Christian course of him who first, with eager hope, acknowl- 
 edged in Jesus the Lamb of God, and saw in the Spirit 
 of God farthest into the history of the Church, and guarded 
 inost jealously its early creed.” Throughout the whole life 
 of St. John, —in Samaria, in Patmos, in Ephesus, in the 
 old world of Judaism, in the new world of Christianity, 
 
 » The form of the surname is well 2 Luke ix. 45; Apoc. xxii. 18. 
 explained by Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. ad 3 Luke ix. 49; 2 John, 9, 10. 
 Mare. iii. 17; the general sense by 4 Cf. p. 234 f. 
 
 Meyer, and most recent commentators 
 on the passage. 5 John i. 35—37; Apoc. i. 10. 
 
304 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 and in that meeting-point of the two dispensations, which 
 was the fiery trial of the early Church; in the most distant 
 times, and in the most diverse lands, we ever find the same 
 personal devotion to the Lord, as the embodiment of the 
 Divine, — alike distinguished from the zeal of St. Peter 
 for His outward glory, and the energy of St. Paul for His 
 extended influence, — enlightened, indeed, and spiritualized 
 by the growth of Christianity in himself and in the world, 
 and yet unchanged. The youthful, womanly form, which 
 art has assigned to St. John, has served to remove from 
 our minds the stronger features of his nature. Yet these 
 may not be forgotten, for even in this aspect the eagle is 
 his true symbol. His love was no soft feeling, but a living 
 principle, an absolute devotion to truth, as he had seen and 
 known it in the Person of his Lord. He stands forth as 
 the ideal of a thoughtful Christian, relentless against evil, 
 and yet patient with the doubting. He “tarried till the 
 Lord came,” and left his Gospel as the witness and seal of 
 the accomplishment of the apostolic work.’ 
 
 From this point of sight the new scope of his Gospel 
 answered to the conditions of anew world. 
 The period which intervened between the 
 dates of the Synoptic Gospels and St. John’s 
 was, beyond any other, full of the distress of nations with 
 perplexity, and marked by the shaking of the powers of 
 heaven, which proved, so to speak, to be 
 the birth-pains of the Christian Church? 
 When St. John wrote, the Jews were led away captive into 
 
 St. John’s Gospel 
 in relation to a new 
 world. 
 
 Judaism. 
 
 1 There is not space now to dwell on xii. 22), St. Philip (i. 44 ff; vi. 5; xii. 
 
 the other characters traced in St. John, 
 but one general remark must be made. 
 The number of distinct persons por- 
 trayed by him is a singular mark of 
 the authenticity of his narrative. In 
 the Synoptic Gospels no one stands 
 out from the Aposties except St Veter, 
 and perhaps the sons of Zebedee, but 
 in St. John we have characteristic 
 traits of St. Andrew (i. 41 ff.; vi. 8,9; 
 
 21 ff. xiv. 8 f.), St. Thomas (xi. 16; xiv. 
 5; xx. 24 ff.), St. Jude (xiv. 22). The 
 parallel between Luke x. 39 ff with 
 John xi. has been often drawn. 
 
 2 Duke xxi: 25; 26. ΟἿ: Tac: Aisioa: 
 2, 3. Sometimes the language of the 
 historian coincides verbally with Scrip- 
 ture: Preter multiplices rerum luma- 
 narum casus, cw/o terraque prodigia et 
 fulminum monitus. 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 905 
 
 @ 
 
 all nations,! and men asked why God had cast away His 
 people? what there was in the Gospel-history which ex- 
 plained the rejection of the seed of Abraham, of whom, 
 as concerning the flesh, Christ came? 
 
 On anotner side, St. Paul had given to Christianity its 
 intellectual development. He had completed 
 the work which St. Peter had begun, and 
 maintained the freedom of the Gentile con- 
 verts who had been first received by the Apostle of the 
 Circumcision. The storm which had raged 
 from Jerusalem to Pontus, from Antioch to 
 Rome, had now ceased, but the fashion of the Church was 
 changed, and men asked what ground there was in the 
 teaching of the Messiah for this new form of Christianity ? 
 
 And yet again, Christianity had come into contact with 
 Philosophy. The voice of the preacher had 
 been heard in Alexandria by the scholars of 
 Philo, and at Hierapolis by the friends of 
 Epictetus; and many must have inquired how far the new 
 doctrines served to unfold the inner life of man? how far 
 they fulfilled the aspirations of the Academy, and realized 
 the morality 6f the Porch. 
 
 To all these deep questionings, unencountered for the 
 most part by the former Evangelists, who 
 regarded rather the outward form of the aes palit 
 Christian faith than its rational or spiritual “e7ecton of Me 
 development, St. John replies by the teaching 
 of the Lord’s Life. The Jews, as a nation, had rejected 
 the Saviour: He came to His own, and His own received 
 Him not2 Throughout the whole ministry of Christ, as 
 recorded in the fourth Gospel, the progress of this wilful 
 blindness is traced, till the record closes with the fatal 
 sentence: Though Jesus had done so many miracles before 
 them, yet the Jews believed not on Him; as Esaias prophe- 
 sied when he saw His glory, and spake of Him. 
 
 Christianity, as 
 a system. 
 
 Acts x. 47. 
 
 Philosophy. 
 
 Col. iv. 18. 
 
 1 Luke xni. 24. 8 John i. 11; xii. 37—41. Cf. p. 279. 
 2 Johni. 11 (τὰ iia, of ἴδιοι). One peculiarity of St. John’s lan 
 
 26* 
 
306 
 
 THE GOSPEL OF 
 
 ST. JOHN. 
 
 Nor are the great doctrines on which St. Paul delighted 
 to dwell, —the doctrines of faith, of love, of 
 
 Christian doc- 
 trine. 
 
 providence, of a redemption, of a Holy 
 
 Spirit, — brought out less distinctly by St. 
 
 John than the fall of the Jews.! 
 
 It is true that we can 
 
 trace these great elements of Christianity in the symbolic 
 teaching of the Synoptists, and in scattered sayings; but 
 
 they form the staple of St. John’s narrative. 
 
 The lesson 
 
 is at least codrdinate with the fact; and the plain revela- 
 
 guage in this view is to be noticed. He 
 speaks of the opponents of the Lord 
 almost always as “‘the Jews” (οἱ “Iov- 
 δαῖοι), which phrase is never used by 
 the Synoptists in this sense, who em- 
 ploy the specific terms, ‘“‘the Phari- 
 sees,” ete St. John uses the term ** the 
 Pharisees” frequently in a definite sense 
 {2 αν τοῦ; Βα ΠΕ ΘΙ ὙΠῸ 
 scribes” (John viii. 3 is even on this 
 account to be condemned), ‘the law- 
 yers,” ‘‘the Sadducees.” The Synop- 
 tists, on the other hand, only put the 
 title ‘* the Jews” in the mouth of Gen- 
 tiles: Matt. ii.2; Matt. xxvii. 11 ff and 
 parallels, with very rare exceptions, 
 where they add notes, as it were, to the 
 original narrative: Matt. xxviii. 15; 
 Mark vii. 8; Luke vii. 8; xxiii. 51 
 (though these two last instances are 
 more remarkable). St. John regards 
 the nation after its final apostasy, and 
 the distinctions of party are lost in 
 their common unbelief. It seems 
 strange that some commentators should 
 have grounded an objection on this 
 ‘“ undesigned coincidence” between the 
 scope and the language of the Gospel. 
 The usage of St. Luke in the Acts nat- 
 urally agrees with that of St. John. 
 
 Some alleged historical difficulties 
 will be noticed afterwards in Chap. 
 Vill. 
 
 1 It would carry us too far to do more 
 than allude to the parallel which may 
 be drawn between St. John and St. 
 Paul on these great topics. The fol- 
 
 lowing hints may suggest a line of 
 inquiry: 
 
 a. Faith. Never the abstract πίστις, 
 but always active as πιστεύειν els, a 
 transference of our hope to another 
 and not a mere assent toa fact, πιστεύ- 
 ely τινι, a construction which occurs 
 commonly in this sense (iv. 21, 50, ete ). 
 Thus the act of faith appears as the 
 ground of sonship (i. 12), life (iii. 15, 
 etc.; xi. 25, 26, etc.), support (vi. 35), 
 inspiration (vii. 88), guidance (xii. 36, 
 46), power (xiv. 12), ‘the woik of 
 God” (vi. 29). In the Synoptists 
 “ faith’ (πίστιϑ) is the mediative energy 
 in material deliverances (Matt. ix. £2; 
 Mark ν. 34; x. 62; Luke vii. 50; viii. 
 48; xvii. 19: xviii. 42), as the types of 
 higher deliverance, and the measure of 
 material power (Matt. ix. 29; xxi. 21; 
 Mark xi. 22). 
 
 b. Love. John xiii. 34; xv.12. (Con- 
 trast Matt. xxii. 39). 1 Cor. xiii. 
 
 c. Providence. “" Predestination.”’ 
 John vi. θά, 65; ili. 27; vi. 87, 44; v.21; 
 Vey GON(Ch: wine 0) Ἐν; ἘΥΝ 1. ὉΠ 
 this connection 7 Spa, of the crisis in 
 each stage of our Lord’s Life, and spe- 
 cially of His Passion, as its crowning 
 point: ii. 4; vii. 80; viii. 20; xii. 28, 27; 
 xiii. 1; xvi. 4; xvii. 1. Cf. 6 Kaipos, 
 vii. 6-8. 
 
 d. Redemption. 
 51; xii. 24; xiii. 31. 
 with John iii. 16. 
 
 6. The divisioninman. 1.18. Comp. 
 Rom. vii. 6 with John 111. 6, and John 
 vi. 63 with 2 Cor. iii. 6. 
 
 i. 29; iii. 14, 15; vi. 
 Comp. Rom. y. 8 
 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 307 
 
 tions which he made, as he recorded the deep words on 
 which he had long pondered, furnish the means of recog- 
 nizing the actual fulness of the other Gospels. Without 
 St. John, it might seem possible to say, with a recent 
 writer, “Not Paul but Jesus;” but with him, the unity of 
 the New Testament is vindicated, and the chain of its 
 connection finished, 
 
 The intimate connection of St. John’s Gospel with the 
 greatest problems of thought and life has 
 never been questioned. A few werds are 
 sufficient to show that the Apostle had felt that there are 
 mysteries beyond all human understanding; and he was 
 contented to state them in the simplicity of antithetic 
 truths. From the first consecration of social intercourse 
 at the Marriage Feast to the last utterances of a Master’s 
 love, the course of spiritual life and death is traced in its 
 progressive stages, as the words and works of the Lord 
 
 Human thought. 
 
 are recorded, year by year, advancing together in ever- 
 widening spheres to their final consummation. The 
 sublime prayer of Plato’ is answered by that Word 
 which abides in us and we in Him. The 
 
 possibility of the true life, of which Stoicism 
 
 was but a counterfeit, is secured by the promised Com- 
 forter, through Whom we shall do the works 
 
 which Christ did, and greater works than John xiv. 15. 
 these, because He has gone to the Father? 
 
 This was the teaching from the Life of Christ which 
 was required by the age at which St. John wrote, and it 
 has been seen that he was peculiarly fitted to supply it. 
 His early call to the Apostleship enabled him to regard 
 
 John xv. 7. 
 
 1 Plat. Phed. 85 πὶ. δεῖν yap... τὸν 2 Perhaps it is from looking at the 
 βέλτιστον τῶν ἀνδρωπίνων λόγων Aa- mysterious depths of thought and lan- 
 βόντα καὶ δυσελεγκτότατον, ἐπὶ τού- guage, often unintelligible to the 
 του ὀχούμενον, ὥσπερ ἐπὶ σχεδίας, thinker and speaker, that St. John re- 
 κινδυνεύοντα διαπλεῦσαι τὸν Ploy, εἰ cords the unconscious testimony of 
 μή τις δύναιτο ἀσφαλέστερον καὶ ἀπκιν- unbelievers: xi. 51; xix 21, 22; (xviii. 
 δυνότερον ἐπὶ βεβαιοτέρου ὀχήματος ἢ 38). 
 λόγου δείον τινὸς διαπορευϑῆναι. 
 
308 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 
 
 Christianity from a Christian point of sight; he had to 
 experience no sudden conversion, like St. Paul; he had to 
 abandon no ancient prejudices, like St. Peter; his whole 
 nature seems to have been absorbed in the contemplation 
 of the Light, and the Life, and the Truth; and while others 
 wandered on distant missions, it was his work to cherish 
 the Mother of his Lord, to see visions, and to meditate on 
 what he had heard, and looked upon, and 
 handled, of the Word of Life. The prophe- 
 cies which ushered in the new dispensation failed; the 
 tongues which gave utterance to the raptures of the first 
 believers ceased; the knowledge of the early Church van- 
 ished before the fuller development of Christianity; but 
 love still remained, and at Ephesus, which combined all the 
 refinement of Greek culture with the freedom of Eastern 
 thought, St. John wrote “the Gospel of the world,” re- 
 solving reason into intuition, and faith into sight. 
 
 1 John i. 1. 
 
ΕΠ ΥΤΙ ΙΝ VE: 
 
 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL OF THE SYNOPTIC EVAN- 
 GELISTS. 
 
 Willst du dich am Ganzen erquicken: 
 So musst du das Ganze im Kleinsten erblicken. — GOETHE. 
 
 HirHeErTo it has been our object to show that the four 
 Evangelists were naturally fitted to record the Life of 
 Christ, under the different forms in which it met the wants 
 of the early Church and is still apprehended by ourselves. 
 It has been seen that the Apostolic age was marked by 
 the existence of representative types of religious belief; 
 that the Gospel narrative was shaped in the first instance 
 by the pressure of immediate needs, and afterwards reduced 
 to writing under circumstances which tended to perpetuate 
 the characteristics which had been preserved by various 
 classes of the first teachers and hearers; that the fourth is 
 distinguished from the other three, by a difference which 
 is likened to the relation of the spirit to the body, of the 
 universal to the special, or again, of the testimony of the 
 loved disciple to the common testimony of the Church. 
 In the present Chapter we shall examine more minutely 
 the mutual bearings of the synoptic Gospels. With this 
 object we shall review in detail the accounts which they 
 contain of the great crises of the Life of our Lord, in order 
 at once to test more rigorously, and define more clearly, 
 the general view which has been proposed. If it be said 
 that the variations to be alleged can be explained by nat- 
 
310 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 ural causes, we at once admit the statement; for it has 
 been shown that one of the elements of Inspiration is the 
 selection of a messenger by God, who shall express truth 
 in its human form with the fulness and force of his proper 
 character. The differences in the Gospels may, and in 
 some sense must, have arisen naturally; but in the same 
 sense the whole working of Providence is natural, and the 
 results of individual feeling in past time have been con- 
 secrated for our instruction by the office of the Christian 
 Church. | 
 
 The mode in which the different Evangelists deal with 
 the history of the Incarnation and Birth of our Lord offers 
 a perfect illustration of their independence and _ special 
 characteristics. St. Mark, who records the active ministry 
 of Christ, gives no details of His Infancy; and both from 
 internal and external grounds there is reason to believe 
 that in this respect he observed the limits of the first oral 
 Gospel. The narrative of the mysteries of the Nativity 
 belonged to the period of the written testimony, and not 
 of the first proclamation; and St.-Matthew and St. Luke 
 combine to reveal as much of the great facts as helps us 
 to apprebend, not the event itself, but the mode in which 
 it was welcomed by those with whom God was pleased to 
 work in its accomplishment. The genealogy with which 
 St. Matthew opens his Gospel introduces at once its pecu- 
 liar subject.t. The first words are an echo of Old Testa- 
 
 1 The questions involved in the two 
 genealogies of our Lord are so numer- 
 ous and intricate that it is impossible to 
 enter upon them here. The omission 
 of the discussion is of little conse- 
 quence, as it has been most ably con- 
 ducted by Dr. Mill (The Evangelical 
 Accounts of the Descent and Parentage 
 of the Saviour vindicated, Cambr. 1842) 
 and by Lord A. Hervey (The Genealo- 
 gies of our Lord and Saviour Jesus 
 Christ, Cambr. 1858). A summary of 
 the results which these critics have ob- 
 tained is given in a little tract, The 
 
 Genealogies in St. Matthew and St. 
 Luke, London, 1856. Without affirm- 
 ing every detail in the explanations 
 proposed, we may be satisfied that 
 every discrepancy can be explained; 
 and more than this is not to be expected 
 in a case where necessarily much of 
 the history is most obscure. Both gen- 
 ealogies without doubt give the de- 
 scent of Joseph,—the universal belief 
 till the sixteenth century, —St. Mat- 
 thew his degal descent, showing that 
 our Lord was Solomon’s heir (2 Sam. 
 vii. 13—17; 1 Chron. xvii. 14), though 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 311 
 
 ment language,' and the symmetrical arrangement of the 
 generations is equally significant in relation to Jewish 
 history and to Jewish thought. But apart from the form, 
 St. Matthew dates the Messianic hope trom David and from 
 Abraham, and binds Christianity with the promises of the 
 ancient covenant.? St. Luke, on the contrary, places the 
 corresponding descent not before the Birth but after 
 the Baptism, and represents Christ as the second Adam, 
 “the Son of God.”? In the one we see a royal Infant 
 born by alegal title to a glorious inheritance; and in the 
 other a ministering Saviour who bears the natural sum of 
 human sorrow. Even in the lines of descent which extend 
 through the period common to the two genealogies there 
 is a characteristic difference: St. Matthew follows the 
 course of the royal inheritance of Solomon, whose natural 
 lineage was closed by the childless Jehoiachim: St. Luke 
 traces through Nathan the natural parentage of “the son 
 of David.” In St. Matthew the Birth of Christ is con- 
 nected with national glories; in St. Luke with pious hopes. 
 Instead of recalling the crises of Jewish history* and the 
 majesty of the typical kingdom, the Pauline Evangelist 
 begins his narrative with a full recital of the personal acts 
 of God’s mercy to the just and prayerful, and of His all- 
 powerful grace® to the holy and believing.’ In St. Matthew 
 
 the line of Solomon failed in Jehoia- Luc iii. f.) For a comparison of St. 
 
 chim (Jer. xxii. 29, 30), and St. Luke 
 his natural descent, showing that he 
 was lineally descended from David (2 
 Sam. vii. 12; Ps. Ixxxix. 35, 36) through 
 Nathan. For the details of the sub- 
 ject I must refer to the works above 
 quoted. 
 
 1 Matt. i. 1, βίβλος γενέσεως. Cf. 
 Gen. v. 1. 
 
 2 Matt. i. 1. 
 
 ®“ Cum [{Lucas] Adamum Dei filium 
 voeat, significat Christum ex virgine 
 ortum, secundum esse Adamum, ejus- 
 que ortum per Spiritum Sanctum non 
 milus esse opus potentiz divine singu- 
 Jare quam Adami fuerat” (Wetst. ad 
 
 Paul’s and Philo’s teaching on the sec- 
 ond Adam, compare Babington, Journ. 
 of Philology, i. pp. 47 ff. 
 
 4 Matt. i. 2, 6, 11. 
 
 5 The words χάρις, xaplCouat, are 
 not found in St. Matthew or St. Mark. 
 The former occurs in the Introduction 
 of St. John, and in all the groups of 
 the Epistles. 
 
 6 Luke i. 6, 18, 28, 45. On the last 
 passage Ambrose says (Jn Lue. ii. § 26), 
 * Quecunque crediderit anima et con- 
 cipit et generat Dei Verbum, et opera 
 ejus agnoscit.... Si secundum carnem 
 una mater est Christi; secundum fidem 
 tamen omnium fructus est Christus.” 
 
512 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 we read of the Incarnation as it was revealed in a dream 
 to Joseph, in whom may be seen an emblem of the ancient 
 people ; but in St. Luke the mystery is announced by “the 
 mighty one of God”? to the Blessed Virgin, the type of 
 the Christian Church? In St. Matthew the Nativity is 
 ushered in by prophecy; in St. Luke it is heralded by 
 those songs of triumphant faith which have been rehearsed 
 ~in our public services for thirteen centuries; and even 
 these, from hymn to hymn, seem to gather fulness and 
 love: the “help of Israel” and the “horn of David” is 
 welcomed as one who shall bring “joy to all the chosen 
 nation,” and give “light to the Gentiles.” In St. Luke 
 the shepherds,—the humble watchers of nature, —the 
 despised successors of the patriarchs,?>— cheered by the 
 voice of angels, recognize and proclaim the praises of the 
 Saviour* of the meek in heart; and the devotion first 
 offered in the stable of the village inn is completed by 
 the thanksgivings of the aged Simeon and Anna in the 
 Temple: in St. Matthew the Magi,—the wise inquirers 
 
 The same writer points out in a word 
 the difference between Zachariah and 
 the Blessed Virgin (Zn Lue. ii. § 15): 
 ‘‘ Hee jam de negotio tractat: ille ad- 
 huc de nuntio dubitat.” 
 
 1 Gabriel: Luke i. 19. Cf. Dan. viii. 
 Geile 
 
 2 Ambr. In Luc. ii. § 7. It has been 
 argued (even by Neander, Z. J. § 14, 7.) 
 that the different modes in which God 
 is recorded to have communicated with 
 man, in St. Matthew by dreams, and 
 in St. Luke by angels, show the extent 
 of the subjective influence of the writ- 
 er’s mind upon the narrative. But 
 surely those are right who see in this 
 difference the use of various means 
 adapted to the peculiar state of the 
 recipient. Moreover, as St. Matthew 
 recognizes the ministry of Angels 
 (xxXvili. 2), so St. Luke relates Visions 
 (Acts x.9—16; xvi.9; xviii.9,10). Cf. 
 Gen. (XX. 5; ΧΧΥΙ 12 Sex, 98 
 (Dreams) — xviii. 2; xix. 1 (Angels). 
 With regard to the names of the angels 
 
 it may be observed that the adoption 
 of foreign terms does not imply the 
 introduction of a foreign belief. Cf. 
 p. 78. 
 
 It is to be noticed that the contents 
 of the divine messages (Matt. i. 20, 21; 
 Luke i. 30—83) are related conversely 
 to the general character of the Gos- 
 pels, as a consequence of the difference 
 of character in those to whom they 
 were addressed. The promise of Re- 
 demption is made to Joseph; of a glo- 
 rious kingdom to the Virgin. 
 
 3 Abba Garien dixit ...ne doceat 
 quisquam filium suum... pastorem... 
 eo quod opificium ipserum est opificium 
 latronum”’ (Wetst. in Lue. ii. 8). 
 
 4 The words σωτήρ (Cic. In Verr. ii. 
 63), σωτηρία, σωτήριος, are not found 
 in St. Matthew and St. Mark. They 
 occur John iy. 42, 22; 1 John iv. 14. 
 The progression in Luke ii. 18—20 is 
 very beautiful: wonder — meditation 
 — praise. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 313 
 
 into the mysteries of the world, — led by a strange portent 
 in the sky, offer adoration’ and symbolic tribute to the 
 new-born king of the Jews. In the one we read of the 
 fulfilment of the Jewish idea of a royal Messiah: in the 
 other, the realization of the cravings, clear or indistinct, of 
 the human heart. In the one we see typified the univer- 
 sal reign of Christ, and in the other His universal mercy. 
 Once more, St. Matthew alone records the murder of the 
 Innocents, the flight into Egypt, the cause of the final 
 settlement at Nazareth; St. Luke, on the other hand, has 
 preserved the details of the Purification, and adds the one 
 incident which links together the Infancy and the Ministry 
 of Christ in the trait of a perfect obedience and a divine 
 consciousness.”. In the former the hostility of earthly 
 powers to the kingdom of Christ is seen to work out the 
 designs of God; in the latter the law is fulfilled in the 
 redemption of the Saviour from the service of the Jewish 
 Temple. 
 
 The consideration of these various details will show the 
 reality of the difference in spirit and form 
 between the two narratives; but the artifi- 
 ciality of the contrast lessens the sense of 
 their complementary character throughout. 
 It is impossible to read them in succession without feeling 
 that we pass from one aspect of the great central fact to 
 
 This contrast in 
 detail the sign of 
 a contrast in gen= 
 eral character. 
 
 1 The word προσκυνεῖν is not applied 
 by St. Luke to our Lord till after the 
 Resurrection: xxiv. 52, where also it is 
 probably an interpolation. Cf. p. 330, 
 n. 2. 
 
 2 A comparison of Matt. ii. 11 with 
 Luke ii. 24 (Levit. xii. 8) leads us to 
 place the Purification before the Visit 
 of the Magi. Luke ii. 39 does not ex- 
 clude the flight into Egypt, and cer- 
 tainly shows the independence of the 
 Evangelists. Nor does there appear to 
 be any discrepancy between Matt. ii. 
 22, 23 and Luke ii. 4. The divine com. 
 mand (Matt. ii. 20) would suggest a 
 return to Bethlehem, in which such 
 
 marvellous things had been wrought; 
 and how can we account for Joseph’s 
 selection of Nazareth as a place of 
 abode so readily as by supposing that 
 he was previously connected with it? 
 Cf. Just. M. Dial. § 78, p. 303 D. 
 
 As for the ἀπογραφῆ, it is enough to 
 say with Wetstein: “Ὁ Epocha tam cele- 
 
 bris non potuit Lucam latere.” Cf. 
 Acts vy. 87 (1851). I leave this note as 
 it was written eight years since. No 
 
 one now after Zumpt’s Essay (Berlin, 
 1854) can doubt that Quirinus was 
 governor of Syria at the time of our 
 Lord's birth as well as ten years after- 
 wards. 
 
 27 
 
314 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 another, that each picture is drawn with perfect inde. 
 pendence, and yet so that the separate details are exactly 
 capable of harmonious adjustment. There is nothing in 
 the one which could lead to the creation of the other; 
 their boundary lines just meet where the character of the 
 scene changes, and they must be united with care that 
 their real continuity may be discovered. Yet if we regard 
 the precise words of the Evangelists, without introducing 
 glosses of our own, their harmony is complete. And if we 
 penetrate to the ideas which they present to us as fulfilled, 
 these are seen to have a permanent importance for the 
 right conception of the history. For both narratives point 
 yet higher in word and idea than the special limits to which 
 they naturally tend, and unite in the spiritual teaching of 
 St. John: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word 
 was with God, and the Word was God, ....and the Word 
 was made flesh, and dwelt among us.” 
 
 Justin represents Trypho as saying that “the Messiah 
 would be unconscious of His own office and 
 unendowed with power, till He had been 
 consecrated by Elias.”! The narrative of the 
 Baptism in St. Matthew points out the 
 element of truth which was contained in this belief. The 
 work of the Baptist included the crowning rite of the old 
 covenant, the confession of a spiritnal need under an out- 
 ward shape. Repentance,—the complete change of mind 
 which was the fitting preparation for the kingdom of 
 heaven, was consecrated in a sacramental sign, and the 
 last ordinance of Judaism was in essence and form a 
 prophecy of Christianity. The new Elias recognized his 
 personal unworthiness to baptize Jesus “ unto repentance,” 
 
 II, The Baptism. 
 
 St. Matthew. 
 
 1 Dial. c. Tryph. ἡ 8, p. 226 B: Xpio- to those who have learnt from St. Paul 
 
 \ >/ 5 ν ͵7 Py, 
 τὸς δέ εἰ Kal γεγένηται καὶ ἔστι που, 
 ἄγνωστός ἐστι καὶ οὐδὲ αὐτός πω 
 c ΣΟ 94 av / / 
 ἑαυτὸν ἐπίσταται οὐδὲ ἔχει δύναμίν 
 τινα μέχρις ἂν ἐλϑδὼν Ἠλίας χρίσῃ 
 αὐτὸν καὶ φανερὸν πᾶσι ποιήσῃ. 
 
 2 Yet even in this thereis no difficulty 
 
 the cardinal doctrine of the Redemp- 
 tion (2 Cor. v. 21), and see in our Lord 
 the “ideal”? man, in the noblest sense 
 of ancient philosophy, the ‘ last 
 Adam” in the language of revelation. 
 In proportion as this truth is forgot- 
 
- 
 
 OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 315 
 and yet he knew not that He was the Messiah till the 
 promised sign appeared.t Simple faith in his mission shut 
 out all conjecture and suspended, it may have been, all 
 hope. But the very act which he would have hindered 
 brought with it the token for which he was waiting. It 
 was fitting, alike for him as the faithful prophet of the 
 Advent, and for Christ, as “subject to the Law,” to fulfil 
 every rite sanctioned by God,— the perfect righteousness 
 of the Jewish covenant. And thus at this point of their 
 contact, the form of the New was shaped by the rules of 
 the Old; and the gift of the Spirit for Christ’s work on 
 earth was connected with a legal observance. 
 St. Luke, on the other hand, does not dwell 
 on this relation. On the contrary, he connects the Bap- 
 tism of our Lord with that of “the multitude” generally, 
 instead of isolating it as a fact wholly alone.’ 
 the event as it affected the Saviour among others, and not 
 apart from them. In this aspect he records His prayer 
 when the heavens were opened rather than the concession 
 by which the act was prefaced.4| From a like reason he 
 gives the heavenly voice as it was addressed to Christ : 
 “ Thou art my beloved Son; in Zhee I am well pleased ;” 
 and not as addressed to John or the people at large: 
 
 St. Luke. 
 
 He regards 
 
 « This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased,” as 
 the words are preserved in St. Matthew. Nor is there 
 any discrepancy in this various transcription of the one 
 divine testimony.® Here, as elsewhere, the spiritual mes- 
 
 ten, the fact itself became an offence. 
 Thus in “the Gospel according to the 
 Hebrews” the following passage oc- 
 curred: ‘* Ecce mater Domini et fratres 
 ejus dicebant ei: Joannes Baptista bap- 
 tizat in remissionem peccatorum: ea- 
 mus et baptizemur ab eo. Dixit autem 
 eis: Quid peccavi, ut vadam et baptizer 
 ab eo? Nisi forte hoc ipsum quod dixi 
 ignorantia est’? (Hieron. adv. Pelag. 
 111. 2, p. 782). 
 
 1 John i. 33. Cf. p. 314.n. 1, 
 
 2 Matt. iii. 15: ἄφες ἄρτι: οὕτως yap 
 
 πρέπον ἐστὶν ἡμῖν πληρῶσαι πᾶσαν 
 δικαιοσύνην. Πρέπειν occurs here only 
 in the Gospels: there is a contrast with 
 > \ / v . 
 ἐγὼ Xpetay ἔχω inv. 14 
 
 3 Luke iii. 21: ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ 
 
 na faa / 
 
 βαπτισϑῆναι ἅπαντα τὸν λαόν, καὶ 
 Ἰησοῦ βαπτισϑέντος καὶ προσευ- 
 χομένου, ἀνεῳχϑῆναι τὸν οὐρανόν. 
 
 4 The same peculiarity occurs in St. 
 Luke’s account of the Transfiguration : 
 ix. 20, (18). Cf. v. 16; vi. 12; xia; 
 (xxii. 41). 
 
 5 Augustine (de cons. £v. i. 2, § 14) 
 
316 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 sage becomes articulate only to the individual soul;! the 
 material sign is intelligible only by divine revelation? 
 
 The Temptation necessarily followed the - Baptism? 
 The first act of the public ministry of the 
 
 IL. The Temptation. - 
 Lord was to reverse the outward cireum- 
 sb stances of the fall. In the fulness of the 
 e . - τὶ i “= ΜΝ "A. 
 ee Spirit He passed into the wilderness to re 
 
 gain the Paradise which Adam lost;* He 
 was with the wild beasts, in the graphic words of St. Mark, 
 who compresses into this one pregnant sentence the cen- 
 tral lesson of the trial, and adds no further details of its 
 course. The two other Evangelists record the same 
 events with an important variation in order, and some 
 slight verbal differences. The representative points of the 
 temptation, for the narratives imply much which they do 
 not contain,’ are given in each case in the order which 
 
 says well: “ Diversitas locutionum ad- 
 huc etiam utilis est, ne uno modo dic- 
 tum minus intelligatur.”.. In the 
 account of the Transfiguration — the 
 outward manifestation of Christ’s glory 
 —all the Evangelists have οὗτος ἐστίν. 
 
 1 It is, however, important to main- 
 tain the objective reality of the voice 
 and sign, though faith was necessary 
 in order to obtain their true meaning. 
 Cf. John xii. 283—80. Acts ix. 7 (ἀκού- 
 OVTES τῆς φων 5); xxii.9(OUK ἤκου- 
 σαν τὴν φωνήν; Dan. x. 7). Cf 
 Characteristics of Gospel Miracles, pp. 
 120 ff. 
 
 2 Cf. Hieron, ad Matt. iii. 16, “ Ape- 
 riuntur autem coeli non reseratione ele- 
 mentorum sed spiritualibus oculis.” 
 
 On the traditional variations as to 
 the details of the Baptism, see Just. M. 
 Dial. § 88, pp. 815 D; 816 Ὁ. and Otto’s 
 notes; Anger, Synopsis Evv. § 15. 
 
 In St. Mark’s account of the Baptism 
 the present participles are characteris- 
 tic: ἀναβαίνων, σχιζομένους, καταβαί- 
 νων. Healoneadds ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ (i. 9), 
 while the other Evangelists’ mention 
 our Lord’s residence there (Matt. ii. 23; 
 uke ii. 51). 
 
 3 It is instructive to compare the dif- 
 ferent phrases by which the Temptation 
 is introduced: 
 
 Matt. iv. 1: avnydyn.... ὑπὸ τοῦ 
 Πνεύματος πειρασϑῆναι (conducting). 
 
 Mark i. 12: τὸ Πνεῦμα αὐτὸν ἐκβάλ- 
 Aet (constraining). 
 
 Luke iv. 1: ἸΙησοῦς δὲ πλήρης Πνεύ- 
 ματος ἁγίου... ἤγετο ἐν τῷ Πνεύ- 
 ματι (inspiring). 
 
 It has been noticed already that the 
 Temptation precedes the narrative in 
 Jobn i. 19. 
 
 4 Bengel, ad Marc. 1.c.: ‘‘ Res magna, 
 Gen. i. 26... Imperium in bestias, cu- 
 jus Adamus tam mature jacturam fece- 
 rat, in summa jam exinanitione exer- 
 cuit: quanto magis exaltatus: Ps. viii. 
 8.” The forms of the Temptation have 
 been often compared with the tempta- 
 tions of Adam: 6. g. Hilar. ad Matt. 
 111. 5. 
 
 5 BE. g. Luke iv. 1, 2: ἤγετο εἰς τὴν 
 ἔρημον ἡμέρας τεσσεράκοντα πειραζό- 
 μενος ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου. Cf. Hom. 
 Clem. xi. 35, ὃ ἀποστείλας ἡμᾶς Κύ- 
 ριος ἡμῶν καὶ Προφήτης ὑφηγήσατο 
 ἡμῖν ὡς ὃ πονηρὸς τεσσαράκοντα ἧμέ- 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 317 
 
 preserves a climax from the particular position occupied 
 by the writer. Taking the arrangement of St. Matthew, 
 we see our Lord triumphing over the natural wants of 
 humanity; refusing to tempt the sustaining power of 
 Providence; and finally shrinking from a momentary alli- 
 ance with the powers of darkness, even to establish the 
 temporal Messianic sway, when He saw the 
 glory of the kingdoms of the world. The 
 first temptation occupies the same position in St. Luke. 
 Personal and material cravings are from any side the first 
 and simplest form of temptation; but the order of the 
 two latter temptations is reversed. The preservation of 
 the just relation of the Saviour to God occupies in St. 
 Luke the final place which St. Matthew assigns to the vin- 
 dication of Messiah’s independence of the world. Jn St. 
 Luke the idea of a temporal empire of Christ passes more 
 clearly into that of mere earthly dominion, which is dis- 
 tinctly regarded as in the power and gift of Satan.’ The 
 crowning struggle of Christ is not to repress the solicita- 
 tion to antedate the outward victory of His power, but to 
 maintain His human dependence upon His Father’s will. 
 Before Messiah the king the temptations arise in the order 
 of His relations to sense, to God, to man; before the man 
 Christ Jesus, in his relations to sense, to 
 man, to God. The sequence is one of idea 
 and not of time. The incidents are given wholly without 
 any temporal connection in St. Luke, and the language of 
 St. Matthew is more definite only in appearance? The 
 narrative, indeed, is one which may perhaps help to show 
 the impossibility of applying to things spiritual and eternal 
 that “phantom of succession,” in the shadow of which 
 we are commonly forced to speak and act. However this 
 may be, the closing words of the two narratives corres- 
 
 Matt. iv. 8. 
 
 1 Zim. τὶ; 3. 
 
 pas διαλεχϑεὶς αὐτῷ... .. Cf. Hom. 2 Luke iv. 8, καὶ εἶπεν... ὅ, καὶ ἄνα- 
 xix. 2. γαγών... .9, καὶ ἤγαγεν... Matt. iv. 3, 
 
 1 Luke iv.6: ἐμοὶ παραδέδοται, καὶ καὶ προσελϑών.... δ, τότε παραλαμ- 
 ᾧ ἐὰν ϑέλω δίδωμι αὐτήν. βάνει... .8, πάλιν παραλαμβάνει. 
 
 27* 
 
318 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 pond to what appear to be their fundamental notions. St. 
 Matthew records the ministry of angels to a heavenly 
 Prince;? St. Like shades the brightness of the present 
 triumph with a dim foreboding of the coming sufferings 
 of the Saviour: then the Devil departed from Him — but 
 only —-for ἃ season? 
 
 The importance which the Jews attached to the conse- 
 cration of the Messiah by Elias has been 
 already noticed; and tradition was much 
 occupied with the various other functions 
 which the great prophet should discharge in the prepara- 
 tion of the heavenly kingdom.’ But Elias, the represen- 
 tative of the second stage in the Jewish dispensation, was 
 not alone, though he occupied the most prominent. place 
 in the popular anticipations of a glorious future. The 
 Mosaic type of the Messiah was not lost, though it had 
 fallen into the back-ground; and there were some who 
 argued that as the ancient lawgiver had reflected the 
 
 1V. The Trans- 
 figuration. 
 
 divine glory from his countenance, so it should be with 
 the prophet like to him whom the Lord 
 should raise up in after time, for Moses was 
 The expec- 
 
 Deut. xviti. 18. 
 
 both a minister and an image of the Messiah. 
 tation thus formed received a literal and yet a spiritual ful- 
 filment. The partial and borrowed glory with which 
 Moses had shone became a complete transfiguration in the 
 case of Christ. That was from without; this from within. 
 That was a sign to all the people; this only to the chosen 
 three, to the zealous, the reverent and the loving. What 
 in old times was given as a token of visible splendor was 
 now changed into a source of silent faith* But even 
 under these changed relations, the correspondence of the 
 
 two events “upon the mount” is very striking. It is im- 
 
 1 Matt. iv. 11, καὶ ἰδού, ἄγγελοι προ- 
 σῆλδον καὶ διηιςόνουν αὐτῷ, compared 
 with Mark i. 18. ἦν μετὰ τῶν ϑηρίων 
 . καὶ οἱ ἄγγελοι διηκόνουν αὐτῷ. Cf. 
 Luke xxii. 48. 
 
 2 Luke iv. 13, ἀπέστη am αὐτοῦ ἄχρι 
 καιροῦ. Cf. John xiv. 80. 
 
 5 Cf. Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Matt. 
 xvii. 10 (ii. p. 339). 
 
 4 Contrast Matt. 
 TO ailig PAS) Hii 
 
 xvii. 9 with Ex. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 319 
 
 possible to read St. Matthew’s account of the Transfigura- 
 tion without recurring to the scene in the Exodus when 
 the face of Moses shone, and the children of 
 Israel were afraid to come nigh to him; and 
 the peculiar language which he uses coincides exactly with 
 the form of Jewish tradition. He alone records the pros- 
 tration of the disciples through their excessive fear, and 
 the Master’s strengthening touch and cheering words, 
 uttered once before upon the stormy lake.? It is with 
 equal significance that St. Matthew —the Hebrew Evan- 
 gelist — relates, without the implied reproof which is added 
 by St. Mark and St. Luke,* the wish of St. Peter to erect 
 three tabernacles, one for Christ, and one for Moses, and 
 one for Elias, — to give, as it were, ἃ permanent standing 
 place to the Jewish law and its prophetic development in 
 connection with the Gospel,— when in truth they were just 
 departing! St. Luke, on the other hand, again at this new 
 crisis recalls to notice the perfect manhood of the Saviour. 
 He who was praying when He was specially marked out 
 for His public ministry, prays also at His insti lation to 
 the mediatorial office. . The characteristic difference 
 between St. Luke and the other Evangelists 
 
 is yet more clearly brought out by the more ance san 
 considerable peculiarities of their narratives. 
 
 St. Matthew and St. Mark place in immediate connec- 
 
 Exod. xxiv. 29, 30. 
 
 1 Matt. xvii. 2, καὶ ἔλαμψε τὸ πρόσω- xvii. 2) and λευκός ἐξαστράπτων (Luke 
 πον αὐτοῦ ws ὁ ἥλιος (ef. xiii. 48). ix. 29). 
 * Fulgida facta fuit facies Mosis instar 2 Matt. xvii. 6,7, μὴ φοβεῖσδε. Cf. 
 solis’”’ (Wetst. ad loc.). The feature Matt. xiv. 27: xxviii. 10. 
 common to all the Evangelists,“ His 8 Mark ix. 6, οὐ yap ἤδει τί λαλήσῃ. 
 raiment became white,” is singularly Luke ix. 33, μὴ εἰδὼς ὃ λέγει. 
 illustrated by Bereshith R. (Wetst. 4. 4 Luke ix. 33, ἐν τῷ διαχωρίζεσδϑαι. 
 c.): ‘ Vestes lucis, he vestes Adami It may be remarked that the heavenly 
 primi.” Cf. Apoe. vii. 13 ff The ma- voice follows on the departure of Moses 
 terial imagery of St. Mark is worthy of and Elias. When they passed away 
 notice, λευκὰ ὡς χιών, οἷα yva- came the words, common to all the 
 pevs ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ov δύνα- Evangelists, “This is my beloved Son 
 Tat λευκᾶναι (Mark ix. 8),com- ... Hear Him.” 
 pared with λευκὰ ὡς τὸ φῶς (Matt, 5 Luke ix. 29, ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσδαι. 
 
320 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 tion with the Transfiguration! ‘a remarkable conversa- 
 tion about Elias, which serves to point out the spiritual 
 connection of the new and old. The substance is the 
 same in both; but St. Mark expresses with greater dis- 
 tinctness the contrast between the traditional idea of Elias’s 
 coming, and its real effects upon Messiah’s kingdom ;? 
 Elias had indeed come and restored all things, but for the 
 advent of a suffering Redeemer, and not for the conquest 
 of a mighty prince. St. Luke omits this discourse, but he 
 gives the subject of that more mysterious conversation 
 when Moses and Elias “talked”? with the Lord. The 
 addition is one of the greatest interest, for it connects the 
 recital of Christ’s sufferings with the fullest manifestation 
 of His glory. The Passion, with its triumphant issue, was 
 the point to which the Law and the prophets tended, and 
 thus we read that the representatives of both talked to 
 Christ of the Exodus which He was about to fulfil in Jeru- 
 sulem.* The Apostles themselves were as yet unprepared 
 for the tidings. As at Gethsemane they were heavy with 
 sleep, but at last when they were awake they saw Christs 
 glory, and the two men that stood with Him. 
 
 While there are these significant variations’ in the 
 details of the narrative itself, all the Evangelists relate the 
 same previous conversation and the same subsequent 
 miracle. The prediction of the disciples’ trials, the image 
 
 1The question Ti οὖν, Kk. τ. A., 
 Matt. xvii. 10 (ef. Mark ix. 11) seems to 
 refer to v. 9, so that the sense is: If this 
 visit of Elias must not be proclaimed 
 till Thou comest in Thy power, can we 
 still believe that he shall, according to 
 the teaching of the scribes, prepare 
 Thy way? 
 
 2 Mark ix.12. Olshausen, rightly, I 
 think, considers this to be the purport 
 of the verse. Kal πῶς introduces an 
 objection grounded on the resumption 
 of the former clause (If it be so, how 
 then ...), which is resolved by Αλλά 
 (Nay, doubt not: I tell you.. .). 
 
 3 Matt. xvii. 8; Mark ix. 4 (συλλα- 
 λοῦντεΞ5). 
 
 4 Luke ix. 81, 82, ἔλεγον τὴν ἔξοδον 
 αὐτοῦ ἣν ἔμελλε πληροῦν ἐν Ἱερουσα- 
 Anu. The construction of λέγειν is” 
 unusual, but occurs again Rom. iv. 6, 
 and in tbe earliest classical writers in 
 the sense of ‘‘ recounting,” ‘‘ relating 
 the details of,” ‘‘ describing.” The 
 word ἔξοδος itself is less definite than 
 decease, and may be best illustrated by 
 the technical sense (Arist. Poet. xii.) 
 “The closing scene of a Tragedy.” 
 
 5 The additions in Mark ix. 10, Matt. 
 xvii. 5 (ἐν ᾧ εὐδόκησα) are character- 
 istic. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 921 
 
 of their Lord’s triumph, and, flowing from it, the certainty 
 of the disciples’ help, exhibit a glorious sequence from 
 every point of view, which few will attribute to an apt 
 coincidence or to a conscious design. 
 
 It does not form any part of our plan to examine at 
 length the synoptic histories of the Passion, 
 or to compare them in detail with that of St. 
 John.’ It will be enough for the present to notice the 
 chief peculiarities of the different Evangelists, so that it 
 may be seen how far they explain the aim and office of 
 each, without regarding the whole progress or the minute 
 relations of the different narratives. Both historically 
 and doctrinally the Passion appears as the central and 
 crowning point of the Gospel. Where all else is described 
 in rapid outlines this is recorded with solemn particularity, 
 and the characteristic traits in each account are propor- 
 tionately more numerous and salient than elsewhere. 
 Without asserting that these furnish a complete solution 
 of the difficulties by which they are accompanied, they 
 contribute at least an important element towards the 
 investigation of them. They place us, in some measure, 
 in the position from which the several Evangelists regarded 
 the course of the whole scene, and charge the picture with 
 the varied forms of busy and restless action, which the 
 great master of Venice has dared to portray with vivid 
 and startling reality. 
 
 The peculiarities in St. Matthew’s narrative are numer- 
 ous and uniform in character. With more or 
 less distinctness they all tend to show how 
 the Messiahship of Jesus was attested dur- 
 ing the course of events which checked the 
 faith of some; and the same feeling which directed the 
 
 V. The Passion. 
 
 St. MATTHEW. 
 
 Cf. Luke xsiv. 21. 
 
 1 The chronology of the Passion ‘ Crucifixion” is perhaps offensive from 
 Week —a subject which cannot be left the fulness of Jife which it exhibits, yet 
 unnoticed —is examined in a note at on deeper study we feel that the Pas- 
 the end of the chapter. sion must have been witnessed in some 
 
 2 The first effect of Tintoretto’s great such form. 
 
ὦ THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 selection of the points of the narrative, influenced the 
 manner of their treatment. In the form, as well as in 
 many of the details, there is something of an Old Testa- 
 ment complexion which completes the impression produced 
 by the circumstances themselves. These are, indeed, in 
 some cases singularly significant. In St. Matthew alone 
 we read the last testimonies which were given to the Mes- 
 siahship of the Lord by Himself and by His enemies. 
 Nowhere else is there the same open and unreserved dec- 
 laration of the Saviour’s majesty as in St. Matthew’s 
 description of the Betrayal and the Judgment. The crises 
 of apparent hopelessness are exactly those which call forth 
 the most royal declarations of sovereign power. When 
 the disciples would have defended their Master at Geth- 
 semane, He reminds them that He could bring to His aid 
 legions of angels, but that the Scriptures must needs be 
 fulfilled; that His kingdom is not to be supported or 
 destroyed by the sword; that He must finish His work 
 on earth before He comes in the clouds of heaven.’ So 
 again, when He stands before the great tribunal of the 
 chosen nation, in answer to the solemn adjuration of the 
 High Priest,? He claims the name and the glory of the 
 Christ. Upto that moment He was silent, but then at 
 last the recognition of the sacred power of the minister 
 of God brought with it the words which proved to be 
 the final condemnation of Judaism. Then it was that as 
 Christ He was mocked by the people;*? and, meanwhile, 
 the remorse and death of Judas witnessed in another 
 place to the fulfilment of Messianic types in the Psalms and 
 Prophets.* So far Christ is seen to be openly proclaimed 
 
 1 Matt. xxvi. 52—54. Cf. John xviii. word Χριστέ is wanting in the other 
 
 Gospels. Compare also xxvii. 17 with 
 
 7 
 
 2 Matt. xxvi. 63, 64, ἐξορκίζω σε κατὰ 
 τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος iva ἡμῖν εἴπῃς 
 ... This clause is peculiar to St. Mat- 
 thew, 
 
 3 Matt. xxvi. 68, Προφήτευσον ἡμῖν, 
 Χριστέ, tis ἐστιν ὃ παίσας σε; the 
 
 Mark xv. 9. 
 
 4 Matt. xxvii. 3—10. The fulfilment 
 of prophecy in the history of the Pas- 
 sion is specially noticed by St. Matthew 
 (xxvi. 56, TOD TO δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν 
 ...compared with Mc. xiv. 49), some- 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 323 
 
 and rejected by His people; but He is also regarded under 
 a peculiar relation to Gentiles. The dream of Pilate’s 
 wife, and the symbolic purification! of the governor him- 
 self, express the influence which the righteousness? of the 
 Saviour exercised upon their imagination and judgment. 
 The one carries us back to the early history of the Jews, 
 when the fortunes of the nation were fashioned by the 
 dreams of heathen princes,— of Abimelech, of Pharaoh, 
 of Nebuchadnezzar ;* the other points forward to the ter- 
 rible consummation of the curse now uttered in reckless 
 unbelief One other testimony remains; St. Matthew 
 alone tells us that the earth was shaken and the rocks rent, 
 and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,> at the 
 death of Christ, whose power was felt in the depths of 
 Nature and of Hades when men asked in 
 mockery for the confirmation of His words: 
 fle said, Iam the Son of God. 
 
 The details peculiar to St. Mark are less numerous, but 
 hardly less characteristic. It has been re- 
 marked often that the account of the young 
 man who fled naked proves that we have in the second 
 Gospel the narrative of an eye-witness, who was nearly 
 
 Matt. xxvii. 43. 
 
 St. MARK. 
 
 omnia enim tum valida et fortia pene- 
 trans Dei Verbum et potestas «terne 
 virtutis irruperat. E£f monumenta 
 aperta sunt: erant enim mortis claustra 
 reserata. Zt multa corpora sanctorum 
 dormientum surrexerunt: illuminans 
 enim mortis tenebras et infernorum 
 
 times directly as here and xxvi. 31 || Mc. 
 xiv. 27 (Zech. xiii. 7), and sometimes 
 indirectly, xxvii. 34 (Ps. Ixviii. 21), 43 
 (Ps. xxi. 9). The contrast between 
 Matt. xxvi. 24|| Me. xiv. 21 (ὡς γέγραπ- 
 Tot) and Le. xxii. 22 (κατὰ τὸ ὡρισμέ- 
 voy) is full of meaning. The quotation 
 
 in Xxvil. 35 is certainly an interpolation. 
 
 i Ch Deut. scsi. 6.7. 
 
 2 Matt. xxvii. 19, Μηδὲν σοὶ καὶ τῷ 
 δικαίῳ ἐκείνῳ... xxvii. 24, ᾿Αϑῷός εἰμι 
 ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τούτου [τοῦ δικαίου] ; 
 but the last words are probably an in- 
 terpolation. 
 
 3 Gen. xx 3; xli. 25; Dan. ii. 8. 
 
 4 Matt. xxvii. 25,70 αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐφ᾽ 
 ἡμᾶς Kal ἐπὶ τὰ τέκνα ἡμῶν. 
 
 5 Hilar. ad Matt. xxvii. 51, 52: ““ Mo- 
 vetur terra: capax enim hujus mortui 
 csse LOn poterat. Petre scisse sunt: 
 
 obscura collustrans, in Sanctorum ad 
 preesens conspicatorum  resurrectione 
 mortis ipsius spolia detrahebat.” The 
 use of the phrase of ἅγιοι is remarka- 
 ble, which does not occur elsewhere 
 absolutely in the New Testament, ex- 
 cept of Christians, and not at all in the 
 Gospels: Acts ix. 18, 32, 41; xxvi. 10; 
 Rom. xii. 13, ete.; Apoc. xi. 18; xviii. 
 20. And yet more, the form of expres- 
 sion, πολλὰ σώματα τῶν ἁγίων 
 eve ἠγέρϑησαν, cannot be overlooked 
 in the interpretation of the passage. 
 
324 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 concerned in an incident which would have seemed trivial 
 to others! One or two other minute points lead to the 
 same conclusion. In the account of the testimony of “ the 
 false witnesses,” St. Mark appears to have preserved words 
 of the Lord which do not occur in the other Evangelists ;” 
 and he alone notices the disagreement of their testimony? 
 In the same way he characterizes Simon the Cyrenian as 
 the father of Alexander and Rufus,* and in him alone we 
 read that Pilate investigated the reality of the death of 
 Christ.’ 
 
 The special details by which the narrative of St. Luke 
 is distinguished are more obviously marked 
 by a common character, and seem in some 
 measure as a complement to those of St. Matthew. For 
 while the peculiar traits preserved by St. Matthew exhibit 
 in various aspects the Messianic dignity of the Lord, those 
 preserved by St. Luke seem rather to present notices of 
 
 St. LUKE. 
 
 1 Mark xiv. 51, 52. Cf. p. 287, 7. 1. tact with the Gospel of St. John. The 
 difference between the recorded words 
 of our Lord and the report of the wit- 
 nesses is striking: 7 can destroy (Matt. 
 xxvi 61, δύναμαι καταλῦσαι): 1 will 
 destroy (Mark xiv. 58, καταλύσω), as 
 compared with Destroy ...and I will 
 3 Mark xiv. οὐδὲ οὕτως ton ἦν ἡ raise (John ii. 19, Avoare... καὶ 
 μαρτυρία αὐτῶν. We have inthe tes- ἐἔγερῶ). 
 timony of the witnesses a point of con- 4 Mark xy. 21. 
 
 2 Mark xiv. 58, Tov ναὸν τοῦτον τὸν 
 χειροποίητον... ἄλλον ἄχει- 
 ροποίητον. The words do not oc- 
 cur elsewhere in the Gospels; but com- 
 pare Hebr. ix. 11, 24; 2 Cor. v. 1. 
 
 5 Mark xv. 44,45. The quotation in xv. 28 is certainly an interpolation. 
 The details common to St. Matthew and St. Mark which are not found in St. 
 Luke are numerous: 
 Matt. xxvi. 81,32. Mark xiv. 27,28. The future foretold. 
 
 — — 387,38. —  — 83,34. The selection of Peter, James, and 
 John. 
 
 — — 40—45. — — 87—41. The three warnings. 
 
 -- — 48. — — 44. The sign of the kiss. 
 
 - — 59--66. — — 55—64. The false witness. 
 
 — xxvii. 12—14. — xv. 4,8. The Lord’s silence before Pilate. 
 Cf. John xix. 9. 
 
 -- — 26. -- — 16. The scourging. Cf. John xix. 1. 
 
 τὸς — 21--]. — - 16—20. The mockery of the soldiers with 
 the reed (Matt.) and crown. 
 
 --͵᾿ — 3b. -- — 28. The deadening draught. 
 
 — -— 39, 40. — — 29,30. The mockery of the passers-by. Cf 
 
 Luke xxiii. 35. 
 — — 46-49. = | = 84-35. heer, ofagony. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 
 
 human sympathy, points of contact with common life, evi 
 dences of a perfect manhood. This is more evident if 
 account is taken of the details common to the two other 
 Evangelists which St. Luke omits; and, though it may 
 appear fanciful to insist on every difference 2s an example 
 of a difference of scope (chiefly through the faults in our 
 apprehension and representation of them), yet the total 
 effect of contrast and combined effect cannot be doubted, 
 St. Luke alone has preserved the question which showed 
 the devotion of the disciples to their Lord, when the bold- 
 ness of one raised the sword in His defence :' he alone re- 
 cords the thrice repeated declaration of Pilate, that “he 
 found no fault in Him;”? and notices the accusation for 
 civil crimes,®? and the examination before Herod.‘ 
 we read of the angel which “strengthened” the Lord’s 
 human nature at the Agony;’ of “an hour of His enemies 
 and of the power of darkness,” when their malice could 
 find full scope; ° of that look which recalled to St. Peter the 
 greatness of his fall;* of the words in which He resigned 
 His Spirit to His Father. 
 which He removed the injury which had been wrought by 
 mistaken zeal;° the last word of warning, in which He 
 turned the thoughts of mourners to the personal conse- 
 quences of the deed which moved their compassion ;"” the 
 
 In him 
 
 The last word of mercy, in 
 
 1 Luke xxii. 49, Ἰδόντες δὲ of περὶ 
 αὐτὸν τὸ ἐσόμενον εἶπαν Κύριε, εἰ 
 πατάξομεν ἐν μαχαίρᾳ. The words 
 seem to exclude any idea but that of 
 sacrifice in a desperate cause. 
 
 2 Luke xxiii. 4, 14, 22. 
 
 8 Luke xxiii. 2, .... διαστρέφοντα 
 τὸ ἔϑνος ἡμῶν καὶ κωλύοντα φόρους 
 Καίσαρι διδόναι... 
 
 4 Ambros. ad Luc. xxiii.4—12. ‘In 
 typo etiam Herodis atque Pilati, qui 
 amici ex inimicis facti sunt per Jesum 
 Christum, plebis Israel populique gen- 
 tilis figura, quod per Domini passionem 
 utriusque sit futura concordia” ... 
 
 5 Luke xxii. 43,44. The extent and 
 character of the variations in the evi- 
 
 dence as to the authenticity of this pas- 
 sage point (like similar variations in 
 other parts of the Gospel) to a double 
 recension of the Gospel, proceeding, as 
 it appears, from the Evangelist himself. 
 
 6 Luke xxii. 53, αὕτη ὑμῶν ἐστὶν 7 
 ὥρα καὶ ἣ ἐξουσία τοῦ σκότους. CF. 
 iv. 18, 6 διάβολος ἀπέστη ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ 
 ἄχρι καιροῦ. 
 
 7 Luke xxii. 61, καὶ στραφεὶς 6 Κύ- 
 ριος ἐνέβλεψεν τῷ Πέτρῳ... 
 
 8 Luke xxiii. 46, Πάτερ, εἰς χεῖράς 
 gov παρατίϑεμαι τὸ πνεῦμά μου. ‘The 
 echo of the words still lingers in the 
 phrase of St. Peter: 1 Pet. iv. 19. 
 
 9 Luke xxii. 51. 
 
 10 Luke xxiii. 27—31. 
 
 28 
 
326 
 
 THE DIFFERENCES IN 
 
 DETAIL 
 
 last prayer of infinite love, in which He pleaded for those 
 who reviled and slew Him;! the last act of sovereign 
 
 grace in which He spoke a blessing from the cross ;* 
 recorded alone by the companion of St. Paul. 
 
 9 
 
 are all 
 
 In St. Mat- 
 
 thew we saw that the dead did homage to the crucified 
 Messiah: in St. Luke?® αὐ the multitudes that came together, 
 and saw the things which were done, returned, beating their 
 
 breasts for sorrow. 
 
 1 Luke xxiii. 34. Πάτερ, ἄφες αὐ- 
 τοῖς" οὐ γὰρ οἴδασιν τί ποιοῦσιν. These 
 words reappear in the narrative of the 
 martyrdom of James, ‘‘ the brother of 
 the Lord,” preserved by Eusebius, H. 
 E. ἢ 23, Παρακαλῶ Κύριε, Θεέ, Πάτερ, 
 ἄφες αὐτοῖς" οὐ γὰρ οἴδασι τί ποιοῦ- 
 σιν. 
 
 2 Luke xxiii. 48. 
 
 8 Luke xxiii. 48. 
 
 4 It may not be out of place to notice 
 one apparent discrepancy in the ac- 
 counts of the Passion on which the 
 opponents of the literal accuracy of the 
 Evangelists insist with the greatest con- 
 fidence. It is said that each of the four 
 Evangelists gives the inscription on the 
 cross in different words. The state- 
 ment is certainly so far true that each 
 Evangelist gives a phrase which is not 
 entirely coincident with that given by 
 any one of the others, but a close ex- 
 amination of the narratives furnishes 
 no sufficient reason for supposing that 
 all proposed to give the same or the 
 entire inscription. St. John, indeed, 
 uses such terms as to Jeave no doubt as 
 to his record: ἔγραφεν δὲ καὶ τίτλον 
 ὃ Πιλᾶτος «.. ἣν δὲ γεγραμμένον... 
 Ἰησοῦς ὃ Ναζωραῖος ὃ βασιλεὺς τῶν 
 *Tovdaiwy (John xix. 19). These Greek 
 words then we may be assured were 
 certainly placed upon the cross; but if 
 we compare the language of St. John 
 with that of St. Mark, it will be obvi- 
 ous that St. Mark only designs to give 
 the words which contained the point of 
 the accusation,— the alleged usur pation 
 of royal dient -- μαὴ ἣν ἡ ἐπι: 
 
 γραφὴ τῆς αἰτίας αὐτοῦ ἐπι- 
 γεγραμμένη. Ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν ᾿Ἰου- 
 δαίων (Mark xy. 26); and these words 
 which contain the charge are common 
 to all the Evangelists. The language 
 of St. Matthew and St. Luke again, 
 though this might be disputed, seems 
 to imply that they have preserved re- 
 spectively the two remaining forms of 
 the trilingual inscription: ἐπέϑηκαν 
 
 νον THY αἰτίαν αὐτοῦ γεγραμμένην" 
 Οὗτός ἐστιν ᾿Ιησοῦς 6 βασιλεὺς τῶν 
 Ἰουδαίων (Matt. xxvii. 81)--- ἦν δὲ καὶ 
 ἐπιγραφὴ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ: Ὃ βασιλεὺς τῶν 
 Ιουδαίων οὗτος (Luke xxiii. 38). If 
 this natural conjecture be admitted, 
 the difference is a proof of complete- 
 ness, and not of discrepancy. St. Mat- 
 thew would certainly preserve the He- 
 brew form in his original Gospel; and 
 the title in St. Luke as given in Cod, 
 Corb., ‘* Rex Judeorum hic est,’ seems 
 like the scornful turn of the Latin title. 
 However this may be, there is at least 
 no possibility of showing any incon- 
 sistency on the strictly literal interpre- 
 tation of the words of the Evangelist. 
 
 The difference between John xix. 14 
 (ἕκτη) and Mark xv. 25 (τρίτη. Cf. 
 xv. 83; Matt. xxvii. 45; Luke xxiii. 44) 
 seems clearly to point to a different 
 mode of reckoning (Cf. John xviii. 28. 
 Ewald, Christus, 217). Again, no one 
 would find a contradiction in the fol- 
 lowing sentence: βαστάζων τὸν σταυ- 
 ρὸν ἐξῆλϑεν.. - ἐξερχόμενοι δὲ εὗρον 
 Σίμωνα: βρρον ἠγγάρευσαν ἵνα ἄρῃ 
 τὸν σταυρόν (John xix. 17; Matt. 
 xXvii. 32). 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. Sat 
 
 The various narratives of the Resurrection place the 
 fragmentariness of the Gospel in the clearest 
 light. They contain difficulties which it is 
 impossible to explain with certainty, but 
 there is no less an intelligible fitness and purpose in the 
 details peculiar to each account. The existence of diffi- 
 culties in brief records of such a crisis is no more than a 
 natural consequence of its character. The events of the 
 first great Easter morning were evidently so rapid in their 
 sequence and so startling in their lessons, that a complete 
 history would have been impossible."| Even in ordinary 
 circumstances the effects produced by the same outward 
 phenomena, and the impressions which they convey to dif- 
 
 VI. The Resur- 
 rection. 
 
 ferent persons in moments of great excitement, are so 
 various, that we are in some measure prepared for appar- 
 ent discrepancies in the recital of the facts which accom- 
 panied what was the new birth of believers no less than of 
 the Saviour. At the same time, we know so little of the 
 laws of the spiritual world, and of the conditions under 
 which beings of another order are revealed to men, that it 
 is idle to urge as a final inconsisteucy the diversity of vis- 
 ions which, while truly objective, may still have depended, 
 in a manner which may be faintly conceived, on the charac- 
 ter of the witnesses to whom they were given. And _ be- 
 sides all this, there are so many tokens of unrecorded facts 
 in the brief summaries which are preserved, that no argu- 
 ment can be based upon apparent discrepancies sufficient 
 to prove the existence of absolute error.”, Where the evi- 
 
 1 Jn this sense the closing words of 
 St. John’s Gospel, which are passed 
 over too often as a mere hyperbole, 
 contain a truth, which, as it holds ina 
 lower sense of the details of every hu- 
 man life, is absolutely true of the de- 
 tails of the Perfect 106 --- ἅτινα ἐὰν 
 γράφηται kad ἕν, οὐδὲ αὐτὸν οἶμαι Tov 
 κόσμον χωρῆσαι τὰ γραφόμενα βιβλία. 
 This perception of the infinity of life 
 makes the historian a true poet. 
 
 2 For instance, from John xx. 7, it 
 appears that Mary Magdalene did not 
 enter the sepulchre at the first visit; 
 and this fact gives a clew to the expla- 
 nation of the Angelic Visions. In Matt. 
 XXViii. 16 (οὗ ἐτάξατο αὐτοῖς) there is 
 a reference to other revelations of the 
 Lord to the Apostles than that which 
 the Evangelist has recorded. St. Luke 
 (xxiv. 84) notices incidentally an ap- 
 pearance to St. Peter which he has not 
 
328 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 dence is confessedly imperfect, it may be wise to hesitate, 
 but it is presumptuous to condemn; and the possibility 
 of reconciliation in the case of partial and independent 
 narratives is all that the student of the Gospels requires. 
 When it is seen that this possibility is further combined 
 with the existence of a special character in the separate 
 accounts, the whole question will be presented in a truer 
 and more instructive form. We shall learn to acquiesce in 
 the existence of diversities which we cannot finally solve, 
 when we find enough recorded to satisfy the individual 
 designs of the Evangelists and the permanent needs of 
 Christians. 
 
 It is necessary to repeat these obvious remarks, because 
 
 the records of the Resurrection have given 
 The true aspect 
 of the narratives. 
 
 occasion to some of the worst examples of 
 that kind of criticism from which the other 
 parts of the Gospels have suffered, though not in an equal 
 degree. It is tacitly assumed that we are in possession 
 of all the circumstances of the event, and thus, on the 
 one hand, differences are urged as fatal, and on the other, 
 elaborate attempts are made to show that the details 
 given can be forced into the semblance of a complete and 
 connected narrative. The true critic will pause before he 
 admits either extreme. He will not expect to find in each 
 Gospel, nor yet in the combination of them, a full and eir- 
 cumstantial record of a mere fact of common history ; and 
 he will be equally little inclined to bind down the possible 
 solutions of the difficulties introduced by variations and 
 omissions to one definite form. He will rather acknowl- 
 edge the characteristics of the truth in narratives Incom- 
 
 detailed; and the same appearance pearance to James, which is elsewhere 
 
 seems to be referred to by St. Paul 
 ΠΟΥ: Σν: δὴ. pst. Panta Cor xv. 6) 
 helps us to distinguish the appearance 
 to the gathered chureh in Galilee from 
 the last appearance to the Apostles 
 (Luke xxiv. 44 ff.), with which it has 
 been confounded; and notices an ap- 
 
 only recorded in apocry phal traditions. 
 If any further testimony to the multi- 
 plicity and variety of the revelations 
 of the Risen Lord is required, it is 
 given in the widest terms by St. Luke 
 in Aets i 8 (ἐν πολλοῖς τεκμηρίαις, 
 ὀπτανόμενοϑ). 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 329 
 
 plete as historical relations, and yet most perfect as lessons 
 of divine truth embodied in representative facts. 
 
