WHY FOUR GOSPELS?
OR,
THE GOSPEL FOR ALL THE WORLD.
A MANUAL DESIGNED TO AID CHRISTIANS IN THE STUDY
OF THE SCRIPTURES, AND TO A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE GOSPELS.
BY
D. S.' GREGORY, D. D.,
PBOFESSOR OF THE MENTAL SCIENCES AND ENGLISH LITERATURE IN THE UNVERSITY OP
WOOSTER; AUTHOR OF "CHRISTIAN ETHICS.;
NEW YORK:
SHELDON AND COMPANY.




COPYRIGHT, 1876,
Bt D. S. GREGORY.
RIVERSIDE, OAMBRIDGE:
STEREOTYPED BY H. O. HOUGHTON AND COMPANY.,




TO MY WIFE,
TO WHOSE CONSTANT ENCOURAGEMENT AND ASSIDUOUS HELPFULNESS
THE CHRISTIAN PUBLIC OWES WHATEVER OF VALUE THIS
VOLUME MAY CONTAIN, IT IS, WITHOUT
HER KNOWLEDGE,
%~ffectionatelpy Metricateer








PREFACE.
IT is admitted on all hands that the central point of
attack upon Christianity in the present age is found in
the Gospels. " The life of Jesus," says Tischendorf, " is
the most momentous of all questions which the Church
has to encounter, - the one which is decisive whether it
shall or shall not live." The assailants demand that the
Christian apologist shall put his system to the test of exhibiting its philosophic basis and its rational explanation.
Whether the demand be reasonable or unreasonable, it is
certain that this scientific age will continue to press its
questions of why and how.
While it is absolutely certain that God's Word will
stand all legitimate tests and remain intact to the end of
time, it is no less certain that some of the old modes of
viewing, exhibiting, and defending it must be abandoned
for others which are more truly scientific, or, in other
words, more in harmony with the divine truth and
thought.
It is a growing conviction in many Christian minds,
that the most conclusive argument for the divine origin
of the four Gospels is not that furnished by the external
evidences but by the Gospels themselves; that whoever
can be brought to take a truly scientific view of them,
that is, to see them as they really are in themselves and
their relations, will need no further arguments to convince him that these productions are each and all from
God.




vi                    PREFACE.
The present work is designed to aid the intelligent
reader in his efforts to see the Gospels as they really are,
that they may present their own claims - based upon
their unity, harmony, completeness, and perfect adaptation to human needs - to be from God, divinely inspired,
and worthy of God. It is the application of simple, common-sense principles to the study and elucidation of the
productions of the Evangelists, with the hope that the result may be helpful to Christians who would go beyond
the old conventional methods and seek to gain clearer,
fresher, truer, and more reasonable views. It is desired
especially that the present essay may commend the study
of the Gospels to the minds of that class of thinkers,
daily increasing, who are to be satisfied only by a reasonable explanation of the facts, whether of the world or
of the Word, with which they come in contact.
The studies which led to this work originated in the
efforts of a pastor to awaken a new interest on the part
of his flock in the study of the Word of God. The encouragement received led to the embodiment of portions
of the subject, in a form different from the present, in a
series of articles for one of the leading Quarterlies. In
response to the urgent request of many earnest laborers
in the Gospel, the thought has been embodied — during
the intervals of a life filled with most pressing duties —
in the present form, in order to bring it within the reach
of a larger number of intelligent readers. Should it be
owned of God in helping inquiring minds to a clearer
and more comprehensive view of the Gospel of Christ,
and to a firmer faith in its Divine origin and aim, the
highest and chief end of its preparation will be secured.
WOOSTER, O., October 2, 1876,




CONITENITS.
INTRODUCTION.
PAGA
THE QUESTION AND THE PROPOSED ANSWERS.......  9
PART I.
THE PURPOSE OF GOD AND THE GOSPEL.
CHAPTER L
THE PREPARATION FOR THE ADVENT OF THE MESSIAH....  29
CHAPTER II.
THE ADVENT AND THE WRITTEN GOSPELS........ 56
PART II.
MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
CHAPTER I.
HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE JEWISH ADAPTATION OF THE FIRST
GOSPEL................    85
CHAPTER II.
CRITICAL VIEW OF THE JEWISH ADAPTATION OF THE FIRST
GOSPEL.................... 109




V111                    CONTENTS.
PART III.
MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
CHAPTER I.
HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE ROMAN ADAPTATION OF THE SECOND
GOSPEL................... 150
CHAPTER II.
CRITICAL VIEW OF THE ROMAN ADAPTATION OF THE SECOND
GOSPEL..................... 169
PART IV.
LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
CHAPTER I.
HIISTORICAL VIEW OF THE GREEK ADAPTATION OF THE THIRD
GOSPEL..................... 207
CHAPTER II.
CRITICAL VIEW OF THE GREEK ADAPTATION OF THE THIRD
GOSPEL..................... 228
PART V.
JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
CHAPTER I.
HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE CHRISTIAN ADAPTATION OF THE
FOURTH GOSPEL.......        277
CHAPTER II.
CRITICAL VIEW OF THE CHRISTIAN ADAPTATION OF THE FOURTH
GOSPEL.....................   299
CONCLUSION.
THE GOSPEL FOR ALL THE WORLD............ 43




INTRODUCTIOiN.
THE QUESTION AND THE PROPOSED ANSWERS.
Question stated. The one Gospel of Jesus Christ
appears in the Sacred Scriptures in four forms,- a first,
according to Matthew; a second, according to Mark; a
third, according to Luke; and a fourth, according to
John. Why not in three, or five, or twenty forms? Or,
why not, in accordance with a prevailing desire of the
present age, in only one form?
Since the fact of four Gospels cannot be escaped,
wherein and why do they differ? Do the order, harmony, and design, which are found everywhere in God's
world, appear also in that other work of God, his Word?
In particular, did the infinite Reason preside in the production of the Gospels, so that we may confidently look
for a divine plan in each of them considered by itself,
and a like plan in the whole of them taken together?
Answers proposed. For eighteen hundred years,
these brief productions, occupying but a few pages in a
single book, have evinced their power to raise such questions as these, and to keep the world employed in the
effort to answer them.
In all ages thoughtful men, and especially the great
souls of the Church, have shrunk from looking upon the
Gospels as aimless and disjointed productions, mere medleys of fact and truth. But in seeking to reach the
order and unity which their natures craved, they have
tried different and often irrational methods.




10              WHY FOUR GOSPELS?
The harmonists have attempted to construct, from the
four Gospels regarded as a poorly arranged mass of material, one complete life of Jesus, or, at least, to remove
the obstacles to the construction of such a life.
The allegorists, seizing upon certain available scriptural symbols, have done their best, in their arbitrary
and fanciful way, to put aim and plan into the Gospels.
From such irrational methods, pursued through centuries with no definite and valuable product of the kind
sought after, resulted the method and work of the modern rationalists. From the despair of plan and aim, or
tihe assertion of unreasonable plan and aim, there came,
as a natural and inevitable reaction against the old unreason, the vehement and unreasoning denial of any plan
and aim.
Against all these the method of right reason is now
vindicating itself. The course of modern progress in
this, as in so many other fields of investigation, has been
from irrationalism through rationalism to the true reaSOlln.
A comprehensive view of this line of work — irrational, rationalistic, and truly rational - of the past centuries, will best open the way for a new attempt to solve
the old and ever-recurring problem.
SECTION I.
THE HARMONISTS.
The Christian Fathers seem to have made little effort
to find any plan in the Gospels. Very early, however,
they began to produce what may, in a loose way, be
called Lives of Christ. These did not so much aim to
explain apparent discrepancies, or even to ascertain the
exact chronological order of the events, as to reduce the
four Gospels to one continuous narrative. They were




THE HARMONISTS.               11
unlike the modern so-called Lives; for although in those
as in these the writings of the Evangelists were torn
member from member, yet the scattered members were
not wholly whelmed in a flood of weak and vapid sentiment, nor entirely lost in the mazes of a cheap but ambitious rhetoric. They shared with some of the moderns
the error, that uninspired man can give a better form to
the material of the Evangelists than the divine form
given by inspiration; but they did not share with them
the more monstrous modern error, that uninspired man
can improve upon the divine material by adding to it
either his profound philosophy or his sentimental twaddle.
As early as A. D. 170, Tatian the Syrian compiled his
Diatessaron,- that is, his Gospel according to the four
Evangelists,- a work now lost. It was substantially a
life of Christ, compiled in accordance with the view of its
author, that the ministry of Jesus lasted only one year.
Ammonius of Alexandria prepared a similar work,
about A. D. 220, which he entitled a Harmony. He
divided the four Gospels into short Sections, which he
numbered according to the order in which they were to
be placed in his combined Gospel or Harmony.
The Canons of Eusebius, A. D. 315, was in fact a
harmony upon a somewhat different plan from the
Ammonian Sections. There are ten of the Canons or
Tables, -one exhibiting the Sections common to all the
Gospels; three, those common to any three of the Gospels; five, those common to any two; and one, those
peculiar to any one Gospel. Very little advance has
been made upon the work of Ammonius and Eusebius in
this direction.
The necessity for explaining in a systematic way the
apparent discrepancies of the Gospels made itself felt at
a later date. The best known, and, perhaps, the most




12              WHY FOUR GOSPELS?
valuable of the Harmonies, constructed under pressure
of this necessity, is that of Robinson (A. D. 1845), based
upon the earlier works of Newcome (1778) and Le Clerc
(1699). In the class of works of which it is the representative, learning the most varied and profound has
been brought to bear in the discussion of times, places,
and circumstances, with the aim of reconciling apparent
discrepancies and contradictions, and of arranging the
material of all the Gospels in exact chronological order
in one narrative.
The Harmonists have done good and worthy work so
far as they have assisted to explain the apparent inconsistencies of the Gospels and to make the true relations
of the various portions better understood. So far, however, as they have undertaken to construct one continuous
and complete narrative of the career of Jesus of Nazareth, they have attempted an impossible task. There
are no sufficient data upon which to base a just conclusion concerning the precise time when many of the events
recorded in the Gospels occurred. It will appear subsequently in this discussion, that it was no part of the aim
of the Evangelists to give a complete account of the life
of Jesus strictly arranged in the order of time. Their
chronology is clear and distinct, at the most, only in the
opening and concluding chapters.  But even if the exact
time of each event could be ascertained, it would still be
impossible to combine the four Gospels in one consistent
whole. The writers were themselves unlike in nature
and culture, and so the style of each is different from
that of all the others. They wrote, as will be shown,
for different classes of readers, each class requiring a different mode of presentation. Each of them  looked at
Jesus from a different point of view. Some one has
compared their four productions to four photographs of
the four different sides of a house, —each is distinct,




THE HAMRMON1STS.               13
and the four sides could not possibly be taken in one
picture.
Results. It is hardly too much to affirm that the
efforts to make a complete and harmonious whole out of
the Gospels have failed.
Says Dr. Isaac Da Costa:  "Unhappily by far the
most of these Harmonies, for want of any principle of
solution drawn from the very nature and organical construction of these writings, have contributed rather to
embarrass than to resolve the problem, owing to the
purely mechanical and forced manner in which its solution has been attempted." 1
Dr. J. Addison Alexander, in an article on Harmonies
of the Gospels, ably sums up the whole matter. " What
then, it may be asked, is the use of all this harmonistic
labor, from the second to the nineteenth century? We
answer, much every way —or rather, every way but
one - and that the very one on which the heart of the
harmonical interpreter is often set - the undesirable, impracticable, and chimerical reduction of these four inestimable gems to one bright but artificial compound. The
true use of Harmonies is threefold, Exegetical, Historical, Apologetical. By mere juxtaposition, if judicious,
the Gospels may be made to throw light upon each
other's obscure places. By combination, not mechanical
but rational, not textual but interpretive, harmonies put
it in our power, not to grind, or melt, or boil four Gospels into one, but out of the four, kept apart, yet viewed
together, to extract one history for ourselves.  And
lastly, by the endless demonstration of the possible solutions of apparent or alleged discrepancies, even where we
may not be prepared to choose among them, they reduce
the general charge of falsehood or of contradiction, not
only ad absurdum, but to a palpable impossibility. How
1 The Four Witnesses, p. 4.




14              WHY FOUR GOSPELS?
can four independent narratives be false or contradictory,
which it is possible to reconcile on so many distinct hypotheses? The art of the most subtle infidelity consists
in hiding this convincing argument behind the alleged
necessity of either giving a conclusive and exclusive answer to all captious cavils and apparent disagreements,
or abandoning our faith in the history as a whole. This
most important end of Gospel Harmonies has been accomplished. It has been established, beyond all reasonable doubt, that however the Evangelists may differ, and
however hard it may be often to explain the difference,
they never, in a single instance, contradict each other.
This is a grand result, well worthy of the toil bestowed
upon it by the Fathers and Reformers and Divines for
eighteen hundred years; while, on the other hand, the
minute chronology, which some of these have viewed as
the great object to be aimed at, is as far from its complete solution now as in the days of Tatian or Augustine; so that the inquirer may still say to the most able
harmonists, with one of Terence's dramatic characters:
Fecistis probe, incertior sum multo quam dudum! "1
When one has clearly grasped the characteristics of
each of the Gospels, the attempt to mass them all in one,
while preserving the glory of each, will appear as absurd
as would the attempt of an architect to construct, from
the materials of S61lomon's Temple, of the Parthenon, of
the Coliseum, and of Westminster Abbey, a new temple
which should preserve and harmoniously combine the
peculiar features of them all, and be neither Jewish,
Greek, Roman, nor Gothic.
1 Princeton Review, vol. xxviii. p. 395.




THE ALLEGORISTS.               15
SECTION II.
THE ALLEGORISTS.
While the Harmonists have been engaged in their impossible task, another class of minds, delighting in allegory and given to imagination, has been engaged upon a
work equally impossible. The Cherubim of Ezekiel and
the -Four Living Creatures of the Apocalypse have
played as important a part in their interpretation of the
Gospels as the cycles and epicycles played in the theories
of the old astronomers. There are four Gospels and
there are four of these figures of prophecy. Is not that
a wonderful coincidence? Besides, have not all scriptural symbols an inexhaustible fullness of mystic, prophetic signification and application? Why, then, were
not those symbols of Ezekiel and John intended by the
Spirit of God to symbolize the four Evangelists, - or, at
least, those aspects of the person and office of Christ
which they respectively exhibit in their Gospels? Who
could say they were not so intended?
Irenemus, Bishop of Lyons in the second century, began with the vision of the four Cherubim, in the first
chapter of Ezekiel. That vision, in its symbolical meaning, he applied to the distinctive peculiarities of the Gospels. "As for the likeness of their faces, they four had
the face of a man, and the face of a lion, on the right
side; and they four had the face of an ox on the left
side; they four also had the face of an eagle."  The
man, according to Irenaeus, symbolizes Matthew's Gospel; the lion, Mark's; the ox, Luke's; the eagle, John's.
So happy a thought could not fail, in the circumstances,
to perpetuate itself. The later Fathers adopted and developed the idea of Irenaeus. At the end of two centuries, Jerome completed the development, and proposed




16              WHY FOUR GOSPELS?
that special arrangement and application of the symbols
which the Latin Church adopted, and which Art has
perpetuated. His order is that of Ezekiel.
The Rhemist fathers interpreted and applied the
vision, in accordance with this order of Ezekiel and
Jerome.  " St. Matthew is likened to a man, because he
beginneth with the pedigree of Christ, as he is a man;
St. Mark to a lion, because he beginneth with the
preaching of St. John the Baptist, as it were the roaring
of a lion in the wilderness; St. Luke to a calf, because
he beginneth with a priest of the Old Testament (to wit,
Zacharias, the father of John Baptist), which priesthood
was to sacrifice calves to God; St. John to an eagle, because he beginneth with the divinity of Christ, flying as
high, as more is not possible." This is plainly worse
than childish, — absurd! It explains nothing. It opens
to view no aim or harmony before invisible.
The great Augustine was dissatisfied with the explanation of Irenmusk So were some even before his day,
and more after it. He preferred the order in John's
vision of the Four Living Creatures, as found in Revelation iv. 7: "And the first beast was like a lion, and
the second beast was like a calf, and the third beast had
a face as a man, and the fourth beast was like a flying
eagle." Matthew's Gospel, according to this view, is
symbolized by the lion, because he sets forth Christ as
the Lion of the tribe of Judah; Mark's by the calf or
ox, because he exhibits Christ as the servant in a life of
patient, humble service; Luke's by the man, because he
hold's forth Christ as the perfection of humanity; John's
by the eagle, because of his heavenward gaze and flight
in unfolding the mysteries of Christ's Deity. This was
better, - if anything better be attainable by a method so
arbitrary, - for it suggests a half-truth in connection with
each of the first three Gospels, to which Jerome's inter




THE ALLEGORISTS.               17
pretation did not open the way. Still there was room
for new efforts in attaching to the Gospels the symbols
of these prophets of the two dispensations.
Among the latest adaptations is that of Lange, in his
"Life of Jesus," - an adaptation approved by Stier.
The ox, the lion, the man, the eagle, is Lange's order.
His view is presented in his introduction to the commentary on the Gospel according to Matthew. " The first
Gospel is preeininently that of history, and of the fulfillment of the Old Testament by the sacrificial sufferings
and death of Christ and the redemption thus achieved.
Hence, the sacrificial bullock is the appropriate symbol
of Matthew. The second Gospel presents to our minds
the all-powerful revelation and working of Christ as direct from heaven, irrespectively of anything that preceded, - the completion of all former manifestations of
the Deity. Symbol, the lion. The third Gospel is preeminently that of humanity, -human mercy presented
in the light of divine grace, the transformation of all
human kindness into divine love. Symbol, the figure of
a man. Lastly, the fourth Gospel exhibits the deep spiritual and eternal import of the history of Christ, -the
divine element pervading and underlying its every phase,
- and with it the transformation of all ideals, in connection with Christ. Symbol, the eagle." Very different, truly, is the symbol of Lange for Matthew from that
of Augustine, -the ox, from the lion, - ignoring entirely the order of divine revelation, - yet with his explanation it serves to bring out another half-truth concerning the priestly character of Messiah as taught in
prophecy and realized in Jesus of Nazareth.
Results. But accommodating as these symbols of
prophecy have been, the various and never-ending
changes in the attempts to apply them to the Gospels
show most clearly that the thing attempted is purely ar2




18              WHY FOUR GOSPELS?
bitrary. Admitting that they may have been of some
use in the past, in helping to group some of the facts peculiar to the respective Gospels, - of use just as the
cycles and epicycles were in the old astronomy, or the
nebular hypothesis in the modern, - still they are
scarcely worthy to be taken into serious account in any
attempt to reach a philosophic and common-sense view of
the existence and structure of the four Gospels.
It is not too much to say that the attempts to put a
plan into the Gospels, in this arbitrary way, have failed
no less utterly than the attempts of the harmonists to put
the material of the Gospels into a new form better than
the divine.
SECTION III.
THE RATIONALISTS.
Out of these irrational modes of treating the Gospels
has come the modern reaction, which has taken form, on
its worst side, in Rationalism. The Rationalist accepts
the failure of the irrational method as conclusive against
all aim and plan in the Gospels. As the Gospels are a
medley, they are therefore not from God. Still, the medley - a very extraordinary one certainly — remains to
be accounted for. To account for it without the aid of
the supernatural is the aim of the rationalist.
Pantheistic form. David Friedrich Strauss, who has
but recently passed away, was. the man who first gave
literary shape — in his "Life of Jesus," published in
1835 - to a view of the Gospels which had been for some
time floating in dim and undefined form in the German
mind of his age.
The reality of our Lord's life may be attacked in two,
and only two, ways; it may be urged that the Gospel
history is pure fable, without any better basis of historical fact than the " Arabian Nights," or that it is a mixt



THE RATIONALISTS.                19
ure of fact and fable, like the Grecian and Roman legends, which can only be separated by the aid of critical
intuition.  Strauss took the former method of attack.
His work was the inevitable last outcome of German
Pantheism.  Pantheism  denies a Personal God.  The
Gospel history must therefore be false or at least mythical, because the notion of a Personal God and Creator of
men, and of a Son of God, revealing the will of the
Heavenly Father, is uanphilosophical, — a dream of superstition, and not a truth of reason as expounded by its
latest and highest prophet, Hegel.1  It was not by his
science, but by his fundamental hypothesis, the assumption of the truth of Pantheism, that Strauss aimed to
rid the world of the Gospel facts.
His scientific method led him to apply both philosophy
and criticism to the Gospels, and in his hands, with the
truth of Pantheism postulated, both were of course
equally destructive.
As Strauss adopted the philosophy of Hegel, we accordingly find the Hegelian idea prominent in all his
speculations on the Gospels. He maintained that he believed as an idea what others believed as history.. The
idea is before the facts and creates the so-called facts.
The need of a deliverer created the idea of a Saviour.
The old prophecies, misinterpreted, fashioned in the popular mind a character to be attributed to that Saviour.
The whole Gospel history is an attempt of the ruling
idea of the Jewish race in that age to realize itself in fact.
The imagination, or mythus, to which the need of a deliverer gave rise, grew in process of time into the great
four-fold fable of the Gospels.
The facts in Christianity were temporary, the ideas
eternal.  Christ was the type of humanity.  His life,
death, and resurrection were the symbol of the life,
1 See Tulloch, Lectures on M. Renan's "Vie de Jesus," p. 32.




20               WHY FOUR GOSPELS?
death, and resurrection of humanity. The former was
unimportant and temporary, the latter momentous and
eternal. An exoteric religion for the people might exhibit the one; the esoteric for the philosopher might retain the other. In short, the dogmas of the Gospel are
true, but the history false.
With his Hegelian philosophy and criticism, Strauss
would have done for the Gospels what Niebuhr and Grote
have done for the Roman and Grecian legends of the
pre-historic age, given in poetry and tradition; and he
would have relegated the Jesus of the Evangelists to the
same shadowy place in history with,Eneas, Hercules, the
early kings of Rome, and the Brutus of England.  It is
already acknowledged by all competent critics that, in
spite of all his marvelous learning, the attempt of Strauss
was, philosophically, a complete and miserable failure.
Jesus of Nazareth lived not in fabulous but in historic
times, - in fact, in the most cultivated age of antiquity.
The four Gospels are, on the very face of them, not
poems, or legends, or myths, but simple, life-like, historical narratives, which could have been produced only by
or with the aid of eye-witnesses. It can be proved that
they all existed in their present form before the close of
the first century, so that no time is anywhere given for
the growth of the wonderful myths of Strauss. It were
far easier to prove Julius Coesar a myth, than to prove
Jesus Christ a myth. The principles by which Strauss
would prove the life of Jesus a fable, would as readily
prove the life of Napoleon a fable.
Positivist form. In the acknowledged failure of
Strauss is found the secret of the changed plan of attack
by M. Ernest Renan, in his " Life of Jesus." It is impossible to show the Gospel history to be all fable; the
next thing to that is to show it to be a mixture of fact
and fable. There must be a basis of fact. M. Renan




THE RATIONALISTS.                21
will pick it out according to his own taste.  He has a
monopoly of the intuition of Gospel fact. So he gives
the world his "' Fifth Gospel," - his " Life of Jesus." It
might more appropriately be styled M. Renan's "Romance of Jesus;" since there is no Gospel left in it except what may be found in the author's very French notions of sentiment and morality.
This work was the inevitable outgrowth of French
Positivism. Positivism affirms that the universe is governed by necessary law, and its order is therefore unchanging. The notion of a personal Will interposing in
human affairs is therefore incompatible with science.
The miracles of the Gospels, in short whatever professes
to be a manifestation of the supernatural or of a personal Will, must be false.1
The chief problem of positivist criticism must therefore require the separation, by some power of critical
intuition, of the true in the Gospels from the false, of
the fact from the fable. To this work Renan, with his
brilliant erudition and his still more brilliant style, sets
himself.
Renan finds three periods in the life of Jesus. In
the first, the hero has some features of the Jesus of the
Evangelists left.  M. Renan would make him appear as
a moralist and a gentle reformer of the noblest and purest character, according to the attenuated French idea of
moralist and reformer and of nobility and purity. In the
second, Jesus is brought under the influence of the
gloomy Baptist, and his sweet nature is changed by close
contact with that sterner character.  Somehow the notion
of a strange ideal kingdom gets into his head, and he
sets about establishing it.  In this he fails, and the
third period is marked by a radical change of character
and conduct. Disappointed and embittered, he raves
1 See Tulloch, Lectures on M. Renan's "Vie de Jesus," p. 33.




22              WHY FOUR GOSPELS?
against all classes of men; is tempted to make use of
deception and yields; add, in the belief in some coming world-revolution, hurries on his own violent death,
and is buried in a grave from which M. Renan does not
allow the stone to be rolled away. This is the basis of
fact, according to Renan, on which the great romances
of the Gospels were constructed.
Naturally not a few readers have inquired how it
happens that the brilliant Frenchman has a monopoly
of that critical intuition which is absolutely necessary to
cull the facts of the Gospels from the fable. Those inclined to receive him as their teacher have gone farther
and insisted on claiming a share of that intuition for
themselves. The intuition of the equally brilliant author
of Ecce Homo differs from that of the Frenchman and
from that of everybody else. Even M. Renan's intuition
changes from time to time; and there is no one to decide
where the rationalistic doctors all disagree.
Men of sense begin to see clearly that this new principle once admitted would destroy all the foundations of
History, no less surely than would the older principle
of Strauss. As they read the grand story of the Gospels, they feel that the life, character, and mission of
Jesus of Nazareth are " one in idea, in purpose, in accomplishment, and result."  They turn away from M.
Renan's no-gospel as a repulsive thing, and the polished
Frenchman's romance, after being a nine-days' wonder,
is making haste to the upper shelves or the waste basket. Not even with the aid of French vivacity and
genius can such a baseless and sentimental production
hold its own against the clear unity, the intense reality,
and the divine spirituality of the Gospel narratives.
Results. On the whole, Christianity has little reason
to complain of the final results of these German and
French ventures. The year in which Strauss published




THE COMMON-SENSE CRITICS.           23
his life of Jesus is as memorable in theology as 1848 in
politics. Theologians of all classes saw that it called for
a reconstruction of the whole subject of the origin and
foundations of Christianity. If it formed the starting
point of the new literature of unbelief, it likewise awakened Christian thought and directed it to the central
facts of Gospel history, and above all to the Divine Person revealed there. The life of Jesus has thus called
forth from Christian scholars the richest results of critical
investigation and exposition of the place of the Gospels
in literature and history, and has given the historical
Christ a firmer hold on the intelligent faith of mankind
than he has ever before had. In fine, both pantheism
and positivism did their best in Strauss and Renan, and
failed.
The conflict that has since been waged is but the necessary disagreement of the inquiring in passing from the
blind and worthless agreement of the ignorant to the
priceless unanimity of the intelligent and enlightened.
But for the efforts of Strauss and his successors, the
Church might still have known nothing of the commonsense, historic criticism, to which it already owes so much,
and from which it may -reasonably hope for so much
more.
SECTION IV.
THE COMMON-SENSE CRITICS.
The modern reaction from the irrational and rationalistic methods has given rise to a common-sense criticism,
which promises to lead ultimately to a correct and full
understanding of the Gospels. It asks men to look at the
Gospels as they are, and to study them in the light of the
times and forces that shaped them. It aims to do for
the Gospels the work that the Baconian philosophy has
done for the world of nature.




24              WHY FOUR GOSPELS?
Says Matthew Arnold: " Of the literature of France
and Germany, as of the intellect of Europe in general,
the main effort, for now many years, has been a critical
effort; the endeavor in all branches of knowledge, —
theology, philosophy, history, art, science,- to see the
object as in itself it really is." We accept this as certainly the proper aim of all critical study of words from
God, if not of the proper study of merely human productions, - to come to see them as they really are. The
practical question in connection with the criticism of the
Gospels is, How can this end be attained? Through a
long period of honest, earnest work the Christian Church
has been approximating to the true method, and through
it to the true answer.
It is obvious, however, from what has already been
presented, that the progress toward the goal has not been
made in a right line. Human reason, when employed
on these great divine subjects, has a most unreasonable
way of taking to by-ways and cross-roads of investigation, and of losing sight of the one main track.
Along the line of Gospel study two things have been
prominent: the divine records themselves; and the everincreasing mass of related facts, geographical, biographical, and historical, drawn partly from those records and
partly from independent sources.
There are, therefore, three possible methods of procedure. The true method and the best results obviously
require that both these sources of knowledge shall be
taken into account. In the actual work of criticism,
however, one class of critics has looked only to the records,
and another only to the related facts; and both, by adopting wrong methods, have failed of securing the most valuable results. The work of the former class has too
often degenerated into a barren consideration of petty
details or of the mere letter of the Scriptures, while that




THE COMMON-SENSE CRITICS.            25
of the latter has sunk into equally barren geographical,
biograhllical, or historical speculation on subjects only
remotely connected with the truths of the divine revelation. But it is a satisfaction to be assured, that even
the departures from the right line of progress must ultimately assist in reaching the truth, by showing that the
truth does not lie in the directions in which these departures have been made, but somewhere midway between
them.
The history of Gospel study, up to the present time,
may be said to have fairly demonstrated that the old
commentary of petty detail, which sticks to isolated facts
and to words and letters, to the neglect of the more
important things of the Scriptures, will not greatly
help men to see the productions of the Evangelists as
they really are.  It ignores the divine system and the
infinitely varied relations that must exist wherever
God's thought finds expression.  It is a fatal mistake
to fix the attention upon verses and phrases, upon names
and dates, upon words and syllables, and to lose sight
of that spirit which is infinitely above the mere letter,
and of that truth of the entire Gospels which is infinitely grander than the mere sum of the separate parts.
In a whole library of commentaries constructed after this
microscopic method, one can scarcely find a trace of the
truest, highest glories of the writings of the Evangelists.
In like manner it has been shown very clearly that
the commentary which devotes itself to things external
and incidental to the Gospels, and which so generally
sinks into petty biographical, historical, or geographical
criticism, can give even less aid toward understanding
the productions of the Evangelists as they really are. It
is doubtless important, in the examination of literary
works, to consider the personality, the circumstances, the
country and the career of the author. But when this




26              WHY FOUR GOSPELS?
degenerates into petty search after curious facts, often
more useless than curious, it fails to lay open the secret
of an author's life, and does little toward making his productions intelligible. Of what imaginable help is it, in
understanding the mighty work of a Newton in the
world, to know that he. was "small enough, when he
was born, to be put into a quart mug, and that if he had
any animal taste, it was for apples of the red-streak
sort? " Of what possible service in understanding the
sublime tragedies of AEschylus, is the much-paraded
story, that the old man had his bald head broken by an
eagle, which, high in air, mistook it for a stone, and
dropped a tortoise on it to crack for a meal? And yet
how much of so-called gospel illustration deals with facts
and fables as petty and worthless as these! Thoughtful
men are beginning to see that valuable lives may be
worse than wasted by scholars vwho give themselves up
to such work in connection with the history of the Evangelists. A whole library of such materials may fail to
give any one the least insight into the real spirit of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, or the slightest glimpse of
the true spiritual power of their productions.
Results. The final result of these erroneous methods
has been to turn the attention toward the true method,
which may be characterized as that of genuine textual
and historical criticism. It gives due attention both to
the sacred records, in their minute details and in their
grand unities, and to the important related facts.
The fundamental law of this criticism requires, on the
one hand, that he who wishes to understand the Gospels
shall devote the proper study and accord due weight, to
the agents and forces, human and divine, individual and
national, which wrought in producing them, and to the
ideas, customs, circumstances, relations, and aims which
gave them final shape. Without proper regard to this




THE COMMON-SENSE CRITICS.           27
canon no right understanding of the Gospels in their
completeness and unity is possible. The same law requires, on the other hand, that he who wishes to understand the Gospels as they really are shall devote no less
earnest study to the sacred records themselves, - seeking
in the light of all the related facts to grasp them in detail and in completeness, in part and in whole; making
use of the previously sought out secret of the author's
age and life and genius, and of the revelation of the divine purpose, to reach the still higher secret of the glad
tidings to all men.
In the " Life, Times, and Travels of St. Paul," Conybeare and Howson have applied this method with notable success in dealing with a portion of the Acts of the
Apostles and with the Pauline Epistles. Their work has
thrown new and marvelous light upon apostolic times in
general, and especially upon the career of the Apostle to
the Gentiles.
A proper application of the same method to the Gospels cannot fail to bring out something of the divine system, which most certainly inheres in the mass of Gospel
facts of which Jesus of Nazareth is the central figure.
The light which it must cast upon the productions of the
Evangelists cannot fail to invest them with a new, fresh,
yet common-sense and historic, interest. The Gospels
themselves will at the same time be permitted to present
their own best vindication against both rationalism and
irrationalism; and will furnish, in their respective aims
and plans, and in their complete unity and harmony, a
new and most convincing argument in favor of the
Christianity based upon them.
Topics. In the course of such a work the questions:
Why are there four Gospels? and, Wherein and why do
they differ? will, it is trusted, be satisfactorily answered;
or, at least, the direction along which the true answer
can alone be found be clearly pointed out.




28              WHY FOUR GOSPELS?
It will appear incidentally how false is the common
notion that the divine work for the redemption of the
world might have been. accomplished just as well by one
Gospel, or any other number than four, - so false, indeed, that history would have to be transformed, the
world revolutionized, and the nature of the races radically changed, before the divine purpose could have
reached its fulfillment through one or three or five or any
other number than the divinely chosen four.
The method. The proposed application of this common-sense method will require: —
First, the consideration of such introductory topics as
the preparation of the world for the advent of the Messiah; the advent and career of the Messiah; and the
actual origin of the four written Gospels.
Secondly, the special consideration of each of the four
Gospels, in its origin, design, and authorship, and in its
adaptation in structure and matter to those for whom it
was originally prepared.




PART I.
THE PURPOSE OF GOD AND THE GOSPEL.
"Careless seems the Great Avenger; history's pages but record
One death-grapple in the darkness'twixt old systems and the Word;
Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne, -
Yet that scaffold sways the future, and, behind the dim unknown,
Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above his own."
JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL.
"For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not
God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that
believe."                                 1 CORINTHIANS i. 21.
CHAPTER I.
THE PREPARATION FOR THE ADVENT OF THE MESSIAH.
THOUGH  man often works irrationally  and  without
plan, God never does. In the introduction of Christianity into the world there was a divine plan whose working out reached through all the ages until the complete
embodiment of the one Gospel in the four forms in
which it appears in the Bible. Into that plan the ancient world, Jewish and Pagan, consciously or unconsciously entered. In general terms, it has been said
that "Judaism prepared salvation for mankind, and
heathenism  prepared  mankind  for salvation." 1   This
statement may perhaps be shown to be only a half-truth,
since it will be found that Judaism  did a chief part
1 Kurtz, Text Book of CA. History, vol. i. p. 44.




30            PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH.
of the work of preparing mankind for salvation, - but
a most important half-truth nevertheless.
Two parts mvr be seen in this plan: a first, which includes the preparation made for the Advent, or the coming of Messiah; a second, which includes the coming and
career of Messiah and the preaching and written embodiment of his Gospel.
The preparation for the advent of Jesus Christ involved the missions of Jew and Pagan. In the case of
the former, the work of preparation was carried on by
means of revelation; in the case of the latter by means
of free experience. So, in substance, writes Pressense.1
It will be seen, however, that revelation had much to do,
through the Jewish dispersion, with the preparation of
the heathen world for Messiah.
SECTION I.
THE PREPARATORY MISSION OF THE JEWS.
"The salvation is of the Jews." 2  These  are  the
words of Jesus Christ himself to the woman of Samaria
by the well of Sychar.  Salvation is the one necessity of
the race. No religion, therefore, that has not salvation
as its essence can meet the wants of the race.
It was the mission of the Jew to receive directly from
God, and, in due time, transmit to the whole human race
the only religion of salvation, and therefore the only
true world-religion.  Everything connected with the
history of the Jews had reference to the completion of
this one religion for mankind. Each revelation and dispensation, all discipline and punishment, every promise
and threatening, their constitution, laws, and worship,
1 Religions before Christ, p. 191.
2 John iv. 22. The definite article used in the original gives the meaning: The (promised and only) salvation comes from the Jews.




MISSION OF THE JEWS.              31
every political, civil, and religious institution (so far as
they were legitimate and proper), tended toward this
one goal.1 In the light of providential developments and
later revelations, the divine plan as connected with the
Jews may readily be traced, in its great outlines, from
the calling of Abraham to the advent of Christ.
The history of the chosen people has been providentially divided into two periods, the first of which ended
with the captivity and the extinction of national independence, and the second, with the Advent. The first
was, in general terms, a period of national unity and
integrity, and of complete separation from the outside
world. The second was a period of national disintegration, of dispersion throughout the whole world, and of
most varied union with mankind.
To the careless glance there seems a contradiction in
the parts of this divine plan. Why first the policy of
complete isolation, and then an abrupt change to the opposite? As always elsewhere, so here, to a closer inspection, the unity and consistency of the divine purpose
clearly appear. The one purpose was twofold. The
work of the period of isolation may be characterized as
the revelation of the world-religion to the chosen people
and the establishment of its sway over them.  The
work of the period of dispersion may be characterized as
missionary in its nature, and as intended to impress the
world-religion, in the form in which it had been revealed
to the chosen people, upon the pagan races, in order to
prepare them for the reception of the Divine Saviour
with his salvation.
I. The Jewish Isolation.
Two great epochs are to be distinguished in the history of Judaism during the period of isolation. In the
1 Kurtz, Text Book of Ch. History, vol. i. p. 43.




32           PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH.
first, the Jewish system was definitely constituted, receiving its institutions from God, in the Covenant,
through Abraham, and in the Law, through Moses. In
the second, Israel was established in the land of Canaan,
and the power of the new religion developed by the
growth and perfection of its institutions and by a cycle
of sublime revelations throwing vivid light upon the
future. The first epoch was characterized by the predominance of the legal element, the second, by that of
the prophetic,- though neither element was ever altogether absent. The Covenant, the Law, and the Prophets thus represent the three aspects of the Jewish religion during the age of isolation.
The Covenant. The first stage of the divine work
of salvation began when Abraham of Ur of the Chaldees was called to be the head of a privileged family,
and the progenitor of a race privileged for the world's
sake.
In the covenant which Jehovah made with Abraham
are found a command, a promise, and a seal.
" Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred." 1 "I am  the Almighty God; walk before me
and be thou perfect." 2 So ran the command. It called
to a separation from paganism with its many gods and
to a dedication to the one Almighty God. Its monotheism and its separation foreshadowed the more complete
revelation and law which were to come by Moses.
"And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will
bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a
blessing: and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse
him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all the families
of the earth be blessed." 3 So read the promise. While
assuring to Abraham and his descendants special blessing and grace, whereby they should be exalted and the
1 Genesis xii. 1.  2 Genesis xvii. 1.  8 Genesis xii. 2, 3.




MISSION OF TEIE JEWS.            33
true religion preserved, it reached out to the whole human race and was made in its interests, and so foreshadowed the world-religion to be brought in by Christ. It
involved the germ of all the subsequent prophecies of
Messiah and all the later developments of God's plan for
the salvation of the world.
" This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between
me and thee, and thy seed after thee; every man child
among you shall be circumcised." 1 Such was the seal.
It was a " fit symbol of that removal of the old man and
renewal of nature which qualified Abraham to be the
parent of a holy seed." 2
Thus were furnished the germs of the world-religion.
The Mosaic System.  The holy seed which was
called and created 3 in Abraham grew into a nation
and in due time was called out of Egypt to receive,
by the hand of Moses, a fuller revelation of God's law
and grace. This was the second stage of the divine
work.
The era of the Law began with the experience in the
wilderness, on the way from Egypt to the promised land.
It was then that the descendants of Abraham received
those divine revelations which shaped their whole national life. They were, at the foundation, revelations of
law, and expressed what it was God's will that the chosen
people should do and become; but they were likewise
revelations of grace, unfolding the method by which the
people might, in conduct and character, attain to the fulfillnlent of the divine will.
The legal element of the divine revelation through
Moses embraced the Jewish civil code and the moral law.
The chosen people, already united by common suffering
1 Genesis xvii. 10.
2 Murphy, Commentary on Genesis, xvii. 9-14.
8 Hebrews xi. 12.
3




34             PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH.
and blessing, were thoroughly organized as a nation, and
their ufinion confirmed and consolidated at Sinai, by the
establishment of a civil code. This code - the similarity of which to our own has been remarked by the eminent French jurist, De Tocqueville - was subordinate to
higher than civil ends.1  The moral law, summed up in
the Decalogue, addressed to the understanding, sanetioned by suitable authority, and enforced by adequate
penalties, was designed to imnpress upon the people God's
moral attributes. It was " the clearest expression of the
holy will of God before the advent of Christ. It set
forth the ideal of righteousness, and was thus fitted most
effectually to awaken a sense of man's great departure
from it, and to give the knowledge of sin and guilt
(Rom. iii. 20).  It acted as a school-master to lead men
to Christ that they might be justified by faith (Gal. iii.
24).  2
The gracious element in the Mosaic system, as distinguished from the legal element, was embodied in concrete
and sensible form in the ceremonial law.  This was necessary, for abstract statement was not enough.  God's
purpose both of law and grace needed to be put into such
a form that it could be impressed upon the mind through
the senses, - needed to be put in the form of a perpetual
object lesson.  This was accomplished by the ritual of
the Mosaic religion. That religion was embodied in the
four institutions which were at the basis of all the ancient religions: sacrifice; the priesthood; the sanctuary,
or sacred place of adoration; and religious festivals, or
periods consecrated  to adoration.   These  institutions
were purified from all heathen elements and given their
full significance.
It was necessary that the grace element should be
1 See Wines, Commentaries on the Laws of the Ancient Hebrews.
2 Schaff, History of the Apostolic Church, p. 39.




MISSION OF THE JEWS.             35
added and placed over against the law, for mere law was
not enough to save men. There was therefore attached
to the Mosaic rites " both a symbolical and typical value,
representing important truths having a present application, and being at the same time the shadow of good
things to come." 1 They spoke at once of present duty
and future blessing. The moral law brought desnair and
death; the sacrifices brought in the idea, of reparation,
of atonement, by death for death, and typified the great
coming atonement. The moral law made man feel his
unfitness to approach Jehovah; the priest, set apart and
purified, appeared between the sinner and an offended
God, symbolizing the separation while typifying the great
High Priest by whom the race should be brought nigh to
God. There was needed a permanent centre for this sacrificial system, a sanctuary; this was found at first in the
tabernacle (afterward in the temple), which perpetually
symbolized the salvation of God, and typified the better
things to come. The people must be brought into close
and frequent contact with this great centre that they
may effectually learn the lessons of their religious system; the sacred festivals, with the daily sacrifices and
sabbatic ordinances, were for this end.
The Mosaic ritual and the whole system of Judaism,
given in the wilderness, were developed and perfected in
the land of promise. Judea was as admirably situated
in that age, for maintaining the isolation of the Israelites
from all the world, as it proved to be, in a later age and
in altered circumstances, for bringing them into closest
connection and union with all the world. It was at the
common centre of the three grand divisions of the old
world, and surrounded by the great nations of ancient
culture; but it was separated from them by deserts on
the south and east, by sea on the west, and by mountains
1 Pressense, The Religions before Christ, p. 207.




36           PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH.
on the north.1 The Mosaic legislation reared a still more
impassable barrier than deserts and seas and mountains,
between God's people and the pagan world.
What with the land and the legislation and the destruction of the Canaanites, freedom for the full development of Judaism, without disturbing influences from the
heathen at home or abroad, was secured.  When the
monarchy reached the height of its glory, under David
and Solomon, the ritual reached its most complete and
magnificent embodiment in the temple then erected and
made the centre of the Jewish system.
Development of Prophecy. The third stage in the
divine work had already been entered upon. While the
law was advancing toward its most perfect unfolding,
the element of prophecy began to assume increasing prominence.
The Pentateuch opens with the promise that the seed
of the woman shall bruise the serpent's head. That
promise had always kept its place in the unfolding of
Judaism.  To Abraham  it was made more definite;
from his seed was to come the mysterious benefactor who
was to restore the whole human race. Thus the promise
of the world-religion, the theme and burden of prophecy,
was given. Each new phase of Jewish history enriched
it.
In the time of Samuel, some eleven centuries before
Christ, prophecy received an organized form in a permanent prophetical office and order, and was thus prepared
to take its place as a leading element in the Jewish religious development. It was the vocation of',he prophet
to keep alive the fundamental truth of the covenant, to
keep before the minds of the people their high vocation,
to call them back from idolatry, and to inspire them with
a living faith in their glorious destiny. Borrowing his
1 Schaff, History of the Christian Church, p. 36.




MISSION OF THE JEWS.              37
symbols from the times in which he lived, and thus securing an ever-present freshness, the prophet of the Lord
pointed, with a clearness increasing to the last, to the
Messiah in whom all the promises should be realized to
Israel and to the world.
Says Dr. William H. Green, in an essay on " The Matter of Prophecy ": " The prophetic exhibition of Christ
is accomplished by successive teachings, each suited to its
own age and its own special design, but all combining to
produce the general effect. The prophets may thus be
likened to a grand orchestra. Each musician plays a
part adapted to his own particular instrument, which,
taken by itself, is designed to give a particular effect to
the piece; and yet they are attuned in such precise harmony, and so contrived with reference to the various possibilities of the melody, that, combined upon the oratorio
of the Messiah, they bring out, as could in no other way
be done, the full power of that magnificent production.
The necessities of one period call for the presentation of
the coming Saviour and his work under one point of
view; those of other periods lead to the contemplation
of them from different sides. And the necessities of the
people, as they arise in the progress of their history, are
themselves accommodated to the grand end to be accomplished, being of such a variety and character, that the
instructions which they demand may complete the total
of the revelations to be made respecting Messiah before
his advent." 1
When the prophetic era closed, the idea of the coming
Messiah, to whom the whole ritual pointed and in whom
all prophecy centred, had been made as prominent in the
Jewish mind as was the law when it had become enshrined in the temple of Solomon at the close of the legal
period. Every eye was turned toward the coming Christ.
1 Princeton Review, The Matter of Prophecy, October, 1862.