 Regarding the recorded details of the Resurrection from 
 this point of view, we can dismiss without i 
 any minute inquiry the various schemes ses an Prom 
 which have been proposed for bringing them, 6%?" of swarate 
 as they stand at present, into one connected 
 narrative. Whether the harmonist has recourse to a mul- 
 tiplication of similiar incidents, or, with a truer insight 
 into the style of the Scriptures, sees in the several accounts 
 perspective views, as it were, in which several incidents 
 are naturally grouped together,’ we may accept the gen- 
 eral conclusion without insisting on the several steps by 
 which it is reached. That will rather be an object of 
 study, to regard each separate account as conveying a dis- 
 tinct image of the signs and results of Christ’s victory. 
 The fullest and truest view of the whole will then natur- 
 ally follow. The most general will result from the most 
 particular; the final impression, from a combination of 
 wholes and not from a mosaic of fragments. 
 
 The narrative of St. Matthew is, as is commonly the 
 case, the least minute. The great features of 
 the history are traced with bold outline. 
 Faith and unbelief, fear and joy, are seen together in the 
 closest contrast; and over all is the light of a glorious 
 majesty abiding “even unto the end.” Heaven and earth 
 are combined in one wide view;? Messiah reigns, and the 
 opposition of His enemies is powerless. The visit of the 
 women, the angelic ministry, a source of deadly terror to 
 the guards, of “great joy” to the believing, the appear- 
 ance of the Lord, the falsehood of the watch, the division 
 among the disciples, the last charge, combine to form a 
 noble picture, yet so as to convey no impression of a com- 
 plete narrative. But the peculiar traits in this brief sum- 
 
 St. MATTHEW. 
 
 1 This form of explanation is well fol- Gesch ), though with his usual errors 
 lowed out by Ebrard (Arit. d. Evang. in taste. 
 2 Matt. xxviii. 18. 
 
 28* 
 
330 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 mary are both numerous and important. St. Matthew 
 alone notices the outward glory of the Resurrection, the 
 earthquake, the sensible ministry of the divine messenger, 
 -the watch of enemies replaced by the guarding angel. 
 The vigilance of Roman soldiery and the authority of 
 priestly power are seen to be unable to check the might of 
 the new faith. The majesty of the triumphant Messiah 
 is shown again by a fact which St. Matthew has preserved 
 as to the feelings of His disciples. He alone notices the 
 humble adoration of the risen Lord before His Ascension, 
 and, as if with jealous care, traces to its origin the calumny 
 “currently reported” among the Jews “to 
 this day.” St. Mark mentions the command 
 to the disciples to go to Galilee, but St. Matthew alone 
 relates the final charge to the assembly of believers, which 
 was given in solemn majesty, and it may be on the very 
 mountain on which Christ first taugnt them. Thus it was 
 foreshown that Jerusalem was no longer to remain the 
 Holy City, the final centre‘of the Church. The “scattered 
 flock” were again gathered together by their Master in 
 the despised country from which they had first followed 
 Him The world-wide extent of His king- 
 dom is at once proclaimed. Their commis- 
 sion extended “to all the nations;” and the highest 
 mystery of the faith is conveyed in the words which are 
 the passport into the Christian community. 
 
 The narrative of St. Mark is attended by peculiar diffi- 
 culties. The original text, from whatever 
 cause it may have happened, terminated ab- 
 ruptly after the account of the angelic vision? The his- 
 
 Matt. xxviii. 11 ff. 
 
 Matt. xxviii. 19, 20. 
 
 St. MARK. 
 
 5 Mark xvi. 8, ἐφοβοῦντο yap. It 
 is vain to speculate on the causes of 
 this abrupt close. The evidence in fa- 
 
 1 Lange, Leben Jesu. 
 2 Matt. xxviii. 9,17. Contrast Mark 
 xv. 19. In Luke xxiv, 52 the words 
 
 προσκυνήσαντες αὐτὸν are very doubt- 
 ful. 
 
 8 Matt. xxviii. 16, τὸ ὄρος οὗ ἐτάξατο 
 αὐτοῖς. 
 
 4 Matt. xxvi. 81, 82 (προάξω ὑμᾶς εἰς 
 τὴν Γαλιλαίαν). 
 
 vor of the remaining verses seems to 
 establish their canonicity, though they 
 cannot be regarded as part of the orig- 
 inal narrative of St. Mark. There is 
 no inconsistency between Mark xvi--13 
 and Luke xxiy. 34, 35, but rather a 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 991 
 
 Oo 
 
 tory of the revelations of the Lord Himself was added at 
 another time and probably by another hand. Yet in both 
 parts of the record one common feature may be noticed, 
 which seems to present the peculiar characteristic of the 
 Gospel. The disciples hesitate before they accept the fact 
 which surpassed their hope. There is doubt before there 
 is faith. Thus, as St. Mark preserves an especial assurance 
 of the reality of Christ’s death, so he confirms most 
 strongly the reality of His resurrection. His narrative 
 shows that the witnesses were not mere enthusiasts who 
 believed what they wished to be true. The 
 women “told nothing to any man” when 
 they had first seen the angelic vision. The apostles only 
 yielded finally to the reproof of their Master 
 when they had rejected in their bitter mourn- 
 ing the testimony of those to whom He had appeared. 
 This gradual progress to faith exhibits that outward side 
 of the history which is further illustrated by the details 
 which the Evangelist has preserved from the Lord’s last 
 charge. The promises of miraculous power 
 assume in this a speciality and distinctness 
 to which there is elsewhere no parallel; and the brief 
 clause in which the progress of the Church and the work- 
 ing of its ministers is described, leads the reader to see 
 on earth the present power of that mighty Saviour, who 
 in this Gospel only is described as “seated on the right 
 hand of God.”? 
 
 St. Luke presents many of the same details as St. Mark, 
 but at a greater length and apparently with 
 a different object. He does not dwell eg 
 directly on the majesty of the Resurrection, as St. Mat- 
 thew, nor on the simple fact of it, as St. Mark, but rather 
 connects it with the Passion, and unfolds the spiritual 
 necessity by which suffering and victory were united. 
 
 Mark xvi. 8. 
 
 Mark xvi. 1. 
 
 Mark xvi. 17, 18. 
 
 most true trait of nature: cf. Luke 1 Mark xvi. 19. Cf. Matt. xxvi. 64; 
 xxiv. 87. Noris there any connection Luke xxii. 69; (Acts vii. δῦ, 56); Col. 
 of time in xvi. 15, καὶ εἶπεν, κ. τ. A. iii. 1; Hebr. x. 12. 
 
982 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 Thus it is that he records that part of the angelic mes- 
 sage in which the death and rising again 
 of Christ were traced in His own words. 
 And the Lord Himself; whether he talks with the two 
 disciples or with the eleven, shows the “necessity” of 
 those events by which their faith was shaken.’ In this 
 connection the eucharistic meal at Emmaus gains a new 
 meaning. That which was before clearly connected at 
 least with the observances of the Jewish ritual is now 
 separated from all legal observances. The “ disappear- 
 ance” of the Lord is, as it were, a preparation for His 
 unseen presence; and at the same time the revelation to 
 the eleven shows that He raised with Him from the grave, 
 and up to heaven, al! that belongs to the perfection of 
 man’s nature.” The last view which St. Luke gives of the 
 office of the risen Saviour corresponds with the earlier 
 traits in which he shows His relation to mankind. In St. 
 Matthew He is seen as clothed “ with all power in heaven 
 and on earth,.... present with the disciples to the end of 
 the age.” In St. Mark He is raised to heaven, to a throne 
 of sovereign power, as One to whom nature does homage. 
 In St. Luke He is the High Priest in whose 
 name repentance and remission of sins is to 
 be proclaimed to all nations,—the Mediator who sends 
 
 forth to men the promise of His Father. 
 There is yet another aspect in which the Resurrection 
 is presented in the Gospels which can only 
 
 Luke xxiv.7. 
 
 Luke xxiv. 47, 45. 
 
 St. JouN. : : . 
 be indicated now, though it presents lessons 
 
 of marvellous fulness. St. John traces its effects, not on a 
 church, nor on an active ministry, nor on mankind at 
 large, but on individuals. The picture which he draws 
 can be completed by traits taken from the other Evange- 
 lists; and if this be done, there is probably nothing else 
 in the Gospels which gives the same impression of sim- 
 
 1 Luke xxiv. 26, οὐχὶ ταῦτα ἔδει πα 2% Luke xxiv. 86 ff. (σάρκα καὶ oo 
 Sev; v. 44, δεῖ πληρωδῆναι τὰ γε- TEA). 
 γραμμένα. Cf. xxiv. 7. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 333 
 
 plicity and comprehensiveness, of independence and _har- 
 mony, of perfect truthfulness and absolute wisdom. The 
 Resurrection, then as now, is proved to be the touchstone 
 of character. In the presence of this great fact the 
 thoughts of many hearts are revealed. Per- 
 sonal devotion, even if mistaken and limited, 
 is received with a welcome of joy. Hope, which had 
 sunk by a natural and violent reaction even 
 to despair, is cheered by a word of peace, 
 and strengthened to utter the highest confession of faith.’ 
 Silent love looks and believes. To the eye 
 of the beloved disciple the Lord was known 
 when hidden from others; and while some hastened to 
 embrace or worship Him, it was his part to wait in 
 patience, and in this sense also to tarry till the Lord came. 
 However incomplete the comparison between parallel 
 evangelic narratives which has been made in 
 
 John xx. 15, 16. 
 
 John xx. 24, ff. 
 
 John xxi. 7, 
 
 The results of these 
 
 this chapter may be in some of its details, it characteristic ai 
 wets » x ferences. 
 
 seems impossible not to feel that it throws a 
 
 striking light upon the individuality, the independence, 
 and the inspiration of the Gospels. A more complete 
 examination, which should take account of every shade of 
 difference, such as could only be apprehended by personal 
 study, would fill up an outline which is too 
 plain to be easily mistaken. The character- 
 istic traits which have been noticed appear in the records 
 of a series of incidents which have been selected for their 
 intrinsic importance, and not arbitrarily. They are so 
 subtle that no one could attribute them to design; and 
 yet so important that they convey their peculiar effect to 
 the narratives. Without any constant uniformity they 
 converge towards one point; and even when their con- 
 nection is least apparent, they present a general impression 
 
 The Individuality, 
 
 1 Matt. xxviii. 9, Χαίρετε. Here σεν. Cf. Luke xxiv. 12, which isa very 
 only in the Gospels. ancient gloss, if not a part of the orig- 
 2 John xx. 26, 28. inal text. 
 3 John xx. 8, καὶ εἶδεν καὶ ἐπίστευ- 
 
BBE THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 of a definite law to which they are subject. Diversity of 
 detail is seen to exist without contrariety; and the exhi- 
 bition of a spiritual purpose with the preservation of literal 
 accuracy. 
 
 Individuality is a sign of independence. The more 
 exactly any one compares parallel passages 
 of the Gospels the more certainly he will 
 feel that their likenesses are to be referred to the use of a 
 common source, and not to the immediate influence of one 
 Gospel upon another. The general’ form is evidently 
 derived from some one original type; the special elabora- 
 tion of it is due to personal knowledge and apprehension 
 of the events included in the fundamental cycle of teach- 
 ing. The evidence of the evangelists is thus one and yet 
 independent. They do not reproduce one uniform history ; 
 but give distinct histories according to the outlines of a 
 comprehensive aud common plan. 
 
 We may proceed yet one step further. Individuality 
 and independence, when presented in such a 
 form as to exhibit complementary spiritual 
 aspects of the same facts, are signs of inspi- 
 ration. From one side it is possible to refer the phe- 
 nomena which they offer to the mental characteristics of 
 the Evangelists; but it has been seen that the human 
 element is of the essence of inspiration. The Bible is 
 divine because it is human. The: Holy Spirit speaks 
 through men as they are, and the fulness of their proper 
 character is the medium for conveying the fulness of the 
 truth. It follows, then, that in proportion as it can be 
 shown that there is a distinctness of purpose, though most 
 free from the marks of conscious design, in the several 
 Gospels,— in proportion that there can be shown to exist 
 in them significant differences consistent with absolute 
 truth, there is a sure pledge of their plenary inspiration in 
 the truest and noblest sense of the words. Nothing less 
 than the constant presence of the Holy Spirit, if we can 
 in any way apprehend the method of His working, could 
 
 independence, and 
 
 inspiration of the 
 Evangelists. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC KYANGELISTS. 335 
 
 preserve perfect truthfulness with remarkable variations ; a 
 perfect plan with childly simplicity ; an unbroken spiritual 
 concord in independent histories. 
 
 NOTE TO PAGE 321. 
 ON THE DAY OF THE CRUCIFIXION. 
 
 The difficulties connected with the chronology of the Paschal week are 
 acknowledged on all hands to be very considerable, and ee et a, 
 the various solutions which have been proposed have gene. 
 tended to perplex the question still more by introducing (a) The Crucifix- 
 uncertainty into the interpretation of the terms involved. pad Se ried ee 
 The examination of these difficulties may be divided into 
 two distinct parts, — the determination (1) of the day of the month, and 
 (2) of the day of the week, on which the Lord suffered. Of these the 
 first includes the alleged discrepancy between the Synoptists and St. John 
 as to the time and character of the Last Supper; the second, on the other 
 hand, is chiefly of interest for the interpretation of the Gospels. The two 
 questions are quite independent, and will be considered separately. 
 
 I, All the Evangelists agree as to the name of the day of the Crucifixion ; 
 and in the absence of all evidence to the contrary, it is entirely unreason- 
 able to suppose that the name is used in more than one sense. The day 
 was The Preparation (ἣ παρασκευή), or rather A Preparation (παρασκευή). 
 
 Matt. xxvii. 62, τῇ δὲ ἐπαύριον ἥτις ἐστὶν μετὰ Thy παρασκευήν. 
 
 Mark xv. 42, ἐπεὶ ἦν παρασκευή, ὅ ἐστιν προσάββατον. 
 
 Luke xxiii. 54, καὶ ἡμέρα ἦν παρασκευῆς καὶ σάββατον ἐπέφωσκεν. 
 
 John xix. 31, ἐπεὶ παρασκευὴ ἦν (cf. ν. 42); ν. 14, ἦν δὲ παρασκευὴ τοῦ 
 πάσχα. 
 
 What then was the Parasceuwe— The Preparation? There can be no 
 doubt that in early Christian writers, as in modern Greek, this was the 
 name of Friday (Clem. Alex. Str. vii. p. 877, § 75, 7 Mlapaokevh .. . ἐπιφη- 
 μίζεται... ἡ ᾿Αφροδίτης. Cf. Polyc. Mart. 7,79 Παρασκευῇ δείπνου ὥρα. 
 Tertull. De Jejun. 14). Friday was indeed the preparation for the weekly 
 Sabbath, and as such it was natural that the name should be used for it 
 so commonly that at last it became the proper name of the day.! But the 
 name and character of Sabbath was not confined to the weekly day of 
 rest. There were other festival-days which had the same Sabbatic charac- 
 ter, and foremost among them the first day of the feast of unleavened 
 
 1The word appears, as it were,ina ἐγγύας μὴ ὁμολογεῖν αὐτοὺς ἐν σάβ- 
 transition-state in a decree of Augustus βασιν, ἢ τῇ mpd ταύτης παρασκευῇ 
 preserved by Josephus: Ant. xvi. 6,2, ἀπὸ Spas ἐνάτης". . 
 
336 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 bread (Lev. xxiii. 15, τὰ σάββατα. Cf. νυ. 11, Hebr. vv. 24, 39); and thus 
 the day before these festival-sabbaths would likewise include a Preparation, 
 in the same way as that before the weekly sabbaths. ΑἹ] festivals did not 
 partake in this Sabbatic character, and consequently the enumeration of 
 days in Judith (viii. 6, evhotevey... χωρὶς προσαββάτων καὶ σαββάτων, καὶ 
 προνουμηνιῶν καὶ νουμηνιῶν καὶ ἑορτῶν καὶ χαρμοσυνῶν οἴκου ᾿Ισραῆλ) proves 
 nothing as to the exclusive use of the word προσάββατον, by which St. 
 Mark explains παρασκευή, for the weekly Preparation.1 
 
 If it is allowed that there is nothing in the Synoptic Gospels, so far as 
 the title of the day is concerned, which determines 
 whether it is to be understood of the weekly or of the 
 festival preparation, St. John seems to leave no real room 
 for doubt. In point of grammar, παρασκευή τοῦ πάσχα 
 —the Preparation of the Passover — might mean the Fri- 
 day in the Paschal week ; but it seems incredible, if we take into considera- 
 tion the significance of St. John’s dates, that the Evangelist should reckon 
 by the week and not by the symbolic feast, of which he is recording the 
 fulfilment.2 In connection with the whole narrative, “‘the Preparation of 
 the Passover” cannot mean anything but “‘the Preparation for the Passo- 
 ver,” or in other words the fourteenth Nisan, the eve of the Paschal sup- 
 per, which was eaten at the bezinninz of the fifteenth Nisan, according to 
 the Jewish reckoning, 7. e., after sunset of the fourteenth, according to 
 our own.® 
 
 The dates furnished by the Synoptists fall in with this interpretation. 
 On “‘ the first day of unleavened bread,”’ which is identi- 
 fied with the fourteenth of Nisan by the significant addi- 
 tion, ‘‘ When they sacrificed the Paschal-offering”’ (Mark 
 xiv. 12, τῇ πρώτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν ἀζύμων ὅτε τὸ πάσχα ἔϑυον; 
 Luke xxii. 7,7 ἦμ. τ. a¢. ἐν ἢ ἔδει τὸ πάσχα ϑύεσϑαι; 
 Matt. xxvi. 87, τῇ δὲ πρώτῃ τῶν aC), the disciples inquired ‘‘ where they 
 should prepare the Passover.”? Then follow in unbroken succession the 
 Last Supper (Matt. xxvi. 20; Mark xiv. 17, ὀψίας γενομένης ; Luke xxii. 
 14, ὅτε ἐγένετο 7 Spa), the departure to Gethsemane (Matt. xxvi. 31; Mark 
 xiv. 27, ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ ταὐτῃ), the arrest, the examination (Matt. xxvi. 74, 
 and parallels, ἀλέκτωρ ἐφώνησεν), the deliberation (Matt. xxvi. 1, πρωΐας 
 γενομένη5), and the various steps of the Passion. Now it appears that the 
 
 (b) The Prepa- 
 ration day fixed by 
 St. John as the Eve 
 of the Passover. 
 
 (c) The Synoptic 
 dates reconcilable 
 with this conclu- 
 sion. 
 
 1 M. Lutteroth, in an ingeniousessay late John xix. 42, because of the Friday 
 
 (Le Jour dela Preparation, Paris, 1855), 
 has endeavored to identify the Prepa- 
 ration with the tenth of Nisan, the day 
 on which the offering was set apart. 
 Luke xxii. 7, seems to be decisive 
 against this supposition, and M. Lut- 
 teroth appears to feel the difficulty 
 which the most forced interpretation is 
 insufficient to remove. 
 
 - 2 This will be felt at once if we trans- 
 
 of the Jews (Bleek, Beitr. 1117). 
 
 3 In conformity with this the Jewish 
 tradition represents ‘‘the Eve of the 
 Passover?’ as the time of the Crucifix- 
 ion (Bleek, Beifr. 148). The connection 
 between the two uses of παρασκευὴ is 
 well seen in the connection of 222. the 
 eve of a feast, and SM2572Z Friday 
 (Buxt. Lex. p. 1659). 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 357 
 
 fourteenth was kept ata later time as a day of rest especially in Galilee 
 (Mishna, Pesach. iv. 1, 5; ap. Bleek, Beitr. 1221), that is probably the 
 natural day, excluding the evening. ‘This fact supports the idea, which is 
 probable in itself, that the question of the disciples was asked immediately 
 upon the sunset of the thirteenth. The Preparation is evidently contem- 
 plated as foreseen by the owner of the house, and need not have occupied 
 much time.2 The evening of the Supper would thus be as St. John repre- 
 sents it, the evening at the beginning of the fourteenth. The same day 
 after sunrise next morning is rightly described as a Preparation-day, — 
 “the Preparation of the Passover,” though the Preparation, in the strict- 
 est sense of the term, was limited to the last three hours, from “ the ninth 
 hour.” 
 
 This view of the time of the Last Supper is supported by a variety of 
 indirect arguments, common to St. John and the Synop- 
 tists, which appear to be so cogent in themselves that 
 many critics who affirm the inconsistency of the two 
 forms of the narrative, assume that the original basis of the Synoptic 
 Gospels presented the same chronology as St. John, and that these coin- 
 cidences spring from the partial preservation of the first text. 
 
 But before noticing these less distinct intimations of the date, there are 
 yet two other passages of St. John which seem to leave 
 no room to doubt his meaning, if it be not clear already. 
 On the morning of the day of the crucifixion the Jews, 
 as he writes, would not enter the judgment-hall of Pilate, 
 “that they may eat the Passover” (John xix. 28, ἵνα φά- 
 γωσι τὸ πάσχα). Nothing but the determination to adapt these words to 
 a theory could suggest the idea that ‘‘ eating the Passover” applies to any- 
 thing but the great Paschal meal.4 Our ignorance as to the custom of the 
 Jews at the time makes it impossible to determine the extent of impurity 
 contracted by entering the house of a heathen, but it would at any rate 
 last till sunset, in which case the person thus impure could not be present 
 at the sacrifice of the offering in the Temple. Nor is it less decisive on 
 the point that towards the close of the evening on which the Last Supper 
 took place, and when it was nearly ended, the disciples thought that Judas 
 
 2. Indirect Evi- 
 dence. 
 
 (a) St. John im- 
 plies that the Pass- 
 over was not eaten 
 on the Crucifixion 
 Day. 
 
 1 Sapientes dicunt, in Judza opera- 
 
 bantur vespera Paschatis. (“A793 
 E°rmit5) usque ad meridiem. Sed in 
 
 Galilea nihil omnino operabantur ; et 
 nocte schola Schammai vetat, schola 
 Hillelis permittit usque δα scintilla- 
 tionem solis. Cf.§ 6. The whole chap- 
 ter is worthy of study in illustration of 
 the care with which even the fourteenth 
 Nisan was observed. Cf. Pesach. ν. 1, 
 p. 159. 
 
 2 Mark xiv. 15, δείξει ἀνώγαιον μέγα 
 ἐστρωμένον ετοιμον. 
 
 8 The phrase occurs in the account of 
 
 the institution of the Passover, Exod. 
 xii. 21, ϑύσατε τὸ πάσχα, and, though 
 the words might perhaps be extended 
 to the keeping of the whole rite, yet 
 they properly describe the sacrificial 
 act as distinguished from the entire fes- 
 tival (ποιεῖν τὸ πάσχα, Num. ix. 2, 6, 
 20; etc.). Cf. Deut. xvi. 2, 5, 6; Ezra 
 vi. 20, 21, ἔσφαξαν τὸ πάσχα... . καὶ 
 ἔφαγον τὸ πάσχα. 
 
 4'The passages quoted in support of 
 the rendering, ‘‘ celebrate the feast, by 
 eating the Chagiga,” fail in true paral- 
 lelism (Bleek, Beitr. 109 ff.). 
 
 29 
 
338 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 was dismissed that he might buy the things which were needed for the 
 feast (John xiii. 29, ὧν χρείαν ἔχομεν εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν), which was already 
 defined as ‘‘the feast of the Passover” (xiii. 1, mpd δὲ τῆς ἑορτῆς τοῦ 
 πάσχα). On the fifteenth such purchases would have been equally illegal 
 and impossible. 
 This passage leads to the series of other passages already alluded to, 
 which so far determine the day of Crucifixion as to show 
 ee oe that it was not fifteenth Nisan. This day — the first day 
 ply that the Cruci- Of unleavened bread — was a Sabbath, on which the Sab- 
 Jixion day was not atic law of rest was specially binding (Exod. xii. 16; 
 the fifteenth Nisan εἴν 2 5 
 (a Sabbath). Lev. xviii. 7). Now the Synoptists and St. John alike 
 exclude the notion that the day of the Crucifixion was 
 such a “Sabbath.” Apart from the extreme improbability that such a 
 festival as the first day of unleavened bread would be described as “ Fri- 
 day” or “ Preparation-day,” everything is done without scruple which 
 would have been unlawful on a Sabbath. A commission to make pur- 
 chases is regarded as natural (John xiii. 29); the Lord and His disciples 
 leave the city contrary to the command (Exod. xii. 22); men come armed 
 for the arrest of Christ! (Luke xxii. 52); the Jewish council meets for 
 judgment ; Simon comes (as it appears) from his ordinary work (Mark xv. 
 21; Luke xxiii. 26, ἐρχόμενον am ἀγροῦ); the condemned are executed and 
 taken down from the crosses, and at the close of the day spices are pre- 
 pared for the embalming of the Lord (Luke xxiii. 55), and because of the 
 Preparation (that is, of the approaching Sabbath) He is laid in a tomb 
 which was near (John xix. 42), whereas if it were the fifteenth, the day 
 itself was a Sabbath.2 To those familiar by experience with Jewish usages, 
 as all the Evangelists must have been, the whole narrative of the Cruci- 
 fixion, crowded with incidents of work, would set aside the notion that 
 the day was the fifteenth. Where the idea was excluded by facts, there 
 would be no need of words and no fear of ambiguity; and if we keep 
 clearly in view the Sabbatical character of the fifteenth, we shall be satis- 
 fied that all the Evangelists equally forbid us to place the Crucifixion on 
 such a day. 
 One or two allusions, which perhaps cannot be urged as arguments 
 without claiming greater authority for the symbolic 
 (c) The symbol- meaning of Holy Scripture than many would concede, 
 ism of the Passion . ᾿ 
 favors the four. seem to point clearly to the result which has been thus 
 teenth of Nisan. obtained from the positive evidence in favor of the four- 
 teenth Nisan, and the negative evidence against the fif- 
 teenth. St. John, by applying to our Lord words from the institution of 
 _ the Passover,’ evidently contemplates Him as the true Paschal Lamb, and 
 
 1 And this, it may be noticed, when acts mentioned, on the Sabbath: the 
 the rulers determined to avoid the feast enumeration itself seems sufficient for 
 (Matt. xxvi. 5; Mark χίν. 2, μὴ ἐν τῇ any one acquainted with the Jewish 
 ἑορτῇ). law. 
 
 2 Bleek (1. 6.) quotes authorities to 3 John xix. 86, compared with Exod. 
 show the illegality of doing the several xii. 46. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 999 
 the harmony of the narrative is completed by the supposition that the 
 time as well as the mode of the Lord’s death coincided with that of the 
 typical victim.! St. Paul repeats the same idea more distinctly, 1 Cor. v. 7, 
 τὸ πάσχα ἡμῶν ἐτύϑη Χριστός' ὥστε ἑορτάσωμεν x. τ. A.; and it has been 
 
 argued with great plausibility that if he had regarded the institution of 
 the Eucharist as taking place at the Paschal meal, he would not have said 
 simply ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ ἣ παρεδίδετο (1 Cor. xi. 23). Noris it to be forgotten 
 that these references of St. Paul are the more important as proceeding 
 from a distinct source. 
 
 On such a point historical tradition may seem to some to be of no great 
 weight, but it is evident that the tendency of any change 
 in the tradition would be towards the identification of 
 the Last Supper with the Paschal meal, and not towards 
 the distinction of the two, if they had been originally connected. Now, 
 as far as appears, early tradition is nearly unanimous in fixing the Cruci- 
 fixion on the fourteenth, and in distinguishing the Last Supper from the 
 legal Passover.2 This distinction is expressly made by Apollinaris,? Clem- 
 ent of Alexandria, Hippolytus,5 Tertullian, Irenzus,® who represent very 
 different sections of the early Church. Origen, according to the Latin 
 version of his Commentary on St. Matthew, seems to identify the Supper 
 with the legal Passover, but the passage is confused.7 From the time of 
 Chrysostom the meal was generally identified with the Passover;8 but 
 Photius expressly notices that two writers who differed widely on other 
 points of the Paschal controversy agreed in fixing the Passion on tue 
 fourteenth, contrary to the later opinion of the Church, and therefore 
 reserves the question for examination.? The quartodeciman controversy 
 
 8. Historic Evi- 
 dence. 
 
 1JIn this aspect the time, the ninth 
 hour (Matt. xxvii. 46; Mark xv. 34; 
 Luke xxiii. 44), is very important. This 
 was the beginning of the solemn Prepa- 
 ration (comp. p. 335, n. 1). ; 
 
 2 Cf. Routh, Rell. Sacr. i. 168. 
 
 38 Fragm. ii. ap. Routh, i. p- 160, λέ- 
 γουσιν [οἱ δι ἄγνοιαν φιλονεικοῦσι 
 περὶ τοὐτων] ὅτι τῇ ἰδ᾽ τὸ πρόβατον 
 μετὰ τῶν μαϑητῶν ἔφαγεν ὁ Κύριος, 
 τῇ δὲ μεγάλῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν ἀζύμων αὐτὸς 
 ἔπαϑεν" καὶ διηγοῦνται Ματϑαῖον οὕτω 
 λέγειν ὡς νενοήκασιν. ὅδεν ἀσύμφω- 
 vos τε νόμῳ Hh νόησις αὐτῶν, καὶ στα- 
 σιόζειν δοκεῖ κατ᾽ αὐτοὺς τὰ εὐαγγέ- 
 Ata. This fragment is specially impor- 
 tant as pointing to what may have been 
 the source of the confusion, the differ- 
 ent reckoning of the Jewish ecclesias- 
 tical and natural days: the evening at 
 the beginning of the fourteenth seems 
 to have been coufounded with the eve- 
 ning at the end of the fourteenth (the 
 
 natural day), 7. e., the evening of the 
 fifteenth and the time of the Paschal 
 meal. 
 
 Apollinaris (in Fragm. iii.) elsewhere 
 states distinctly that the Lord, “the 
 great sacrifice,” was crucified and 
 ‘* buried on the day of the Passover,” 
 the fourteenth, “the true Passover of 
 our Lord.” 
 
 4 Clem. Alex. Fragm. p. 1016, Pott. 
 
 5 Hipp. Fragm. i. ii. (p. 869, ed. 
 Migne). 
 
 6 Tertull. adv. Jud. 8; Iren. iv. 10,1 
 (28) (quoted by Browne, Ordo Seclo- 
 rum, Ὁ. 66). Yet Ireneus calls the 
 meal “ἃ Passover”? (ii. 22, 2). 
 
 7 Orig. Comm. in Matt. § 79. 
 
 8 The interesting Catena on St. Mark 
 published by Cramer contains both 
 opinions (Cram. Cat. in Marc. pp. 420, 
 421), the second with a reference to St. 
 Jolin. 
 
 9 Phot. Cod. 115, 116. 
 
340 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL 
 
 itself has no decisive bearing on the date. The evidence as to the point 
 on which the controversy turned is too meagre and ambiguous to allow of 
 any satisfactory conclusions being drawn from it.1 
 But in answer to all these arguments which are drawn from direct and 
 indirect evidence of every kind, it is said that the Syn- 
 Sure ΓΕ optists plainly speak of the Last Supper as the Paschal 
 Tat Stupor: meal. It might, perhaps, be enough to answer that they 
 define the day of the Crucifixion at least as plainly, and 
 that St. John, who is in perfect harmony with them as to the day, shows 
 that the meal was not the Paschal meal, as, indeed, it could not be, if it 
 was on “the Preparation-day.”’ Either, then, they must include a gross 
 contradiction in their narrative, or we must misinterpret their meaning as 
 to the day or the meal; and certainly not as to the former, because that is 
 fixed by a complicated chain of evidence, while the other is expressed in 
 one or two phrases which admit readily of a different sense, when once we 
 reflect that the very circumstances of the case must have put out of ques- 
 tion for Jews what appears to us to be their most natural meaning. It is 
 said that the disciples speak of “preparing for eating the Passover” 
 (Matt. xxvi. 17; Mark xiv. 12; Luke xxii.9); that Christ Himself pro- 
 poses to eat it (Matt. xxvi. 18); Mark xiv. 15; Luke xxii. 8); that the dis- 
 ciples actually “prepared the Passover” (ἡτοίμασαν τὸ πάσχα; Matt. 
 xxvi. 19; Mark xiv. 16; Luke xxii. 13); that in the course of the meal 
 which followed immediately afterwards the Lord said, “1 desired to eat 
 this Passover with you” (ἐπεθύμησα τοῦτο τὸ πάσχα φαγεῖν wed ὑμῶν, 
 Luke xxii. 15). If these words stood alone, there can be no doubt that we 
 should explain them of the Paschal meal taken at the legal time; but the 
 Evangelists who use them exclude this sense by their subsequent narra- 
 tive, and there are in the contexts indications of the sense in which they 
 must be taken. The Lord, in sending His disciples to 
 make the preparation, said, ‘‘ My time is near” (Matt. 
 xxvi. 18), as if to explain something unusual in His com- 
 mand. He sent, as the words imply, to a disciple who was expecting 
 Him, and speaks with authority as “the Master’ (ὁ διδάσκαλος, Matt. 
 xxvi. 18; Mark xiv. 14; Luke xxii. 11). May we not then suppose that 
 the preparation which the disciples may have destined for the next day 
 was made the preparation for an immediate meal which became the 
 Paschal meal of that year, when the events of the following morning 
 rendered the regular Passover impossible?? If this seems a forced sense, 
 we must remember that while the memory of events was still fresh, as it 
 was when the oral Gospel was fixed, statements which are perplexing to 
 us may have been readily intelligible from a knowledge of the connecting 
 facts. Nothing at least can be more unlikely than that the narratives 
 should be severally inconsistent with themselves. Ritual difficulties which 
 
 How this inust be 
 understood. 
 
 1 Cf. Bleek, Beitr. 156 ff. The use of πάσχα for the Christian 
 
 2 Hippol. Fragm. i. p. 869, ovTos yap Eucharist would render the confusion 
 > / Φ . . 5 . Β . . 
 ἦν τὸ πάσχα TO προκεκηρυγμένον Kal easier in after time; cf. Mingarelli, Did. 
 τελειούμενον τῇ ὡρισμένη ἡμέρᾳ. de Trin. ii. 16. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 541 
 
 we can fecl only by effort and careful study, would be felt instinctively by 
 the Evangelists. They and their first readers could not have referred the 
 events of the Crucifixion-day to the “ Sabbath”’ on the fifteenth, and con- 
 sequently could not, as we might do, refer the words which describe the 
 supper which preceded it to the legal Passover. 
 
 II. It remains to notice very briefly the second point of inquiry. Long 
 use and tradition seem to have decided this already, but 
 it may be questioned whether there are not grounds for i. The weck- 
 doubting the correctness of the common opinion. In the πὼς Sea 
 record which St. Matthew has preserved of the saying of 
 the Lord as to “the sign of Jonah,” it is stated that “the Son of Man 
 shall be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth’’ (Matt. xii. 
 40, τρεῖς ἡμέρας καὶ τρεῖς νύκτας). Admitting that the parts of the days 
 of the burial and the resurrection are to be reckoned as “ days,” yet even 
 thus the pericd from Friday tili Sunday is only three days and ¢wo nights. 
 Are we then to conclude that the separate enumeration of days and nights 
 is without any special force, and strictly speaking inaccurate? or to sup- 
 pose that the term “‘ Preparation-day ”’ has Jed to the very natural but erro- 
 neous identification of the day of the Crucifixion with Friday? The evi- 
 dence on both sides is but slight. On the one hand it may be said that Str. 
 John spoke of the Sabbath which followed the Preparation as being of 
 special solemnity (John xix. 31, ἦν δὲ μεγάλη 7 ἡμέρα ἐκείνου τοῦ σαββά- 
 του), and this would certainly be the case if the fifteenth of Nisan, a festi- 
 val Sabbath, coincided with the weekly Sabbath; and so also St. Luke 
 appears to mark only one day as intervening between the burial and the 
 resurrection (Luke xxiii. 54, 56, σάββατον ἐπέφωσκεν .. . τὸ μὲν σάββατον 
 ἡσύχασαν). But St. Matthew describes the day after the Crucifixion in so 
 remarkable a manner, as to lead to the belief that he did not regard it as 
 the weekly Sabbath: “ The next day that followed the day of the Prepara- 
 tion the chief priests came to Pilate” (τῇ δὲ ἐπαύριον, ἥτις ἐστὶν μετὰ τὴν 
 παρασκευήν, Matt. xxvii. 62). Such a circumlocution seems most unnatu- 
 ral if the weekly Sabbath were intended; but if it were the first day of 
 unleavened bread, then, as the proper title of that day had been already 
 used to describe the commencement of the Preparation-day (Matt. xxvi. 
 17, τῇ δὲ πρώτῃ τῶν ἀζύμων), nO characteristic term remained for it. More- 
 over, the day in itself was a “great Sabbath,” and could be described as 
 such by St. John, without supposing any coincidence of the weekly and 
 festival Sabbaths. And the whole Sabbatic period, extending from the 
 beginning of the fifteenth of Nisan to the dawn of the first day of the 
 week might, perhaps, without violence be called a Sabbath; or at least 
 the rest on the fifteenth might be implied in the statement of the rest 
 observed on the Sabbath. Such a period would completely satisfy the 
 term fixed by “the sign of Jonah,” and the text of the Gospels, with the 
 exception of the one passage in St. Luke, which forms an apparent diffi- 
 culty, leaves the length of the entombment undetermined, except so far 
 as it is fixed by “the first day of the week,” and the legal resting-time 
 whrich interrupted the preparations of the disciples.1 
 
 1 The other dates which refer to the interval are: (1) Matt. xxvii. 63, εἶπεν 
 
 29* 
 
942 
 
 DIFFERENCES OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 
 
 But without pursuing the question further at present, what has been 
 said may be sufficient to direct attention to the investigation, which seems 
 to call for more notice than has been hitherto given to it. 
 
 «ὐν μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμέρας ἐγείρο- 
 μαι: κέλευσον οὖν ; cf. Mark viii. 31, 
 del... META τρεῖς ἡμέρας ἀνα- 
 στῆναι; Mark ix. 81; x. 84, ἀσφαλισ- 
 Siva τὸν τάφον ἕως τῆ" τρίτης 
 ἡμέρας. (2) John ii. 19, λύσατε τὸν 
 ναὺν τοῦτον καὶ [ἐν] τρισὶν ἡμέραις 
 ἐγερῶ αὐτόν. Cf. Matt. xxvi.61; Mark 
 xiv. 58; διὰ τριῶν ἡμερῶν. Matt. 
 
 xxvii. 40; Mark xv. 29, ἐν τρισὶν ἡμέ- 
 pats. (3) Matt. xvi. 21; xvii. 28; xx. 
 19; Luke ix. 22; xviii. 33; xxiv. 7, 46, 
 τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ ἀναστῆναι. (4) Luke 
 xxiv. 21, τρίτην ταύτην ἡμέραν ἄγει. 
 It will scarcely be denied that the ob- 
 vious meaning of these phrases favors 
 the longer interval, which follows from 
 the strict interpretation of Matt. xii. 40. 
 
SAP TER VEL: 
 
 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT OF THE SYNOPTIC 
 EVANGELISTS. 
 
 Le coeur a son ordre. — PASCAL. 
 
 Tue differences of arrangement in the Synoptic Evangel- 
 ists are more obvious and not less important 
 than the differences in detail. Numerous japon sorte te 
 groups of events present the same arrange-  S"eceii ese 
 ment in every case, but other events are trans- 
 posed, so as to convey a new lesson from the new position 
 in which they stand. While there is very much which is 
 common to all the Synoptists, the incidents peculiar to 
 each produce the same kind of individuality in the whole 
 narratives, as the special details impart to the separate ele- 
 ments of which they are composed. Each Evangelist has 
 a characteristic arrangement, coincident up to a certain 
 point with that of the others, and yet so far different that 
 harmonists are commonly driven to violent expedients — 
 assumptions of the repetition or confusion of similar events 
 — to bring all into agreement. But before taking recourse 
 to such solutions of the difficulty we may fairly ask, whether 
 the order of the Evangelists is a violation or an abandon- 
 ment of chronological sequence. If the succession of time 
 is subordinated to the succession of idea, then it is but lost 
 labor to seek for a result which our materials are not fitted 
 to produce. The object of the student will be to follow out 
 the course of each revelation of the Truth, and not to frame 
 
844 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 annals of the Saviour’s Life. There are, indeed, times 
 marked out by marvellous coincidences and significant 
 relations in which we may see something of the symmetry 
 of the divine plan of history, but evidence is wanting to jus- 
 tify the extension of a system of minute dates to the teach- 
 ing of the Lord. If what has been already said of the 
 fragmentariness of the Gospels be true, and the character 
 and express language of St. John’s Gospel seem to be con- 
 clusive on this point, then it is from the first unlikely that 
 writings which do not aim at completeness should observe 
 Selection is 
 in the one case what arrangement is in the other. The 
 first was guided by an instinctive perception of representa- 
 tive facts; the other by an instinctive perception of their 
 An inspired order is the cor- 
 
 with scrupulous exactness the order of time. 
 
 relation to a central idea. 
 relative of an inspired abridgment. The existence of the 
 one sugeests the existence of the other, or at least removes 
 any presumption against the disregard of the common 
 
 rule cf composition. 
 If, however, the text of the Gospel bear clear traces 
 of a systematic attention to chronology, the 
 
 The Gospels ex- - a 
 hibit few tracesof argument based on a mere analogy which 
 ig might be expected to hold between matter 
 But in fact it is not so. The 
 
 examination of a few chapters of the Synoptic Gospels 
 
 and form must be set aside. 
 
 will leave little doubt that temporal sequence was not the 
 standard of their arrangement. Their whole structure, as 
 well as their contents, serves to prove that they are me- 
 moirs and not histories. Definite marks of time and place 
 are extremely rare; and general indications of temporal or 
 
 local connection are scarcely more frequent. The ordi- 
 
 1 From the time of the Temptation 
 to the Transfiguration I have noticed 
 ouly the following distinct connections 
 of detailed events: 
 
 1. Matt. viii. 18, 34. The storm 
 stilled; the Gadarene demoniacs; the 
 yeturn. So Mark iy. 35 ff. (connecting 
 
 these events with the great day of Par- 
 
 ables: cf. Matt. xiii.53); Luke viii. 22 ff. 
 2. Matt. ix. 18, ταῦτα αὐτοῦ λαλοῦν- 
 
 Tos. Of the new and old; Jzirus’ 
 
 daughter. Cf. Mark v. 22; Luke viii. 
 
 ΔΝ , . . 
 41, καὶ ἰδοῦ, fixing no connection of 
 time. 
 
9 
 
 OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 345 
 
 nary words of transition are either indefinite or are dis- 
 
 junctive.’ 
 
 are more like collections of anecdotes than histories. 
 
 3. Matt. ix. 82, αὐτῶν δὲ ἐξερχομέ- 
 νων. The healing of two biind; the 
 healing ofa dumb man (peculiar to St. 
 Matthew). 
 
 4, Matt. xii. 46, ἔτι αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος ; 
 xiii 1, ἐν TH ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ (yet cf. Acts 
 τ ἢ. Aare ἵν, ke καὶ πάλιν. Luke 
 viii. 4, συνιόντος δὲ ὄχλου. The blas- 
 phemy of Pharisees; the true kindred; 
 the day of Parables. Compare No. 1. 
 
 5. Matt. xiv. 22; Mark vi. 45, evdéws 
 ἠνάγκασεν. The walking on the water 
 immediately after the feeding the five 
 thousand. 
 
 6. Matt. xvii. 1; Mark ix. 2, wey 
 ἡμέρας εξ. Luke ix. 28, ὡσεὶ ἡμέραι 
 vxTw. The coming of the kingdom; 
 the Transfiguration. 
 
 7. Mark i. 29, καὶ εὐθὺς ἐξελϑόντες. 
 Luke iv. 38, ἀναστὰς δέ (Matt. viii. 14, 
 καὶ eAd@y... noconnection: ef. y 23; 
 Mark i. 99). The demouiac in the syn- 
 agogue; Peter's wife’s mother cured. 
 
 8. Luke vii. 11, ἐν τῇ ἑξῆς (all. τῷ 
 €fjs). The centurion’s servant; the 
 widow’s son. 
 
 These data are evidently insufficient 
 to determine one certain order of 
 events; nor are the ambiguities re- 
 moved by taking into account the no- 
 tices that some events followed others: 
 Matt. ix. 9, 27; xii. 9, 15;. xv. 21, 29. 
 
 It may be observed that the style of 
 St. Matthew produces the greatest ap- 
 pearance of continuity, though prob- 
 ably he offers the most numerous diver- 
 gences from chronological order. (Cf. 
 Matt. viii 1, bxAOL πολλοῦ" 2—4, 
 καὶ ἰδού... μηδενὶ εἴπῃς: 5, εἰσελ- 
 δόντος ; 14, καὶ ἐλδών; 18, ἰδὼν δέ; 
 23, καὶ ἐμβάντι; χὶν. 13,14). St Luke, 
 on the other hand, is the least con- 
 nected. The great series of events 
 which he connects with the last jour- 
 ney to Jerusalem (xi.—xvii.), is at once 
 one of the strongest arguments against 
 the observance of time by the Evangel- 
 
 Outwardly, at first sight, the Synoptic Gospels 
 
 If 
 
 ists, and the most striking illustration 
 of their mode of connection. 
 
 1 Jn this respect the usage of each 
 Evangelist is peculiar. The following 
 connecting plirases may be uoticed: 
 
 1. In St. Matthew: 
 
 (a) Tote (at that time; no close se- 
 quence. The word does not oceur in 
 this manuer in St. Mark; cf. Luke xxi. 
 10) iii. 5, 18; (iv. 1); ix. 14, 37 {ἐν 35); 
 δι τε ἢ 1}. ἐν, eo USL. GOs) Vs 1. 15. 
 Xvi. 243: xvili. 21; xix.18,.27; xx. 20; 
 xxiii. 1. In iv.1; xiii. 35, it marks a 
 direct sequence. 
 
 (b) δὲ. iv. 18; vy. 1; viii. 18; xi. 2; 
 xv. 82; xvi. 18. 
 
 (c) καί, iv. 28; viii. 14: ix.2, 9, 27,85; 
 Pee Ni OU EI >.2\'e, ARS gyi ea La 
 
 (d) ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ καιρῷ, xi. 25; xii. 
 1; xiv. 1. ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ὥρᾳ, xviii. 1. 
 ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις, 111.1. ἐν τῇ 
 ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ, xiii. 1. 
 
 (6) To these may be added the use of 
 éxewdev, ix.9, 27; xii. 9, 15; xiii. 53; 
 xv. 21, 29. 
 
 2. In St. Mark: 
 
 (a) Kal... πάλιν; ii. 1,13; iii. 1; iv. 
 1 (καὶ πάλιν); vii. 81 (καὶ πάλιν); viii. 
 1, ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις πάλιν. 
 
 (b) kal, i.21, 40; ii. 18, 28; iii. 7, 13, 
 20, 81; iv. 21, 24, 26, 805 vi. 1, 7, 14, 30; 
 vii. 1, 28; viii. 22, 27. 
 
 3. In St. Luke: 
 
 (a) καὶ ἐγένετο (ἐγένετο δέ) (occurs 
 in St. Luke forty-one times; in St. 
 Mark twice; in St. Matthew, καὶ ἐγέ- 
 veto ὅτε ἐτέλεσεν (συνετ. viii. 28), 
 else once, ix. 10), v.1, 12,17; 
 ix 18; 
 
 five times: 
 Vide 9. 15. vil, 11 vile. 22% 
 a Ue. gam 
 
 (Ὁ) καί, iv. 16, 81; vii. 18; viii. 26; 
 ise 10. 61. Ka 36, 
 
 (c) δέ, vii. 86; viii. 19; ix. 1, 7, 48, 48; 
 2 baal Hy 
 
 The connections of xi.—xvii. will be 
 noticed afterwards. 
 
940 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 we compare any series of incidents which they contain 
 with a similar series in any historian, ancient or modern, 
 we shall find at once that, apart from all other differences, 
 there is a fundamental difference in the way in which the 
 incidents are put together. In the one the circumstances 
 of time and place rule the combination; in the other the 
 spiritual import, not independent of these, but yet rising 
 above them, is distinctly predominant. 
 
 But while it is maintained that the separate Gospels are 
 not to be forced into any chronological har- 
 mony; that the law of their composition is 
 moral and not temporal; that there is a pro- 
 gressive development in the several histories, 
 co neglect which is to lose the very outline of their divine 
 meaning; yet the order of time, as far as it can be ascer- 
 tained, is not to be neglected. The occasion frequently 
 gives its character to the action. A marked connection 
 brings out with unerring power some latent trait which 
 might otherwise have been overlooked.t’ Thus it is that 
 particular days seem to stand out with signal prominence 
 in the history of Christ, as portraying a crisis of faith and 
 unbelief in a rapid concurrence of events.” The days them- 
 selves stand isolated, while as distinct wholes they have an 
 internal unity. But beyond such a limited influence of 
 time as this, there is an influence which extends to a much 
 In the perfect Life all succession proceeds by 
 asupreme law. The progress in the lessons which it unfolds 
 will answer absolutely, as among men partially, to its out- 
 ward development. It is, then, impossible but that there 
 
 The order of time 
 generally coinci- 
 dent with aspiritual 
 order. 
 
 wider range. 
 
 1 The healing of the woman with the receive a new life. It is impossible not 
 
 issue, which in all the accounts inter- 
 rupts the history of the raising of Jai- 
 rus’ daughter, offers the most remark- 
 able illustration of this, The beginning 
 of the woman’s plague was coeval with 
 the maiden’s birth. The one had suf- 
 fered for twelve years when she was 
 made whole; the other had lived for 
 twelve years when she fell asleep to 
 
 to recognize in this a typical meaning. 
 The faith of the Gentiles seizes the gift 
 which is destined for the Jew. This is 
 beautifully brought out by Hilary, Jn 
 Matt. ix. § 6. 
 
 2Two such days may be noticed: 
 Luke iv. 883—42, a day of faith; Mark 
 111. 22—v.22, a day of opposition, warn- 
 ing, power. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 347 
 
 should be some broad lines of agreement in order between 
 records of Christ’s work based on its varied spiritual mean- 
 ings. General agreement will be diversified by character- 
 istic divergences. The agreement will be sufficiently wide 
 to convey to us some sense of the infinite harmony of every 
 part and relation of the human life of the Saviour; the 
 divergence sufficiently striking to save us from sacrificing 
 the manifold bearings of eternal truth to a rigid order 
 of time. 
 
 If this view be correct, the technical work of the har- 
 monist is limited to a narrow compass. When 
 he has shown that the few incidental fixed 
 dates in the Gospels are consistent with one 
 another, all objections drawn from the dis- 
 cordant order which they present otherwise 
 fall to the ground. He is then free to interpret the letter 
 by the spirit; and to lay open that inner harmony which 
 springs out of the union of various purposes, and leads to 
 the full portraiture of a divine work. The reality of such 
 a harmony is involved, as we have seen, in the very idea 
 of Inspiration, and it is, perhaps, a corollary from the exist- 
 ence of a four-fold record. Yet it is to be felt rather than 
 analyzed. The subtlest signs by which it is characterized 
 vanish in the rude process of dissection. To present it 
 clearly, and even then very inadequately, would be to write 
 a commentary on the Gospels; and for the present it must 
 be enough if we can determine some of the great features 
 by which it appears to be distinguished. 
 
 We have already seen that St. Matthew connects the 
 
 The Harmony of 
 the Gospels to be 
 sought in the combi-~ 
 nation of the pur- 
 poses which they 
 work out. 
 
 beginning of the Gospel-history with the glo- 
 ries of the typical kingdom and the hopes of 
 the first covenant. At the very outset he 
 announces the Messiah as the son of David 
 and the son of Abraham, the branch and seed 
 to which all prophecy looked. 
 
 I. St. Matthew's 
 Gospel. 
 
 The History of 
 the promised Mes- 
 siah. 
 
 The Introduction 
 (i. ti.) 
 
 The genealogy, confined 
 
 within the limits of the national promise, is the introdue- 
 
348 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 tion to his narrative; the birth of the Christ? his first sub- 
 ject. The inner scope of the whole Gospel is directed to 
 the development of this idea in the light of ancient revela- 
 tion” The fear of Joseph is connected with 
 the righteousness of the law; and the imper- 
 fection of this righteousness is at once intimated by the 
 
 Matt. i. 18. 
 
 1 There can be little doubt that the correct reading in Matt. i. 18, is τοῦ δὲ 
 Χριστοῦ ἢ γένεσις οὕτως ἣν. 
 2 The following analysis may guide the student in pursuing the teaching of 
 St. Matthew. 
 INTRODUCTION. i., ii. 
 The Royal pedigree (i. 1—17). 
 The Virgin’s Son, the promised Saviour (18—25). 
 The homage (ii. 1—12). 
 The persecution (18—23). 
 (In all the words of prophets are fulfilled.) 
 1. THE PRELUDE. iiii., iv. 
 (a) The Baptist (iii.): 
 The Messenger (l1—6). The Message (7--12). The Recognition 
 (18—17). 
 (b) The Messiah (iv ): 
 The Trial (1—11). The Home (12—16). The Message (17). The 
 Call (18—22). The Work (28—25). 
 2. THE LAWGIVER AND PROPHET. v.—xiii. 
 (a) The new Law in relation to the old (v.—vii.) 
 (δ) The testimony of signs (viii., 1x.). 
 Characteristics (viii. 1—15). 
 The Suppliant (Resignation, 1—4); the Intercessor (Faith, 
 5—13); the Restored (Service, 14, 15). 
 The Lord and the Disciples (viii. 18—ix. 17). 
 Self-denial (18—22). 
 Power (Nature, 23—27; Spirits, 283-34; Sin, ix. 1—8). 
 Mercy (9-- 19). 
 Prudence (14—17). 
 The Results (ix. 18—34). 
 Faith confirmed (20—22); raised (28—26); attested (27—381). 
 Unbelief hardened (32—34). 
 (c) The Commission (ix. 86—xi.). 
 The Charge (x.). 
 The Hearers (xi.). 
 John (1—15); the People (16—19). 
 W oes (20—24); Thanksgivings (25—380). 
 (d) The Contrast (xii.). 
 The letter and the spirit of the Law. 
 Example (1—9); Miracle (10—18). 
 The kingdom of Satan and the kingdom of God (22—87). 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. ot) 
 
 reference to the sins of the people from which Christ should 
 save then. But the holy name Jesus — sym- 
 bolical at once of the ancient triumphs of Is- 
 rael and of the future triumphs of the Church — is merged 
 
 Matt. i. 21. 
 
 The sign of Jonas (88—45). 
 Natural and spiritual kindred (46—50). 
 
 (e) Parables of the kingdom: its rise, growth, consummation (xiii. ). 
 
 ὃ Toe Kine. xiv.—xxv. 
 (a) The character of the King, compared with 
 
 Temporal dominion: ; 
 The feast of Herod; death of John (xiv. 1—12). 
 The feast of Christ (Jews); the disciples saved (18---88). 
 
 Hierarchical dominion: 
 The tradition of the elders (xv. 1—20). 
 The Syropheenician heard (21—28). 
 The Gentiles healed and fed (29—39). 
 Truth hidden from some (xvi. 1—12), revealed to others (198-20. 
 
 (b) Glimpses of the kingdom. 
 The prospect of suffering (xvi. 24—28). 
 The vision of glory (xvii. 1—18). 
 The secret source of strength (14—21). 
 The citizens. 
 Moral principles: Obedience: a sign (xvii. 24—27); Humility, 
 Unselfishness, Forgiveness (Xviii.). 
 Social characteristics: Marriage, children, riches, sacrifice 
 {πξῖχ.} 
 Yet all without intrinsic merit (xx. 1—16). 
 (c) The King claims his heritage. 
 The Journey (xx. 17—384) 
 The triumphal Entrance (xxi. 1—17). 
 The Conflict (xxi. 18—xxii.). 
 The sign (xxi. 18—%2) The first question (23—27). The por: 
 traiture (28—xxii. 14). The temptation (15—40). The last 
 question (41—46). 
 The Judgment (XxXiii-—XXv.). 
 The Teachers (XxXiii.). 
 The City (xxiv.). 
 The World (xxv.). 
 4, DEATH THE GATE OF THE ETERNAL KINGDOM. xxXvi.—xxviil. 
 (a) The Passion (xxvi., XXvii.). 
 Contrasts: foreknowledge, craft (xxXvi. 1—8). 
 love, treason (6—16). 
 The Last Supper: woes foreseen and faced (17—29). 
 The rash promise: power misjudged (30—395). 
 The inward Agony (36 —46). 
 The outward Desertion (87—56). 
 The Confession of Christ (57—68). 
 
 30 
 
300 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 for the moment in that mysterious title which was conse- 
 crated by the memory of an ancient deliver- 
 ance. The sense of God’s personal presence, 
 which, when shadowed forth in former times, had sustained 
 the king of Judah against the armies of Syria and Damas- 
 cus, is at length confirmed by a literal fulfilment of the 
 symbol. Jimmanuel is no longer a figure, but a truth. 
 The parable becomes a fact; the word of hope, a confes- 
 sion of faith. 
 
 The first chapter declares the title of Messiah, the 
 second foreshows His reception. Adoration on the ‘one 
 side, persecution on the other; the ministry of the powers 
 of heaven, the tyranny of the powers of earth; bloodshed 
 and flight and exile; such are the beginnings of the king- 
 dom. Ile who is saluted by prophets as God 
 with us, is, according to the tenor of their 
 teaching, a Wazarene, poor and despised, in the eyes of men. 
 
 So far we have a preface to the Gospel pregnant with 
 symbolic facts. Next follows a brief sum- 
 mary of Messiah’s work, presented in a rapid 
 contrast between His preaching and the 
 preaching of His herald. Both proclaim the same mes- 
 
 sage.’ Both choose the field of their labor 
 ue “according to the declarations of prophecy. 
 But with this the resemblance ends. The 
 work of John is that of the Law, to awaken and convict. 
 
 15. vit. 
 
 Matt. ii. 23. 
 
 1. The Prelude. 
 (iit. tv.) 
 
 The denial of Peter (69—75). 
 
 The death of Judas (xxvii. 3—10). 
 
 The death of Christ (11-50). 
 Christ and Barabbas (15—26). Christ and the soldiers (27—81)- 
 Christ and the bystanders (382—456). 
 
 The Burial (57—61). The watch (62—66). 
 
 (δ) The Triumph. 
 
 The Rising in glory (1—-10). 
 The false report (11—15). 
 The great commission (16—20). 
 
 1 Matt. iii. 2; iv. 17, Μετανοεῖτε, ἤγ- reading in the second case is not simply 
 γικεν yap ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν. Ἤγγικεν 7) Bao. τ. ovp. See Scholz 
 It may be doubted whether the true ad loc. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 501 
 He confronts the two great sections of the Jewish Church! 
 with terrible denunciations against the pre- 
 
 scriptive holiness of descent and ritual. For 
 
 hope he points only to Him who should come. In act, 
 if not in word, he acknowledges the fulfilment of his 
 office in the recognition of Messiah.2 And then the 
 scene changes. The wilderness, which was 
 
 the place of John’s teaching, is the place of 
 
 Christ’s Temptation. When John is cast into prison, 
 Christ definitely begins His work.’ Instead of repelling 
 or dismissing men, Christ calls them to fol- 
 low Him and share His labor. Te announces 
 in the synagogues the Gospel of the king- 
 dom,* and confirms His word by signs of 
 power and love. 
 
 From this point we are led to regard our Lord more in 
 detail under His different offices, as Law- 
 giver, Prophet, and King. One trait prepares 
 the way for the other, so that it is difficult to 
 make a very definite line of demarcation between the 
 different sections of the history; but, while the transitions 
 are gradual, the general progress of idea is beyond ques- 
 tion. The beginning is a counterpart of the revelation from 
 Sinai; the close a fulfilment of the covenant with David. 
 
 In this aspect the Sermon on the Mount is first seen in 
 its true bearing on the scope of St. Matthew. 
 That which was for St. Luke but as one dis- 
 course among many, was for St. Matthew the 
 introduction and key to all.6 The phrase with which it is 
 
 Matt. tii. 7. 
 
 Matt. vii. 1; iv. 1. 
 
 Matt. iv. 18 ff. 
 
 Matt. iv. 23 ff. 
 
 2. The Messiah 
 as Lawgiver and 
 Prophet. (v.—aiti.) 
 
 (a) The New 
 Law. (v.—vii.) 
 
 1 From not observing the point of 
 this, some have felt a difficulty at the 
 mention of these sects. St. Matthew 
 gives the relation of the religious par- 
 ties of the Jews to John, as St. Luke 
 of each social alass. Both form to- 
 gether a whole: τῶν Φαρ. καὶ Σαδδ. 
 
 2 Thus he yields to the words, πλη- 
 paca πᾶσαν δικαιοσύνην (Matt. iii. 15). 
 Compare John i. 31. 
 
 8 Matt. iv.12,17. Yet He had taught 
 before: Jolin iii. 22 ff. 
 
 4 Matt. iv. 28, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς 
 βασιλείας. The phrase is characteris- 
 tic of St. Matthew, ix. 85 (a remarkable 
 parallel); xxiv. 14. In Marki. 14, it is 
 a false reading. 
 
 5 Matt. xxviii. 18, 20. 
 
 6 There cannot, I think, be any rea- 
 sonable doubt that the discourse related 
 
352 
 
 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 opened marks the solemn majesty of its delivery. Words 
 
 of blessing are the preface of the new dispensation? 
 
 Step 
 
 by step the nature of Christ is unfolded as the consumma- 
 
 tion of the Jewish Theocracy.’ 
 
 in Luke vi. 20 ff. is the same as that 
 related by St. Matthew. The differ- 
 ences on which some have laid stress 
 vanish upon an accurate examination 
 of the text. The scene in St. Matthew 
 is τὸ ὄρος (vy. 1), a word of general 
 meaning: St. Luke defines the spot 
 more precisely as τόπος πεδινός (vi. 1 
 not πεδίον), a plateau on the mountain, 
 below its highest peak (καταβάς), such 
 as would naturally be chosen for ad- 
 dressing amultitude. I see no contra- 
 diction between ἔστη in Luke vi. 17, 
 and καϑίσαντος αὐτοῦ in Matt. v. 1. 
 The words refer to different moments, 
 and St. Luke preserves a trait of the 
 
 The great features of the 
 
 latter in vi. 20, €mapas τοὺς ὀφϑαλ- 
 μοὺς αὐτοῦ εἰς TOUS μαϑητά-. 
 
 1 Matt. ν. 1. ἀνοίξας τὸ στόμα (cf. 
 Eph. vi. 9). Spanheim, Dub. Hvang. 
 111. p. 875. In v. 21 ff. ἀρχαίοις is cer- 
 tainly (as apparently all the ancient 
 versions) ‘to the men of old.” Cf. 
 Rom. ix. 12 (ix. 20 LXX); Gal. iii. 16; 
 Apoce. vi. 11; ix. 4; Matt. xxii. 31. 
 
 2It is worthy of remark that the 
 Kingdom is noticed in the first and last 
 (v. 8, 10); nor would it be difficult to 
 point out a relation observed in the 
 order of the blessings. Verses 4 and 5 
 in E. V. should be transposed. 
 
 3 The following outline of the Sermon on the Mount will make this clearer: — 
 
 1. THE CITIZENS OF THE KINGDOM (vy. 1—16). 
 
 (a) Their character (1—12). 
 In themselves (8 —6). 
 Poor in spirit. 
 eousness. 
 Relatively (7—12). 
 Merciful to men. 
 secuted. 
 
 Meek. 
 
 Peace towards God. Pursuing peace. 
 
 Sorrowing., Hungering after right- 
 
 Per- 
 
 The example of the prophets. 
 
 (Ὁ) Their influence (18—16). 
 To preserve (13): 
 2. THE NEw Law (17—48). 
 
 To guide (14—16). 
 
 (a) The fulfilment of the Old generally (17—20). 
 (Ὁ) The fulfilment of the spirit of special commandments. 
 Murder. Adultery. Perjury. Revenge. Exclusiveness. (21—48.’ 
 
 8. THE NEw LIFE (vi.—vii. 28). 
 
 (a) Acts of devotion (vi. 1—18). 
 
 Alms (1—4). 
 (6) Aims (19—84). 
 
 Prayer (5—15). 
 
 Fasting (16—18). 
 
 The true treasure (19—21). 
 The single service (22—24). 
 The perfect repose (25—84). 
 
 (c) Conduct vii. (1—12). 
 
 Charitable in judging (1—5). 
 Circumspect in teaching (6). 
 Faithful in well-doing (7—12). 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 353 
 
 Christian commonwealth, the character! and influence of 
 its citizens, the principles of the Christian law, and the 
 practice of the Christian life, are deduced from the ordi- 
 nances, and often expressed in the words, of the Old 
 Testament. The voice which speaks is one of absolute 
 authority, but it proclaims everywhere not abrogation but 
 fulfilment. 
 
 The promulgation of the new Law is followed by the 
 record of a series of miracles* which enforce 4) me testimony 
 and explain the true position and authority Ὁ sigs (viii. ἴω.) 
 of the Lawgiver. He fulfils the spirit of the Ἀπὸ. »# 1-1”. 
 Law and acknowledges its claims, while He violates the 
 
 (4) Dangers (vii. 13—23),. 
 From himself (13, 14). 
 From false teachers (15), to be tested by 
 Works of faith (16—20), not by 
 Works of power (21—23). 
 4. THE GREAT CONTRAST (vii. 24—27). 
 