38           PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH.
But before this great work had been fully accomplished
and the voices of the prophets hushed, the chosen people had passed from the period of isolation from all the
world to the period of dispersion through all the world.
II. The Jewish -Dispersion.
Certain events in the progress of the prophetic period,
and especially toward its close, prepared for the transition from the early condition of national unity and isolation to the later one of disintegration and dispersion.
The extraordinary material prosperity of the Jewish
monarchy began the work of breaking down the barriers
between the chosen people and the world; the judgments
of God completed it. In the prosperity and the judgments originated the system of mneans divinely employed
for disseminating the truths of the world-religion.
Prosperity and judgments. In pushing the bounds
of his kingdom out to the limits of the other great nations of the earth, King David made the Israelites one
of the most prominent nations of that age, the rival in
power and splendor of Egypt and Assyria, and a fit
object for their fear and jealousy.
Still later, the necessity for gold and silver and other
building materials, arising from the construction of the
temple of Solomon and the various works in which that
monarch attempted to rival the other great empires, gave
an impulse to a world-wide commerce and intercourse.
The sea on the west ceased to be a barrier, and became
instead a highway to the nations, even as far west as
Tarshish or Spain. The ports of Ezion-geber and Elath,
at the head of the Akabah, opened the way for an active
trade, both to the south and east, with the nations along
the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean. The deserts on the
east, north and south, no longer shut them out from the
older nations of the world from which the Jewish race




MISSION OF THE JEWS.            39
originally sprung. -By building Tadmor, or Palmyra,
on an oasis midway between Damascus and the Euphrates, Solomon gained control of the immense trade of
Egypt and Asia Minor with the east by caravan, and
thus made the wealth of both the cast and the west
tributary to the prosperity of his own realm. A highway
for trade was opened into Egypt, and Solomon allied
himself to Pharaoh by marrying his daughter. The way
was thus prepared for the Jews, who were by nature a
race of merchants, to become the merchants of the
world.
The story of the very general departure of the Jewish
race from the true God and of their lapse into idolatry,
which resulted from their connection with the heathen
nations, is too familiar to need rehearsal.- In this defection Solomon himself — who, with all his wisdom, was
unable to withstand the seductive influences of prosperity
— took the lead, by the introduction and establishment of
idolatry in the various forms in which it was practiced
by his heathen wives. Ho had taken these wives in disobedience to God's plain command, thereby showing his
own early departure from the true religion.
The story of the divine judgments which followed the
apostasy of the chosen people is equally familiar. The
divine wrath did not delay, but fell even upon Solomon.
At his death the vast empire of David had already shrunk
to its original narrow limits, and the Lord declared that
even what remained should be rent from his successors.
Jeroboam, when he had drawn off the ten tribes in revolt, established the idolatrous worship as the religion
of the State, and from that time Israel, or the ten tribes,
made haste to destruction, in spite of the many warnings
and judgments of God. The final blow fell when Shalmanezer, king of Assyria, took Samaria, razed it, destroyed the kingdom of Israel, and carried the captives




40           PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH.
away to Halah and Habor (Chebar). Judah followed
in the idolatry of Israel, and a little more than a century later its people were carried away captive to Babylon, save a remnant that fled into Egypt.
The prophetic activity reached its height during the
decline and captivity. It was then that the sins against
the covenant needed most to be rebuked. Early in that
period appeared Elijah and Elisha, who wrought more
miracles than any prophet since the days of Moses and
Joshua. Just before the overthrow of Israel, Isaiah and
Micah flourished in Judah, contemporary with Hosea
and Amos in Israel. The two former survived that
overthrow, and were succeeded by Nahum and Zephaniah,
through whom, in the reign of Hezekiah and Josiah, a
partial and temporary reformation was wrought in Judah.
It is obvious, moreover, that in the captivity the hopes
of the Messiah needed to be kept most clearly before the
people. Still more earnestly, therefore, did the prophets
then ply their vocation among the captives of Judah,
directing them in working( God's purposes, - Jeremiah
with the remnant in Egypt; Ezekiel among those by
the river of Chebar; Daniel at the court of the great
eastern monarch; Ezra and Nehemiah in leading back
the band that rebuilt Jerusalem and the temple. Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, after the restoration, concluded the communications of God, in that age, touching
the coming of Messiah and the great events of the future,
using the deliverance from captivity as the type of Messiah's work. With them the roll of the prophets ended,
and the voice of prophecy ceased till the near approach
of the Advent.
Dissemination of the World-religion. The work of
transmitting the true religion from the narrow limits
of the Jewish race, where it had been prepared, to th,




MISSION OF THE JEWS.             41
widest limits of the human race, for which it had been
prepared, had already begun.
Providentially, in connection with the prosperity and
the judgments, there was somehow perfected the most
complete system of means possible for the dissemination
of the truth. It may now be seen that everything
wrought together marvelously in God's plan, and for
the accomplishment of his ends. It is manifest from history that the captivity and dispersion made the profoundest moral impression upon both Jew and Gentile, and
that the restoration of the Jews resulted in the most
constant and intimate intercourse of Jerusalem with all
the world.
The captivity produced a revolution in the sentiments
of both Jews and Gentiles respecting the true Judaism.
It cured the Jews of their idolatry, bound them as
never before to their sacred records, and urged them on
to make proselytes of all the world. Says Dr. Schaff:
" As to religion, the Jews, especially after the Babylonish captivity, adhered most tenaciously to the letter of
the law, and to their traditions and ceremonies, but
without knowing the spirit and power of the Scriptures." I This is the universal testimony on the subject. Neander has shown how the Pharisees, or strict
Jews, labored to make proselytes. The wavering authority of the old national religions, the unsatisfied religious necessities of so many, came in to aid them. Hence,
the inclination to Judaism, particularly in the large capital cities, became very marked.2
The character of the Jew, as elevated by the judgments of the captivity, turned the favorable attention of
the heathen world to the trie religion. The Jew was
the cultured religious man of that age. With Egypt he
i Schaff, History of the Christian Church, p. 37.
2 Neander, Church History, vol. i. p. 67.




42            PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH.
had shared the early knowledge of the arts. In the exodus, before the origin of Greek letters, his written language exhibited the fruits of his sojourn in the land of
the Nile. He belonged to that Semitic race which has
given the world, besides so many precious words of science and art, the three great and only systems of Theism.
It is obvious, too, that the religion of the Jew, unlike
that of the heathen, was bound to a law of moral purity.
Men might complain that they could not see the God of
the Jew; but they could not help feeling the morality
of his law. As a slave in heathen households moulding
the young, as a steward overseeing his master's business,
as a counselor of kings directing the destinies of nations,
the true Israelite was everywhere doing in his measure,
by the purity and diligence of his life, the work which
Daniel the prophet did, in the highest positions, by his
personal influence in winning men to his own pure and
lofty faith.
The Jew, moreover, was then as ever the thrifty man of
the world. Born with a tendency to acquisition, made by
his religion a man to be trusted, he was prepared by his
tact and thrift and enterprise to be the banker, merchant,
and executive man of business, and so to cooperate in the
work for heathendom which God was carrying forward
both by natural and supernatural agencies. Xerxes, who
attempted the conquest of Greece, had a Jewish cupbearer, a Jewish consort, and a Jewish prime minister.
But the most striking impressions made upon the nations in favor of the true religion were due to the special
manifestations of divine power.
These manifestations were very marked during the exile. They were needed both to correct and comfort the
people of God, and also to impress the character of Jehovah, as the only true God, upon the greatest of the




MISSION OF THE JEWS.            43
Oriental Empires. In all this miraculous work, the
prophets were the representatives of God.  Foremost
among them all was Daniel, the most faultless character
of the old dispensation, and one of the grandest of all the
prophets. The book which bears his name is one continued record of miracles of power and foresight, wrought
at the very centre of oriental magnificence, and exerting
an influence on the future destiny of the nations that
witnessed them, perhaps greater than those wrought in
Egypt and at Sinai. Kings heard his prophecies, and
knew that God spoke by him. They witnessed his miraculous works and his striking deliverances, and acknowledged the God of the Jews to be "the God of
gods."  By royal decrees they did what was in their
power to make their own feeling the universal feeling of
western Asia. Influenced by the prophet, Cyrus issued
the decree for the rebuilding of the temple and provided
the requisite means for the work. The reestablishment
at Jerusalem of a grand religious centre, from which
light was to go out into all the world while men were
waiting for the advent of Messiah, was therefore one of
the most impressive proofs of the wonderful revolution
wrought by the exile,in Oriental heathendom.
The New Religious Centre. Never was there a more
complete and marvelous provision of God than that for
making the most of this moral impression, upon Jew
and Gentile, in giving the true religion the widest possible influence. The restored city and temple, the completed canon of the Scriptures, and the synagogue system
constitute the chief features of that provision.
Jerusalem was restored to be henceforth not a national
centre, as under David and Solomon, but simply a religious metropolis to the whole dispersed nation, from which
should go forth the spiritual influences which should fashion the future of mankind.




44            PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH.
Hence the edict of Cyrus, which originated in the divine counsels, was a permission and not a command. The
long period of war and desolation had changed the aspect
of Judaea. It had ceased to be in the old-sense " a land
flowing with milk and honey." It could never again be
the great natural centre of wealth it had once been, for
the line of trade had been changed, and its history was
to be one of dependence. Henceforward it must be
sought as a home chiefly for the memories of what it had
been, or for the hopes of what it should again become
through the Messiah.
No decree of earthly king could have brought back
more than a small portion of the descendants of Abraham. The great mass had become engaged in commerce,
banking, and retail traffic, and would not make the Holy
City their place of residence. " The emigrants doubtless consisted chiefly of the pious and the poor; and as
the latter proved docile to their teachers, a totally new
spirit reigned in the restored nation." 1 Jerusalem thus
became comparatively pure, as a religious centre, and
was fitted to elevate the Jews of the dispersion who came
up from year to year to the great festivals.
While the Holy City and the temple were thus being
restored, the divine religion, which gave them their significance and their sacredness, was receiving its final and
unalterable written form.
One step toward securing this result was taken in the
gathering up of the sacred writings and the completion
of the Old Testament canon, by Ezra, the prophet and
scribe. From that time forward nothing was to be added
to the word of God until Christ should come, and the
Jews guarded it with jealous care against all attempted
additions whatsoever.
Another step was taken when the Hebrew ceased to
1 See Kitto, Cyclopcedia, article "Captivities."




MISSION OF THE JEWS.             45
be a living language. Living languages change; old
words die or receive new meanings; new words are constantly produced. With a living language, in constant
contact with new phases of Oriental and Greek thought,
the Jews might have greatly corrupted the sacred records. But in the violent disruption and the foreign intercourse, the Hebrew became a dead tongue, and Judaism, in its divinely revealed form, thus became fixed
and incapable, through the centuries preceding the advent of Messiah, of ally extensive corruption. From the
day of the restoration the true religion spoke out from
that spiritual centre of the world with no uncertain
voice.
The establishment and development of the synagogue
system furnished the connecting link between the temple with its divine religion, and the Jew of the dispersion, and the heathen world wherever the Jew was to be
found.
The synagogue probably originated during the captivity. At all events, its great development took place then.
When the temple had been destroyed, the Jews naturally established the synagogue to take its place in keeping up their religion. The rule was, that "a synagogue
was to be erected in every place where there were ten
Batelnim, that is, ten persons of full age and free condition always at leisure to attend the service of it." 1 The
services to be performed in these synagogue assemblies
were prayers, reading the Scriptures, and expounding
them. Morning and evening the Law was read on three
days in the week, and then on the Sabbath it was reread. Each year the five books of Moses were read
through and repeated. Besides, each day had its reading
of the Prophets, and of certain passages of the Law
called the Shema. The greatest familiarity with the let+ See Prideaux, Old and New Testament Connected, vol. i. pp. 298, 299.




46            PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH.
ter of the Scriptures was thus secured wherever the wanderings of the Jews carried the synagogue system.
After the restoration of the temple, the cessation of
prophecy turned the attention of the religious leaders at
that great centre with tenfold eagerness to the study of
the Scriptures, especially of the prophecies concerning
the Messiah. The Jews of the dispersion, who went up
anliually in immense numbers to Jerusalem to the great
religious festivals, carried back from the temple to the
synagogues, in all parts of the pagan world, the latest
developments of this study. The extent of this intercourse may be imagined from the statement of Josephus,
that, when Jerusalem was besieged by the Romans under
Titus, three millions of Jews, who had come up to the
Passover, were shut in by the besiegers.
By this vast telegraphic system the latest thought at
Jerusalem was speedily made the property of all the
Jews, and through them was borne to the doors of the
entire pagan world. As the time of the Advent drew
nigh, the expectation of a coming Messiah, deepened and
directed to the times designated in prophecy, had been
awakened in all lands. All men were looking for a great
Deliverer to come out of Judaea.
The old religion in its Jewish form had done its part
of the preparatory work for the Christ, in accordance
with the divine plan.
SECTION II.
THE PREPARATORY MISSION OF THE GENTILES.
A view of the preparation for the Messiah would be
incomplete if confined to the Jews alone. Salvation has
been seen to have come forth from Judaea, but to be
adapted to the necessities of the world. Three great historic races, the Oriental, the Greek, and the Roman, suc



MISSION OF THE GENTILES.           47
cessively entered, along with the Jew, into the work of
preparing the world for the advent of Messiah and the
spread of his divine salvation.
This was in accordance with the prophecies of Daniel,
contained in the second and seventh chapters of his book.
These great empires were to precede and prepare the
way for the mightier kingdom of Messiah which the God
of heaven should set up, and which should be an everlasting kingdom. Each will be found to have accomplished a twofold preparatory work.
I. Tlhe Migssion of the Oriental Races.
The Oriental empires which entered into this work
were the Babylonian, represented by the head of gold in
the great image of prophecy, and the less magnificent
Medo-Persian, represented by the arms and breast of
silver. In the later prophecy, of the four beasts, the
former is symbolized by the first beast, which was like a
lion, and had eagle's wings; since it was a lion in
strength and an eagle in swiftness: the latter is symbolized by the second beast, which was like a bear; since, in
the desire for conquest, it was all-voracious like the bear.
The Oriental Problem. These great Oriental races
represented material riches, power, and grandeur. It
was a subordinate part of their mission to prove the insufficiency of the greatest wealth, luxury, and splendor
to satisfy and save man. It was the problem on which
Solomon wrought, and whose solution he gives in Ecclesiastes when he brings back from his varied experience
the conclusion: " Fear God and keep his commandments,
for this is the whole of man,"- the same problem, only
on a vastly grander scale. The nations of the Orient
came from its attempted solution wretched and perishing.
But the more important part of their mission was to furnish the agencies and theatre for the Jewish dispersion,




48            PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH.
and for the early dissemination of the germs of the
world-religion.  For this they were eminently fitted.
The Jew was their proper representative, belonging to
their own race. He had come forth from the valley of
the Euphrates, in Abraham the Chaldee. The captivity
was but a return to the primitive home. Who was so
entitled as the Jew to be called the representative Oriental?
The Oriental races could most easily come into sympathy with Judaism, and could most readily furnish the
conditions requisite for the fuller development of the
germs of the true religion.  In the Oriental mind,
therefore, the Jew was to place the grand truths of his
religion first, and thus to open the way to reach, at a
later date, the Greek and Roman. By their self-will and
brute force the Oriental races were meantime to chastise
the Jewish race and cure it of its idolatry.
II. The M2ission of the Greeks.
The eastern empires fell successively under the sentence which the handwriting on the wall passed upon
Belshazzar, and which history repeats against every despotism to the end of time: " Thou art weighed in the
balance and found wanting," - wanting in fulfilling the
true ends of states and governments, in securing the
welfare of mankind and their union in the bonds of social
life.1
In the later period of its history, when in the height
of power under Xerxes, the Medo-Persian empire came
into direct and open conflict with the West as represented by Greece, the nation which was divinely appointed to work out another problem, - whether man's
free energy in poetry and art, in learning and philosophy, could perfect his social state, and thus accomplish
I See Philip Smith, aistory of the World, Qol. i, p. 242.




MISSION OF THE GENTILES.           49
that in which the East with its despotic power and wealth
and magnificence had failed.
The Greek empire under Alexander was the third
kingdom  which was to rule over all the earth.  Its
strength is represented by the brass of the image of the
vision, in Daniel, and the rapidity of its conquests and
the insatiableness of its ambition, by the third beast, the
leopard, with its four wings and four heads.'
The Greek Problem. In its career the Greek race
tested the insufficiency of the human reason with the
highest human culture to satisfy and save man; while
in the conquests of Alexander it gave the world the highest human civilization of the ancient ages, and the most
perfect of languages in which to embody the true religion. These are the main points of interest in the mission of the Greek. In fact, Greek wisdom exhausted its
free energies upon the same great problem which despotic
Oriental power and magnificence had failed to solve.
For a millennium the Greek race directed its varied
powers and consummate genius in vain to the work of
perfecting humanity. It achieved the greatest results in
thought ever permitted to unaided human effort. Its
civilization was one of the grandest the world has ever
seen, - grand in its recognitions of humanity, in its poetry and philosophy, in its science and art. But its culture was purely intellectual,- having no religious and
moral ground of support capable of withstanding every
shock and indestructible under all changes, and in the
natural course of its development it could only degenerate into false civilization and end in social corruption.
It had no light and life from God. " There was yet no
salt to preserve the life of humanity from decomposing,
or to restore it back again when passing to decomposition."
1 Daniel ii. 32, 39; vii. 6.
4




50           PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH.
It is not too much to say that the Greek did everything toward the perfecting of man that could be done
by a purely intellectual civilization. He demonstrated
for all time what human reason, when situated most favorably and tasked to the utmost, could accomplish for
the salvation of a race with endowments superior to the
other races. The later ages showed it to be very little.
It became manifest that the glory of the Greek thought
needed to be saved from its own corruption, - saved for
the good of mankind. This could only be accomplished
by extending its sway over the Oriental empires, and
bringing it in contact with the saving influences of the
world-religion which was being diffused everywhere by
the scattered and exiled seed of Abraham.
The World Hellenized.  When the Greek had voiced
his wonderful thoughts of beauty and power iii a language made for them and by them, and, therefore, the
most perfect of the languages of the ancient ages, - the
one most worthy to become the world-language, — and
before the blight and decay had fallen upon the race,
Alexander of Macedon appeared to perform the needed
office of Hellenizing the world.
Of the work of Alexander, Howson says: "He took
up the meshes of the net of civilization, which were lying
in disorder on the edges of the Asiatic shore, and spread
them over all the countries which he traversed in his
wonderful campaigns.  The East and the West were
suddenly brought together. Separated tribes were united
under a common government. New cities were built, as
the centres of political life. New lines of communication
were opened, as the channels of commercial activity.
The new culture penetrated the mountain ranges of
Pisidita and Lycaonia. The Tigris and Euphrates became
Greek rivers. The language of Athens was heard among
the Jewish colonies of Babylonia; and a Grecian Baby



MISSION OF THE GENTILES.           51
ion was built by the conqueror in Egypt and called by
his name." 1
When Alexander passed away leaving his vast plans
unfinished, in his dying words, "to the strongest," he
left his empire to the only men who could have carried
out the work of making the world permanently Greek,
- his own great generals whom he had trained to command. When the empire was broken into four, the four
were Greek, and Antioch and Alexandria rivaled Athens
and Corinth as centres of Greek learning and art.2
From Alexander to the Advent Judaism and Hellenism
were in world-wide contract. The man of prophecy was
elevating the view of the man of reason, while the man
of reason was widening the vision of the man of prophecy. Even where the Greek contemptuously held himself aloof from the Jew, the Jewish religion was one of
the most powerful influences in breaking down the old
paganism. At the bar of reason, polytheism could not
stand before the doctrine of one God. It was doomed
from the hour when the Greek heard the first whispers
concerning Jehovah. But the Greek did not everywhere
hold himself aloof; the two modes of thought came
into direct contact; the philosopher and the scribe met
and became one. This occurred especially in the great
centres. At Alexandria, the Septuagint, or Greek version of the Old Testament Scriptures, was made three
centuries before the Advent, for the use of those employing the Greek language, and the old revelation of the
world-religion was thus scattered abroad for the Greekspeaking communities. At the same centre of culture
Platonism and Judaism came together and were consoli1 See Conybeare and Howson, Life, Ti'mes, and Travels of St. Paul,
vol. i. p. 9.
2 See D6llinger, The Gentiles and Jews in the Court of the Temple of
Christ, vol. i. p. 341.




52           PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH.
dated in the Neo-Platonism which exerted such an influence both before and after the Advent.
In this twofold manner, by despair of reason and hope
from prophecy, the Greek was borne onward to the
completion of his part in the work of preparation for
the coining of the Messiah, until mankind was found in
possession of the world-religion with its predictions of
the coming Redeemer, written in the perfected worldlanguage, and made capable of greater expansiveness by
the Greek forms of thought.
The Greek mission was thus evidently essential in the
preparation for Messiah.  It forced the thinking men
of that age to feel and confess the insufficiency of human
reason, even in its most perfect development, for the deliverance and perfection of mankind, and left them waiting and longing for one who could accomplish this work.
It brought in a dawning sense of human brotherhood,
and so helped to bring mankind together into the true
unity. It aided men to cut loose from the hoary but
unreasonable traditions of the past, and thus prepared
themi to receive the reasonable truth of God. It made
ready and living the better and broader forms of thought
and speech in which the Gospel with its grander truths
-too grand and living to be put into the narrow and
dead Hebrew - should be proclaimed to all the world.
III. The Mission of the Romans.
Rome was already the rising power of the West when
Alexander gave the Greek civilization to the East. The
Roman Empire was the fourth kingdom of the prophecy
of Daniel. Its strength is represented by the iron of the
great image, since it was to be " strong as iron;" its
terrible character, by the fourth beast, which had more
than the power of the lion, more than the greed of
the bear, and more than the swiftness and' insatiable




MISSION OF TIlE GENTILES.          53
cruelty of the leopard, and to which no name could be
given.1
The Roman Problem. The Roman was to try another
solution of the problem on which the Oriental and the
Greek had failed. He was to try whether human power,
taking the form of law, regulated by political principles
of which a regard for law and justice was most conspicuous, could perfect humanity by subordinating the individual to the state and making the state universal.
" The power which was destined at length to raise a universal empire on the ruins of the Eastern Monarchies, of
the free states of Greece, and of the commercial oligarchy
of Carthage, combined in itself the strongest points of
the systems which it superseded," 2- more than the material power of Oriental despotismn; much of the freedom and intelligence and more than the social order of
Greece; a stronger and better aristocracy than that of
Carthage.
In the old Roman race, the will, or that part of man
which pushes to action and enables him to control and
mould nature and mankind, was the predominant element, associated with conscience or the natural sense of
justice. Its herculean tasks and its universal empire
furnish the highest expression of the human soul as the
repository of the energy for shaping the world to law and
order. The Roman, as the man of power, was to attempt
the solution of the same problem of perfecting man in
which the man of prophecy and the man of reason and
taste had already failed, and in his failure was to complete the preparation for the coming of him who could
solve the hitherto insoluble problem.
The World Romanized.  Before the time of the Advent, Rome had demonstrated the powerlessness of hu1 Daniel, ii. 33, 40; vii. 7, 19, 23.
2 Smith, History of the World, vol. i. p. 131.




54            PREPARATION FOR MESSIAH.
man power to save mankind. It had done its best, but
its best was little, - practically nothing. It needed the
coming Christ that itself might be saved. Imperialism
was as helpless as Orientalism and Hellenism.
But the Roman performed a still more important part
in preparing the world for the Messiah and the spread of
the world-religion. It was Rome that cast up the highways along which the Jews plied their traffic and carried
out to the ends of the earth the truth of God and the
expectation of a coming Deliverer. It was Rome that
made the influence of the divine religion free, rapid, and
world wide.
But more than all, Rome did for the whole world that
law-work without which man never feels the greatness of
his need of the Gospel. In carrying out his mission of
power the Roman was, as already hinted, the representative of natural justice in the world. It was doubtless
some alleviation that the moulds into which the Roman
power so remorselessly crushed men and nations were
moulds of justice; yet in proportion as the world was a
wicked world was the justice a terrible justice. Rome is
aptly described by the prophet Daniel as the iron kingdom: "The fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron, forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things,
and as iron that breaketh all these shall it break in
pieces and bruise;" and again, as the ferocious beast,
"dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly, with
great iron teeth, which devoured and brake in pieces, and
stamped the residue with the feet of it." It was justice
practically omnipotent and omnipresent, and so neither
to be resisted nor escaped, - justice which never dreamed
of mercy until the work of conquest and consolidation
was done. It made men long for mercy, because it demonstrated to them that there was no hope for them in
righteous law.




MISSION OF THE GENTILES.           55
The Total Result.  So it came about that there was
going up from all the world a wail for deliverance when
the divine Deliverer appeared.
Says Neander: " The three great historical nations had
to -contribute, each in its own peculiar way, to prepare
the soil for the phlnting of Christianity, - the Jews on
the side of the religious element; the Greeks on the side
of science and art; the Romans, as masters of the world,
on the side of the political element. When the fullness
of the time was arrived, and Christ appeared, - when
the goal of history had thus been reached, - then it was,
that through him, and by the power of the spirit that proceeded from him, - the might of Christianity, - all the
threads, hitherto separated, of human development, were
to be brought together and interwoven in one web." 1
Regarding the subject fro-m another point of view, human nature had exhausted itself in the efforts of the
Gentile world to solve the problem of man's elevation and
salvation.  The Oriental had given the freest rein to
human desires, in the most favorable circumstances, and
was perishing in magnificence and luxury. The Greek
had given fullest scope to reason and taste, in circumstances equally favorable, and was perishing in the very
glory of his creations of thought and beauty. The Roman had made all the other powers subordinate to his executive energy, and conscience, with its insatiate justice,
was crushing him, and all the world with him, even by
his universal empire. There were no other powers in
human nature to bring to the task. The world over, on
the great and all-absorbing question of man's salvation,
the oracles of heathenism were dumb.
It was only as Judaism had wrought with heathenism
and for it, that hope remained for mankind. Along the
line of the divine purpose of grace, Jew and Gentile had
1 Church History, vol. i. p. 4.




56              ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
wrought together, for the most part unconsciously, for
more than a thousand years, and the final results were
now to be reached.
When the Caesars were firmly established on the throne
of the Empire, and the three phases of civilization, in
Judaism, Hellenism, and Imperialism, had in measure
blended and reached out over the world from Gibraltar
and Britain to the shores of the Caspian, the Messianic
expectancy and longing reached the highest intensity. It
was the fullness of times. Could the world endure longer
without the coming of Christ?
CHAPTER II.
THE ADVENT AND THE WRITTEN GOSPELS.
JESUS CHRIST came in "the fullness of the time"
(Gal. iv. 4), or at the hour appointed in the divine plan
and prepared for by the divine providence, — the hour
when everything was ready for his coming.  He proclaimed the great truths of the Gospel, was rejected by
men, and finished his sacrificial work on the cross. In
due time, under commission from him, his Apostles gave
that Gospel to the world, first in their oral preaching,
and then in the permanent records known as the four
Gospels.
SECTION I.
THE ADVENT OF JESUS CHRIST.
In the life of Jesus Christ is to be found the key to
the history of the world. As the ages before were but
the preparations for his advent, and replete with events
and prophecies which turned all eyes toward that advent,
so the ages since have often been shown to be but the un



THE PROPHECY.                    57
folding of his true power and glory in the progress of his
kingdom among men. With the historical verity of his
person and career, Christianity stands or falls.  The person of Jesus Christ constitutes Christianity in its highest
and truest sense.1
It is natural, therefore, in these days, when radical infidelity is pushing its destructive criticism to the utmost,
that the life of Jesus Christ should become the centre
of the religious controversies which are agitating the
world.2
To attempt a full discussion of this whole subject, or
to give a detailed chronological exhibition of the life of
Christ, would obviously lead beyond the scope of the
present work.  Nothing more can be done than to group
the main facts and direct the attention of the reader -
who wishes to consider the subject further - to some of
the writers from whom  he can obtain the needed guidance and assistance.
The Time of the Advent. According to the view
long held and early indorsed by the Romish Church,
Jesus Christ was born on Christmas, at the opening of
the Christian Era, or about 754 years after the founding
of Rome.  A  more accurate historical knowledge has
made it evident that his birth was rather four or five years
earlier, or about 750 or 749 after the founding of Rome,
and most probably in the spring-time. This conclusion
is based upon the fact that Herod the Great, in whose
reign the birth of Christ took place, died in the fourth
year before the commencement of our era, shortly before
Easter.3
The important facts connected with the Advent may
1 See Schaff, The Person of Clhrist, p. 9.
2 See Tischen(lorf, The Origin of the Gospels, p. 23. Also, Row, The Superlltural in the New Testament, pp. 4-8.
3 See Matthew ii. 1; Josephus, Antiquities, xvii. 9, 3; Andrews, Life of
our Lord; Robinson, Harmony of the Gospels.




.58              ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
be found in the opening chapters of the Gospels. That
Christ came at just the right juncture in the unfolding
of the divine plan is the main point for present consideration.
Lange has remarked, that the days of Herod form the
centre of the world's history, and that every review of
the state of the Jewish and heathen world, at the time
of Christ's birth, confirms the truth of the remark of
Paul to the Galatians, that he appeared when the fullness
of the time was come.1
Many prophecies combined to fix upon just that as the
time for the appearance of the great Deliverer.
Jacob, in blessing his sons, declared that the sceptre
was not to depart from  Judah, nor a lawgiver to cease
from  among his descendants, till Shiloh should come
(Genesis xlix. 10). In Herod the Great, Judah still had
a king, but perhaps in less than a month after the birth
of Jesus, Herod died, and the kingdom as such came to
an end.
A special period - marked according to the method
elsewhere used in the Jewish Scriptures, of computing by
heptads (weeks) of years - was fixed, from the going
forth of the command to restore and to build Jerusalem,
to the cutting off of Messiah (Dan. ix. 24-27).  Starting from  the time of the issue of the commission of
Artaxerxes to Ezra (Ezra vii. 12-28), say about 457 B.
c., the middle of the seventieth heptad reached forward
486, years, to about 30 years after the opening of the
Christian Era, as the date of the death of Messiah.2
The same prophecy fixed with great accuracy the duration of Messiah's public work and the date of the destruction of the Holy City by the Romans.
The time of the manifestation of Christ in his public
1 Lange, Commentary on Luke, p. 33.
2 See Prideaux; also, Wordsworth, Daniel and the Mlinor Prophets.




THE EXPECTATION.               59
work was also determined by prophecy. He was to
come, the desire of all nations, to the second temple, and
to imnpart to it by his presence a greater glory than that
of Solomon's temple (Hag. ii. 7-9; Mal. iii. 1). A
generation later than the death of Jesus the temple
passed away and this prediction could not have been fulfilled after that date.
More definitely still, a herald was to appear before
Messiah, a voice crying in the wilderness, making preparation for his coming (Isa. xl. 3; Mal. iii.; iv. 5). A
few months before the entrance of Jesus upon his public mission, John the Baptist appeared, claiming to be
such a herald, and in due time baptizing Jesus and introducing him to the Jewish nation as the Messiah (Matt.
iii.; Mark i.; Luke iii.; John i.).
The Expectation of the World.  These are only
instances taken out of that great mass of prophecy which
at the time of the Advent, through the temple and synagogue system, had brought the Jews into an attitude of
hourly expectancy of the Messiah.
That there was a like expectancy, throughout the
heathen world, of some deliverer or ruler to come forth
from Jud'a, is equally clear. It was thus that the Magi
came, at the right hour, inquiring at Jerusalem after the
new-born King of the Jews. Suetonius relates that " an
ancient and definite expectation had spread throughout
the East, that a ruler of the world would, at about that
time, arise in Judsea." 1 Tacitus makes a similar statement.2 Schlegel mentions that the Buddhist missionaries traveling to China met Chinese sages going to seek
the Messiah about 33 A. D.3
The entire world was thus evidently in an attitude of
1 Life of Vespasian, c. iv.
2 History, v. 13.
8 Philosophy of History.




60               ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
expectancy. The Oriental had despaired of his material
magnificence, the Greek of his reason and philosophy,
and the Roman was despairing of his universal empire.
God must interpose or the world must perish.'
SECTION II.
THE CAREER OF JESUS.
At just the right hour Jesus Christ came and accomplished his appointed task, in a life of probably a little
over thirty-three years, about three and a half of which
were devoted to his public ministry. The attempted
chronological arrangement of all the recorded facts of
his career may be consulted in the various Harmonies.2
i. Outline of the Career.
Without entering into the minute details of the harmonists, a fair working outline of the life of Christ may
be constructed from the chronological data furnished
chiefly by John and Luke. John, as is well known, narrates the whole period of our Lord's public ministry in
connection with his journeys to Jerusalem to keep the
different feasts, omitting no single passover occurring
during this period, but even mentioning the one not
kept by him at Jerusalem  (John vi. 4).  He has thus
furnished the scheme of Christ's public ministry. Luke
has not only supplied several special dates of the greatest
importance,3 but has in his preface intimated his intention of narrating the events of our Lord's life in order,
an order doubtless largely chronological.
Wieseler's Outline. Paying due regard to these data
from  John and Luke; admitting and emphasizing the
1 See D6llinger.
2 See Andlews, Life of Our Lord; Robinson, Harmony of the Gospels.
S Luke ii. 1; iii. 23; Acts i. 1, 3; and particularly Luke iii. 1, 2.




THE CAREER.                    61
impossibility of securing a perfect chronological arrangement of all the facts; and avoiding that fatal error
of the harmonists, of attempting to secure chronological
unity at the expense of the individuality of the Gospels,
- Wieseler divides the Gospel History into six Sections.1
Section 1. The history of our Lord's childhood. Luke
i. 5-ii. 52.  Compare Luke iii. 23-38. Matt. i., ii.
Section 2. From the first public appearance of John
the Baptist, and then of our Lord, to the imprisonment
of the Baptist, and Christ's return to Galilee, after his
journey to the Feast of Purim. Luke iii. 1-iv. 13;
Mark i. 1-13; Matt. iii. 1-iv. 11; John i. 19-v. 47.
Section 3. From  our Lord's return to Galilee to his
journey to the Feast of Tabernacles. Luke iv. 14-ix.
50; Mark i. 14-ix. 50; Matt. iv. 12-xviii. 35; John vi.
I-vii. 1.
Section 4. From our Lord's journey to the Feast of
Tabernacles to his last regal entry into Jerusalem. Luke
iv. 51-xix. 28; Mark x. 1-52; Matt. xix. 1-xx. 34;
John vii. 2-xii. 11.
Section 5. From our Lord's regal entry into Jerusalem
to the day of his crucifixion and burial. Luke xi'x. 29xxiii. 55; Mark xi. 1-15, 47; Matt. xxi. 1-xxvii. 61;
John xii. 12-xix. 42.
Section 6. From  our Lord's burial to his ascension.
Luke xxiii. 56-xxiv. 53; Acts i. 1-11; Mark xvi. 1-20;
Matt. xxvii. 62-xxviii. 20; John xx. 1-xxi. 25.
Simplified Outline. It will be observed at a glance
that Section 2 takes in our Lord's early ministry in
Judaa; Section 3, his public ministry in Galilee; and
Section 4, his ministry in Peraea, aftei he was driven
from his public ministry in Judeea and Galilee by the hostility of the Jews.  This suggests, as more easily remem1 See Wiescler, Chronological Synopsis of the Four Gospels, p. 24.




62              ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
bered, the following statement of the divisions given by
Wieseler:Section 1. The childhood and youth. Thirty years
from 4 B. c. to 26 A. D.
Section 2. The inauguration and ministry in Judaa.
About one year, from 26-27 A. D.
Section 3. The public ministry in Galilee. About two
years, from 27-29 A. D.
Section 4. The public ministry in Perea — beyond
Jordan. About six months, from October, 29 A. D., to
April, 30 A. D.
Section 5. The atonement by death. About one week,
April 2d to 8th, 30 A. D.
Section 6. The burial, resurrection, and ascension.
About forty days, from April 9th to about May 18th,
30 A. D.
II. The Historical Reality of the Career.
It is admitted on all hands that "the life of Jesus
is the most momentous of all questions which the Church
has to encounter, -the one which is decisive whether it
shall or shall not live." 1 If his life be not a reality, then
even the morality which is based upon the Gospels has its
root in immorality, - in a lie. What then of the historical reality?
The direct knowledge of the life of Jesus is derived almost exclusively from the four Gospels. The other writings of the New Testament, however, furnish some additional facts.
After these comes the indirect knowledge from writings
based upon the Sacred Scriptures, whether by the advocates or the opposers of the Christian system, and which
attest the facts of Christ's life, because these writings
must have originated in the facts.
1 See Tischendorf, Origin of the Four Gospels, p. 24.




THE CAREER.                   63
Finally, in two classical writers, Tacitus and Pliny, we
possess incidental expressions which have a lasting interest.  The former testifies that Christ, the founder of the
religion which had gained so strong a hold even in Nero's
time, had been punished with death, by the procurator
Pontius Pilate, during the reign of Tiberius.1. The latter
asserts, in a communication to Trajan, that the Christians, already a numerous body in Bithynia, were in the
habit of singing songs of praise to Christ as God.2
It is therefore easy to see why the Gospels are the
main point of attack in the present age. They are the
chief direct witnesses to the historical reality of the life
of Jesus Christ.
Whether judged by the plain principles of common
sense or by the formal canons of a scientific criticism, the
argument for the historical verity of the life of Christ, as
that life is presented in the Gospels, is of overwhelming
force. It will only be proper, in this connection, to advert to some of its forms, chiefly in order to direct attention to some of those works accessible on the subject
which may be consulted with profit.
From Common Sense. From the point of view of
common sense, the history of the world, both before and
since the beginning of the Christian era, is a Sphinx's riddle, if the historical truth of the life of Jesus Christ be denied. How was it that all the ages before reached out in
type and prophecy and human longing and development
toward the nman of Nazareth, and found their fulfillment
and completion only in him? How is it that all the ages
since have been but the logical unfolding from the life of
that central figure of human history? How could a myth
— an impostor, a cheat, a lie -give to man all his highest
blessings, and all his grandest civilization, and inspire all
1 Tacitus, Annal. xv. 44.
2 Pliny, Epist. x. 97. See Tischendorf, Origin, etc. p. 25.




64               ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
his noblest purposes and achievements? The historical
verity of the Christ-life in the Gospels is the only sufficient reason for the movements of the ancient ages, the
only adequate cause for the developments of the modern
ages and the Christian anticipations of the future ages.
In the view of common sense, a mythical Christ and
no Christ at all are equally fatal to the rationalistic hypotheses.
1st. On the supposition that Jesus of Nazareth never
actually existed, it is not within the range of rational belief that the idea of such a being was formed in that
country, in that age, and in the minds of such men as the
Evangelists are held to have been, and as in point of mental endowment and culture and social rank they certainly
were. When it shall have been fully ascertained what
that being who is presented to us in the Gospels really
was, the evidence will be irresistible that this is not
within the range of rational belief, but is so unlikely and
unnatural as to be morally impossible. It would contradict all experience and all legitimate induction from experience, and be as utterly out of the course of human
things as any miracle ever recorded.1 The men of that
age never could have conceived the life of Jesus unless
they had first witnessed it; never could have conceived
his sublime doctrine unless they had first heard it.
2d. On the supposition that Jesus of Nazareth did actually exist, and that the statements made by the Gospels concerning the facts of his humanity are on the whole
what the writers saw and heard, then the facts concerning his divinity must likewise be true, and the entire
record of the Gospels must be true.
It Ihas been shown by various able writers, in pursuing
this line of argument, that the life of Jesus stands out a
mysterious exception to all the laws which ordinarily
govern the destiny of men.
1 See Young, Christ of History, p. 24.




THE CAREER.                  65
The outer conditions of that life were most unfavorable.  He was born in poverty, among the lowly and
ignorant, wrought for most of his life as a carpenter, received no formal education, had only the companionship
of peasants and fishermen, and no acquaintance with the
great and wise, received no patronage of any kind from
any one.
His public life was the briefest, — only a little over
three years and this friendless young peasant of Galilee
came to his death of shame by the cross. Even in that
brief course he used no ordinary weapons or machinery
or plans, but only the simple utterance of great spiritual
truths which men hated, and the setting at work of
invisible spiritual forces at which men scoffed.  The
moral condition of the age and place in which he appeared was eminently unfavorable. It was an age of
awful corruption, as witnesses Paul, in the Epistle to the
Romans, in his description of the state of the Gentile
world, and as also witness the heathen historians of that
age. The land of the chosen race, with its greater light,
was the centre of moral perversity; Galilee was disreputable even in that; and Nazareth was the focus of intellectual as well as of moral darkness. There was nothing
in those thirty years in that centre of darkness to develop
such character, life, and doctrine as those of the Jesus
of the Gospels. A righteous man could ask with pious
horror, " Can any good thing come out of Nazareth? "
Yet out of Nazareth came forth Jesus, of his own free
will, claiming to be the Messiah, yet wearing a form
wholly different from that of the Messiah expected by his
age, and possessed with an idea wholly original and
totally different froml that of his (age, -he came forth
to save not from earthly subjection but from sin, and to
save not Judaet only, but all the lost world.
Just as evidently unique was he in his spiritual indi5




66               ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
viduality, -in his constant and conscious communion
with God; in his consciousness of sinlessness, of divinity
and of the grandest of missions; in the universality, completeness, and unapproachable greatness of his manhood,
attained and manifested by him without apparent cause
and without conscious effort; in the entire unselfishness
and boundless self-sacrifice of his life and in the sublime
devotion of it to God and humanity; in his faith in God
and truth and in his calm assurance of the triumph of
his kingdom on earth. In all these he was absolutely
alone among men.
In the centre of darkness he began a unique work
with the revelation to men of their moral condition and
with the call to repentance, and there he gathered the
disciples who in his name should conquer the world.
Mingling a terrible severity with a divine tenderness,
and uniting the severest simplicity with the most absolute authority, he dealt with the corrupt age, sparing no
wickedness, overlooking no sorrow, teaching in a form
and clearness unattained by any other teacher the three
great doctrines which are announced in the Gospels, —
the doctrine of the soul, the doctrine of God, and the
doctrine of the reconciliation of the soul and God by his
sacrificial death alone.
Such a character, personality, work, in such outer
conditions, are simply impossible, except upon the supposition of the Deity of Jesus Christ. They forbid -
even if the supernatural elements are left out of sight —
his classification with men as a mere man. The simple
facts of his humanity, once admitted, irresistibly bear
with them the undoubted truth of his Godhead.' The
historical verity of the life of Jesus of Nazareth cannot be
denied without abjuring common sense.
1 See Young, Christ of History. Also, Bushnell, lNature and the Supernatural, ch. x., "The Character of Jesus forbids his possible Classification with Men."




THE CAREER.                  67
From  Scientific Criticism.  It has been shown to
be equally beyond the range of rational belief that the
Apostles did their preaching and wrought the mightiest
revolution of all ages without the actual existence and
career of Jesus as presented in the Gospels. Without
the verity of the history no adequate and rational motive
for their conduct can possibly be pointed out.
"There never was such a being as Jesus of Nazareth!"  Whence then this mightiest movement of time,
which is seen in the origin, development, and world-wide
sway of Christianity?.
" He was but a miserable deceiver, at the best, himself
deluded while misleading others! " How then this world
of light out of such utter darkness'?  Who call believe
that all the best blessings of the world could come from
such a source? Is a lie more beneficent than the truth?
" The disciples were convinced that he was a failure,
but they stole away his dead body and devoted themselves heart and soul to keeping up the work of deception which he had begun!"  Can a sane man believe
that? Do men naturally iact from such motives? Would
they keep up such a coarse, with no whisper of dissent
or exposure of the base secret, through fire and blood,
along all ages, until the world is converted to their lie?
Imagine the poor fishermen and peasants, in deadly fear
and in despair, stealing away that lifeless body of Jesus
for such a purpose!
The conclusion of scientific criticism is in accordance
with that of common sense, - that the Gospels are veritable history. Such criticism in its only proper form is
simply the best rational application of collmon-sense
principles.
The evidence bearing upon the genuineness and authenticity of the Gospels has been often and admirably
presented by the scientific defenders of Christianity.




68               ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
Tischendorf has exhibited in a simple and interesting,
though not eminently systematic, manner, for the Christian public at large, and with a knowledge of the ancient authorities unequaled by any of his opponents, the
main facts and arguments in favor of the Gospel claims.1
Professor Fisher has set forth, in his clear and compact
style, for the more cultivated Christian public, a broad
and complete view of the subject, in which he has not
only established the claims of the Gospels by the principles of scientific historical criticism, but has also stated
and refuted successively the various false hypotheses of
the rationalists, - including those of Baur, Strauss, and
Renan, and that of their chief American imitator, Theodore Parker.2
But perhaps the freshest, ablest, and most complete
presentation of the latest aspects of this whole question
may be found in 1" The Supernatural in the New Testament Possible, Credible, and Historical," by Rev. C. A.
Row, prepared and published at the request of the leading British Society devoted to the work of keeping the
subject of Christian Evidences before the public. The
author was invited to undertake this important work,
because in his previous publication he had shown himself peculiarly qualified to meet and answer the later
skeptical writers on their own ground.3
What with the comllon-sense and the scientific criticism, the Christian may confidently conclude that there
is nothing in the ancient history of the world more certain than - nay, nothing so certain as - the facts of the
career of Jesus Christ. The probabilities in favor of
the view that Jesus Christ was born, lived, suffered,
died, and rose from the dead, as the Gospels represent,
1 See The Origin of the Gospels.
2 See Essays on the Supernatural Origin of Christianity.
8 See Row, The Jesus of the Evangelists.




PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES.            69
are overwhelmingly great, as against either the hypothesis of a mythical Christ or of no Christ at all. The
Gospels are veritable history, or else no such thing as
veritable history can be shown to have come down to us
from the ancient times.
The deliverer came forth from  Judea, as the world
expected, and by his life and death prepared the forces
which were to renovate the race.  How out of the
shame and death with which his career ended could the
longed-for life and glory arise?
SECTION III.
THE PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES.
There are two sources of information concerning the
apostolic work: the Sacred Scriptures, and the facts and
traditions preserved by the early Christian writers.
I. Facts from the Scriptures.
The Apostolic History, as given by the sacred writers, may be subdivided into two parts: a connected
narrative, extending from our Lord's ascension to the
second year of Paul's captivity at Rome, embodied in
the Acts of the Apostles; and a body of detached and
incidental statements, scattered throughout the other
books of the New Testament.
Of the Acts of the Apostles, Dr. J. Addison Alexander has said, that the subject is "a special history of
the planting and extension of the Church among the
Jews and Gentiles, by the gradual establishment of radiating centres or sources of influence at certain salient
points throughout a large part of the empire, beginning
at Jerusalem and ending at Rome." 1
The two central figures in the Acts are Peter and
1 Alexander, Acts of the Apostles, vol. i., Introduction.