 1 If we represent to ourselves the company, the emphatic duets in v. 13, 14 will 
 appear very striking. 
 
 2 The following scheme of the Miracles recorded by St. Matthew will serve te 
 show their relation to the framework of his Gospel. Noone scheme, of course, 
 can exhaust the lessons of the miracles. This only shows their bearing in suc- 
 cession upon one great idea. The miracles peculiar to St. Matthew are marked 
 by italics: 
 
 1. THE MIRACLES OF THE LAWGIVER. 
 (a) In relation to the Old Law. 
 a. The spirit before the letter (v. 3). 
 The leper cleansed (viii. 2—4). 
 b. Faith before descent (v. 10). 
 The healing of the centurion’s servant (viii. 5—18). 
 6. The service of love before ritual observance (v. 14). 
 The healing of Peter’s wife’s mother (viii. 14, 15). 
 {Many healed, as Esaias prophesied, viii. 16, 17 ] 
 (0) In Himself, as all powerful over, 
 a. The material world. 
 The stilling of the storm (viii. 23—27). 
 ὃ. The spiritual world. 
 The Gadarene demoniacs healed (viii. 28—84). 
 e. The power of sin. 
 The paralytic healed (ix. 1—8). 
 {c) In relation to man, as requiring faith: 
 a. Actively, to seize the blessirg. 
 The woman with issue healed (ix. 20—22). 
 b. Passively, to receive it. 
 Jairus’ daughter raised (ix. 18—26). 
 τ 90} 
 
354 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 letter ;! He points to faith, and not inheritance, as the basis 
 of His kingdom; He shows that active gratitude for God’s 
 mercies is unrestrained by ceremonial injunctions.” Or, to 
 regard the subject from another point of sight, the same 
 miracles indicate in succession the certainty, the spirituality, 
 and the completeness of His works; and if we turn from 
 the works themselves to those for whom they were wrought, 
 we notice resignation as the true mark of the suppliant ; 
 faith, of the intercessor; service, of the restored. Outcast, 
 stranger, and friend, are alike heard. All is, indeed, infinite 
 
 c. As a measure of the blessing (v. 29). 
 The two blind men (ix. 27—81). 
 d. As the means of understanding it. 
 The dumb devil east out (ix. 82—84). 
 [Many healed, ix. 35 } 
 2. THE MIRACLES GF THE PROPHET OF THE KINGDOM. 
 (a) Vindicating the law of conscience (in Action). 
 The withered hand healed (xii. 10—14). 
 (Ὁ) Rescuing the sight and speech from the power of evil. 
 The blind and dumb devil cast out (xii. 22—30). 
 8. THE MIRACLES OF THE KING. 
 (a) As to His people. 
 a. Jews. 
 In relief of want. 
 Feeding of the five thousand (xiv. 15—21). 
 In relief of toil (v. 24). 
 Walking on the sea (xiv. 22—85). 
 5. Gentiles. 
 In answer to prayer. 
 The woman of Canaan (xv. 21—28}. 
 [Many healed, xv. 30, 31.} 
 In reward of patience (v. 32). 
 The feeding of the four thousand (xv. 32—89). 
 (δ) As to His title. 
 a. Perfect by human preparation (v. 21). 
 Healing the lunatic (xvii. 14—21). 
 ὃ. Legitimate by divine right (wv. 25, 26). 
 The stater in the fish (xvi. 24—27). 
 [Many healed, xxi. 2.] 
 (c) As to His government. 
 a. Merciful according to our prayer (v. 32). 
 The two blind men healed (xx. 30—384). 
 b. Just according to our fruits (vv. 19—22). 
 The fig-tree cursed (xxi. 17—22). 
 1 It was unlawful to touch a leper: Matt. viii. 5; Lev. v. 3. 
 2 Matt. viii. 16 indicates that the miracle was wrought on the Sabbath. Cf. 
 Luke iy. 81, 38. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. δὺ 
 
 because it is divine. The significance of the signs deepens 
 as we look to their different bearings. 
 
 The common relation of Christ to the people being thus 
 indicated, He is seen in a clear relation to 
 His disciples. He claims perfect self-denial 9“ "™**~"* 
 and he exhibits perfect power and mercy and wisdom. 
 The material and spiritual worlds obey His voice: the bands 
 of sin are loosened by His word. But, at the same time, 
 faith is ‘exhibited as the measure of man’s syst ir. o0. 
 blessing, and the means whereby he may rec- Matt. wr. 6, 22. 
 ognize the presence and the power of God. as 
 The outward cure is the image of an unseen salvation. 
 The blind do not see till they believe; and 
 when utterance is given to the dumb, the neg 
 Pharisees can say that the devil is cast out through the 
 prince of the devils. 
 
 The character of the Lawgiver next passes into that of 
 the Prophet. The mission of the apostles is 
 the public establishment of the kingdom, of 
 which the nature and authority are already 
 declared. Discourses predominate largely over miracles. 
 The facts are constructive and not initiatory. 
 
 (c) The Com- 
 
 mission. 
 
 Matt. x. 
 The great charge is placed in vivid juxtaposi- matt. «i. 1-19; 
 : : ° 20—30. 
 tion with a portraiture of the people among 
 whom the apostles should work. Woes are balanced by 
 thanksgivings. The true disciples are shown to be, not 
 the wise, but the simple; not the spectators of mighty mir- 
 ~acles, but the meek and lowly of heart. 
 > . (a) The Contrast. 
 Then follows a contrast which penetrates the λαμ, «ii. 1-- 18. 
 whole range of life. The letter and the spirit 
 of the Law are contrasted by the light of Seripture,' of 
 reason, of miracle; the kingdom of Satan Oe 
 ¥F Matt. xii, 22--57 ; 
 with the kingdom of God; the sign of Jonas — aii. 38-45. 
 : ae : : Matt. wii. 46-50. 
 with the questionings of the Jews; the kin- 
 dred of blood with the kindred of the spirit. And at this 
 
 1 The remarkable passage, rv. 5—7, is peculiar to St. Matthew. 
 
356 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 point, while the multitudes press to hear, the formation 
 and growth of “the kingdom ” in its widest 
 (e) Parables of ᾿ “ ᾧ Θ ὰ 
 the kingdom. relations is explained by analogies from the 
 Matt. xiii. 1—52. ΓΞ . . . 
 natural world,' rich in instruction for the 
 believing, and mere riddles for the faithless. We read 
 S) ; 
 
 1 The following are the Parables re- fore in the record of the miracles, and 
 corded in St. Matthew, which, it will be in the general plan of the Gospel. The 
 seen, fall into two divisions, which cor- parables peculiar to St. Matthew are 
 respond with the Prophetic and Kingly marked by italics: 
 aspects of Christ’s character, as seen be- 
 
 1. IMAGES OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 (a) Its source. 
 a. From God. 
 The sower (xiii. 8—8). 
 b. Yet counterfeited by the devil. 
 The tares (xiii. 24--- 80). 
 (8) Its progress. 
 a. In outward extent. 
 The mustard-seed (xiii. 31, 82). 
 b. In inward influence. 
 The leaven (xili. 33). 
 (c) Its relation to men. 
 a. Asa gift from heaven. 
 The hid treaswre (xiii. 44). 
 b. As a power in the individual. 
 The merchant seeking pearls (xiii. 45, 46). 
 6- As a wide-working instrument. 
 The drawnet (xiii. 47—50). 
 2. IMAGES OF THE LIFE OF MEN. 
 (a) Love. 
 a. A spontaneous feeling. 
 The lost sheep (xviii. 12—14). 
 ὃ. A debt due to God. 
 The unmerciful servant (xviii. 28—25). 
 (b) Dependence. 
 The laborers in the vineyard (xx. 1—16). 
 (c) Activity. 
 a. Obedient in spirit, as of sons of God. 
 The two sons (xxi. 28—82). 
 ὃ. Unselfish, as of stewards of God. 
 The wicked husbandmen (xxi. 83—41). 
 (d) Reverence. 
 The marriage of the king’s son (xxii. 1—14). 
 (e, Responsibility. 
 a. At all times. 
 The ten virgins (xxv. 1—13). 
 ὃ. In all positions. 
 The talents (xxv. 14—380). 
 
 2 St. Matthew alone expressly gives planatory of His teaching, wv. 14, 15. 
 Christ’s reference to prophecy as ex- It is implied in the other accounts. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 357 
 of the Divine power which founds it, and of the simul- 
 taneous influence of evil;' of its outward majesty and of 
 its inward power; of its objective value and of its subjec- 
 
 tive claims ;? and, lastly, of its universality. 
 
 On earth con- 
 
 fusion and error prevail to the last, but there will be a day 
 
 of final separation. Christ 
 prophet in His own country. 
 
 Himself is no 
 
 Matt. ziti. 53 ff. 
 He does there Biomirnet 
 
 few mighty works because of their unbelief; and yet He 
 is preparing to claim His royal inheritance. 
 The royal dignity of Messiah is introduced by an inci- 
 5 
 
 dent which, but for this connection, appears, 
 to break the tenor of the history. 
 anny of an earthly sovereign —the feast of 
 Herod and the death of John —stands in 
 clear opposition to the love of Him whose 
 compassion was moved by the sight of the 
 
 8. The Messiah as 
 
 1 ss 
 
 ‘Die tyre 4s: 
 
 i Matt. xiv.—xxv. 
 (a) The charac- 
 
 ter of the King, 
 
 as compared with 
 
 earthly and 
 
 Matt. xiv. 1-33. 
 
 gathered multitudes, so that He healed and fed them in 
 
 the wilderness. 
 
 tradition of the elders is set aside as opposing 
 
 Herod, though grieved, works murder; 
 Christ saves even beyond the extent of man’s hope. 
 poral dominion presents one side of the con- 
 trast: hierarchical dominion, the other. 
 
 Tem- 
 
 hierarchical do- 
 
 minton. 
 
 Matt. xv. 1—29. 
 
 The 
 
 the Law of God; and the blessings extended to Jews are 
 now symbolically assured to Gentiles, as citizens of the 
 
 future kingdom. 
 
 The faith of the Canaanite and the 
 
 patience of the waiting multitude win the help which 
 
 1The real force of this parable 
 (24—30) seems to have been lost by not 
 attending to the word ὡμοιώϑη, as dis- 
 tinguished from ὁμοία ἐστί. The 
 Church is subject tooutward influence; 
 it is made like to some things, as it 18 
 like to others. Cf. xviii. 28; xxii. 2; 
 xxv.1. The full foree of (Cama, which 
 had the semblance but not the fruit of 
 wheat, is well given in the words of 
 Origen: Non solum est sermo Christus, 
 et est sermo Antichristus: veritas Chiris- 
 tus, et simulata veritas Antichristus: 
 sapientia Christus, est simulata sapi- 
 
 entia Antichristus ...quoniam omnes 
 species boni quascunque habet Christus 
 in se in veritate ad xdificationem homi- 
 num, omnes eas habet in se diabolus 
 in specie ad seductionem sanctorum. 
 (Comm. in Matt. 88.) 
 
 2 xiii. 45, ὁμοία... dvSpdémw... (η- 
 τοῦντι not ὁμοία μαργαρίτῃ asin v. 44. 
 The spirit of the kingdom works in the 
 man. In 44, 45, 47, a threefold form of 
 image is given, corresponding to a 
 threefold aspect of the operation of the 
 Gospel (ϑησαυρῷ: avdpémrw, σαγήνῃ) 
 
358 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 excites the surprise of the disciples. Yet even thus it is 
 not given to all to see Christ. The signs of 
 the times are unintelligible to the blind of 
 heart; while to the faithful God Himself reveals the deep- 
 est mysteries. 
 
 St. Peter’s inspired confession opens the way to further 
 elimpses of the kingdom. Yet the earliest 
 manifestation of Christ’s glory, like the splen- 
 dor of the eastern sky, betokens the coming 
 storm. The announcement of shame 
 and death is the introduction to the vision of 
 majesty. The Transfiguration of Messiah is 
 connected with the first distinct announce- 
 ment of His sufferings, with the prospect of His human 
 conflict, and the vindication of His divine right. Thence- 
 forth He speaks more in detail of the citizens of the king- 
 dom: of their moving principles, obedience, 
 humility, unselfishness, forgiveness; and of 
 their social characteristics, of the rights of 
 marriage, as a religious bond; of the duties of wealth, as a 
 blessing derived only from God. Yet all claims of merit 
 ~ are excluded. Many first shall be last. The 
 warning voice of the parable which closes 
 the section shows that our reward rests in God’s good 
 pleasure. 
 
 The journey to Jerusalem presents once again the con- 
 flict between the hopes of the disciples and 
 the work of Christ. Their prayer for dignity 
 is answered by the foretelling of suffering ; 
 and on the other hand,:the eyes of the blind are opened, 
 though the multitude rebukes them, as they cry for mercy 
 to the Son of David ‘The title of Messiah, with which 
 
 Matt. xvi. 1-20. 
 
 (b) Glimpses of 
 the Kingdom. 
 Matt. xvi. 5. 
 
 Matt. xvi. 24—28. 
 and 
 
 Sorrow 
 
 Matt. xvit. 21, 26. 
 
 Matt. avii. 24— 
 Tvl. 
 Matt. xix. 
 
 Matt. ax. 1-16. 
 
 (c) The ing 
 claims His heritage. 
 
 Matt. xa, 20—34. 
 
 1It is worthy of notice that this stores true vision to man. In Mark 
 
 phrase is used in the one other place in 
 which sight is restored to the blind at 
 their own prayer: Matt. ix. 27. We 
 may feel that the act of faith which 
 acknowledges Jesus as the Messiah re- 
 
 viii. 22, sight is restored by interces- 
 sion; in John ix. 3,4, by a direct act 
 of divine mercy: so many are the ways 
 in which God enlightens us. Cf. Matt. 
 xii. 23; xv 22; xxi. 9, 15. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 
 the Gospel began, is thus resumed at its close.’ In virtue 
 of His royal power He purifies the temple of 
 God, and marks by a type the national bar- 
 renness of Israel,—a disobedient and faithless people. 
 Then follows the conflict. The question of 
 eavillers is followed by a portraiture of their 
 eharacter. The political objections of the Herodian, the 
 intellectual difficulties of the Sadducee, the legal disputes 
 of the Pharisee, are answered.2. A counter 
 question closes finally this second Tempta- 
 tion; and a triple judgment pronounced on 
 the teachers, on the city, on the world, prepares the way for 
 the Passion. The record of the public ministry of Christ 
 ends where it began, in the teaching of the Law. But 
 woes answer to blessings ; the sentence of the Scribes to the 
 Sermon to the multitudes: the first had declared the ful- 
 filment of the spirit of Judaism, the last exposes the cor- 
 ruption of its practice. And when Christ turns to His 
 disciples the words of judgment still remain. He destroys 
 their present hope of an earthly kingdom by prophesying 
 the destruction of Jerusalem; and, yet more, He passes on- 
 ward to the end of the outward Christian Church, to that 
 final day when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of 
 His glory, and judge all nations as their King.’ 
 
 Matt. xxi. 18-22. 
 
 Matt. xxi. 23--xxti. 
 
 Matt. xxii. 41--46. 
 Matt. xxiii.--xxv. 
 
 The narrative of the Passion, like so much 5 Dore) Ge 
 τε gate of the Eternal 
 else in St. Matthew, proceeds by contrasts. Aigdom. 
 
 (a) The Passion. 
 
 Calm foreknowledge and restless craft; de- 
 votion and treachery; the advance to death and the rash 
 
 promise; the inward agony 
 
 1 The multitudes, and afterwards the 
 children, cry: Hosanna to the Son of 
 David (Matt. xxi. 9, 15). This saluta- 
 tion does not occur in the other Gospels. 
 
 2The variety of language of the 
 Evangelists gives a full picture of the 
 spirit of Christ’s enemies: Matt. xxii. 
 18, γνοὺς τὴν πονηρίαν. Mark xii. 15, 
 εἰδὼς τὴν ὑπόκρισιν. Luke xx. 23, 
 κατανοήσας Thy πανουργίαν. 
 
 and the outward desertion, 
 
 3 Matt.xxy. 31. The whole discourse 
 is peculiar to St. Matthew; and this is 
 the only place in which our Lord as- 
 sumes the title of King. Cf. Matt. v. 
 85; xxi. 5; Luke xix. 38; John xix. 
 27. 
 
 The reader of Plato will call to mind 
 the magnificent myth of Er the Arme- 
 nian (Zoroaster, Clem. Alex. Str. v. § 
 104): Resp. x. pp. 614 ff. 
 
360 TIE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 heighten the effect of a pieture which only familiarity 
 can weaken. And the contrast does not end even here. 
 The confession of the Lord and the denial of the servant; 
 the death of Judas and the death of Christ; the care of 
 friends and the vigilance of enemies, carry it 
 on to the last with a divine power. Love 
 still lingers by the grave which seemed to be closed over 
 all hope. 
 
 The history of the Resurrection completes the lesson of 
 the whole Gospel. We have passed from the 
 spirit of the Mosaic Law to the foundation 
 of the Church, and the inspiring strength of the Atone- 
 ment. The temporal hopes of the ancient people have 
 been gradually replaced by their spiritual antitypes; the 
 costly offerings of the Magi by the precious ointment of a 
 believing woman; the adoration of sages by the simple 
 
 faith of a despised Canaanite. Yet once 
 
 Matt. xxvii. 61. 
 
 (b) The Triumph. 
 
 Ca vert 15 again the Lawgiver of the New Covenant 
 
 addressed His disciples from the Galilean 
 mountain, but He dwelt no longer on the people of the 
 past, but on the Church of the future: the command- 
 ments to the men of old were fulfilled in the teaching of 
 Christianity. Once again the promised King 
 appeared, and received the homage of His 
 subjects, but it was as the Lord of heaven and earth, and 
 not as the Prince of Israel. Once again the 
 Prophet of our Faith spoke comfort to His 
 Apostles, while He assured to them the essence of the the- 
 ocratic rule in the promise of the abiding presence of Im- 
 manuel: Lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the 
 world.’ 
 
 Mait. xaviit. 19. 
 
 xxviii. 20. 
 
 1 The Gospel of St. Matthew is not gelist. Among these the following are 
 very broadly characterized in language the most important : — 
 or construction. Thestyle isnot nearly 1. Ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν (rasta 
 so Hebraizing as that of St. John, nor ©2227). The kingdom of heaven, 
 is the language so rich as that of St. which occurs thirty-two times in St. 
 Mark. Yet there are some words and Matthew, and not in the other Evan- 
 phrases which mark the Hebrew Evan-  gelists, who use in parallel passages 
 
OF THE 
 
 SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 
 
 361 
 
 The Gospel of St. Mark offers a great contrast to that 
 
 of St. Matthew in its general effect. 
 peculiarities of language and minuteness of 
 detail which are least observable in St. Mat- 
 
 The 
 
 Il. St. Mark. 
 Christ working 
 among nien, 
 
 thew are most obvious in St. Mark; and, conversely, St. 
 Mark offers nothing which answers to the long expositions 
 
 of the Lord’s teaching in St. Matthew. 
 
 This fundamental 
 
 difference is seen at once in the relative pro- 
 
 portion in which the records of miracles and 
 
 The 
 action. 
 
 Gospel of 
 
 parables stand to one another in St. Mark. 
 The number of miracles which he gives is scarcely less 
 
 ἡ βασιλεία Tod Seov, the kingdom of 
 God. (Matt. vi 88; xii. 28; xxi. 31, 48.) 
 
 2. ὁ πατὴρ ὁ ἐν οὐρανοῖς (ὃ οὐρά- 
 vios), which occurs fifteen times in St. 
 Matthew, twice in St. Mark, and not 
 at all in St. Luke (in xi. 2, it is a false 
 reading). Generally it will be observed 
 that of οὐρανοὶ is the seat of the heay- 
 enly powers; ὅ οὐρανὸς the physical 
 heaven. 
 
 3. Tids Δαυείδ, seven times in St. 
 Matthew, three times each in St. Mark 
 and St. Luke. 
 
 4. ἡ ἁγία πόλις, the Holy City. 
 Matt.iv.5; xxvii.53. Not in the other 
 Evangelists. Cf. Matt. xxiv. 15, τόπος 
 ἅγιος. Apoc. xi. 2; χχὶ. 2 (ἡ πόλις ἡ 
 ἁγία); xxi. 10. 
 
 5. ἡ συντέλεια τοῦ αἰῶνος, the con- 
 summation of the age (“ the end of the 
 world”). Matt. xiii. 89 (συντ. αἰ.) 40, 
 49; xxiv. 3; xxviii. 20. Hebr. ix. 26, 
 συντέλεια τῶν αἰώνων, the meeting of 
 the Old and New. Cf. Job xxvi. 10, 
 LXX. ap. Schleusn. 
 
 6. ἵνα (ὅπως) πληρωϑῇ τὸ ῥηϑέν, 
 eight times in St. Matthew. Not else- 
 where in this form. In St. John, ἕνα 
 mAnpwsn ὃ λόγος (ἣ γραφή); in St. 
 Mark once, ἵνα πλ. ai γραφαί. 
 
 7. τὸ pndev twelve times (ὅ pnveis, 
 iii. 3); ἐῤῥήδη six times. Not else- 
 where of Scripture (Mark xiii. 14, a 
 false reading). Cf. Gal. iii. 16. St. 
 Matthew always uses τὸ ῥηϑὲν when 
 
 quoting Scripture himself. In other 
 quotations he has γέγραπται, as the 
 other Evangelists. He never uses the 
 singular γραφή. 
 
 8. καὶ ἰδού (in narrative) in St. Mat- 
 thew twenty-three times; in St. Luke 
 sixteen; not in St. Mark. 
 
 9. (παρεγένοντο)... λέγοντες abso- 
 lutely, without the dative of person. 
 Cf. Gersdorf, Beitrage, 95 f. 
 
 10. ἐϑνικός, Matt. v. 47; vi. 7; xviii. 
 17. Cf. Gal. ii. 14. 
 
 11. ὀμνύειν ἐν. twelve times in St. 
 Matthew. Cf. Apoc. x. 6. 
 
 Several other peculiarities collected 
 by Credner (inl. 37) and Gersdorf 
 establish the unity of authorship, but 
 do not appear to be obviously charac- 
 teristic of the position of the author, 
 €. J., EWS οὗ, πᾶς ὅστις, τάφος, ava- 
 χωρεῖν, προσελϑεῖν, μαϑητεύειν, μα- 
 λακία, ἐγείρεσϑαι ἀπό, the position of 
 the adverb after the verb, ete. Cf. p. 
 Sol, τι. 4. 
 
 Still more characteristic is the intro- 
 duc‘ion of prophetic passages by the 
 Evangelist himself (cf. p. 282, n.1): i. 
 23 || Is. vii. 14; ii. 15 |] Hos. xi. 1; ii. 18 j] 
 Jer SXxvill. 15% ji. 22% ἦν. 15,16] Jes 
 tx.1,2; viii. 17 || Is. liti. 4; xii. 18 fF I} 
 is tlio Ff; wii. 85 || Ps. ieevit. 2: 
 xxi. 5 || Zech. ix. 9; xxvii. 9, 10 || Zech. 
 xi. 135. The general references to Mes- 
 siah’s work (distinguished by italics) 
 deserve especial notice, 
 
 ol 
 
 > 
 
902 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 than that in the other Synoptic Gospels,’ while he relates 
 only four parables.2 Like St. Peter,® he is contented to lay | 
 the foundation of the Christian faith, and leave the super- 
 structure to others. It is enough that Christ shouid be 
 presented in the most vivid light, unfolding the truth in 
 acts rather than in words; for faith will translate the pass- 
 ing deed into an abiding lesson. Everything centres in 
 the immediate facts to be noticed. Without drawing a 
 complete history, St. Mark frames a series of perfect pic- 
 tures. But each is the representation of the outward fea- 
 
 1 The Miracites recorded by St. Mark fall into the following groups: — 
 1. SIGNS OF THE SAViIOUR’S WORK (i. 238—ii. 12). 
 The devil cast out in the synagogue (i. 28—28 ) 
 The fever healed in the house (i. 80, 31). 
 Tlie leper cleansed (i. 40—45). 
 The paralytic pardoned and restored (ii. 3—22). 
 2. SIGNS OF THE SAVIOUR’S TEACHING (iii. 1—6; iv. 85—v). 
 (a) Freedom of action. 
 The withered hand restored on the Sabbath (iii. 1—6). 
 (0) Trials of faith. 
 The storm stilled (iv. 35—41). 
 The legion cast out (v. 1—20). 
 The woman with issue healed (v. 25—34). 
 Jairus’ daughter raised (v. 21—24, 85—43). 
 3. SIGNS OF THE KINGDOM (vi. 30—52; vii. 24—viii. 9, etc.). 
 (a) The extent of the Kingdom. 
 The satisfaction of the Jews: five thousand fed (vi. 830—44). 
 The passage (vi. 45—52). 
 The satisfaction of Gentiles: 
 The Syrophenician (vii. 24—380). 
 The deaf and dumb man (vii. 81—87). 
 The four thousand fed (viii. 1—9). 
 (Ὁ) Special lessons. 
 Discernment. The blind man at Bethsaida (viii. 22—26). 
 Faith. The lunatic (ix. 14—29). 
 Mercy. Bartimzeus (x. 46—52). 
 Judgment. The fig-tree (xi. 12—14). 
 The most remarkable omission is that Miracles peculiar to St. Mark are dis- 
 of the ‘*Centurion’s servant.” The tinguished by italics. 
 2 They are the following: — 
 (a) Parables of the growth of the Kingdom. 
 The sower (iv. 1—20). The seed growing secretly (iv. 26—29} 
 The mustard seed (iv. 830—82). 
 (δ) Parable of judgment. 
 The husbandmen (xii. 1—12). 
 
 8 Dr. Stanley’s Sermons on the Apostolic Age, p. 102. 
 
 - 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 363 
 
 tures of the scene. For this reason the Evangelist avoids 
 all reference to the Old Testament.' The quotations which 
 occur in the Lord’s discourses remain, but after the intro- 
 duction he adds none in his own person. The living por- 
 traiture of Christ is offered in the clearness of His present 
 energy, not as the fulfilment of the past, nor even as the 
 foundation of the future. His acts prove that He is both; 
 but this is a deduction from the narrative, and not the sub- 
 ject of it. 
 
 It follows from what has been already said, that the 
 chief point for study in St. Mark’s Gospel is 
 the vividness of its details, and not the subor- ara of St. Mark to 
 
 : : . ὦ be sought in details. 
 dination of its parts to the working out of 
 any one idea. The narrative does not, indeed, vary consid- 
 erably in its contents from the other Synoptic Gospels, and 
 offers several broad divisions which mark successive stages 
 in the work of Christ.2,. But turning from the construction 
 
 1 The quotation in xv. 28 isan inter- afterwards. It may be noticed that the 
 polation. The quotation in 1. 2, 8 seems word νόμος never occurs in St. Mark; 
 to show that the Evangelist purposely itis frequent in the other Evangelists, 
 avoided references to the prophecies but is not found in St. Peter. 
 
 2 The following outline will convey a general notion of the construction of the 
 Gospel, and supersede the necessity of examining it in detail :— 
 
 THE PREPARATION. i. 1—13. 
 1, THE Work FORESHOWN By AcTS. i. 14—ii. 12. 
 (a) The call (i. 14—20). 
 (Ὁ) Signs (i. 21—ii. 12). 
 Possession; fever; leprosy; palsy. 
 2. OUTLINES OF TEACHING. ii. 13—iv. 34. 
 (a) Traits of the new life. 
 The call of the publican (ii. 13—17). 
 The lesson of prudence (18-—22). 
 The Sabbath: Example (ii. 23—28); sign (iii. 1--6). 
 (δ) The Kingdom of God and the world. 
 The apostles (iii. 13—19); the enemies (20—30); the true kin- 
 dred (31—35). 
 Parables of the Kingdom (iv. 1—3t). 
 (ce) Signs (iv. 35—v.). 
 The storm (iy. 85—41); legion (v. 1—20); the woman with issue; 
 Jairus’ daughter (21—43). 
 /d) The issue: Unbelief (vi. 1—6). 
 
904 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 of the whole record to the characteristic treatment of sep- 
 arate incidents, we are at once struck by the extent and 
 importance of the minute peculiarities which St. Mark 
 presents. There is not, perhaps, one narrative which he 
 gives in common with St. Matthew and St. Luke to which 
 he does not contribute some special feature. These pecu- 
 liarities are so numerous that they prove his independence 
 beyond all doubt, unless we are prepared to admit the only 
 possible alternative, that they are due to the mere fancy 
 of the Evangelist; a supposition which is sufficiently 
 refuted by their character. The details point clearly to 
 the impression produced upon an eye-witness, and are not 
 such as would suggest themselves to the imagination of a 
 
 8. THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE KINGDOM. vi. 6 b—xiii. 
 (a) The mission of the Aposties (vi. 6 b—13): 
 Temporal dominion. 
 The feast of Herod: John (vi. 14—29). 
 The feast of Christ: Christ on the waters (80—652). 
 Hierarchical dominion. 
 The tradition of the Elders (vii. 1—28); blessings for the Gen- 
 tiles; the Syrophenician; the deaf and dumb; the multi- 
 tudes fed (vii. 24—viii. 9). 
 Lack of discernment in some (10—21). 
 A sign (22—26). 
 Revelation to others (27—83). 
 (δὴ) Glimpses of the Kingdom (ix.—x. 81). 
 The prospect of suffering (viii. 34—388); the vision of glory (ix. 
 1—13); the secret source of strength (14—29). 
 The citizens. : 
 Humility; charity; self-denial (ix. 33—50); marriage; chil- 
 dren; riches; sacrifice (x. 1—31). 
 (c) The sovereignty claimed (x. 32—xiii). 
 The journey (x. 32—52). 
 The triumphal entrance (xi. 1—11). 
 The conflict. 
 The sign (xi. 12—25); the first question (27—83); the portrai- 
 ture (xii. 1—12); the temptation (18—34); the last ques- 
 tion (98 —37). 
 * The Pharisees (88 —40): the widow (41—44). 
 _ The judgment (xiii). 
 4. THE ETERNAL KINGDOM ENTERED THROUGH THE GATE OF DEATH. 
 xiv.—xvi. 
 The end foreshown by act (xiv. 8—9) and word (12—31). 
 The agony; betrayal; denial; condemnation (xiv. 32—-xv. 20). 
 The crucifixion; burial (xv. 21—47). 
 The resurrection; revelation; ascension (xvi). 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 365 
 
 chronicler. At one time we find a minute touch which 
 places the whole scene before us;’ at an- 
 other time an accessory circumstance, such 
 as often fixes itself on the mind, without 
 appearing at first sight to possess any special interest ;* now 
 there is a phrase which reveals the feeling of those who 
 were witnesses of some mighty work;* now a word which 
 preserves some trait of the Saviour’s tenderness,’ or some 
 expressive turn of His language.’ Other additions are 
 such as might have been made for the sake of clearness, 
 even by one who had no immediate information as to the 
 
 Additions which 
 prove direct wyor- 
 mation. 
 
 1 In the enumeration of the chief pe- 
 culiarities of St. Mark given in the fol- 
 lowing notes, 1 have not attempted 
 more than a rough classification. The 
 erroneous views commonly held as to 
 the epitomatory character of his Gos- 
 pel invest these details with peculiar 
 interest, and they will repay careful 
 study. 
 
 iv. 87, 38, τὰ κύματα ἐπέβαλλεν 
 eis τὸ πλοῖον... καὶ αὐτὸς ἣν ἐν TH 
 πρύμνῃ ἐπὶ τὸ προσκεφάλαιον Kadev- 
 δων. 
 
 vi. 38. 
 
 vi. 48, Kal ἤϑελεν παρελϑεῖν αὐτούς. 
 
 ix. 8. 
 
 ix. 14—16. 
 
 x. 50, 6 δὲ ἀποβαλὼν τὸ ἱμάτιον αὐ- 
 τοῦ ἀναπηδήσας ἦλθεν... 
 
 xv. 44. 
 
 5.1. 20, μετὰ. τῶν μισϑωτῶν. 
 
 ivy. 86, καὶ ἄλλα δὲ πλοῖα ἦν per’ 
 αὐτοῦ. 
 
 vi. 41, καὶ τοὺς δύο ἰχϑύας ἐμέρισεν 
 πᾶσιν. 
 
 xiv. 51,52. Cf. pp. 236, 323. 
 
 xiv. 3, συντρίψασα τὴν ἀλάβαστρον. 
 
 ὃ.νὶ. 52, οὐ γὰρ συνῆκαν ἐπὶ τοῖς 
 ἄρτοις" ἦν γὰρ αὐτῶν ἡ καρδία πεπω- 
 ρωμένη. 
 
 viii. 32, παῤῥησίᾳ τὸν λόγον ἐλάλει. 
 
 ix. 10. 
 
 x. 24, οἱ δὲ μαϑηταὶ ἐδαμβοῦντο ἐπὶ 
 τοῖς λόγοις αὐτοῦ. 
 
 x 82, ἣν προάγων αὐτοὺς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, 
 
 καὶ ἐδαμβοῦντο, οἱ δὲ ἀκολοϑοῦντες 
 ἐφοβοῦντο. 
 . / 
 
 xi. 10, Εὐλογημένη ἡ ἐρχομένη Ba- 
 σιλεία τοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν Δαυείδ. 
 
 Cf. vi.8,6 TéEKTwY. 
 
 4 vi. 31, Δεῦτε ὑμεῖς αὐτοὶ κατ᾽ ἰδίαν 
 εἰς ἔρημον τόπον καὶ ἀναπαύσασδε ὀλί- 
 γον. 
 
 vi. 34, ἐσπλαγχνίσθη ἐπ’ αὐτούς 
 ef z c \ 
 ὅτι ἦσαν ws πρόβατα μὴ 
 ἔχοντα ποιμένα. 
 
 sss) ¢ / [a > 
 
 viii. 8, καί τινες αὐτῶν ἀπὸ μακρό- 
 Sev εἰσίν. 
 
 ix. 21, 25, 27. 
 
 x. 3, 4. 
 
 δ1. 15, πεπλήρωται 6 καιρός... πισ- 
 τεύετε ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ. 
 
 - > / “ Μ 
 
 iy. 11, ἐκείνοις τοῖς ἔξω. 
 
 Vii. 8, ἀφέντες τὴν ἐντολὴν τοῦ δεοῦ 
 κρατεῖτε τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνδρῶπων. 
 
 viii. 88, ἐν τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ TH μοι- 
 
 / « a 
 χαλίδι καὶ ἅμαρτω λῷ. 
 
 ix. 12, καὶ πῶς --- eLovdevwd7 ; 
 
 ix. 89, οὐδεὶς ydp.... δυνήσεται 
 ταχὺ κακολογῆσαί με. 
 
 / 
 
 x. 21, ἄρας τὸν σταυρὸν. 
 
 x. 30. 
 
 xi. 17, οἶκος προσευχῆς κληϑήσεται 
 πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔϑδνεσιν. 
 
 xi. 24, πιστεύετε ὅτι ἐλά- 
 βετε καὶ ἔσται ὑμῖν. 
 
 pa yok 7 ἢ 
 
 xii. 6, ἔτι ἕνα εἶχεν υἱὸν ἀγαπητόν. 
 
 xiii. 82, οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός. 
 
 xiv. 18, 6 ἐσδίων μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ. 
 
 xiv. 87, Σίμων καδεύδεις ; 
 
 ol* 
 
366 
 
 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 events recorded ;' but, on the other hand, there are some 
 which indicate yet more distinctly the apostolic source of 
 
 the peculiarities of St. Mark. 
 
 He alone describes on sev- 
 
 eral occasions the look and feeling of the Lord,? and pre- 
 
 serves the very Aramaic words which He uttered? 
 
 He 
 
 records minute particulars of persons, number, time, and 
 place,* which are unnoticed by the other Evangelists. 
 
 1 iii. 14, va ὦσιν μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἵνα 
 ἀποστέλλῃ αὐτοὺ κηρύσσειν... 
 
 iii. 80, O71 ἔλεγον, Πνεῦμα ἀκάϑαρ- 
 τον ἔχει. 
 
 ν. 26, μηδὲν ὠφεληδϑεῖσα ἀλλὰ 
 μᾶλλον εἰς τὸ χεῖρον ἐλ- 
 “οῦσα. 
 
 ve20: 
 
 vil. 2—4. ! 
 
 xi. 13, 6 yap καιρὸς οὐκ ἣν σύκων. 
 
 Cf. vi. 18, ἤλειφον ἐλαίῳ πολλοὺς 
 ἀῤῥώστους. ν. 4, ὅ. 
 
 2 iii. 5, [καὶ περιβλεψάμενος αὐτοὺς] 
 μετ᾽ ὀργῆς, συλλυπούμενος ἐπὶ τῇ 
 πωρώσει τῆς καρδίας λέγει... 
 
 iii. 34, περιβλεψάμενος κύκλῳ τοὺς 
 περὶ αὐτὸν καθημένους λέγει... 
 
 ν. 82, περιεβλέπετο (not aor.) ἰδεῖν 
 τὴν τοῦτο ποιήσασαν. 
 
 vi. 6; ἐδαύμαζε διὰ τὴν ἀπιστίαν αὐ- 
 τῶν. 
 
 x. 21, 6 δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἐμβλέψας αὐτῷ 
 ἠγάπησεν αὐτόν... 
 
 χ. 28, καὶ περιβλεψάμενος ὃ 
 gous... 
 
 xi. 11, καὶ περιβλεψάμενος πάντα... 
 
 Cf. i. 41, 48; (x. 22). 
 
 3 1. 17, Boaynpyés, ὅ ἐστιν viol 
 βροντῆς. 
 
 v.41, Tarde κοῦμι, ὅ ἐστιν μεδερ- 
 μηνευόμενον, Τὸ κοράσιον, σοὶ λέγω, 
 ἔγειρε. 
 
 vii. 11, Κορβᾶν, 
 Matt. xxvii. 6). 
 
 vii. 34, Ἐφφαδϑά, 6 ἐστιν Atavoi- 
 XINT I. 
 
 xiv. 86, ABBa, ὁ πατήρ. 
 
 Cf. ix. 48; x. 46. 
 
 4 (a) Persons: i. 29, Kat ’Avd. μ. Ἰ1. 
 καὶ “I. 
 
 Ἴη- 
 
 «“ 
 
 ἐστιν δῶρον. (Cf. 
 
 - / 
 i. 80, κατεδίωξαν αὐτὸν Σίμων καὶ οἱ 
 μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ. 
 ii. 26. 
 sae \ lol A 
 iii. 6, μετὰ τῶν Ἡρωδιανῶν. 
 eae € al ἘΝ € 
 iii. 22, of γραμματεῖς of ἀπὸ Ἵεροσο- 
 (a 
 λύμων καταβάντες... 
 vil. 26. 
 xi. 11, μετὰ τῶν δώδεκα. 
 xi. 21, avauvyodels ὃ Πέτρος. 
 eee > / EE > 5φΩ, 
 xiii. 8, ἐπηρώτα αὐτὸν κατ᾽ ἰδίαν 
 Πέτρος καὶ 1. καὶ Ἴ. καὶ ᾽Α. 
 xiv. 65, of ὑπηρέται. 
 της fic 
 xv. 21, τὸν πατέρα ᾽Α. καὶ Ῥ. 
 xvi. τ, τῷ Πέτρῳ. 
 εἴ ῇ 
 (b) Number: v.18, ὧς δισχίλιοι. 
 vi. 7, ἀποστέλλειν δύο δύο. 
 Μ , 
 vi. 40, ἀνέπεσαν mpacial πρασιαΐ, 
 κατὰ ἑκατὸν καὶ κατὰ πεντήκοντα. 
 - \, > / ΄ 
 χίν. 80, πρὶν ἢ Sls ἀλέκτορα φωνῆ- 
 σαι τρίς με ἀπαρνήσῃ. 
 . . " δ v / 
 (c) Time: i. 85, πρωὶ ἔννυχα λίαν. 
 Ο χ να: ῶ, 
 ss 2 ς “ 
 ii. 1, δι ἡμερῶν. 
 Beis ea ln a, x Ἔα τὰν Se? 
 iv. 85, ἐν ἐκείνῃ TH ἡμέρᾳ ὀψίας γε- 
 νομένης. 
 Β / 
 vi. 2, γενομένου σαββάτου. 
 ° > vf i 2° Ye . 
 xi. 11, ὀψίας ἤδη οὔσης. Cf. xi. 19. 
 xiv. 68. 
 xv. 25, ἦν δὲ Spa τρίτη. 
 on / 
 (d) Place: ii. 18, Tapa τὴν ϑάλασσαν. 
 ΘΕ avian ΣΙ 
 ν. 20. ἐν τῇ Δεκαπόλει. 
 ἘΞ. πὸ aN / ~ cys 
 vii. 31, ava μέσον τῶν ὁρίων Δεκα: 
 πόλεως. 
 (viii. 10). 
 oe ΄ κ. Ζ΄ 
 xii. 41, κατέναντι τοῦ γαζοφυλακίου. 
 xiii. 8, κατέναντι τοῦ ἱεροῦ. 
 . / 
 xiv. 68, εἰς τὸ προαύλιον. 
 ς \ 3 5 / 
 xv. 89, 6 παρεστηκὼς ἐξ ἐναντία. 
 . > “ ~ 
 xvi. 5, Kad. ἐν τοῖς δεξιοῖς. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 367 
 
 His language and style correspond with this particularity 
 of observation. His phrases of transition are 
 lively." In narration he frequently adopts 
 the present for the historic tenses,’ and introduces a direct 
 for an indirect form of expression.* He couples together 
 words or phrases of similar meaning to heighten or define 
 his meaning.* Like St. John, he repeats the subject in 
 place of using the relative.» And in many cases he uses 
 terms of singular foree which do not occur elsewhere in 
 the New Testament.® 
 
 The few incidents which are peculiar to St. Mark illus- 
 trate, as might be expected, the general char- 
 acter of his Gospel. The one parable* which 
 he alone has preserved turns our attention 
 to God’s presence in the slow and silent opera- 
 tions of nature, as typical of His constant presence among 
 men in their daily life. Of the two peculiar miracles,” one 
 lays open the gradual process of the cure wrought ;’ and 
 the other exhibits a trait which seems to reveal something 
 of the agony of the Redeemer’s work, as leading to the 
 last agony at Gethsemane, when He looked up to heaven 
 and groaned (ἐστέναξε) in contemplation of the wreck 
 which sin had wrought in man, who is ever dull in hearing 
 and slow in praising God. The connection of these three 
 
 Style. 
 
 Additional ἴπ- 
 cidents character- 
 istic. 
 
 Mark iv. 26—29. 
 
 vii. 21, ἔσωϑεν ... ἐκ τῆς καρδίας, 
 etc. 
 
 5 11. 19, 20, 27; iii. 1,3; iv. 15 (cf. Mt 
 and Le.); v. 41, 42; vi. 17, 18 (cf. Mt.); 
 x. 13 (cf. Mt. and Le ); xiv. 66, 67 (cf. 
 Mt. and Le.). 
 
 6 ἐκϑαμβεῖσϑαι, ix. 15; xiv. 33; xvi 
 5, 6. 
 
 ἐναγκαλίζεσϑαι, ix. 36; x. 16. 
 
 Tpomepiuvay, xiii. 11. 
 
 guvasariBeww, ν. 24, 31. 
 
 Τ viii 22-26, émidels τὰς χεῖρας... 
 
 1Thus καὶ εὐϑύς occurs, perhaps, 
 twenty-seven times (the reading is often 
 uncertain) in St. Mark, eight times in 
 St. Matthew, and twice in St. Luke. 
 
 21, 40. 44° 5S) ths xi. ἘΠῚ  χῖν, 48, 
 65, ete. 
 
 3 iv. 89, Σιώπα, πεφίμωσο. 
 
 vy. 8, Ἔξελθε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἀκάϑαρ- 
 τον ἐκ τοῦ ἀνδρώπου. 
 
 vi. 28, 31; xii. 6, etc. 
 
 41.13, ἦν [ἐκεῖ ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ. 
 
 ii. 20, τότε... ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρα. 
 
 iii. 29, οὐκ ἄφεσιν ἔχει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα 
 
 ἀλλὰ ἔνοχός ἐστιν αἰωνίου ἁμαρτήμα- 
 ros. 
 
 iv. 33, 84; v. 26, etc. 
 
 vi. 25, εὐδὺς μετὰ σπουδῆς. 
 
 a See note, additional, p. 472. 
 
 εἶτα πάλιν ἐπέϑηκεν τὰς χεῖρας. 
 
 8 vii. 831—37. Cf. John xi. 85. It is 
 remarkable that in both these miracles 
 our Lord took the sufferer apart (vii. 33, 
 
 b See note, additional, p. 472. 
 
368 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 special lessons is surely most significant. Without taking 
 away the attention from the outward act, they lead us to 
 look at the inmost processes which the outward act reveals. 
 Together they give hope and strength for all labor. A 
 Saviour sorrows over man’s sufferings and unbelief, and 
 meets each advance of faith; a Spirit works within us, 
 bringing to maturity by hidden steps the seed which God 
 has planted. 
 
 The smaller variations in the narrative offer several fea- 
 tures of interest, in addition to those which 
 have been already noticed. One of these 
 characterizes the whole Gospel. St. Mark, 
 more than any other Evangelist, records the effect tial 
 was produced on others by the Lord’s working. Just as 
 he follows out the details of the acts themselves, he men- 
 tions the immediate and wider results which they produced. 
 From the beginning to the end he tells us of the wonder 
 and amazement and fear! with which men listened to the 
 teaching of Christ. Everywhere multitudes crowd to hear 
 Him,? as well as to receive His blessings. When He 
 
 was in a house, the whole city was gathered 
 
 Additional traits 
 in common inci- 
 dents. 
 
 Mark i. 33 
 aa ἣν to the door, and even then the crowd could 
 ark τὶ. 2. 
 
 find no room. So great at times was the 
 
 Mark i. 45. 
 excitement that He could no longer openly 
 enter into the city; and it is said twice that, as many 
 
 came and went, He could not even eat, so that He seemed 
 
 ἀπολαβόμενος ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄχλου ; viii. 23, 
 ἐξήνεγκεν ἔξω τῆς κώμη). 
 
 One other circumstance in connec- 
 tion with Christ’s miracles is noticed 
 by St. Mark, that even those who 
 “touched the border of His garment 
 were made whole” (Mark vi. 56. Cf. 
 Luke vi. 19; viii. 46; Acts xix. 12). 
 
 1 j. 22 (ἐξεπλήσσοντο). 27; vi. 20; xi. 
 18; vii. 37 (ὑπερπερισσῶς ἐξεπλ.); x 
 26 (περισσῶς ἐξεπλ..). 
 
 v. 20 (ἐθαύμαζον; ix. 15 (ἐξεϑαμβή- 
 ήσαν); x. 24 (ἐδαμβοῦντο). 
 
 y. 42 (ἐξέστησαν ἐκστάσει μεγάλῃ); 
 vi. 51 (λίαν ἐκ περισσοῦ ἐξίσταντο). 
 
 iv. 41 (ἐφοβήϑησαν φόβον μέγαν): ν 
 15; (ix. 6);. ix. 32. 
 
 2ij. 13, mas ὁ ὄχλος ἤρχετο πρὸς 
 αὐτὸν καὶ ἐδίδασκεν αὐτούς (ef. ii. 14. 
 15); iv. 1, ὄχλος πλεῖστος; y. 21, 24, 
 BAS ὅς. Ἐν πῖνε 
 
 8 iii, 20, 21, ὥστε μὴ δύνασϑαι αὐτοὺς 
 μηδὲ ἄρτον ας: καὶ ἀκούσαντες 
 οἱ παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ. - ἔλεγον ὅτι ἐξέστη. 
 vi. 81, ἦσαν οἱ ἐρχόμενοι καὶ ot ὑπά- 
 γοντες πολλοί, καὶ οὐδὲ φαγεῖν εὐκαί- 
 ρουν. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 369 
 to His kindred to be beside Himself. Those who were 
 healed, in spite of His injunctions, proclaimed abroad the 
 tidings of His power.' And in His retire- 
 ment, men from ail the cities ran toyéther on 
 foot to see Him; and wherever He went, into 
 villages or cities or country, they placed their sick before 
 Him; and as many as touched Him were made whole. 
 
 In substance and style and treatment the Gospel of St. 
 Mark is essentially a transcript from life. 
 The course and the issue of facts are imaged 
 in it with the clearest outline. If all other 
 arguments against the mythic origin of the Evangelic nar- 
 ratives were wanting, this vivid and simple record, stamped 
 with the most distinct impress of independence and origi- 
 nality, —totally unconnected with the symbolism of the Old 
 Dispensation, totally independent of the deeper reasonings 
 of the New, — would be sufficient to refute a theory sub- 
 versive of all faith in history. The details which were ori- 
 ginally addressed to the vigorous intelligence of Roman 
 hearers* are still pregnant with imstruction for us. The 
 teaching which “met their wants” in the first age finds a 
 corresponding field for its action now. It would be worse 
 then idle to attempt any general comparison of the effects 
 which the several Gospels may be supposed to work upon 
 
 Mark vi. 33. 
 Mark vi. 55, 56. 
 
 The importance 
 of St. Mark as a 
 historical record. 
 
 11. 28, 45. ἤρξατο κηρύσσειν πολλὰ 
 καὶ διαφημίζειν τὸν λόγον. ν. 20; vii. 
 86. 
 
 2 The following passages may be 
 taken as examples of St. Mark’s style 
 in connection with the parallel ac- 
 counts: vi. 30—43 (The feeding the five 
 thousand); ix. 14—29 (The healing of 
 the lunatic); and vi. 14—29 (The feast 
 of Herod’. In each case we have, I 
 believe, the testimony of an eye-wit- 
 ness. Inthe last some friend of Jchn 
 may have been present. 
 
 3 Euseb. Τ᾿. £. iii. 39, Cf. pp. 191, 237. 
 
 One peculiarity of St. Mark’s lan- 
 guage not yet noticed seems to point to 
 this Roman origin, his use of several 
 
 Latin forms which do not occur in the 
 other Gospels: KevTupiwy, xv. 39, 44, 
 45 (elsewhere ἑκατόνταρχος, -apxns); 
 κοδράντης, xii. 42 (Matt. v. 26); σπε- 
 KovAdTwp (vi. 27); τὸ ἱκανὸν ποιῆσαι 
 (xv. 15. Cf. Acts xvii. 9. To these 
 may perhaps be added ξέστης (vii. 4, 
 8); κράββατος- (in St. John and Acts). 
 Other words he has in common with 
 one or more of the other Evangelists: 
 δηνάριον (all); κῆνσος (Mt.); λεγίων 
 (Mt. Le.); πραιτώριον (Mt. J.); ppa- 
 γελλοῦν (Mt.). 
 
 In all these notices of St. Mark’s lan 
 guage I have derived great help from 
 Credner (Ein/. § 49), though his large 
 collections require careful sifting. 
 
370 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 the Church, but it is impossible not to see some signifi- 
 cance in the circumstance that the historic worth of the 
 Gospels was then most recklessly assailed when St. Mark 
 was regarded as a mee epitomator of the other Synoptists. 
 We cannot gain a full perception of the truth till the form 
 of its outward revelation is surely realized. The form is 
 not all, but it isan element in the whole. The picture of 
 the sovereign power of Christ battling with evil among 
 men swayed to and fro by tumultnous passions, is still 
 needful, though we may turn to St. Matthew and St. John 
 for the ancient types or deeper mysteries of Christianity, 
 or find in St. Luke its inmost connection with the unchang- 
 ing heart of man. 
 For “the Gospel of St. Paul”? is in its essential charac- 
 teristics the complementary history to that 
 ee ame of St. Matthew. The difference between the 
 two may be seen in their opening chapters. 
 The first words of the Hebrew Evangelist gave the clew to 
 
 1 The following outline of the Gospel will serve to explain the connection of 
 the several parts: — 
 INTRODUCTION. i. ii. 
 The annunciation of the birth of John and of Christ (i. 1—56). 
 The birth of John; the nativity; the presentation; Christ with 
 the doctors (i. 57—ii). 
 1. THE PREPARATION. iii.—iy. 18. 
 The work of the Baptist (iii. 1—20). 
 The attestation at the baptism and by descent (21—88). 
 The trial (iv. 1—13). 
 2. THE ANNOUNCEMENT. iv. 14—44. 
 Preaching (14, 15). 
 Tidings at Nazareth (16—30). 
 Signs: The unclean spirit (31—37); Simon’s wife’s mother (388, 39) 
 Many works (40, 41); wide teaching (42—44). 
 8. THE FuTURE CHURCH. y.—ix. 43a. 
 (a) Its universality. 
 The sign: the draught of fishes (vy. 1—11). 
 The leper cleansed (12—16). 
 The paralytic restored (17—26). 
 The publican called (27—39). 
 The law vindicated from superstition (vi. 1: —11). 
 (b) Its constitution. 
 The apostles called: the Sermon on the mount (vi. 12—49). 
 The spring of help. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. Bye | 
 
 his whole narrative; and so the first chapter of St. Luke, 
 with its declarations of the blessedness of 
 faith and the exaltation of the lowly, lead 
 at once to the point from which he contemplated the life 
 
 Luke i. 45, 52. 
 
 Faith in man: the centurion’s servant (vii. 2—10). 
 Love in Christ: the widow’s son (11—17). 
 The hearers. 
 John and the people (18 —35). 
 The Pharisee and the sinner (386—50). 
 The ministering women (viii. 1—3). 
 (c) Its development. 
 The sower (viii. 4—18). 
 Earthly ties (19—21). 
 Lessons of faith: the storm stilled (22—25); the legion cast 
 out (26-39); the woman healed (45—48); Jairus’ daugh- 
 ter raised (40—56). 
 (d) Its claims. 
 The commission (ix. 1—6); the earthly king (7—9). 
 The five thousand fed (9—17); the confession (18—28). 
 The transfiguration; the lunatic healed (28—48 q@). 
 4. THe UniversaL Cuurcu. THE REJECTION OF THE JEWS FORE- 
 SHOWN. ix. 43 b—xviii. 30. 
 (a) Preparation (ix. 43 b—xi. 13). 
 Coming persecution (43 b—45). Traits of the true disciple (46—62). 
 The mission of the seventy (x. 1—20). Thanksgiving (21—24). 
 One family of men: the good Samaritan (25—37). 
 One thing needful: Mary and Martha (38—42). 
 Prayer the strength of life (xi. 1—13). 
 (b) Lessons of warning (xi. 14—xiii. 9). 
 Inward: Seven worse spirits (xi. 14—28). 
 Sign of Jonah (29—85). 
 Pharisaic religion (837—54). 
 Outward: Persecution (xii. 1—12). 
 Wealth (18—31). 
 Life (82—53). 
 Signs of the times (54—59). 
 The fate of the Galilaans (xiii. 1—5). 
 The barren fig-tree (6—9). 
 (c) Lessons of progress (xiii. 10—xiy. 24). 
 The woman (the Church) set free (xiii. 10Q—17). 
 The growth of the Church outward and inward (18—21]). 
 The duty of effort (22—30). 
 The assurance in working (31—85). 
 Formalism defeated (xiv. 1—6). 
 The poor called (7—14). 
 The feast furnished with guests (15—24). 
 (4) Lessons of discipleship. 
 The completeness of the sacrifice (xiv. 25—35). 
 The universality of the offer (xv.). 
 Social duties. 
 
1 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 of Him who was to give light to them that sit in darkness 
 and in the shadow of death. The perfect 
 manhood of the Saviour, and the consequent 
 mercy and universality of His covenant, is his central sub- 
 ject, rather than the temporal relations or eternal basis οἵ 
 Christianity. In the other Gospels we find our King, our 
 Lord, our God; but in St. Luke we see the image of our 
 Great High Priest, made perfect through suf- 
 fering, tempted in all points as we are, but 
 without sin, so that each trait of human feeling and natu- 
 ral love helps us to complete the outline and confirms its 
 truthfulness. 
 
 The pictures of the Infancy, to which the Temple forms 
 the background, typify in aremarkable manner this human 
 
 be ae and priestly aspect of the life of Christ. 
 the Infaney. The circumstances and the place equally 
 Τ λό ἐν = turn the thoughts of the reader to the real- 
 ities shadowed forth in the old law of sacrifice. The 
 
 Luke 1. 79. 
 
 Hebr. ti. 10; iv. 15. 
 
 The stewardship of wealth (xvi.). 
 Offences; faith; seryice (xvii. 1—10). ~ 
 (e) The coming end (xvii. 11—xvili. 30). 
 The sign: the ten lepers (xvii. 11—19). 
 The unexpectedness of Christ coming (20—37). 
 The unjust judge (xviii. 1—8). 
 Obstacles to faith. 
 Self-righteousness; pride; selfishness (9—30). 
 5. THE SOVEREIGNTY CLAIMED. Xvili. 31—xxi. 
 (a) The journey. 
 Warnings; Bartimeus; Zaccheus; the talents (xviii. 31—xix. 27). 
 (ὃ) The entry (xix. 28—44). 
 The work begun (45—48). 
 (c) The conflict. The first question (xx.1—8); the portraiture (9—19) 
 the Temptation (20—40); the last question (41—44). 
 The Pharisees (45, 46); the widow (xxi. 1—4). 
 The judgment (xxi. 5—386). 
 The work (87, 38). 
 6. THE SOVEREIGNTY GAINED BY DEATH. XxXii.—xXiv. 
 The end foreshown (xxii. 1—23). 
 Divisions within (24—34); dangers without (35—38). 
 The agony; betrayal; denial; condemnation (389—71). 
 The judgment of Herod and Pilate (xxiii. 1—25). 
 The crucifixion; burial (26—56). 
 The revelation of the risen Saviour (xxiv. 1—48). 
 The last charge; the ascension (44—53). 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 373 
 Saviour Himself— the perfect victim and the perfect 
 Priest — received the seal of the first Covenant, and in 
 due time was presented in the Temple and 
 redeemed from its service. The offering 
 was the offering of the poor; and the first blessing. was 
 mingled with words of sorrow. Years of 
 silent growth then followed; and when He 
 had arrived at the age of legal maturity! 
 “the child Jesus” went up to the feast, and claimed the 
 Temple as His Father’s House, and spoke of other work 
 than that in which His life as yet was spent. But 
 while the future was thus mysteriously fore- 
 shown, for the present He was subject to His 
 earthly parents, and increased in wisdom and stature, and 
 i favor with God and men. The development of the 
 divine consciousness in Him who was indeed God is 
 described to us as it proceeded according to the laws of 
 human life. At each successive stage in the long prepara- 
 tion for His work, from first to last, we mark the gradual 
 and harmonious revelation of His double nature. His God- 
 head and Manhood — signs of triumph and suffering — are 
 united at the Nativity, the Presentation, the Examination 
 in the Temple, the Baptism, the Temptation; for all is 
 order and truth in the Godlike life, quickening and quick- 
 ened in due measure? 
 
 The main contents of St. Luke’s Gospel may be divided 
 into several groups which present distinctive 
 
 Luke ii. 84, 35. 
 
 Luke ti. 40, 
 Luke ii. 41 ff. 
 
 Luke ti. 52. 
 
 2. The announce- 
 
 > * Christ’ 
 features, though each one passes so gradually 9 ™" % “irsts 
 into the next as to afford no clear line of de- Sel τὸ 
 
 mareation. 
 forms -an introduction to the more detailed 
 
 A general announcement of Christ’s work 
 narrative. 
 
 1 Chagiga (ap. Wetst. ad Lue. ii. 42): 
 A xii. anno filius censetur maturus. 
 Joma, (id.): Ab anno xii. initiabant 
 pueros ad jejunandum,. Tradition as- 
 signed this age as the crisis in the lives 
 of Moses, Samuel, and Solomon ( Wetst. 
 l.c.). Cf. [Hipp.] adv. Her. p. 156. 
 
 4 Origen, Hom. iy. in Luc. Non illo 
 
 tantum tempore preparatz sunt viz et 
 direct semite, sed usque hodie adven- 
 tum Domini Salvatoris spiritus Joannis 
 virtusque precedit. O magna mysteria 
 Domini et dispensationis ejus! Angeli 
 preecurrunt Jesum: angeli quotidie aut 
 ascendunt aut descendunt super salutem 
 hominum in Christo Jesu. Cf. John i. 61. 
 
 32 
 
374 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 This announcement differs characteristically from that in 
 St. Matthew. In St. Matthew the preach- 
 ing of the Lord is connected with the ful- 
 filment of prophecy; in St. Luke it is pre- 
 sented in its own power. In St. Matthew the first dis- 
 course is the Sermon on the Mount, in which Christianity 
 is displayed in its relation to Judaism; in St. 
 Luke, the discourse at Nazareth, in which the 
 Gospel is freely offered to the poor, the desolate, and the 
 stranger. The first miracles in St. Matthew 
 signify the removal of legal impurity and 
 national distinctions; while in St. Luke the message of 
 mercy is confirmed by the deliverance of captives from 
 spiritual and bodily infirmity, from evil active 
 and personal! within them. 
 
 In the succeeding chapters the work thus outlined is 
 described under two great heads. The first 
 (v.—1x. 43 a) contains a view of the future 
 Church; the second the teaching of Christ, 
 leading to the call of a new people and the rejection of 
 The first is chiefly a record of miracles ;” the 
 
 Matt. iv. 14 ff. 
 Luke iv. 15. 
 
 Luke iv. 16 ff. 
 
 Matt. viri. 1, 5. 
 
 Luke iv. 31, 38. 
 
 Two great divis- 
 tons of the Gospel. 
 
 the Jews. 
 
 1 Luke iv. 85, 39 (ἐπετίμησεν). The terfere with religious life. In charac- 
 
 word occurs of the fever in St. Luke 
 only. Cf. viii. 24 and parallels. 
 
 These two miracles were wrought on 
 the Sabbath (iv. 16); and hence we may 
 see that spiritual and bodily maladies 
 are so far healed by Christ as they in- 
 
 ter the two miracles are complement- 
 ary: there was an unclean spirit in the 
 synagogue, and a faithful woman 8107. 
 fering (ἦν συνεχομένη) at home from 
 a great fever. 
 
 2 The spiritual teaching of the miracles in St. Luke, asa whole, will be seen 
 
 from the following table. 
 Italics: — 
 
 The miracles peculiar to St. Luke are marked by 
 
 1. SIGNS OF THE MISSION OF THE SAVIOUR (iv. 18) —GENERALLY TO 
 CHECK THE ACTION OF EVIL. 
 
 (a) Spiritual. 
 
 The unclean spirit cast out (iv. 99---87). 
 
 (6) Physical. 
 
 Peter’s wife’s mother healed (iv. 38, 39). 
 
 2. THE CHRISTIAN SOCIETY. 
 (a) Its universality: 
 Hence Christ 
 
 The miraculous draught of fishes (v. 4—11). 
 
 a. Purifies the outward life. 
 
 The leper cleansed (¥. 12—14). 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 375 
 
 second a record of parables. In the one we read the 
 works of the Son of God; in the other the words of the 
 
 b. Purifies the inward life. 
 The palsy healed (v. 18—26). 
 6. Quickens deadened energies. 
 The withered hand restored (vi. 6—11). 
 (b) The spring of its blessings. 
 α. Faith in man. 
 The centurion’s servant (vii. 2—10). 
 Ὁ. Love in Christ. 
 The widow's son raised (vii. 11—17). 
 (9) The fulness of Christ’s power to preserve it, as seen in His sover- 
 eignty over 
 a. Matter. 
 The storm stilled (viii, 22—25). 
 
 ὃ. Spirit. . 
 The Gadarene demoniacs (viii. 26—89). 
 c. Death. ᾿ 
 
 Typical: the woman with issue (viii. 43—48). 
 Natural: Jairus’ daughter raised (viii. 41—56). 
 (d) The extent of its claims. 
 a. To instruct and strengthen all. 
 The five thousand fed (ix. 10—17). 
 ᾧ. To overcome by faith all evil. 
 The lunatic healed (ix. 37—42). 
 3. Signs OF CHRIST’S WORKING ON MEN. 
 (a) To give utterance to the spiritually dumb. 
 The dumb devil cast out (xi. 14—26). 
 (b) To remove 
 a. The inward checks to our progress. 
 The woman with a spirit of infirmity (xiii. 11—17). 
 Lb. The outward obstacles to it (v. 5). 
 The man with the dropsy (xiv. 1—6). 
 (c) To cleanse impurity, outward and inward (v. 19). 
 The ten lepers cleansed (xvii. 12—19). 
 (4) To restore spiritual sight. 
 The blind man restored (xviii. 85—48). 
 [The healing of Malchus: xxii. 50, 51.) 
 
 The miracles recorded by St. Mat- of notice because they symbolize the 
 thew and St. Mark which are omitted call of the Gentiles. But the charac- 
 by St. Luke are: The walking on the ter of St. Luke’s Gospel is to be sought 
 sea; the healing of the Syrophenician’s in its general tone. The message which 
 daughter; the feeding of the four thou- it conveys is universal, and not exelu- 
 sand; the barren fig-tree. The omis- sive in any sense. 
 sion of the last three is the more worthy 
 
 1 The parables in St. Luke illustrate the general course of his narrative. 
 
 1. THE FOUNDATIONS. 
 (a) Love: the two debtors (vii. 41—48). 
 (b) Productiveness: the sower (viii. 4—15). 
 (c) Charity: the good Samaritan (x. 30—87). 
 (ad) Importunity in prayer: the friend at midnight (xi. 5—8). 
 
376 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 Son of Man. The miraculous draught of fishes, combined 
 ge ora with the prayer of St. Peter and the promise 
 
 Church. Inswniver- of the Lord, is a perfect introduction to the 
 sality. (Luke v.1 
 
 —vi. 11.) doctrine of the Church. Its first character- 
 Luke v. 8, 10. signers ne . . . Ξ - 
 istic is universality; and the idea which is 
 thus announced is continuously unfolded in a:series of acts 
 ταν tee ΠΟΙ ἸΟἸνεδι triumphs owe physical un- 
 —265 27-89. cleanness, moral guilt, social degradation, and 
 Luke vi. 1—11. ee : = ? 
 legal superstition. 
 The extent of the new Covenant having been thus set 
 forth, we next observe something of the 
 Its constitution. : 3 τ Lge . 
 (Lukevt. 2—viti, nature of the society in which it is embodied. 
 3.) e ° 3 ° > 
 The selection and instruction of the Apostles 
 marks them as men who do not take their stand on the 
 
 2. LESSONS OF WARNING. 
 (a) Dependence: the rich fool (xii. 16—21). 
 (δ) Faithfulness: the servants (xii. 35—48). 
 (6) Fruitfulness: the barren fig-tree (xiii. 6-9). 
 3. LESSONS OF PROGRESS, 
 (a) Outward growth: the mustard seed (xiii. 18, 19). 
 Inward change: the leaven (xiii. 20, 21). 
 (Ὁ) The humble exalted: the chief seats (xiv. 7—11). 
 The poor called: the great supper (xiv. 12—24). 
 4. LESSONS OF DISCIPLESHIP. 
 (a) The rational] sacrifice. 
 The tower-builder (xiv. 28—80). 
 The king going to war (xiv. 31—83). 
 (6) The universal offer. 
 The guideless wanderer from the Church: the lost sheep (xv: 
 3—7). 
 The lost slumberer in the Church: the lost drachma (xv. 8—10). 
 The wilful apostate from the Church: the prodigal son (xv. 
 11—82). : 
 (c) Social duties. 
 In the use of outward blessings. 
 Prudence: the unjust steward (xvi. 1—12). 
 Charity: the rich man and Lazarus (xvi. 19—81). 
 Service no ground of merit: unprofitable servants (xvii. 7—10). 
 5. Lessons OF JUDGMENT. 
 (a) The injured heard at last: the unjust judge (xviii. 1—8). 
 (Ὁ) Man’s judgment reversed: the Pharisee and publican (xviii. 9—14) | 
 (c) The Christian rewarded according to his work: the talents (xix. 
 11—27). 
 (4) The retribution of the wicked: the wicked husbandmen (xx. 9—16} 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 
 
 9 
 
 dad 
 (4 
 
 fulfilment of the Law, but on the wider basis of Christian 
 charity.’ The events which follow illustrate the source of 
 their power and the character of those among whom they 
 have to work. Faith on the part of man, 
 
 and love on the part of Christ, are shown to |, Zuhe vi 2-10; 
 
 11-- 17. 
 bring blessings beyond all hope. John and PaaS ae. 
 the people, the Pharisee and the sinner? ὅτ. 
 Luke viii. 1—3. 
 
 exhibit the contrasts of Jewish life. And the 
 
 notice of the ministering women aptly closes the section 
 which opens with the call of the Apostles. The Teacher, 
 who included in His Church the humble, the distressed, 
 and the repentant, is attended by the weak and loving 
 rather than by a council of elders, a band of warriors, or 2 
 
 school of prophets.’ 
 