70              ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
Paul, - the former in the first twelve chapters and the
latter in the:last sixteen. Yet the book is as far as possible from being a biography of these two men, either as
individuals or as Apostles. The subject of the first part
is not Peter, but the planting and extension of the
Church among the Jews by the ministry.of the Apostles,
among whom Peter appears as a leader, often associated
with the whole body, but sometimes especially with
John. Tile subject of the second part is not Paul, but
the planting and extension of the Church among the Gentiles by the ministry of Paul.
From the point of view of the present work, it will
appear that the Acts of the Apostles furnishes a glimpse
- an outline sketch - of the work of the Apostles in
fulfilling the commission and giving the Gospel to the
world. It describes its promulgation among those representing the three great world-wide phases of thought,at Jerusalem, the centre of Jewish religion and influence
in the early Church; at Antiochl, the centre of Greek
thought and influence; and at Rome, the centre of Roman power and influence. Along these three lines of
apostolic effort, as will subsequently appear, the first
three Gospels had their origin.
The book begins too late to take in the work done for
the Jews during the life of Jesus, and recorded in the
Gospels; and it ends before' the latter and more extended
spiritual influence of John's work in Asia Minor and
throughout the Church. Nevertheless, all the men connected with the four Gospels engage in its work, and,
with the exception of one, are prominent in it; Matthew,
as one of the Twelve, at the opening of the history;
Peter and Mark, and Paul and Luke, as the chief actors
in the early progress of the Christian movement; and
John, as singled out from the rest at the outset.
From  the remaining portions of the Sacred Script



PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES.          71
ures - the Epistles and the Apocalypse - a body of
detached and incidental statements is derived, which may
be used to supplement and complete the account given in
the Acts. Among other things, glimpses are given of the
movements of Peter and John among the Gentiles, by
which, after their work recorded in the Acts, they extended their influence over the Romlan world; and it is
suggested that Paul was probably released from prison at
Rome, to push his mission work still farther among the
heathen, and to be again at a later date placed in bonds
to suffer martyrdom.
It is manifest to the careful reader of the Acts of
the Apostles, that the same temple and synagogue system which had so long connected Jerusalem with all the
world, and by means of which the universal expectancy
of a coming. deliverer had been awakened, was one chief
agency employed by the followers of Jesus of Nazareth
in disseminating his doctrine.
The early work centred in Jerusalem, and especially
in the temple itself, as may be seen from the first five
chapters of the Acts, which end with the declaration that,
"' daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased
not to teach and preach Jesus Christ." The influences,
however, reached out almost immediately to the synagogues of the foreign Jews and Judaized foreigners. The
sixth and seventh chapters of the Acts give a glimpse of
the work in one of these synagogues, so numerous in the
Holy City. In it the proto-martyr Stephen discusses the
truths of the Gospel with the representatives of Europe,
Asia, and Africa.
In their work abroad over the world the Apostles and
other early preachers found the synagogues the great centres for influencing men, and the new faith was proclaimed in these throughout the Roman Empire in an
incredibly short space of time. When Saul went on his




72               ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
journey of persecution to Damascus, it was with letters
to the synagogues; and when he was converted he
straightway preached Christ in the synagogues (Acts ix.
2, 20). It was in the synagogues that the way was prepared for reaching both Jew and Gentile, - as in the
preaching of Paul and Barnabas at Antioch in Pisidia
(Acts xiii. 14, 42); at Iconium  (Acts xiv. 1); and at
other places.
In the providence of God the same great system of intercourse which had been the means of preparing the
world for the Advent became a most important agency
in giving that world the Gospel.
II. Facts from  Tradition.
It is true, however, that the work of the majority
of the Apostles in spreading the Gospels throughout the
world is not exhibited in the sacred writings. What is
known of it is learned chiefly from the early ecclesiastical writers, — as Nicephorus, Tertullian, Eusebius, and
others.
It is sometimes difficult to pick out the precise historical facts from  the mass of statements, yet the current
traditions, generally received at the time, doubtless had
a basis of historic fact, and are worthy of some degree
of credence. It is made clear that such were the zeal
and success of the Apostles, that at the close of the first
century Christianity had been preached and embraced
throughout and even beyond the bounds of the Roman
empire.
It is said that Andrew carried the Gospel through
Scythia and the neighboring countries, and then over
into eastern Europe; and that he at last suffered martyrdom on the cross at Patraea, a city of Achaia.
James, the brother of John, is said to have preached
to the dispersed Jews in Judaea, Samaria, and Spain,




PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES.            73
and to have settled at last in Jerusalem, where the Acts
assure us he was beheaded by Herod (xii. 2).
Philip, after preaching successfully for several years in
upper Asia, went to Hierapolis, the centre of idolatry in
Phrygia in Asia Minor, and perished by martyrdom  in
the attempt to overthrow that idolatry.
Bartholomew, or Nathanael, preached abroad as far as
Hither India; then returned westward and labored with
Philip in tIierapolis in the overthrow of idolatry; and,
barely escaping martyrdom there, bore the message of his
Master up to Albania, on the shores of the Caspian Sea,
where he won the martyr's crown.
Simonn, the Canaanite or Zealot, is said to have
preached the Gospel in Egypt, Cyrene, Africa, and
finally in Britain, where he was put to death on the
cross.
Jude first preached in Syria and afterward throughout
Judma, Galilee, Samaria, Idumnmea and Arabia, Syria,
Mesopotamia and Persia, and at last fell a martyr
through the zeal of the Magi in the defense of the old
Oriental faith.
Matthias, who took the place of Judas, first preached
with great success in Judea, and afterward in Ethiopia,
where he was stoned and beheaded.
Tradition adds to the statements of the Scriptures
much that is interesting and important concerning the
lives of the men whose names are immediately connected
with the Gospels. This will properly be brought forward in treating of the authorship of the Gospels.1
It is obvious from the Scriptures and tradition combined, that before the close of the apostolic age the
Great Commission had already met its fulfillment, in
spirit at least. This brought the crisis of that age, foretold by Christ in his last days. The Church, a spiritual
1 See Kitto, History of the Bible.




74                ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
kingdom, had now been firmly established the world
over. The time had come when men could everywhere
worship the Father in spirit and in truth.  There was,
therefore, no longer need of the great religious centre at
Jerusalem and of the temple and synagogue system.
Apostate Judaism had become only an influence for evil,
everywhere interfering with the progress of the Gospel.
The proclamation of the crucified Christ seems quickly
to have sifted the false and the true; and then the rejecters of the new doctrine, still holding possession of the
synagogues, became the agents of bloody persecutions.
It was in this way that Stephen met with his death and
that the first persecution arose (Acts vii., viii.). It was
the apostate Jews in the synagogue at Damascus who
sought to slay Saul of Tarsus (Acts ix. 22); and the
Hellenistic Jews at the synagogue at Jerusalem  who
afterward attempted the same thing (Acts ix. 29).
It was largely out of the foreign element connected
with the synagogues that the Church was gathered, while
most of the Jews rejected the claim of Jesus to be the
Christ, and organized persecution against the Christians;
as was the case at Thessalonica (Acts xvii. 1-9).  The
synagogue at Berea is instanced as a marked exception
to this general rule (Acts xvii. 10-12); but the Jews
of Thessalonica, by their emissaries, extended the persecution even to Berea, and drove Paul out of it (Acts
xvii. 13-15).
This inference from the Acts is confirmed by Justin
Martyr, who affirms that "converts, in greater numbers
and of more genuine character, proceeded from the body
of the pagans, than from the great mass of the Jews." 1
It is still further manifest from the writings of Justin,
that the more thoroughly Judaized this pagan element
1 See Justin Martyr, Apolog. 1. 2, f. 88. Neander, Church History, vol.
i.p. 63.




ORIGIN OF THE WRITTEN GOSPELS.        75
had become, the more hopeless was the task of preaching
the Gospel to it. Of the proselytes in the strict sense,
he says to the Jews, that they " do not simply not believe, but they blaspheme the name of Christ twofold
more than yourselves, - and they would murder and torture us, who do believe on him; for they strive in every
respect to become like you." 1 It was from proselytes of
the gate, or those who had adopted from the Jewish system the principles of theism and the hope of Messiah,
without becoming wholly Jews, that the mass of converts to the Church came.
When these converts had been gathered  into the
Church, - the few Jews and the many pagans, - the
work of temple and synagogue as a connected and worldwide system was done. They could henceforward be a
source of only evil to the world-religion, - a source of
terror in that age only less dreadful than Jesuitism with
the Inquisition in a later age. The destruction of the
temple by Titus, in 70 A. D., and the breaking up of the
Jewish nation, destroyed at once the centre and the
power of the old system, and brought the Christian
Church into its true place of prominence and influence.
Thenceforward there were four distinct classes of representative men, and four definite and different phases
of thought, recognized in the ancient world, — Jewish,
Greek, Roman, and Christian.
SECTION IV.
THE ORIGIN OF THE WRITTEN GOSPELS.
While the great work of the Apostles and their colaborers was still going forward in the full tide of its
energy, the chief business was that of preaching the
doctrine of Christ's life, crucifixion, and resurrection for
1 See Neander, Church History, vol. i. p. 67.




76                ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
the salvation of the world. In the early stages there was
little need of written records, for there were the living
and divinely inspired witnesses.
But as the work widened there came, in the various
local churches, emergencies requiring special instruction
on the varied topics of the Gospel as related to Christian life. Before the Apostles passed off the stage of action there arose the necessity for a permanent record of
the story of the Gospel as they had proclaimed it to
men. Hence were given to the Church the Epistles and
the Apocalypse, and the four Gospels. The origin of
the latter alone requires to be considered in this connection.
I. Theory of the Origin.
In a true theory of their origin is found the explanation of the number of the Gospels, their peculiarities,
their agreements and differences. Such a theory must
evidently be based upon and constructed out of the facts
of the age and work of the Apostles.1 It must run
somewhat as follows:The Gospel for the World.  The aim  of the Great
Commission and the common design of the four Gospels
were to commend Jesus the Nazarene to all mankind as
the great Deliverer from sin and its evil consequences.
" Go preach my Gospel to every creature."
The Races of the World.  As has been seen, there
were three great races and three great phases of thought
reaching throughout that world with which Christianity
first came into contact, - the Jewish, the Roman, and
the Greek. There was in addition the kingdom of Christ,
the Church, constituted of those brought out of the three
races of men and made spiritual by the preaching of the
Gospel.
1 See Westcott, Introduction to the Stud, of the Gospels, ch. iii., for a clear
and valuable discussion of the origin of the Gospels.




ORIGIN OF THE WRITTEN GOSPELS.       77
The Preaching to the World. The Apostles went
forth preaching the Gospel like common-sense men, presenting Jesus to each of the three great races or classes
of mankind in the way best suited to the end in view,
of leading those races to submit to him as the divine
Saviour. The same presentation would not equally commend him to all the races. Each of them had its peculiarities which must be taken into account; each of them
its side to be reached; each of them its own characteristic view of the evils of the world and of the qualities
of the needed deliverer, of which, so far as it was right,
the Gospel must take advantage. Those early preachers
took wise account of all this, and preached to the Jew,
to the Roman, and to the Greek, - from the three great
centres, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Rome, as set forth in
the Acts, - in a form suited to their needs.
After the Church had been founded and enlarged by
converts made in all lands by the preaching of the missionary Gospel in its varied adaptation to the races, that
Gospel which presents Christ as the light and life, for
the purpose of leading men, already Christians, to higher
attainments in the Christian life, became necessary and
was preached throughout the world.
The Permanent Records for the World. But the
Apostles could not be everywhere and always with men.
Before they passed away there arose the desire in the various races of men, who had heard their Gospel, to have
it embodied in permanent written form, that it might
preach to them still when the early preachers were absent or dead.
This desire expressed itself among the Jews, and Matthew, by divine inspiration, gave them his Gospel to meet
that desire. It was the Gospel which his long preaching
to the Jews, the men of prophecy, had already thrown
into the form best suited to commend to their acceptance Jesus as the Messiah.




78              ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
The same desire expressed itself among the Romans,
and Mark by divine inspiration gave them his Gospel to
meet that desire. It was the Gospel which Peter, by his
preaching to the Romans, the men of power, had already
thrown inlto the form best suited to commend to their
acceptance Jesus as the almighty deliverer of men.
The same desire expressed itself among the Greeks,
and Luke by divine inspiration gave them his Gospel to
meet that desire. It had its basis in the Gospel which
Paul and Luke by their long preaching to the Greeks,
the men of reason and universal humanity, had already
thrown into the form best suited to commend to their
acceptance Jesus as the perfect, divine man.
All these, the missionary Gospels, were given their
final shape before the fall of Jerusalem, probably between 50 and 70 A. D.
It was later that the longing came, in the Church, for
a spiritual Gospel, which should help the Christian to
develop, strengthen, and perfect the life already begun,
and John by divine inspiration gave his Gospel to meet
that longing. It was the Gospel the materials for which
he had gathered in the more intimate communion with
his Master, and which, by his long preaching to the
brethren, he had thrown into the form best suited to commend to the faith of Christians Jesus as the light and
life of all who believe.
II. Historic Basis and Adequacy of the Theory.
Basis. That this is not a mere groundless hypothesis
may readily be made to appear. It has a stable basis of
fact.
That the aim of the Great Commission was to give
the Gospel to all the world, appears upon its very face.
The Gospel was to be preached to every creature.
That there were three great races and three corre



ORIGIN OF THE WRITTEN GOSPELS.         79
sponding phases of thought throughout the world has already been shown in treating of the preparation for the
Advent.
That the Apostles went forth presenting the Gospel
to these various classes of men in the way best suited to
the nature of each, and with the view of winning them
to Christ as the Saviour, has been seen in considering the
preaching of the Apostles.
That the four Gospels actually originated in the manner stated will be shown in the subsequent chapters in
treating of the origin of each of the Gospels.
Adequacy. If this be the true theory, it may readily be seen that it will furnish a most perfect and satisfactory explanation of the number and character of the
Gospels, and of their otherwise unexplained agreements
and differences.  This will appear best in the course of
the subsequent discussions, but a brief statement of some
few points will help to make those discussions more intelligible.
1st. There are four Gospels, because Jesus was to be
commended to four races or classes of men, or to four
phases of human thought, - the Jewish, Roman, Greek,
and Christian. Had not these exhausted the classes to
be reached there would doubtless have been more Gospels; and had there not been so many classes, with essential differences in temperament and modes of thought,
there would doubtless have been less. The world of that
age must have been revolutionized and the nature of the
races materially changed to admit of either more or less.
2dly. The very striking differences seen in the three
missionary Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and between thlese three and the Christian Gospel, John, are
fully explained.  While the resemblances of the three
Synoptics originated in the common facts of the character and career of Christ, which all the Apostles went




80                ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
forth to preach, the differences originated in the adaptation of each by a different Apostle to a different class of
men, - of Matthew to the Jew, of Mark to the Roman,
and of Luke to the Greek.  The fact that the first three
Gospels were missionary Gospels, originally preached to
unspiritual men with the view of bringing them to the
faith in Christ and to the Christian life, accounts for
their so marked variation from John,'the Christian Gospel, originally preached to spiritual men already brought
to faith in Christ and into membership in the true
Church by the Gospel in its first three forms, and
preached for the purpose of aiding them in making progress in the divine life. The impossibility of only one
Gospel, the absurdity of four Gospels of precisely similar character, the insufficiency of the three missionary
Gospels, and the completeness of the four Gospels as
they are, all appear manifest from this point of view.
3dly. The force of the great mass of alleged discrepancies, as objections to the historical character of the
Gospels, is utterly broken by the simple consideration -
essential to the theory and based upon undoubted facts -
that the productions of the Evangelists are not histories,
but memoirs in a modified sense; in short, not at all
biographical sketches of Christ, but records of the Apostles' practical preaching of Christ as the Saviour of men.1
The justness of this consideration is manifest, as has
been shown by Mr. Row, from the statements of their
object by the Evangelists themselves.  The  Gospels
most distinctly affirm that they do not belong to the class
of professed histories, but to that of memoirs.  "They
not only affirm that they are memoirs, but memoirs of
a peculiar character, that is to say, religious memoirs,
composed with a double purpose, namely, that of setting
1 See Row, The Supernatural, etc. p. 475; and Westcott, Introduction,
etc. ch. iii.




ORIGIN OF THE WRITTEN GOSPELS.          81
forth the events of a life and at the same time of teaching a religion."
Matthew's object appears in the opening line of his
book, - to bring the Jew to faith in Jesus as the Messiah. Mark opens with " the beginning of the gladsome
message of Jesus Christ the Son of God." Luke writes
for the special and immediate purpose of communicating
systematic instruction concerning the Gospel facts to
Theophilus.  John more distinctly declares that he has
selected his materials out of a large mass and written
them  for a definite religious purpose: "Many signs
truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are
not written in this book, but these are written that ye
may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and
that believing ye may have life through his name"
(John xx. 30, 31).
Even more definitely is the character of the Gospels
presented in the traditions of their origin, not as histories but as records of the Apostolic preaching, - as will
be seen in the subsequent chapters.
It follows, therefore, that it was no part of the design
of the writers to secure that chronological accuracy of
arrangement and of detail which is " essential to history,
but which forms no portion of the plan of a memoir." i
It is absurd to demand it of them. They nowhere propose to give it. It would have prevented the accomplishment of their great object; since religion and not chronology, conversion of men to Christ and not the writing
of history, was the chief thing. In preaching to the various classes of mankind, those facts and truths were
brought forward which suited the practical end in view,
and they were put in that order which seemed best fitted
to secure the one great result, the acceptance of Jesus as
the Saviour.  Where the order of time suited the preach1 See Row, The Supernatural, etc.
6




82               ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
er's purpose, it was freely followed, and it was as freely
departed from where it did not suit that purpose.
In short, chronology is of comparatively little importance in the Gospel view of the life of Christ,- of so
little, indeed, that from John only can be learned the extent and the successive periods of the public ministry of
the Saviour.  A rigid adherence to the order of time and
a complete biography of Jesus would have been the worst
of faults, a fatal fault, since by eliminating their practical features, it would have unfitted the Gospels for
reaching the various classes of mankind.
The same point of view makes clear the object of the
Evangelists in devoting so much space to the narration of
the events connected with the death of Jesus. The cross
is the capital fact of Christianity as a religion, the one
upon which salvation and eternal life depend. Hence
Matthew, Mark, and Luke give one third of their Gospels to it, while John gives it one half of his.
4thly. The theory presented explains the fitness of
the Gospels for the world in all ages. Those classes were
representative classes for all time. There are the same
needs among men to-day, - one man needing, for conviction of the truth of Christianity, to hear an authoritative word of God in type or prophecy, in the Scriptures, and to be assured of its fulfillment as proclaiming
the divine mission of Jesus; a second needing to see him
as the divine power in his living activity, confirming his
own claims; a third requiring a manifestation of God
ad(ldressed to reason, through the perfect manhood of Jesus; a fourth demanding only the spiritual presence and
teachings of Jesus to recognize in him the light and life.
The Gospels appeal respectively to the instincts which
lead men to bow to divine authority, power, perfection,
and spirituality, and may thus be shown to exhaust the
sides of man's nature from which he may best be reacher




ORIGIN OF THE WRITTEN GOSPELS.        83
and led to submission to the Saviour, and to completeness in him.  The four Gospels given to men in the
apostolic times are therefore the complete Gospel of God
for the world in all ages.
III. Object of the Present Work.
The object of the present work is to verify this theory,
while using it in the elucidation of the meaning of the
four Gospels.
The Aim. The attempt will be made to show that
all the Gospels, both in their general drift and in their
special peculiarities, fall in with and confirm the theory
which has been outlined, while the theory itself explains
or renders significant much in the structure and matter
of the Gospels that is otherwise inexplicable or without
significance.
The subordinate part which the chronological order of
events plays in the work of the Evangelists will be seen
in the prosecution of this work. It will appear that
there is a higher law of unity and arrangement than
mere succession in time. Out of the vast array of facts
and events which were crowded into the life of Jesus,
the Holy Ghost leads each writer to select those which
will best serve the special purpose of each; and to arrange them in accordance with his own design, now following the order of time and now departing from it.
No one of them attempts a complete life of Christ after
the pattern of the biographers. All of them together
can scarcely be said to furnish the materials for such a
life.
The Method. It will manifestly be necessary to consider in connection with each Gospel such questions as
the following: —
What was the actual origin of this Gospel, and for
whom was it especially designed?




84              ADVENT OF MESSIAH.
What was the character and what were the needs of
those for whom it was written?
How far does this Gospel itself agree with the answers
to these questions, in its authorship, its point of view, its
material, and its entire scope?
No one capable of duly weighing them will consider
these inquiries unimportant. How important will best
appear when they have been answered.




PART II.
MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
"One God, one law, one element,
And one far-off divine event,
To which the whole creation moves."
ALFRED TENNYSON.
" The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son
of Abraham."                                    MATTHEW i. 1.
" Primus omnium Matthbeus est Publicanus, cognomento Levi, qui
Evangelium in Judxea Hebrveo sermone edidit, ob eorum vel maxime
causam, qui in Jesum crediderant ex Judneis, et nequaquam Legis umbram, succedente Evangelii veritate, servabant."     JEROME.
CHAPTER I.
HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE JEWISH ADAPTATION OF
THE FIRST GOSPEL.
THE investigation of the Gospels for present purposes
is either historical or critical. The former includes the
inquiries into their actual historical origin and design,
into the character of the class for whom they were intended, and into their authorship. The latter embraces
the inquiries into their actual contents, and into their
general and special adaptation to the classes for which
they were prepared.




86       MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
SECTION I.
ORIGIN AND DESIGN OF THE FIRST GOSPEL.
Two questions need to be answered, in accordance
with the facts of history, if possible, before any complete
and critical knowledge of the structure and drift of the
Gospel can be attained. These questions are: What
was the actual origin of the Gospel according to Matthew? For what class of readers was it primarily designed?
I. Imagined Origin.
The so-called scientific criticism, in the hands of the
rationalist, has lost both its science and its criticism. It
has exhausted the power of an ungoverned and ungovernable imagination in the attempt to account for the
origin and form of the Gospels, while it has not given
the least attention to the plain facts of history touching
the points in question.
One has imagined an original Hebrew or Aramman
Gospel out of which the four were afterwards compiled
in the most bungling and mechanical manner. By turns
Matthew, Mark, and Luke have each been made to play
the part of a fundamental Greek Gospel, on the basis of
which the remaining ones have been constructed. Some
have fancied that there was one primitive Gospel, and
that the separate or remaining Gospels grew out of
lesser evangelical essays representing single incidents in
the life of Christ, or out of memoirs of Christ current in
the early Church. Still others have assumed that the
Gospels are the productions of the Evangelists whose
names they bear, who do not however give plain historical facts, but " whose minds are said to have expressed
in na've fiction the consciousness of the Church."
A first fatal objection to all such hypotheses is, that




ORIGIN AND DESIGN.                87
they are pure imagination, with just as considerable a
basis of fact as " Baron Munchausen" or the "Arabian
Nights." A second, and equally fatal, is that they do
not in the slightest measure account for the free and
beautiful originality and the wonderful and sustained
unity found in each and all the Gospels. As a consequence of their utter baselessness and inadequacy, and
at the same time furnishing a further proof of their falsity, these innumerable hypotheses have all alike failed
to command the general assent of even the unbelieving
world, while the most able and brilliant of them all have
ultimately, and often speedily, failed to secure the abiding faith of their own authors, and have fallen into
merited contempt and oblivion.
II. Actual Origin and Design.
The question to be asked by the seeker for truth is
not, What possible origins of the Gospels can be conceived? but rather, What was their actual origin? Concerning the first Gospel the question is, What, as a matter of history, was the origin, and what the design, of
the Gospel according to Matthew.
It must be manifest to any one of average common
sense, that even second-rate tradition on this point, if
no better can be obtained, is infinitely more valuable than
the best conclusions of the uncertain rationalistic imagination. Of what use, then, the imagination, if the real
historical origin of the Gospels can be clearly established?
Now the fact is that the investigator is not left to
uncertain tradition, much less to pure conjecture, for it
can be conclusively shown that Matthew wrote his Gospel for the Jewish race, the first of the three great representative races of which the civilized world of his day
was made up.




88       MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
Most Ancient Witness. The most ancient direct testimony concerning the Gospel according to Matthew is
that of Papias. Papias was bishop of Hierapolis, in
Asia Minor, a city which, according to the tradition already given, was evangelized by Philip and Bartholomew.
The testimony of Papias possibly -reaches back to the
end of the first century, certainly to the beginning of the
second. Eusebius names him among the famous bishops
of his age, makes him contemporary with Justus of Jerusalem and Ignatius of Antioch, in the first quarter of the
second century; and speaks of him  as " a man in the
highest degree eloquent and learned and above all skilled
in the Scriptures." I Irenoeus writes, that he was said
to be the disciple or hearer of John and the associate of
Polycarp, who was bishop of Smyrna at the opening of
the second century.2 That he refers to John the Presbyter (or elder), the disciple of the Apostles, and not to
John the Apostle, is evident from the statement of Papias himself, as quoted by Eusebius, in which he confesses
that he heard the words of the Apostles from those who
were their followers, especially from Aristion and John
the Presbyter.3
The testimony of Papias was originally given in the
fourth book of a work in five books, which he called,
" Interpretations of our Lord's Declarations."   From
this work,- now no longer extant, but which still existed in the time of Eusebius, in the fourth century, -
the early church historians have made copious extracts.4
In the preface to his work Papias makes known his
object and method, declaring that he not only recorded
1 Hist. Eccies. lib. iii. 36.
2 Idem, lib. iii. 39.
8 Idem.
4 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. iii. 39. Iren. Against Heresies, book v. ch.
xxxiii. 4.