 Such being the breadth and foundation of the Christian 
 society, we are led to regard the process of 
 
 its development, and the nature of the claims 
 
 Its development. 
 (Luke viii. 4—56.) 
 
 which it makes on those who are admitted to 
 
 its privileges. 
 
 The parable of the sower is presented 
 
 under a new aspect in St. Luke; it exhibits the responsi- 
 bility of the hearers of the Gospel,‘ and does not, as in St. 
 Matthew, form an introduction to a general 
 
 view of the outward kingdom. Hence, next 
 
 Luke viii. 16—18; 
 19—21. 
 
 we are taught the obligation of Christian 
 example and the omnipotence of religious duty; and to 
 
 1 This follows from a comparison of 
 Luke vi. 20—49 with St. Matthew’s 
 record of the Sermon on the Mount. 
 As to the identity of the two discourses 
 see p. 351 n. 6. 
 
 2 The lesson of love is the first para- 
 ble recorded by St. Luke, as the draught 
 of fishes is the first miracle. 
 
 5 Evans, Scripture Biography, ii. p. 
 268. Exod. xviii. 25 (Moses); 2 Sam. 
 xxiii. 8 ff. (David); 2 Kings ii. 2, 7 ( Eli- 
 jah). The apostles themselves offer a 
 contrast scarcely less striking than the 
 women. 
 
 4 This difference in the scope of the 
 
 parable is indicated by vv. 8, 15, com- 
 pared with Matt. xiii. 8—28. St. Luke 
 dwells on the single idea of productive- 
 ness, and does not regard the different 
 degrees of productiveness which must 
 exist in the Christian church. This 
 idea is afterwards given in the pounds 
 (xix. 12 ff.); and conversely St. Mat- 
 thew notices only equal productiveness 
 in the talents (xxv. 14 ff.). 
 
 The comparison of Matt. xiii. 13 (871) 
 with Luke viii. 10 (ἵνα) is full of instrue- 
 tion: spiritual deafness is at once the 
 cause and the result of not listening te 
 God’s voice. 
 
 82" 
 
378 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 encourage men in the varied struggles of Christian life, a 
 series of miracles attests the Saviour’s power 
 over matter, spirit, and death. He supplies 
 the strength when He enjoins the task. 
 When He sends forth His apostles He endues 
 them with power. When they return, He 
 feeds the hungry multitude, lest they should despair from 
 the inadequacy of their natural powers for the conversion 
 of the world. The prospect of suffering is relieved by the 
 vision of glory; and when evil prevails 
 against them, He still casts out the unclean 
 spirit which baffles their doubting efforts. 
 The second great division of the record of the Lord’s 
 ministry, includes a remarkable series of acts 
 and discourses which are grouped together 
 in connection with the last journey to Jerusa- 
 lem.’ Some of the incidents occur in differ- 
 ent connections in the other Evangelists; and 
 the whole section proves, by the absence of historical data 
 
 Iuke viii. 22—25; 
 26—39; 40—56. 
 
 Its claims. 
 1—43 a.) 
 
 Luke ix.1—6; 10 
 lite 
 
 (ix. 
 
 Luke ix. 28—86. 
 
 Luke ix. 37—43 a. 
 
 4. The universal 
 Teaching. 
 
 The Great Epi- 
 sode. 
 
 (Luke ix. 43 6.— 
 aviil. 80.) 
 
 1 The connections of time in this 
 great episode (ix. 48 b—xviii. 14) de- 
 serve particular attention, especially in 
 reference to those sections which occur 
 in the other Evangelists in a different 
 context. These parallels for the most 
 part consist in short and weighty say- 
 ings, such as are constantly repeated, 
 even by writers in different works; and 
 there is no difficulty in supposing that 
 they were introduced by the Lord into 
 different discourses. More rarely par- 
 ables recur in new relations; and in 
 one case incidents, alike in every par- 
 ticular, are found to occupy a different 
 position in St. Luke from that which 
 they occupy in St. Matthew. Besides 
 these partial or complete parallels, 
 there are a large number of sections 
 peculiar to St. Luke. The following 
 table of passages, with the particles of 
 connection by which they are intro- 
 duced, will place the question oy 
 before the reader: 
 
 I. Sections including parallels with 
 the other Gospels. 
 
 (a) In short sayings or parts of dis- 
 courses. 
 
 X. 1—16 (μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα). Cf. Matt. 
 ix. 37, 88; x. 10—16; xi. 21—28; x. 40. 
 Luke ix. 1 ff. 
 
 xi. 1—4 (kal ἐγεν. ἐν τῷ εἶναι ad. ἐν 
 Τ. τ. προσ.). Cf. Matt. vi. 9---18. 
 
 xi. 5—13 (Kal εἶπεν). Cf. Matt. vii. 
 7-11. 
 
 xi. 29-35 (τῶν δὲ ὄχλων ἐπαδροιζο- 
 μένων). Cf. Matt. xii. 88-42; vy. 15; 
 vi. 22, 23. ‘Luke viii. 16. 
 
 xi. 87-54 (ἐν δὲ τῷ λαλῆσαι). 
 Matt. xxiii. 
 
 xii. 1—12 (ἐν ois). 
 xX. 28—83, ete. 
 
 xii. 22—40 (εἶπεν δέ... 
 Cf. Matt. vi. 
 
 Ck 
 Cf. Matt. xvi. 6; 
 
 Διὰ τοῦτο). 
 
 xii. 4153 (εἶπεν δὲ 6 Πέτρος). Cf. 
 Matt. xxiv. 45 ff. 
 xii. 54-59 (ἔλεγεν δέ. Cf. Matt. 
 
 xvi. 2, 3, etc. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 379 
 and the unity of its general import, that a moral and not 
 a temporal sequence is the law of the Gospels. For it is 
 possible to trace throughout this part of the narrative a 
 contrast between the true and the false people of God, 
 between the spiritual and the literal Israel. The shadow 
 
 of eclipse is seen to rest already on the old system and the 
 
 old spirit. 
 
 A new covenant and a new dis- 
 cipleship are ushered in by words of warning 
 
 Preparation. 
 Luke ix. 43 b—. 
 
 and reproof. The journey, which seemed to 
 
 be for honor, is announced to be for death. 
 
 The intolerant 
 
 zeal of St. John is checked when he would have restrained 
 
 xiii. 22—30 (εἶπεν δέ Tis). Cf. Matt. 
 vii. 13, etc. 
 
 xiii. 3135 (ἐν αὐτῇ TH ἡμέρᾳ). Cf. 
 Matt. xxiii. 87—89. 
 
 xiv. 25-85 (συνεπορεύοντο δὲ αὐτῷ 
 ὃ. π.). Cf. Matt. x. 81, etc. 
 
 xvii. 1—4 (εἶπεν δέ). Cf. Matt. xviii. 
 6, 7; 21, 22. 
 
 xvii. 22—37 (εἶπεν δέ). Probably the 
 same discourse as Matt. xxiv. 
 
 (>) In parables and longer discourses. 
 
 ix. 46 ff. (εἰσῆλϑεν δέ) = Matt. xviii. 
 1 ff. ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ Spa. Mark ix. 33 ff. 
 
 x. 21—24 (ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ὥρᾳ) = Matt. 
 xi. 25 (ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ καιρῷ). 
 
 xiii, 18--21 (ἔλεγεν οὖν). Matt. xiii. 
 81,82. Mark iv. 30—82. 
 
 xiv. 16-24 (ὁ δὲ εἶπεν [ἑνὶ τῶν συν- 
 avak.]). A variation recurs Matt. xxii 
 1—14. 
 
 xv. 3-7 (εἶπεν δέ). Matt. xviii. 12 
 —)4. 
 
 (c) In incidents. 
 
 ix. 49 (δέ). Mark x. 38 (δέ). 
 
 ix. 57 (kal πορευομένων αὐτῶν ἐν 
 τῇ ὁδῷ). Matt. viii. 18. 
 
 xi 14 (καὶ ἦν ἐκβ. 5.). Matt. xii. 22 
 (τότε). 
 
 xviii. 15—17 (προσέφερον δέ). Matt. 
 xix. 13 (τότε): Mark x. 13 (καὶ προσ... 
 II. Sections peculiar to St. Luke. 
 
 ix. 51—56 (ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ συμπληρ. 
 τ. Nu. τ. ἀναλ. ad.), 
 
 x. 17—20 (ὑπέστρεψαν δέ). 
 
 x. 25—87 (καὶ ἰδού). Not the same as 
 Matt. xxii. 34 ff.; Mark xii. 28 ff. 
 
 x. 88—42 (ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ Topev- 
 εσδαι). 
 
 xii. 18--2] (εἶπεν δὲ τις αὐτῷ ἐκ τοῦ 
 ὔχλουγ. 
 
 xiii. 1--ὃ (παρῆσαν δέ τινες ἐν αὐτῷ 
 τῷ καιρῷ). 
 
 xiii. 6-- (ἔλεγεν δέ). 
 
 xiii. 10—17 (ἦν δὲ διδάσκων). 
 
 xiv. 1—13 (καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ ἐλδεῖν 
 εἰς οἶκον). 
 
 xv. 8—10; 11—82 (εἶπεν δέ). 
 
 xvi. 1-13 (ἔλεγεν δέ). Cf. Matt. vi. 
 24. 
 
 xvi. 14—31 (ἤκουον δέ... καὶ εἶπεν). 
 Cf. Matt. ν. 18. 
 
 xvii. 5—10 (καὶ εἶπαν). 
 
 xvii. 11—19 (καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ πο- 
 ρεύεσδϑαι αὐ. εἰς ‘I.), 
 
 xviii. 1--8 (ἔλεγεν δέ). 
 
 xviii. 9—14 (εἶπεν δέ). 
 
 Of all these passages one only is at- 
 tended with any serious difficulty — 
 Luke ix. 57, compared with Matt. viii. 
 18. The historical order appears to be 
 that given by St. Luke. In all the 
 other cases of parallelism we find repe- 
 titions which are perfectly natural, and 
 borne out by repetitions which occur in 
 the same Gospel. It does not, how- 
 ever, appear that the difference between 
 ἔλεγεν and εἶπεν as introductory words 
 is so clear as to admit of being urged: 
 xiv. 7,12; xvi. 5; yet see iii. 7; iv. 22; 
 vy. 36, ete. 
 
 1 This has been pointed out by Mr, 
 Browne, Ordo Seclorum, p. 688, n. 1. 
 
380 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 the progress of good because it was advanced by one “ who 
 followed not with them.” St. James and St. John are 
 rebuked when they would call down fire on the enemies 
 of Jerusalem, though the Son of Man came to save men’s 
 lives and not to destroy them. For the 
 Christian there is no shelter, no delay, no 
 After this introduction the fuller development 
 
 of the new dispensation begins with the 
 
 mission of the Seventy, and not with the 
 mission of the Apostles. Its groundwork, from the point 
 of sight of St. Luke, is the symbolic evangelization of 
 every nation upon earth,’ and not the restoration of the 
 twelve tribes of Israel. The mission is closed 
 by thanksgiving; and as a comment upon 
 the tidings with which the teacher was charged, we read 
 that the spirit of the Law was fulfilled by 
 a Samaritan, that the truest devotion was 
 shown by the patient listener who was not cumbered with 
 much serving, that prayer, even if the answer 
 be delayed, will in the end triumph over all 
 difficulties. Then follow lessons of warning, 
 of progress, of discipleship, of judgment. 
 Perils from within and from without are laid 
 
 Luke ix. 57—62. 
 
 retreat. 
 
 Luke x. 1—16. 
 
 Luke x. 21—24. 
 
 Luke ic. 30—37. 
 
 Luke 2. 32—42. 
 
 Luke xi. 1—13. 
 
 Lessons of warn- 
 ing. 
 
 Luke xi. 14—28. 
 
 Luke xi. 29—36; 
 
 97---4. 
 
 re es τον ΜΝ perils from the lack of God’s Spirit, 
 5—53. ° ayes 
 
 Luke wii, 54. from wonder-seeking and Pharisaism, from 
 
 Luke xiii. 9. 
 
 Luke xii. 17. 
 
 Luke xiii. 18—30. 
 
 Lessons of prog- 
 ress. 
 
 Luke «iii. 831—35. 
 
 Luke xiv. 1—24. 
 
 persecution and worldly cares. The times 
 are shown to be pregnant with signs of ruin; 
 and yet, in the midst of this stern teaching, 
 the “multitude rejoices.” In spite of opposi- 
 tion the growth of the Church is assured. 
 
 If some are rejected, others from afar shall fill their places. 
 
 1 According to Jewish tradition there 
 were seventy (Clem. Hom. xviii. 4; ef. 
 
 and tongues in the world. In the text 
 of St. Luke ἑβδομήκοντα δύο is very 
 
 Gen. xlvi. 27) or seventy-two (Clem. Al. 
 Strom. i. § 142; Clem. Recogn. ii. 42. 
 Deus ...in ]xxii. partes divisit totius 
 terre nationes, eisque principes (Dan. 
 x. 18) Angelos statuit.) different nations 
 
 highly supported. 
 
 The numbers twelve and seventy are 
 combined, Numb. xxxiii. 9. Cf. Ori- 
 gen, Hom. xxvii. in Num. ὃ 11, for an 
 interpretation of the passage. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 381 
 
 Even death itself cannot forestall the completion of the 
 appointed work. Formalism is silenced; the poor are 
 called, and the feast, which was despised by those who 
 were first invited, is furnished with guests. 
 
 The character of the true guest is next de- μῶν % 
 scribed in a series of parables which portray = 7 tt? 5δ ῦσ, 
 in the liveliest images the completeness of te *—~" 
 the sacrifice required of him, the universality 
 
 of the invitation offered, the relative duties of disciples to 
 one another. The quickening power of God and the fruit- 
 ful struggles of penitence are pictured in the case of those 
 who have been lost from Christ’s fold! through careless- 
 ness, or have lain inactive in His Church 
 from darkness, or have wilfully joined them- 
 selves with the citizen of a far country. The obligations 
 of wealth and station, the duty of forbearance, and the 
 power of faith, are seen to guide the Christian in social 
 life; and when every claim is fulfilled he is 
 still taught to feel that he is an unprofitable 
 servant. 
 
 Luke xv. 15. 
 
 Luke xvii. 10. 
 
 The tokens of judgment grow clearer as we draw to the 
 close of the section. Among the ten lepers χεωσνο of judg- 
 who were healed, a Samaritan alone returned = ™"* 
 
 : : Luke xvii. 18. 
 to give glory to God. If the Pharisees ask 
 when the kingdom of heaven shall come, they are told 
 that it is already within them. The day of " 
 
 : 4 : Luke xvii. 24. 
 
 vengeance for the elect is promised quickly Luke xviii. 1-8. 
 
 πῇ eye . . : Luke xviii, 9-30. 
 (v. 8). Humility, childliness, and self-sacrifice 
 —the opposites of prevalent vices —are set forth as the 
 conditions of entrance into the kingdom; and if the words 
 seem hard, one sentence marks the cause of 
 the difficulty which men felt and the remedy 
 for it: That which is impossible with men is possible with 
 
 God. 
 
 Luke xviii. 27. 
 
 1 The difference between Luke χν. 4, ΜῊΝ ἢ €v...marks the different as- 
 Tis ἄνϑρωπος.. ἀπολέσας Ev... pects of the parable in the two Gos- 
 and Matt. xviii. 12, Ἐὰν... πλα- pels. 
 
382 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 The narrative of the Journey and the Conflict follows 
 the same general outline as in the other Gos- 
 pels, but with some characteristic additions. 
 Zaccheus, a publican and a sinner, was 
 deemed worthy to entertain the Son of God and_pro- 
 nounced to be ὦ son of Abraham. And as 
 we noticed in St. Matthew that his first strain 
 was repeated at the close of his Gospel, so in St. Luke the 
 angelic hymn which was earliest sung in heaven in honor 
 of the Saviour’s birth, is reéchoed by the band of disciples 
 as He approaches Jerusalem for the last time before the 
 close of His work. Yet again we hear the same peculiar 
 tones of mercy and love on the road to Cal- 
 rary, and from the very cross, and once 
 more, when the risen Lord promises to His 
 disciples His Spirit from on high before they preach the 
 Word to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem! From first 
 
 5. The kingdom 
 claimed. 
 
 Luke xix. 9. 
 
 Luke xxiii. 89—45, 
 
 Luke xxiv. 49. 
 
 1 The following are the most remark- 
 able additions to common narratives 
 (besides those already noticed) which 
 occur in St. Luke: 
 
 ili. 1,2, the date of John’s ministry. 
 
 iii. 5, 6, (ὄψεται πᾶσα σὰρὲ τὸ 
 σωτήριον τοῦ Θεοῦ). 
 
 iii. 10---14. The social differences and 
 duties of John’s hearers. 
 
 iv. 1, πν. ay. TA. 
 
 xix. 37—40, 41—44. 
 
 xx. 16, ἀκουσ. δὲ εἶ, μὴ γένοιτο. 
 xx. 20, εἰς τὸ παραδ. --- τοῦ ἤγεμ. 
 xx. 26, καὶ οὐκ tox. — ἐν. τοῦ λαοῦ. 
 ς. 84, οἱ vi. — ἐκγαμ. 
 
 . 88, πάντες γὰρ αὐτῷ ζῶσιν. 
 
 Χχ. 99, 40. 
 
 Xxi. 24, 34—36, 37, 38. 
 
 xxii. 8, εἰσ. δὲ ὁ Σ. eis 71. 
 
 xxii. 15—18, 24—38, 43, 44, 45. 
 
 iv. 6,13, ἄχρι καιροῦ. 2 Luke xix. 38—40, ἐν οὐρανῷ εἰρήνη 
 iy ΠΡ 30. καὶ δόξα ἐν ὑψίστοις. Cf. ii. 
 iv. 85, μηδὲν βλάψαν αὐτόν. 14. Peace ratified in heaven is the 
 
 iv. 42, 48, καὶ of ὄχλοι --- ἀπέσταλ- 
 μαι. 
 
 vi. 8, αὐτὸς δέ--- αὐτῶν. 
 δέ --- ἀν. 
 
 vi. 12, καὶ ἦν διανυκτ. ἐν τ. προσ. 
 τοῦ Θεοῦ. 
 
 vii. 20, 21; 29, 80. 
 
 viii. 1—8, 47, ἐν π. τοῦ λαοῦ. 
 
 viii. 2, Κηρ. THY Bao. τοῦ Θεοῦ. 
 
 ix. 29, ἐν τῷ προσ. αὐτόν. 
 
 ix. 31, 82; 44, ϑέσϑε ὑμεῖς... τ. λ. τ. 
 Cf. xxi. 14. 
 
 xviii. 81, καὶ TEA. — τῷ ὑ. τ. ἀνῶρ. 
 
 XViii. 84, Kal ἦν τ. ῥ. τ. κεκρ. ---- τὰ 
 λεγ. 
 
 11, αὐτοὶ 
 
 pledge of peace to be realized on earth. 
 
 3 The view which has been given of 
 St. Luke’s Gospel as containing the 
 offer of the Gospel to all— not to Jews 
 only nor Gentiles only — is remarkably 
 confirmed and explained by his ‘‘ later 
 treatise.” For as in the one we mark 
 the universality of Christ’s promises, so 
 in the other we see their full accom- 
 plishment. In the outset of the Acts 
 (Acts ii. 9—11) we are told that Jews 
 and proselytes, from Arabia to Pontus 
 —from Parthia to Rome—heard the 
 tidings of salvation in their own 
 tongue; and the last glimpse of apos- 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 
 
 to last the same great subject abides. 
 
 383 
 
 The Gospel of the 
 
 Saviour begins with hymns and ends with 
 
 praises; and as the thanksgivings of the 
 
 Luke xxiv. 53. 
 
 meek are recorded in the first chapter, so in the last we 
 listen to the gratitude of the faithful.’ 
 
 tolic history is full of encouragement 
 and hope, when it is recorded (Acts 
 XXviii. 31) that, after turning to the 
 Gentiles, Paul received all that came 
 unto him, and preached with all confi- 
 dence the things which concern the Lord 
 Jesus, no man forbidding him. 
 
 Those writers who regard the book 
 of the Acts as partial and incomplete, 
 seem to have mistaken its entire pur- 
 pose; for we do not require for our 
 spiritual guidance a history of the 
 Apostles, but a record of the establish- 
 ment of the Christian Chureh. The 
 title is not the Acts, but Acts of the 
 Apostles (πράξεις τῶν ἀποστόλωυ), --- 
 such acts as should be significant to 
 future times; and so we read in the 
 book of all the modes of thought which 
 Christianity encountered in Judea, 
 Asia, Greece, aud Rome; we learn from 
 it how far the Apostles modified the 
 framework of our faith to build up 
 the several Churches, and how far they 
 selected a fit foundation for their teach- 
 ing from the popular belief. The Gos- 
 pels do not give usa life of Jesus, but 
 a narrative of man’s redemption; the 
 Acts does not detail the fortunes of 
 men, but sets forth the establishment 
 of the various forms of Christian truth. 
 
 1 The language of St. Luke presents 
 many peculiarities, some of which are 
 characteristic; and a large number of 
 words are common to the Gospels and 
 the Acts, and do not occur elsewhere 
 in the New Testament. The following 
 peculiarities are the most remarkable : 
 
 (1) Χάρις (χαριτόω, i. 28) eight times. 
 Elsewhere in Gospels only Jolin i. 14, 
 16,17. Common in Acts and Epistles. 
 
 (2) σωτήρ, i. 47; 11. 11 (Sohn iy. 42). 
 σωτηρία, i. 69, 71,77; xix. 9 (John iv. 
 22). τὸ σωτήριον, ii, 30; iii. 6. Gen- 
 
 eral in Acts and Epistles. Sew fre- 
 quent throughout the New Testament. 
 
 (3) Εὐαγγελίζεσϑαι (Matt. xi. δ only} 
 ten times. Frequent in Acts and Epis- 
 tles. Εὐαγγέλιον (Matt.. Mark, Acts, 
 Epp., Apoc.) does not occur in the Gos- 
 pels of St. Luke and St. John, nor in 
 St. John’s Epistles. 
 
 (4) πλῆδϑος eight times in Gospels, 
 seventeen times in Acts; elsewhere in 
 the New Testament seven times. 7A7- 
 ρής with gen. (John i. 14. Cf. Mark 
 viii. 19)iv.1; v.12; eight timesin Acts. 
 πλῆσαι, metaph. (cf. ἐμπλῆσαι) six 
 times in Gosp., nine times in Acts; not 
 elsewhere. πληροῦν throughout the 
 New Testament. 
 
 (5) ὑπάρχειν seven times in Gosp., 
 twenty-four times in Acts, fourteen 
 times elsewhere; not in other Gospels 
 (τὰ ὑπάρχοντα, Matt. xix. £1; xxiv. 
 47; xxv. 14. In St. Luke eight times). 
 προυπάρχειν in Gosp. and Acts once. 
 
 (6) παῖς (Θεοῦ) of David, Israel, 
 Christ, i. 54,69; Acts iii. 13, 26; iv. 25, 
 27, 30. 
 
 (7) ἱκανός nine times in Gosp., eigh- 
 teen times in Acts, three times each in 
 Matt. and Mark; elsewhere six times. 
 
 (8) οἶκος, metaph. (Matt. x. 6; xv. 
 24, oix. “Iop.) seven times in Gosp., nine 
 times in Acts. 
 
 (9) νομιικός (Matt. xxii. 35; Tit. iii. 13 
 only) six times in Gosp. ἐπιστατής 
 (= ‘PaBBet) six times; not elsewhere. 
 ἀληϑῶς with λέγω (= ἀμήν) three times 
 in Gosp.; not elsewhere. 
 
 (10) ὕψιστος (as an epithet of God) 
 five times in Gosp., in Acts twice; else- 
 where Mark v. 7; Hebr. vii. 1. 
 
 (11) Peculiar words (a) found only in 
 St. Luke’s Gospel and Acts: 
 
 διϊσχυρίζεσϑαι, διοδεύειν. Evedpevery, 
 ἐπιδεῖν, ἐντόνως, κατακλείειν, κατακυ- 
 
384 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT 
 
 Such appears to be, in rude outline, the general tenor of 
 the Synoptic Evangelists; and though it be 
 impossible to discuss within our present lim- 
 its their more minute divergences in order 
 and narration, yet it will be sufficiently clear that they 
 subserve to special uses, that they imply and explain fun- 
 damental differences of scope, and unfold the Christian 
 faith as it falls within each separate range. The events 
 recorded by the synoptists are not generally distinct, but 
 they are variously regarded, that we may be led to recog- 
 nize the manifold instructiveness and application of every 
 word and work of Christ. It may, indeed, be difficult to 
 trace the progress of the subject, as it is taken up in each 
 successive part of the histories; yet from time to time the 
 same familiar notes recur, and we feel sure that a deeper 
 knowledge and a finer discernment would lead us to recog- 
 nize their influence, even in those passages which are most 
 complicated and obscure. We have followed no arbitrary 
 arrangement in classifying the miracles or discourses of 
 our Lord, and yet in the mere simplicity of the Gospels we 
 have traced the great signs of a new and noble sequence, 
 too uniform and pregnant to be attributable to chance, too 
 
 General Sum- 
 
 mary. 
 
 unpretending and obscure to be the work of design. 
 
 λουϑεῖν, κλάσις (ἄρτου), μεγαλεῖα, 
 ὀχλεῖσϑαι, προβίλλειν, προσδοκία, 
 συμπληροῦν, συνεῖναι, τραυματίζειν 
 (τραῦμα, Gosp. once) (all once in Gosp., 
 once in Acts); διϊστάναι, ἐπιβιβάζειν, 
 SduBos (twice in Gosp., once in Acts); 
 ἐπιχειρεῖν, ἴασις, [συναδϑροίζειν] (Gosp. 
 once, Acts twice); διαπορεῖν, ἐπιφω- 
 νεῖν, εὐλαβής, καδίεναι, συναρπάζειν 
 (Gosp. once, Acts three times); 7 ἑξῆς, 
 καϑεξῆς (twice; three times); Kaddre 
 (twice; four times); ὀδυνᾶσϑαι (three 
 times; once); ὁμιλεῖν (twice; twice); 
 συγκαλεῖσϑαι, Midd. (three times; 
 twice); συμβάλλειν (twice; four times). 
 
 (Ὁ) Found only in Gospel: πτοεῖς 
 σϑαι, συκοφαντεῖν, ὑποχωρεῖν, χρεο- 
 φειλέτης (each twice); συνιέναι, σὺυν- 
 
 And 
 
 τυχεῖν, τελεσφορεῖν, φιλονεικία, etc. 
 (each once). 
 
 (c) Occurring more often in Gosp. 
 and Acts than in the other books of 
 the New Testament: ἅπας, ἀτενίζειν, 
 ἐξαίφνης, καλούμενος, ὀνόματι, κατελ- 
 Je, παραχρῆμα. 
 
 (12) καὶ ἐγένετο (ἐγέν. δέ) ἐν τῷ... 
 In Gosp. twenty-two times, in Acts 
 twice (Mark iy. 4). Compare ἐγένετο 
 ΠΟΤΕ Ne 
 
 (13) ἦν, etc., with partic. In Gosp. 
 forty-seven times, in Acts thirty-seven 
 (Matt. ten; Mark twenty-seven; John 
 eighteen). 
 
 In the numbers given some differences 
 may arise from various readings, but 
 they are, I believe, generally correct. 
 
OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 385 
 
 surely the conviction of this truth, more than any other, 
 —incommunicable it may be, and ill-defined by language, 
 —must fill us with the devoutest reverence for the Gospel 
 histories, a reverence which is no vain “ Bibliolatry,” but 
 a feeling which springs from the satisfaction of our inmost 
 wants, and furnishes the fullest materials for patient study. 
 For such a scheme of the holy Gospels is at once most wor- 
 thy of their divine origin, and most consistent with their 
 outward form ; it realizes the individuality of their author- 
 ship, and explains the facts of their perversions; it satis- 
 fies, in its manifoldness, every requirement of the past and 
 future relations of Christian truth; it falls in with early 
 tradition, and opens to us a new view of the providential 
 government of the Church; and, finally, it sets before us, 
 in the clearest light, the combination of the human and 
 divine, which lies at the basis of all revelation. The surest 
 answer to all doubts, the readiest help in all difficulties, 
 the truest consolation in all divisions, must spring from a 
 real sense of the union of God and man in religion and in 
 Scripture, which is the perfect record of the historical 
 fulfilment of the union; and, if we read the words of inspi- 
 ration humbly and sincerely, we have a promise which 
 cannot fail. 
 
 1 Orig. Selecta in Num. xi. 25: & γὰρ ἐν Χριστῷ τὸ πνεῦμα, καὶ μία διὰ 
 πάντων ἡἣ ἐνέργεια. 
 99 
 
ΟΗ AP ARE RW LL. 
 
 THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 Πεπαιδευμένου ἐστὶ ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον τἀκριβὲς ἐπιζητεῖν Kad ἕκαστον γένος, ep 
 ὕσον ἣ τοῦ πράγματος φύσις ἐπιδέχεται. — ARISTOTELES. 
 
 Ir we have in any measure succeeded in establishing the 
 aie idea of a distinct spiritual purpose and order 
 ne Coen wh. in the writings of the several Evangelists, if 
 rieely tneowsidere- we have shown that they rest upon the foun- 
 dations of the past and meet the wants of 
 the future, the remainder of our task will be easy. We 
 shall feel the presence of the Holy Spirit throughout the 
 whole narratives, and seek neither to limit His influence 
 nor to define His operation. We shall recognize the diver- 
 gences of the sacred writers, but still strive to discover the 
 law of their course and the point of their reunion. We 
 shall bear in mind how much is clear and evident in the 
 written Word, while we ponder over dark and disputed 
 sentences. We shall admit the obscurities which critics 
 have detected in our Gospels, and endeavor to explain their 
 origin, while we remember that, like the spots upon the 
 surface of the sun, they neither mar the symmetry nor 
 impair the glory of the great Source of our life and light 
 which is imaged in them. ᾿ 
 il ee It would be a profitless task to discuss at 
 for meeting orice. length the objections which have been urged 
 Bab against distinct passages of the Gospels, for 
 it is always the penalty of controversy that the whole is 
 
THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 387 
 
 neglected for details; but it may be not without use to 
 indicate some general grounds for receiving with patience 
 accounts which we cannot entirely reconcile. Such gen- 
 eral considerations may lead us to wait for fuller knovwwl- 
 edge, not with doubt and misgiving, but with a sure 
 confidence in God’s eternal truth. 
 
 We have already noticed the error of those who contem- 
 plate the lite of Christ, as recorded by the 
 Evangelists, only outwardly, without regard- ΟΣ ἀπε spring 
 ing its spiritual significance. Hence it has ἐδ ταν tte 
 followed, that details, historically trivial, have 
 been deemed unfit subjects for the exercise of inspiration ; 
 and it has been argued, from the omission of a wide cycle 
 of facts by the Evangelists, that their narratives are vague 
 and incomplete. The first step to a right understanding 
 of the Gospels must be the abandonment of this point of 
 sight; we must regard them as designed to set forth the 
 progress of a divine work embodied in the life of the Son 
 of Man; we must compare them with the inward experi- 
 ence of Christians, and not with the annals of biographers} 
 we must read them to learn the details of our redemption, 
 and not to add some new facts to the chronicles of the 
 world. Before we pronounce any clause or word in the 
 Bible insignificant or needless, let us be assured that it con- 
 tains no “mystery,”? that it teaches the humble student no 
 new lesson in the knowledge of the world, or of man, or 
 of God. 
 
 A second source of objections to the Gospels follows 
 from the general disregard of their spiritual ) Pane 
 character. No attempt is made to realize ted onethn g 
 their individual purposes, as representing nat- 
 ural and fundamental differences in the conception of the 
 
 1 Orig. Philoc.c. i. Πρέπει τὰ ἅγια τῶν ἀπὸ πληρώματος." Kal οὐδέν 
 γράμματα πιστεύειν μηδεμίαν κεραίαν ἐστιν ἐν προφητείᾳ, ἢ νόμῳ, ἢ εὐαγ- 
 ἔχειν κενὴν σοφίας Θεοῦ... ἐκ yap γελίῳ, ἢ ἀποστόλῳ ὃ οὔκ ἐστιν ἀπὸ 
 τοῦ πληρώματος αὐτοῦ λαβόντες of πληρώματος. 
 προφῆται λέγουσι. ‘did πάντα πνεῖ 
 
388 THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 Life of Christ. If their individuality is asserted, it is as 
 the partial result of design, and not as the spontaneous 
 expression of a finite mind filled with the truth. To bor- 
 row an illustration from classical literature, the “ Memoirs” 
 of the Apostles are treated historically by a method which 
 no critic would apply to the “Memoirs” of Xenophon. 
 The scholar admits the truthfulness of the different pic- 
 tures of Socrates which were drawn by the philosopher, 
 the moralist, and the man of the world, and combines 
 them into one figure instinct with.a noble life, half hidden 
 and half revealed, as men viewed it from different points; 
 but he seems often to forget his art when he studies the 
 records of the Saviour’s work. Hence it is that superficial 
 differences are detached from the context which explains 
 them. It is urged as an objection that parallel narratives 
 are not identical. Variety of details is taken for discrep- 
 ancy. The evidence may be wanting which might har- 
 monize narratives apparently discordant; but experience 
 shows that it is as rash to deny the probability of recon- 
 ciliation as it is to fix the exact method by which it may 
 be made out. If, as a general rule, we can follow the law 
 which regulates the characteristic peculiarities of each 
 Evangelist, and see in what way they answer to different 
 aspects of one truth, and combine as complementary ele- 
 ments in the full representation of it,’ we may be well 
 contented to acquiesce in the existence of some difficulties 
 which at present admit of no exact solution, though they 
 may be a necessary consequence of that independence of 
 the Gospels which, in other cases, is the source of their 
 united power. 
 
 1 Orig. In Joann. Tom. x. 18. Ἐπίσ- 
 Tnoov δὲ ἐπιμελῶς, εἰ δυνατὸν ὡς τάς 
 γε ἐναλλαγὰς TOY γεγραμμένων καὶ 
 τὰς διαφωνίας διαλύεσϑαι παρὰ τὸν 
 τῆς ἀναγωγῆς τρόπον, ἑκάστου τῶν 
 Εὐαγγελιστῶν διαγράφοντος διαφόρους 
 τοῦ λόγου ἐνεργείας ἐν διαφόροις ἤδϑεσι 
 ψυχῶν οὐ τὰ αὐτὰ ἀλλά τινα παραπ- 
 λήσια ἐπιτελούσας. 
 
 The wisdom of 
 
 Origen’s principle is not shaken in any 
 degree by his own failure in applying 
 it. 
 
 2 Cf. Matt. viii. 5—10; Luke vii. 
 1—10. 
 
 Matt. xxvii. 5; Acts i.18. See Gaus- 
 sen, Theopneustia, p. 143( EH. Tr.), fora 
 curious parallel. 
 
 John. xix. 17; Luke xxiii. 26. See 
 
YHE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 389 
 
 The neglect of the spiritual object of the Gospels, by 
 which they are deprived of their proper 
 character, leads necessarily to the disregard ὦ fim. neg. 
 of their secondary character, as true narra- en ee: 
 tives of facts. Many recent critics have not 
 only reduced our Gospels to the level of ordinary writings, 
 but have then denied their special and independent author- 
 ity. They commonly admit a fact on the testimony of 
 Josephus, which they question if it rest on the statement 
 of St. Matthew or St. Luke.’ They do not concede those 
 privileges to the Evangelists which they yield to other his- 
 torians in accordance with the received rules of evidence; 
 and though it be said that the assumed inspiration of the 
 Gospels removes them to a fresh position, it is clear that, 
 in the interpretation of the outward text, they must be 
 subject to the just arbitration of criticism ; for the body is 
 obedient to the laws of matter, though informed by a liv- 
 ing spirit. We claim for the Gospels the strictest inter- 
 pretation of language. Let the test be applied universally, 
 and the apologist will gain as much as the interpreter. 
 As soon as we disbelieve in the force of words, similarity 
 is confounded with sameness ; differences are quoted as 
 contradictions ;* the general is asserted to be inconsistent 
 
 p. 825, n. 6, and Orig. Comm. in Matt. Matt. xiv. 15—21; xv. 32—88. Cf. 
 
 Tom. xii. § 24. xvi. 9, 10. 
 1 Matt. xiy. 3. Matt. xxvi. 6—13; Luke vii. 36—60. 
 Matt. xxiii. 35. Luke ix. 1 sqq.; X. 1 sqq. 
 Matt. xxvii. 51 sqq.; 62--66; xxviii. Jobn ii. 14—17; Matt. xxi, 12, 13. 
 11—15 (Strauss, iii. 4, § 133). John iy. 46—54; Luke vii. 1—10. 
 
 Luke iii. 1 (Strauss, ii. 1, § 44). 
 
 Luke xxiii. 45 (Strauss, iii. 4, § 133). 3 Matt. iii. 14; Johni. 81. Cf. p. 293, 
 There is no mention of an Eclipse, but n. 2. 
 of Darkness (σκότος ἐγένετο. Matt. Matt. xx. 29—84; Mark x. 46—52; 
 xxvii. 45; Mark xv. 33; Luke xxiii. Luke xviii. 85—48. Cf. Davidson’s 
 44). The objection is as old as the time Hermeneutics, p. 558. 
 
 of Origen, who answers it rightly: Matt. xxvii. 54; Luke xxiii. 47. 
 
 Comm. Ser. in Matt. § 184. Matt. xxvii. 87; Mark xv. 26; Luke 
 John i. 28; iii. 238; iv.5. Cf. xviii.l. xxiii. 38; John xix. 19 ( The inscription 
 2 Matt. ix. 82—34; xii. 22—380. on the Cross). Cf. p. 826, n. 4. 
 
 85 
 
390 THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 with the particular;! the connection of subject is taken for 
 a connection of time.” 
 It cannot be denied that the real origin of many, per- 
 haps of most of the objections to the Gos- 
 ee pels, lies deeper than textual criticism. The 
 objections to the record rest on a fundamen- 
 tal objection to the implied fact. An unexpressed denial 
 of the possibility of miracles is the foundation of detailed 
 assaults upon a miraculous narrative. Critical difficulties 
 are too often, in the first instance, the excuse for a foregone 
 conclusion, or at least fall in with a definite bias. A 
 charge of prejudice is alleged against the defenders of: the 
 Gospels, and it lies more truly against those who attack 
 them. The prevalence of a suspicion of all miraculous 
 history, of a willingness to accept any explanation which 
 may limit or modify its character, of a kind of satisfaction 
 in believing that we may plausibly doubt some part of it 
 and so question the whole, is far greater than we commonly 
 admit even to ourselves. No one probably is free from the 
 feeling; and it is well to consider how much of each difh- 
 culty is due to the nature of the fact, and how much to 
 the nature of the evidence by which it is attested; how 
 far it is a fair result of the text itself, and how far a nat- 
 ural consequence of the conception which the text contains. 
 Christianity is essentially miraculous. This is a postulate 
 of Biblical criticism; and it follows that miraculous cir- 
 cumstances are exactly in the same position in the Gospel 
 history as natural cireumstances in common history. If 
 the postulate be granted, the conclusion is inevitable; if 
 it be denied, argument is impossible. No external evi- 
 dence can produce faith. 
 
 1 Matt. xi. 2 sqq.; John i. 34; iii. 27. John v. 31; viii. 14. 
 
 Matt. xi. 14; Johni. 21. A suggestive instance occurs in Matt. 
 Matt. xxi. 88; Acts iii. 17; xiii. 27. xx. 20; Mark x. 25, when we compare 
 Matt. xxvi. 8; John xii. 4. Matt. xx. 22 with Mark x. 38 (οἴδατε). 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 69—75; Mark xiv. 66--72; Matt. xiv. 18; Luke ix. 10. 
 Luke xxii. 56—62; John xviii. 17, 18, 
 25—27 (The denials of St. Peter). Cf. 2 Matt. xxi. 19, 20; Mark xi. 20. 
 p- 801, n. Luke xxiy. 50; Acts i. 3. 
 
THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 391 
 
 Apart from narratives which involve this antagonism of 
 principle, it may be observed that even in 
 _those passages which present the greatest 
 difficulties there are traces of unrecorded 
 facts, which, if known fully, would probably explain the 
 whole;! further knowledge tends to remove, instead of 
 increasing, objections ; and few objections are admitted to 
 be of force by all adverse critics. The heritage of scepti- 
 cism is rather the settled spirit of doubt than the accumu- 
 lated store of arguments. Each antagonist of Christianity 
 thinks that the battle fails where he is not himself engaged. 
 Isolated and independent efforts are opposed to the gath- 
 ered strength which ages of faith have transmitted to the 
 Church. 
 
 It is, perhaps, the more necessary to insist on these 
 particulars, as much of the criticism at the 
 present day seems to assume that there is 
 some resting-place between the perfect truth- 
 fulness of inspiration and the uncertainty of 
 ordinary writing. A subjective standard is erected, which, 
 if once admitted, will be used as much to measure the 
 doctrines as the facts of Scripture; and, while many spec- 
 ulators boldly avow this, others are contented to admit 
 the premises from which the conclusion necessarily follows. 
 But, within the Church, criticism is the interpreter and 
 assessor, and not the sole and final judge. The same Spirit 
 which gave the Revelation, for the establishment of the 
 outward society, will unfold its meaning, but not supersede 
 its use. The Spirit and the Word work together, and not 
 apart. To claim a distinct personal enlightenment, inde- 
 pendent of a written Word, is to violate the highest attri- 
 
 The gravest 
 objection® are un- 
 certain. 
 
 Importance of 
 feeling the literal 
 truthfulness a 
 Scripture : 
 
 1 Luke ii. 2, αὕτη ἢ ἀπογραφὴ 
 πρώτη ἐγένετο, kK. τ. A. The force 
 of the objection lies in the neglect of 
 the word πρώτη, which seems to refer 
 tosome other “ taxing,” with which we 
 are unacquainted (1851). Cf. p. 318, n. 2. 
 
 Mark ii. 26, ἐπὶ "ABiadap τοῦ ἀρ- 
 
 χιερέως" not ἐπὶ ᾿Αβιάϑαρ ἀρχιερέων 
 (Luke iii.2. Cf. Herod. i. 15, 56, 65, 94). 
 John xix. 14; Mark xv. 25. Cf. 
 Townson, Dissert. Ψ 111. 1, § 2. 
 We see the importance of this minute 
 criticism in Mark xi. 18, ἔχουσαν 
 φύλλα. 
 
592 THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 
 bute of man — his social dependence. To convert the writ- 
 ten Word into a rigid code of formal teaching, indepen- 
 dent.of the abiding presence of the Spirit who draws from 
 it lessons for each age, is to destroy the idea of a Church 
 —that “Communion of Saints” which realizes in life the 
 historic verities of Christianity. Both feelings alike, though 
 in different ways, spring out of that tendency of our age 
 which would obliterate the name of government and the 
 claims of national life. 
 
 Still we must not seek, by an excess of zeal, to limit the 
 narratives of Scripture to any mechanical 
 
 even when we can- 
 not prove it. 
 
 arrangement; they are diving oracles, whose 
 vitality consists in their integrity. It is 
 enough for us to refute the conclusions of our adversaries, 
 without imitating their subtleties. The great marks of the 
 divinity of the Gospels are written on every page and 
 included in every word. Their perfect adaptation to our 
 wants is proved by the witness of our own hearts, not 
 because we can discover truth, but because, by God’s help, 
 we can recognize it; and it is equally unwise 
 and unchristian to mar our glorious heritage 
 in the pursuit of a faithless knowledge, to impair its ful- 
 ness, or abridge its scope, because our own reason, or that 
 of others, is too proud to bow before the wondrous works 
 and miracles consequent on the perfection 
 and reality of a God manifest in the flesh. 
 Surely here, if anywhere, it befits our weak- 
 ness “to be thankful, and to wait.”?! 
 
 But, while either extreme of indifferentism 
 and formal harmonization is alike hurtful, — 
 for by the one we are apt to destroy our sense 
 of moral beauty, and by the other our regard for moral 
 
 Acts vii. 38. 
 
 Hebr. xi. 1. 
 
 ᾿. 7 χε τῆῆς 16; 
 (ΘΣ or ΟΣ). 
 
 The relation of 
 Faith to Reason 
 in Scripture. 
 
 1Cf. Orig. Philoc. ο. 1. ᾿Ασφαλὲς νοις αἰωνίοις σεσιγημένου, φανερωϑ έν- 
 
 οὖν τὸ περιμένειν τὴν ἑρμηνείαν τοῦ 
 σαφηνιστοῦ λόγου, καὶ τῆς ἐν μυστη- 
 ρίῳ σοφίας ἀποκεκρυμμένης, ἣν οὐδεὶς 
 τῶν ἀρχόντων τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου ἔγ- 
 νωκε κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν μυστηρίον χρό- 
 
 τος τοῖς ἀποστόλοις καὶ τοῖς ἐκείνοις 
 παραπλησίοις διά τε γραφῶν προφητι- 
 κῶν, καὶ τῆς γενομένης εἰς αὐτοὺς 
 ἐπιφανείας τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν λόγου 
 τοῦ ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν δεόν. 
 
THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 393 
 
 truth, — we are not to decline, with some, the labors of a 
 searching criticism, or, with others, the veneration of the 
 humblest faith; for it is only by the combination of 
 these that the deepest meaning of Holy Scripture is laid 
 open. Reason and faith are not antagonistic principles, 
 but another form of the great antithesis which lies at the 
 basis of all our knowledge. By the one we discover the 
 human form, and by the other the spiritual basis of 
 revealed truth. Reason gives us the laws which limit our 
 human conceptions, as made in time and space, and Faith 
 gives us those absolute ideas of spiritual things which rea- 
 son embodies. The one answers to the human, and the 
 other to the divine, in our nature; and both alike are 
 addressed by the Word of God, and consecrated to the 
 Christian’s use, 
 
 From this view of our constitution we may see that the 
 very existence of difficulties in our Gospels fied * 
 
 1. Difficulties are 
 
 —which are the groundwork of our faith — — wefut Intellectu- 
 is a fresh incentive to vigorous and rational τα 
 study. There is a noble remark of Origen,! which is true 
 in a moral sense, and perhaps even literally, that “the 
 Divine Word ordered some stumbling-blocks and stones 
 of offence in the sacred records, that we might not be led 
 away by the unalloyed attractiveness of the narration, and 
 seek for nothing more divine.” We feel assured that the 
 Scriptures contain infinite depths, from our sense of the 
 general dealings of Providence and of the wants of the 
 Church; and the subtlest criticism discovers enough to 
 encourage us to dedicate every energy to the investigation 
 of their mysteries. If there were no need for rigorous 
 criticism, no reward for acute philology, no scope for phil- 
 osophical inquiry, in the study of the Bible, —if the text 
 were uniform, the diction simple, and the connection 
 
 1 Philoc. i. 15, ὠκονόμησέ τινα οἱονεὶ ἵνα wh πάντη ὑπὸ τῆς λέξεως ἑλκόμε- 
 σκάνδαλα καὶ προσκόμματα καὶ ἀδύ- νοι τὸ ἄγωγον ἄκρατον ἐχούσης... 
 vata, διὰ μέσου ἔγκαταταχϑῆναι τῷ μηδὲν ϑειότερον μάϑωμεν. 
 γόμῳ καὶ τῇ ἱστορίᾳ ὃ τοῦ Θεοῦ λόγος" 
 
994 THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 obvious, — we might neglect the consecration of our entire 
 faculties to divine ends;! while, as it is, we find in the 
 human form, and the natural transmission of the sacred 
 volume, the noblest field for our labors. If it be said that 
 these subtleties are only for the scholar, the answer is 
 obvious, that so are the objections to which they corre- 
 spond. The Bible appeals to all as they are; no one occu- 
 pies a position of superiority. The difficulties of Scripture 
 are useful intellectually.’ 
 
 But, again, we must remember that all revelation is 
 given to us as in a state of probation,’ and 
 that not only in reference to a part of our 
 nature, but to the whole. We are subjected to a mental 
 as well as to moral trial, or, rather, morality is extended to 
 reason as well as to life; and we might expect that Scrip- 
 ture should furnish us with a proper training for both. 
 “ Believe, and then thou shalt find beneath 
 the imaginary offence a full source of profit,” 
 was a saying of Origen’s, never more truly applicable than 
 in an age of unexampled restlessness. The outward 
 moral temptation is now, perhaps, less formidable than 
 heretofore, from the form of our civilization, while the in- 
 ward struggle waxes fiercer and fiercer, as men seek not so 
 much to live freely as to know fully, forgetting too often 
 that love is the source of wisdom ;‘ for “the chasms (and 
 discrepancies) in the divine history afford room for the 
 exercise of faith —a faith whose root is to be found, not in 
 science, not in demonstration, but in simple and self-sub- 
 duing submission of our spirits.”® The difficulties of 
 Scripture are useful morally. 
 
 Origen® will still furnish us with another remark: the 
 
 2. Morally. 
 
 Philoc. i. 23. 
 
 1 Arist. Hth. N. vi. 12. refer to Pascal’s notes, Vol. ii. pp. 205, 
 2 Among the notes for Pascal’s great 265. 
 Apology is the following: ‘‘ Plusieurs 4 ((ΤΊ faut aimer les choses divines 
 
 Evangélistes pour la confirmation de pour Jes connaitre.’? — Pascal. 
 la vérité. Leur dissemblance utile.” 5 Neander, Life of Christ, Introd. 
 (Ed. Faugé-e, ii. p. 371). 6 De Princip. iv. p. 168 (i. § 7), ὥσπερ 
 
 3 In addition to Butler, we may ov χρεωκοπεῖται 7 πρόνοια διὰ τὰ μὰ 
 
THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 395 
 
 difficulties of the revelation in the Bible are strictly anal- 
 ogous to those of the revelation in nature. 
 
 “In both we see a self-concealing, self-reveal- ΙΝ 
 ing God, who makes Himself known only to 
 
 those who earnestly seek Him; in both we find stimulants 
 to faith, and occasions for unbelief.” There are apparent 
 anomalies in the phenomena of the material world, but 
 their general uniformity teaches us that these are only dis- 
 crepancies in appearance. There are difficulties in apply- 
 ing the great doctrine of gravitation, — as in the case of 
 the tides,— but we feel that they arise not from any want 
 of universality in the law, but from our ignorance of the 
 conditions of the problem. There are also difficulties in 
 Scripture; and shall we not rest assured, from that Divine 
 wisdom which we can discern, that they spring only from 
 our ignorance of the circumstances on which the question 
 turns? If the Gospels had presented no formal offences, 
 how soon should we have heard objections drawn from the 
 general course of God’s dealings! How readily should we 
 have been reminded of the plausibility of human forgeries, 
 and of the mystery of Divine Providence! It would have 
 been even said,’ that the advance of Christianity — which 
 must be folly to the Greek — was due to the 
 beauty of its external form, and the perfec- 
 tion of its superficial smoothness, and not to the power of 
 its inner truth: whereas, at present, the discrepancies of 
 Scripture lead us back to the Author of nature; and as 
 we do not question His eternal Presence, though many 
 details of His operation transcend our knowledge, so 
 neither need we doubt the perfect inspiration 
 of the Scriptures, though frequently we may 
 be unable to recognize the treasure of God in the earthly 
 
 1 Cor..t. 23. 
 
 2 Cor. iv. 7. 
 
 γινωσκόμενα Tapa τοῖς γ᾽ ἅπαξ mapa- παρίστασϑαι TH κεκρυμμένῃ λαμπρό. 
 δεξαμένοις αὐτὴν καλῶς, οὕτως οὐδὲ THTL τῶν δογμάτων ἐν εὐτελεῖ Kal 
 ἡ τῆς γραφῆς ϑειότης διατείνουσα εἰς εὐκαταφρονήτῳ λέξει ἀποκειμένῃ. 
 πᾶσαν αὐτὴν, διὰ τὸ μὴ KAY ἑκάστην 1 Neander, 2. c. 
 
 λέξιν δύνασϑαι τὴν ἀσϑένειαν ἡμῶν δ Origen, Philoc. 1v. 
 
390 THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 
 
 vessels which contain it. The difficulties of Scripture are | 
 useful as unfolding the true analogy of God’s works. 
 
 But “not to rest in this school of nature,” we must 
 remember, in the midst of the doubts and _ perplexities 
 which so easily beset us, that at present we 
 know but in part the facts and the bearings 
 of revelation. Dim views of a wider scope and a more 
 perfect wisdom are ever opened before us. Faith looks 
 forwards as well as inwards; and even now we see enough 
 whereon to rest securely the firm foundations of our hope, 
 possessing our souls in peace, till that which is in part 
 shall be done away,— til the glorious buildings of the 
 New Jerusalem and its heavenly splendors shall be fully 
 disclosed, whereof at present we can but discern, amid the 
 mists of earth, wondrous pillars and buttresses, or through 
 some dim window the distant rays of that 
 glorious Sun—even the Lamb of God— 
 which shall at one time illumine the Holy City. 
 
 1 Οὐογ. αἰϊῖ. 9. 
 
 Rev. xxi. 95. 
 
 TENHOHTQ HMIN KATA THN ΠΙΟΤῚΝ HMQN KAO HN KAI 
 IIICTEYOMEN OTI TIACA TPA®H OE€OIINEYCTOC OYCA KAI 
 QbvEAIMOC ECTI, —ORIGENEs. 
 
APPENDICES. 
 
APPENDICES. 
 
 APPENDIX A. 
 
 ON THE QUOTATIONS IN THE GOSPELS. 
 
 Οὐδέποτε οὕτως ἐλάλησεν ἄνϑρωπο. ---- JoUN VII. 46 
 
 Tue quotations made from the Old Testament by our Lord and His 
 disciples, give us, perhaps, the truest and most decisive Tid: eapitaon 
 view of the inspiration of the Bible; for no one, Isup- of the Old Testa- 
 pose, will refuse that authority to the Gospels and Epis- eT a τος 
 tles which is assured to the Law and the Prophets. The 
 Christian Councils must have had the same authority and guidance in 
 deciding on the Canon of the new Scriptures as was enjoyed by the Jewish 
 Church, nor can we believe that less grace was given to those who por- 
 trayed the substance of the Gospel than to those who saw its shadow ; for 
 the only alternative is to deny the need of an outward society and a divine 
 Word for the fulfilment of the second dispensation. It will be seen from 
 the following passages, taken from the books of Moses, the Psalms, and 
 the Prophets, that a spiritual significance lies beneath the Bible as a whole ; 
 that its power and usefulness is not confined to striking predictions or defi- 
 nite precepts, but spread over simple historic details, and involved in the 
 records of individual life. We may conclude this, — 
 
 I. From the mode in which our Lord appeals to Scripture as decisive : 
 (a) In direct precepts : And thatis proved 
 Matt. iv. 4, 7,10; Cf. Luke iv. 4,8,12 1. Bythe quotations 
 (γέγραπται" εἴρηται" Deut. vi. 13, 16 ; i fas εν δον 
 viii. 3). Matt. ix. 13; xii. 7 (Hos. vi. 11). 
 Matt. xv. 4 (6 Θεὸς εἶπεν) Mark vii. 10 (Μωῦσῆς εἶπεν, Ex. 
 xx. 12). Cf. Matt. xxii. 36, 38; Matt. xviii. 16. 
 Cf. Deut. xix. 15. 
 (Ὁ) In distinct prophecies : 
 Matt. xi. 10 (οὗτός ἐστιν περὶ οὗ γέγραπται, Mal. iii. 1). 
 Matt. xxiv.15. Mark xiii. 14 (τὸ ῥηδϑὲν ὑπὸ Δανιὴλ τοῦ 
 ap. Dan. ix. 27; xii. 11). 
 Matt. xxvi. 54 (πῶς οὖν πληρωθῶσιν αἱ γραφαί, ὅτι οὕτω dei 
 γενέσδϑαι; Cf. ν. 56). 
 Luke vii. 27. Matt. xi. 10 (περὶ οὗ γέγραπται. Mal. iii. 2). 
 Luke xxii. 37 (τὸ γεγραμμένον δεῖ TEAC TARY at ἐν ἐμοί" 
 Isa. lili. 12). 
 
400 ON THE QUOTATIONS IN THE GOSPELS. 
 
 And significant : 
 (c) In its secondary application : 
 
 Matt. x. 35 (Mic. vii.6). Matt. xii. 5 (οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε" Num. 
 xxvii. 9ὴ- 
 
 Matt. xiii. 14, 15 (ἀναπληροῦται αὐτοῖς ἢ προφητεία' 
 Isa. vi. 9, 11). 
 
 Matt. xv. 8, 9 (προεφήτευσεν ‘Ho. Isa. xxix. 13). 
 
 Matt. xxi. 15. Mark xi.17. Luke xix, 46 {γέγραπται" 
 Isa. lvi. 7). 
 
 Matt. xxi. 16 (οὐδέποτε ἀνέγνωτε ; Ps. viii. 2). 
 
 Matt. xxi. 42 (οὐδέποτε ἀνέγνωτε ἐν ταῖς γραφαῖς) ; Mark 
 
 xi. 10 (ἡ γραφὴ αὕτη) ; Luke xx. 17 (τὸ γεγραμμέ- 
 
 νον τοῦτο" Ps. cxviii. 22, 23). 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 31 (γέγραπται: Zech. xiii. 7). 
 
 John vi. 45 (yeyp. ἐν τοῖς προφήταις᾽ Isa. liv. 13). 
 
 John xiii. 18 (7 γραφή: Ps. xli. 9). 
 
 John xv. 25 (ὃ λόγος 6 γεγραμμένος ἐν τῷ νόμῳ αὐτῶν’ Ps. 
 sox Vel 9): 
 
 (d) In its spiritual depth: 
 
 Matt. xii. 40 (John ii. 1). Matt. xix. 4, 5 (οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε) ; 
 Mark x. 6. Gen. i. 27; ii. 24. 
 
 Matt. xxii. 32 (τὸ ῥδηϑδὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ); Mark xii. 26 
 (οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε ws εἶπεν ὁ Θεός) ; Luke xx. 37 (Ma@i- 
 σ ἢ ἐμήνυσεν Ex, ill. 6, 16). 
 
 Matt. xxii. 43, 44 (Δανεὶδ ἐν πνεύματι); Mark xii. 36 
 (A. ἐν my. ἁγίῳ); Luke xx. 41 (Aaveld λέγει’ Ps. 
 Cx): 
 
 Matt. xxvii. 46; Mark xv. 34. Cf. Ps. xxii. 2. 
 
 Mark ix. 49.' 
 
 John x. 34 (yeyp. ἐν τῷ νόμῳ ὑμῶν. Ps. 1xxxii. 6).? 
 
 From these passages it will be seen that we must either accept the doc- 
 érine of a plenary inspiration, as we have already explained the phrase, or 
 deny the veracity of the Evangelists. If our Lord’s words are accurately 
 recorded, or even if their general tenor is expressed in one of the Gospels, 
 the Bible is indeed the “‘ Word of God,” in the fullest spiritual sense ; for 
 no scheme of accommodation cai be accepted where it tends to lead men 
 astray as to the sources of divine help. 
 
 II. The doctrine which we have seen to be implied in the language of 
 
 ti By ea. Oe Lord is yet more fully unfolded by the Apostles and 
 tions of the Evan- Evangelists. It will be enough for our present purpose 
 ΠΩΣ to give a general table of the citations in the Gospels : 
 
 1 Cf. Olshausen, Comm. S. 555 if. (Origen, Philoc. 1. § 10); xvi. 29, 31; 
 2Cf. Matt xxvii. 46; Luke xi. 52 John v. 39, 46; vii. 38. 
 
ON THE QUOTATIONS IN THE GOSPELS. 401 
 
 (a) Distinct prophecies : 
 Matt. ii. 6 (γέγραπται: Mic. v. 2). 
 Matt. iv. 15, 16 (ἵνα πληρωδϑῇ τὸ ῥηϑὲν διὰ τοῦ wp. Isa. 
 i, 4, 2). 
 Matt. xii. 17-21 (ὅπως πληρωδῇ τὸ ῥηϑέν" Isa. vi. 1-4). 
 Matt. xxi. 5 (ἵνα πληρωδῇ τὸ ῥηδέν" Zech.ix. 9); John xii 
 15 (καϑώς ἐστιν γεγραμμένον). 
 
 (Ὁ) Typical acts and words fulfilled in the Gospel history : 
 
 Matt. i. 22 (ὅλον γέγονεν ἵνα πληρωδῇ τὸ ῥηϑὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ 
 Κυρίου διὰ τοῦ mp. Isa. vii. 14). 
 
 Matt. ii. 15 (a πληρωδῇ τὸ ῥηδὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ Κυρίου διὰ τοῦ 
 mp. Hos. xi. 1). 
 
 Matt. ii. 18 (τότε ἐπληρώϑη τὸ ῥ. διὰ τοῦ mp. Jer. XxXi. 
 15). 
 
 Matt. ii. 23 (ὅπως πληρωδνῇ τὸ ῥ. διὰ τῶν προφητῶν). 
 
 [ Matt. iii. 3. Mark 1. 8. Luke iii. 4. John i. 23.] 
 
 Matt. viii. 17 (ὅπως mAnpwd7. Isa. liii. 4). 
 
 Matt. xili, 35 (ὅπως TA. τὸ ῥηδὲν διὰ τοῦ mp. Ps. |xxviii. 2). 
 
 Matt. xxvii. 9, 10 (τότε ἐπληρώϑη τὸ ῥ. [Zech.] xi. 12, 13). 
 
 John ii. 17 (yeyp. ἐστίν" Ps. xix. 9). 
 
 John xii. 38-41 (οὐκ ἠδύναντο πιστεύειν ὅτι εἶπεν Ἧσ...... 
 ἵνα πληρωδῇ 6 λόγος Ἣσ...ταῦτα εἶπεν ‘Ho. ὅτε εἶδεν τὴν 
 δόξαν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐλάλησε περὶ αὐτοῦ; Isa. liii. 1; vi. 
 9, 10). 
 
 John xix. 24 (ἵνα ἣ γραφὴ πλερωϑῇ ἣ Aey. Ps. xxii. 18. 
 Cf. Matt. xxvii. 35). 
 
 John xix. 36 (iva ἣ yp. TA. Ex. xxii. 46; γραφὴ λέγει' 
 Zech. xii. 10). 
 
 It may be worth while to enumerate some general conclusions to which 
 this enumeration leads : 
 
 1. There appears to be a distinct meaning in the dif- Piggies ati 
 ferent modes of quotation. Surenhusius' has made a 
 valuable collection of the formulz in use among the Rabbins, which may 
 be compared with the Greek phrases ; but the discussion of this question 
 would necessarily lead us beyond the Gospels. 
 
 2. The usage of the Evangelists shows that they did not introduce the 
 quotations into the speeches of Jesus. For while St. Mark and St. Luke 
 do not quote the prophets in their own narratives, they agree exactly with 
 St Matthew in their records of our Lord’s teaching. 
 
 3. The authority of Christ himself and of his Apostles encourages us 
 to search for a deep and spiritual meaning under the ordinary words of 
 Scripture, which, however, cannot be gained by any arbitrary allegorizing, 
 but only by following out patiently the course of God’s dealings with 
 
 1 In his Βίβλος καταλλαγῆς. Cf supr. p. 58, n. 
 34* 
 
402 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 man.! ‘There are traces even in the Old Testament of the recognition of 
 this fulness of the written Word.? Such a belicf ties at the basis of the 
 arguments of St. Paul? and of the Epistle to the Hebrews ;+ and we shall 
 find that it was ratified for at least three centuries by the common consent 
 of the Church. 
 
 AP PE PP TX sb. 
 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 70 Τιμόϑεε, Thy παραϑδήκην φύλαξον, ἐκτρεπόμενος τὰς βεβήλους κενσφω- 
 vias, καὶ ἂντιϑέσεις THS ψευδωνύμου γνώσεως" Hv τινες ἐπαγγελλόμενοι, περὶ 
 τὴν πίστιν ἠστόχησαν. --- 1 TIM. VI. 20. 
 
 In the present Appendix I shall endeavor to collect, as far as possible, 
 all the chief opinions of the Fathers of the first three centuries on the 
 nature of Inspiration. We may be inclined to judge some of their state- 
 ments fanciful or unsound, but still it cannot be a profitless task to learn 
 what they thought of our Bible, who found in its teaching a support in 
 martyrdom; it cannot be unworthy of the most advanced Christian to 
 treasure up the sayings of those who lived while an apostolic tradition 
 still lingered among the disciples of St. John, St. Peter, and St. Mark. 
 
 In the course of our inquiry we shall meet with men who regarded our 
 religion from the most opposite points of view. We shall hear the testi- 
 monies of the converted Jew, the awakened heathen, and the hereditary 
 Christian — of those who found in the faith of Christ the fulfilment of 
 ancient promises or early hopes, and of others who were driven to embrace 
 it by the pressure of their own wants, after they had gone through the 
 circle of philosophy. Yet more, we shall be obliged to recognize the 
 various influences of Eastern and Western life. Palestine and Assyria, 
 Antioch and Alexandria, — the seats of divergent systems of criticism and 
 theology, —contributed to fill the ranks of Christian writers, and furnished 
 words to express their new ideas. The voice of Christianity comes to us 
 from Athens and Carthage, from Rome and Lyons. All these points 
 
 1 Those who wish to pursue this ques- 
 tion further in, relation to modern 
 opinions, will do well to study Olshau- 
 sen’s beautiful tract, Lin Wort wber 
 tiefern Schriftsinn. 
 
 2 Olshausen, § 7; the passages in the 
 Apocrypha are given in § 8. 
 
 ΘΟΕ Core ΞΘ 18: 2 ΘΌΥ 11]. 7: 
 8 (Cf. Orig. in Joan. Tom. xxx1t. § 17); 
 
 Gal. iv. 21-81; Eph. v. 29-32 (Gen. ii. 
 24); Col. ii. 17. 
 
 4 The whole argument of the Epistle 
 depends on the reality of the spiritual 
 meaning of the Old Testament. Cf. 
 Heb. iv. 5,7; v. 5-12; vii.-x.; xii. 1, 
 
 In the Apocalypse also we find the 
 same deep symbolism. Cf. xxi. 10 
 oi a © 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 403 
 
 must be carefully remembered if we wish to form an adequate idea of the 
 real purport and true unity of the teaching of the Church. For in pro- 
 portion as their differences of country, education, and temperament are 
 greater, so much the more striking is the essential agreement of the early 
 Fathers in points of faith and feeling ; and if we can trace, under various 
 forms, one great idea of inspiration in the scattered societies of ancient 
 Christendom — if we can find it incorporated into distinct systems and 
 acknowledged by the most incongruous minds —if the universal consent 
 of antiquity lead us to Scripture for the groundwork of our creed — we 
 shall surely acknowledge that tradition has done for us a noble and neces- 
 sary work, by maintaining an inspired Bible, a definite canon, and a 
 general method of interpretation. 
 
 For the sake of simplicity"it will be best to follow the common arrange- 
 ment of Church histories, and examine in succession the subapostolic 
 Fathers (ὁ 1); the Apologists (§ 2) ; the Fathers of Asia Minor (§3); North 
 Africa (ἢ 4); Rome (ᾧ 5); Alexandria (δ 6); and the Clementines (§ 7). 
 
 SECT. I.— THE SUBAPOSTOLIC FATHERS. 
 
 Οὔτε yap ἐγὼ οὔτε ἄλλος ὅμοιος ἐμοὶ δύναται κατακολουϑῆσαι τῇ σοφίᾳ 
 τοῦ μακαρίου καὶ ἐνδόξου Παύλου. --- ΡΟΙΥΘΑΠΡ. 
 
 1. From the nature of the subapostolic writings all allusions to Inspi- 
 ration are incidental. ‘The first literature of a Church is 
 rather practical than doctrinal, and we must endeavor to 
 discover the teaching which it involves, rather than merely that which it 
 expresses. Thus Barnabas uses such phrases as the 
 following, when quoting Scripture: “The Lord saith 
 in the prophet” (Ps. xvii. 45); “The Spirit of the Lord prophesieth” 
 (Ps. xxxiii. 13). Again, he tells us that “the prophets § 5. 
 received their gift from Christ and spake of Him,” and § 10. 
 that “Moses spake in the Spirit.’ Consistently with See 
 this view, he asserts the presence of a spiritual meaning in the Law and 
 History of the Jews,! and discovers types of the Cross in the ancient 
 Scriptures (Exod. xvii. 18, sqq.; Isai. Ixv. 2; Num. 
 
 Ξ : 4 § 14. 
 xxi. 9). The number of those circumcised by Abra- § 9. 
 ham (318, in Greek ti7) represents, he says, at once the 
 name of Jesus (IH) and the figure of the Cross (T). Than this there is 
 no truer (yvnoiwrepos) word. But such knowledge was 
 hidden in old time: “we have gained the right sense of ee 
 the commandments, and speak as the Lord wished.” 
 We are, as it were, a new creation. The first tables of the Covenant 
 
 1. BARNABAS. 
 
 Ep. § 9. 
 
 1 Rosenmiiller (Hist. Interpr. 1. 65 tween the interpretations of Barnabas 
 sqq-) has drawn a striking parallel be- and Philo. 
 
404 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 which Moses brake because of the unworthiness of the people have been 
 given to us by the Lord. ‘In us God truly dwells, that 
 is, the Word of His faith (6 λόγος αὐτοῦ τῆς πίστεως), 
 the calling of His promise, the wisdom of His ordinances, the command- 
 ments of His teaching, Himself prophesying in us, Himself dwelling in us ; 
 by opening for us who were enslaved by death the doors of the temple, — 
 even our mouth, —and by giving us repentance, He brought us into the 
 incorruptible temple |7. e., made us true temples of God]. He, then, that 
 longeth to be saved, looketh not to man, but to Him 
 that dwelleth in him and speaketh in him. .. . And 
 one rule of those who walk on ‘the way of light’ is: 
 
 ‘Thou shalt guard what thou hast received, neither adding nor taking 
 2.2) 
 
 § 16. 
 
 819. Cf. Rev. 
 eee 18, τῶν 
 
 away from it 
 2. Clement of Rome quotes many passages from Scripture with the 
 words: ‘‘for the Scripture saith;” “by the testimony 
 
 9 NS fi 5 . ea . 
 gee Sot Scripture ;” “the Holy Spirit saith.” He exhorts 
 
 Ep. i. 23, 84. 
 
 i. 18, 16. his readers to ‘‘look carefully (ἐγ[κύπτετε εἰς) into the 
 os ad Γ Scriptures, which are the true [utterances] of the Holy 
 i. 45. Spirit.’ Again, he says: ‘‘ Ye-know, beloved, ye know 
 7. 55. 
 
 well the sacred Scriptures, and have looked carefully into 
 the oracles (τὰ λόγια) of [God] ;” and “ the spirit of low- 
 liness and awe (τὸ ὑποδεὲς) through obedience, not only improveth us, but 
 also improved the generations before us, even those (unless we probably 
 read καταδεξομένους with Davis) who received His oracles in fear and 
 truth.” In another place he speaks of “the ministers of 
 the grace of God [the prophets of the Old Testament], 
 who by the Holy Ghost spake of repentance.” But the greatest effusion of 
 the Spirit was reserved for the Christian Church, when our Lord sent forth 
 his Apostles, even as He was sent by the Father, to preach the kingdom 
 of God “with the full assurance and measure of the 
 Holy Spirit (μετὰ πληροφορίας πνεύματος ἁγίου), when 
 they had received the promises, and been fully convinced (πληροφο- 
 ensevtes) by the Resurrection, and confirmed in the word of God” 
 (πιστωϑέντες ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ Ocod); of whose number 
 “the blessed Paul, at the beginning of the Gospel, in very 
 truth wrote by inspiration ”’ (πνευματικῶς, divinitus inspiratus. Vet. Int.) 
 to the Corinthians. 
 Again, the epistle of Clement abounds in Old Testament illustrations. 
 He traces in the men of old time the results of envy, and 
 
 Polos 
 
 ἢ, Ὁ: 8, 
 
 ἃ. 42. 
 
 i. 47. 
 
 i. 4,917. ae ς 
 the blessings of faith, obedience, and humility. He 
 . Ἷ recognizes, moreover, the lasting import of the recorded 
 
 history, and the significance of the most minute details. 
 The scarlet thread which Rahab hung out of the window was “to show 
 that a redemption (λύτρωσις) should be made by the blood of the Lord 
 
 1 Compare the remarkable passage, Ephes. ii. 12. 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINI 405 
 
 “~ 
 
 OF INSPIRATION, 
 
 for all who believe and hope upon God.” The use as well as the lan- 
 guage of Clement proye in what account he held “ the aaa 
 Word of God.” pi 
 
 3. The short and affecting epistle of Polycarp contains little which 
 illustrates our subject, though he tells us, with touching 
 humility, that ‘neither he nor any like him is able to 
 attain perfectly (κατακολουσῆσαι) to the wisdom of the 
 blessed and glorious Paul” (contrast 2 Pet. iii. 15, 16), and seems for 
 once to burn with the zeal of his master when he declares that ‘he is the 
 first-born of Satan whoever perverts the oracles of the 
 Lord to suit his own passions, and says that there is 
 neither resurrection nor judgment.” The last quotation is valuable, for, 
 when compared with the passages of Clement cited before, it proves that 
 the same term (τὰ λόγια) was used in quoting the old and new Scriptures. 
 Again, Polycarp writes ‘‘that he trusts his hearers are well versed in the 
 
 8. POLYCARP. 
 
 C. ὁ. 
 
 ἃ. 
 
 sacred writings (in sacris litteris),”’ alleging at the same 
 
 time Psalm iv. 4; Ephes. iv. 26. 
 
 Indeed, the words and 
 
 ΣΤΟΝ 
 
 spirit of the New Testament seem to be inwrought into his mind; for 
 though he only once mentions the name of the sacred 
 
 writer whom he quotes, there appear to be in his short 
 
 ce. 11 (Paul). 
 
 epistle more than twenty distinct references to the Apostolic books.' 
 4. The transition from Polycarp to Ignatius is very striking, whichever 
 
 recension of the Ignatian letters we may be inclined to 
 We read in one passage that the writer “ trusts 
 to attain to that lot to which he has been mercifully 
 
 adopt.’ 
 
 4. IGNATIUS. 
 Lp. ad 
 Philad. 5. 
 
 called, having fled to the Gospel? as to the flesh of Jesus, and to the 
 
 Apostles as to the Presbytery of the Church ;” and “ yet 
 more,” he adds, ‘‘let us love the prophets, because they 
 
 ad Magn. 8. 
 
 were the heralds of the Gospel (κατηγγελκέναι eis...) ... and by belief 
 
 1 Fevardentius, in his notes on Ire- 
 nzus (111. 8, p. 118, App. Ed. Benedic.), 
 quotes some questionable fragments 
 from a MS. Catena on the Gospels, pur- 
 porting to be the versions of some 
 chapters of the Responsions of Poly- 
 carp, Bishop of Smyrna, made by Vic- 
 tor of Capua (c. 480). Their character 
 will be seen from the following quo- 
 tations: Matt. xix.5, ‘* Deus vero qui 
 per inspirationem divinam in corde 
 Adam ἰδία verba formavit ipse Pater a 
 Domino recte locutus fuisse refertur; 
 nam et Adam hane prophetiam protulit, 
 et Vater qui eum inspiravit recte dicitur 
 protulisse.” ‘‘* Rationabiliter Evan- 
 geliste principiis diversis utuntur 
 
 quamvis una ecademque Evangelizandi 
 eorum probatur ratio; . cure 
 fuit eo uti proemio quod unusquisque 
 judicabat auditoribus expetere.”’ Surely 
 this is not the language of the apostolic 
 age. 
 
 2 There are, apparently, only half as 
 many references to Scripture in the 
 shorter recensions of the Epistles as in 
 the remains of Polycarp, though in 
 bulk the former are, perhaps, ten times 
 as great as the latter. 
 
 3 In opposition to Hefeie and Nie- 
 meyer, I can only understand these 
 words of written histories and epistles 
 according to the context and the gener- 
 al usage of the words. Cf. Ussher, 1. ὁ. 
 
406 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 in it were saved ;” “for the divinest (ϑειότατοι) Prophets lived according 
 to Jesus Christ..... being inspired (ἐμπνεόμενοι) by 
 His grace;”.... “He was the subject of their preach- 
 ing, and the Gospel is the perfection of immortality 
 (ἀπάρτισμα apdapoias).” 
 
 In one place Ignatius seems to claim for himself a direct communication 
 from heaven: “TI call you to witness that 1 knew tunis 
 not from man (σαρκὸς avSpwrivys), but the Spirit pro- 
 claimed, saying, Do nothing without your bishop; keep your flesh as a 
 
 be renee temple of God;.... be ye imitators of Jesus even as 
 
 (So Syr.) He was of His Father ;” yet again he disclaims the per- 
 
 a5 ibs : sonal possession of this higher knowledge, which was 
 
 τὰ reserved for the time ‘‘ when he received the pure light” 
 by death, and so became “ἃ man of God.” ‘Ido not give you injunc- 
 tions (Siatdocoua),”’ he says, “as Peter and Paul: they 
 were Apostles, I a condemned man.”. ... The Christian 
 “who possesses the Word of Jesus is truly able to hear even His silence, 
 that he may be perfect; that in what he speaks he may 
 act, and in what he is silent his character may be known; ” 
 “the bishops” “too are in the mind (ἐν τῇ γνώμῃ εἰσιν) of Jesus, as 
 Jesus is the mind of His Father.” 1 
 
 5. Papias, who was a contemporary of Polycarp, is the first writer who 
 
 et Relies distinctly recognizes the synoptic Gospels. In illustra- 
 
 Euseb. H. E. tion of them, as it appears, he composed “‘ An exposition 
 
 Pike of the Oracles of the Lord” (Λογίων Κυριακῶν ἐξήγησις), 
 including in his book traditions still current, whieh might seem to throw 
 light upon the apostolic narrative. Like Clement and 
 the Alexandrine school, he is said to have given a spirit- 
 ual interpretation to the history of the Creation (eés 
 Χριστὸν καὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν πᾶσαν τὴν ἑξαήμερον vonoas); 
 and he is quoted by Andreas as a witness to the authority of the Apoc- 
 alypse. 
 
 6. The Shepherd of Hermas evinces by its form and reception? the 
 belief of the primitive age in the nature and_ possibility 
 of Inspiration. We have not to discuss here the apos- 
 tolic claims of the book, but its existence is a distinct proof of the early 
 recognition of a prophetic power somewhere existent in the Church. 
 What was the character of this influence we may learn from the com- 
 mencement of one of the visions : “And again the Spirit 
 carried me away to the same place, .. . and when I had 
 risen from prayer, I saw a Matron walking and reading a book, and she 
 
 ad. Philad. 9. 
 Cf. ad Smyrn. 7. 
 
 ad Philad. 7. 
 
 ad Eph. 15. 
 
 ad Eph. 3. 
 
 Sr. tx. (Routh), 
 
 Prol.in Apoc. 
 
 6. HERMAS. 
 
 Vis. τὶ. 1. 
 
 1 In one passage Ignatius seems to the Syriac version, at least in a perfect 
 express a sense of the deeper meaning form. 
 of Scripture: ad Ephes. x1x. (in Syr.). 2 It is quoted with marked respect by 
 It will be seen that, with one exception, Irenzus, Clement of Alexandria, and 
 the passages quoted are not found in Origen. Cf. Euseb. H. EZ. v. 7; 11. 25. 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 407 
 
 said to me: ‘Can you report this to the elect of God?’ I said to her: 
 ‘Lady, I cannot retain so great things in my memory; but give me the 
 book, and I will write them down.’ —‘ Take it,’ she said, ‘and restore 
 it to me.’ Now, when I had taken the book, I retired and wrote down 
 everything letter by letter, for I did not discover the [divisions the] 
 syllables (non enim inveniebam syllabas ; cf. Clem. Alex. 
 Str. v1. § 181). The Lady, he afterwards tells us, is 
 the Church of God, and the revelation is to be sent to foreign cities, and 
 delivered to the widows and orphans of the Church.! 
 
 7. One more passage I will add, from an uncertain but very early 
 writer,” who, addressing an inquiring heathen, describes 
 
 Vis. di. 4. 
 
 7. Ee. ad 
 the blessings of believers, among whom ‘the fearful DioGNeTuM. 
 811. 
 
 strains of the Law are repeated, the grace of the Proph- 
 ets recognized, the faith of the Gospe!s established, the tradition of the 
 Apostles kept, and the grace of the Church triumphant (σκιρτᾷ). And 
 if thou grievest not this grace thou shalt know what the Word speaks to 
 men, by whom He pleases, when He will” (ἃ Adyos ὁμιλεῖ, δ ὧν βούλεται, 
 ὅτε ϑέλει). In this noble sentence we see the first intimation of the co- 
 ordinate authorities of the Bible and the Church, of a written record and 
 a living voice; and it may well serve as a summary of the principles 
 which we have traced in the earliest Fathers of the Christian faith. 
 
 SECT. II.— THE APOLOGISTS. 
 
 / a > / 
 οὔπω μέχρις αἵματος ἀντικατέστητε. --- HEB. XII. 4. 
 
 1. The writings of the earliest Apologists, Quadratus and Aristides, 
 have perished ; but Eusebius has preserved a tradition 
 that the former, like the daughters of Philip (Acts xxi. 
 9), was distinguished for his prophetic power — another 
 intimation of the belief of the early Church in the real 
 existence of a gift of Inspiration. Thus it is that the 
 works of Justin, who, as we are told, still retained the mantle of the 
 philosopher after he had adopted the doctrines of the Gospel, first pre- 
 sent to us Christianity in relation with the ancient faith ; and by their 
 whole form and language they clearly show the necessary change whick 
 
 1. The early Apol- 
 oyists. 
 
 H. E. tii. 36; v. 
 17 (on the authority 
 of Miltiades). 
 
 1 The whole section is very interest- 
 ing. Origen (Philoc. τ. 11) gives a sin- 
 gular allegorical interpretation of the 
 two copies which Hermas is ordered 
 tomake. He represents Grapte as the 
 letter, for she teaches widows and or- 
 phans —those who are not yet united 
 with the Spouse of the Church, though 
 divorced from their old connection, 
 
 nor yet adopted children of the Father; 
 while Clement typifies the spirit, ex- 
 tending its influence far and wide with- 
 out corporeal restraints. 
 
 2 Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 95 ff. 
 I do not remember to have read any- 
 where more eloquent outbursts of 
 Christian feeling than are found in 
 several chapters; 6. g., ch. Vv. 
 
408 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 had taken place since the time of the Apostles in the hearers and teachers 
 of the new religion.! 
 2. The Scriptural quotations introduced by Justin into all his works 
 
 2. Justin Man. Ἀγ. numerous, and his mode of citation is singularly 
 
 TYR. expressive. He tells us of the “history which Moses 
 The Law. wrote by Divine Inspiration (ἐκ Selas ἐπιπνοίας)," while 
 Chap re “the Holy Spirit of prophecy taught through him.” 
 ΠΣ Again, he quotes the language of David, “who spake 
 on et) thus (Ps. xix. 2-5) through the spirit of prophecy ;”’ 
 
 pol, τ. 00. 
 
 and of Isaiah, who was moved (ϑεοφορεῖσϑαι) by the 
 same Spirit (Isa. xv. 2; Iviii. 2). 
 
 Yet more, he tells us that “‘as Abraham believed on the voice of God, 
 and it was reckoned to him for righteousness, so do the 
 Christians too believe on the voice of God, which has 
 been addressed again to them by the Apostles of Christ, 
 and proclaimed by the prophets,...whose writings — the memoirs of the 
 Apostles,” or the books of the Prophets (τὰ ἀπομνημο- 
 νεύματα τῶν ἀποστόλων ἢ TA συγγράμματα τῶν προφητῶν) 
 — were read each Sunday (τῇ τοῦ ἡλίου λεγομένῃ ἡμέρᾳ) in the public 
 assembly ;” for ‘we have been commanded by Christ 
 Himself to obey not the teaching of men (ἀνϑρωπείοις 
 διδάγμασι, but that which hath been proclaimed by the blessed prophets 
 and taught by Him.” 
 
 How glorious was the prophet’s office in Justin’s opinion we may ima, 
 gine when he says, “ that we must not suppose that the 
 language (λέξεις) proceeds from the men who are inspired, 
 but from the divine Word which moves them (μὴ a 
 αὐτῶν τῶν ἐμπεπνευσμένων, GAN ἀπὸ τοῦ κινοῦντος aUTOUS 
 ϑείου λόγου). ‘Their work is to announce that which the 
 Holy Spirit, descending upon them, purposes, through them, to teach those 
 who wish to learn the true religion” (τὴν ἀληδϑῆ Inowe- 
 Bey). ‘For neither by nature nor human thought 
 (ἐννοίᾳ) can men recognize such great and divine truths, but by the gift 
 which came down from above upon the boly men [under the Jewish 
 dispensation], who needed no art of words, nor skill in captious and con- 
 tentious speaking, but only to offer themselves in purity (καϑαροὺς mapa- 
 
 The Prophets. 
 
 Dial. ο. 119. 
 The New Testa- 
 ment. 
 
 Apol. 7. 67. 
 
 Dial. 48, 
 
 The 
 Office. 
 Apol. i. 50. (ef. ec. 
 38, and Apol. ti. 10. 
 Cohort. 35). 
 
 Prophet's 
 
 Cohort. c. 8. 
 
 1 The elders quoted by Ireneus make 
 use of the writings of the New Testa- 
 ment as well as of those of the Old ( Hist. 
 of N. T. Canon, pp. 87, 88); and Euse- 
 bius (H. #. 111. 87) speaks of Evangel- 
 ists in the reign of Trajan as ‘‘striving 
 to deliver to others the Scripture of the 
 divine Gospels (τὴν τῶν Selwy εὐαγ- 
 γελίων ypaphy).” 
 
 27. e., our Gospels (Hist. of N. T. 
 Canon, pp. 115 ff.). It is very imyortant 
 
 to observe that the two classes of writ- 
 ings — the apostolic and the prophetic — 
 are placed in the same rank through- 
 out; for the Apostles, ‘‘ by the power of 
 God, announced to every race of men 
 the Word of God, as they were sent by 
 Christ (Matt. xxviii. 20) to teach all’ 
 (Apol. τ. 89). Justin refers to ‘‘ John, 
 one of the Apostles,”’ as having prophe 
 sied (Dial. ο. 81). 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 409 
 
 σχεῖν) to the operation of the Divine Spirit, in order that the divine power 
 of itself might reveal to us the knowledge of divine and heavenly things, 
 acting on just men as a plectrum on a harp or lyre” (iva αὐτὸ τὸ ϑεῖον ἐὲ 
 οὐρανοῦ κατιὸν πλῆκτρον, ὥσπερ ὀργάνῳ κιϑάρας τινὸς ἢ λύρας τοῖς δικαίοις 
 ἄνδρασι χρώμενον, τὴν "τῶν ϑείων ἡμῖν καὶ οὐρανίων ἀποκαλύψῃ γνῶσιν). 
 However strictly we may be inclined to interpret Justin’s metaphor, we 
 must remember (as has been well observed) that the tone and quality of 
 the note depend as much upon the instrument as upon the hand which 
 plays it.! And how can we listen to the full and deep harmonies of the 
 Bible without feeling that more than half their power and beauty lies in 
 the divine union of the different human instruments through which the 
 Spirit speaks, ‘“ perfecting one full message of salvation 
 for those who will discern it, stopping and staying every 
 inworking of the evil spirit, even as the strain of David stayed the evil 
 spirit which oppressed the soul of Saul ”’ 2 
 
 Justin’s view of the Interpretation of Scripture is perfectly consistent 
 with his doctrine of Inspiration. ‘ There are,” he tells 
 us, “many revelations veiled in parables and mysteries, 
 or expressed in symbolic actions, which prophets ex- 
 plained who arose after those who spoke and acted;” and “ there is no 
 profit in quoting the words or facts of Scripture unless 
 we are able to render an account of them, a gift which 
 cometh [to Christians] by the great grace of God ;” for “the Scriptures 
 belong to the Christian, and not to the Jew, who when he 
 
 Orig. in Matt. ii. 
 
 Interpretation. 
 Dial. § 68. 
 
 Dial. § 92. 
 
 : : "Ξ Dial. § 29. Of 
 reads does not understand their meaning (νοῦν). Thus 9/7" a 
 he says, in his dialogue with Trypho, that “he can prove The Ceremonial 
 
 ᾿ rat) ἢ « Ἢ ἢ σρς Law. 
 by a careful enumeration that all the ordinances of Moses Dio, $42 CF. 
 
 were types and symbols and indications (xarayyeAlas) Of — Apol. 1. 92; Dial. § 
 those things which were to be realized in the Messiah” 5. 
 (τῷ Χριστῷ γενέσϑαι). The twelve bells which hung 
 round the robe of the high-priest prefigured the twelve Apostles who were 
 united “with our eternal Priest, by whose voice the 
 whole earth was filled with the glory and grace of God 
 and Christ.” The Paschal Lamb was a type of the death of Christ, even 
 as the two goats at the great Fast set forth His two 
 Advents, and the offering of fine flour in the case of 
 leprosy, ‘‘ the remembrance of His Passion” in the Eucharist. 
 
 Justin finds an equally deep significance in the facts recorded in the 
 Old Testament. He sees symbols of the Cross in the ete 
 tree of Life —in the brazen serpent —in Moses, as he Mi pga i, 
 stood victorious over Amalek —in the ensign of Judah, Dial. §§ 86; 131; 
 “whose horns are as the horns of a unicorn” (Deut. is pase slo 
 xxxili. 17)— and in the very form of man. So, also, ἡ reins 
 the events of patriarchal history are pregnant with meaning. The mar- 
 
 Dial. § 42. 
 
 Dial. § 40. 
 
 Dial. § 41. 
 
 1 See the passage of Hippolytus quoted below, § 1v. 4, p. 410. 
 35 
 
410 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 riages of Jacob with Leah and Rebecca prefigured the union of Jesus 
 
 with the Synagogue and the Christian Church: 
 spiritual sight of the Jews was weak, and Rachel con- 
 
 Dial. § 134. 
 
 cealed the gross gods of her fathers. 
 
 the 
 
 These examples of the method of Interpretation which Justin followed 
 
 will suffice.! 
 Dial. § 134. 
 
 Dial. § 131 f. 
 
 We may add, however, that he does not 
 seem ever to deny the fecal truth of the narratives 
 which furnish him with these divine analogies ; 
 
 on the 
 
 contrary, in some cases he insists on the bare interpretation of the text 
 
 with unnecessary strictness. 
 
 3. The apologetic discourse of Tatian, Justin’s 
 
 3 TATIAN. 
 
 disciple, affords hiin 
 
 little scope for speaking of inspiration; yet he draws a 
 
 striking contrast between the positions of the heathen 
 
 and of the Christian. 
 
 “The Spirit of God,” he says, ‘is not with all 
 
 men, but abiding with some whose conversation is just (παρά τισι τοῖς 
 
 δικαίως πολιτευομένοις καταγόμενον), 
 
 and being united with their soui 
 
 (συμπλεκόμενον τῇ ψυχῇ) it proclaimed to all other souls, 
 
 § 13. 
 
 by prophetic teaching, that which had been hidden; and 
 
 those which obeyed wisdom attracted (ἐφείλκοντο) to themselves a kindred 
 spirit, while those who did not obey....were found to fight 
 
 § 29. 
 
 great antiquity of Scripture, 
 
 against their God.” 
 and says that its prophetic power (τὸ προγ- 
 
 In another place he notices the 
 
 νωστικὸν τῶν μελλόντων) Was one of the grounds on which he was led to 
 
 believe in its doctrine.” 
 
 4, ATHENAGO- 
 RAS. 
 Leg. pro Christ. 
 § 9. 
 
 the Prophets, 
 
 of Montanism. 
 
 4. The language of Athenagoras, when speaking of 
 is perhaps withaqut parallel, and it has been 
 regarded, with good reason, as expressing the doctrine 
 He says that, “while entranced and 
 
 deprived of their natural powers of reason (κατ᾽ ἔκστασιν τῶν ἐν αὐτοῖς λο- 
 
 1 Justin’s principles in this respect 
 may have been modified by his resi- 
 dence at Alexandria. He speaks with 
 admiration of Philo and Josephus (Co- 
 hort. c. 10), and argues that the old 
 philosophers ‘‘ were compelled, by the 
 Divine Providence acting in behalf of 
 men, to say many things in support of 
 Christianity” (Cohort. ¢. 14, πολλὰ 
 καὶ αὐτοὶ ὑπὸ τῆς Selas τῶν ἀνϑρώ- 
 νῶν προνοίας καὶ ἄκοντες ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν 
 εἰπεῖν ἠναγκάσϑησαν). 
 
 2 tie quotes John i. 5, with the words, 
 “This is that which was said (τὸ εἰρη- 
 μένον)" 
 
 The accounts of his Diatessaron are 
 too vague to enable us to form any 
 clear idea of its purpose. Eusebius 
 
 (H. E. Iv. 29) describes it ‘‘ as a strange 
 harmony and combination of the [four] 
 Gospels;” nor does there seem any 
 reason to suppose, with Neander (Ch. 
 Hist. 11. 167, n. Eng. Tr.), that apoery- 
 phal traditions were wrought into it. 
 We find it used by many who followed 
 the apostolic teaching (ἀποστολικοῖς 
 ἑπόμενοι δόγμασι. Theodor. Fab. 
 Her. τ. 20). and it commenced with the 
 words, ‘In the beginning was the 
 Word.” Its similarity to the ‘“ Gospel 
 of the Hebrews” probably arose from 
 the omission of the history of the In- 
 fancy, which would militate against 
 Tatian’s Gnosticism (Epiphan. xtvi 1; 
 Theodor. 1. 6. Cf. Olshausen, Ueber die 
 Echtheit wu. 8, w. 8. 335 ff.; Hist. of N. 
 T. Canon, pp. 358 ff.). 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 411 
 
 γισμῶν) by the influence of the divine Spirit, they uttered that which was 
 wrought in them (ἃ éynpyodvro), the Spirit using them as its instruments, 
 as a flute-player might blow a flute.” And again, under another image, 
 he describes “‘the Holy Spirit, which works in those 
 who speak prophetically, as an emanation issuing from 
 God, and carried back to Him, like a ray from the sun” (ἀπόῤῥοιαν τοῦ 
 Seod ἀπόῤῥεον καὶ ἐπαναφερόμενον ws ἀκτῖνα ἡλίου). Thus the Christian 
 “ives no heed to the doctrines of men, but those 
 uttered (ϑεοφάτοις) and taught by God;” for “he has 
 prophets as witnesses of his creed (ὧν νοοῦμεν καὶ πεπιστεύκαμεν), who, 
 inspired (read ἔνϑεοι for évdéw) by the Spirit, have spoken of God and 
 the things of God.” ! 
 
 5. Far different is the language of Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, — 
 sixth in succession from the Apostles, — who addressed 5 ny optus. 
 an admirable defence of Christianity, still extant, to a — Euseb. H. Ε. iv. 
 heathen, Autolycus. According to him, the inspired “Ὁ 
 writers were not mere mechanical organs, but men who, coincidently with 
 the divine influence, displayed a personal and moral fitness for their 
 work. “The men of God being filled with the Holy 
 Spirit (πνευματοφόροι Πνεύματος ‘Aytov) and gifted with 
 prophecy, having inspiration and wisdom from God, were taught of Him, 
 and became holy and just. Wherefore, also, they were deemed worthy to 
 obtain this recompense, to be made the instruments of God (ὄργανα Sod 
 γενόμενοι) and receive (χωρήσαντες) the wisdom which cometh from Him, 
 by which wisdom they spake of the creation of the world and all other 
 things... which happened before their birth, and during their own time, 
 and which are now being accomplished in our days; and 
 so we are convinced that in things to come the event 
 will be as they say.” Again, he adds, that ‘the Christians alone have 
 received the truth, inasmuch as they are taught by the Holy Spirit, who 
 spake by the holy prophets, and [still] announces all things to them 
 beforehand (τοῦ λαλήσαντος ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις προφήταις καὶ τὰ πάντα προκατ- 
 ayyéAAovtos):”” who is “the Beginning and Wisdom ii. § 10. 
 and the Power of the Most High,” so that “the words ti. § 84. 
 of the prophets are the words of God.” Moreover, ‘the se 
 contents of the Prophets and of the Gospels are found to be consistent (ἀκό- 
 AovSa), because all the writers spake by the inspiration of the one Spirit 
 of God? (διὰ τὸ τοὺς πάντας πν.υματοφόρους ἑνὶ πνεύματι ϑεοῦ λελαληκέναι). 
 
 § 10. 
 
 ou, et, 
 
 ad Aut. vi. 9. 
 
 ii. § 33. 
 
 1 It is singular that there is scarcely compingens). Cf. ad Autol. ii, 22: 
 any trace of Allegorical Interpretation ...‘‘all the holy Scriptures teach us 
 in Athenagoras. See Guericke, Hist. and all who were inspired by the Holy 
 Schole Catech. Alex. ii. p. 50. Spirit (πνευματοφόροι), of whom was 
 
 2 We learn from Jerome that Theoph- John (Evan.i.3).” Rosenmiiller (Hist. 
 ilus composed a Commentary on the Jnterp. i. 1, p. 200) quotes this passage 
 Gospels (in Evangelium, i. 6.. τὸ evay- to prove that Theophilus “ distinguishes 
 ‘yeAtov); or perhaps a harmony (JV. between the sacred ‘ Scriptures’ and the 
 Evangelistarum in unum opus dicta writings of the Apostles.’ Surely the 
 
412. ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 SECT. III. — THE FATHERS OF THE CHURCH OF ASIA MINOR. 
 Ὁ ἔχων οὖς ἀκουσάτω τί τὸ πνεῦμα λέγει ταῖς ἐκκλησίαι“. --- APOC. ii. 7, 11,13. 
 
 1. We have just seen that the early apologies for Christianity proceeded 
 from heathen converts ; in like manner, the first endeavor 
 after an ecclesiastical history was made by a Hebraizing 
 Christian, with whom the historical side of his faith had naturally the 
 fullest significance. The fragments of Hegesippus contain little or noth- 
 ing which bears on our inquiry; yet in one sentence, 
 preserved in Eusebius, he seems to recognize authorita- 
 tive Christian documents when he says that ‘“‘in each city all is ordered 
 according to the preaching (κηρύσσει) of the Law, of the Prophets, and of 
 the Lord.” ἢ 
 
 2 Melito, Bishop of Sardis, helps us by the titles of some of his trea- 
 tises, and by his own personal reputation. We learn 
 from Tertullian that he was accounted a prophet by 
 very many, and Polycrates describes him as ‘‘having 
 transacted everything by the Holy Spirit” (6 ἐν “Ay. Πν. 
 Among his works we find discourses ‘‘ On [Chris- 
 
 1. HEGESIPPUS. 
 
 Η. E. iv. 22. 
 
 2. MELITO. 
 
 ap. Hieron. de 
 Vir, Ill. ec. xxiv. ap. 
 Euseb. H. E. v. 24 
 
 / / 
 πάντα TOALTEVTAMEVOS ). 
 
 tian] Conversation (πολιτείας) and Prophets,” —‘“‘ On 
 
 Euseb. H. E.w. Prophecy,” — “On the Revelation of St. John,” —and 
 26. (43 1 7 2) aa = ΄ aaaqrd 
 
 Rouih ἘΠῚ: *Sa- The Key.” The last-mentioned book necessarily sug- 
 
 gests to us an anticipation of the Alexandrian school ; 
 and some examples of Melito’s exegesis, probably bor- 
 rowed from it, sufficiently indicate the extent to which he carried the 
 
 cre, i. pp. 116 sgq. 
 
 typical significance of each word and detail of Scripture.? 
 3. A fragment of Claudius Apollinaris® furnishes us with another 
 
 distinction can be of little use to lower 
 the authority of St. John. Elsewhere 
 (ad Autol. 111. 14) Theophilus quotes an 
 injunction of St. Paul (1 Tim. ii.) as an 
 utterance of ‘*the Divine Word.” 
 
 In one passage (ad Autol. 11. 14), The- 
 ophilus draws a mystical meaning 
 from the Mosaic account of the crea- 
 tion, but he also accepts all the details 
 literally. 
 
 1In another fragment, given by 
 Routh (fell. Sacer. 1. p. 209, Ed. 1), he is 
 represented as saying that ‘those who 
 maintain the doctrine of 1 Cor. ii. 9, lie 
 against the holy Scriptures and the 
 Lord. Matt. xiii. 16.” If there be no 
 error in this quotation, it is a strange 
 example of the literal style of interpre- 
 
 tation which Origen had to meet. Cf. 
 Hist. of N. T. Canon, p. 288, n. 
 
 2 Eusebius (H. Z. 1v. 26) has preserved 
 an important letter of Melito, in which 
 he relates what he has done to satisfy 
 a friend’s wish to become acquainted 
 with the ‘*‘ Scriptures of the Old Testa- 
 ment” (τὰ τῆς παλαίας διαϑήκης βιβ- 
 λία). The phrase seems to imply New 
 Testament Scriptures also. 
 
 3 In connection with this name we 
 may quote the remarkable words of 
 Serapion (Bp. of Antioch in the reign 
 of Commodus) in reference to the false 
 Gospel of St. Peter: ‘‘ We receive Peter 
 and the other Apostles as Christ; but 
 those writings falsely ascribed to him 
 we decline to receive through our ex- 
 perience” (Euseb. H. £. v1. 12). 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 413 
 
 instance of the typical interpretation of Scripture; but without dwelling 
 any longer on these minute details, we must proceed (4) 
 to the great work of Irenzus, which unfortunately has 
 come down to us chiefly through the uncertain medium 
 of a Latin version,! for no Greek MS. is known to 
 exist. Reared under the teaching of Polycarp,? — whose 
 words, he tells us, he remembered better than the events 
 of his later life, —and succeeding ἃ martyr in the bishopric of Lyons, Ire- 
 nus is a noble representative of the faith and zeal of the early Church. 
 ‘Then only does he seem to.forget his master’s lessons of peace and love, 
 when he contends against those who deny the continual manifestation of 
 God’s Spirit in His Church, or of His providence in the 
 world. So full and comprehensive is his treatment of 
 inspiration, though he only discusses it incidentally, that 
 it is difficult to convey a notion of its general bearing by isolated quota- 
 
 8. CLAUDIUS 
 APOLLINARIS. 
 
 Routh, i. p. 150. 
 
 4. JREN2&US, 
 
 Euseb. H. E. v.20. 
 
 General view of 
 Inspiration. 
 
 tions. According to him; the successive dispensations of God wrought 
 . a "Oc γ 2 i Ἷ ) ray 
 
 together to one great end by the operation of One lower, ἘΠ ecu 
 
 as ‘‘ men were accustomed to bear (portare) God’s Spirit 14,2. 
 
 and hold communion with Him.” Thus “the prophet = 7+ 
 
 spake of the advent of the Word in the flesh, as acted on by His influence 
 (charisma) ;” and ‘all who foretold the coming of 
 Christ received their inspiration from the Son;” for 
 “how could Scripture testify, as it does, of Him alone, 
 unless all things had been revealed by one and the same God, through 
 the Word, to believers?” Yet till His advent ‘ Christ was, as it were, the 
 hidden treasure in the field of Scripture, since He was 
 [only] indicated by types and parables ;...for all proph- 
 ecy, till its accomplishment, is full of riddles and ambiguities to men.” 
 To us, however, ‘ the Apostles. by the will of God, have 
 consigned (tradiderunt) the Gospel in the Scriptures to 
 be the ground and pillar of our faith,...and by them we 
 have learnt the truth, that is, the doctrine of the Son of God......For after 
 that our Lord rose from the dead, and they were clothed 
 with the power of the Spirit from on high, they were 
 filled with a perfect knowledge in all things” (de omnibus adimpleti sunt, et 
 habuerunt perfectam agnitionem).® Consequently “ they 
 are beyond all falsehood” (extra omne mendacium), 
 though they speak “according to the capacity of their hearers, talking 
 
 wv. 26, 1. 
 
 ἘΠῚ. a 
 iii. pref. 
 
 wi. 1, 1. 
 
 tit. 5. 
 
 1 Massuet’s remarks on Jrenzus’ view 
 of Scripture are so essentially polemical 
 as to be almost valueless ( Disserf. 111. 
 1, 2). 
 
 2In connection with this name we 
 may again refer to the letter of Poly- 
 crates (Bp. of Smyrna in the reign of 
 Severus), in which he tells us ‘that 
 having examined the whole of holy 
 
 Scripture (on the question of Easter), 
 he is not afraid of his opposers; for 
 those greater than himself have said, 
 It is right to obey God rather than 
 man” (Kuseb. H. E. v. 24). 
 
 3 So again (111. 12, 5): αὗται φωναὶ 
 τῶν μαδϑητῶν τοῦ κυρίου τῶν ἀληδῶς 
 τελείων μετὰ τὴν ἀνάλεψιν τοῦ κυρίου 
 διὰ πνεύματος τελειωϑέντων. . .. 
 
 30* 
 
414 ON TIE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 blindly with the blind” (c@cis cceca confabulantes). Each, too, preserves 
 lis own individuality ; thus, ‘St. Paul frequently uses’ 
 hyperbata on account of the rapidity of his utterance 
 and the vehemence of the Spirit which is in him (propter velocitatem ser- 
 monum suorum et propter impetum qui in ipso est spirités) ; as, for instanee, 
 in Gal. iii. 19 we must suppose a man asking the question and the Spirit 
 answering it; and so, again, in2 Thess. ii. 8. But we must not imagine 
 that the truth was thus impaired by the human agent, or the significance 
 of words destroyed. ‘‘ Matthew might have said, ‘ The 
 generation of Jesus was on .this wise,’ but the Holy 
 Spirit, foreseeing the corruptions of the truth, and fortifying us against 
 their deception, says, by Matthew, ‘ The generation of Christ was on this 
 wise.’”’ 
 
 Moreover, Irenzeus sees a mystical fulness and meaning in the four 
 Evangelists: ‘‘ As God made all things in fair order and 
 connection, so was it needful that the [outward] form of 
 the Gospel should be well framed and fitted together ;”’ 
 and “as there are four! regions of the world in which 
 we are, and four general winds, —as the Church is scattered over the 
 whole earth, and the Gospel is the pillar and support (στήριγμα) of the 
 Church, — we might expect it should have four pillars [and four winds as 
 it were], breathing on all sides immortality, and kindling [the divine 
 spark] in men,” Again: as in the ancient Church the visible form of God 
 rested on the four-faced cherubim, “50 Christ, when mani- 
 fested to men, gave us his Gospel under a fourfold form, 
 though held together by one spirit,” and on these Gospels he rests (τὰ 
 εὐαγγέλια ἐν οἷς ἔγκαδέζεται 6 Χριστός). 
 
 In many of his general views of Scripture, Ireneus anticipates the 
 
 Deeper meaning thoughts and language of Origen. He tells us that “the 
 of Scripture. Scriptures are perfect, inasmuch as they were uttered 
 
 τι: 28,2 (dictce) by the Word of God and His Spirit, though we 
 want the knowledge of their mysteries ;’’ and how much, he adds, is unex- 
 plained to us in the operations of nature — the rising of the Nile, the 
 migration of birds, the ebb and flow of the tide; ‘“‘is it, then, a hard 
 case that —as in the outward world some truths are, as it were, sacred to 
 God (ἀνάκειται τῷ Θεῷ), while some have come under our knowledge — 
 some of the difficulties in the Scriptures, which are all full of spiritual 
 meaning (πνευματικῶν), should be explicable by the grace of God, while 
 the solution of others must rest with Him, aud that not only in this world 
 (αἰών), but also in the world to come ; that God may still teach, and man 
 still ever learn from God?” The revelations of the Bible may seem too 
 meagre to satisfy our curiosity ; yet “no small punishment (ἐπιτιμία) will 
 be his who adds to or takes from the Scripture.” The details may seem 
 
 ti. 7. 
 
 ai. 16, 2. 
 
 The Gospels. 
 iit. 11, 9. 
 qi. 11, 3. 
 
 iii. 11, 8. 
 
 1 Compare a very striking passage in Routh, Rell. Sacre, 111. 456; Crosnier, 
 the symbolism of the number four ina Jconogr. Christ. pp. 50, 51; Philo, de 
 fragment of Victorinus, de Fabr. Cali; M. §§ 15, 16. 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 415 
 
 insignificant ; yet ‘nothing is empty or without meaning in the dealings 
 of God.’ The connection of its parts may seem _per- 
 plexing; yet “all Scripture, as it has been given to a. ΎΣΣ: wii. 8; 
 us by God, will be found to be harmonious.” The © awii. 18,19. 
 interpretation of its teaching may be difficult; yet — 'Jh% 
 “we guard our faith, which has been admitted (per- τος 
 ceptam) by the Church, and which, like a precious gift 
 stored up in a fair vessel, is ever renewed (rejuvenescens) by the Spirit of 
 God, and gives new life (rejuvenescere facit) to the vessel in which it is. 
 For this gift of God is entrusted to the Church, to give life to the world 
 (ad inspirationem plasmation?) as the soul to the body, and in it [the gifts 
 of faith entrusted to the Church] lies the enjoyment of the Holy Spirit 
 sent by Christ, which is the earnest of our immortality, the confirmation 
 of our faith, the ladder by which we ascend to God. For where the 
 Church is, there is also the Spirit of God; and where the Spirit of God is, 
 there is the Church and all grace; but the Spirit is Truth ;” and Truth is 
 one; for we acknowledge as one the God of Creation and the God of 
 Redemption, the author of the old dispensation and 
 the author of the new; “we follow Him alone as our 
 Teacher, and regard His words as the rule of Truth” (regulam veritatis 
 habentes ejus sermones). 
 
 The doctrine of Irenzeus on the Millennium illustrates his view of the 
 literal truth of Scripture, while it also shows the influ- 
 ence of his Asiatic master. On other occasions, also, he pandietiatey τρῶς 
 adheres so strictly to the text as to draw arguments from megs 
 isolated details of parables, and the natural coloring of language ; more- 
 over, he strongly opposes the system of the Gnostics, who 
 based the truth of their opinions on numerical analogies 
 and verbal symbols, though he himself admits the propriety of such subtle 
 inquiries when pursued for the illustration of that which 5, oy) κω). 
 is admitted on other grounds. There can be no doubt  & Stieren le. 
 that he recognizes an under sense (ὑπόνοια) in Seripture, ὠ 7” Law. 
 and allows the symbolic meaning of the gifts and sacri- ak 
 fices of the Mosaic law, since heavenly truths can only be conveyed under 
 earthly forms. Again, he sees figures of national and 
 individual application in the records of the chosen 
 people, —as when he acknowledges a type of the Gentile church in the 
 marriage of Moses with the /Ethiopian, and explains at 
 some length the history of the birth of Phares and Zara, 
 as foreshadowing the fortunes of the two covenants.} 
 In another place he contrasts the mother of the human race with the 
 mother of the Saviour: “ What the Virgin Eve bound by her want of 
 faith, that the Virgin Mary loosed by her faith.” He finds types of Christ 
 
 iv. 83; 7. 34, 1. 
 
 History. 
 
 iv. 20, 12. 
 iv. 25, 2. 
 
 1 This method of typical interpreta- dition (presbyter dicebat) in the case of 
 tion he justifies by the authority of tra- the spoiling of the Egyptiams. iy. 30, 1. 
 
‘416 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 in the rod of Moses, “‘ which, assuming a body (incarnata), confuted and 
 destroyed all the opposition of the Egyptians ! to the dis- 
 pensation of God ”’— in the brazen serpent —in Joseph 
 and in Joshua, who completed what Moses had com- 
 menced, and for manna gave the people corn, which is 
 ‘“‘the first-fruits of life.” 
 
 In many cases the explanations of Irenzeus seem arbitrary and inco- 
 herent, from the want of any such general principle as 
 guided the speculations of Origen. Thus he finds a 
 type of the Church in Lot’s wife, who became a pillar of sa/t, and, accord- 
 
 ii, 22, 4. 
 
 i. 21, 8. 
 
 iv. 2,73 fr. p. 346, 
 ed. Bened.; fr. p. 
 845. 
 
 Indefinite. 
 
 iv. 31, 8. ing to tradition, unchanging and incorruptible. Again, 
 fr. ». 346. he likens the boy who led Samson to John the Baptist, 
 Sr. p. 8545. 
 
 and the two pillars of the building which he destroyed, to 
 the two Covenants by which the world is supported. We are told, more- 
 over, that he interpreted the Fall spiritually, and not historically, and 
 maintained his view by very weighty arguments. 
 
 The instances already quoted clearly show the general principles which 
 Ireneus applied to Holy Scripture, acknowledging at 
 once the mysteries of its letter? and of its spirit. To 
 this inner sense of the Word of God he tells us that the 
 Christian will ever strive to penetrate, by the help of 
 daily experience and the use of appointed ordinances ;* he will gather all 
 the analogies of the outer world which may serve to direct his judgment, 
 and scrutinize all the records of revelation which may enlighten his 
 mind and extend his knowledge. The works of nature and the words of 
 God combine to train and perfect the race of man, “in 
 which are accomplished those mysteries into which 
 angels desire to look, that they may trace the workings of that Wisdom 
 by which Creation is made conformable and united to the Son.” 
 
 Scripture to be 
 combined with na- 
 twre. 
 
 υ. 36 f. 
 
 SECT. IV.— THE FATHERS OF THE ROMAN CHURCH. 
 “Ὅσα προεγράφη, εἰς τὴν ἡμετέραν διδασκαλίαν προεγράφη. --- Rom. xv. 4. 
 
 There is something mournful in the silent, shadowy line of Roman 
 bishops during the first three centuries; their voices seem only to be 
 
 1 The relations of the Jews to the 
 Ezyptians are perpetuated in those of 
 the Christian Church to the unbelieving 
 world in all ages. IV. 80. 
 
 2 In his explanation of the history of 
 Lot (Gen. xxx. 30-8), he evidently 
 maintains its real truth, while he justi- 
 fies the relation as properly typical. 
 
 8 Cf. 11. 4, 1; Iv. 38, 8; for further 
 
 illustration of Irenzus’ views on the 
 Chureh. He speaks in a very remark- 
 able passage (11. 3, 4, cf. Euseb. H. £. 
 v.7) of the continuance of the powers 
 of exorcism, prophecy, and healing in 
 the Church at his own time. Compare, 
 also, for a strong assertion of the same 
 belief, the author quoted by Eusebius, 
 HE Vidic 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 417 
 
 heard when they claim the powers which their successors gained. The 
 only famous Roman writers of the period were Caius and Novatian, who 
 were presbyters, and Hippolytus, Bishop of Portus, whose education was 
 wholly Eastern. Yet we must remember here the prac- Hen! Diels 
 tical tendencies of the national character, which were alike fused. HE. te 
 displayed in the absence of theological studies, and in 353. 
 that zealous liberality which was regarded as the traditional glory of the 
 Roman Church. 
 
 1. In afragment preserved in Eusebius, Caius seems to regard “ reve- 
 lations ” as a mark of an apostle,! and in the same place 
 uses the striking phrase, “the Scriptures of God.” In 
 another fragment, which is attributed by some to Caius, the writer speaks 
 of the followers of Artemon, “ who fearlessly laid their 
 hands on the divine Scriptures, saying that they cor- 
 rected them...How great is the daring of their error,” he 
 adds, “cannot be unknown even to themselves; for either they do not 
 believe that the divine Scriptures were spoken by the Holy Spirit (‘Aye 
 Πνεύματι λελέχϑαι), and are unbelievers; or they hold themselves wiser 
 than the Holy Spirit, and we must say they rave” (δαιμονῶσιν). 
 
 2. The famous fragment on the Canon had been falsely attributed to 
 Caius, but it is certainly of the same date.?- We find in 
 this, probably, the first distinct recognition of the Inspi- 
 ration of the Gospels, which are regarded as formally 
 divergent, yet one in their great end. “ Though various elements are 
 inculeated (/icet varia principia doceantur) in each, still 
 the faith of believers differs not, since everything con- ce ee 
 cerning the Nativity and Passion and Life [of our Lord] 
 is declared in all of them by one and the self-same guiding Spirit”’ (uno 
 et principali® Spiritu). 
 
 3. The writings of Novatian are full of quotations from the Old and 
 New Testaments, and his view of their authority is clear 
 and wide. He regards the whole Law as spiritual, “‘ for 
 divine ordinances must be received in a divine sense ;” 
 and traces the symbolic meaning of the Mosaic restrictions on food. 
 The books of the prophets furnish him with a clear proof 
 of God’s providence, “which not only extends at all 
 times over individuals, but also over cities and states, 
 whose issues God declared by the words of His servants (voetbus prophe- 
 tarum cecinit), yea, even over the whole world.” And the forms of the 
 prophetic language prove the certainty of their predic- 
 tions ; for they use the past tense in speaking of the fu- 
 ture, since “divine Scripture regards as accomplished that which will, 
 
 1. Carus. 
 
 Euseb. v. %; cf. 
 Routh, v. p. 18 sqq. 
 
 2. Fragm. de 
 Canone. 
 
 8. NOVATIAN, 
 de cid. Jud. c. 2. 
 
 de Trin. c. 8. 
 (ed. Rig.). 
 
 de Trin. c. 28. 
 
 1 Κήρινϑος ὁ δ ἀποκαλύψεων ὡς Spds ὑπάρχων ταῖς γραφαῖς τοῦ Θεοῦ 
 ὑπὸ ἀποστόλου μεγάλου γεγραμμένων. Euseb. H. Ε. 111. 28. 
 τερατολογίας .... ἐπεισάγει ... ἐχ- 2 Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 285 ff 
 
 3 i. €., ἡγεμονικῷ, cf. Routh, 1. c. 
 
418 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 beyond all doubt, come to pass.” Yet more grace was given to the writers 
 
 of the New Covenant, for though “the prophets and 
 Apostles were inspired by one and the self-same Spirit, 
 still on the former He came but for atime (ad momentum), while He 
 abode with the latter always. ΤῸ the one some degree of His influence 
 was vouchsafed ; on the other His whole energy was poured. In the one 
 case it was a scanty gift, in the other a bounteous loan (large commodatus), 
 not set forth before the resurrection, but conferred by it according to 
 Christ’s promise (John xiv. 26) of a Comforter, ..... .who strengthened 
 the hearts and minds of the Apostles, who made clear to them the 
 mysteries of the Gospel (distinxit evangelica sacramenta), who dwelt 
 within them and enlightened their minds on divine things.” 
 
 4. There appears to be no reason for doubting the tradition which 
 represents Hippolytus of Portus as the disciple of Ive- 
 neus. In him we find a real link between the Asiatic 
 and Alexandrian schools, for Jerome tells us that he preached before 
 Origen. His writings exhibit the same deep sense of the spiritual mean- 
 ing of Scripture! as we have already traced in his immediate teacher and 
 in earlier writers. He regards that which has once been revealed by 
 
 God to man as still full of instruction and wisdom after 
 A Noetum, 88 11, the primary application is gone. ‘The Law and the 
 
 Prophets were from God, who in giving them compelled 
 His messenger to speak by the Holy Spirit, that receiving the inspiration 
 of the Father’s power (τῆς πατρῴας δυνάμεως τὴν ἀπόπνοιαν λαβόντες) 
 they may announce the Father’s counsel and will. In 
 these men therefore the Wort found a fitting abode 
 (πολιτευόμενος) and spoke of Himself; for even then 
 He came as His own herald, showing the Word who was about to 
 appear in the world.”..... - 
 
 “These blessed men....spake not only of the past, but also of the 
 present and of the future, that they might be shown not to be for a time 
 merely (πρόσκαιροι), but heralds of the things to come to all generations. 
 SEH: For these Fathers, having been perfected by the Spirit of prophecy, 
 and worthily honored by the Word Himself, were brought to an inner 
 harmony (ἑαυτοῖς ἡνωμένοι), like instruments, and having the Word within 
 them, as it were, to strike the notes (ὡς πλῆκτρον) by Him they were 
 moved, and announced that which God wished. For they did not speak 
 of their own power (be well assured),? nor proclaim that which they 
 
 id. c. 29. 
 
 4, HiPPOLYTUS. 
 
 de Antichristo, 
 
 § 2. 
 
 1 See de Antichr. §§ 14, 15, 28. He Lauter’ as one ‘‘ who could not escape 
 quotes Rev. xiii. 10, and suggests the the name of Antichrist,” but inclines to 
 words TEITAN,, EYAN@AC, and adopt ‘‘ Maometis” as the true solution 
 AATEINOC, as satisfying the number of the number. Fora comparison of the 
 which ‘‘the Holy Spirit mystically ‘allegories” of Hippolytus with those 
 showed forth” (de Antichr. 50). The of Origen, see Bunsen, 1. 802 (ed. 1). 
 same names are given by Irenzeus (v. 2 Μὴ πλανῶ: this parenthetical 
 30). See others in Fevardentius’s note; phrase occurs also in [Hipp.] adv. Her. 
 the zealous Franciscan quotes ‘‘ Martin x. 33 (Bunsen, 1. p. 272). 
 
 ὅσω 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 419 
 
 wished themselves, but first they were rightly endowed with wisdom by 
 the Word, and afterwards well foretaught of the future by visions, and 
 then, when thus assured (πεπεισμένοι), they spake that which was 
 [revealed] to them alone by God.” 
 
 It will be readily seen how widely this view is removed from that of 
 Athenagoras, though conveyed under a similar metaphor, differing from 
 it, indeed, just as the analogous description of Justin. ‘The instrument 
 here is first tuned to express the Divine strain; the moving power dwells 
 within as a vivifying principle, and does not act from without on an invol- 
 untary subject. The reason is cleared and not clouded; the melodies 
 of heaven are fitted to the words of men, not by an arbitrary power, but 
 by an inward affinity. “The blessed prophets,” to use another image, 
 “are eyes of Christ.” “ They ministered the oracles of God for all gen- 
 erations.’ So, then, it is our duty to listen to the faintest voice of the 
 Bible, to trace its relation to ourselves and its source 
 from above us: “ As the divine Scriptures proclaimed 
 the truth, so let us view it; all they teach let us acknowledge by the 
 growth of Faith (ἐπιγνῶμεν) ; as the Father pleaseth to be believed, let 
 us believe Him; as the Son pleaseth to be glorified, let us glorify Him; 
 as the Holy Spirit pleaseth to be given, let us reccive Him; not according 
 to our own choice, or our own mind (νοῦν), forcing to our own tastes 
 that which has been given by God, but as He chose to show the truth 
 through the Holy Scriptures, so let us view it.” 
 
 c. Noet. § 1. 
 
 SECT. V.— THE FATHERS OF THE NORTH-AFRICAN CHURCH. 
 τῷ πνεύματι (éovres. — Rom. xu. 11. 
 
 We have now traced the history of the doctrine of Inspiration as 
 unfolded in the Greek and Roman Churches; we have tis Scat 
 seen the same great principles enunciated by those who the North African 
 claimed to draw their doctrine frem St. John, and by pI other 
 those who sought to base their authority on St. Peter. ‘ 
 Whether it were viewed as part of the heritage of that wide Christian 
 family which Irenzus loved to contemplate, or as the bond of that great 
 power which silently grew at Rome, Holy Scripture was still held to 
 supply the believer with the divine elements of his life and faith. We have 
 yet to consider our subject in relation to two other Churches, and two 
 other forms of mental development — those of North Africa and Egypt. 
 In the writers of North Africa, whether at Carthage or Hippo, we find an 
 intensity of zeal, a depth of feeling, a power of intuition, but little modified 
 by cautious criticism or severe logic. The aspirations of Tertullian after 
 a stricter life led him into Montanism; and the craving for a clearer 
 knowledge at first united Augustine with the Manichees. We shall thus 
 see how the doctrine of Inspiration was regarded by men of a warmer 
 
420 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 temperament and a more restless faith, who sought out the truth with 
 earnestness, and embraced whatever conclusion they obtained without 
 reserve. Indeed, the whole character of the African Church is emotional, 
 if we would distinguish it from the doctrinal and practical types of Asia 
 and Rome. But while the Churches of North Africa, Asia, and Rome, 
 combined to look at Christianity as a great historic fact, rather than as 
 the final satisfaction of the ill-expressed wants of man, the Alexandrians 
 sought to follow out this latter view, by bringing all that was grand and 
 beautiful in human systems into a spiritual harmony with Divine Truth. 
 1. On one point, it has been well observed;' Tertullian never doubted ; 
 whether Catholic or Montanist, he still maintained alike 
 the Inspiration of the Old and New Testament Scrip- 
 tures. Whether he be writing to the heathen, the heretics, or the ortho- 
 dox, he expresses the same belief in the same unwavering language. He 
 tells as in his noble Apology that ‘‘ God sent forth, from 
 the first, men who, by their justice and innocency, were 
 worthy to know God and to make Him known, and filled them to over- 
 
 flowing (inundatos) with the Divine Spirit;”....and so “gave us a 
 
 written Testament? (cnstrumentum litterature), that we 
 
 might more fully and more deeply learn of Him, and of 
 
 His counsels, πα οἵ His will.’ Nor does he scruple to 
 
 call these books the “writings” (Jitteras Dei) and the ‘words of God” 
 
 (voces Dei), which the Christian studies for warning or 
 
 remembrance, and to which he looks ‘as the food of his 
 
 faith, the spring of his hope, and the bulwark of his trust.” 
 Like all the other Fathers whom we have examined, Tertullian sees a 
 profound unity in the dispensations of God. ‘‘ The same 
 
 The unity of all ΟΝ τ es : 
 
 Saou. divine power (divinitas) was preached in the Gospel 
 adv. Mare.x.2. which had ever been known in the Law, though the dis- 
 signe cipline was not the same.” ‘ The Law, indeed, is the 
 
 root (radix) of the Gospels;”? and ‘in succession all 
 the Prophets utter the words of the same God (os prophetarum ejusdem Dez 
 vocibus sonat), enforcing the same law by an iteration of the same pre- 
 cepts.” He even goes farther back than Moses for the first elements of 
 the ancient Covenant. He traces the development of this dispensation in 
 
 Paradise and among the Patriarchs, apart from the ceremonial observan- 
 
 ces of the Jewish ritual. Abel, Enoch, Melchisedec, and 
 
 Lot, were accepted by that God, “ who, according to the 
 
 circumstances of the times, reshapes (reformantem) the precepts of His 
 
 Law for the salvation of men” (1. salutem). . 
 
 1. TERTULLIAN. 
 
 Apol. 18. 
 
 de Anima, 2. 
 Apol. 51. 
 
 Apol. 39. 
 
 adv. Jud. ce. 2. 
 
 1 By Maréchal, Concordantia Patrum, um” in its ordinary acceptation, though 
 I. p. 162; a work which is admirably it seems to have been current before his 
 executed, and is well worthy of the time. [Marcion] duos deos dividens pro- 
 Benedictine fame. inde diversos, alterum alterius Jnstru- 
 
 2 Tertullian is the first writer, 1 be- menti vel (quod magis usui est dicere) 
 lieve, who uses the word ‘*Testament- Testamenti ... adv. Mare. Iv. 1. 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 421 
 
 Thus Prophets, Evangelists, and Apostles, are placed by Tertullian in 
 
 one rank as God’s ministering servants. Christ spoke by 
 Moses, ‘‘ for He was the Spirit, of the Creator;”’...and 
 “‘the prophecies are the voice of the Lord.” The madness 
 (dementia) of those who deny that the Apostles knew all 
 things,’ or who admit that they knew all, but maintained 
 
 Inspiration under 
 the New Covenant. 
 
 adv. Mare, tii. 10. 
 Cf. de Orat. 9. de 
 Cor. 9. 
 
 that they did not reveal all things to all men, is equally reprehensible. The 
 
 four Gospels, he tells us, are reared on the certain basis 
 of Apostolical authority, and so are inspired in a far 
 different sense from the writings of the spiritual Chris- 
 tian. ‘“ All the faithful, it is true, have the Spirit of God,? 
 but all are not Apostles”.....“ The Apostles have the 
 Holy Spirit in a peculiar sense; they have it in the works 
 of prophecy, and in the operation of mighty powers (effi- 
 cacia virtutum), and in the gift of tongues,’ not as pos- 
 sessing the influence in part as the rest.”’. ... . The revela- 
 tion of the Apostles is the revelation of Christ; and 
 “happy is that Church’’— he is speaking of the Roman 
 
 adv. Mare. iii, 6; 
 te. 13. 
 
 de Resurr. Carn. 
 22. 
 
 de Preescr. Her. 
 25. 
 adv. Marc. w. 2. 
 dc exh. Castit. 4. 
 id, 
 
 de Preescr. 
 ret. 21. 
 id. 36. 
 
 He- 
 
 Church as it then was — “which combines the Law and the Prophets 
 with the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles, and draws her faith 
 
 from them.”’.,... 
 
 This being the case, we might expect that Tertullian would reject that 
 
 which is not proved by Scripture,* and bid such as tam- 
 pered with the Sacred Volume, fear the woe destined for 
 those who add to or take from it;”? while he himself 
 “adores its fulness which reveals the Worker and the 
 works ;”” which admits of wide application, and univer- 
 sal reference; for ‘‘all Scripture is fit for edification, 
 being inspired by God.” Nay, more, he even thinks that 
 “the Scriptures were so arranged by the will of God 
 
 The peculiar au- 
 thority of 
 ture. 
 
 adv. Hermog. 22. 
 
 id. 
 
 de hab. Mia. 3. 
 
 Serip- 
 
 de Preescr. 
 Her. 39. 
 
 that they might afford materials for heretics, since it is written that here- 
 
 sies must be, which could not be without the Scriptures.” 
 
 In his Principles of Interpretation Tertullian exhibits an equal sense 
 
 of the truthfulness and depth of the Bible. ‘ The lan- 
 guage of the Prophets,” he says, when arguing from their 
 language on the Resurrection, “is generally allegoric 
 and figurative, but not always; ... many of their words 
 
 The Interpreta- 
 tion of Scripture. 
 de Resurr. Cara. 
 
 ων 
 
 can be maintained in a naked and simple sense.® But, nevertheless, in 
 
 1JIn reference to Gal. ii. 11, he re- 
 marks rightly: Conversationis fuit vi- 
 tium non predicationis. De Prescr. 
 Her. 22. 
 
 2 This doctrine was part of the 
 ** Regula Fidei” (de Preser. Her. 138): 
 {Profiteamur Jesum Christum] misisse 
 vicariam vim Spiritus Sancti qui cre- 
 dentes agat. 
 
 3 Documento linguarum, as a friend 
 suggests to me for documentorum lin- 
 guam. 
 
 4 Cf. de Monog.4. Negat Scriptura 
 quod non notat; and de Cor. Mil, 2. 
 Prohibetur quod non ultro est permis- 
 sum. 
 
 5 In all such cases Tertullian seems 
 inclined to destroy the primary histor- 
 
 36 
 
422 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 other places! he admits the mystical import even of numbers, and 
 traces a symbolism of the Apostolic twelve in the 
 twelve fountains of Elim, the twelve gems of the high- 
 priest’s robe, and the twelve stones selected by Joshua 
 from the Jordan. He finds a figure of Holy Baptism 
 in the pool of Bethesda,— though this was effective only once a 
 year, but that is so always; and though that wrought (operabutur) 
 temporal health, while this renews (reformat) eternal vigor. ‘The 
 same Sacrament was still more clearly ane in 
 the passage of the Red Sea; and as “after the flood, 
 —the Baptism of the World, so to speak, —by which 
 the ancient sins of man were cleared away, the dove first brought the 
 olive-branch of peace, so, when we rise from the Baptismal font, the 
 Dove, —the Holy Spirit, — flies to us, sent forth from heaven, where the 
 Church is the antitype of the ark.” 
 
 At the same time Tertullian urges us to employ “the rudder of inter- 
 
 adv. Mare. iv. 13. 
 
 de Bapt. 5. 
 
 de Bapt. 9. 
 de Bapt. 8. 
 
 pretation, ... 
 Swyject to the 
 Church. 
 
 de Prescr. Her. 
 
 ae no divine utterance is so unconnected, 
 that the words only can be maintained, and not their 
 general bearing (ratio) ;” for we must adhere “te the 
 
 47. rule of the Church (regula Ecclesice), which she received 
 
 de Preescr. Her. 
 
 from the Apostles, and the Apostles from Christ, and 
 19. Christ from God ;” 
 
 . while we may be assured, that 
 
 “where there is seen to be truth of discipline and Chris- 
 tian faith, there will there be the truth of the Scriptures, and of interpre- 
 
 tation, and of all traditions.” ? 
 
 2. Cyprian’s doctrine of Inspiration is scarcely less exact, though less 
 
 2. CYPRIAN. express. 
 
 Lestim. i. Pref. 
 ad. 
 
 He more frequently shows his sense of the 
 value of the “divine Scriptures ” by quoting their testi- 
 monies,’ than by fixing their authority. The books of 
 
 the Old and New Testaments are to him “ the fountains of divine fulness 
 
 ical fulfilment of the prophecy, regard- 
 ing the employment of the tenses as 
 arbitrary, since ‘‘ with the Deity there 
 is no difference of time, for with Him 
 eternity itself brings all time to the 
 same uniform relation” (dirigit wni- 
 formem statum temporum) (adv. Mare. 
 111. 5). ‘* Kternity hath no divisions of 
 time” (non habet tempus ceternitas) 
 (adv. Mare. τ. 8). Pantenus, Nova- 
 tian, and Irenzus, seem to have held 
 the same doctrine. 
 
 1 Compare his explanation of Isa. vii. 
 Non solum sonum nominis spectes sed 
 et sensum... nobiscum Deus; . 
 spolia autem Samariz ipsos magos; 
 regem autem Assyriorum Herodem in- 
 
 tellige ... (adv. Mare. 11. 12). Cf. 
 Just. M. Dial. § 77 
 
 See other examples adv. Marc. 111. 18. 
 
 2 Cf. Bp. Kaye’s Essay on Tertullian, 
 pp. 290-3804; and especially p. 297, n 
 (ed. 2), for the idea of primitive ‘ Tra- 
 dition” in relation to the doctrine of 
 the English Church. This tradition 
 was merely hermeneutic, and not an 
 independent source of doctrine. 
 
 3 Cyprian composed three books of 
 ‘** Testimonies,” containing a selection 
 of texts from Scripture, arranged for 
 doctrinal purposes, at the request of a 
 friend. 
 
 The quotations from Cyprian’s corre: 
 spondents are given in brackets. 
 