ORIGIN AND DESIGN.               89
what he found in written form, but also made special
effort to gather up such unwritten tradition as could be
traced back to the Apostles.  "Nor shall I regret," said
he, " to subjoin to my Interpretations, also for your benefit, whatever I have at any time accurately ascertained
from the Elders and treasured up in my memory, in
order to give additional confirmation to the truth by my
testimony.  For, as it seems to me, I have never (like
many) delighted to hear those who make a great show
of words, but those who teach the truth, nor those who
relate new and strange precepts, but those who give the
commands of the Lord and things which came from the
truth itself.  Whenever, therefore, I met with any one
who had been on intimate terms with the Elders, I used
to make special inquiries touching what were the utterances of the Elders, - what Andrew, or Peter, or Philip,
or Thomas, or James, or John, or Matthew, or any other
disciple of the Lord, or what Aristion and John the
Presbyter, also disciples, said. For I believed that the
books would not be of so much profit to me, as the living
word of men still surviving." 1
In the course of his work, in a passage preserved by
Eusebius, Papias recorded what he was able to learn in
this way respecting the origin of the Gospels. His testimony concerning the first Gospel is, that " Matthew
wrote the Oracles (of the Lord) in the Hebrew tongue,
and every one interpreted them as he was able." 2
The circumstances connected with this testimony are
given thus in detail, in order that the full value of it
may be seen. It is true that Eusebius elsewhere speaks
of Papias as a man of inferior judgment; 3 but it is also
1 Hist. Eccles. lib. iii. 39.
2 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. iii. 39. See Fisher, Supernatural Origin of
Christianity, p. 160.
3 Idem.




90       MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
true that this was chiefly on account of the millenarian
views of the latter, which were so offensive to the church
historian. The latter opinion is therefore of little
weight in comparison with the former high estimate already quoted. Papias was evidently a good man, and
Professor Fisher has rightly said, that " however moderate his intellectual powers, he was justly regarded as an
honest witness or reporter of what lie had seen and
heard. He reports what he had received from companions of the Apostles." It is likewise well to remember
that the testimony of a man of narrow intellect may, in
such circumstances, be even better than that of a greater
man whose view of facts is warped by adherence to some
favorite theory. Judged by his purpose, method, and
opportunities, no better witness need be cited than
Papias.
The statement of Papias is then that of a competent
witness, made after devoting himself intelligently and
diligently to the work of ascertaining the facts in question. He made his investigations less than a generation
after the writing of the Gospels, or after an interval less
than our present remove froml the first Napoleon or even
from the Duke of Wellington. He had the best of opportunities, for Polycarp, whose associate he was, had
been the disciple and friend of John, and knew more
about that Apostle than did any one else in that age, and
more, doubtless, than any of the contemporaries of even
Napoleon or Wellington knew of them. Such testimony
can only be made to appear worthless by that destructive
criticism which would sweep away all the facts of history
and make Homer, Shakespeare, Napoleon, and Jesus all
myths alike.
Later Testimony. But Papias is not alone in his testimony. Some of the ablest of the leaders of the early
Church agree with him.




ORIGIN AND DESIGN.               91
Irenaeus —the pupil of the same Polycarp, and who
was bishop of Lyons in the last quarter of the second
century - affirms, that " Matthew issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter
and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church." 1 His position in the Church
and his wide acquaintance with it made him a most credible and competent witness.  Still more explicitly: " The
Gospel of St. Matthew was written for the Jews, who
specially desired that it should be shown that the Christ
was of the seed of David; and St. Matthew endeavors
to satisfy this desire, and therefore commences his Gospel with the genealogy of Christ." 2
Origen (disciple of Clement of Alexandria)- a man
of extraordinary learning and of extensive travel, who
was known throughout the entire Church during the first
half of the third century - also declares, that " St. Matthew wrote for the Hebrew, who expected the Messiah
from the seed of Abrahaml and David." 3
Eusebius, bishop of Csesarea, — a historian of great
celebrity, whose veracity has never been questioned by
any one except the infidel Gibbon, and who flourished
during the latter part of the third century and earlier
part of the fourth, - besides preserving the testimony of
Papias, as already cited, gives the following definite
statement of the facts concerning the origin of the first
Gospel: " Matthew having in the first instance delivered
his Gospel to his countrymen in their own language, afterward, when he was about to leave them and extend
his apostolic mission elsewhere, filled up, or completed,
his written Gospel for the use of those whom he was
leaving behind, as a compensation for his absence." 4 It
1 Irenmus, A/arinrst Heresies, book iii. i. 1.
2 Caten. in Matt. Massuet, p. 347; Against Heresies, iii. 9, 1.
8 Origen, In Joann. tom. i. 6.
4 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 24.




92       MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
is doubtless true that of all the men of his day Eusebius
was the best acquainted with the historical records and
the traditions of the Church.
Jerome   "the most learned of the Latin Fathers of
the Church," who lived still later - says: " The Church,
which according to the word of Christ is built upon a
rock, has four evangelical rivers of Paradise.
First of all is Matthew the publican, called Levi, who
composed a Gospel in the Hebrew tongue for the special
use of those Jews who had believed in Christ, and no
longer followed the shadow of the Law, after the revelation of the substance of the Gospel." 1
Gregory Nazianzen also affirms that Matthew wrote
for the Hebrew.2
But there is scarcely need of further presentation of
testimony on a subject upon which there was one harmonious tradition.
Pertinent Facts. While many points suggest themselves as worthy of discussion, only the main facts touching the origin and design of the first Gospel are related
directly to the present investigation.  These facts are:
that Matthew wrote the Gospel for his Jewish countrymen; that it was the embodiment of the oral Gospel
which he had preached to them; that it was intended to
give that preaching permanent form for their benefit;
and that it took advantage of the Jewish Messianic beliefs and was in this way fitted to commend Jesus as the
Messiah to the Jews.
There is still another point that should be noticed, which
bears indirectly upon the theory of the Jewish origin
of Matthew and is confirmatory of it, but which is not
essential to that theory. Patristic authority, represented
in and by the witnesses already cited, is almost unan1 Hieron. Comment. in Evang. Matt. Prolegom. 3, 4.
2 Carmin. lib. i. sect. i. 12, vers. 31.




ORIGIN AND DESIGN.              93
irnous in asserting a Hebrew original of the first Gospel.
The treatment which this testimony has often received
at the hands of the critics illustrates well the ease with
which a rash and dogmatic criticism can dispose of the
plainest facts of history.
The testimony of these witnesses — the very men
upon whom largely depend the establishment of the
canon of the Scriptures and the settlement of the great
questions of primitive church history - is declared to be
false, because if there had been a Hebrew original of the
first Gospel it would have been preserved. How utterly
unwarranted the assumption may be made apparent by
a fair presentation of the case.
These men of the highest character, and with the best
opportunities for knowing the facts, declare it to be a fact,
that Matthew first wrote his Gospel in the Hebrew.
There is entire agreement in the matter, since no one
in that age contradicts the statement. Aside from its
being contrary to their acknowledged character to utter
falsehood, they had in this case no conceivable motive
for it.
Moreover, in the view of common sense it seems eminently natural and appropriate that Matthew should address the Gospel to his countrymen in the Hebrew. It
was at once their sacred language and, in modified form,
their vernacular tongue; and one of the best methods of
allaying prejudices and conciliating them, would be to
make use of it. Paul used the Hebrew, and with marked
effect, for this very purpose, when, standing on the stairs
of the castle above the temple at Jerusalem, he addressed
the Jewish mob below: " He spake unto them in the
Hebrew tongue,.... and when they heard that he
spoake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more
silence" (Acts xxi. 40-xxii. 2). That Matthew, a native of Judema, should address the native Jews in the Hebrew was, of course, still more natural and appropriate.




94        MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
But the entire question of fact is set at rest by the
best of direct testimony from those who saw the Gospel
in its Hebrew  form.  Jerome, the most skilled of all
the Fathers in the Hebrew tongue, and who lived in Palestine, declares that he himself saw the Hebrew Gospel,
and had an opportunity of transcribing and translating
it.1  Epiphanius, one of the most learned among the
Fathers of the Eastern Church, gives similar testimony.2
The disappearance of the Hebrew form  of the Gospel
is easily accounted for by a state of things peculiar to
that age.  Few of the early Christian writers were familiar with that language.  They were accustomed to go to
the Septuagint or Greek version for their knowledge of
the Old Testament, and they therefore naturally turned
to the Greek form  in which Matthew's Gospel existed,
and which was confessedly of divine authority.  It is
moreover true, as is affirmled by early Christian writers,
that "the Hebrew  Gospel of Matthew  was used, and
alone adopted of all the Gospels, by certain heretical sections of the ancient Clhurch, the Ebionites, and the Nazarenes; and was mutilated and interpolated by them." 3
This abuse of it naturally lefd the early Christians to
neglect and avoid it; while it also explains the fact that
the authors of the Peschito, or Syriac version of the Gospels, translated the Greek Gospel of Matthew, instead of
reproducing or modifying the -apostolic original in Hebrew.
Or, if these causes were not sufficient to account for its
disappearance, the great historic event of the age is certainly sufficient.  The destruction of Jerusalem  swept
away the centre of Hebrew  civilization, brought to an
1 Hieron. de Vir. III. c. 3; Contra Pelagianos, lib. iii., etc.
2 Epiphan. Imrasres. xxx. de Ebionitis.
8 See references to Epiphanius, Jerome, etc., in Wordsworth, Greek Tes.
tament, Introduction to St. Matthew's Gospel.




ORIGIN AND DESIGN.                95
end the knowledge, among the scattered Jewish masses,
of even the modified or Aramaman form of the languagco
which had survived the wreck of the Babylonish captivity,
and consigned to ultimate destruction most of the Hebrew literature save the Old Testament Scriptures.  The
Jewish historian Josephus furnishes an illustration of the
fate of the Hebrew original of Mattllew.  Josephus himself informs us that he " wrote his great work, the History of the Jewish Wars, originally in Hebrew, his native tongue, for the benefit of his own nation; and he
afterwards translated it into Greek.  No notices of the
original Hebrew now survive: it has perished; but the
Greek version is often referred to by the early Christian
Fathers, and is now extant." 1 Is it any wonder, then,
that the Hebrew orioginal of the first Gospel, with the
strong prejudices existing in the Church against its use,
soon perished? 2
As already said, the theory of the present work does
not directly depend upon the acknowledgment of a Hebrew  original of Matthew's Gospel.  Indirectly, however, it does; for if that original be admitted it furnishes
anotier indication of the Jewish aim of the Evangelist.
Besides, the same d priori critical methods that would
sweep this IIelrew document out of existence would
carry away with it all the most stable facts of history,
leave the Gospels without any historical basis, and make
all investigations concerning them  worse than useless.
As Archbishop Wllately so admirably showed in his
"Historic Doubts," this new and advanced mode of playing fast and loose with facts would annihilate all history.
In protesting against such reckless criticism, Principal
Tulloch, in his "Lectures on Renan," says, on this very
point: " It appears to us, however, that it is impossible
1 Josephus, Jewish Wars.
2 See fuller discussion in Wordsworth.




96       MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
to disregard these statements (of the Fathers) altogether,
especially while resting so confidently as we do on the testimony of the same Fathers to the genuineness of the Gospels. We regret, therefore, to notice that, in the last edition of his Greek Testament, Dean Alford goes the length
of repudiating a Hebrew original of St. Matthew's Gospel, in the face of evidence which, with all possible deductions, seems irresistible." 1
It may be confidently affirmed then, that, taking into
account the number, credibility, and competency of the
witnesses cited, it cannot be reasonably maintained that
their statements on these points are not in the main
in agreement with the historical facts, and that they did
not arise out of those facts. Matthew undoubtedly prepared his Gospel for the Jews.
SECTION II.
THE CHARACTER AND NEEDS OF THE JEW.
If the first Gospel originated, as has been seen, in the
preaching of the Apostles, especially of Matthew, to the
Jews, and was designed to commend Jesus to the acceptance of the Jews, then the character and needs of the
Jew must furnish the key to that Gospel.
The Jew must be understood before the Gospel for the
Jews can be adequately appreciated and interpreted.
What manner of man was he? What, especially, were
his spiritual needs? The answers will cast light upon
whatever has been prepared for the Jewish race, under
the influence of the Holy Ghost.
I. The Jews.
There are certain characteristics which clearly distinguish the Jews from the other great historic races.
1 Lectures on Renan's' Vie de Jesus,' note, p. 119.




THE JEWISH CHARACTER.            97
They were the chosen people of God, and were conscious that God was in a peculiar sense in their history. They had the oracles of God, the true world-religion. They had the only divinely ordained forms of
religious worship. Above all, they had the promise of the
Messiah, in whom all their blessings and privileges should
attain perfection, and his coming was the central and absorbing thought in the mind of the race.
Out of these characteristics, which made the Jew an
altogether peculiar man, came the needs of the Jewish
race, — partly through a right development, partly
through a wrong. Along the line of these peculiarities
must, therefore, be sought the correct understanding of
the Gospel requirements of the Jews in the time of
Christ and the Apostles.  A  development altogether
right would have produced the ideal Jew; a right and
wrong combined produced the actual Jew.
The Chosen People. The Jews were the chosen people of God. They were elected to be the objects of his
special care, the recipients of his special favor, and, notably, to be, in religion, the repository of God's revealed
truth, the hope of the world, and the central race of the
ages. No other people has ever occupied such a position.
Had the Jews made the most and the best of their
election, they would doubtless have been to-day the most
favored race of mankind. A sense of the distinguishing
love of God did indeed lead the true Israel to humility,
to thankfulness, to devotion to Jehovah, and to an appreciation of their high destiny. But in the days of Christ
and the Apostles, as in the time of the Prophets, the true
Israel was but a remnant. With the great mass of the
Jews the election had resulted only in pride, conceit, arrogance. They were ever ready to cry, " We be Abraham's seed and heirs to the promise of God," — thus
claiming as their own inherited and inalienable right
7




98       MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
what could be theirs only through the grace of God and
fidelity to the covenant.
The Jews had the clear consciousness that Jehovah
was in a peculiar sense in their history, as their God.
This naturally resulted from their election and from their
experience as a people. No other nation could point to
such a miraculous career, to such deliverances in which
God himself appeared in his omnipotence to save them
from their bondage, from their adversaries, from their
captivities. Jehovah was known throughout the world
as the God of the Jews.
With the true Israel this consciousness of intimate
union with God was doubtless a source of spiritual profit.
It. was a great comfort in prosecuting the ends of righteousness to feel assured that all the world existed for
them, that its changes took place for them, that its real
treasures were to be inherited and enjoyed by them, and
that all the nations were to beconie submissive to their
faith. It sustained them in sore trials and lifted them
above disaster and defeat and all the accidents of time.
But with the mass of Jews it led to a national narrowness and exclusiveness, which had reached their height at
the time of the Advent. Their selfishness had become
extreme and proverbial. While they had forgotten that
they were elect out of the world, not against it but for
it, in order that all the world might be blessed in them,
they had also forgotten that the world was not theirs for
them to make the most of as Jews for their own selfish
ends, but theirs to bring to the true faith through the
oracles of God and the coming of the Messiah. Their
selfishness naturally led to worldliness and covetousness.
The old Mosaic enactments - such as that of the Sabbatic yeatr and of the tithes to be used in the religious festivals and to be distributed to the poor - which were
intended, negatively, to scatter the Jews' property and




THE JEWISH CHARACTER.            99
to check the cupidity of their nature, and, positively, to
bring out a genuine and large benevolence, had long since
become a dead letter, and through their haste to become
rich the name Jew was becoming then, as it is now, " a
by-word and a hissing."
The Evangelist who would reach and save the Jews
must recognize their election and the presence of God in
their history, and must at the same time aim to correct
their errors.
The World-religion. The Jews had the oracles of
God. The world-religion had been delivered to them.
They alone had the written revelation of the true God.
That revelation gave them the key to the character of
Jehovah, to his works, to his providences, to his sublime
and eternal plan. It cast the only clear light in the
world upon the nature, character, condition, and destiny
of man. It alone gave man a glimpse of the origin and
end of the universe and the present earthly system of
things. In short, the Jews had all the clear religious
light in the world.
An Apostle has declared that the benefits of the election of Israel were every way great, and chiefly because
to them were committed the oracles of God (Rom. iii. 2).
The revelation of doctrine given to the Jew had in it all
the germs of the fuller revelation by Christ; so that the
true Judaism found its natural culmination in Christianity. As a fact that old revelation led the true Israel,
along lines of thought and experience the most natural,
directly to Christianity. It is likewise a fact that it led
the most of the Jews to a knowledge of the true doctrine
concerning God, a knowledge to which the Gentiles did
not attain, and thus made it unnecessary for the Evangelist of the Jews to dwell upon these elementary doctrines.
At the time of the Advent, the masses had departed
from the pure religion of the Law and the Prophets.




100      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
The great council, the Sanhedrim, the head of the Jewish
system, had been brought, in large measure, under the
influence of the heathen rulers of the nation, and secularized. There had sprung up a party, the Herodians, doubtless numerous, who had cut loose from Jewish hopes and
aspirations as well as Jewish worship, and who " saw in
the power of the Herodian family the pledge of the preservation of their national existence in the face of Roman
ambition," - a party so entirely worldly that a Herod
could meet all their longings for a deliverer. The remainder of the nation was divided into the two great religious
sects, - the Pharisees and Sadducees (the Essenes or
mystics were too few to be of importance), the traditionalists and the skeptics. The former class, embracing by
far the greater number and reaching down among the
common people, had added to the teaching of the Scriptures a mass of traditions which had completely overlaid
that teaching, and taken its place, making their religion
mere form and ceremony, mere theatrical show. The latter class, comprising the more scholarly and cultivated of
the people, had not only discarded all tradition, and rejected every doctrine which was not plainly taught in the
Scriptures, but had made free with the Scriptures themselves - very much after the style of the modern rationalists - receiving or rejecting as best suited them, and
giving little or no attention to practical religion. In
truth practical religion was at the lowest ebb.
Most of the Jews had lost sight of or perverted those
great doctrines which are the proper regulators of human
conduct. Their practical creed ran thus:' Thou shalt
love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy."  "Thou shalt
not take interest from a Jew, but shalt exact usurious interest from all Gentiles." " Be scrupulous about outward
forms, for God looks mainly at these." To each living
truth they had conjoined the fatal error which destroyed't, or else had quite substituted the error for the truth.




THE JEWISH CHARACTER.           101
The Evangelist who would reach and save the Jews
must recognize their possession of God's oracles, and
must seek to recall these lost principles and to correct the
perverted ones. He must carry this apostatizing race
back to the oracles of God.
The Divine Forms. The Jews had the only divinely
ordained forms of religious worship. The Mosaic ordinances embodied the Mosaic truth. The Mosaic ritual
embodied God's view of the best forms of the divine
worship in that age of tutelage, when prescribed forms
seemed necessary to a rude people who were under training for a later spiritual age and worship. The Jews
alone had the true and God-given forms of worship.
These religious forms were doubtless very helpful to
the true Israel in keeping the revelations of God before
their minds, and lifting their thoughts heavenward.
The ritual undoubtedly served as a perpetual object-lesson to the whole nation, keeping some of the main truths
of Judaism always before them.
But the mass of the nation, long before the Advent,
had lost sight of the substance in the form. Their religion had become intensely formal, a mere outward show,
a procedure in which man only acted a part, played the
hypocrite. The Pharisees could steal the possessions of
widows and orphans, and then tithe the herbs and weeds
in their gardens and make long prayers at the corners of
the broad streets, and think themselves the patterns of
the world in religion.
The Evangelist who would reach and save the Jews
must understand the true import of these divine forms,
as the changing shadows of an unchanging substance,
and must aim to correct this awful, and, if uncorrected,
fatal perversion of the truth.
The Messianic Promise. Above all, the Jews had
the promise of the Messiah.




102      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
Acknowledging the divine authority of the Old Testament Scriptures, they read in them of a coming Deliverer. The promises and prophecies had grown clearer
all along the centuries. He was to be the seed of the
woman, the seed of Abraham, a prophet like unto Moses,
the royal son of David, the child of a virgin. All the
types found their explanation in him, all the sacrifices
pointed to him, all prophecy centred in him, all the experience and history of Israel shadowed his coming and
work. In person he was to be God and man, Emmanuel,
the everlasting Father and the man of sorrows in one.
Officially he was to be Messiah, or, as the Greek has it,
Christ, the anointed of God; and as the anointing of
the old dispensation was used in inducting into the three
offices of prophet, king, and priest, he was to be a
prophet, like the greatest of the prophets, was to -be the
legal heir to the throne of David, and was to bear the
sins of his people. This great outline was filled in with
a multitude of details, made up of circumstances and incidents connected with his birth, his life, and his death,
and serving to mark his character and his work for the
world. The Jews had daily access to this prophetic history of the Messiah, and were hourly expecting his advent when Jesus of Nazareth came and claimed to be
the fulfillment of prophecy.
To the true Israel, the Simeons and Annas, the doctrine of the Messiah was the support and solace in the
trial and sorrow which fell upon the later days of the
old dispensation and made way for the opening of the
new.
But the masses had departed from the correct teaching
on this subject. They had not read the prophets aright.
They had started out from the prediction of Christ as
the son and heir of David, or as king, and had warped
all their reading and interpretation to agree with their




THE JFWISH CHARACTER            102
worldly notions of what was demanded by that. The
Roman Empire dazzled them and they could only inter
pret prophecy in its light. David had conquered and
imposed tribute on the surrounding nations, had led the
armies and decided the great civil questions, had made
Israel one of the powerful kingdoms of the earth. The
Jew overlooked or explained away everything that did
not accord with the temporal splendor of a king and
kingdom  after this model.  He had cast away that
grander idea of a spiritual, universal, and everlasting
kingdom, which fills the books of the Prophets. He had
lost sight of the part to be played by the prophet and
priest in the Messianic work and character. His Messiah
was to be the Jewish Ccesar of the world.
As the Messianic idea was the one in which all the
other Jewish ideas of that age centred and culminated,
the Evangelist who would reach and save the Jewish
race must, above everything else, keep in view the true
doctrine on that point, and must, most of all, give himself to correcting the otherwise fatal perversions of the
truth by the degenerate Jews.
II. The Key to JMatthew's Gospel.
Such being the character of the Jews, it is easy to see
how it furnishes the key to the Gospel intended for
them.
Clearly it would have been a fatal mistake to set forth
Jesus of Nazareth- as Mark sets him forth for the Roman -simply as the Son of God, wielding almighty
power in establishing a universal empire. It would not
have commended him to the true Israel who had been
holding out for ages, with brave heart and boundless endurance, against the material power of all the great
nations of the world, and who ever bowed to Scriptures
and prophecy, but never to mere power. It would have




104      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
had little attraction for the apostate Israel, absorbed in
their dream of a magnificent world-empire, except as it
tended to foster their perverse view of the Messiah.
Equally vain would it have been to bring him forward
as Luke does — as the divine-man, coming down from
God out of heaven, passing through a perfect human development, entering into sympathy with all suffering
amnd sorrowing humanity - for the Jew was not looking
for the perfect man, the son of Adam, the son of God,
but for a son of Abraham, a king descended from David
by the royal line.
Still more fruitless would it have been to exhibit him
as John does,- as the eternal Word, the very God, the
light and life of the world, - for the veil was before the
eyes of the Jew, and he could not discern the spiritual
God as manifested in the Word. The light shone into
the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not.
For the Jew the credentials of Jesus must be drawn
from Moses and the Prophets. In his origin, human and
divine, in the capital facts of his life, in his character private and official, in short, in his work and in his kingdom, he must be shown to meet the requirements of the
Messianic Scriptures. Jesus must be set over against the
prophetic Messiah, so that they shall both be seen to be
one and the same. This work properly done, no Jew
could escape the conclusion: Jesus of Nazareth is the
Messiah.
SECTION III.
THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE FIRST GOSPEL.
There has been but one prevalent opinion concerning
the authorship of the first Gospel. It has always been
ascribed to a Jew, the Apostle Matthew. This authorship is sufficiently established by the witnesses already
cited.




THE AUTHORSHIP.               105
Like most of the Apostles of our Lord, he was a man
almost without a biography. Ile takes occasion to mention but the fewest facts concerning himself: his call to
become a disciple of Jesus; the feast which he made for
his new Master; and his appointment to the Apostleship.
The other Evangelists simply corroborate his statement
of these facts. Tradition, as has been seen, makes some
additions concerning the origin of the Gospel which
bears his name, and concerning his later ministry outside
of Judaea.
I. A Representative Jew in Nature.
From these facts and traditions in connection with the
Gospel itself, the Apostle is seen to have been a representative Jew and eminently fitted by his nature, and by
his experience, Jewish and Christian, for the work of
preaching and embodying the Gospel for the Jewish race.
What is known of his personal history marks him as a
man appreciating the need for the Gospel most fully himself, and fitted to press it most earnestly upon the acceptance of his countrymen.
His own account of his call to become a disciple of
Christ, and of the feast in his house, is as follows:
"; And as Jesus passed forth from thence, he saw a man,
named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom; and
he saith unto him, Follow me. And he arose and followed him. And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat
in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came
and sat down with him, and his disciples" (Matt. ix.
9, 10). Mark, in his account, calls Matthew by his Jewish name, " Levi, the son of Alpheus," and represents
the feast as occurring in his house (Mark ii. 14, 15).
Iuke nanmnes him  Levi, and declares that "he left
all," that he made Jesus "a great feast in his own
house," and that there was " a great company of publi



106      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
cans and others that sat down with them " (Luke v.
27-29).
The account of his appointment to the Apostleship is
given by himself, by Mark, and by Luke. All the catalogues place him in the fourth couple of the twelve Apostles along with Thomas; Mark and Luke place him first,
" Matthew and Thomas" (Mark iii. 18; Luke vi. 15);
but he places himself second, and writes, " Thomas and
Matthew the publican " (x. 3).
The business of the tax-gatherer, from which he was
called, had doubtless trained him to system. The public
official is obliged to methodize his business, to use titles,
headings, indices, to put things into such shape that they
may be easily grasped and understood. Hence his eminent fitness to present to the Jew the claims of Jesus as
Messiah, in a clear, systematic, and business-like manner.
It is obvious, likewise, that the business of the publican must have led him to an intimate knowledge of the
Jewish character, especially of the covetousness and hypocrisy which were such marked features of it.
As a publican he was at variance with the Pharisaic
party, and the Pharisaic disposition among his own people. By the orthodox Jew he must have been looked
upon as unclean and often treated as an object of contempt. He may have been freed from the power of
Pharisaism in either of two ways: by being overcome
and carried away by the spirit of covetousness and extortion, which reached their height in the average taxgatherer of the day; or by attaining to a more liberal
piety and a more vital comprehension of the Old Testament, and so reaching a contempt for the common formality and hypocrisy which passed for piety.
It was in the latter way that Zaccheus attained to hiF
emancipation from Pharisaism, and it has been suggeste,




THE AUTHORSHIP.               107
that Matthew was a Je w of like spirit, and therefore an
honest and upright publican. The readiness with which
he left his vocation and his possessions to follow Jesus,
and the necessity for some previous spiritual fitness on
his part, have been urged in favor of this view.1
On the other hand, equally strong reasons may be
brought forward for regarding him as belonging to the
infamous rather than to the pious publicans. From the
time of his conversion he seems to have regarded the
publican on the one side, as he regarded the Pharisee on
the other, as a representative Jewish sinner, each, in his
place and way, the wickedest man of his race. It is remarkable that he has not recorded the story of Zaccheus,
the honest publican, nor the parable of the Pharisee and
the publican, nor anything else concerning the publicans
which could raise our estimate of their character as a
class. It is still more remarkable that he has recorded
so much that blackens that character, and especially that
memorable saying of our Lord, " Verily I say unto you,
that the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom
of God before you " (xxi. 31).  While he joins with the
other Evangelists in connecting the publicans and sinners, he alone, in this passage, conjoins publicans and
harlots.
II. A Representative Jew in Experience.
There is also enough in these facts, in connection with
his Gospel, to show that Matthew's experience of the
saving power of the Gospel was that of a representative
Jew.
He arose and left all and followed Jesus. These
words of Luke indicate, perhaps, that he had grown rich
or was growing rich in the calling of the publican. He
left behind him forever the gain and the means of gain,
1 See Lange, Life of Jesus, vol. i.




108      MATTHEW  THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
so dear to the man who is a Jew by nature, to follow him
who had not where to lay his head. It was a complete
revolution of character and life.
But if Matthew was one of the outcast publicans,
justly regarded as infamous, then his conversion into an
Apostle of the Lord, ill whom he recognized the true and
eternal king of Israel, must have been indelibly impressed upon his mind as a miracle of divine grace. He
was despised in the eyes of the false theocrats of Israel,
and the true Theocrat thus highly exalted him. He
must have learned to feel the contrast between the true
and the spurious kingdom of God in all their respective
aspects. But even without taking into account the unreasonable contempt of the Pharisees, it is still manifest
that his former doubtful calling, when compared with his
present exalted vocation, his former associates, who consisted partly of the most degraded of men, when contrasted with the consecrated circle in which he now lived,
and, finally, his former, when compared with his present,
state of mind, must all have appeared to him in their
darkest colors. He was translated from a condition of
the deepest shame to one of the highest honor, from a
most critical to a most advantageous position. Hence it
would accord with such a state of things, that a strong
feeling for contrasts should have been found in him,"'
along with a profound appreciation of all the various
aspects of life.
His many years of preaching the Gospel to his countrymen compelled him to study most diligently the great
facts concerning the person and work of Jesus, and to
throw them into the form best suited to commend him as
Messiah to the Jews.
Recurring to the peculiar characteristics of the Jew,
as already given, it will be seen that Matthew had meas1 See Lange, Life of Jesus, vol. i.




THE GENERAL PLAN.              109
ured the whole range of the Jewish character and experience. He was one of the chosen people, and understood their arrogant, self-righteo- i claims to the peculiar
favor of God and to exclusive right to the world. He
was familiar with the oracles of God and with their perversions. He had perfect acquaintance with the forms of
the true religion, and with the formality and hypocrisy
that had arisen out of them. He had been taught the
true doctrine of Messiah and all the departures from it.
All this is manifest throughout his Gospel.
Take him all in all, there was no man among the Apostles so fitted as Matthew to embody the Gospel in permanent form for the Jew. The impulse which led his
countrymen to ask him to make a record of that Gospel
for them, and that which led him to accede to their request, were doubtless both from the Holy Ghost, the
Spirit of all wisdom. Doubtless, out of all the men of
that age, the Holy Ghost chose the man best fitted, by
his nature and experience as a representative Jew, to
write the Gospel for the Jew.
CHAPTER II.
CRITICAL VIEW OF THE JEWISH ADAPTATION OF THE
FIRST GOSPEL.
IN examining the first Gospel in the light of its Jewish
origin, design, and authorship, its very marked adaptation
to the needs of the Jew of that age will become apparent
as we consider the plan of the Evangelist, the central idea
and general drift of his production, the characteristic
omissions and additions, and the incidental variations and
peculiarities.




110      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
SECTION I.
THE JEWISH ADAPTATION IN THE GENERAL PLAN OF
THE FIRST GOSPEL.
It may seem strange, and requiring explanation, that at
this late day inquiry should need to be made in order to
ascertain the plan of the Gospels. Have we not the divisions of Matthew and its plan given in the twentyeight chapters of the Gospel? Is not the same thing
true of the sixteen chapters of Mark; of the twenty-four
of Luke; of the twenty-one of John? Why, then, look
any farther?
I. The Plan of the Gospels.
Even a partial investigation of the facts will convince
any one that the outward history of the Bible is one continued record of marvels. Sometimes an accident, often
a trifle, has, in the ordainings of Providence and through
cooperation with some prevailing tendency of human
thought or drift of human events, decided the way in
which the great mass of men should regard the Word of
God for centuries to come.
The mechanical division of its separate books into
chapters and verses may be looked upon as one of these
apparently trifling incidents, which has nevertheless exerted a vast influence upon the views taken of the connections of the Scriptures, from the time when the printed
Bible first began to find a place in the Christian home
until the present day. The work was done in a way, and
at a time, to give it the greatest possible influence in
hiding the structural harmony and unity of the Sacred
Word. Prepared by a purely mechanical process, - as
one would be led to conclude, without even the trouble
of an examination, by the fact that Robert Stephens




THE GENERAL PLAN.               111
completed the division of the New Testament into verses
during a journey on horseback from Paris to Lyons, in
the troublous times of the middle of the sixteenth century; given to the Church ten years before the birth of
Lord Bacon, while the mechanical philosophy still held
undisputed sway in the world of thought; it was exactly
fitted to meet the intellectual wants of the times. Commending itself as a convenient arrangement, in favor of
which much may yet be said; completed in time to be
attached to even the earlier English editions of the Bible
(the earliest had been issued only sixteen years before,
and King James's version was not issued till sixty years
after), it was equally fitted to take advantage of the
drift of events in extending and perpetuating its influence
among the English-speaking peoples.
It does not fall within the scope of the present discussion to inquire, what may have been the design of God
in ordering such a thing at such a time. One result of
it has undoubtedly been to turn the attention to the great
doctrines that everywhere lie upon the very surface of
the Scriptures, and to reserve the development of the
argument for the rhetorical unity of the various books
of the Bible until this age, when the attack comes from
that side. On the other hand, it can scarcely be denied
that its tendency has been to lead the multitudes to
read the Word of God very much as if made up of detached portions, having little or no logical or rhetorical connection with one another, and each composed of
ten or twenty words, more or less; and to lead the popular expounders of the Scriptures to construct their commentaries very much in accordance with this view.
Perhaps the influence of this mechanical chopping up
of the Scriptures, in preventing the recognition of a beautiful structural harmony, and in concealing most obvious
and characteristic differences in aim and plan, has been




112      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
nowhere more positive than in that portion so much read
and commented upon - the Gospels. The common theory
among the masses seems to accept the productions of the
Evangelists as so many lives of Christ, more or less complete, but it assigns no peculiar sphere and attributes no
special design to any one of them. It recognizes no existing reason why there should be more than one Gospel,
or, since there are more than one, why there should not
be three or five instead of four.
It follows naturally from this failure to recognize a
specific aim in each Gospel, that the masses come to look
upon them all as being without coherent plan or inherent
harmony of structure. Nor could one even remotely infer from most of the works professing to expound them
for the masses, that Matthew or Mark or Luke or John,
whether consciously or unconsciously, each gave to the
world a book with a definite plan, possessed of a harmony
and unity entirely different from that which Cardinal
Hugo and Robert Stephens together discovered so long
ago, when the former divided the New Testament into
chapters and the latter into verses.
These considerations will fairly justify the present inquiry after the plan of the Gospels.
II. The Plan of Mlatthew's Gospel.
It may be seen, in the light of a careful study of its
origin, aim, and matter, that the Gospel according to
Matthew is naturally divided into five parts, or, rather,
into three principal parts, — presenting the successive
stages of the work of Jesus as the Messiah in establishing
the kingdom of heaven, - with an appropriate introduction and conclusion.
In these divisions the character and career of Jesus
are unfolded in their connection with the appropriate
Old Testament exhibitions of the Messiah. The historic




THE GENERAL I'LAN.                    113
personage is thus seen side by side with the prophetic
ideal, and the exact correspondence of the two is made
apparent.
It may not be wholly unnecessary to remark that an
outline view is given first, in order that, by getting the
contents of the Gospel fully and clearly before the mind,
the way may be prepared for a better understanding of
the more specific and interesting views that are to follow.
For the assist:ance of any who may desire to make a
fuller comparative study of the characters of "Jesus"
anid " Messiah," the Messianic teachings of the Old Testament have been connected with the outline view given
of Matthew's Gospel.
OUTLINE OF THE FIRST GOSPEL.
INTRODUCTION.
The Advent of the Messiah. Matthew demonstrates
by way of introduction, that Jesus had the origin and official preparation of the Messiah of the Prophets. i. 1iv. 11.
Section 1. Jesus had the origin of the Messiah. i. 1ii. 23.
A. In his royal and covenant descent from David and
Abraham.  i. 1-17.
Prophetic References. For the prophecies suggested to the Jew by verse
1, see Ps. lxxxix. 35, 36, cxxxii. 11; Isa. ix. 6, 7; xi. 1; Jer. xxiii. 5, 6.
For the scriptural basis of the argument of the genealogy, see the genealogies in Gen. xlvi.; Ruth iv.; 1 Chron. iii.
B. In his divine origin and human birth, as Immanuel,- begotten by the Holy Ghost and born of the Virgin Mary.  i. 18-25.
Proph. Refs. For the prophecy fulfilled in this passage, and formally
referred to in verses 22, 23, see Isa. vii. 14. For the prophecy that he
shall save his people friom their sins, and for the scriptural data for deciding that this was the precise time for the appearing of the Messiah, see
Dan. ix. 24-26.
8




1 14        MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR  THE JEW.
C. In the place of his birth, -not Nazareth, as the
Jews supposed, but Bethlehem; in the circumstances of
his early life in  connection with  the two places; and  in
the place of his residence and development, the secluded
Nazareth. ii. 1-23.
Proph. Refs. For the prophecy of the star, ch. ii. 2, see Num. xxiv. 17.
For the coming of the Gentiles, fulfilled in the Magi, verse 1, see Isa. xi.
10; xlii. 1; lx. 3. With the decree of the Sanhedrim, verse 6, compare
Mic. v. 2. With the flight into Egypt, verses 13-15, compare Hos. xi. 1.
With the murder of the innocents, verses 16-18, compare Jer. xxxi. 15.
With the settlement and residence in Nazareth, verse 23, compare Ps. xxii.
6; lxix. 7, 12; Isa. xlix. 7; liii. 2, 3, etc.; and John i. 46.
Section 2. Jesus received the preparation and inauguration of the Messiah.  iii. 1-iv. 11
A. In  the preparation  of the  Jews, by  a forerunner,
for his public appearance and ministry. iii. 1-12.
Proph. Rafs. For the prophecy of the forerunner, referred to in verse
3, see Isa. xl. 3. For the garb of the forerunner, verse 4, see 2 Kings i. 8.
For the prophetic character of Messiah, verses 10-12, see Isa. iv. 4; xli. 816; Mal. iii. 1-3.
B. In his external and public consecration for his.work,
in the baptism by John and in the recognition and anointing from heaven. iii. 13-17.
Proph. Refs. For the prophecy of the Messiah's subjection to the law of
righteousness, verse 15, see Ps. xl. 6-10; Jer. xxiii. 6. For the promise
of anointing by the Holy Spirit, verse 16, see Isa. xlii. 1 ~lxi. 1. For the
prophetic recognition as the Son of God, verse 17, see Ps. ii. 7.
C. In his internal and private girding for the Messiah's work  and  his actual commencement of that work,
as man for man, in his first bruising of the serpent's
head, in the temptation. iv. 1-11.
Proph. Refs. Compare with this passage the Protevangelium, or first
Gospel revelation, Gen. iii. 15. Also the promised obedience of the Messiah
to the law of' God for man, Ps. xl. 7, with the fulfillment in this passage,
in verses 3, 4, of the law of self-renunciation, Dent. viii 3; in verses 5-7, of
the law of trust in God, Ps. xci. 11, 12, and Deut. vi. 16; in verses 8-10, of
the law of worship, Deut. vi. 13. Compare the experience of verse 11 with
the promise of divine protection to Messiah, Ps. xci. 11, 12.




THE GENERAL PLAN.                       115
PART I.
The  Public  Proclamation  of Messiah's  Kingdom.
Matthew  demonstrates that Jesus did  the public work
and bore the public character of Messiah, the King and
Prophet, in the period devoted chiefly to the proclamation  of the  coming  Kingdom   of  Heaven, with  divine
power, in Galilee. iv. 12-xvi. 12.
Section 1. Jesus did this in his personal proclamation,
unfolding  the  law  and  relations of his  Kingdom, and
demonstrating his own divine authority. iv. 12-ix. 35.
A. In his early and preliminary work, -  in the place,
message, and results.  iv. 12-25.
Proph. Isefsj. For the prophecy of the place of beginning his mission,
verses 12-17, see Isa. ix. 1, 2. With verses 18-22, compare the vision
of holy w:aters, Ezek. xlvii. 9, 10. With verses 23-25, compare Isa. lxi.
1-3, etc.
B. In his proclamation of the Law  of the Kingdom, -
in its spirituality, as contrasted with  Jewish views,-  in
t. e Sermon on the Mount.  v. 1-vii. 29.
Tlhe Lawgiver presents the Constitution of the Kingdom of Heaven by exhibiting, -
a. Tile Citizens of tile Kingdom.  v. 3-16.
(a.) In their blessed character and experience.  3-12.
(b.) In their salutary influence upon the world. 13-16.
Proph. Refs. For the character of Messiah as King, Prophet, and Lawgiver, compare the promise to Judah, Gen. xlix. 10; and of a prophet like
unto Moses, Deut. xviii. 15. Also such passages as Isa. ii. 2-4; ix. 6, 7;
Mic. iv. 1-3, etc. For the propheic basis for the spiritual character of
the subjects of the kingdoml, see the predlictions and partial descriptions
in Ps. lxxii.; Isa. Ix.; Jer. xxx. and xxxi.; Ezek. xxxiv. 22-31; Dan. ii.
34, 44, etc. For the world-wide influence as the salt, compare Isa. Ix.
21-22; Prov. x. 11; xi. 30; xii. 12, etc. For the light, compare Prov.
iv. 18; Ps. xxxvii. 6; cxix. 105, 130; Isa. ix. 2; Ix. 1-20, etc.
b. The teachings of the Kingdom, in its relations to
Jewish Law and Life.  v. 17-vii. 6.
(a.) To the old Jewish law: first, as revealed in the




116         MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
Old Testament Scriptures (v. 17-19); secondly, as revealed in the doctrine of the Scribes and  Pharisees, as
given  by the literal interpreter (v. 21-32), and by the
liberal interpreter (v. 33-48).
(b.) To the Jewish life, as seen in the pattern saints
of the day: first, in the religious life (vi. 1-18); secondly,
in the worldly life (vi. 19-34); thirdly, in the conversation (vii. 1-6).
Proph. Refs. With the teaching of the Lawgiver concerning the mission of Messiah and the higher righteousness demanded in the kingdom of
heaven, compare such propliecies as Isa. xxviii. 16-18; Dan. ix. 24, etc.
With the condemnation of the literalist and the liberalist, compare the Law
as given in Ex. xx; Isa. v. 18-25; Jer. xiv. 13-16; xxiii. 38-40, etc.
With the contrast with the Pharisee righteousness, compare Ps. Ii. 16, 17;
Isa. lvii. 15; lxvii. 1-4; Jer. vii. 1-28, etc. With the life of trust, as opposed to the Pharisee worldliness, compare Ps. xxxiv. 10; xxxvii. 3; xxiii.;
and the various enactments requiring the Jews to hold and use their wealth
as stewards of Jehovah.
c. The practical Way into the  Kingdom.  vii. 7-27.
(a.) The positive directions. Verses 7-14.
(b.) The  warning  against  the  two  chief  dangers.
Verses 15-23.
(c.) The final urgent exhortation.  Verses 24-27.
Proph. Rifs. For teachings concerning the way of life, compare Ps.
xxiv. 3-5; Prov. viii. 17; Isa. xlv. 19; lii. 13-15; liii. 1-12; Jer. xxix.
10-14, etc. For the fate of the rejecters of God, compare Ps. i. 4-6; Dan.
xii. 2, etc.
C. In his establishment of his divine authority to  set
up such a Kingdom and proclaim  its Law, -  as shown by
three series of miracles brought together and arranged for
the purpose. viii. 1-ix. 35.
a. First series, exhibiting  Jesus as  the  Messiah, in
his relation to the Old Testament Law.  viii. 1-18.
Proph. Refs. For special prophecy fulfilled, compare verse 17 with Isa.
liii. 4.
b. Second series, exhibiting Jesus, the Messiah, as in




THE GENERAL PLAN.                        117
himself all-powerful, and as claiming absolute authority.
viii. 18-ix. 8.
Proph/. Refs. With "son of man," ch. viii. 18, compare I)an. vii. 13.
With "Son of God," ch. viii., compare Ps. ii. 7. With the absolute
divine authority, ch. ix. 2, compare the authority attributed to Messiah
in Ps. ii; Pls. cx.; and throughout the Messianic prophecies, especially
in Isa. ix. 6, 7.
c. Third  series, exhibiting  Jesus, the  gracious Messiah, in his relations to lost men, -  showing active mercy
and requiring active faith.  ix. 9-35.
Prophi. Refs. With his character as Saviour of sinners, chl. ix. 10-13,
compare Hos. vi. 6; Jer. xxxi. 33, 34; Isa. lii. 53, etc. With his character as the Healer and Lord of life, ch. ix. 22, 25, 30, 35, compare Isa. liii.
4 ix. 2, etc. With Jesus as the conqueror of the demons and their prince,
irse 33, compare Gen. iii. 15.
Section  2. Jesus  also did the ptblic work, and bore
the  public character of the  Messiah, in his  labors, as
associated with  the Twelve Apostles, in the wider proclamation of the coming Kingdom  in Galilee.  ix. 36-xvi.
12.
A. In the choice, preliminary instruction, and mission
of the Twelve.  ix. 36-x. 42.  This embraces:
a. The occasion of the call and mission, - the spiritual destitution of Israel, - the general commission, and
the caLtalogue of tile Twelve.  ix. 36-x. 4.
Proph. Refs. For the prophetic view of the condition of Israel and
the work of Messiah, the compassionate Shepherd for the lost sheep, especially as seen in ch. ix. 36-38, and ch. x. 1, 6-9, compare Isa. liii. 6; Jer.
1. 6; Ezek. xxxiv.., etc.
b. The charge to the Twelve, or the law of associated
effort in  the  Kingdom, and  their exclusive  mission  to
Israel. x. 5-42. Their instructions cover:(a.) Their work in preparation for the Kingdom, in
heralding the coming of Jesus to the various  cities  of
Israel.  Verses 6-15.
(b.) Their work in the established Kingdom, or from




118        MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
Pentecost on: first; to  the  destruction  of Jerusalem,
verses 16-23; and, secondly, to the end of time, verses
24-42.
Proplh. Refs. For general character of Messiah's work, verses 6-9, compare Isa. liii. 6, etc., as just given. For the enmity shown to Messiah and
his followers, compare the bruising of his heel by Satan, foretold in the
Protevangelium; Gen. iii. 15; Ps. ii. 1-3; Isa. liii. 2, 3, etc. For the
social estrangement resulting, verses 34-39, compare Mic. vii. 6; Exod.
xxxii. 26-29.
B. In the awakening of doubt of his Messiahship, and
consequent opposition, by the fuller revelation of the exclusively spiritual character of his Kingdom.  xi. 1-xii.
50.
The antagonism  as presented by Matthew, includes: —
a. The apparent expression, on the part of John the
Baptist and his followers, of doubt of the Messiahship
of Jesus, - giving Jesus occasion to present his credentials as the Messiahh; to vindicate the faith and divine mission of his forerunner; to judge that childish
generation, and the cities in which his mighty works had
been done; to claim the divine authority and extend the
gracious invitation of Messiah.  xi. 1-30.
Proph. Refs. Compare verse 5 with Isa. liii. 4; xxxv. 5-10; viii. 14, 15.
Compare verses 20-24 with Isa. i., etc. Compare the gracious invitation,
verses 28-30, with Isa. xlv. 22; Iv. 1-3, etc.
b. The appearance of open opposition. xii. 1-45.
(a.) Unorganized, on the part of the leaders of Israel,
for a righteous and merciful act. Verses 1-13.
(b.) Organized, by the Pharisees and Scribes, resulting in the withdrawal and quiet work of Jesus. Verses
14-45.
c. The interference of his relatives, whose claims he
rejects for higher. xii. 46-50.
Proph. Ie.fs. Compare the acts which awaken the opposition, ch. xii.
1, 9-13, with 1 Sam. xxi. 3-6; Ex. xxix. 32, 33; Lev. viii. 31; xxiv. 9;
Num. xxviii. 9, 10; Hos. vi. 6. See, also, Ex. xxiii. 4, 5; Deut. xxii.