 — 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 423 
 
 from which the Christian must draw strength and wisdom ;” the source 
 of those “divine commands (magisteria) by which God has vouchsafed 
 to train and instruct us, that, enlightened by his pure and 
 bright radiance, we may hold the way of life through 
 their saving mysteries” (sacramenta). They are “the foundation of our 
 hope, the bulwark of our faith, the support of our hearts, the guide of 
 our path, the safeguard of our salvation.” In the Scrip- ; 
 
 Betta . = (Ep. xaxi. 
 tures the Christian must find “the torch which shall — 5) 
 kindle his faith” in the hour of danger; ‘the arms with 
 which he shall face the terrors of persecution and the 
 
 de Orat. Dom. i. 
 
 (ἢ 
 
 Ep. 1υῖϊὶ. (56) 7 
 cf. Ep. vi. (81) 2. 
 
 coming of Antichrist;”’ and “the trumpet which shall [Ep. xaxi. (26) 
 rouse him to the battle.” When writing to future mar-  *! 
 
 tyrs, Cyprian says, “that his poor skill, aided by divine yg le Δίατί. 
 inspiration,' shall bring forth armor for them from the ρὲ ; : 
 
 precepts of the Lord.” .. . “1 know,” he adds, “that the 
 intricacies of human speech must be removed, and only those things set 
 down, which God says, and by which Christ exhorts His servants to mar- 
 tyrdom.” We read in his writings, again and again, that the Holy Spirit 
 spake in the Law and in the Gospel,—by Prophets, 
 Apostles, and Evangelists. ‘By Him the Prophets 
 were quickened to a knowledge of the future.” By Him 
 the Apostles teach us, “ what they learnt from the pre- 
 cepts of the Lord and heavenly revelations” (calestibus 
 mandatis), being “full of the grace of the inspiration ‘of their Master” 
 (dominice inspirationis). By Him, too, according to the promise, the 
 Christian answers his accusers in the hour of death; 
 “for we do not speak, but the Spirit of the Father, 
 who departeth, not from His confessors, and Himself speaketh in us, 
 and shareth our crown.” And thus it is that the Power of God lives 
 in the Church, “ which, like Paradise, includes within 
 her walls all fruit-bearing trees, which she waters with 
 four rivers, even the four Gospels, and on which she pours, with a 
 heavenly stream, the grace of a saving baptism.” 2 
 
 Yet more; the teaching of Scripture — whether by History or Proph- 
 ecy, by Laws or Psalms —is full of deep meaning, and 
 its spiritual import is perfect, — “the Gospel cannot 
 stand in part and fall in part,’ — nor is it limited in its 
 application like the doctrine of men; so that Cyprian describes a selection 
 
 de Lapsis, 7. 
 
 Ep. Wiii. (56) 5, 6. 
 Ep. lWwiii. 3. 
 
 de Op. et Eleem. ὃ. 
 
 Ep. Wwiii. (56) 5. 
 
 Ep. laxiii. 10. 
 
 Cf. Ep. trix. (76). 
 de Lapsis, 20. 
 
 11 am not sure that Maréchal is 
 right in referring these words to the 
 Holy Seriptures. Cf. Ep. Lxxim. 8. f. 
 Libellum ‘‘de bono patientiz” guan- 
 tum valuit nostra mediocritas permit- 
 tente Domino et inspirante conscripsi- 
 mus. 
 
 2 In one place Cyprian seems to draw 
 
 a distinction between the writings of 
 the Bible: ‘‘ Much hath God chosen to 
 be spoken and heard through His 
 Prophets; yet how much greater are 
 those words which the Son of God 
 speaketh— which the Word of God, 
 who was in the Prophets, testifieth by 
 Lis own yoice.’? — De Orat. Dom. § 1. 
 
424 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 of texts which he made under a remarkable similitude: “they are,” he 
 says, “as the very wool and purple from the Lamb by 
 
 de Exhort. Mart. 
 Pref. 3. 
 
 whom we are redeemed and quickened, of which each 
 may make for himself a robe, . . 
 
 εν that, having covered 
 
 their former nakedness, all may wear the dress of Christ, arrayed in the 
 
 sanctification of heavenly grace.” 
 
 Among the types which Cyprian 
 
 quotes, we find the Church prefigured by “the robe 
 
 de Unt. Eccles.7. 
 Ep.lxix. (76) 2,4. 
 Ep. laiv. (59) 3. 
 Ep. lxiti. 4, 6. 
 
 without seam,” by the ark, and by Rahab. He sees a 
 spiritual meaning in the account of the raising of the 
 Shunammite’s son, from which he deduces the propriety 
 of Infant Baptism; and discovers a symbol of the Eu- 
 
 - charist in the “ bread and wine,” which Melchisedec 
 offered to Abraham, and, again, in the blessing of Judah. He recognizes 
 alike the authority and the mystery of Scripture; and declares the peculiar 
 and lasting functions of the Spirit in the Church and in the Christian. 
 
 3. Lastly, the sentiments of Cyprian were shared by the other bishops 
 
 of the African Church of his time. 
 the Council of Carthage, on the rebaptization of heretics, 
 
 ConciL. CAk- 
 
 THAG. 
 
 In the account of 
 
 we find that many of those present based their judg- 
 ments expressly on the authority of Scripture, using such language? as 
 shows most clearly the feelings with which they regarded it 3 
 
 SECT. VI.— THE FATHERS 
 
 OF ALEXANDRIA. 
 
 ᾿Αλεξανδρεὺς τῷ γένει, ἀνὴρ λόγιος, δυνατὸς Sv ἐν ταῖς ypabais. — ACTS 
 XVIH. 24. 
 
 The designs of the Macedonian conquerer in founding Alexandria 
 
 were more than fulfilled. 
 
 He wished to unite in that city the East 
 
 and West by the bonds of commerce and the intercourse of daily business ; 
 
 1 In connection with Cyprian we may 
 quote the following passage from Fir- 
 milan (Bp. of Cxserea in Cappadocia): 
 “The Divine Word surpasses the nature 
 of man, nor can the soul form a perfect 
 and entire conception of it, and there- 
 fore there is so great a number of 
 Prophets, that the manifoldness of Di- 
 vine wisdom may be distributed among 
 many. Whence also [at a later time] 
 the first is ordered ‘to keep silence in 
 prophesying, if a revelation shall have 
 been made to a second” ({[Cypr.] Ep. 
 LXxv. 4). It would be impossible to 
 find a more distinct recognition of the 
 separate purposes of the sacred writers. 
 
 21. g., “Seripture Sancte” (5, 6, 
 74); “ Seripturee deitice ” (8); ‘* Hzre- 
 ticos — decerpentes sancta et admira- 
 bilia Secripturarum verba execrandos 
 censeo” ... (81); ** Divine Scripture ” 
 (33). 
 
 3 The very remarkable poem of Com- 
 modian — one of the most interesting 
 specimens of rude Latin now remain- 
 ing — offers the same kind of mystical 
 interpretations as Tertullian and Cyp- 
 rian. For instance, addressing a Jew, 
 he says (ὁ 39): * Inspice Liam typum 
 Synagoge,” etc. So again he says: 
 ‘In te Apostolus clamat, immo Deus 
 per illum * (§ 58). 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 425 
 
 and it proved the point of their religious contact, and the centre of a 
 new spiritual life. The faith of Palestine and the reason 
 of Greece existed there side by side, till they were pre- 
 pared to received the principle of a combined vitality in 
 the preaching of Christianity. The colony of Jews at Alexandria, — 
 “the glory of Israel,” as they were called,—adopted the language, and 
 learnt the doctrines of Greek Philosophy; they recognized the element of 
 good which it contained,! and, doubtless, if they did not teach, at least in 
 turn suggested fresh thoughts to its masters. The Jew- 
 ish Rabbi became an instructor of the zyptian king, 
 and ‘“‘the entire interpretation of all the books of the Law (τῶν διὰ τοῦ 
 νόμου πάντων) was completed under the prince surnamed Philadelphus.” 
 We may believe that the later writers of this school lost sight of the stern 
 realities of Jewish history, and, in anticipation of a wider future, forgot 
 the meaning of the past; yet, even Philo professed only 
 
 to follow the principles and patterns of men of old time, Bi hee eee: 
 who interpreted allegorically the philosophy of their 
 
 fathers (τὴν πάτριον φιλοσοφίαν ἀλληγοροῦντες); and the writings of the 
 Apocrypha exhibit unequivocal marks of the same view 
 of Scripture. However this may be, it cannot be denied 
 that the views of the allegoric school were first accepted and then syste- 
 matized by the Christian fathers, and we shall endeavor to show in what 
 way the unscientific criticism of Clement, which was based on the mere 
 feeling of the depth of the sacred writings, was reduced to symmetry and 
 order by Origen, whose views of inspiration, with all the faults of his 
 Eastern ardor, are perhaps the noblest and worthiest which have ever 
 beeen set forth. 
 
 1. Clement’s doctrine of the plenary Inspiration of Scripture is at once 
 rigid in its primary form and wide in its general applica- Ge vews Arex. 
 tion. He recognizes the working of Providence in the Str. vi. 8, § 64. 
 moral teaching of Greeks and Barbarians, and traces “τ δ 512. 
 the origin of Pagan philosophy to the same God (6 tis Ἑλληνικῆς 
 φιλοσοφίας δοτὴρ τοῖς “EAAnot) who was the Author of the Mosaic and 
 Christian covenants, and compares the Jewish prophets with those among 
 the heathen ‘whom He raised up as prophets in their own dialect, and 
 separated from common (xvdaiwy) men, as they were 
 
 The Alexcand vine 
 School. 
 
 2 Macc. i. 10. 
 
 Sirac. xxiv. 28-9. 
 
 able to receive the Divine favor ;”’ while in another place Str. vi. 8, § 67. 
 he does not hesitate to call philosophy “a peculiar cove- “ὅν 8% 
 nant (οἷον διαϑήκην οἰκείαν) given to the Greeks on Peed. i. ri. § 96. 
 which might be built the philosophy of Christ.”’* But it Protr, i. § 5, 
 
 was by “the masters of Israel” that God led men prop- 
 erly to the Messiah, speaking to them in the Law,® the Psalms,* and the 
 
 1 Olshausen, Ein Wort u. s. w. δὲ 18, § 128), as well as that of the Shepherd 
 19. of Hermas (§ 121). 
 2 In illustration Clement quotes the 
 " 3 Hon Oe ᾿ 
 Κήρυγμα Πέτρου. He asserts explicitly Str. 11. 28, § 148 
 the inspiration of this work (Str. v1.15, 4 Ped. 11.10,§ 110, Ὁ λόγος τοῦτε 
 
 36* 
 
426 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 Prophets ;1 for, “disregarding the lifeless instruments, —lyre and harp, 
 —the Word of God reduced to harmony by the Holy Spirit not only this | 
 world, but man the microcosm, both body and soul, and so makes melody 
 to God through that many-voiced instrument, and says to man: Thou 
 art my harp, my flute, my temple: my harp, from the harmony [of many 
 notes], —my flute, from the Spirit that breatheth through thee, —my 
 temple, from the Word that dwelleth in thee.”. . .“ Truly 
 of man the Lord wrought a glorious living instrument 
 after the fashion of His own image; one which might give every harmony 
 of God tuneful and holy” (&pyavov Θεοῦ παναρμόνιον, ἐμμελὲς καὶ ἅγιον, 
 σοφία ὑπερκόσμιος, οὐράνιος Adyos). ‘Thus the foundations of our faith 
 rest on no insecure basis, ‘‘for we have received them 
 from God through the Scriptures,” ... “of which (ὧν 
 γραφῶν) not one tittle shall pass away without being 
 accomplished ; for the mouth of the Lord, the Holy Spirit, spoke it’ 
 (ἐλάλησε ταῦτα); “and we have believed on Him 
 through His voice; and he that believeth on the Word, 
 knoweth that the thing is true, for the Word is truth; but he that believ- 
 eth not on him that speaketh, disbelieveth God :” for 
 he disbelieveth “that which hath been spoken by the 
 Holy Spirit for our salvation” (τὰ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος σωτηρίως 
 εἰρημένα). 
 The Gospel dispensation is still more glorious than the Law: ‘the 
 Prophets were perfect in prophecy, the just perfect in 
 
 Protr.t. § 5. 
 
 Str. ii. 4, § 12. 
 Protr. ix. § 82. 
 
 Str. ii. 4, § 12. 
 
 Str. vi. 15, § 126. 
 
 ac News Testes. wiehteousness t=. but the Apostles were fulfilled 
 Str. iv. 21, 8185. (πεπληρωμένοι) in all things.” | Yet ‘there is no discord 
 Str. ti. 23, § 146. between the Law and the Gospel, but harmony, for they 
 
 both proceed from the same Author” (ἑνὸς ὄντος ἀμφοῖν 
 χορηγοῦ τοῦ Κυρίου), “differing in name and time to 
 suit the age and culture of their hearers (kad ἡλικίαν καὶ προκοπὴν οἰκονο- 
 μικῶς δεδομέναι), by a wise economy, but one potentially (δυνάμει),᾽ since 
 “ the faith in Christ and the knowledge (γνῶσις) of the 
 Gospel is the explanation (ἐξήγησις) and fulfilment of 
 the Law.”2 In all the Scriptures, — “in the Law, in the Prophets, and 
 in the blessed Gospel,’”— ‘which are ratified by the 
 authority of Almighty power,’ — “ κυρίας οὔσας ἐξ 
 αὐϑεντείας παντοκρατορικῆς) we “have the Lord as the 
 spring of our teaching, who, by the various ministrations of His servants, 
 in sundry times and in divers manners from beginning to end guides the 
 course of knowledge.” 
 
 Clement is not inclined to undervalue human learning, yet he adds that 
 
 Str. ii. 6, § 29. 
 
 Str. iv. 21, § 136. 
 
 Str. iv. 1, § 2. 
 Str. viis 16, § 95. 
 
 ψάλλει διὰ Δαβὶδ περὶ τοῦ κυρίου προφήτης ... μᾶλλονε δὲ ἐν Ἵερ. τὸ 
 λέγων (Ps. χ]ν. 8 sq.). ἅγιον πνεῦμα ἐπιδείκνυσι τὸν δεόν. 
 
 ὶ 2ΟΥ Str. vir. 16, § 108; Adwmbr. in 
 
 1 Protrept. viii. § 78. Ἱερεμίας δὲ ὃ Petri Ep. 1m.1. 12; Pedag. 11. 12, § 94 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 427 
 
 “the reading of the Scriptures of the Lord is necessary for the demon- 
 stration of what the Christian teacher brings forward ;” 
 
 and as they are the basis of our spiritual knowledge so as sie Τα’ 
 
 Seripture to Man. 
 
 are they also the means of quickening our spiritual vision. Str. vi. 11, § 91. 
 “The Christian training exercises our mind and awak- © 15 8 138, 
 
 . 5 ᾿ 5 : ΡΣ Str. t. 5, 32. 
 eus our intelligence, begetting in us an inquiring and 
 
 sagacious spirit (ἀγχίνοιαν ζητητικήν), through that true philosophy which 
 we liave found, or rather received from Him who is the Truth (f#v..... 
 Tap αὐτῆς τῆς ἀληδείας ἔχουσιν oi μύσται). We may have fallen from 
 our original glory, yet Clement bids those “ whose men- 
 tal eye has been dulled by evil rearing and instruction 
 to come to their proper light, seeking the truth which sets forth that 
 which is unwritten in writing” (ἐπὶ τὴν ἀλήϑειαν τὴν ἐγγράφως τὰ ἄγραφα 
 δηλοῦσαν) ; and to come with humility, for “some patch 
 together divers fabrications and falsehoods that they may 
 seem to reject the Scriptures, — that is, the Holy Spirit, — with a show of 
 reason ;’’— with patience, for some “have refused to 
 admit them after a superficial perusal, having lacked the 
 zeal to penetrate the depth of their meaning ;”” — and with obedience, 
 “for he ceases to be a man (ϑήριον γένοιτο), 80 to speak, 
 who spurns the tradition of the Church, and lightly 
 turns aside (ἀποσκιρτήσας,ἴο the opinions of human heresies.” And then 
 he says, quoting the words of St. Paul (2 Tim. iii. 15), “the Scriptures 
 are truly holy, for they are writings which make us holy 
 and make us godlike (τὰ ἱεροποιοῦντα καὶ ϑεοποιοῦντα 
 γράμματα) ; and of these holy writings and words the Bible is composed, 
 which the same Apostle calls inspired by God, being useful for doctrine, for 
 reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” 
 
 The method of Interpretation adopted by the Alexandrine Fathers 
 serves to place their view of Inspiration in the clearest 
 light; for it was not to them, as it might seem now, a 
 mere exercise of ingenuity, but an earnest search after a wider and more 
 certain knowledge (γνῶσι5). Clement maintains the existence of an 
 allegoric meaning throughout the whole of the Bible, 
 whose deeper mysteries are only seen ‘‘by the light 
 which dawns on those who are truly initiated in knowl- 
 
 ° The Law. 
 edge, and seck the truth in love. ‘ Moses,” he tells us, Str. i. 26, § 167; 
 “was a living law guided by the gracious Word” (νύμος φ'. 10. 
 ἔμψυχος τῷ χρηστῷ Ady κυβερνώμενος), so that his writ- hea riatien 3 fis 
 ings are still full of instruction, though their literal ac- 
 ceptation has passed away.'! The details of patriarchal history,? and the 
 
 St. i.1, § 10. 
 
 Str. vii. 16, § 99. 
 
 Str. vii. 16, § 98. 
 
 Str. vii. 16, § 95. 
 
 Protr. ix. § 87. 
 
 Interpretation. 
 
 Str. vt. 15, § 129. 
 
 1 Cf. Str. 1 15, § 67. The Ten Com- 2 For instance, he explains the his- 
 mandments have a philosophic as well tory of Abraham in the following way, 
 as a natural sense;—‘* Even the two apparently after Philo: Divine Wis- 
 tables may be a prophecy of the two dom (Sarah) brings no fruit at first to 
 Covenants.” Str. vi. 16, §§ 183 sqq. the believer (Abraham), and so, while 
 
428 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 proportions of the Jewish Tabernacle,’ are significant to the Christian 
 philosopher (γνωστικός). Even the admission of Psalms into the Sacred 
 Canon suggests the idea “‘of the harmony of the Law 
 and the Prophets, of the Gospel and the Apostles, in 
 the Church, and of that under-current of melody which flows on through 
 all the changes of persons” (τήν τε ὑποβεβηκυῖαν τὴν καϑ᾽ ἔκαστον προ- 
 φήτην κατὰ τὰς μεταπηδήσεις τῶν προσώπων συνῳδίαν). But “it would 
 be a long task to go through all the details of the Law and 
 the Prophets which are expressed in riddles, for almost 
 the whole of Scripture speaks to us in this oracular language,” yet most 
 deeply and fully in the books of the new Covenant. 
 
 “The Saviour teaches His disciples nothing after a merely human 
 fashion, but all things bya Divine and mystic wisdom ;... 
 for even those things which seem to have been expressed 
 simply, still are found to require as much attention, nay, 
 even more than what was spoken enigmatically, on account of the exceed- 
 ing excess of meaning in them.” His works? and words? alike convey 
 ever-new lessons to those who search for them: hence it is necessary in 
 reading Scripture to regard the general scope and the particular phrase, 
 for “the careful distinction of words and facts produces 
 great light in our souls, and we must needs listen atten- 
 tively to those single expressions which convey many significations, and to 
 the single signification of many words together.” Thus, by the continual 
 advances of Faith, we gain the mystical sense* of the Bible, while “the 
 
 Str. vi. ll, 88. 
 
 Str. v. 6, § 32. 
 
 The Gospel. 
 de div. Salv. § 5. 
 
 Str. vi. 10, § 82. 
 
 unwritten tradition of the written Word,® given by the 
 
 Str. vi. 15, § 131; 
 cf. 8 13. 
 
 Saviour Himself to the Apostles, is handed down even 
 
 toe us, being inscribed on new hearts according to the 
 renewing of the Book by the power of God” (κατὰ τὴν ἀνακαίνωσι. τοῦ 
 
 βιβλίου). 
 
 he is still vigorous, he is induced to 
 apply himself to worldly learning (the 
 Egyptian Hagar), but afterwards she 
 gives birth toa spontaneous truth (τὸ 
 avrouadés, Isaac). Str. τ. δ, §§ 80, 81. 
 
 1 He gives a detailed explanation of 
 the symbolism of the Tabernacle: Str. 
 ν. 6,382 sqq. Thus the hangings which 
 covered it indicated that its mysteries 
 were veiled; the curtain over the jive 
 pillars (the five senses) represented the 
 separation between the worlds of sense 
 and reason; while the jour pillars 
 which divided the Holy of Holies from 
 the Sanctuary, signified the four Cove- 
 nants and the sacred Name of God. 
 
 2 Cf. Str. νι. 11, § 94. 
 
 8 Cf, Str. Iv. 4, § 15. 
 
 4 Cf. fr.66. 6 σωτὴρ τοὺς ἀποστό- 
 λους ἐδίδασκεν τὰ μὲν πρῶτα τυπικῶς 
 καὶ μυστικῶς, τὰ δὲ ὕστερα παραβολι’ 
 κῶς κἀὶ ἠνιγμένως, τὰ δὲ τρίτα σαφῶς 
 καὶ γυμνῶς καταμόνας. Generally (Cf. 
 Str. νι. 15, § 182) Clement only notices 
 two senses of Scripture: in Str. 1. 28, 
 § 179, he appears to consider three. 
 
 It is a natural tradition which repre- 
 sents James and John and Peter as im- 
 mediately instructed by our Lord after 
 his Resurrection, and the _ others 
 through them. Clem. Alex. ap. Euseb. 
 H. E.11.1, 3; cf. Str. να. 8,5 68. 
 
 5 Cf. Str. vir. 17, ὁ 105. This was the 
 key (κλείς) of the true believer, while 
 the misbeliever has a false key (ἀντι- 
 κλείς), 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 429 
 
 _ This inner teaching Clement regards as useful for our moral training, 
 and necessary from the nature and aim of Revelation. δ deca We 
 “The Scriptures conceal their meaning (ἐπικρύπτονται — jidden meaning of 
 τὸν νοῦν) that we may be led to inquire from the com- = Serpture. 
 mencement of our course, and be ever vigilant in the Perinee ot 
 investigation of the words of salvation;’’... “ their character is figurative 
 (παραβολικός), because the Lord, though He was not of the world (κοσμι- 
 xés), came to men as if He were of the world, endued with every [human] 
 virtue, and purposed to lead man — the foster-brother of the world — by 
 the way of knowledge to pursue the intelligible and absolute, rising from 
 a lower to a higher sphere” (ἔμελλεν τὸν σύντροφον τοῦ 
 κόσμου avSpwrov ἐπὶ τὰ νοητὰ καὶ κύρια Sia τῆς γνώσεως 
 ἀνάγειν ἐκ κόσμου εἰς κόσμον). Consequently ‘there are difficulties in the 
 Bible, yet all things, we read (Prov. viii. 9), are plain to those who under- 
 stand, that is, to all who receive and ever preserve the interpretation of the 
 Scriptures, which has been made clear by Christ, according to the rule of 
 the Church (ἐκκλεσιαστικὸς κανών), which consists in the perfect combina- 
 tion of all the notes and harmonies (συνῳδία καὶ συμφονία) of the Law and 
 the Prophets with the Testament! delivered at the presence of the Lord.” 
 2. Hitherto we have collected the scattered hints and implied assump- 
 tions of the plenary Inspiration of the Scriptures which 
 are found in the works of the early Fathers of the Church ; 
 we have still a more difficult task before us in the examination of the 
 direct arguments and definite conclusions of the great teacher of Alexan- 
 dria — of him whose proper name is said to mean the “Son of Light,” 
 and whose labors earned for him the title of ‘‘ Adamantine.” The for- 
 tunes of Origen during his lifetime aptly prefigured the fate of his writ- 
 ings. His zeal was accounted infatuation, and his learning turned to a 
 reproach. Though he was known to have reclaimed the wandering, and 
 to have refuted the malicious, yet he was driven from the service of the 
 Church in the very city where he had preached Christ on the steps of the 
 Temple of Serapis, and strengthened his father to endure the terrors of 
 martyrdom. Though ‘countless doctors, priests, and confessors” pro- 
 ceeded from his school, he was himself arraigned as a heretic and con- 
 victed ; though he was the friend and teacher of saints,” his salvation was 
 questioned and denied. For many centuries he was condemned almost 
 universally by the Western Church, in consequence of the adverse judg- 
 ment of Jerome. In later times Picus of Mirandola® ventured to main- 
 tain the cause of the great Father; the thesis was suppressed, but the 
 
 Str. vi. § 125. 
 
 2. ORIGEN. 
 
 1 Διαϑήκη. Cf. de Div. Serv. § 8; passages from Origen’s writings on 
 Greg. Nyss. ap. Suicer. 8. Vv. ἢ Sed- Holy Scripture, etc., which bears the 
 πνευστος διαϑήκη. title of Philocalia. Huet, Origeniana, 
 
 1. 4, 10, gives a list of the pupdls of 
 
 2 Gregory Thaumaturgus and Basil Origen. 
 
 compiled the edmirable selection of ὃ Huet, Origeniana, τι. 4, 3, 19. 
 
430 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 author remained uncensured ; indeed, a pious lady was said to have re- 
 ceived a revelation not long before, which seemed to assure her of the 
 forgiveness of Samson, Solomon, and Origen. This hope, however, in 
 the case of the last, was admitted apparently by few: and Baronius | ex-: 
 presses his surprise that any doubt of his condemnation could be raised 
 after the sentence of Anastasius. 
 
 It is not our object now to enter at all into the general opinions and 
 character of Origen: it will be enough for us to listen to his own words 
 about Holy Scripture, and if we find in them a deep and solid foundation 
 of truth constructed with earnestness and wisdom, — unaptly crowned, it 
 may be, with the fantastic structures of a warm and hasty imagination, — 
 it is possible that we may be led to regard his other labors with charity, if 
 not with gratitude, and to remember that his errors refer to questions 
 which had not in his time been decided by the authority of the Church. 
 
 The work “on Principles” (περὶ ἀρχῶν) which supplied the enemies of 
 Origen with the richest store of objections, contains also 
 the most complete view of his Theory of Inspiration. 
 At the commencement of the first book he assumes the 
 doctrine as acknowledged by all Christians, and in the last he supports it 
 by a profound and independent proof, which in later times suggested the 
 “Analogy ” of Butler. “ Truly,” he says, “it is most 
 evidently preached in the Churches that the Holy Spirit 
 inspired each of the Saints, Prophets, and Apostles, and 
 that the same Spirit was present in those of old time as in those who were 
 inspired at the coming of Christ;” for ‘“ Christ, the Word of God, was 
 in Moses and the Prophets,...and by His Spirit they 
 spake and did all things.” By the help of this illumi- 
 nating Power the ministers of truth explained the hidden mysteries in 
 the life and actions of man; unfolded the workings of God’s Providence 
 in Creation and Redemption ; and, at the same time, edified the simple 
 ‘and unlearned by instructive narratives. The true God acted on the 
 prophets to enlighten and strengthen them, and not to 
 cloud or confuse their natural powers, like the Pythian. 
 Deity, who was akin to those demons which Christians are wont to drive 
 out by prayers and adjurations ; for the divine messengers ‘by the con- 
 tact of the Holy Spirit with their soul (διὰ τῆς πρὸς τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτῶν ἁφῆς 
 τοῦ καλουμένου ἁγίον πνεύματος), 80 to speak, gained a keener and a 
 clearer intuition of spiritual truth” (διορατικώτεροι τὸν νοῦν [Eth. Nic. 
 VI. 6] καὶ τὴν ψυχὴν λαμπρότεροι) ; and they thus became more perfect 
 men as well as wiser seers. 
 
 The details of the Cosmogony and the records of the chosen people 
 
 were, in Origen’s judgment, as truly written by the in- 
 Oy ae ες spiration of Divine Wisdom as the works of the Proph- 
 Ho ets. He assuines that “the records cf the Gospels are 
 oracles of the Lord, pure oracles as silver purified seven 
 times in the fire” (Ps. xii. 6), and that there is a meaning in their minutest 
 
 General view of 
 Inspiration. 
 
 de Prine. i. 
 Pref. 4. 
 
 τῶν 1. wd. iv. 15. 
 
 e. Cels. vii. 4. 
 
 1 Huet, Origeniana, 11. 4, 3, 21. 
 
‘gardless of the full and perfect meaning of such pas- 
 
 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 421 
 
 details ; while they are without error, inasmuch as we believe “that they 
 were accurately written by the cooperation of the Holy 
 
 Spirit”. ... The opening words of St. Luke's Gospel 
 
 seem to him to prove and illustrate this doctrine of Inspira- Py prem 
 
 tion: they ‘‘ attempted ” (ἐπεχείρησαν) to write histories αὐ. 8. 
 
 who did so without the gift of God’s grace (χωρὶς χαρίσς | Matte Tom. 
 
 ματος); our Evangelists did not “ attempt” that which Si & te 
 
 they did by the motion of the Holy Spirit (ἔγραψαν ἐξ ἁγίου 
 
 κινούμενοι Tvevuatos), and their books only we receive on the authority of 
 the Church of God. Yet more, Origen does not hesitate 
 to say that the Christian receives the words of Paul as the 
 words of God,! for he was made fit (ἱκανωθ εἰς) to be a minister of the 
 new Covenant, not of the letter, but of the spirit. They 
 only, he elsewhere tells us, will find contradictions in the 
 Apostle’s writings ‘‘who sever the one doctrine of the 
 Faith into the diverse opinions of sects, and examine only those testimo- 
 nies of Scripture which support their. peculiar view, re- 
 
 de Princ. iv. 14. 
 
 In the Epistles. 
 
 Comm. in Joan, 
 τι ° 
 om. ὃ. ὁ. 
 
 Comm. in Rom, 
 
 Lib. iti. 7. 
 
 sages as exhibit the opposite side of the truth”. (e divers 
 
 veniunt). But, again, he notices that St. Paul speaks some things in his 
 own person which do not possess the same authority ;* and he seems to 
 consider that the inspiration of the Epistles generally is 
 derived from the Gospels, for they are a Gospel in an- 
 other form. Yet still they are not less pregnant in mean- 
 ing than the other parts of Scripture, though to some 
 they may seem more plain than the /istoric and prophetic books, but are 
 full of the elements of the mightiest and most manifold thoughts. Such 
 is the variety which we find in the Bible, yet all parts combine into one 
 harmonious whole. “There are many sacred writings, 
 
 Comm. in Joan. 
 Tom. i. v. 
 
 de Princ. iv. 10. 
 
 Ω - 5 ; Ss 
 yet there is but one Book: there are four Evangelisis, pan ape 
 yet their histories form but one Gospel:” they all con- ii. γ. 90. 
 spire to one end, and move by one way. All the sacred = (Het) 
 
 ie a Hom. in Jerem, 
 volumes “ breathe the Spirit of fulness, and there is noth- καὶ, 9, 
 
 ing, whether in the Law or in the Prophets, in the Evan- 
 gelists or in the Apostles (sive in Evangelio sive in Apostolo), which does 
 not descend from the fulness of the Divine Majesty. Even at the present 
 
 1 Cf. Hom. vit. in Levit. § 4. Mihi 
 autem sicut Deo et Domino nostro Jesu 
 Christo ita et Apostolis ejus adhzxrere 
 bonum est, et ex divinis seripturis se- 
 cundum ipsorum traditionem intelli- 
 gentiam capere. 
 
 2 lis language at times seems incon- 
 sistent, unless we observe this distinc- 
 tion between the personal and general 
 
 contents of the Epistles. For instance, 
 he says of the * Epistle to Romans” 
 (Pref. in Ep. ad Rom.): Videtur Apos- 
 tolus in hac epistola perfectior fuisse 
 quam in ceteris, quoting 1 Cor. ix. 27; 
 Phil. iii. 10, 18. Again: Scribunt Thes- 
 salonicensibus in verbo Dei Paulus et 
 Silvanus et Timotheus (Lib. 111. fr.). 
 Cf. Hom. τι. in Ezech. 1.; Hom. Xxx, 
 in Luc.; de Orat. 1. § 2 
 
432 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 time the words of fulness speak in Holy Scripture to those who have eyes 
 to see the mysteries of heaven, and ears to hear the voice of God.” 
 We may call the Gospel “the first-fruits of the Scriptures,” 1 or “ the 
 
 elements of the Faith of the Church; ” we may believe 
 All Scripture % 
 
 RE Katelin: that ‘‘ the divinity of the prophetic revelations, and the 
 Comm. in Joan. spiritual meaning of the Law, shone forth by the dwell- 
 Tom. 1. 6. 
 
 ing of Jesus on earth,” and that there were no clear 
 proofs of the inspiration (ϑεοπνεύστους) of the writings 
 of the old Covenant before that time; yet the Christian —who has 
 recognized in his own Faith the fulfilment of Prophecy, and received the 
 substance which the Law shadowed — will prize equally 
 Bsa Num. all “the words of God.” ‘We cannot say of the wri- 
 tings of the Holy Spirit (Spiritus Sancte litter) that 
 anything in them is otiose or superfluous, even if they seem to some ob- 
 scure.”’ We cannot believe that there’is “one jot or 
 Hom. xxxix.in tittle written in the Scriptures which does not work its 
 peas a own work, when men know how to employ it.” The 
 fault is our own if “the rock of stumbling” remain, 
 for we shall indeed “ find connection (οὐδὲν παρέλκει) and use in all that 
 has been written, if we give heed to our reading, and pass over no letter 
 without examination and inquiry.” As in the natural world the skill of 
 the Creator is not only seen in the stars of heaven, but in the organiza- 
 tion and life of the meanest insect, and in the structure 
 of the smallest plant, ‘‘so too we conceive of all that has 
 been recorded by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost 
 (τὰ ἐξ ἐπιπνοίας Tod ἁγίου πνεύματος ἀναγεγραμμένα), believing that the 
 divine (ἱερᾶς) foreknowledge, which supplies superhuman wisdom to the 
 race of man by the Scriptures (διὰ τῶν γραμμάτων), has placed, so to 
 speak, the seeds of saving truths in each letter as far as possible; . . . at 
 least whoever has once received these Scriptures as inspired by the Crea- 
 tor of the world, must expect to find in them all the difficulties which 
 meet those who investigate the system of the universe.”’ 
 Origen rests his proof of Inspiration on the influence of the Sacred 
 The proof of n- 00k, and the fulfilment of prophecy. Other legislators 
 spiration. besides Moses, and other teachers besides Christ, he tells 
 dePrinc.wv.1. ys, framed laws and systems which they would gladly 
 have propagated through the world, but the Jewish 2 and Christian Creeds 
 alone have spread successfully, in spite of national prejudices and religi- 
 ous persecution. Moreover, he adds, the rapidity with which Christian- 
 
 de Prine. iv. 6. 
 
 Comm. in Ps. ἃ. 4. 
 (Philoc. 2.) 
 
 1 Comm. in Joan.1.4. χρὴν δ᾽ ἡμᾶς Ads καὶ βάρβαρος ἡ κατὰ Thy οἰκου- 
 “ys / > ca > a 
 εἰδέναι ov ταὐτὸν εἶναι ἀπαρχὴν καὶ μένην ἡμῶν ζηλωτὰς ἔχει μυρίους, 
 
 / ΄ 
 πρωτογέννημα. Μετὰ γὰρ τοὺς καταλιπόντας τοὺς πατρῴους νόμρυς 
 ig “ 
 πάντας καρποὺς ἀναφέρεται ἣ ἀπαρχή, καὶ νομιζομένους Seovs, THs THPH- 
 3, ΙΑ A 
 πρὸ δὲ πάντων τὸ πρωτογέννημα. σεως τῶν Μωσέως νόμως, 
 
 καὶ τῆς μαϑητείας τῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ 
 2 De Princip. τν.11. Πᾶσα δὲ Ἑλ- λόγων. .. 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 433 
 
 ity was promulgated proves the divine nature of the Christian word,! 
 “which is preached in the whole world so that Greeks 
 and Barbarians, wise and foolish, profess the doctrines of — “6 Prine. tv. 2 
 our Faith.’ Again: the Law, the Psalms, and the Proph- 
 ets, abound with predictions of the Advent and Reign of 
 Christ, and foreshadow the desolation of Judah, and the assumption of 
 the Gentile Church.? The fulfilment of these by the life of Jesus and the 
 course of Christianity “has placed the Inspiration of the Scriptures beyond 
 a doubt, and raised the veil from the face of Moses.” Such are the out- 
 ward proofs for the unbeliever; the Christian, however, will rest his faith 
 on the teaching of the Church. The Bible is the bulwark 
 of the Church, and the Church is its guardian. That eae 
 alone is to be believed as truth which accords with the } 
 apostolic ‘‘ tradition ® handed down in the preaching of the Church, by 
 order of succession from the Apostles, and even now abiding in the 
 Churches.” 
 
 The objections which are urged against the doctrine of a plenary Inspi- 
 ration Origen answers by analogies from Life, from 
 Nature, and from Providence, as Irenzus,? in a more pear ae oie 
 general way, had done before him. The anthropomor- 
 phic language of Scripture he compares with our own mode of addressing 
 children, suitably to their understanding, to secure their 
 benefit, and not to exhibit our own capacity (Deut. i. 31) ; 
 though still for the spiritual it has also a spiritual meaning contained in the 
 simple words, if we know how to hearken to them. Again: we have 
 already seen that outward insignificance is no ground for disparaging the 
 marvellous beauty of the least being in the natural crea- 
 tion ; and the same holds true in the Bible. And thirdly, 
 there are difficulties in the doctrine of Providence which 
 we cannot yet solve, as, for instance, the existence of venomous animals, 
 still we do not for this reason speak against the Author of nature, but 
 wait, if haply we may be deemed worthy to kuow that about which we 
 now reverently withhold our judgment; and so too in the divine Scriptures 
 are many things which we cannot explain, and yet dare not condemn; but 
 “as the doctrine of God’s Providence is not destroyed 
 (χρεωκοπεῖται) by our ignorance on particular points when 
 we have once rightly admitted it, so likewise the divinity of the Scriptures, 
 which extends through them all, remains undisturbed, though our weak- 
 ness cannot in each special phrase master the hidden glory of the truths 
 concealed under simple and contemptible language.” ® 
 
 de Princ. iv. 5-6. 
 
 c. Cels. iv. 71. 
 
 Comm. in Ps. i. 4. 
 (Philoe. 2.) 
 
 de Prine. tv. 7. 
 
 1 It is worth while remarking how 1,2; Ps. )xxii. (Ixxi.) 7, 8; Isai. vii. 14; 
 absolutely Origen identifies the Chris- viii. 9; Mic. v. 2; Dan. ix. 24. 
 
 tian Books and the Christian Doctrine. 3 Cf. p. 422, n. 2. 
 2 The following are the prophecies 4 Cf. p. 414. 
 which he quotes: Gen. xlix. 10; Hos. 5 When defending the rude style of 
 
 iii. 4; Deut. xxxii 21; Ps. xlv. (xliv.) the Scriptures upon the ground of their 
 or 
 ΤΙ 
 
484 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 We have already seen that Origen represents the doctrine of the Inspt. 
 ration of the Bible as taught by the universal Church; 
 in like manner he tells us that her principles of Inter- 
 pretation were fixed, though there were variations in 
 private judgment from the earliest times. “It is a point 
 in her teaching that the Scriptures were written by the Spirit of God, and 
 admit not only of the obvious meaning, but of another unperceived by 
 many ;! for those details which are written are the forms of certain mys- 
 teries and the images of divine things, and in this the 
 opinion of the whole Church is one, that every, part of 
 the Law is spiritual.’’...“‘ The simplest acknowledge the presence of 
 these mystic dispensations,? and the most sagacious (of εὐγνώμονες καὶ 
 
 Interpretation. 
 c. Cels. iti. 11. 
 de Prine. i. 
 Pref. § 8. 
 
 de Prince. iw. 9. 
 
 ἄτυφοι) confess that they do not understand them.” 
 The peculiar feature of Origen’s system of Interpretation is the main- 
 
 A triple sense. 
 
 tenance of a threefold sense in Scripture generally ; he 
 finds indications of this principle in several passages of 
 
 the Old Testament,? and maintains that as “‘ man consists of body, soul, 
 
 de Princ. iv. 14. 
 Hom. v. in Lev. 5. 
 Hom. v. in Lev. 1. 
 
 popularity, Origen adds (c. Cels. VI. 2): 
 ἐστὶ γοῦν ἰδεῖν τὸν μὲν Πλάτωνα ἐν 
 χερσὶ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναι φιλολόγων 
 μόνον. τὸν δὲ Ἐπίκτητον καὶ ὑπὸ 
 τῶν τυχόντων καὶ ῥοπὴν πρὸς τὸ ὠφε- 
 λεῖσϑαι ἐχόντων ϑαυμαζόμενον, αἰσῶο- 
 μένων τῆς ἀπὸ τῶν λόγων αὐτοῦ βελ- 
 τιώσεωΞ. Any national literature 
 would furnish a parallel. 
 
 1 This spiritual sense is granted by 
 the Spirit to the Church. Hom. in Lev. 
 Vv. 8. 
 
 2 The instances he quotes will best 
 explain his meaning: Gen. xix. 30-388; 
 Gen. xvi.; Gen. xxix.; Gen. xxx. 
 
 3 For instance, from the Mosaic his- 
 tory he refers to the construction of 
 the Ark (the Church) “ with lower, 
 second, and third stories” (Hom. 11. in 
 Gen. § 6); from the Law, to Levit. vii. 
 9: Clibanus secundum sui formam pro- 
 fundiora ... significat . . . Sartago 
 
 ea quee si frequenter versentur ... ex- 
 plicari possunt. Craticula autem ea 
 que palam sunt. . . (Hom. v. in Lev. 
 
 5), from the Proverbs, to Prov. xxii. 20, 
 21(LXX.); and, again, from the Gos- 
 
 and spirit, so too does Holy Scripture, which has been 
 granted by God for the salvation of man;”* and thus 
 the simple may be edified by the body (σῶμα), the more 
 advanced by the soul (ψυχή), and the perfect by the spirit (πνεῦμα). 
 
 Cor- 
 
 pel, to the three loaves in the parable, 
 Luke xi. 5, 6 (Hom. v. in Levit. § 5). 
 
 4'The threefold character of man’s 
 being, and its entire (ὁλόκληρος) con- 
 secration to God’s service by Christian- 
 ity, is clearly expressed in 1 Thess. v. 
 23. It is important to distinguish ac- 
 curately between the principle of nat- 
 ural —intellectual—life (ψυχή), and 
 that of spiritual — religious life (wvev- 
 μα). Divine revelation (6 λόγος τοῦ 
 Θεοῦ) sometimes by its mysteries leaves 
 the one unsupported by the other (με- 
 ρισμὸς ψυχῆς τε καὶ πνεύματος. Heb. 
 ἵν. 19). \CfialsCor save τς ἘΠῚ Ζὴν; 
 Luke i. 47. Hence it is that ψυχή and 
 σάρξ are never contrasted. 
 
 Those who gladly trace the earlier 
 anticipations of truth will recognize 
 this triple division in Plato, Resp. 1v. pp. 
 441 sqq., where he distinguishes the ap- 
 petitive (τὸ ἐπιϑυμητικόν ---- σάρξ), the 
 emotional (τὸ ϑυμοειδές ---- ψυχή), and 
 the rational (τὸ λογιστικόν --- πνεῦ- 
 μα) elements in ἃ man and astate; and 
 also in Aristotle’s definition of a triple 
 “essence (οὐσία) --- material (Am), 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 435 
 
 responding to these three parts are three methods of Interpretation — the 
 historical, the moral, and the mystical; and properly “the body” was 
 for those who were before us, “the soul” for us, and “ the spirit” for those 
 “who shall receive the inheritance of eternal life, by which indeed they 
 may reach the heavenly kingdoms.” 
 
 The utility of the literal sense of Scripture “is proved by the multitudes 
 of those who believe sincerely and simply ;”' and the 
 
 reality of the moral meaning is shown by the example |, 7Ӣ Fiteral, de 
 
 ε : Prince. tv. 12, the 
 Ofte aol 1 Corsix..9 = Dent. xxv. 5), from which Moral de Princ. 
 we may gather that Origen intends to include under this 1Ὁ, and the 
 
 head the adaptation of the particulars of Scripture to pines! i " 
 the earthly life of man. “ The spiritual explanation is 
 
 that which shows the archetypes and substances imaged and shadowed 
 in the Law;” and is found, by the teaching of the Apostles, to 
 exist both in the ritual and in the historical books (1 Cor. x. 11; 
 Gal. iv. 21—24; Heb. viii.5; Rom. xi. 4). The “spiritual world,” in 
 which this interpretation is realized, may be regarded as heavenly, or as 
 Christian and earthly:? when we contemplate the former, we explain 
 “ anagogically,” and “allegories” properly are applied only to the latter. 
 
 Thus, the prophecies which describe the character and 
 
 fate of various nations under the Jewish dispensation 
 
 de Princ. iv. 22. 
 
 may be referred, according to the one system (ἀναγωγή), to the inhabitants 
 of the celestial regions correlative to the kingdoms on earth.’ or by the 
 other (aAAeyopia), to spiritual characters unfolded by Christianity. 
 
 We have now to inquire how far Origen refuses to acknowledge the 
 
 literal sense in all cases: ‘‘ Some Scripiures,’’ he says, 
 “have not the corporeal* (τὸ σωματικόν, ἱ 6., consequen- 
 tiam historialis intelligentiv, as Rufinus renders it), so 
 that in such cases we must seek alone the soul and the spirit.” 
 
 formal (εἶδος), and the combination of 
 these (τὸ ἐξ ἀμφοῖν), De Anima, 11. 2; 
 and in his separation of the appetitive 
 (ὀρεκτικόν), sensational (αἰσϑητικόν), 
 and rational (διανοητικόν), in human 
 life: De Anima, 11.3 (the other species of 
 life— the nutritive (ϑρεπτικόν), and the 
 translative {κινητικὸν κατὰ τόπον), — 
 do not belong to this view). These sys- 
 tems are naturally distinguished from 
 the scriptural teaching by their less 
 distinet exhibition of the ‘spiritual ” 
 principle, which is absorbed in “ rea- 
 son.” 
 
 1Cf. De Prin. 1v. 14. Προέκειτο 
 γὰρ καὶ τὸ ἔνδυμα τῶν πνευματικῶν, 
 λέγω δὲ τὸ σωματικὸν τῶν γραφῶν, 
 ἐν πολλοῖς ποιῆσαι οὐκ ἀνωφελές, 
 
 Ts the literal sense 
 always true? 
 de Princ. iv. 12. 
 
 By this 
 
 δυνάμενόν τε τοὺς πολλούς, ὡς χω- 
 povot, βελτιοῦν. 
 
 2 ο Guericke (Hist. Schole Catech. 
 11. p. 60) rightly maintains against 
 Mosheim and Rosenmiiller. 
 
 3 In relation to this singular opinion 
 compare Huet, Origeniana, τι. 2, 11, 
 11: whatever Origen’s error may be, it 
 is clear that it arises from an extreme 
 regard to the /etter of Scripture. 
 
 4 Hom. ττ. in Gen. § 6. Non semper 
 in Scripturis divinis historialis conse- 
 quentia stare potest, sed nonnunquam 
 verbi causa deficit, ut Proy. xxvi. 9; 1 
 Regg. vi. 7; Ley. xiii. 
 
 Ovigen finds a symbol} of the “ὁ two or 
 three”? meanings in Jolin ii. 6 (de Prine 
 Iv. 12). 
 
436 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 he evidently means that certain passages, taken literally, do not instruct 
 us, for no one can deny that they have a meaning. They may then be 
 either untrue morally, or untrue historically ; they may contain, in the 
 letter, hurtful patterns, or symbolic narratives ; let us examine Origen’s 
 opinion in relation to these two possible cases. 
 
 With regard to the first class of instances, no one would maintain that 
 the moral failings of the patriarchs- (Gen. ix., Xx., 
 xxxviii., which Origen quotes)! are objects for our 
 direct imitation, and he himself asserts most strongly 
 that the records are profitable in other ways. Again, we may include 
 under this division those precepts of the Mosaic Law which are no longer 
 needful for our moral training. These the Christian is to receive not lit- 
 erally, but spiritually ; but though he does not value their outward sense, 
 he is not therefore to cast them aside as worthless and worn out, but to 
 seek for their inner significance.? Origen does not deny that the details 
 of the Law were actuallly observed, but he maintains also that they are 
 
 Morally 2 
 Stom. fr. 
 Hom. wm Gen. vi. 
 
 useful now.? 
 
 But in some places, it will be said, Origen denies the literal truth of 
 
 ; facts. 
 Historically ? ' 
 
 We have, indeed, already seen that he did not, 
 as fanatics in those times as well as in our own, attribute 
 
 passions to the Deity according to the letter of Scripture, but rather 
 received its statements as true only in idea; and he carries out the same 
 
 de Prine. iv. 16. 
 
 principle somewhat further ; he denies that we ought to 
 
 understand literally the account given of God ‘‘ planting 
 the garden of Paradise,” and “ walking in it in the cool of the evening.” 
 
 _1Cf. Hom. vi. in Gen. § 1. Si quis 
 hee (Gen. xx.) secundum litteram so- 
 lum audire vult et intelligere, magis 
 cum Judeis quam cum Christianis debet 
 habere auditorium. Origen does not 
 deny the literal truth of the fact, but 
 its moral fitness. 
 
 2 Cf. Hom. x1.in Num. ὃ 1 τ. Osten- 
 dimus, ut opinor, auctoritate Scripture 
 divine ex iis que in lege scripta sunt 
 aliqua penitus refugienda esse et ca- 
 venda, ne secundum litteram ab Evan- 
 gelii discipulis observentur; quedam 
 vero Omnimode, ut scripta sunt, obti- 
 nenda, alia autem habere quidem se- 
 cundum litteram veritatem sui, recipere 
 tamen utiliter et necessario etiam alle- 
 goricum sensum. Cf. Hom. x1. in Ex. 
 § 6; Hom. 1x. in Num. § 4. 
 
 3 In some places he speaks of partic- 
 ular details of the Law as unreasonable 
 (ἄλογα. De Princ. τν. 17) and impossi- 
 
 ble, if taken merely in their obvious 
 sense: e.g , Gen. xvii. 14; Exod. xvi. 
 29; Jer. xvii. 21,22. We may also un- 
 derstand from this point of view his 
 real meaning when he says that the 
 law outwardly is ‘Jess elegant and 
 reasonable than many human systems,”’ 
 and that ‘‘it may prove a stumbling- 
 block without the Gospel; ”’ but in that 
 all its discords are resolved, or, in Ori- 
 gen’s own beautiful words: When the 
 people murmured in the wilderness 
 Moses Jed them to the rock to drink, 
 and even now he leadeth them to 
 Christ (Hom. x1. in Ex. § 2). 
 
 The literal sense of some passages in 
 the Gospels Origen holds to be similarly 
 untenable: e. g., Luke x. 4; Matt. x. 
 10; v. 89. Such examples show most 
 distinctly the kind of error which he 
 had to meet, and from which, indeed, 
 he had himself suffered. 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 457 
 
 Yet more, he rejects that material theory of the Temptation which sup- 
 poses that “all the kingdoms of the world were placed before the bodily 
 eyes of Jesus, as contiguous to one mountain; ”’ and adds that “ whoever 
 avefully examines the question will find countless similar incidents in the 
 jiospels, not literally true [but true in idea], inwrought into those narra- 
 fives which are. to be received according to the letter.” ! If Origen had 
 rested here it would have been an easy task to defend him, but in other 
 places he speaks still more boldly. When discussing the 
 apparent discrepancies of the Evangelists, he says that 
 “if one were to set them all forth, then would he turn 
 dizzy, and either desist from trying to establish all the Gospels in very 
 truth, and attach himself to one,...or, admitting the four, grant that their 
 truth does not lie in their corporeal forms” (ἐν τοῖς σωματικοῖς χαρακ- 
 tipo). But, at the same time, he only abandons the literal sense when he 
 considers that it is self-contradictory, useless, or unworthy of God; he 
 accepts all the Bible, and feels bound to give an intelligible reason for 
 his faith :* he faces difficulties which many do not choose to see, and pro- 
 poses a solution which only exhibits his veneration for Holy Scripture. 
 
 Comm. in Joan. 
 Tom, x, 2. 
 
 ‘Otherwise he admits the naked truth of the Patriarchal 
 
 and Jewish history,’ for ‘‘those things which are true 
 
 de Prince. iv. 19. 
 
 historically are many more than those which contain merely a spiritual 
 
 1 The Greek text stands as follows in 
 Lommatzsch’s edition: παραπλησίως 
 δὲ τούτοις Kal ἄλλα μυρία ἀπὸ τῶν 
 εὐαγγελίων ἔνεστι τὸν ἀκριβοῦντα 
 τηρῆσαι, ὑπὲρ τοῦ συγκαταδϑέσϑαι 
 συνυφαίνεσϑαι ταῖς κατὰ τὸ ῥητὸν 
 γεγενημέναις ἱστορίαις, ἕτερα μὴ συμ- 
 βεβηκότα. One MS. omits συνυφαίνεσ- 
 Yat, and it seems likely that the word 
 is merely a gloss to explain συγκατα- 
 Segal, which is generally used in a 
 different sense: the comma after ioTo- 
 plats should be removed. 
 
 2 Comm. Ser. in Matt. § 184. Judicavi 
 igitur bonum, ut accipiens bonum pro- 
 " positum eorum, qui in fide constantes 
 esse desiderant, solutiones crimination- 
 um eorum, in quantum mihiex Deo est 
 virtus, inveniam pro evangelica veii- 
 tate: ut fideles non solum fide simplici, 
 sed etiam ratione fidei muniantur in 
 fide. 
 
 Strauss (Introd. ξ 4) has endeavored 
 to find a mythical tendency in the fol- 
 lowing beautiful passage: καὶ τοῦτο 
 προλαβόντες δι᾽ ὅλην Thy φερομένην 
 ἐν τοῖς εὐαγγελίοις περὶ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ 
 
 ἢ 
 
 ἱστορίαν εἰρήκαμεν, οὐκ ἐπὶ ψιλὴν πίσ- 
 τιν καὶ ἄλογον τοὺς ἐντρεχεστέρους 
 ἐκκαλούμενοι, ἀλλὰ βουλόμενοι παρα- 
 στῆσαι, OTL εὐγνωμοσύνης χρεία τοῖς 
 ἐντευξομένοις, καὶ πολλῆς ἐξετάσεως, 
 / ay “ > ‘ > > 
 καί, tv οὕτως ὀνομάσω, εἰσόδου εἰς Td 
 / “~ / a> c ~ 
 βούλημα τῶν γραψάντων, ἵν᾽ εὑρεδῇ, 
 / YY “ / 
 ποίᾳ διανοίᾳ ἕκαστον γέγραπται. c., 
 Cels. 1. § 42. 
 
 3 The Tenth Homily on Genesis is a 
 good example of his method of dealing 
 with such subjects. The passage re- 
 ferred to is quite sufficient to show that 
 he admits the reality of Rebecca’s his- 
 tory, though he maintains that the 
 Holy Spirit had a deeper object in dic- 
 tating the record: hee fabulas putatis 
 esse, et historias narrare in Scripturis 
 Spiritum Sanctum (§ 2) for neither 
 fabula nor μῦϑος involve the falsity of 
 the narrative which they convey. Cf. 
 Hom. τι. in Ex.§ 1. Nos omnia que 
 scripta sunt non pro narrationibus an- 
 tiquitatum, sed pro disciplina et utili- 
 tate nostra didicimus scripta.. Hom. 
 1.in Ex.§ 5. Non nobis hee ad hie 
 - 
 
458 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATIUN. 
 
 sense ;” he is unshaken in his belief in the most remarkable miracles,' and 
 paints with force and feeling? the details of ancient events (res geste), 
 that they may minister to our instruction ; it is true that 
 oat” Ep αὐ Christ ever opens the eyes of those who are mentally 
 blind, but while on earth He restored to men their bodily 
 sight: it is true that He ever raises the dead, but then He raised Lazarus 
 from the grave; it is true that He ever stills the tempests in which the 
 Church is tossed, when His disciples call upon Him, but then we know 
 that He wrought the special work recorded in the Gospel history. Origen 
 ae accepts the record — “for we know that all things which 
 Flom. xvii. in Lue. : Σ = : 
 Piha ΕΝ, are written are true” — but he looks for something 
 Hom. xxavit. iw deeper; the question we have always to ask is, ‘“ What 
 nt is the meaning of this relation” (quo hee tendit historia)? 
 for we cannot believe that it is “ mere history, and does not pertain to us.” 
 The answer to this inquiry must be sought by careful and laborious criti- 
 cism. In Origen’s judgment, we must insist on the strict interpretation of 
 tenses and persons,’ and find a meaning in phrases which are commonly 
 held to be vague conventionalities ;* we must not omit an article,5 nor 
 neglect an antithesis ;° for the fulness of our spiritual insight will be pro- 
 portioned to the distinctness of our historical conception — the inward and 
 the outward are so combined that we must proceed to the one by the 
 other. 
 
 From the passages which we have quoted it will appear that Origen’s 
 errors lie rather in the application of his theory than in 
 the theory itself; many of our greatest expositors un- 
 consciously adopt his separate principles, but all, probably, would shrink 
 back from imitating the haste and boldness of his deductions. Yet it 
 
 Errors in detail. 
 
 toriam scripta sunt, neque putandum 
 est libros divinos Mgyptiorum gesta 
 narrare, sed que scripta sunt ad nos- 
 tram doctrinam et commonitionem 
 scripta sunt... . Hom. 1x. in Jos. § 7, 
 Hee quidem veterum historie referunt 
 gesta: sed quomodo nos hanc historic 
 narrationem ad mysticam intelligenti- 
 am referemus? .. . 
 
 1 For instance, in the history of Ba- 
 laam. Hom. x11. in Num. § 8. 
 
 2 Cf. Hom. 1x. in Num. § 5. 
 
 3 Cf. Comm. Ser. in Matt. § 25; where 
 he accepts the remarkable tradition 
 which identifies ‘Zacharias the son 
 of Barachias’”* with the father of John 
 the Baptist, from the form ‘‘ye slew” 
 (Matt. xxiii. 30). Cf. Thilo, Cod. Apoer. 
 Prol. 64. See also Hom. x. in Lue. 
 (Luke i. 76). Comm. in Matt. Tom. 
 Xu. f. Matt. xvi. 19 (οἱ οὐρανοί), 
 
 compared with Matt. xviii. 18 (6 ovpa- 
 vés). 
 
 4 Hom. xv.in Gen. § 1. Si diligentius 
 consideremus, inveniemus quia nun- 
 quam fere in sanctum quis locum dici- 
 tur descendisse, neque ad vituperabilem 
 conscendisse memoratur. Cf. Hom. 
 xx. in Luc. Crebro descendit Jesus 
 cum discipulis nec absque fine 
 sublimia tenet. Hom. in Josh. 11. 3. 
 
 So again (Hom. 111. in Luc.) in Luke 
 i. 11, he finds in the word “ appeared ” 
 a law of spiritual phenomena: [eorum] 
 quee sunt divina et superna in voluntate 
 est videri et non videri. Cf. Hom. 1x. 
 in Luc. (Luke i. 57). Ubicunque justus 
 nascitur ibi complentur dies. 
 
 5 Hom. xxxv. in Luc. (Luke xii. 58). 
 
 6 Hom. vitt. in Luc. (Luke i. 46: ψυ- 
 χή --- μεγαλύνει, πνεῦμα --- ἀγαλλιά: 
 
 εται). κῶς 
 
 δ δ». 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 439 
 
 must be remembered that when he first investigated the question of 
 Scripture Interpretation, it was governed by no laws, and limited rather 
 by custom than by reason. The Alexandrine school of Philo had long 
 endeavored to rescue the Law, by any means, from the contempt of 
 Philosophy; the teachers of the Christian Church had received certain 
 models of exposition in the New Testament, and sought to reproduce 
 their form without determining the basis of their construction. But Origen 
 went further: he was dissatisfied with the inheritance of Jewish allegories 
 and Christian imitations, and sought to determine afresh the true system 
 of Biblical Criticism; he did not indeed decline the arduous labors of a 
 scholar for the more pleasing speculations of a commentator ; but while 
 he laid down deep and striking laws of Interpretation, he revised the 
 text of Scripture with singular ingenuity and zeal. He felt that there 
 was something more than a mere outward form in the Bible; he felt that 
 the “words of God” must have an eternal significance,! 
 for all that comes into relation with God is eternal; he 
 felt that there is a true development and a real growth in the elements of 
 Divine Revelation ; 2 he felt the power and glory of the Spirit of Scripture 
 bursting forth from every part; and can we wonder that he sometimes 
 failed to notice the fair symmetry and perfect proportions of its frame- 
 work? Can we condemn him for gazing too earnestly where we are 
 unwilling to turn our eyes? Can we reject his entire system because it 
 has been misapplied by others or by himself? It is not our purpose now 
 to estimate the intrinsic merits of his scheme, or the extent to which he 
 failed in using it, yet we may call to mind that the founder of modern 
 Philosophy not only laid down the principles of knowledge, but alse 
 endeavored to employ them; and it may be as unfair to disparage the sym- 
 bolic interpretation of Scripture by Origen’s errors in detail, as to judge 
 of the capabilities of Inductive Science from Bacon’s ‘‘ Theory of Heat.” 
 
 It only remains for us now to refer to Origen’s view of the personal 
 use of the Scriptures, which is too noble not to claim 
 some slight notice. We must read them, he tells us, 
 “with attention, yea, with great attention, for it is needed 
 in reading the divine writings, that we may not speak or form notions 
 about them rashly.”” We must read them with reverence : 
 “for if we use great care in handling the Sacred Ele- 
 ments, and rightly so, is ita less offence (piaculum) to 
 disregard the Word of God than His Body?” We must read them with 
 
 Matt. xii. 32. 
 
 The Study of 
 Scripture. 
 Ep. ad Greg. § 3. 
 
 Tiom. xiii, in Ex. 
 
 Ὁ 
 O- 
 
 1 Hom. 1x.in Num. § 7. Reconditum similis esse alicui seminum, cujus na- 
 
 in iis (ss. Scripturis) invenies et secre- 
 tum mysteriorum sapientie et scientix 
 Dei sensum, quo nutriantur et pascan- 
 tur anime sanctorum non so'um in 
 presenti vita sed etiam in futura. 
 
 2 Hom. 1. in Ex, § 1. Videtur mihi 
 Unusquisque éeermo divine Scripture 
 
 tura hee est, ut cum jactum fuerit in 
 terram regeneratum in spicam vel in 
 quamcunque aliam sui generis speciem, 
 multipliciter diffundatur, et tanto cu- 
 mulatius quanto vel peritus agricola 
 plus seminibus laboris impenderit vel 
 beneficium terra foecundius indulserit.. 
 
440 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 pure hearts: for “no one can listen to the Word of God....... unless 
 he be holy in body and spirit; .....no one can enter 
 into this feast with soiled garments.” Yet “the mere 
 language of the Bible is not enough to reach the soul of 
 man, unless power be given from God to the reader, and shed its influence 
 (€mavSeiv) over the lesson;! for, if there are oracles of 
 God in the Law and the Prophets, in the Gospels and 
 Apostles, he who is a student (“aSntevduevos) of God’s oracles must place 
 himself under the teaching of God” (defoea...... 
 διδάσκαλον ἐπιγράφεσϑαι ϑεόν) ; such a one must “seek 
 their meaning by inquiry, discussion, examination, and, which is greatest, 
 by prayer; ? ‘“he must not be content to ‘knock’ and to ‘seek,’ for prayer 
 is the most necessary qualification for the understanding of divine things, 
 
 ...and the Saviour urged us to this when he said, not only ‘knock, 
 and it shall be opened,’ ‘seek, and ye shall find,’ but also, ‘ask, and it 
 shall be given you.’” If, then, we read the Bible with patience, prayer, 
 and faith ; if we ever strive after a more perfect knowl- 
 edge, and yet remain content in some things to know 
 only in part, even as Prophets and Apostles, Saints and Angels, attain 
 not to an understanding of all things, —our patience will be rewarded, 
 our prayer answered, and our faith increased.2 So “let 
 us not weary in reading the Scriptures which we do not 
 understand, but let it be unto us according to our faith, by which we believe 
 that all Scripture, being inspired by God (ϑεόπνευστος οὖσα), is profitable.” 
 “Oftentimes we derive good without perceiving it, for thus our life is 
 supported ;..... 80, too, our spiritual life is frequently profited by the 
 mere reading of Scripture, when our reason does not receive the fruit: a 
 charm, as it were, acts upon our nature; its better elements are strength- 
 ened and matured, the worse weakened and brought to nought.” 
 
 TIom. xt. τὴ Ex. 
 
 §7. 
 
 6. Cels. v2. § 2. 
 
 Hom. in Jer. α. 81. 
 
 Flom. in Gen. αὐ. 3. 
 
 de Princ. tv. 26. 
 
 Hom. xx. in Jos. 
 
 SECT. VII.——- THE CLEMENTINES. 
 
 There is yet one group of writings, stamped in common with the 
 name and authority of Clement of Rome, which requires 
 some notice. Of this the Clementine Homilies and Rec- 
 ognitions are the most important representatives, which 
 do not, I believe, yield in intellectual interest to any production of the 
 
 THE 
 TINES. 
 
 CLEMEN- 
 
 1 Cf. de Prine. tv. 10. Kav ἐπὶ τὰ 
 εὐαγγέλια δὲ φϑάσωμεν, κἀκείνων ὃ 
 ἀκριβὴς νούς, ἅτε “νοῦς ὧν Χριστοῦ, 
 δεῖται χάριτος τῆς δοϑείσης τῷ εἰρη- 
 κότι' ἡμεῖς δὲ νοῦν Χριστοῦ ἔχομεν 
 (1 Cor. ii. 12). 
 
 2 Hom. xi. in Ex. § 4. Non solum 
 studium adhibendum est ad discendas 
 litteras sacras, verum et supplicandum 
 
 Domino, et diebus et noctibus obse- 
 crandum, ut veniat Agnus ex tribu Ju- 
 da, et ipse accipiens librum signatum 
 dignetur aperire, 
 
 3 Hom. vi. in Lue. Utinam mihi 
 eveniat ut ab infidelibus stultus dioar 
 qui talibus eredidij, Such are Origen’s 
 words when contemplating the great 
 tmaystery of Christianfty. 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE QF INSPIRATION. 441 
 
 first three centuries.'- Both works present the same great outlines. Both 
 give a history of the conflict between ‘the chief of the Apostles,” St. 
 Peter, and the great enemy of the first age, Simon Magus. But under 
 this general likeness they offer considerable differences in detail and theo- 
 logical tendency. The Homilies are distinetly Ebionite and anti-Pauline, 
 while the Recognitions present a view of the Person of our Lord inter- 
 mediate between the opinions of Artemon and Arius.2 The value of the 
 Clementines does not, however, lie in the system of doctrine which they 
 contain, for in this respect they are often confused and contradictory, but 
 in a singular richness of thought and speculation. In reading them we 
 seem to stand face to face with some old speculator who tries at one time 
 to bring Christianity within the measure of his philosophy, and then again 
 to sulve former difficulties by Christian truth. Questions which we regard 
 commonly as the growth of a later age are debated with subtle ingenuity. 
 The ‘‘ scepticism” of the first century is found to have been scarcely less 
 powerful or less pregnant than that of our own. 
 
 The existence of this speculative element in the early Church, hidden 
 too often under the name of Gnosticism, is of the great- wo 
 
 = : : - Ξ Their importance 
 est importance for estimating rightly the growth of Chris- ὡς, ;ecognizing a 
 tianity in the face of an able and thoughtful opposition ; — sceptical element in 
 and the form of teaching to which it led is scarcely less. ¢/”"* %9** 
 interesting as a phase of mental culture. But without entering on these 
 wider relations of the Clementines, we must confine ourselves to the light 
 which they throw on the primitive idea of Inspiration. On this subject 
 the Homilies and the Recognitions present points of difference which cor- 
 respond with the fundamental differences of the two books, and both alike 
 offer a striking contrast to the broad comprehensiveness of the Catholic 
 doctrine which has been already traced in the fathers of the Church. 
 
 The Homilies—and in this they only present a common error in a 
 bolder form —regard Inspiration only in relation to the 
 Prophet, and not to the Church. The individual over- 
 powers the society : he at once conveys the message and interprets it. In 
 this partial view the Homilies support the opposite extreme to Montan- 
 ism. The Montanists regarded an ecstasy —a suspension of man’s natu- 
 ral facilities — as the necessary mark of a divine teacher, 
 but in the Homilies we read that “the Spirit must be 
 innate and perpetual ”’ (ἔμφυτον καὶ ἀένναον), and that the revelation must 
 be distinctly conceived in the Prophet’s consciousness, for partial knowl- 
 edge and temporary possession “belong to those who are maddened by 
 
 i. The Homilies, 
 
 Hom, iii. 12. 
 
 1 For the general history of the give all that can be required. Of the 
 Clementines, the works of Schliemann Homilies, Dressel’s edition (Gétt. 1853) is 
 (Die Clementinen. . . Hamb. 1844) and the best; of the Recognitions, the small 
 Uhlhorn (Die Homilien und Recognitio- text of Gersdorf (Lips. 1888) the most 
 nem αἱ. Klem. Rom. . . Gottingen, 1854) accessible. 
 
 2 Schliemann, 638 ff. ; 330 ff. 
 
442 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 the spirits of disorder, and intoxicated by the reeking of altars.” The true 
 Prophet, with boundless spiritual intuition (ἀπείρῳ ψυχῆς 
 ὀφϑαλμῷ), sees and knows all things, mental and material 
 (πάντα πάντοτε... πάϑη, τόπους, ὅρους), by an imme- 
 diate and perfect knowledge, Without the agency of dreams and visions ; 
 for those influences are uncertain and no mark of piety, 
 while the Prophet must be sure and sinless, —they are 
 independent of the exercise of reason, while his power 
 works through his soul. Such prophets were Adam, 
 Moses, and Christ, who appear in clear preéminence above all other men, 
 and next to them stand Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.! ‘Till 
 the coming of Christ the Pentateuch — in its pure form — 
 was the depository of Truth, for the later Prophets were 
 inspired by the secondary power, typified by Eve, through which the divine 
 element was involved in human corruptions. 
 
 In one remarkable passage Peter is represented as declaring the nature 
 of Revelation from his own experience, at the time when he received the 
 blessing of the Lord. “ ‘The answer rose in my heart : 
 I know not howI said, ‘Thou art the Son of the liv- 
 ing God;’... and from that time I Jearnt that to learn 
 without teaching, or vision, or dream, is Revelation. And truly it is so; 
 for in that [truth] which is placed in us of God all truth is contained sem- 
 inally (σπερματικῷῶς ), and is covered and revealed by the hand of God, 
 who worketh in us according to the merit (ἀξίαν) of each; but that any- 
 thing should be manifested from without, by visions or dreams, is clearly 
 not an instance of Revelation, but of wrath.” Though in this case the 
 Apostle is made to claim the privilege cf a direct communication with 
 God, in other places he declines the title of Prophet: “I 
 am a servant of God, the Creator of all things,” he says ; 
 “a disciple of His right (δεξίου) Prophet ; wherefore be- 
 ing His Apostle I speak the truth;” and again, ‘Iam a disciple of the 
 true Prophet, and not a Prophet.” 
 
 With these subjective views of the prophetic office the writer of the 
 Homilies does not hesitate to maintain the unauthenticity of the Mosaic 
 
 Flom. iti. 13. 
 
 id. 
 
 Flom. xvii. 15-17. 
 Hom. v1. 6. 
 Hom. xvii. 14. 
 
 Hom. tit. 23, 25. 
 
 Matt. xvi. 16, 17. 
 Hom. xvii. 18. 
 
 Hom. vii. 11. 
 
 Flom. xviii. 7. 
 
 writings. According to him, the Law was first given 
 See orally by the Prophet to the seventy elders and after- 
 
 wards reduced to writing, when the devil was permitted 
 . to introduce errors? into its form, that the hearts of its readers might be 
 
 1 The seven Old Testament Prophets 
 are called by the author of the Homi- 
 lies the ‘‘seven pillars of the world” 
 (Hom. xviii. 18, 14). Cf. Schliemann, 
 194 ff.; Uhlhorn, 164 ff. 
 
 2 The errors which are eumerated in 
 the Clementines are partly the anthro- 
 
 pomorphic descriptions of God’s anger, 
 jealousy, repentance, ete. (Hom τι. 43); 
 and partly the moral failings of the 
 Patriarchs. It is worth while to recall 
 the method by which Origen removed 
 these difficulties. See above, p. 490. 
 Schliemann (197, anm.) scarcely docs 
 justice to the great Christian Father. 
 
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 443 
 
 tried ; yet this doctrine of the corruption of the Pentateuch is only for the 
 advanced Christians, and not for the simple and unlearned. The fitness 
 of the Bible to prove the faith of man is beautifully 
 described : ‘There are many representations of the De- 
 ity in the Scriptures, . ..and each finds in them that idea of God which 
 he wishes. Moreover, our soul within is arrayed for immortality in His 
 image; if, then, I leave Him who gave it the likeness, the likeness justly 
 will leave me.” . . Thus the right discrimination of the truth of the Scrip- 
 tures must rest in the internal witness of the believer's 
 heart, who should be, after his Lord’s command, ‘a 
 good money-changer,”! skilful to discern the true image of the Divine 
 and the current counterfeit. 
 
 “The Recognitions ”’ differs in its whole doctrinal tendency from the 
 Homilies, though it was undoubtedly based upon them. 
 In this book Christianity is no longer regarded as identi- 
 eal with pure Judaism, nor are the Prophets degraded 
 into the ministers of a corrupt power; and though the full majesty of the 
 Saviour is still unrecognized, He is raised above the ancient Lawgiver. 
 Consistently with this view of the two economies, the author of the Re- 
 cognitions declares the harmony of the Law, the Histo- Fee Το 
 ries, and the Prophets ;? and, at the same time, he Recoy. ti. 48; i. 
 places the source and the proof of their Inspiration in ὅδ 
 Jesus. The difficulties which beset the understanding of the Scriptures 
 are not attributed to the outward corruptions of an evil 
 spirit, but to the “sin which has grown up with (coado* 
 levit) men;”’ so that the truth is not referred to the judg- 
 ment of the personal consciousness, but drawn from the tradition of the 
 appointed teachers in the Church. 
 
 Yet more, The Recognitions differs from the Homilies in the view 
 which it gives of the mode, the extent, and the instruments of Divine 
 Revelation. In the Homilies we read that dreams and 
 visions are marks of God’s wrath, but in the Recogni- 
 tions it is said that He has condescended to address men by such outward 
 agencies ; and the objective glories of the Mosaic Law — “ the heavenly 
 voices and visions of Sinai” — are distinctly acknowledged. The impor- 
 tance of this difference will be more apparent when we remember that the 
 call of St. Paul? to his Christian mission was made by a glorious appear- 
 ance of the Lord, who further instructed the future Apostle of the Gentiles 
 by visions in Arabia, Jerusalem, and Paradise. In another place the 
 
 Hom. xvi. 10. 
 
 Hom. ivi. 50. 
 
 ii. The Recogni- 
 tions. 
 
 Recog. t. 21. 
 Recoy. vi. 45, 55. 
 
 Recog. iv. 21. 
 
 1 Hom. 11. 51: εὐλόγως 6 διδάσκαλος guttis misericordia ejus irrorati ex- 
 ἡμῶν ἔλεγεν" γίνεσϑε τραπεζῖται δό- clamabant (Πόρου. 11. 44). 
 κιμοι. Cf. Cotelerius, ]. c.; Inf. p. 425. In another place we read: Imagines 
 2 Thus quotations from the Psalms gestorum Moysi et ante ipsum patri- 
 are introduced with the following arch Jacob, ipsius (veri prophetx) per 
 words: Sancti Spiritu Dei repleti, et omnia typum ferebant (Recog. v.10). 
 8 For this remark I am indebted to Schliemann, 312. 
 
444 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 
 
 whole circle of natural acquirements is included by the author of the Recog- 
 nitions in the gifts of the Apostolate: Peter is described 
 ‘‘os a man of God, full of all knowledge (plenus totius 
 scientie), acquainted even with Greek learning, because he is filled with 
 the Spirit of God;” though, indeed, such empty eloquence .(/oquacitus) 
 was unsuited to the dignity of one who rightly spake of heavenly things.! 
 For the Christian has another and an abiding source of wisdom in the 
 presence of “the true Prophet,’ who teaches him accord- 
 en a ing to his needs. ‘This “true Prophet,” even Christ, is 
 Recog. i. 21. the one illuminator of the soul. He is the sole author of 
 ae Sg all perception of the divine and the eternal. He alone 
 knows all the past, the present, and the future. The 
 whole existence of the world is but as the course through which He 
 hastens to rest. He taught the patriarchs, and in each generation was 
 present to the good, though under a veil, especially to those who looked 
 for Him. The progress of history was in some sense a preparation for 
 His Incarnation, which was the most powerful charm to 
 win the love of men. And when He died “all the 
 world suffered with Him: for the sun was darkened, and 
 the mountains were rent asunder, and the graves were opened, and the veil 
 of the temple was torn, as if in sorrow for the destruction which was com- 
 ing upon the place.’ ? 
 
 GEecog. vi. 5. 
 
 Recog. i. 60. 
 Recog. t. 54. 
 
 The general effect of the inquiry into the early doctrine of “ Inspiration 
 of Scripture,” which is now completed, is to confirm in the fullest degree 
 the results which were obtained independently from a consideration of the 
 idea of a written record of a Divine revelation. The unanimity of the early 
 Fathers in their views on Holy Scripture is the more remarkable when it is 
 taken in connection with the great differences of character, and training, 
 and circumstances by which they were distinguished. In the midst of 
 errors of judgment and errors of detail, they maintain firmly, with one 
 consent, the great principles which invest the Bible with an interest most 
 special and most universal, with the characteristics of the most vivid indi- 
 viduality and of the most varied application. They teach us that inspi- 
 ration is an operation of the Holy Spirit acting through men, according to 
 the laws of their constitution, which is not neutralized by His influence, 
 but adopted as a vehicle for the full expression of the Divine Message. 
 They teach us that it is generally combined with the moral progress and 
 purification of the teacher, so that there is on the whole a moral fitness in 
 the relation of the prophet to the doctrine. They teach us that Christ — 
 the Word of God — speaks from first to last; that all Scripture is per- 
 manently fitted for our instruction ; that a true spiritual meaning, eternal 
 and absolute, lies beneath historical and ceremonial and moral details. 
 They teach us that this view was in their time no late invention, but a 
 
 1 Schliemann, 311. 2 Cf. Uhlhorn, 284. 
 
ON THE APOCRYPHAL TRADITIONS. 445 
 
 tradition which they received and transmitted, each according to his skill 
 endeavoring to carry out the principles which he had learnt. It is possi- 
 ble that objections, more or less serious, may be urged against various 
 parts of the doctrine, but it cannot, I think, be denied that as a whole it 
 lays open a view of the Bible which vindicates with the greatest clearness 
 and consistency the claims which it makes to be considered as one harmo- 
 nious message of God, spoken “in many parts and many manners ”’ ly 
 men and fo men —the distinct lessons of individuai ages reaching from 
 one time to all time. If it be false, we shall then be bound to inquire 
 earnestly what are the grounds, the proofs, the limits of our own belief ; 
 if it be true, we shall certainly be led to prize the Scriptures more highly 
 and more personally, as inexhaustible wells of living water, ever spring- 
 ing up unto eternal life. 
 
 Verum hee per excessum quendam, ret tamen ipsius consequentia commonitos 
 breviter dixisse sufficiat ad ostendendum id quod sunt 
 quedam quorum significatio proprie nullis omnino, potest 
 humane lingue sermonibus explicari, sed simpliciore magis 
 intellectu, quam ullis verborum proprietatibus declarantur. Ad quam regulam 
 etiam divinarum Seripturarum intelligentia retinenda est, quo scilicet ea que 
 dicuntur non pro vilitate sermonis sed pro divinitate Sancti Spiritus qui cas 
 conscribi inspiravit, censeantur. 
 
 Orig. de Prine. 
 
 Seals 
 
 Abt oN et XC. 
 
 ON THE APOCRYPHAL TRADITIONS OF THE LORD’S WORDS 
 AND WORKS. 
 
 Συναγάγετε τὰ περισσεύσαντα κλάσματα ἵνα μή τι ἀπόληται. --- 81. 
 JOHN, VI. 12. 
 
 Ir is a fact of great significance, that traditional accounts of words or 
 works of the Lord which are not noticed in the Gospels 
 are extremely rare. The Gospels are the full measure Pri arg 
 of what was known in the Apostolic age, and (may we 
 not add?) of what was designed by Providence for the instruction of 
 after-ages. There are, however, some fragments which appear to contain 
 true and original traits of the Lord’s teaching, and as such are invested 
 with the greatest interest. Some traditional sayings, again, are evidently 
 duplicate recensions of passages contained in the Gospels. Others are so 
 distorted by the admixture of explanation or comment as to present only 
 a very narrow point of connection with the Evangelic history. The follow- 
 ing collection of these various kinds of traditional sayings is as complete 
 
 38 
 
446 ON THE APOCRYPHAL TRADITIONS 
 as I have been able to make it, but may probably still admit of additions. 
 The first saying is stamped with the authority of St. Paul, and cannot, 
 therefore, be called apocryphal, but it is too important a supplement to 
 the records of the Gospel to be passed over in an account ef “ unwritten 
 words.” 1 
 
 1. ... Remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how 
 He said, /¢ ts more blessed to give than to receive (Acts 
 Xx. 35).2 Compare Luke vi. 30. The saying does 
 not appear, so far as I know, elsewhere. 
 
 2. On the same day, having seen one working on the Sabbath, He said 
 to him, O man, if indeed thou knowest what thou doest, thou art blessed ; but 
 
 1. Traditional 
 words. 
 
 (a) Original tra- 
 ditions. 
 
 if thou knowest not thou art cursed, and art atransgressor of the law.? 
 3. But ye seek to increase from little, and from greater to be less.4 Cf. John 
 
 v. 44. 
 
 4. The Son of God says, Let us resist all iniquity, and hold it in hatred.6 
 5. Thus He [Christ] saith, They who wish to see me and to lay hold on my 
 
 kingdom must receive me by affliction and suffering.® 
 
 Acts xiv. 22. 
 
 11 have been unable to obtain Koer- 
 ner, De dictis Christi ἀγράφοις, 
 1776. The collection by Bunsen, Anal. 
 Ante-Nic. τ. 29 ff. is very imperfect. On 
 the other hand, that of Anger (Synops. 
 Evang. quoted before) is, as far as he 
 goes, very complete. 
 
 2... μνημονεύειν τῶν λόγων τοῦ Κυ- 
 ρίου Ἰησοῦ ὅτι αὐτὸς εἶπεν, Μακά- 
 ριόν ἐστιν μᾶλλον διδόναι 
 ἢ λαμβάνειν. 
 
 3 This very remarkable narrative oc- 
 curs in Cod. D, after Luke vi. 4: τῇ 
 αὐτῇ ἡμέρᾳ ϑδεασάμενός τινα ἐργαζόμ- 
 ενον τῷ σαββάτῳ εἶπεν αὐτῷ *Ar- 
 ὥρωπε, εἰ μὲν οἶδας τί ποι- 
 εἰς pardptos εἰ ci BE wh 
 οἶδας ἐπικατάρατος Kal Tapa- 
 βάτης- εἶ Tov νόμου. The form 
 of address (ἄνϑρ.) occurs Luke xii. 14; 
 ἐπικατάρατος occurs John vii. 47; Tapa- 
 Barns νόμου is a phrase of St. Paul. 
 It is evident that the saying rests on 
 some real incident; but it does nor re- 
 cur elsewhere. 
 
 Other additions: which occur in D 
 seem to be only new versions of passa- 
 ges in the Gospels. The most remarka- 
 ble are: 
 
 After § 3, Matt. xx. 28, εἰσερχόμενοι 
 δὲ Kat παρακληϑέντες δειπνῆσαι μὴ 
 
 Cf. Matt. xvi. 24; 
 
 ἀνακλίνεσϑαι (ἀνακλίνεσϑε) εἰς τοὺς 
 ἐξέχοντας τόπους. μήποτε ἐνδοξότερός 
 σου ἐπέλθῃ, καὶ προσελϑὼν ὃ δειπνο- 
 κλήτωρ εἴπῃ σοι. Ἔτι κάτω χώρει, καὶ 
 καταισχυνϑήσῃ" ἐὰν δὲ avaméons εἰς 
 τὸν ἥττονα τόπον καὶ ἐπέλθῃ σου ἥτ. 
 των, ἐρεῖ σοι 6 δειπνοκλήτωρ Σύναγε 
 ἔτι ἄνω, καὶ ἔσται σοι τοῦτο χρῆσι- 
 μον. 
 
 John vi. 56: καϑὼς ἐν ἐμοὶ 6 πατὴρ 
 κἀγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί. ἀμήν, ἀμὴν λέγω 
 ὑμῖν, ἐὰν μὴ λάβητε τὸ σῶμα τοῦ υἱοῦ 
 τοῦ ἀνδρώπου ws τὸν ἄρτον τῆς ζωῆς 
 οὐκ ἔχετε ζωὴν ἐν αὐτῷ. The same 
 passage occurs in some Latin authori, 
 ties. 
 
 4 Cod. D, and it. pler. after Matt 
 xx.28: ὑμεῖς δὲ (ζητεῖτε ἐκ μικροΐ. 
 αὐξῆσαι καὶ ἐκ μείζονος ἔλαττον εἶναι. 
 This striking sentence is variously ren- 
 dered by the Latin MSS. It seems to 
 be a genuine fragment. The phrase ἔλ- 
 αττον εἶναι is very remarkable. 
 
 5 Barn. Ep. 4... dicit filius Dei: Re- 
 sistamus omni iniquitati et odio habea- 
 mus cam. 
 
 The passage quoted by Barnabas, c. 6, 
 Dov, ποιήσω τὰ ἔσχατα ws τὰ πρῶτα, 
 seems to be a mixture of Ezek. xxxvi. 
 11 and Matt. xix. 30. 
 
 6 Barn. Ep. 7: οὕτως, φησίν, ot 
 
OF THE LORD’S WORDS AND WORKS. 
 
 6. Show yourselves tried money-changers.1 
 7. He that wonders shall reign; and he that reigns shall rest.* 
 
 wonder at that which is before you.® 
 
 447 
 
 Cf. 1 Thess. v. 21. 
 Look with 
 
 8. I came to put an end to sacrifices, and unless ye cease from sacrificing 
 
 | God's] anger will not cease from you.* 
 
 Cf Matt ix 1s: 
 
 9. Jesus said to His disciples, Ask great things, and the small shall be 
 added unto you; and ask heavenly things, and the earthly shall be added unto 
 
 you.® Cf. Matt. vi. 33. 
 
 10. Our Lord Jesus Christ said, 
 
 will 1 also judge you.® 
 Lord. 
 
 In whatsoever I may find you, in this 
 
 Such as I may find thee, I will judge thee, saith the 
 
 11. The Saviour Himself says, He who is near me is near the fire; he 
 
 who is far from me is far from the kingdom? 
 
 SéAovrés pe ἰδεῖν καὶ ἅψ- 
 ασϑαί μουν THs βασιλείας- 
 ὀφείλουσι ὥλιβόντες καὶ 
 
 παδόντες λαβεῖν με. 
 
 1 Τίνεσϑε τραπεζῖται δόκιμοι. Apel- 
 les ap. ELpiph. 44, 2; Orig. in Joann. 
 ΧΙΧ. ete.; cf. Anger, p. 274. This is the 
 most commonly quoted of all apocry- 
 phal sayings, and seems to be genuine. 
 The thought is explained in an addition 
 to the parable of the Talents which oc- 
 curs in the Clementine Homilies, = 0 U 
 yap, φησὶν [ὁ Κύριος], avd pwre, 
 τοὺς λόγους pov ws apyt- 
 ριον ἐπὶ τραπεζιτῶν kal 
 ὡς χρήματα δοκιμάσαι (Clem. 
 Hom. ut. 61). 
 
 2Ex Ev. Hebr. ap. Clem. Al. Strom. 
 1.9,645: Ὁ ϑαυμάσας βασι- 
 λεύσει καὶ 6 βασιλεύσας 
 ἀναπαυϑήσεται. 
 
 3 Trad. Matt. ap. Clem. Al. Strom. 
 u. 9, § 45: ϑαύμασον. Ta Ta- 
 ρόντα βαϑμὸν τοῦτον πρῶτον τῆς 
 ἐπέκεινα γνώσεως ὑποδέμενος. 
 
 4 Ev. Ebion.ap. Epiph. Her. xxx. 16, 
 p. 140: Ἦλϑον καταλῦσαι τὰς ϑυσίας, 
 καὶ ἐὰν μὴ παύσησϑε τοῦ ϑύειν οὐ 
 παύσεται ap ὑμῶν ἡἣ ὀργή. 
 
 5 Orig. de Orat. § 2: εἶπε γὰρ ὁ Ἴη- 
 gous τοῖς μαϑηταῖς αὐτοῦ Αἰτεῖτε 
 τὰ μεγάλα καὶ τὰ μικρὰ 
 ὑμῖν προστεδήσεται, καὶ 
 αἰτεῖτε τὰ ἐπουράνια καὶ 
 τὰ ἐπίγεια προστεϑήσεται 
 ὑμῖν. Cf. Clem. Str. 1. 24,§ 158: at 
 
 Cf. Luke xii. 49. 
 
 τεῖσϑε γάρ, φησί, Ta μεγάλα 
 καὶ πὰ “μικρὰ μὲν προστπ ε- 
 δήσεται. Id. Strom. iv. 6, ὁ 84. 
 
 6 Just. M. Dial. 41: ὁ ἡμέτερος Κύ- 
 ptos ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστὸς εἶπεν: “Ev ois 
 ἂν ὑμᾶς καταλάβω, ἐν τού- 
 τοις καὶ κρινῶ. Clem. Al. Quis 
 dives,§40: "Eq ois γὰρ ἂν εὕρω 
 ὑμᾶς, φησίν, ἐπὶ τούτοις καὶ 
 κρινῶ. 
 
 7 Nilus ap. Anast. Sin. Queest. 4 (An- 
 ger, p 207): οἷον yap [ἂν] εὕρω 
 σε, τοιοῦτόν σε κρινῶ, φησὶν 
 ὁ Κύριος. 
 
 8 Orig. Hom. in Jerem. Ul. p. Τῖϑ: 
 Legi alicubi quasi Salvatore dicente, et 
 quero sive quis personam figurarit Sal- 
 yatoris, sive in memoriam edduxerit, 
 ac yerum sit hoc quod dictum est. Ait 
 autem ipse Salvator: Qui juxta me est, 
 jucta ignem est ; quilonge a me longe 
 est a regno. 
 
 Didymus, in Ps. 88,8: διὸ φησὶν ὁ 
 Sornp Ὁ ἐγγύς μου ἐγγὺ- τοῦ 
 πυρός: ὁ δὲ μακρὰν aw ἐμοῦ 
 μακρὰν ard τῆς- βασιλείας. 
 
 For the knowledge of this remarka- 
 ble saying I am indebted to the Rey. 
 F. J. A. Hort. 
 
 A very similar phrase occurs in Igna- 
 tius (ad Smyrn. 4): ἐγγὺς μαχαίρας 
 ἐγγὺς ϑεοῦ: μεταξὺ μαχαίρας μεταξὺ 
 ϑεοῦ; and both phrases offer some 
 resemblance to one quoted from the 
 Doctrine of Veter by Gregory Naz, 
 (Ep. τ. ad. Ces. ap. Credn. Beitr. 
 
448 ON THE APOCRYPITAL TRADITIONS 
 
 12. The Lord says in the Gospel, 17 ye kept not that which is small, who 
 will give you that which is great? For I say unto you, that he that is faithful 
 in very little is faithful also in much.! Cf. Luke xvi. 11, 12, 10 (the last 
 clause coincides verbally). 
 
 13. [The Lord] says, Keep the flesh pure and the seal unspotted, that we 
 may receive eternal life (perhaps that ye may receive eternal life.) ” 
 
 14. The Lord Himself having been asked by some one, When His 
 kingdom will come? said, When the two shall be one, and that which is 
 without as that which is within, and the male with the female neither male nor 
 female? Cf. Gal. iii. 28. 
 
 15. Jesus says, For those that are sick Iwas sick, and for those that hunger 
 7 suffered hunger, and for those that thirst 1 suffered thizst.4 Cf. Matt. xxv. 
 35, 36 (ἐπείνασα, ἐδίψησα, hasevnoa). 
 
 16. ... In the Hebrew Gospel we find the Lord saying to His disciples, 
 Never be joyful except when ye shall look on your brother in love.® 
 
 1. 353): κάμνουσα ψυχὴ ἐγγύς ἐστι 
 δεοῦ. 
 
 1 (Clem. Rom.] Ep. 11.8: λέγει γὰρ 
 6 Κύριος ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ Ei τὸ 
 μικρὸν οὐκ ἐτηρήσατε, τὸ 
 μέγα τίς ὑμῖν δώσει; λέγω 
 γὰρ ὑμῖν, ὅτι ὁ πιστὸς κ.τ.λ. 
 
 This form of the thought occurs again 
 in Irenzus (11. 34, 3): Si in modico fi- 
 deles non fuistis, quod magnum est 
 quis dabit vobis? 
 
 2[Clem. Rom.] Ep. 11.8: ἄρα οὖν 
 λέγει, Tnphoate τὴν σάρκα 
 ἁγνὴν καὶ τὴν σφραγῖδα ἄσ- 
 πιλον, ἵνα τὴν αἰώνιον ζωὴν ἀπολά- 
 βωμεν (-ητε 1). 
 
 8 (Clem. Rom.] Ep. τι. 12: ἐπερωτη- 
 Seis... αὐτὸς 6 Κύριος ὑπό τινος πότε 
 ἤξει αὐτοῦ ἡ βασιλεία, εἶπεν Ὅταν 
 ἔσται τὰ δύο εν καὶ τὸ εξῶ 
 ὡς τὸ ἔσω καὶ τὺ ἄρσεν μετὰ 
 τῆς ϑηλείας οὔτε ἄρσεν 
 οὔτε δῆλυ. This mystical saying, 
 which seems very different in form 
 from tke character of our Lord’s 
 words, is found in Clement of Alex- 
 andria in several shapes. Strom 111.9, 
 §§ 63 ff.: φασὶ yap ὅτι αὐτὸς εἶπεν 6 
 Σωτήρ Ἦλϑον καταλῦσαι τὰ 
 ἔργα τῆς ϑηλείας.. ἣ Σαλώμη 
 φησί Μέχρι τίνος of ἄνϑρωποι ἀποϑαν- 
 οῦνται; . .. ὃ Κύριος ἀποκρίνεται 
 Méxpis ἂν τίκτωσιν αἱ γυ- 
 ναῖκες.. Καλῶς οὖν ἐποίησα μὴ τε- 
 κοῦσα... ἀμείβεται 6 Κύριος Πᾶσαν 
 
 φάγε βοτάνην τὴν δὲ πικ- 
 ρίαν ἔχουσαν μὴ payns.. ld. 
 18, § 92: πυνϑανομένης τῆς Σαλώμης 
 πότε γνωσδήσεται τὰ περὶ ὧν ἤρετο, 
 ἔφη 6 Κύριος Ὅταν τὸ τῆς- αἰσ- 
 χύνης ἔνδυμα πατήσητε, καὶ 
 ὅταν γένηται τὰ δύο ἕν καὶ 
 τὸ ἄῤῥεν μετὰ τῆς δηλείας 
 οὔτε ἄῤῥεν οὔτε ϑῆλυ. Clem- 
 ent believes, he says, that the narrative 
 was contained in the Gospel according 
 to the Egyptians. 
 
 A passage of Pseudo-Linus (De Pas- 
 sione Petri), for which I am indebted 
 to Baron Bunsen (Anal. Ante-Nic. 1. p. 
 31), appears to contain another version 
 of this saying: Dominus in mysterio 
 dixerat, Si non feceritis dextram sicut 
 sinistram et sinistram sicut dextram et 
 que sursum sicut deorsum et que ante 
 sicut retro non cognoscitis regnum Dei. 
 
 A good instance of the mixture of a 
 mystic explanation with a simple text 
 occurs in a passage of the Πίστις Σοφία, 
 quoted by Tischendorf, on Matt. xxiv. 
 22. 
 
 4 Orig In Matt. Tom. x11r.2: Ἰησοῦς 
 γοῦν φησί Διὰ τοὺς ἀσδϑενοῦν- 
 τας ἠἡσδένουν, καὶ διὰ τοὺ 
 πεινῶντας ἐπείνων, καὶ διὰ 
 τοὺς διψῶντας ἐδίψων. The 
 words appear to be only an adaptation 
 of the passage in St. Matthew. 
 
 5 Hieron. in Eph. ν. 8: in Hebraico. 
 -.. Evangelio legimus Dominum ad 
 
 —— 9 
 
OF THE LORD’S WORDS AND WORKS. 
 
 449 
 
 17. ... When the Lord came to Peter and the Apostles [after His 
 resurrection], He said to them, Zuke hold, handle me, and see that 7 am not 
 
 fn incorporeal spirit. 
 
 And straightway they touched Him and believed, 
 
 being convinced by His flesh and by His Spirit.1 
 18. Christ said: Good must needs come, but blessed is he through whom 
 
 at comes.2 
 
 19. It was not through unwillingness to impart His blessings that the 
 Lord announced in some Gospel or other: My mystery is for me and for 
 
 the sons of my house. 
 
 We remember our Lord and Master, how he said to 
 
 us: Keep my mysteries for me and for the sons of my house. 
 20. The cause, therefore, of the divisions of soul that came to pass in 
 houses [Christ] Himself taught, as we have found in a place in the Gospel 
 
 discipulos loguentem: Zt nunguam, in- 
 quit, /eti sitis, nisi quum fratrem ves- 
 trum videritis in caritate. 
 
 In another place (adv. Pelag. 111. 2) 
 Jerome has preserved from the same 
 source aversion of Matt. xviii. 22... 
 (Luke xvii. 4), differing from the canon- 
 ical text: Si peccaverit, inquit, frater 
 twus in verbo ct satis tibi fecerit, septies 
 in die suscipe eum. Dixit illi Simon 
 discipulus ejus: Septies in die? Re- 
 spondit Dominus et dixit ei: Ltiam ego 
 dico tibi, usque septuagies septies. Et- 
 enim in prophetis quoque, postquam 
 uncti sunt Spiritu Sancto, inventus est 
 sermo peccati. The Greek text of this 
 passage has been given by Tischendorf 
 from the margin of one of his new 
 MSS. ( Noftitia, ete., p.58),as taken from 
 τὸ ᾿Ιουδαϊκόν. But the Greek does not 
 remove the obscurity of the last clause. 
 Td Ἰουδαϊκὸν ἑξῆς, ἔχει μετὰ τὸ ἐβ- 
 δομηκοντάκις ἑπτά: καὶ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς 
 προφήταις μετὰ τὸ χρισϑῆναι, αὐτὸς 
 ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ, εὑρίσκεται ἐν αὐτοῖς 
 λόγος ἁμαρτίας (ad Matt. xviii. 22). 
 The MS. contains other varieties of 
 reading. from the same source, on Matt. 
 iv. 5; xvi. 17; xxvi. 74, which all tend 
 to show the close connection of the 
 apocryphal and canonical texts. 
 
 Jerome again refers to the saying 
 given in the text in Comm. in Ezech. 
 VI., XVII. 7,... in Evangelio quod 
 juxta Ilebraos Nazarewi legere consuey- 
 erunt, inter maxima ponitur crimina, 
 qui fratris sui spiritum contristaverit. 
 
 1 Ignat.ad Smyrn.8:... ὅτε mpds 
 τοὺς περὶ Πέτρον ἦλϑεν, ἔφη αὐτοῖς. 
 Λάβετε, ψηλαφήσατέ με καὶ 
 ἴδετε ὅτι οὐκ εἰμὶ δαιμό- 
 νιον ἀσώματον. Καὶ εὐϑδὺς αὐ- 
 τοῦ ἥψαντο καὶ ἐπίστευσαν, κρατη- 
 ϑέντες τῇ σαρκὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ τῷ πνεύ- 
 ματι. 
 
 The same words are quoted by Jerome 
 from the Nazarene Gospel, De. Vir. 
 Illustr. 16: Ecce palpate me et videte 
 quia non sum demonium incorporeum. 
 Cf. Hieron. Jn Isai. Lib. xvii. Prol. 
 The chief clause occurred also in the 
 Doctrine of Peter: Non swum demonium 
 incorporeum (Orig. de Princ. Pref. 8). 
 Cf. Euseb. H. £. 111. 35. 
 
 2 Clem. Hom. x11.29: ἔφη Τὰ ay- 
 asa ἐλϑεῖν δεῖ μακάριος 
 δέ, φησίν, δι’ οὗ ἔρχεται. The 
 other sayings which occur in the Hom- 
 ilies (111.55): 6 πονηρός ἐστιν 
 ὁ πειράζων. x1x.2: Μὴ δότε 
 πρόφασιν τῷ πονηρῷ, ete., 
 seem less likely to be genuine. 
 
 3 Clem Alex. Strom. v.10, § 64: οὐ 
 yap φϑονῶν, φησί, παρήγγειλεν ὃ 
 Κύριος ἔν τινι εὐαγγελίῳ, Muar ή- 
 ριον ἐμὸν ἐμοὶ καὶ τοῖς 
 υἱοῖς τοῦ οἴκου μου. Clem. 
 Hom. χιχ. 0: Μεμνήμεϑα τοῦ Κυρίου 
 ἡμῶν καὶ διδασκάλου ὡς ἐντελλόμενος 
 εἶπεν ἡμῖν Τὰ μυστήρια ἐμοὶ 
 καὶ. trois viots τοῦ οἴκου 
 μου φυλάξατε. 
 
 38* 
 
450 ON THE APOCRYPHAL TRADITIONS 
 
 existing among the Jews in the Hebrew language, in which it is said: 1 
 
 (2) 
 will select to myself these things (τ ὸΞ G1) : very very excellent are those whom 
 
 my Father who is in heaven has given to me. 
 
 PT nat oo The Lord taught of those days [of His future kingdom on 
 earth] and said: The days will come in which vines shall spring up, each 
 having ten thousand stocks, and on each stock ten thousand branches, and on 
 each branch ten thousand shoots, and on each shoot ten thousand bunches, and 
 on each bunch ten thousand grapes, and each grape when pressed shall give 
 Jive and twenty measures of wine. And when any saint shall have seized one 
 bunch, another shall cry: I am a better bunch ; take ine; through me bless the 
 Lord. Likewise also [He said], that a grain of wheat shall produce ten 
 thousand ears of corn, and each grain ten pounds of fine pure flour; and 
 so all other fruits and seeds and each herb according to its proper nature. 
 And that all animals, using for food what is received from the earth, shall 
 live in peace and concord with one another, subject to men with all sub- 
 jection...... And he [Papias] added, saying: Now these things are 
 credible to them which believe. And when Judas the traitor believed not 
 and asked: How then shall such productions proceed from the Lord ? 
 the Lord said, They shall see who shall come to these times. Of this then 
 (Irenzeus adds) Isaiah prophesied, Isai. xi. 6 ff. .... 
 
 In addition to these passages, which seem to contain in a more or less 
 
 altered form traces of words of our Lord, there are 
 ee ga εν other fragments which are either variations of known 
 
 sayings, or (as it appears) sentences framed to suit the 
 character of the apocryphal work in which they were found. Of these 
 fragments the following are the most remarkable : 
 
 1. The Lord said: Should you be with me gathered in my bosom, and not 
 do my commandments, I will cast you off, and say to you, Go from me, I know 
 you not whence. you are, workers of iniquity? Cf. Matt. vii. 21-23. 
 
 2. The Lord saith: Ye shall be lambs in the midst of wolves. But Peter 
 answers Him, and saith: What, then, should the wolves tear in pieces the 
 lambs? Jesus said to Peter: Let not the lambs fear the wolves after they 
 are dead ; and do you fear not those who kill you and can do nothing to you ; 
 
 1 Eusebius, Theophania, 1v. 18 (p. it on the authority of those who had 
 234, Prof. Lee’s Translation). This heard St. John speak of teaching of the 
 quotation seems to have been un- Lord to such effect. The history of the 
 noticed. tradition is a sufficient explanation of 
 
 2 Papias, cf. Iren. v. 88, 8. It isevi- the corruption which it has suffered. 
 dent that this famous passage gives 8 (Clem. Rom.] τι. 4:... εἶπεν 6 Κύ- 
 only a very imperfect representation of ρος Ἐὰν ἦτε μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ συν- 
 the discourse of the Lord to which it nymévot ἐν τῷ κόλπῳ μου, 
 refers, for I think that it is certainly kal μὴ ποιῆτε τὰς ἐντο- 
 bused on areal discourse. It must be Ads pov, ἀποβαλῶ ὑμᾶς. 
 observed that the narrative isnow only καὶ ἐρῶ ὑμῖν Ὑπάγετε ἀπ᾽ 
 preserved in a Latin translationofa ἐμοῦ, οὐκ οἷδα ὑμᾶς ποϑὲεν 
 free quotation from Papias, who gave ἔστε, ἐργάται avoptas. 
 
OF THE LORD’S WORDS AND WORKS 451 
 
 but fear Him who after you are dead hath power over soul and body, to cast 
 them into hell-fire+ Cf. Matt. x. 16, 28; Luke xii. 4, 5. 
 
 3. In the Preaching of Peter the Lord says to the disciples after the 
 Resurrection: 7 chose out you twelve disciples, having judged you worthy of 
 me.” Cf. John vi. 70; xv. 16. 
 
 4. Peter says that the Lord said to the Apostles : Should then any one 
 of Israel be willing to repent, so as to believe upon God through my name, his 
 sins shall be forgiven him. After twelve years go out into the world, lest any 
 one say, “We did not hear.” 3 
 
 5, . . . According to some who alter the Gospels [Christ says]: Blessed 
 are they who have been persecuted through righteousness, for they shall be per- 
 fect ; and blessed are they who have been persecuted jor my sake, for they shall 
 have a place where they shall not be persecuted.* Cf. Matt. v. 10. 
 
 6. ... The Word says to us : Should any one for this reason kiss [a woman] 
 a second time because she pleased him [he sins]; and adds, Men must there- 
 fore act thus with extreme caution in the kiss [of peace] (or rather the salu- 
 tation), as knowing that, if perchance it should be sullied by thought, it would 
 place them out of the pale of eternal life.® 
 
 7... . [In the Gospel according to the Hebrews] the Saviour Himself 
 says: Just now my Mother, the Holy Spirit, took me by one of my hairs, and 
 bore me away to the great mountain, Thabor.® 
 
 1 Clem. Rom. 11. 5: Δέγει yap 6 
 Kipios Ἔσεσδε ὡς ἀρνία ἐν 
 μέσῳ λύκων. ᾿Αποκριϑεὶς δὲ 6 
 Πέτρος αὐτῷ λέγει Ἐὰν οὖν δια- 
 σπαράξωσιν οἱ λύκοι τὰ ἀρνία; Eimwey ὁ 
 Ἰησοῦς τῷ Πέτρῳ Μὴ φοβείσδω- 
 σαν τὰ ἀρνία τοὺς λύκους 
 μετὰ τὸ ἀποδϑδανεῖν αὐτά; καὶ 
 ὑμεῖς μὴ φοβεῖσδε τοὺς ἀπ- 
 οκτείνοντας ὑμᾶς καὶ μηδὲν 
 δυναμένους ποιεῖν: ἀλλὰ φο- 
 Betode τὸν μετὰ τὸ ἀποϑα- 
 νεῖν ὑμᾶς ἔχοντα ἐξουσίαν 
 ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος, τοῦ βα- 
 λεῖν εἰς γέενναν πυρός. 
 
 2Clem. Al. Strom. νι. § 48: ἐν τῷ 
 Πέτρου Κηρύγματι ὁ Κύριός φησι πρὸς 
 τοὺς μαϑητὰς μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν 
 ᾿Ἐξελεξάμην tuas δώδεκα 
 μαδητάς, κρίνας ἀξίους ἐμοῦ. 
 
 3. Clem. Al. Strom. v1. § 43: διὰ τοῦτο 
 φησὶν ὁ Πέτρος εἰρηκέναι τὸν Κύριον 
 τοῖς ἀποστόλοις Ἐὴὰν μὲν οὖν 
 τις ϑελήσῃ τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ μετ- 
 ανοῆσαι διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματός 
 μου [τοῦ] πιστεύειν ἐπὶ τὸν 
 Sedv, ἀφεϑήσονται αὐτῷ αἱ 
 
 ἁμαρτίαι: μετὰ δώδεκα [8] 
 ἔτη ἐξέλδετε εἰς τὸν κόσ- 
 μον μή τις εἴπῃ οὐκ ἢκού- 
 σαμεν. 
 
 4 Clem. Al. Strom. 1v. § 41: ὥς τινες 
 τῶν μετατιδϑέντων τὰ εὐαγγέλια 
 Μακάριοι, φησίν, οἱ δεδιωγμ έ- 
 
 νοι ὑπὸ τῆς" δικαιοσύνης 
 ὅτι αὐτοὶ ἔσονται τέλειοι. 
 
 καὶ μακάριοι οἱ δεδιωγμένοι 
 ἕνεκα ἐμοῦ ὅτι ἕξουσι τόπον 
 ὅπου οὐ διωχϑήσονται. 
 
 5 Athenag. Legat. 88: . ἡμῖν λέγ- 
 οντος τοῦ λόγου Ἐάν τις διὰ 
 τοῦτο ἐκ δευτέρου καταφι- 
 Anon ὅτι ἢρεσεν αὐ τῷ — καὶ 
 ἐπιφέροντος Οὕτως οὖν ἀκριβώ- 
 σασϑαι τὸ φίλημα (μᾶλλον δὲ 
 τὸ προσκύνημα) δεῖ, ὡς εἴπου 
 μικρὸν τῇ διανοίᾳ mrapaso- 
 Awdeln, ἔξω ἡμᾶς τῆς αἰω- 
 νίου τιδϑέντος ζωῇς-. 
 
 6 This very singular saying, which is 
 evidently of Hebrew origin, from the 
 gender of Spirit (Ruach), is quoted sev- 
 eral times. Orig. Jn Joann. Tom. 11. 
 §6f.: Ἐὰν δὲ προσίεταί tis τὸ καϑ᾽ 
 
452 
 
 8. [Christ] said: Many shall come in my name. 
 And, Take heed to false prophets.' .. . 
 
 be schisms and heresies. 
 
 ON THE APOCRYPHAL TRADITIONS 
 
 ... And, There shall 
 
 9, [It is said] in Scripture: The just shall fall seven times, and shall rise 
 
 again.” Cf. Luke xvii. 4. 
 
 10. It is said in the Gospel according to Luke: He to whom more is for- 
 
 given loves more; and he to whom less ts forgiven loves litile.* 
 
 vii. 47. ς 
 
 Cf. Luke 
 
 11. [Christ said] Z often desired to hear one of these words, and had not 
 
 one to tell me.* 
 
 The traditional facts relative to the Gospel history, which present the 
 slightest semblance of truth, are even fewer than the 
 
 2. Traditional 
 
 traditional words. 
 facts. 
 
 Justin Martyr gives some details 
 
 which appear to be mere deductions from the received 
 history, or translations of prophecy into history. Such are the notices 
 that the mother of the Lord was of the family of David, that the Lord 
 
 ‘EBpaiovs εὐαγγέλιον, ἔνϑα αὐτὸς ὃ 
 Σωτήρ φησιν ἄρτι ἔλαβέ με ἡ 
 μήτηρ μοῦ, τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, 
 ἐν μιᾷ τὼν τριχῶν μου, καὶ 
 ἀπήνεγκέ με εἰς τὸ ὄρος τὸ 
 μέγα Θαβ ὦρ. Id. Hom. in Jerem. 
 xv. 4: εἰ δέ τις παραδέχεται τὸ 
 ἄρτι ἔλαβε με, κιτ.λ. Hieron. 
 In Mich. vit. θ:. .. qui... crediderit 
 Evangelio quod secundum MHebrzos 
 editum nuper transtulimus, in quo ex 
 persona Salvatoris dicitur Modo tulit 
 me mater mea, Sanctus Spiritus, in 
 uno capillorum meorum... Id. In Isai. 
 xv. Il: ...in Evangelio quod juxta 
 Hebrzos scriptum Nazarzi lectitant, 
 Dominus loquitur Afodo me tulit, ete. 
 Id. In Ezech. xvi. 18: In Evangelio 
 Hebreorum quod lectitant Nazarai, 
 Salvator inducitur loquens Jodo me 
 arripuit mater mea, Spiritus Sanctus. 
 Cf. Fabricius, Cod. Apocr. N. T. 361, n.; 
 Bp. Pearson, On the Creed, p. 166. 
 
 1 Just. M. Dial, § 35, p. 253 B: εἶπε 
 ydp.... Eoovtat sxlouata 
 καὶ αἱρέσεις. This sentence seems 
 to have been formed from the sense of 
 our Lord’s words and the form of 1 Cor. 
 xi. 18,19. It occurs in a transitional 
 shape in Clem. Hom. xvi. 21. Justin, 
 however, quotes it as an independent 
 saying. 
 
 The passage quoted by Hegesippus 
 (Phot. Cod. 232, p. 472; Fragm. ap. 
 
 Routh, I. p. 219) seems to be only a 
 citation from memory of Matt. xiii. 16. 
 See also Tischdf. ad Matt. vii. 22. 
 
 The words quoted by Origen from 
 Celsus (c. Cels. vitt. 15, 16) do not 
 seem to make any pretensions to being 
 words of the Lord (Anger, p. xxvii. n). 
 The whole passage is extremely ob- 
 scure. 
 
 2[Hipp.] adv. Her. (Naass.) v. 7, p. 
 ex 3 i 5 / ͵ 
 
 102: τοῦτο ἐστὶ τὸ εἰρημένον, φησίν, 
 
 ἐν τῇ γραφῇ Ἑπτάκις πεσεῖται 
 
 6 δίκαιος καὶ ἀναστήσεται. 
 
 5 Cypr.. Test. 111. 116: In Evangelio 
 cata Lucam Cui plus dimittitur, plus 
 diligit; et cui minus [pusillum] dimit- 
 tiur, modicum diligit. Cf. Iren. m1. 
 20, 2. 
 
 To these passages may be added the 
 clause appended by D, and numerous 
 Latin authorities, to Mark xiii. 2: καὶ 
 διὰ τριῶν ἡμερῶν ἄλλος ἀναστήσεται 
 ἄνευ χειρῶν. Compare also p. 424, 
 n. 3. 
 
 4‘Mareos, ap. Iren. 1. 20; 25. - - ἘΡ 
 τῷ εἰρηκέναι Πολλάκις ἐπεὺὼ ὑ- 
 Mnoa ἀκοῦσαι ἕνα τῶν λύ- 
 γων τούτων καὶ οὐκ ἔσχον 
 τὸν ἐροῦντα. I think that ἐπε- 
 ύμησα was an early corruption for 
 ἐπεϑύμησαν, and that the reference is 
 to Matt. xiii. 17. Ἐπεϑύμησα seems to 
 be inconsistent with the context. 
 
OF TIE LORD’S WORDS AND WORKS. 
 
 was born in a cave, that the wise men came from Arabia, that the Lord's 
 miracles were attributed to magic, that the ass which the 
 disciples brought for Him was found tied toa vine. Of 
 a similar kind are the statements made by Celsus, that the person of the 
 Lord was “little and ill-favored (δυσειδές) and ignoble,” and that His 
 mother wrought with her own hands ;* and those which occur in the 
 Clementines, that John the Baptist (like the Moon) had thirty diset- 
 ples, as our Lord (the Sun) had twelve,® and that the ministry of Christ 
 began at the spring solstice* Some traditions had a wider currency, 
 though they may have had a like origin, as that the Baptism was ac- 
 companied by the appearance of a bright fire or light, and the words, 
 “Thou art my Son: This day have I begotten Thee.’*® One, which appears 
 in many different forms, represents our Lord as commanding His disci- 
 ples to remain for twelve years at Jerusalem;® another relates that 
 He remained with them eighteen months after the Resurrection,? and 
 gave fresh revelations which were preserved in esoteric books. ‘The ten- 
 dency to exaggeration appears in the story of the death of Judas given 
 on the authority of Papias ; and, since it is as natural to define as to ex- 
 aggerate, names were affixed to many of the chief persons who are name- 
 less in the Gospel history. Of the domestic life of the Lord one trait 
 only, except such as are obviously fabulous,? has been preserved, which 
 from its simplicity may be true, where Justin says that “ ploughs and 
 yokes were preserved, which Christ wrought while among men.” 19 Some 
 details are added to narratives of the Gospels, as in the notice that “ the 
 man with a withered hand” was a mason, and that a ‘ vast lintel of the 
 Temple” was shattered by the earthquake at the Cru- 
 cifixion; but the history of the appearance of the Lord 
 to St. James is the only independent record of a fact known to have 
 taken place which is not mentioned in the Gospels.¥ 
 
 Yet cf. Luc. i. 27. 
 
 t. Cor. xv. 7. 
 
 1 Just. M. Dial. 48, 78, 69. 
 
 2 Cels. ap. Orig. c. Cels. νι. 75; 1. 28. 
 
 8 Clem. Hom. τι. 28. 
 
 4 Clem. Hom. τ. 6 f. 
 
 5 Cf. p. 435, n. 2; p. 488. 
 
 6 Clem. Al. Strom. vi. § 48:... μετὰ 
 δώδεκα ἔτη ἐξέλϑετε εἰς τὸν κόσμον 
 μὴ τὶς εἴπῃ Οὐκ ἠκούσαμεν. Cf. Apol- 
 Jon. ap. Euseb. H. Ε.ν. 18 (ὡς ἐκ παρα- 
 δόσεωΞ5). The Πίστις Σοφία (Anger, p. 
 xliii.) gives eleven (7) years. 
 
 7 Valentiniani ap. Iren. 1. 3, 2. 
 
 8 Examples of this appear in the Ver- 
 sions of the Gospels. Thus the two 
 thieves are called in Matt. xxvii. 38, 
 89, Zoatham and Camma,; in Mark xv. 
 27, Zoathan and Chammatha, by Colb. 
 Par.; and in Luke xxiii. 32, Joathas 
 and Maggatras, by Rhedig. In Luke 
 
 xxiv 13, the name Emmaus by a va- 
 riety of changes is made to serve as the 
 name of one of the disciples. 
 
 Compare also Hom. Clem. 11. 19, 
 Ἰούστα τις ἐν ἡμῖν ἐστὶν Συροφοινίκισ- 
 oa, Κ΄ T. A. (Matt. xv. 22). Even the 
 Rich man in Luke (xvi. 19) receives a 
 name: Nineve (Sahid. and Schol. Gr.). 
 
 9 The famous story of the Alphabet 
 may deserve notice from the early date 
 at which it was current: Iren. 1. 20, 1. 
 Cf. Thilo, Cod. Apocr. p. 290 ff. Other 
 early legends occur in Justin, Gnost. 
 ap. [Hippol.] Philos. v.*p. 146. 
 
 10 Just. M. Dial. c. 88. 
 
 11 All these examples are taken from 
 the Gospel according to the Hebrews, 
 Cf. pp. 435 f. 
 
 One of the early additions to the last 
 
454 ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 
 
 AUP LP Naat oC 
 
 ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 
 Καπηλεύοντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ. ---- 2 Cor. 11. 17. 
 
 Tue acts and sayings attributed to the Lord, which have been preserved 
 elsewhere than by the Evangelists, have been already noticed : it still re- 
 mains for us to collect the materials which illustrate the general character 
 and contents of those early writings which for a time partially occupied 
 the place or disputed the claims of the canonical Gospels. As might have 
 been anticipated, these “ apocryphal Gospels ” present two great types, one 
 Judaizing, the other Pauline. The former type is preserved in several spe- 
 cific forms which correspond to differences in the Judaizing sects — The 
 Gospel according to the Hebrews (i), The Ebionite Gospel (ii), The Clemen- 
 tine Gospel (iii) : the latter in The Gospel of Marcion (iv). It would carry 
 us away from our immediate subject to discuss how far the first three 
 Gospels are to be regarded as having a distinct existence as written rec- 
 ords, but I cannot but believe that too little weight is allowed ordinarily to 
 the power of oral tradition to mould and propagate modified forms of 
 isolated passages. ‘The fragments themselves will show on what a narrow 
 basis many ingenious theories have been built. One point, however, seems 
 beyond all reasonable doubt, that the synoptic Gospels give a simpler and 
 therefore an earlier form of the common narratives. This follows at once 
 from. a general view of the fragments ; and argurient of detail would be 
 of little avail against a critic who could maintain that the Gospel according 
 to the Hebrews or the Gospel of Marcion are respectively the originals of 
 St. Matthew and St. Luke. 
 
 I. THe GosPpEL ACCORDING TO THE HEBREWS (τὸ kad’ ‘EBpatous 
 εὐαγγέλιον. Clem. Alex.; Orig. Evangelium secundum (juxta) Hebrzos. 
 Hieron. ). 
 
 Several passages of this Gospel have been already quoted, for which a 
 simple reference is sufficient: the remaining fragments are given at length. 
 
 1. Cf. p. 449, num. 17. 
 3. Cf. p. 451, num i. 
 5. Cf. p. 448, num. 16. 
 
 chapter of St. Mark deserves notice 
 from its singularity. It is preserved 
 by Jerome: In quibusdam exemplari- 
 bus et maxifne in Grecis codicibus 
 juxta Marcum in fine ejus Evangelii 
 scribitur: Postea cum occubuissent un- 
 decim, apparuit eis Jesus et exprobravit 
 incredulitatem et duritiam cordis eo- 
 rum, quia his qui viderant eum resur- 
 
 2. Cf. p. 447, num. 7. 
 4, Cf. p. 448, n. 5. 
 6. Cf. p. 449, num. 20. 
 
 gentem non crediderunt (Mare. xvi. 14). 
 Et illi satisfaciebant dicentes: Seculum 
 istud iniquitatis et incredulitatis sub- 
 stantia est (one MS. sub Satana est), 
 quz non sinit per immundos spiritus 
 veram Dei apprehendi virtutem: id- 
 circo jam nunc revela justitiam tuam 
 (Adv. Pelag. τι. § 15). 
 
ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 455 
 
 7. The Gospel contained a history of “a woman who was accused of 
 many sins before the Lord,” which was related also by Papias.' 
 
 8. It is written in a Gospel, which is styled “ according to the He- 
 brews,” if any pleases to receive it, not as an authority, but as an illustra- 
 tion of the subject before us. Another rich man said to Him, Master, what 
 good thing shall I do to tive? He said to him, Fulfil the law and the prophets. 
 He answered Him, I have fulfilled them. He said to him, Go, sell all that thou 
 possessest, and distribute to the poor, and come, follow me. But the rich man be- 
 gan to scratch his head, and it did not please him. And the Lord said to him, 
 How sayest thou, I have fulfilled the law and the prophets, since it is written 
 in the law, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself ; and lo! many of thy breth- 
 ren, sons of Abraham, are clothed in filth, dying of hunger ; and thy house is 
 full of many goods, and nothing at all goes out of it tothem? And He turned 
 and said to Simon His disciple, who was sitting by Him, Simon, son of Jonas. 
 it is easier for a camel to enter the eye of a needle than for a rich man {to enter| 
 into the kingdom of heaven.” 
 
 9. The Gospel entitled “according to the Hebrews,” which I lately 
 translated into Greek and Latin, and which Origen often quotes, contains 
 the following narrative after the Resurrection. Now the Lord, when He 
 had given the cloth to the servant of the priest, went to James and appeared to 
 him. For James had taken an oath that he would not eat bread from that 
 hour on which he had drunk the cup of the Lord, till he saw Him risen from 
 the dead. Again, a little afterwards, the Lord says, Bring a table and 
 bread. Immediately, it is added, He took bread, and blessed, and brake, and 
 gave it to James the Just, and said to him, My brother, eat thy bread, for the 
 Son of Man has risen from the dead.* 
 
 10. In the Gospel according to the Hebrews . . . there is the following 
 passage : So, the mother of the Lord and His brethren said to Him: John the 
 Baptist is baptizing for the remission of sins; let us go and be baptized by 
 
 1 Euseb. HW. FE. 111. 89: ἐκτέϑειται δὲ 5 Hieron. de Vir. Illustr. 11.: Evan- 
 
 [ὁ Παπίας] καὶ ἄλλην ἱστορίαν περὶ 
 γυναικὸς ἐπὶ πολλαῖς ἁμαρτίαις διαβ- 
 ληϑείσης (de muliere adultera, Ruf.) 
 ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου, ἣν τὸ Ka ‘EBpalous 
 εὐαγγέλιον περιέχει. There is no 
 reason to suppose that Papias derived 
 the history from the Hebrew Gospel, 
 and not from tradition. The narrative 
 may (as Rufinus implies) be the same as 
 the pericope, John viii. 1-11. Cf. Fa- 
 bricius, Cod. Apocr. N. T. p. 356 n. 
 
 2 This passage is given in the Latin 
 version (not by Rufinus. Cf. Huet, Ovi- 
 geniana, 111. 8, 12) of Origen’s commen- 
 tary on St. Matthew (Tom. xvr. § 14). 
 The passage is not found in any Greek 
 MS. The text is printed by Tischen- 
 tlorf on Matt. xix. 15. 
 
 gelium quoque quod appellatur secun- 
 dum Hebreos, et ame nuper in Grecum 
 Latinumque sermonem translatum est, 
 quo et Origenes Sape utitur, post resur- 
 rectionem Salvatoris refert: Dominus 
 autem cum dedisset sindonem servo sa- 
 cerdotis, ivit ad Jacobum et apparuit 
 ei. Juraverat enim Jacobus se non 
 comesturum panem ab illa hora qua 
 biberat calicem Domini, donec videret 
 eum resurgentem a dormientibus (Gr. 
 ἀναστάντα ἐκ νεκρῶν) Rursusque 
 post paullulum: Afferte, ait Dominus, 
 mensam et panem. Statimque additur’ 
 Tulit panem et benedixit ac fregit et 
 dedit Jacobo justo, et dixit ei: Frater 
 mi, comede panem tuum, quia resur- 
 revit Filius hominis a dormientibus. 
 
456 ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 
 
 him. But He saidto them: What sin have I committed that I should go and. 
 be baptized by him? unless perchance this very word which I have spoken is 
 [a sin of | ignorance.' 
 
 11. According to the Gospel written im Hebrew which the Nazarenes 
 used (it is said): The Holy Spirit with full stream shall come down upon 
 Him (the branch of Jesse) . . . . Moreover, in the Gospel of which I made 
 mention above, we find this written: Now it came to pass when the Lord 
 had come up out of the water, the Holy Spirit with full stream came down and 
 rested upon Him, and said to Him: My Son, in all the prophets I was wait- 
 ing for Thee, that thou shouldest come. and I might rest in Thee. For Thou 
 
 art my rest; Thou art my Firstborn Son, who reignest forever.? 
 12. Bethlehem of Judea... this is an error of the copyist: for I think 
 that the word given originally by the Evangelist, as we read in the He- 
 
 brew, was Judah, not Judea? 
 
 13. In the Gospel entitled accordiny to the Hebrews for panis supersub- 
 stantialis (of the Latin version, Matt. vi. 11), I found mahar, which 
 
 means for the morrow.* 
 
 14. In the Gospel which the Nazarenes and Ebionites use, which I 
 
 1 Hieron. adv. Pelag. 111. 2: In Evan- 
 gelio juxta Hebreos, quod Chaldaico 
 quidem Syroque sermone sed Hebraicis 
 litteris scriptum est, quo utuntur usque 
 hodie Nazareni secundum Apostolos, 
 sive, ut plerique autumant, juxta Mat- 
 theum,quod et in Cesariensi habetur 
 bibliotheca, narrat historia: Ecce Ma- 
 ter Domini et fratres ejus dicebant ei: 
 Joannes Baptista baptizat in remissi- 
 onem peccatorum ; eamus εἴ baptizemur 
 abeo. Dixit autem eis; Quid pecexvi 
 ut vadam et baptizer ab e0? nisi forte 
 hoc ipsum quod αἰαὶ ignorantia est. Et 
 in eodem volumine: Si peccaverit, in- 
 quit, frater tuus in verbo, ete. (cf. p. 
 427 n.). 
 
 This narrative was found also in the 
 Preaching of Paul (or of Peter, or of 
 Peter and Paul): . in quo libro 
 contra omnes scripturas et de peccato 
 proprio confitentem invenies Christum, 
 qui solus omnino nihil deliquit, et ad 
 accipiendum Joannis baptisma pene 
 invitum a matre sua Maria esse com- 
 pulsum. Item cum baptizaretur ignem 
 super aquam esse visum, quod in Evan- 
 gelio nullo est scriptum . . . (Auct. De 
 Rebaptismate, ¢. XV11.). 
 
 I have not noticed any passage in 
 which the mention of a light at the 
 
 Baptism is referred to the Gospel ae- 
 cording to the Hebrews, though the cir- 
 cumstance was described in the Ebion- 
 ite Gospel. 
 
 2 Hieron. Comm. in Isai. IV. ΧΙ. 2: 
 ... Juxta Evangelium quod Hebreo 
 sermone conscriptum legunt Nazarzi: 
 Descendit super eum omnis fons Spirit- 
 us Sancti . Porro in Evangelio, 
 cujus supra fecimus mentionem, hee 
 scripta reperimus: Factum est autem 
 cum ascendisset Dominus de aqua, 
 descendit fons omnis Spiritus Sancti 
 et requievit super eum et dixit illi: Filt 
 mi, in omnibus prophetis expectabam 
 te, ut venires et requiescerem in fe. Tu 
 es enim requies mea; tues filius meus 
 primogenitus qui regnas in sempi- 
 ternum. 
 
 3 Hieron. ad Matt. 11. 5: Bethlehem 
 Judee ... Librariorum hic error est. 
 Putamus enim ab Evangelista primum 
 editum, sicut in ipso Hebraico legimus, 
 Jude non Judee. 
 
 4 Hieron. ad Matt. v1.11: In Evan. 
 gelio quod appellatur secundum He- 
 breos pro supersubstantiali pane re 
 peri Mahar, quod dicitur crastinum; 
 ut sit sensus: Panem nostrum crasté 
 num (id est futurum) da nobis hodie. 
 
ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 457 
 
 lately translated from the Hebrew into Greek, and which is called by very 
 many the original Gospel of Matthew, the man with the withered hand is 
 described as a mason, who sought the help (of Christ) with words to this 
 effect : Z was a mason, seeking a livelihood by the lubor of my hands. [ pray 
 Thee, Jesus, to restore to me my health, that I may not beg my bread in dis- 
 grace} 
 
 15. In the Gospel used by the Nazarenes I find the son of Jehoida for 
 the son of Barachias.” 
 
 16. The name Barabbas is interpreted in the Gospel styled according to 
 the Hebrews as Son of their master®... 
 
 17. In the Gospel of which I have often made mention, we read that 
 a lintel of the Temple of vast size was broken asunder.* 
 
 Il. Tur Gosret OF THE EBIONITEs. 
 
 Epiphanius speaks of the Nazarenes as “having the Gospel according 
 to Matthew in a most complete form, in Hebrew,” though he immediately 
 adds that he does not know whether “ they removed the genealogies from 
 Abraham to Christ.”® In contrast with this statement he says that the 
 Ebionites had a Gospel “ called the Gospel according to Matthew, not 
 entire and perfectly complete, but falsified and mutilated, which they call 
 
 the Hebrew Gospel.” © 
 
 1 Hieron. ad Matt. x11. 13: In Evan- 
 gelio quo utuutur Nazareni et Ebion- 
 itz, quod nuper in Grecum de Hebreo 
 sermone transtulimus, et quod yocatur 
 a plerisque Matthzi authenticum, homo 
 iste qui aridam habet manum, ca#men- 
 tarius scribitur, istiusmodi vocibus 
 auxilium precans: Cementarius eram, 
 manibus victum queritans. Precor te, 
 Jesu, ut mihi restituas sanitatem ne 
 turpitur mendicem cibos. 
 
 2 Hieron. ad Matt. xxii. 35: In 
 Evangelio quo utuntur Nazareni pro 
 jilio Barachie, filum Joiade reperimus 
 scriptum. 
 
 3 Hieron. ad Matt. xxvit. 16: Iste 
 (Barabbas) in Evangelio quod scribitur 
 jucta Hebreos, filius magistri eorum 
 interpretatur. . 
 
 4 Hieron. ad Matt. xxvii. 51: In 
 Evangelio cujus sepe facimus menti- 
 onem, superliminare templi infinite 
 magnitudinis fractum esse atque divi- 
 sum legimus. Cf. Lp. ad Hedib. vin. 
 1: In Evangelio autem quod Hebraicis 
 litteris scriptum est, legimus, non velum 
 templi scissum sed superliminare tem- 
 pli mire magnitudinis corruisse. 1 see 
 
 39 
 
 He then gives several passages professedly taken 
 
 no reason for referring the quotation 
 given from Hegesippus (cf. p. 450, 7 ) to 
 the Gospel according to the Hebrews, 
 though he used it: Euseb. H. 2. Iv. 
 22 (cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 283, 
 234). 
 
 So again Jerome refers to his He- 
 brew friends and not to a Hebrew Gos- 
 pel in Comm. in Hab. 11. 3 (audivi He- 
 breum .. . disserere}; Comm. in Isai. 
 ΧΙ. 1 (eruditi Hebreorum), and no con- 
 elusion can be drawn from those pas- 
 sages as tothe contents of the Gospel 
 according to the Hebrews. 
 
 5 Epiph. Her. xx1x. 9, p.124: ἔχουσι 
 δὲ τὸ κατὰ Ματϑαῖον εὐαγγέλιον πλη- 
 ρέστατον Ἑ βραϊστί. παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς γὰρ 
 σαφῶς τοῦτο, Kadws ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἐγράφη 
 Ἑ βραϊκοῖς γράμμασιν ἔτι σώζεται. 
 οὐκ οἶδα δὲ εἰ καὶ τὰς γενεαλογίας τὰς 
 ἀπὸ τοῦ ᾿Αβραὰμ ἄχρι Χριστοῦ περι- 
 εἴλον. 
 
 γοῦν παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς εὐαγγελίῳ κατὰ Ματ- 
 ϑαῖον ὀνομαζομένῳ, οὐχ ὅλῳ δὲ πλη- 
 ρεστάτῳ, ἀλλὰ νενοϑευμένῳ καὶ 
 ἠκρωτηριασμένῳ, Ἑ βραϊκὸν δὲ τοῦτο 
 καλοῦσιν, ἐμφέρεται, κ. τ. A. 
 
458 ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 
 
 from this Gospel, but they present so many inconsistencies that it is evi- 
 dent that they cannot have belonged originally to the same book. One 
 fragment contains a narrative of the Baptism, with the addition of apoc- 
 ryphal details, which gained a wide currency at a very early time. An- 
 other gives a saying of the Lord which may have been included in the 
 original Ebionite Gospel. Of the remaining pieces one belongs to a writ- 
 ing like the Clementines, in which the simple form of history was ex- 
 changed for a didactic form. It is possible that this incongruous element 
 had been incorporated in the Gospel in the time of Epiphanius; or he 
 may have derived his information from different sources. It is only neces- 
 sary to notice that the fragments were not of the same origin. 
 
 1..[In the Ebionite Gospel] the following passage occurs: There 
 came a man by name Jesus, and He was about thirty years old, who 
 chose us. And when He came to Capernaum He entered into the house 
 of Simon, who was surnamed Peter, and opened -his mouth and said: 
 As I passed along the lake of Tiberias, I chose John and James, sons of 
 Zebedee, and Simon and Andrew, and Thaddeus, and Simon Zelotes, 
 and Judas Iscariot; and thee, Matthew, I called as thou wert sitting at 
 the receipt of custom, and thou followedst me. You, then, I wish to be 
 twelve apostles, for a testimony to Israel. 
 
 2. And John came baptizing, and Pharisees went out to him and were 
 baptized, and all Jerusalem. And John had raiment of camels’ hair, and 
 a girdle of skin about his loins; and his food (the Gospel says) “‘ was 
 wild honey, the taste of which was the taste of manna, like a honey-cake 
 steeped in oil,” —that they may convert the word of truth into a lie, and 
 put “ honey-cakes” (ἐγκρίδας) for “locusts ” (ἀκρίδας) 2 
 
 3. The beginning of their Gospel is this: It came to pass in the days 
 of Herod, king of Judwa, that John came baptizing, with a baptism of 
 repentance, in the river Jordan, who was said to be of the race of Aaron 
 the priest, a son of Zachariah and Elizabeth, and all went out to him. 
 
 1 Epiph. Her. 13, p.137: ἐν τῷ παρ᾽ 
 αὐτοῖς εὐαγγελίῳ... ἐμφέρεται ὅτι 
 ἐγένετό τις ἀνὴρ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦς, καὶ 
 αὐτὸς ὡς ἐτῶν τριάκοντα, ὃς ἐξελέξατο 
 ἡμᾶς. καὶ ἐλδὼν εἰς Καφαρναοὺμ. εἰσ- 
 ἤλδεν εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν Σίμωνος τοῦ ἐπικ- 
 ληϑέντος Πέτρου, καὶ ἀνοίξας τὸ στόμα 
 αὐτοῦ εἶπε Παρερχόμενος παρὰ τὴν 
 λίμνην Τιβηριάδος ἐξελεξάμην ᾿Ιωάν- 
 νὴν καὶ ᾿Ιάκωβον υἱοὺς Ζεβεδαίου καὶ 
 Σίμωνα τὸν Ζηλωτήν καὶ ᾿Ιούδαν τὸν 
 Ἰσκαριώτην' καί σε τὸν Ματϑαῖον 
 καδεζόμενον ἐπὶ τοῦ τελωνίου ἐκά- 
 λεσα καὶ NKoAovsnods por ὑμᾶς οὖν 
 βούλομαι εἶναι δεκαδύο ἀποστόλους εἰς 
 
 3 Epiph. JZ. 6. 
 
 μαρτύριον τοῦ Ἰσραήλ. καὶ ἐγένετο 
 Ἰωάννης, K. τ. A. 
 
 2 Epiph. . ς.: καὶ ἐγένετο ᾿Ιωάννης 
 βαπτίζων καὶ ἐξῆλϑον πρὸς αὐτὸν Φαρ- 
 toaior καὶ ἐβαπτίσϑησαν καὶ πᾶσα ‘lep- 
 οσόλυμα. καὶ εἶχεν ὃ ᾿Ιωάννης ἔνδυμα 
 ἀπὸ τριχῶν καμήλου καὶ ζώνην δερ- 
 ματίνην περὶ τὴν ὀσφὺν αὐτοῦ, καὶ τὸ 
 βρῶμα αὐτοῦ, φησί, μέλι ἄγριον, οὗ H 
 γεῦσις ἦν τοῦ μάννα, ws ἐγκρὶς ἐν 
 ἐλαίῳ, ἵνα δῆϑεν μεταστρέψωσι τὸν 
 τῆς ἀληϑείας λόγον εἰς ψεῦδος καὶ 
 ἀντὶ ἀκρίδων ποιήσωσιν ἐἔγκρίδας ἐν 
 μέλιτι. The variation shows that the 
 Gospel was in Greek. 
 
 This passage has apparently been interpolated from St. Luke 
 
 (Zacharias, Elizabeth). In the following chapter Epiphanius again quotes the 
 
ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 459 
 
 4. And after a long interval it adds, that “when the people were bap- 
 tized, Jesus also came and was baptized by John. And when He came 
 up from the water, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Holy Spirit 
 of God in the form of a dove, which came down and came upon him.! 
 And a voice came from heaven, saying: Thou art my beloved Son; in 
 Thee I am well pleased. And again: To-day have I begotten Thee.* 
 And immediately a great light shone round about the place ;* and John, 
 when he saw it (the narrative continues), says to Jesus: Who art thou, 
 Lord? And again a voice came from heaven to him [John]; This is my 
 beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And then (it continues) John 
 fell down before Him, and said: I beseech thee, Lord, do thou baptize 
 me. But he forbade him, saying, Suffer it: for thus it is becoming that 
 
 all things be fulfiled.” + 
 
 beginning of the Gospel. A comparison of the two quotations illustrates the 
 carelessness of Epiphanius and the manner in which the text was altered. 
 
 13: ἐγένετο ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις Ἡρώδου c.14: ἐγένετο ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις Ἡρώδου 
 
 τοῦ βασιλέως τῆς ᾿Ιουδαίας 
 | 
 
 ἦλϑεν Ἰωάννης 
 
 βαπτίζων βάπτισμα μετονοίας 
 
 ἐν τῷ ᾿Ιορδάνῃ ποταμῷ, 
 
 ὃς ἐλέγετο εἶναι ex γένους ᾿Ααρὼν 
 
 τοῦ ἀρχιερέως καὶ ἐξήρχοντο πρὸς 
 αὐτὸν πάντες. 
 
 βασιλέως τῆς Ιουδαίας 
 
 ἐπὶ ἀρχιερέως Καϊάφα 
 
 HAE τις Ἰωάννης ὀνόματι 
 βαπτίζων βάπτισμα μετανοίας 
 ἐν τῷ ποταμῷ ᾿Ιορδάνῃ, 
 
 καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς. 
 
 The insertion of ποταμῷ is worthy of notice. The word is doubtful in Matt. 
 
 iii. 6, but certain in Mark i. 5. 
 
 1 The difference of this clause from 
 the cofresponding clause in the Canon- 
 ical Gospel is full of meaning. There 
 the Spirit descends (καταβαῖνον) as a 
 Dove; here it is as a Dove which came 
 down (KateASovons). 
 
 2 These words are also quoted as used 
 at the Baptism by Justin and Hilary; 
 and are actually given as part of the 
 text in Luke iii. 22, in the Codex Berne 
 (D),and some Latin copies. 
 
 8 This detail is added in two Latin 
 MSS. ( Vercell. a. Sengerm, gi): Et cum 
 baptizaretur (Jesus gi) lumen ingens 
 (magnum g') circumfulsit (fulgebat gi) 
 de aqua, ita ut timerent omnes qui ad- 
 venerant (qui congregatierant gi). Cf. 
 Just. M. Dial. 88; Sibyll. Orac. vit. 
 82—84. 
 
 It is worthy of remark that in an 
 addition which occurs in another Latin 
 MS. (Bobb. k), a miraculous (7) light is 
 
 connected with the resurrection: Mark 
 xvi. 4, Subito autem ad horam tertiam 
 tenebre diei (3 d. ten.) facte sunt per 
 totum orbem terra, et descenderunt de 
 celis angeli, et surgentes] in claritate 
 visi Dei simul ascenderunt cum eo, et 
 continuo lux facta est. 
 
 4 Epiph. Her. xxx. 13, p. 188: καὶ 
 μετὰ τὸ εἰπεῖν πολλὰ ἐπιφέρει ὅτι TOD 
 λαοῦ βαπτισϑέντος ἦλϑε καὶ Ἰησοῦς 
 καὶ ἐβαπτίσϑη ὑπὸ τοῦ Ἰωάννου. καὶ 
 ὡς ἀνῆλϑεν ἀπὸ τοῦ ὕδατος ἠνοίγησαν 
 οἱ οὐρανοὶ καὶ εἶδε τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ ϑεοῦ 
 τὸ ἅγιον ἐν εἴδει περιστερᾶς κατελ- 
 δούσης καὶ εἰσελϑούσης εἰς αὐτόν" καὶ 
 φωνὴ ἐγένετο ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ λέγουσα, 
 Σύ μου εἶ ὃ υἱὸς ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν σοὶ ηὐδό- 
 κησα' καὶ πάλιν Ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγέννη- 
 κά σε. Καὶ εὐθὺς περιέλαμψε τὸν τόπον 
 φῶς μέγα. ὃν (1. ὃ) ἰδών, φησίν, ὁ ᾿Ιωάν- 
 yns λέγει αὐτῷ Sv, τίς εἶ Κύριε; καὶ πά- 
 λιν φωνὴ ἔξ οὐρανοῦ πρὸς αὐτόν, Ob- 
 
460 ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 
 
 5. Cf. p. 447, No. 8. 
 
 6. [In the account of the Last Supper they add the interrogative and 
 the word flesh], saying: Have I earnestly desired to eat this flesh, the 
 Passover, with you 7} ; 
 
 7. They say, according to their absurd argument: Jt 15 sufficient for 
 the disciple to be us his Master.” 
 
 11. THe Gosret oF THE CLEMENTINE HOMILIES. 
 
 The numerous quotations which occur in the Clementine Homilies are 
 generally allowed to furnish another form of the Ebionite Gospel. It 
 may, however, be very fairly questioned whether the peculiarities which 
 these quotations exhibit may not be more properly referred to oral tradi- 
 tion or to errors of memory than to any one written source. With one or 
 two exceptions, the Homilies contain no sayings of the Lord which are 
 not either mere duplicates of passages in the Gospels or deductions which 
 follow directly from them. ‘The subjoined list contains, I believe, a 
 complete list of the passages quoted in the Homilies. The quotations 
 marked by Italics are verbal in the main; the remainder generally give 
 the sense of the corresponding passage of the canonical Gospel in other 
 words.’ 
 
 Matt. ν. 8. . . Cf. Hom. xv. 10: 6 διδάσκαλος ἡμῶν πιστοὺς πένητας 
 
 ἐμακάρισεν. 
 
 δ. ταν . Cf. Hom. xvii. 7: ἵνα of καθαροὶ τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτὸν ἰδεῖν 
 δυνηνῶσιν. 
 
 νει Ἐὰν . Hom. iii. 51: οὐκ ἦλϑον κ. τ. ν. 
 
 XIV, Bae ev LS: 
 VASANB DA ON es κα 
 
 Hom. iti. 51: 6 οὐ ρ. ----παρελ. ἰῶτα Ev —T. νόμου. 
 
 Hom. iii. 56: μὴ ὑμόσητε τὸν odp. — ὑποπόδ. τ. 7. 
 Qu. ἐ. 
 
 Hom. iii. 55; xix. 2: ἔστω bu. τὸ val vat, (καὶ) τὸ od 
 οὔ: τὸ yap 7. — πον. ἐ. Cf. 2 Cor. i. 17. 
 
 ν sO=4 i oe ce (ΠΟ τ ν: 5. 
 
 ν 44, Pee ek ΉΡΙΠΙΣ ik 9: 
 
 Vic esilinde tote comers Aleks 
 
 τός ἐστιν ὃ vids μου 6 ἀγαπητός, ἐφ᾽ 
 ὃν ηὐδόκησα. Καὶ τότε, φησίν, 6 
 3 / \ 3 ~ αν, / 
 
 Iwavyns προσπεσὼν αὐτῷ ἔλεγε Δεο- 
 
 , » if € \ 
 pat σου Κύριε, σύ με βάπτισον: ὃ δὲ 
 ἐκῷλυεν αὐτῷ λέγων “Apes, ὅτι οὕτως 
 ἐστὶ πρέπον πληρωϑῆναι πάντα. 
 
 1 Epiph. Her. xxx. 22, p. 146: ἐποίη- 
 gay... αὐτὸν λέγοντα Μὴ ἐπιϑυ- 
 μίᾳ ἐπεδύμησα κρέας τοῦτο 
 τὸ Πάσχα᾽ φαγεῖν wed ὑμῶν. 
 Immediately below Epiphanius quotes 
 
 \ 2 / > / 
 the passage: Μὴ ἐπιῶυμίᾳ emeduunoa 
 τοῦτο τὸ Πάσχα κρέας φαγεῖν med 
 ὑμῶν. The true reading was probably 
 κρέας τοῦτο, or τοῦτο τὸ κρέας. 
 
 2 Epiph. Her. xxx. 26, p. 151; φασὶ, 
 yap κατὰ Toy ἐκείνων ληρώδη λόγον 
 ᾿Αρκετὸν τῷ μαϑητῇ εἶναι ὡς ὁ διδάσ- 
 καλος. If it were not that Epiphanius 
 quotes the passage again in the same 
 form (§ 80, p. 160), it would seem that 
 the change (εἶναι for ἵνα γένηται) was 
 simply an error of his. 
 
 3 The Clementine quotations are 
 printed in a convenient form by Cred- 
 ner, Beitrage, 1. pp. 284 ff. 
 
 Ihave discussed the quotations of 
 Justin M. elsewhere: J/ist. of N. 17. 
 Canon, pp. 188 ff. 
 
‘ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 
 
 Matt. v. 45. 
 
 vi. 6. 
 Vi, o2t 8: 
 
 vi. 13. 
 Vil. 2. 
 Vil. 7. 
 vii. 9-11. 
 
 alae pees 
 
 vik 13, 14. 
 vii. 15, 16. 
 
 i.) 
 
 viii. 11. 
 
 viii. 5-11. . 
 
 Vili. 24. 
 Vili. 31. 
 > ee ee 
 
 >: el (4 eee 
 So 71.1--15; 
 x. 28. 
 x. 29, 30 
 x. 34, 35 
 ἘΠ: Li. 
 Ki, 25. 
 ἘΠῚ Pe 
 xi. 28 
 
 xil. 26. 
 
 Xii. 34. 
 ΧΙ 41. 
 xii. 42. 
 
 ΧΙ. 17. 
 xili. 39. 
 Xili. 52. 
 xv. 13. 
 
 xvi. 13 ff. . 
 
 . Hom. ili. 57. 
 
 401 
 
 Ch si, 56: πΥΠ Ὁ, 
 
 . Hom. iii. 55. 
 . Hom. iii. 55; οἷδεν γάρ ----Ὡἃπ. πρὶν αὐτὸν ἀξιώ: 
 
 σητε. 
 
 . Hom. xix. 2: ῥ. -ττ τ. πον. 
 
 “ΟἿ Hom. xviii. 16. 
 
 . Hom, iii. 52: (yr. καὶ εὑρίσκετε. 
 . Hom. iii. 56: τίνα αἰτήσει vi. ἄρτον --- ἢ καὶ ixs.— 
 
 6 π. b. ὃ ovpdvios —Tois αἰτουμένοις αὐτὸν καὶ 
 
 τοῖς ποιοῦσιν τὸ ϑέλημα αὐτοῦ. 
 
 . Cf. Hom. xii. 839 ; ὃ ϑέλει ἑαυτῷ ϑέλει καὶ τῷ πλησίον. 
 
 Cf. vii. 4. 
 
 . Hom. xviii. 17. 
 . Hom. vii. 15, 16. 
 ΓΕ Hom: wis Δ: 
 
 , / , / > 
 τί με λέγεις,κ ύριε, κύριε, Kal οὐ 
 ποιεῖς ἃ λέγω. 
 
 . Hom. viii. 4. 
 
 Ὁ Porn. ne 21. 
 
 . Cf Hom: six. 14: 
 . Cf Hom. xix. 14. 
 
 . Hom iii. 7: ἀξ. ἐ. ὃ épy. τοῦ μισδοῦ αὐτοῦ. 
 
 . Hom. iii. 56: 6 Θεὸς ἔλεος ϑέλει καὶ οὐ ϑυσίαν, ἐπιγνω- 
 
 σιν αὐτοῦ καὶ οὐχ ὁλοκαυτώματα (Hos. vi. 6). 
 
 Cf. Luke 
 ἘΠ 2 Dim: ve ts. 
 
 Cf. Hom. iii. 30, 31. 
 
 , HOM vil. 5: 
 
 > Cf. Hom. xii::31. 
 . CY, Home ἘΠ. Ὁ, 
 , Ch Hout. τι, 17. 
 
 . Hom. viii. 6: fou. σ. πάτερ τοῦ οὐρ. καὶ τ. γ. ὅτι ἐκ. 
 
 . Hom. iii. 
 
 . Hom. xix.2: εἰ 6 Σ.--- π. οὖν 
 
 * Hom. xix. 7: 
 
 τ. ἃ. σ. πρεσβυτέρων καὶ --- νηπ. 
 Cf. Hom. xvii. 5; xviii. 15. 
 
 SnAd Covey. 
 
 . Hom. xvii. 4; xviii. 4: οὐδεὶς ἔγνω τὸν πατέρα εἰ μὴ 
 
 6 υἱὸς ὡς οὐδὲ Toy υἱόν τις Oldev εἰ μὴ ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ois 
 ἂν βούληται 6 vids ἀποκαλύψαι. 
 
 52: δεῦτε --- κοπιῶντεϑ. 
 
 αὐτοῦ στήκῃ ἣ 
 βασιλεία; 
 
 ἐπ π. K. OT. A. 
 
 TRELOME. Mie. 
 
 Hom. xi 33: Bac. v. ἐγερϑ. μ. τ. γ. --- ἀπὸ τ. π. --΄ 
 
 Σολ. ὧδε καὶ οὐ πιστεύετε. 
 
 . Hom. iii. 53. 
 
 ~ CL Hom. xix. 9. 
 
 . Cf. Hom. viii. 7. 
 
 . Hom. iii. 52: πᾶσα φ. --- ὃ π. ὁ οὐρ. exp. 
 . Hom. xvii. 18 f. 
 
 39* 
 
462 ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 
 
 Matt. xvii. 5... Hom. xvii. 53: οὗτος ἐστίν μου ὃ vids ὁ ἀγαπητὸς εἰς 
 ὃν εὐδόκησα: τούτου ἀκούετε. : 
 
 xvii. 20. . . . Cf. Hom. xi. 16: διὰ πίστεως... . τὰ ὄρεσιν ἐοικότα. 
 eee μεϑίστησι πάϑη. 
 
 WH TOS os TAO VE ἣν 
 
 xviii. 17. . + . Hom. xii. 29. Cf. p. 449. num. 18. . 
 
 Six 8) 4.6.02 Comrie | 
 
 1x. 16=18. (vos ΠῸῈ Homnxvail.3: : 
 
 xx. 16; xxil, 14. Hom. vill. 4: πολλ. KA. OA. δὲ ἐκλ. 
 
 xxi ἘΞῚ4. Cr, Home vin 99. 
 
 ἘΣ BS. sa. Ch. om) Am 54. 
 
 xxil.382. . . . Hom. iii. 55: οὐκ ἔστιν &. v. ἀλλὰ ¢ 
 
 AKI. 2 τος 3° 5) OM. Mt. 18. ᾿ 
 
 $l WS. ΟΣ Hom xv ΤΟ] | 
 
 XXill. 25, 26. . Hom. xi. 29: οὐαὶ 6. yp. καὶ φ. 6.6. kK. τ. ποτ. ---- τὸ 
 ἐξ. ἐσ. δὲ γέμει ῥύπους. 
 
 Χχιν, 2. 54.. κα OM. 15: 
 
 xxiv. 45-51. . . Hom iii 60; 64. 
 
 xxv. 21. . . . Hom iii. 65: εὖ $.— more. 
 
 ΧΧν. θ΄. ἢν 3 Home ΠΟΙ. 
 
 ΧΧΥ ee ae Homes ΙΧ x23: 
 
 ἘΧΎΘΗ evi 
 
 In addition to these passages there are others which present parallels 
 with the remaining canonical Gospels. 
 
 Mark iv. 34. . . Hom. xix. 20: διὸ καὶ τοῖς αὑτοῦ μαϑηταῖς κατ᾽ ἰδίαν 
 éméAve τῆς τῶν οὐρανῶν βασιλείας τὰ μυστήρια. 
 
 vii. 26. . . . Hom. ii 19: Συροφοινίκισσα. 
 
 xii. 29. » »« -« Poni. m..57. (Deut.cvi. 4): 
 
 Luke viii. 18, =. Cf. Hom, xviii. 16 (κἂν δοκῇ ἔχειν). 
 
 ΧΙ ΒΤ το rhe ROMINA Ψ: 
 
 es τς ars ΚΟΥ ἜΠΟΤΗΙ: IK Ὁ 
 
 xvi 1Ξ8. τ᾿ ΠΟΤ: ΧΥΠ 6: 
 
 xix. 1-10. . . ΑΕ Hom. ii. ‘63. 
 
 RRINCSS, a ον ΕΙΘΤ; ΧΙ ἢ; 
 
 John 11. ὅ, . - Hom. xi. 20. 
 
 is LAL 5+ ΠΟΙ ΧΙ ee: 
 
 x.9. . . . . Hom. iii. 52: ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ πύλη τῆς ζωῆς. 
 
 x.27. . . . . Hom. iii. 52: τὰ ἐμὰ πρόβατα ἀκούει THs ἐμῆς φωνῆς. 
 
 IV. Tre Gosre, or Marcron: 
 
 Tertullian and Epiphanius! supply us with materials for reconstructing 
 the Gospel which Marcion published as ‘“ the Gospel of the Lord,” or “ of 
 
 le. Heres. XuiI. pp. 309 seqq. It eral variations which occur in Epiph- 
 will be sufficient for our purpose to anius appear to be later errors of 
 refer only to Tertullian, who examines transcription, or errors of Epiphanius 
 the Gospel of Marcion in the fourth himself. 
 book of his treatise against him. Sev- 
 
ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 453 
 
 Christ.” It does not appear that he made any additions to the Pauline 
 narrative of St. Luke, which he adopted as the basis of his history ; and 
 the following table! will show how much of it he recognized. In most 
 cases the reasons for the changes and omissions will be evident, when we 
 
 bear in mind the peculiar features of the Marcionite heresy. 
 
 St. LUKE. 
 
 The first, second, and third chapters of St, Luke were 
 
 wanting in Marcion’s Gospel, which began with the 
 
 ee Same 
 
 Give athe ὃ Ὁ 
 
 . words: ‘In the fifteenth year of the 
 reign of Tiberius Cxsar [God 5] 
 .came down to Capernaum, a city 
 
 Tertull. adv. 
 Barc. iv. 7. 
 
 of Galilee, and was teaching on the Sabbath-day.” 
 
 iv. 832-87. . , υ. 84-- Ναζαρηνέ 
 
 iv. 38,39. . . Doubtful. 
 iv. 16-30. Omitting all reference to the Old Tes- td. tv. 8. 
 tament, and in v. 16=06 ἣν TeSpap- 
 μένος and κατὰ Td ciwdds αὐτῷ. 
 iv. 40-44. Entire. 
 v. 1-39. . Entire? Inv. 14, ἵνα eis μαρτύριον ὦ ἴα. iv. 9-11. 
 : Ἕ pee id. iv. 12-17, 
 vi. 1-49. , Entire.* In v. 17, κατέβη ἐν αὐτοῖς. pee 
 
 vii. 1-28 ; 36-50. 
 
 vv. 29—35 are opposed to Marcion’s 
 
 view of the relation of John the Baptist to Jesus, 
 and to his idea of the true Christian life. 
 
 viii. 1-18 ; 20-56 ; Entire.® 
 ix. 1-62. . 
 
 In v. 30 Marcion seems to lave read 
 συνέστησαν αὐτῷ (or rather ἔστησαν 
 
 adv. Mare. 
 iv. 19, 20. 
 
 id. τυ. 21—25. 
 
 μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ) ; and in place of v. 31, 
 only ὀφϑέντες ἐν τῃ δόξῃ αὐτοῦ. 
 
 1 In the construction of this table I 
 have chiefly followed Hahn’s edition of 
 Marcion’s Gospel, published in Thilo, 
 Codex Apocryphus, pp. 403-408; and I 
 have throughout compared my own 
 table with that given by De Wette 
 ( Einl. § 71 b), who quotes the results of 
 Ritschl’s investigations into the sub- 
 ject. All the passages of St. Luke 
 which were contained in Marcion’s 
 Gospel are placed in the first column, 
 and any significant variations are noted 
 in the second. 
 
 2 The Marcionites maintained the no- 
 tion of a sudden and unexpected (subi- 
 tum ex inopinato, Tertull. /. c.) ap- 
 pearance of the good Deity to frustrate 
 the designs of the God of the Jews. 
 Cf. Neander, Church History, 1. pp. 
 182, sqa. 
 
 3 Tertullian (adv. Mare. tv. 11) 
 acutely criticizes the impropriety of 
 the sudden introduction of John the 
 Baptist after the removal of the open- 
 ing chapters of St. Luke’s Gospel. 
 Marcion’s explanation of vy. 14, 86-39, 
 may be seen in Tertullian, adv Mare. 
 IV. 9, 11 (pp. 210, 222). 
 
 4 Marcion explained v. 23, and the 
 “woe” in v. 24,so as to accord with 
 his own views: Tértull. adv. Mare. iv. 
 15. 
 
 5 Marcion represented the announce- 
 ment of “the mother and brethren of 
 Jesus” as made “ftentandi gratia: 
 adv. Marc. αν. 19, p. 260. According to 
 Epiphanius, 7 μήτηρ ---ἀδ. avd. were 
 wanting. 
 
 6 The explanation which Marcion 
 gave of the Transfiguration is interest- 
 
464 ON 
 
 adv. Marc. iv. 24, 
 
 x. 1-11; 16-42. 
 
 25. 
 Bett 90, δὲ« 
 52-54. 
 id. iv. 28, 29. xi. 1-5; 8-59; 
 
 id. iv. 30. RTO Ree bee 
 
 id. tv. 51. 
 
 xiv. 1-6 ; 12-35. 
 
 id. iv. 83. xv. 1-10. 
 id. tv. 33, 34. xvi. 1-31. 
 id. tv. 35. xvii. 1-6 ; 11-37. 
 
 id. iv. 80. 
 
 id. Ww. 37. 
 
 id. iv. 88. xx. 1-8; 19-36; 
 39-47. 
 
 id. iv. 89. 
 
 23-38. 
 
 “τα. iv. 40, 41. 
 
 52-71. 
 
 id. iv. 42. 
 
 v.21 --- πάτερ and καὶ τῆς. γῆς. 
 
 In v. 
 
 xxi. 5-17; 19,20; v. 27=Kal δύξης." 
 
 SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 
 
 The 
 order in v. 22 was reversed by Mar- 
 cion ; Ὁ. 24 he probably read only 
 ὅτι mp. οὐκ εἶδον ἃ ὑμεῖς βλέπετε. υ. 
 25= ai@vov.! 
 
 xi. 1-29; 33-48; Cf. Varr. Lectt. in v. 2; v. 29=ei μὴ 
 
 τὸ on. "Iw.2 Inv. 42 he read 
 κλῆσιν for κρίσιν, and = ταῦτα --- 
 
 ἀφιέναι. 
 
 In vv. 8, 9, ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ. 
 In v. 28, for ᾿Αβραάμ --- προφήτας, Mar- 
 
 cion read πάντας τοὺς δικαίους, and. 
 
 added ἐκβ. καὶ κρατουμένους 
 ΕΒ 
 ἔξω. 
 
 Inv. 26, Marcion read καταλείπει for 
 
 μισεῖ. 
 In v. 10, ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ. Cf. xii. 
 
 8, 9. 
 12, τὸ ἐμόν: Inv. 17, for the 
 
 last clause Marcion read : μοῦ ἢ τῶν 
 
 λόγων μίαν Kep. 7.4 
 
 Marcion added inv. 2, εἰ οὐκ ἐγεν- 
 
 νήϑη ἢ le] At. μ; and inserted 
 Luke iv. 27 after v. 14. 
 
 Xvill. 1-30; 35-43. v. 857 = ὃ Ναζωραῖος. ν 915 
 xix. 1-28; 47, 48. ν. 9 = καϑότι--- ἐστίν. 
 Entire. 
 
 In 0-32, foray 
 γενέα αὕτη, Marcion read 6 οὐρανὸς 
 kal ἢ γῆ. v. 36 = καὶ --- ἀνθρώπου. 
 
 Xxli. 1-15; (17,18) υ. 8 = εἰσῆλϑε δὲ σατανᾶς. 
 19-29 :31-34; 
 39-41 ; 45-48; 
 
 XX. 1-42; 44-46; v. 8 = τῶν Ἰουδαίων. 
 
 50-56. v. 84 = διαμερίζόμενοι ---- κλῆρον. 
 
 ing: adv. Marc. τν. 22. He justifies 
 the apparent harshness of vv. 57 seqq. 
 
 1 Cf. Tertull. adv. Marc. τν. 25, p. 298. 
 
 2 Marcion supposed that ‘‘ the strong 
 man armed” (ν. 21) meant the Creator 
 —the God of tle Jews, and ‘the 
 stronger man,” the good Deity. Ter- 
 tull. 1v. 26, p. 299. 
 
 8Iny. 5, the ‘*‘ fearful God” is the 
 Creator, who is also signified by ‘‘ the 
 
 thief” (v. 39). Tertull. 7. 6. pp. 304, 
 911. 
 
 4 For Marcion’s explanation of the 
 parable (19-31) see Tertull. 7. ec. pp. 828 
 seqq. The words sicut et lex et proph- 
 ete (Tertull. rv. 83) seem to be a ccom- 
 ment of Tertullian. 
 
 5 Marcion probably applied the pas- 
 sage to the Jewish Messiah (Hahn). 
 
 6 Epiphanius represents Marcion as 
 
ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 465 
 
 xxiv. 1-26 ; 28-47. v. 25, οἷς ἐλάλησεν ὑμῖν. v. 32 = ὡς id. tv. 48, 
 Sinv. Hu. τ. γραφάς. v. 37 ,pavTracua 
 for πνεῦμα. v. 39 = ψηλαφήσατε, σάρκα. v.44 = 
 ὅτι -- ἐμοῦ. v. 45 = τότε --- αὐτοῖς. v. 46 = ὅτι --- 
 γέγραπται." 
 
 No one of the remaining Apocryphal Gospels claims any special notice. 
 The fragments quoted from the Gospel according to the Egyptians? have 
 been already given ; and of the Gospels of Basilides, Cerinthus, Apelles, 
 Matthias, we know little more than the names. But there is another class 
 of writings alse called Apocryphal Gospels, to which the Gospels of the 
 Infancy and the Gospel of Nicodemus belong, which cannot be left wholly 
 unnoticed. ‘The narratives which we have hitherto examined were either 
 based on the same oral traditions as the canonical Gospels, or revisions of 
 the canonical texts ; but these enter on a new field, and illustrate the writ- 
 ings of the New Testament more by the complete contrast which they 
 offer to the spirit and style of the whole, than by minute yet significant 
 divergences from particular books. The completeness of the antithesis 
 which these spurious stories offer to the divine record appears at once — it 
 we may be allowed fora moment to compare light with darkness — in 
 relation to the treatment of the three great elements of the Gospel history, 
 miracles, parables, and prophecy, the lessons of power, of nature, and of 
 providence. In the Apocryphal miracles we find no 
 worthy conception of the laws of providential interfer- 
 ence; they are wrought to supply personal wants, er to gratify private 
 feelings, and often are positively immoral. Nor, again, is there any spir- 
 itual element in their working; they are arbitrary displays of power, and 
 without any spontaneity on our Lord’s part or on that of the recipient. 
 The Apocryphal Gospels? are also entirely without par- 
 ables ; they exhibit no sense of those deeper relations 
 between nature and man— between corruption and sin — which are so 
 frequently declared in the Synoptic Gospels. And, at the same time, 
 they do not rise to the purely spiritual theology of St. John, which in its 
 very essence rises above the mixed earthly existence of man. 
 
 Yet more, they do not recognize the office of prophecy; they make no 
 reference to the struggles of the Church, with the old 
 forms of sin and evil reproduced from age to age, till 
 the final regeneration of all things. History in them becomes a mere col- 
 lection of traditions, and is regarded neither as the fulfilment of the past 
 nor as the type of the future. 
 
 As to miracles : 
 
 Parables: 
 
 Prophecy. 
 
 introducing various changes into v. 2, 8 Compare the following passages im 
 of which traces appear elsewhere. Cf. the Apocryphal Gospels: 
 
 Tischdf. ad loc. (a) Gosp. Inf. 14-20, 38 (ed. Thilo). 
 1 It appears that the end of Marcion’s Gosp. Thom. ὃ. 
 
 Gospel was as abrupt as the commence- Gosp. Inf. 29, 47, 49. 
 
 ment. Compare Hahn, /. c. p. 486. (δ) Gosp. Inf. 28, 36-7, 40. 
 
 2 Cf. p. 448, n. 3. Gosp. Inf. 14, 17 sqq. 
 
466 A CLASSIFICATION OF TUE GOSPEL MIRACLES. 
 
 The differences in style are not less than these differences in spirit. For 
 the depth of a spiritual sequence we have affected explanations and irrele- 
 yant details.' And the divine wisdom of our Gospels stands in clear con- 
 trast to mere dreams of fancy, if we compare some Scriptare story with 
 obvious parallels in the most esteemed of the Apocryphal histories. Thus, 
 we might refer ta the cure of the demoniac (Gosp. Inf. 14), and the reci- 
 tal in St. Luke (viii. 26—32); to the discourse from the Mount of Beati- 
 tudes (Matt. v.—vii.), and the address from Mount Olivet ( Gosp. Joseph. 
 1. 544.) ; to the inspired records of the Crucifixion, and the Gospel of Nie- 
 odemus. For even these wild legends have their use. If the corruptions 
 ef the Gospels lead us back to ἃ common source preserved in our Canon, 
 the fables of early times teach us how far the characteristics of the Gos- 
 pels were above the natural taste of the first Christians. 
 
 APPENDIX E. 
 A CLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL MIRACLES. 
 
 ἄιστευετέ μοι OTL ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρὶ καὶ ὃ πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί: εἰ δὲ μή, διὰ τὰ 
 ἔργα αὐτὰ πιστεύετε. ---- Sv. Joun xiv. 11. 
 
 I HAVE examined elsewhere ὁ the general relations of the Gospel Mira- 
 eles as a Revelation——a whole in themselves of singular harmony and 
 completeness : at present it will be sufficient to give an outline of the 
 results obtained, by presenting a classification of the Miracles, which will 
 exhibit their mutual connections.® 
 
 I. MIRACLES ON NATURE. 
 1. MIRACLES OF CREATIVE POWER. 
 
 (a) The Water made Wine: John ii. t—I12. 
 Character changed. Christ the Source of Joy. 
 (0) The Bread multiplied. 
 a. Matt. xiv. 15—21; Mark vi. 35—44; Luke ix. 12— 
 17; John vi. 5—14. ν 
 b. Matt. xv. 32—39; Mark viii. I—10. 
 Substance increased, Christ the Source of Subsist- 
 
 ence. 
 1 Cf. Gosp. Inf. 50-2. 2 Characteristics of the Gospel Mira- 
 47-8. cles, Cambr. 1859. 
 Protey. S. Jac. 111. 3 The arrangement proposed is not 
 
 Gosp. Joseph. 16, 17. offered as absolute or final. It offers, 
 
A OLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL MIRACLES. 467 
 
 (c) The walking on the Water: Matt. xiv. 22—26; Mark vi. 48, 
 49; Jolin vi. 16—21. 
 Force controlled. Christ the Source of strength. 
 
 2. MrRACLES OF PROVIDENCE. 
 (a) Miracles of Blessing. 
 a. The first Miraculous Draught of Fishes : Luke v. 1—11. 
 The foundation of the outward Church. 
 b. The Storm Stilled: Matt. viii. 23—27; Mark iv. 
 35—41; Luke viii. 22—25. 
 The defence of the Church from without. 
 c. The Stater in the Fish’s Mouth: Matt. xvii. 24—27. 
 The support of the Church from within. 
 d. Thesecond Miraculous Draught of Fishes: John xxi. 
 1—23. 
 _ The Church of the future. 
 (b) Miracle of Judgment. 
 The fiy-tree cursed : Matt. xxi. 19 ff.; Mark xi. 20 ff. 
 
 II. MIRACLES ON MAN. 
 
 i. Mrracites Or PersonaL Faitn. 
 (a) Organic Defects (the Blind). 
 a. Faith special. 
 The two blind men in the house: Matt. ix. 29—31. 
 b. Faith absolute. 
 Bartimeus restored: Matt. xx. 29—34; Mark x. 
 46—52; Luke xviii. 35—43. 
 (b) Chronic Impurity. 
 a. Open. Leprosy. 
 Faith special. 
 The one Leper: Matt. viii. 1—4; Mark i. 40—45; 
 Luke v. 12—16. 
 Faith special and absolute contrasted. 
 The Ten Lepers: Luke xvii. 11—19. 
 b. Secret. 
 The Woman with the Issue: Matt. ix. 20—22; Mark 
 ν. 25—34; Luke viii. 43—48. 
 2. MrracLes OF INTERCESSION. 
 (a) Organic Defects. (Simple Intercession. j 
 a. The blind: Mark viii. 22—26. 
 b. The deaf and dumb: Mark vii. 31—37. 
 (b) Mortal sicknesses. (Intercession based on natural ties.) 
 a. Fever. 
 The nobleman’s son healed : John iv. 46—54. 
 
 unless I am mistaken, one very natura] exists. Deeper study may lay open 
 and instructive view of relations which more subtle and profound points of 
 are many-sided; and at least itis suf- union between the different incidents. 
 ficient to show that some connection 
 
468 A CLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL MIRACLES. 
 
 b. Paralysis. 
 The centurion’s servant healed: Matt. viii. 5—13; 
 Luke vii. 1—10. 
 The man borne of four healed: Matt. ix. 1—8 ; Mark 
 li. 1—12; Luke νυ. 17—26. 
 
 3, MrracLes OF Love. 
 (a) Organic Defect. 
 The blind man healed: John ix. 
 (b) Disease. 
 a. The fever healed: Matt. viii. 14, 15; Mark i. 29—34: 
 Luke iv. 38—41. 
 b. The dropsy healed: Luke xiv. 1—6. 
 c. The withered hand restored: Matt. xii. 9—18 ; Mark i ili. 
 1—5; Luke vi. 6—11. 
 d. The argolend man restored: John v. 1—17. 
 e. The woman with a spirit of infirmity set free: Luke xiii. 
 10—17. 
 (c) Death. 
 a. The Death-chamber. 
 A girl raised: Matt. ix. 18 ff.; Mark v. 22 ff. ; ἘΠῚ 
 Vili. 41 ff. 
 b. The bier. 
 A young man raised; Luke vii. 11—18. 
 c. The tomb. 
 A tried friend raised: John xi.} 
 
 III. MIRACLES ON THE SPIRIT-WORLD. 
 
 1. Mrracres OF INTERCESSION. 
 
 (a) Simple Intercession. 
 a. A dumb man possessed by a devil: Matt. ix. 32—34. 
 b. A blind anda dumb man: Matt. xii. 22 ff. Cf. Luke 
 xi. 14 ff. 
 (Ὁ) Intercession based on natural ties. 
 a. The Syrophenician’s daughter healed: Matt. xv. 21—28 . 
 Mark vii. 24—30. 
 b. The lunatic boy healed: Matt. xvii. 14 ff.; Mark ix. 14 
 ff.; Luke ix. 37 ff. 
 
 2. MIRACLES OF ANTAGONISM. 
 
 (a) In the Synagogue. 
 The unclean spirit cast out: Mark i, 21—28; Luke iv. 
 ais. 
 
 1 The healing of Malchus (Luke xxii. how the Divine Power represses and 
 51) seems not to fall within the true remedies the evils caused by inconsid 
 cycle of the Gospel Miracles either in erate zeal. 
 character or import. We may see in it 
 
A CLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL PARABLES. 469 
 
 (δ) In the Tombs. 
 The Legion cast out: Matt. viii. 28—34; Mark ν. 1—17; 
 Luke viii. 26—37. 
 
 It will be seen that in the fundamental and crowning miracle of the 
 Gospel — the Resurrection — all these forms of miracu- 
 lous working are included. ‘The course of nature was 
 controlled, for there was a great earthquake ; the laws 
 of material existence were overruled, for when the doors were shut Jesus 
 came into the midst of His disciples, and when their eyes 
 were opened He vanished out of their sight. The reign 
 of death was overthrown, for many of the saints came 
 out of their graves and went into the Holy City. The ὀ Afatt. xxvii. 2. 
 powers of the spiritual world were called forth, for an- a 
 gels watched at the sepulchre and ministered to believ- 
 ers. Thus full and harmonious is the whole strain of 
 Scripture: All things are double, one against another, and God hath made 
 nothing imperfect. 
 
 Matt. xaviii. 2. 
 John xx. 6. 
 
 Luke xxiv. 81. 
 Matt. xxvii. 53. 
 
 Wisd. xl. 25. 
 
 ae PEN DEX. ¥. 
 
 A CLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL PARABLES. 
 
 / ot . 
 Πάντα δισσά, ἐν κατέναντι τοῦ ἑνός 
 
 καὶ οὐκ ἐποίησεν οὐδὲν ἐλλεῖπον. ---- ECCLUS. XLII. 24. 
 
 We have already endeavored to discover in the combination of the 
 Gospel miracles the laws of Divine interference for the aap eee 
 Redemption of man, and the proofs of the universality Parables to Mira- 
 of the Saviour’s power; it will be our object now to point ¢!** 
 out the converse truths from a consideration of the Parables: in them we 
 shall seek to mark the lessons which we may learn from the Natural 
 World on the progress and scope of Revelation, and the testimony which 
 man’s own heart renders to the Christian Morality. Thus it is that the 
 Miracles and Parables are exactly correlative to each other; in the one 
 we see the personality and power of the Worker, and in the other the 
 generality and constancy of the Work; in the one we are led to refer the 
 ordinary events of life to God, and in the other to consider their relation 
 to man: in the one we are led to regard the manifoldness of Providence, 
 and in the other to recognize the instructiveness of the Universe. 
 
 The Parables in the Gospels may be presented in the following classifi- 
 cation, if we consider the sources from which they are drawn. 
 
 40 
 
470 A CLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL PARABLES. 
 
 I. PARABLES DRAWN FROM THE MATERIAL WORLD. 
 
 1. Tor SOURCES OF THE ELEMENTS OF NATURAL OR SPIRITUAL 
 LIFE: 
 (a) The Power of Good. The Sower: Matt. xiii. 3—8; Mark 
 iv. 4—8; Luke viii. 5—8. 
 (Ὁ) The Power of Evil. The Tares: Matt. xiii. 24—30. 
 
 2. THE MODE OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT SILENT AND MYSTERIOUS. 
 The Seed growing secretly: Mark iv. 26—29. 
 3. THE FULNESS OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT: 
 (a) An outward Growth. The Mustard-seed: Matt. xiii. 31, 32; 
 Mark iv. 30—32 ; Luke xiii. 18, 19. 
 (Ὁ) An inward Change. The Leaven: Matt. xiii. 33; Luke 
 xiii. 20, 21. 
 
 II. PARABLES DRAWN FROM THE RELATIONS OF MAN. 
 
 1. To THE LowER WORLD, as explaining his Connection also with 
 higher Beings,' while he 
 (a) Destroys the worthless (campa). The Draw-net : Matt. xiii. 
 47—50. 
 (0) Labors with the unfruitful. The barren Fig-tree: Luke xiii. 
 6—9. 
 (c) Seeks to reclaim the lost, whether it has been lost 
 a. By its own Wandering. The lost sheep: Matt. xviii. 12 
 —14; Luke xv. 3—7. 
 ὃ. By his Carelessness. The lost Drachma: Luke xv. 8 
 —10. 
 
 2. To n1s FELLOW-MEN: 
 
 (a) In the Family, from the higher to the lower, as explaining 
 his personal relations to God : 
 a. Merey. The unmerciful Servant : Matt. xviii. 23—35. 
 Correlative: Gratitude. The two Debtors: Luke vii. 41 
 —43. 
 ὃ. Forgiveness. The prodigal Son: Luke xy. 11—32. 
 Correlative: Obedience. The two Sons: Matt. xxi. 28 
 —32. 
 (δ) In socrat LiFe, as explaining his Relations to the Church : 
 a. Zeal in the Petition for Blessings : 
 i. For others. The Friend at Midnight: Luke xi. 5—8. 
 ii. For ourselves. Zhe unjust Judge: Luke xviii. 1—8. 
 
 1Cf. Matt. xiii. 49,50: Luke xvy.7 careless within the existing Church 
 (χαρὰ ἔσται ev τῷ οὐρανῷ" when were awakened). It is easy to see why 
 the Redemption ‘was accomplished): there is no corresponding clause in 
 Luke xv. 10 (χαρὰ γίνεται ἐνώ- “the Prodigal Son.” 
 πιον τῶν ἀγγέλων τοῦ Jeov' when the 
 
A CLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL PARABLES. 471 
 
 ὁ. Patience in the course of Life: 
 i. For others, Endurance. The ten Virgins: Matt. xxv. 
 
 1—13. 
 ii. In ourselves, Self-denial. The lower Seats: Luke xiv. 
 7—l1. 
 
 ce. Regard for outward Ordinances : 
 i. As a feeling from within. The great Supper: Luke 
 xiv. 15—24. 
 ii. As required by their Dignity. Zhe King’s Marriage- 
 feast: Matt. xxii. 1—14. 
 {c) IN REGARD TO HIS MEANS, as explaining the Devotion of 
 our Endowments to God’s Service : 
 a. Thoughtfulness in planning his Works, as to 
 i. His own power: 
 Absolutely. The Tower-builder : Luke xiv. 28—30. 
 Relatively. The King making War: Luke xiv. 31 
 
 ode 
 ii. Their effects on others. The unjust Steward: Luke 
 xvi. 1—9. 
 
 5. In his Works. 
 i. As to himself, Fruitfulness 1 
 Absolutely. The Talents: Matt. xxv. 14—30. 
 Relatively. The Pounds: Luke xix. 11—27. 
 ii. As to others, Unselfishness. The wicked Husbana- 
 men: Matt. xxi. 33-44; Mark xii. 1—12; Luke 
 xx. 9—18. 
 e. After the completion of his Works : 
 i. As to himself, Humility. The unprofitable Servants : 
 Luke xvii. 7—10. 
 ii. As to others, Dependence. The Laborers in the 
 Vineyard: Matt. xx. 1—16. 
 3. To PRovIDENCE, as teaching that spiritually as well as tempo- 
 rally Advantages imply Duties, whether we obtain them 
 (a) Unexpectedly. The hid Treasure: Matt. xiii. 44. 
 (b) After a zealous Search. The Man seeking Pearls: Matt. 
 xiii. 45, 46. 
 (c) By natural Inheritance. The rich Fool: Luke xii. 16—21. 
 
 There are still remaining three symbolic narratives which are usually 
 ranked as Parables :— “The Publican and Pharisee,” ‘The Good Sa- 
 maritan,”’ and “The Rich Man and Lazarus.” These, however, in their 
 plimary reference give direct patterns for action, and in their secondary 
 meaning apply to classes, and not to individuals. It seems as if we may 
 read in them the opposition of Christianity to Judaism, in its essential 
 Spirituality, in its universal Love, and in its outward Lowliness. 
 
ADDITIONS FOR PAGE 367, 
 
 RECEIVED TOO LATE FOR INSERTION THERE. SEE INTRODUCTION 
 TO AMERICAN EDITION, p- X. 
 
 * The following parables are recorded by St. Mark. That which is peculiar to 
 him is marked by Italics. 
 
 1. The sower (iv. 4—8). 
 
 2. The seed growing secretly (iv. 26—29). 
 
 3. The mustard seed (iv. 90--- 82). 
 
 The unity and completeness of the lesson which these convey must be obvious 
 without comment. 
 
 b The miracles recorded by St. Mark are both numerous and characteristic of 
 his Gospel. Peculiar narratives are (as before) marked by Italics. 
 
 1. The unclean spirit cast out (i. 21—28). 
 
 2. The fever healed (i. 29—84). 
 
 8. The leper cleansed (i. 40—45). 
 
 4. The palsy healed (ii. 1—12). 
 
 5. The withered hand restored (iii. 1—5) [iii. 10, 11, Many healed: unclean 
 spirits cast out]. 
 
 6. The tempest stilled (iv. 85—41). 
 
 7. The legion cast out (v. 1—17). 
 
 8. The woman with issue healed (vy. 25—84). 
 
 9. Jairus’ daughter raised (v. 22 ff.). 
 
 10. The five thousand fed (vi. 85—44). 
 
 11. The walking on the water (vi. 48, 49) ἵν]. 54 ff., all that touched Christ 
 made whole]. 
 
 12. The Syropheenician’s daughter healed (vii. 24—80). 
 
 13. The deaf and dumb healed (vii. 31—87). 
 
 14. The four thousand fed (viii. 1—10). 
 
 15. The blind man healed (viii. 22—26). 
 
 16. The deaf and dumb spirit cast out (ix. 14 ff.). 
 
 17. Bartimezus healed (x. 26—52). 
 
 18. The fig-tree cursed (xi. 20 ff.). 
 
ee IN) ἃ Fe: OS 
 
 ADVENT, attempts to fix the date of, | CLEMENTINE RECOGNITIONS ON IN- 
 
 142. 
 
 SPIRATION, 448. 
 
 ALEXANDRIA, the meeting-point of | ComPLETENESS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE, 
 
 Judaism and Greece, 83. 
 
 ANTIGONUS OF SOcCHO, 86. 
 
 ANTIOCHUS, effects of his persecution, 
 85. 
 
 \POCALYPSE, usage of term in New 
 Testament, 34 n. 
 
 \POCALYPSE AND PROPHECY CON- 
 TRASTED, 93 1. 
 APOCRYPHAL JEWISH BOOKS, 93; 
 
 silent as to a personal Messiah, 112; 
 Gospels (see Gospel), 454; sayings of 
 our Lord, 445; works of our Lord, 
 452. 
 APOLOGISTS, on Inspiration, 412. 
 _POSTLES, their relation to Christian- 
 ity, 174. 
 \rosrirs, their 
 Christianity, 222. 
 ASSEMBLY, the great, 81 
 ATHENAGORAS ON INSPIRATION, 410. 
 AUGUSTINE, his essay on the Gospels, 
 251. 
 
 different views of 
 
 BAPTISM OF OUR LORD, accounts of 
 the, 314. 
 
 BARNABAS ON INSPIRATION, 403. ω 
 
 CAIUS ON INSPIRATION, 417. 
 
 CALVINISTIC VIEW OF INSPIRATION, 
 91. 
 
 CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT, 77 1ὺ 
 
 CLAUDIUS APOLLINARIS ON INSPI- 
 RATION, 413. 
 
 CLEMENS (Rom.) On INSPIRATION, 404. 
 
 CLEMENS (Alex.) ON INSPIRATION, 
 425. 
 
 CLEMENTINE HOMILIES ON INSPIRA- 
 TION, 441. 
 
 40} 
 
 53-59. 
 
 CONCORDANCES between the Gospels, 
 200. 
 
 CONNECTING PHRASES used by the 
 Evangelists, 345 n.; (last journey to 
 Jerusalem); 378 n. 
 
 CRUCIFIXION, Synoptic narratives of 
 the, 321; day of the, 289 n.; 338. 
 
 CYPRIAN ON INSPIRATION, 422. 
 
 DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS, their 
 origin, 387; their usefulness, 393. 
 
 DI0GNETUM (Zp. ad.) ON INSPIRATION, 
 407. 
 
 Doctors, sayings of the later, 91. 
 
 ECCLESIASTICUs, 91. 
 
 EspraAs 2, its character, 126; its doc- 
 trine of Messiah, 129. 
 
 EssEeneEs of Palentinian origin, 89 n. 
 
 EVANGELISTS not conspicuous in his- 
 tory, 229. 
 
 EVANGELISTS, their emblems, 250. 
 
 FAITH AND REASON in relation with 
 Scripture, 392. 
 FLIGHT INTO EGyyT, 318 n. 
 
 GEMARA, singular reference to Messiah, 
 153. 
 
 GENEALOGIES OF OUR LORD, 310 n. 
 
 “GosrEL,” use of term, 180; oral in 
 origin, 198, 212; facts mentioned in 
 Acts of the Apostles, 188; the Epis- 
 tles, 185; its first preaching historic, 
 182, 191. 
 
 GosPELs, the four, their general char- 
 acter, 46, 178, 212, 286, 387; inspired 
 
414 
 
 history, 218; embody Apostolic 
 preaching, 178, 229; order of their 
 composition, 214 n.; their distinctive 
 character, 221, 229, 387; their real 
 unity, 252; their difficulties, 386; 
 their historical authority, 389. 
 
 GOSPEL according to the Hebrews, 
 454; according to the Egyptians, 448 7. 
 
 GOSPEL of the Ebionites, 457; of the 
 Clementine Homilies, 460; of Mar- 
 cion, 462; of the Infancy, 465; of 
 Nicodemus, 465. 
 
 GRAMMATICAL INTERPRETATION OF 
 Horny SCRIPTURE ESSENTIAL, 60, 389. 
 
 GREEK LANGUAGE, omen of universal 
 religion, 103. 
 
 GREEK THOUGHT IN CONTACT WITH 
 JUDAISM (Alexandria), 83. 
 
 HAGIOGRAPHA, their character due to 
 captivity, 80. 
 
 HEATHEN ALLUSIONS TO AN EXPECTED 
 Messrau, 151. 
 
 “ HEAVEN”  SYNONYMOUS 
 ‘‘ Gop,” when first used, 86 7. 
 
 HEBREWS, Epistle to the, its testimony 
 to the Gospel, 189. 
 
 HEGESIPPUS ON INSPIRATION, 412. 
 
 HeEnocu, Book of, clearness of Messi- 
 anic doctrine, 117. 
 
 HERETICS, their adoption of the sev- 
 eral Gospels, 244. 
 
 HERMAS ON INSPIRATION, 406. 
 
 HIPPOLYTUS ON INSPIRATION, 418. 
 
 HisToRY OF HUMAN RACE CENTRES 
 
 - IN THE GOSPEL, 69. 
 
 History OF JEWISH PEOPLE, its im- 
 portance, 71. 
 
 WITH 
 
 IGNATIUS ON INSPIRATION, 405. 
 INSPIRATION, different theories of, 30; 
 defined, 34,39; combines the divine 
 and human, 218; various forms of, 
 _ 87; proofs of, 48; claimed in the New 
 Testament, 43 n.; opinions of the 
 fathers of the first three centuries on, 
 402, 445. 
 INTERPRETATION, 
 spiritual, 59, 389. 
 JRENZUS ON INSPIRATION, 418. 
 
 grammatical and 
 
 JAMES, St., his testimony to the Gos- 
 pel, 186. 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 “‘ JESUS CHRIST,” use of title in the 
 Gospels, 296 n. 
 
 JEWISH THOUGHT, development of, 
 71; later doctrine of the Messiah, 
 155; people, affected by the captivity, 
 75; contrast between Galilee and 
 Judea, 287; literature, outline of, 
 108. 
 
 JOHN, St. (Baptist), how mentioned by 
 St. Matthew and St. Luke, 351 n. 
 
 JOHN, St. (Evang.), his character, 302; 
 his life, 242, 255; analysis of Gos- 
 pel, 280; its poetical conception, 274; 
 language, 264 n., 268 n.; style, 268; 
 contrasts to the Synoptists, 254, 284; 
 coincidences with the Synoptists, 291, 
 295 n.; coincidences with St. Paul, 
 306 m.; quotations from the Old Tes- 
 tament, 283 n.; adapted by the Valen- 
 tinians, 249; rejected by the Alogi, 
 263; his account of the resurrection, 
 882; his Epistles, their testimony to 
 the Gospel, 189. 
 
 JOSEPHUS, rejection of Messianic hope, 
 150. 
 
 JUBILEES, Book of, no reference to the 
 Messiah, 182. 
 
 JUDE, St., his testimony to the Gospel, 
 186. 
 JusTIN MARTYR ON INSPIRATION, 
 408. - 
 KABBALA, its doctrine of Messiah, 
 
 156. 
 
 Kosmos, mundus, zon, 50 7.; (6 κόσ- 
 fos), how used by St. John, 266 n. 
 (See World). ‘ 
 
 Law, the, statedly read after the cap- 
 tivity, 79 7. 
 
 “ Lire” (7 (wh), how used by St. John, 
 265 n. 
 
 “ Light” (τὸ φῶς), 266 n. 
 
 Locos (see Word), use of term in 
 LXX. and New Testament, 264 n. 
 
 Lorp, our, identity of character in 
 Gospels, 296. 
 
 Lost TRIBES, Jewish tradition on, 1381, 
 155. 
 
 LUKE, St., analysis of Gospel, 370 n.; 
 language of Gospel, 383 2.; connected 
 with St. Paul, 195, 239; adapted by 
 the Marcionites, 248; preface, 196, 
 
INDEX. 
 
 241 ».; his account of the crucifixion, 
 825; his account of the resurrection, 
 831. 
 
 MANETHO, contemporary with LXX., 
 96 n. 
 Mark, St., analysis of Gospel, 363 
 
 n.; language of Gospel, 365; con- 
 nected with St. Peter, 191, 235; 
 
 adapted by the Docetz, 247; his ac- 
 count of the crucifixion, 328; his 
 account of the resurrection, 331. 
 
 Mary, V., not mentioned by name in 
 St. John, 292 n. 
 
 MATTHEW, St., analysis of Gospel, 348 
 n.; language of Gospel, 360 .; his- 
 tory of Gospel, 194 n.; Aramaic origi- 
 nal of Gospel, 281; quotations from 
 Old Testament, 232 n.; adapted by 
 the Ebionites, 245; his account of 
 the crucifixion, 322; his account of 
 the resurrection, 330. 
 
 MELITO ON INSPIRATION, 412. 
 
 MeEssIAH, earlier doctrine developed 
 in Old Testament, 110; later doctrine 
 developed in New Testament, 141; 
 distinguished from the ‘** Word,” 162 
 n.; distinguished from Shekinah, 
 Metatron, etc., 159 ».; preéxistent, 
 155 n.; suffering, 156 n.; dying, 181; 
 character not openly claimed by our 
 
 Lord, 147 n.; usage of Word in New | 
 
 Testament, 147 n. 
 
 MESSIANIC PROPHECIES, Jewish in- 
 terpretation of, 168. 
 
 MINISTRY OF OUR LORD, its length 
 uncertain, 289 7. 
 
 MIRACLES, their character, 50; record- 
 ed by St. Matthew, 353 n.; recorded 
 by St. Mark, 362 n., 367, 472; recorded 
 by St. Luke, 374; recorded by St. 
 John, 283 n.; of the Gospels classified, 
 466. 
 
 Misuna, reference to Messiah, 152. 
 
 MYSTICISM OF THE ESSENES, 89; of 
 
 the Therapeute, 100; of the Kab 
 
 balists, 156. 
 NOVATIAN ON INSPIRATION, 417. 
 OBJECTIONS TO THE GOSPELS, their 
 
 origin, 387; their uncertainty, 391. 
 OLD TESTAMENT’, history of Canon 
 
 475 
 
 obscure, 77 n.; how quoted in the 
 Gospels, 232, 283 n., 399; its suf- 
 ficiency in primitive times, 181, 190. 
 
 OMISSIONS IN THE GOSPELS, 286. 
 
 ORIGEN ON INSPIRATION OF SoRIP- 
 TURE, 429; on interpretation of 
 Scripture, 439. 
 
 ORPHIC AND SIBYLLINE WRITINGS, 
 98. 
 
 PAGANISM, essentially local, 103. 
 
 PARABLES, their character, 51; to 
 whom addressed, 288; recorded by 
 St. Matthew, 356 n.; recorded by St. 
 Mark, 362 n., 867, 472; recorded by 
 St. Luke, 3875; their analogies in St. 
 John, 290; classified, 469. 
 
 PARALLELISM a poetic feature in St. 
 John, 274. 
 
 Passion, our Lord’s, Synoptic narra- 
 tives of, 321, 
 
 PASSOVER, last, uncertainty of date, 
 289 2. 
 
 PAUL, St., his teaching compared with 
 St. John’s, 306 ».; his Epistles, their 
 testimony to the Gospel, 187. 
 
 PECULIARITIES OF THE GOSPELS, 
 their amount and value, 201. 
 
 PETER, St., his name, 202 n., 299 n.; his 
 character, 299; his denial, 801 2.; his 
 Epistles, their testimony to the Gos- 
 pel, 186. : 
 
 | PuIo, scope of his teaching, 99; scope 
 of his doctrine of Messiah, 148; scope 
 of his doctrine of the Word, 163. 
 
 PHILOSOPHY, its work in preparing for 
 Christianity, 104. 
 
 PRAYER developed during the captiy- 
 ity, 78. 
 
 PREACHING the first form of Christian 
 doctrine, 177, 179. 
 
 PROPHECIES OF MeEssrAn, how ex- 
 plained by the Jews, 168; of Old 
 Testament, how quoted in New Testa- 
 ment, 52, 53 2. 
 
 “PSALMS OF SOLOMON,” clear refer- 
 ence to Messiah, 140. 
 
 QuoTATIONS of our Lord, 399; of the 
 Evangelists, 538 n., 400; confirm the 
 Hebrew Matthew, 282 ».; referred to 
 Messiah, explained by Jews, 168; in 
 
 St. John’s Gospel, 283 n, 
 
476 
 
 RESURRECTION predicted in Book of 
 Henoch, 128; of body confined to 
 the righteous in Book of Henoch, 123 
 n.; our Lord’s, four narratives of, 327. 
 
 Roman Empire identical with civil- 
 ized world, 106; suggestive of a 
 universal religion, 104. 
 
 SAMARITAN DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH, 
 111. 
 
 SANHEDRIM, its origin, 79 n. 
 
 SAYINGS OF OUR LORD, apocryphal, 
 446. 
 
 SrEcTS, their rise among the Jews, 86; 
 at Corinth, 245 n. 
 
 SEPTUAGINT VERSION, its history, 96; 
 reference to Messiah doubtful, 134. 
 SERMON ON THE Mount, outline of, 
 
 352 1. i 
 
 SHECHINAH, whether applied to Mes- 
 siah, 159 2., 162 7. 
 
 SIBYLLINE BOOKS conceive a univer- 
 sal theocracy, 98; their testimony to 
 Messiah, 114. 
 
 Simon Magus, the Antichrist of first 
 age, 238. 
 
 SIMON THE JUST, his great maxim, 82. 
 
 ‘*Son OF GOD,” usage of phrase, 145 7. 
 
 SPIRITUAL INTERPRETATION OF HOLY 
 SCRIPTURE, 63. 
 
 SYNAGOGUE AND SCHOOLS, their rise, 
 12, 79. 
 
 SYNOPTIC GOSPELS, their agreements, 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 200; their differences, 205; order o 
 composition, 214 .; contrasted wit | 
 St. John, 220; unchronological, 348. 
 
 TARGUMS, their date, 136 n.; their cleare 
 reference to Messiah, 135; their clear 
 reference to the Word, 162. 
 
 TATIAN ON INSPIRATION, 410. 
 
 TEMPTATION OF OUR LorD, accounts — 
 of, 316. 
 
 TERTULLIAN ON INSPIRATION, 420. 
 
 THEOPHILUS ON INSPIRATION, 411. 
 
 THERAPEUTA, 100. 
 
 TITLES OF THE GOSPELS, 218 7.; on the 
 Cross, 236 7. 
 
 ‘““TRADITION OF THE ELDERS,’’ Mish- 
 na, Talmud, 88. 
 
 TRANSFIGURATION, narratives of, 318. 
 
 “TrutTa” (ἢ ἀλήϑεια), how used by 
 St. John, 266 n. 
 
 VERBAL COINCIDENCES BETWEEN THE 
 SYNOPTISTS, 203. 
 
 ‘‘Wispom OF SoLomoy,”’ 101. 
 
 ‘* WORD,” doctrine of the, in Palestine, 
 161; in Egypt, 163; in St. John, 264 
 n., 267; not applied to Messiah by 
 Henoch, 126 ».; by Targums, 159 2., 
 162 n.; by Philo, 149 n., 166. 
 
 WORLD, state of the; at the Advent, 
 105; 6 κόσμος, how used by St. John, 
 266 n. 
 
 For the Index I am indebted to the kindness of my friend the Rey. J. Frederi¢ 
 Wickenden, M. A., of Trinity College, Cambridge. 
 
 Che Guo. 
 
LAs A 
 
 Rie P ἡ; ΠΝ ᾿͵ 
 ΑΙ ‘ 
 ree fi Ν 
 ΠῚ Me 
 . my) eee if 
 I ; i} ui { ΠΗ 
 Ι i 5 ᾿ } 
 1 Wer? kul ΠΝ 
 ἥν owe 
 ᾿ Ὕ , 
 Ν ΤᾺ ck} 
 \ J i ‘ ‘at 
 7 i τὴ Dey 
 ἤν ϊ i ἐϊ 
 [᾿ ; ‘ y 
 ᾿ } ᾿ Vie 
 hh a 4 ¥, 
 wh ͵ A 
 ν᾿ et 7 
 ! | 
 4 "» 7 
 i 
 ᾿ ΙΝ i 
 τ ΤΙΝ 
 ᾿ Wi 
 ἵ ‘ 
 ’ : 
 ee ear y f 
 i TY ey 
 ‘ ἵ ἱ ΤΥ 
 hat ey) 
 pray ᾿ 
 ΔΗ Μὴ Ἢ 
 PRD Mas} ; ἢ 
 i ee ide! 
 - Eee Ἷ ᾿ Wh 
 ᾽ [ "Ὁ We τ ee ΣΝ ἜΝΙ H 
 P Ἢ re hai rj 
 ot ) 1) 4 ᾿ Ἷ f ‘ Ot i 
 iq ‘Ve [ Τὸ yok ee wil 
 o Vd a ( ) ὲ Ἢ ᾿ ἣν 
 i 4 ; ms Mags ᾿ ΠῚ , wary Y an 
 I ay Wied fe ΡᾺ { 
 j ὶ i wit Jae nF 
 ΩΝ Pe ! ὶ \ ΤΣ Αι 
 ᾿ ’ Ἂν fi " 4 
 SAM ΨΩ ha \ ae. Ἑ igs 
 i ee ee | ν ᾿ re bi 
 δ ait ἡ j \ - 
 ὶ 4 » rt 
 j 1 " 
 Pe } 
 
 >. te 
 
 ihe 
 ue 
 
 t er 
 
 aha ey 
 
eee 
 
 DATE DUE 
 
 Hf ) 
 1 
 4 
 Ξ 
 
 - 
 
 τε 
 
 PRINTEDINU.S.A | 
 
 GAYLORD 
 
δὰ νύν δ} ὅν}