THE GENERAL PLAN.                    119
4. For the quiet withdrawal and beneficent work, verses 15-21, see Isa.
xlii. 1-4.
C. In his consequent substitution of parabolic for plain
teaching, in presenting the mystery of the opposition to
the Kingdom of Heaven.  xiii. 1-53.
The parables of the Kingdom  include:a. Four parables to the people, with explanations to
the disciples.
b. Three parables to the disciples alone.
Proph. Refs. For the Messianic prophecy fulfilled in this phase of
the work of Jesus, compare verses 10-16 with Isa. v. 4-7; vi. 9, 10;
Ezek. xii. 2.
D. In the culmination of the opposition in his rejection  by the representatives of all the leading classes.
xiii. 54-xvi. 12.  The exhibition of this rejection includes:a. His rejection by the synagogue of Nazareth, on
account of his obscure origin, - resulting in the withdrawal of his works of power.  xiii. 54-58.
Proph. Refs.  For the obscurity of Messiah, compare Ps. xxii. 6; lxix.
7, 12; Is. xlix. 7; liii., etc.
b. His rejection as the heavenly King by Herod the
earthly king, -  resulting in  his withdrawal, and  furnishing the credentials of the Messiah, in his character
and works. xiv. 1-36.
Proph. Refs. For proof that Jesus, in contrast with Herod, appears in
the true character of Messiah, compare Isa. vii. 14-25; ix. 1-3; xi. 1-5;
Mic. v. 1-5; Jer. xxiii. 1-6.
c. His rejection by the Jerusalem Scribes and Pharisees, the theological authorities and models, - resulting
in his exposing their hypocrisy and wickedness; and his
withdrawal into the Gentile world, where he furnishes
anew the credentials of the Messiah, the deliverer of the
world. xv. 1-39.
Proph. Refs. With the rejection, verses 7-9, compare Isa. xxix. 13.
With his work in his retirement, verses 21-39, compare the prophecies




120       MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
of blessing to the Gentiles through Messiah, in Gen. xii. 3; Isa. xi. 10; xlii.
6, etc.
d. His rejection by the Galilee Pharisees and Sadducees, - the true Head of the Theocracy by the earthly
heads, - resulting in withdrawal, and his condemnation
of then.  xvi. 1-12.
Proph. Refs. On the rejection compare with the same Scriptures as in
the rejection by the Scribes and Pharisees.
PART II.
The Distinct and Public Claim of Messiahship.
Matthew shows that, after the rejection and the retiremnent from the public ministry in Galilee, Jesus openly
claimed to be the Messilah, and abundantly proved the
righteousness of his claim both to his disciples and to the
people. xvi. 13-xxiii. 39.
Section 1. Jesus did this with the Twelve, while correcting their false Jewish views of his priestly character
and of his kingdom. xvi. 13-xx. 28.
A. In calling forth  their explicit confession of his
Messiahlship and giving them  authority in the kingdom
of heaven (the Chlrch), -- thus preparing them  for the
lesson of the suffering and conquering  Messiah.  xvi.
13-20.
Proph. Refs. For prophecies of the authority here claimed, see Ps. ii.
6; xlv. 6, 7; lxxii. 8-11; isa. ix.; Mic. v. 1-.5; Dan. ii. 44, etc.
B. In teaching in its first form, the lesson of his sacrificial death at the hands of the Jewish Sanhedrim, and
of his resurrection, -  and then  confirming their faith
anew. xvi. 21-xvii. 21. This includes: —
a. The announcement of the death and its unwilling
reception. xvi. 21-28.
b. The twofold  confirmation  of their faith, in the
transfiguration and in the healing of the epileptic demoniac. xvii. 1-21.




THE GENERAL PLAN.                      121
Proph. Refs. For the doctrine of the suffering Messiah, compare all
the sacrificial system of the Old Testament; and such passages as Isa. liii.
4-10; Dan. ix. 26, etc. For the rejection by Israel, see Isa. xlix. 7, etc.
For the doctrine of the resurrection, see Ps. xvi. 10.
C. In teaching, in its second form, the lesson of his
death, -  through betrayal by  his own followers, -  and
then unfolding the true spiritual relations of his followers
in his kingdom. xvii. 22-xx. 16. This comprehends the
unfolding of,a. The church relations and duties, - comprising the
relation to the old religion and to worldly supremacy, and
the law of church censure and of brotherly forgiveness.
xvii. 24-xviii. 35.
b. The earthly relations and duties, - comprising
those arising out of the family and earthly riches in their
subordination to the heavenly mission. xix. 1-xx. 16.
Proph, Refs. For prophecy of the betrayal of Messiah by his own
friends, compare Ps. xli. 9, with John xiii. 18. See also Ps. lv. 12-14,
etc. For the unworldly character of the kingdom of Messiah, compare
references under ch. v. 3-16.
D. In teaching, in its third form, the lesson of his
death, —as a ransom for many, at the hands of the
Roman rulers, - and then checking the rising spirit of
worldly ambition.  xx. 17-28.
Proph. Refs. For prophecies of the combination of many classes against
Messiah, see Ps. xxii., etc. For the special rage of the Gentiles, or heathen,
see Ps. ii. 1, in connection with Acts iv. 25. For the doctrine of the ransom, compare Ex. xxi. 30; Prov. xiii. 8; Isa. liii. 5.
Section 2. Jesus made this public claim before the
people also, at Jerusalem, the city of the great King,correcting the false Jewish notions and establishing his
Messiahship by miracles performed in the Temple itself.
xx. 29-xxiii. 39.  This includes:
A. The public claim to be the son of David, in Jericho; the triumphal entry into the city of David; the




122         MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
assumption of Messianic authority and performance of
Messianic works in the Temple.  xx. 29-xxi. 17.
Proph. Refs. With the healing of the blind men, ch. xx. 34, compare
Isa. xxxv. 5-10. With the triumphal entry, compare Zech. ix. 9; Ps.
cxviii. 24-26. With the cleansing of the temple, Isa. lvi. 7; Jer. vii. 11.
With the miraculous credentials of Messiah, ch. xxi. 14; Isa. xxxv. 5-10.
With the praises of the children, Ps. viii. 2.
B. The public conflict, defensive and offensive, as Messiah, with  the hardened  Jewish  officials.  xxi. 18-xxiii.
39. This comprises:a. The introductory sign of the nation's fate, in the
cursing of the barren fig-tree.  xxi. 18-22.
Proph. Refs. Compare the symbolic curse with that of Israel in Isa.
v. 4-10.
b. The public conflict with  the Sanhedrim, defensive
and offensive, ending in their discomfiture and condemnation.  xxi. 23-xxii. 14.
Proph. Refs. For the prophecy of the rejection of Messiah, compare ch.
xxi. 42-44, with Ps. cxviii. 22, 23; also with such passages as Ps. ii. 9;
xxi. 8, 9; Isa. Ix. 12; Dan. ii. 34, 35, 44, 45. For the foreshadowed rejection of the nation, ch. xxii. 7-14, compare Dan. ix. 26; Zech. xiv. 1, 2.
c. The public conflict, defensive and offensive, with the
leading classes of the nation, as tools of the Sanhedrim,
ending in the judgment and casting off of themselves
and the nation. xxii. 15-xxiii. 39.
Proph. Refs. With the argument against the Sadducees, compare Deut.
xxv. 5; Exod. iii. 6; with that against the lawyer, Deut. vi. 5; Lev. xix.
18; with the discomfiture of the Pharisees, Ps. cx. 1. With the defining
of the position of the Scribes and Pharisees, compare Neh. viii. 4-8; with
the curse, MVIal. ii. 7-9; with the judgment denounced upon Jerusalem,
Jer. xxii. 5; Hos. iii. 4, 5.
PART III.
The Sacrifice of Messiah the Priest.  Matthew  demnonstrates that, after his public rejection by the Jews,
Jesus fully established his claim  to  be the  Messiah, by
fulfilling the Messianic types and prophecies in laying the




THE GENERAL PLAN.                        123
foundation for the Kingdom of Heaven by his own
priestly sacrifice. xxiv. 1-xxvii. 66.
Section 1. He represents Jesus as beginning his work,
as the rejected and suffering Messiah, by preparing his
disciples for his sacrificial death.  xxiv. 1-xxv. 46.
A. Inll unfolding the true doctrine of his coming in
glory, and  of the  end  of the  existing  order of things.
xxiv. 1-43.
Proph. Re/fs. For the fact of a coming judgment, compare ch. xxiv. 2,
with 1 Kings ix. 7-9; Jer. xxvi. 18; Mic. iii. 12. For the time, compare
ch. xxiv. 15, with Dan. ix. 27; xi. 31; xii. ll. For the suddenness of
Messiah's coming, compare ch. xxiv. 27, with Zech. ix. 14. For the great
events attending, compare ch. xxiv. 29-31, with Isa. xiii. 9, 10; Joel ii.
10, 30, 31; Amos v. 20; viii. 9; Dan. vii. 13, 14; Zech. xii. 10-12.
B. In teaching thema the true posture of his followers
in waiting for his coming, and in describing that coming
in glory to the judgmnent of the world.  xxiv. 44-xxv. 46.
Proph. Refs. For the terribleness of the final coming to judgment, ch.
xxv. 31-46, compare Ps. i. 5; Isa. xxiv. 21-23; Dan. xii. 1, 2, etc.
Section  2. Matthew  represents  Jesus as  consummating his work, as the rejected and suffering Messiah, by
his priestly  offering up of himself as the fulfillment of
the Law and the Prophllets. xxvi. 1-xxxvii. 66.
A. In preparing for the sacrifice and in putting himself
in the place of the Paschal lamb; and in overcoming the
terrors of death.  xxvi. 1-46.
Proph. Refs. With the conspiracy of the rulers, ch. xxvi. 3, compare
Ps. ii. With the price of betrayal, verses 14, 15, compare Ex. xxi. 32;
Zech. xi. 12, 13. With the pointing out of the traitor, verses 20-23, compare Ps. xli. 9. With the predicted death as Messiah, verse 24, compare
Gen. iii. 15; Ps. xxii.; Isa. liii.; Dan. ix. 26. With the assumption of
the place of the lamhb in the Passover, verses 26-29, compare Ex. xii. 21-29,
etc. With the predicted forsaking by the disciples, verses 30-32, compare
Zech. xiii. 7. With the experience in Gethsemane, verses 36-46, compare
Ps. lxix. 20; Isa. liii. 3, 4; Lam. i. 12, etc.
B. In his betrayal by Judas, and in his trial and condelmnation before the Sanhedrim  and before Pilate, -  or




124         MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
as the Messianic Priest in the power of his enemies.
xxvi. 47-xxvii. 26.
Proph. Refs. For prophecies of the betrayal, with ch. xxvi. 47-50, compare Isa. xlix. 7; Ps. xli. 9, etc. With the unresisting surrender, verses
51-54, compare Isa. liii. 7, etc. For the general prophecy fulfilled, verse
56, see Isa. liii.; Dan. ix. 26, etc. With the bringing of false witnesses,
ch. xxvi. 59-61, compare Ps. xxvii. 12; xxxv. 11. With the silence of
Jesus, verses 62, 63, Isa. liii. 7; with the oath to the high priest, and the
predicted coming, verses 63, 64, Dan. vii. 13, 14; with the abuse, verses
67, 68, Isa. 1. 6; with the remorse and death of Judas, ch. xxvii. 3-10,
Zech. xi. 13. With the experience before Pilate, ch. xxvii. 11-26, compare Isa. liii. 7, 9, 11, etc.
C. In his experience in the hands of his executioners,
as the Messiah sacrificed for sin, — mocked, crucified,
dead, and buried. xxvii. 27-66.
Proph. Refs. With the experience in the hands of his executioners,
compare Isa. liii.; Ps. xxii.; I)an. xii. 2, etc.
CON CLUSION.
The Triumph of Messiah the Saviour and King.
Matthew  shows in conclusion that Jesus, after his death,
fully established his claim to the Messiahship, as the
risen Lord and Redeetner. xxviii. 1-20.
Section 1. By his rising from the dead on the third
day, and furnishing abundant evidence, private and  official, of his resurrection. xxviii. 1-15.
Proph. Refs. With the resurrection, verses 1-4, compare Ps. xvi. 8-11;
Dan. x. 6; and Christ's own predictions.
Section 2. By his formal assumption of Messianic authority, and by sending forth his disciples to the spiritual
conquest of the world. xxviii. 16-20.
Proph. Refs. With the assumption of Messianic authority, compare
Ps. ii. 6-9; xxii. 27, 28; xlv. 6, 7; lxxii.; cx.; Isa. ix. 6, 7; xi. 1-10;
Dan. ii. 44, 45; vii. 27, etc.




THE CENTRAL IDEA.              125
SECTION II.
THE JEWISH ADAPTATION IN THE CENTRAL IDEA OF
THE FIRST GOSPEL.
The outline, as already given, is its own witness that
the first Gospel was prepared by Matthew for the Jew.
It also opens the way for showing how the central idea
and general drift of the Gospel confirm the historical testimony touching the Jewish aim of the Evangelist.
I. The Central Idea.
A single glance makes it clear that Matthew seizes
upon the one idea of the Jewish system which was most
prominent in the Jewish mind of that age. He gives us
the Gospel of Jesus, the Messiah of the Prophets.
The Messiah. His one subject, always and everywhere, is, Jesus is the Messiah.  He opens with the
origin of Jesus, the Messiah, and closes with his assumption of the universal authority of the Messiah, and from
the beginning to the close never for a moment parts company with the Messianic idea.
It is patent to the reader that the first Gospel is that
of the Messianic royalty of Jesus. It seizes upon the
regal idea, as the one uppermost in the mind of the race,
and takes advantage of it to open the way for the presentation of Jesus, under the most favorable aspect, to
the Jewish soul. Its opening genealogy is that of Jesus,
the Messiah, the Son of David (i. 1). He is the descendant of Joseph, the son and heir of David (i. 20).
The Magi inquire, " Where is he that is born King of
the Jews? " (ii. 2). John the Baptist announces him as
the founder of the kingdom of heaven (iii. 2). Jesus
himself begins and continues with the proclamation of
the kingdom of heaven (iv. 17; v. 3, etc.). Jesus is the
Messiah, the King, throughout the Gospel.




126      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
But the Evangelist takes special pains, as will subsequently appear more fully, to correct the false Jewish
notions, at that day so prevalent, concerning the kingdom of Messiah, and to bring into their true place and
rightful prominence the more important elements of his
prophetic and priestly character, which had been so generally lost out of view.  He accordingly exhibits the
kingdom not as a temporal one, like the Roman Empire,
but as theocratic, or as a spiritual reign of God himself,
in the person of Messiah, in the hearts of men (v. 3-12;
xii. 1-52, etc.). The prophetic glory of the Messiah is
seen, as Jesus speaks for God the grand truths of this
spiritual kingdom, in the Sermon on the Mount, in the
parables, and in the other chief discourses, and as he foretells the events of the future, in the prophecies of his
own death and in the revelation of the last things (ch.
xxiv.). The priestly character of the Messiah is given
its true prominence by various teachings throughout the
Gospel, but especially by the three remarkable prophecies of his death, uttered during the period given to the
instruction of his disciples in the much needed lesson of
his sufferings and sacrifice (xvi. 21; xvii. 22, 23; xx.
17-19), and in his experience in his trial, condemnation,
and death for the ransom of the world.
It should likewise be remarked that in pursuing his
one central theme, the Evangelist never fails to take into
account and attach due weight to the other ideas peculiar
to the Jews. He regards them as the chosen people,
their religion as the true world-religion, its forms as the
only divine religious forms, and its promise of Messiah
addressed first of all to the Jews. Every diligent reader
of his Gospel will not fail to discern evidence of the constant aim of Matthew, while presenting his main theme,
to press all these truths upon the attention, and at the
same time to correct the erroneous and distorted views,
which, as already seen, had arisen out of them.




THE CENTRAL IDEA.                     127
Use of Prophecy. Out of his single central theme,
so steadily pursued, arises Matthew's peculiar use of the
prophecies of the Old Testament, so in contrast with the
usage of the other Evangelists.
His references to the Jewish Scriptures, while more
numerous than in all the other Gospels, are not, as in
them, merely incidental, or for the sake of giving  the
knowledge of some doctrine involved, but rather to furnish the basis for the entire argument and to correct the
practical errors into which the Jews had fallen.
Mark has perhaps, less than a score of such references,
almost all of which are general.  But three of them, at
the most, are properly fulfillments of prophecy -Mark i.
2; i. 3; xv. 28, -and only the last of the three is distinctly presented as such.'
Luke has perhaps thirty references or allusions to the
Old Testament Scriptures. Most of these are simple incidental citations of fact or law. The allusions to prophecy are given in the discourses embodied in the Gospel,
-  as in that of the angel (i. 17); of Mary (i. 55); of
Zacharias (i. 69-75); of Simeon (ii. 32); in those of
Jesus (iv. 17-21; vii. 22; xxiv. 25-28, 45-48).  The
argument of the book does not at all depend either upon
the authority of the Scriptures or upon the fulfillment of
prophecy.2
John has twenty or more references to the Old Testament Scriptures. These generally take for granted that
the Church is acquainted with the revelation of the Old
1 The references to prophecy in the Gospel according to Mark, are as
follows: ch. i. 2, 3, 15; ch. ii. 25, 26; ch. ix. 12, 13; ch. x. 4, 19; ch. xi.
17; ch. xii. 10, 19, 26, 29, 36; ch. xiii. 14; ch. xiv. 27; ch. xv. 28.
2 The references to the Old Testamnent Scliptures, in the Gospel according
to Lukc, are as follows: ch. i. 17, 55, 69-75; ch. iv. 4, 8, 10, 12, 17-21; ch.
v. 14; ch. vi. 2-5, 6-10; ch. vii. 22; ch. x. 26-28; ch. xi. 29; ch. xiii. 14;
ch. xiv. 1-5; ch. xvi. 16-18; ch. xviii. 20, 21, 31; ch. xix. 46; ch. xx. 17,
28, 37, 38, 42, 43; ch. xxi. 22; ch. xxii. 37; ch. xxiv. 25-27, 45-48.




128       MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
Testament. In the first half of the Gospel, the references are chiefly incidental and confined to fact and law,
the words of the Baptist (i. 23) being an exception.
In the second half, in which the teaching of Jesus in connection with his death is presented in its relations to the
Christian life, all the references are occasioned by direct
fulfillment of Messianic prophecies, well known to those
who first heard these discourses of our Lord, and familiar
to all intelligent Christians in all ages. The main argument of the Gospel does not, however, at all turn upon
them as prophecies, but they are mainly introduced in
order to bring out some hidden spiritual meaning, not
brought out in Matthew and not needed for the purposes
contemplated by him in his Gospel.1
Matthew, on the other hand, as has already been
shown, rests his Gospel entirely upon a basis of Old
Testament revelation. He presents one continued comparison of Jesus of Nazareth with the Messiah of the
Prophets, a comparison which could not fail to have marvelous convincing power with any candid Jew.  His
argument is nothing, and his Gospel almost unintelligible
without this, — in short, the Old Testament doctrine of
the Messiah, as announced in the Protevangelium, in the
opening of Genesis, and unfolded through all the ages
till the final words of Malachi, is the only key to the
first Gospel.
II. The General Drift.
The influence of the central theme of the Evangelist
is everywhere manifest in the general drift of his Gospel,
so different from that of the other Gospels.
1 The references to the Old Testament Scriptures, in the Gospel according to John, are as follows: ch. i. 23; ch. ii. 17; ch. v. 9, 10; ch. vi. 14,
31, 45; ch. vii. 22, 23, 38, 42; ch. viii. 5, 17; ch. x. 34, 35; ch. xii. 14-16,
34, 38, 39-41; ch. xiii. 18; ch. xv. 25; ch. xix. 24, 28, 36, 37.




THE CENTRAL IDEA.              129
To follow the outward form, the Gospel opens with
the origin and preparation of Jesus for the work of Messiah, and his induction into the office of Messiah. Part
First presents the public proclamation by Jesus as Messiahl of the kingdom of heaven, first by himself alone,
and afterward as associated with the twelve Apostles.
Part Second exhibits his public claim to be the Messiah,
made and confirmed first to the Twelve and then to the
people at large. Part Third sets forth his sufferings and
death as the Messiah, first announced as being at hand,
and then prepared for and endured as a ransom for many.
The Conclusion exhibits the fact and proof of the resurrection of Jesus as Messiah from the dead, and his assumption of the royal Messianic prerogatives.
To follow the inward drift of thought, the Gospel
takes the life of Jesus as it was lived on earth, and his
character as it actually appeared, and places them alongside the life and character of the Messiah as sketched in
the Prophets, the historic by the side of the prophetic,
that the two may appear in their marvelous unity and
in their perfect identity. The greatness of the Prophet
like unto Moses is seen in the Nazarene, as he speaks for
God the fundamental truths of the kingdom of heaven
and foretells its future. The grandeur of the suffering
Servant of Jehovah, " despised and rejected of men,"
" wounded for our transgressions," shines through all his
words and acts that culminate in his vicarious death on
Calvarv. The sublimity of the King of whom Jehovah
said, "I have set my King on my holy hill of Zion," appears in the Son of David, as he forms and gives law to
a world-wide spiritual society, an everlasting state, the
kingdom of heaven. Jesus and the Messiah are demonstrated to be in all respects one and the same.
All this was just what was needed to commend him
as a Saviour to the Jews. It was a true view of the
9




130      MATTHEW, TIHE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
prophet of Nazareth, for whatever Jesus may have been
besides, he was also and primarily the Messiah, the highest development of Judaism, - humanly speaking, the
ideal Jew. He was not merely the accomplishment of
Hebrew prophecy in an external sense, but the highest
expression of all that was good in Judaism - the inheritor of whatever moral wisdom, whatever spiritual genius,
survived in it.1 This Jesus, at once the greatest among
Jews, and the finisher of Judaism — the Messiah - is
the Jesus represented by Matthew.
SECTION III.
THE JEWISH ADAPTATION IN THE OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS OF THE FIRST GOSPEL.
The Jewish design of the first Gospel is still further
manifest both from what the Evangelist omits of what is
found in the other Gospels and from what he adds to
what is found in them.
I. The Omissions of the First Gospel.
Matthew, in writing for the Jew, characteristically
omits, as useless for his purpose, whatever is distinctively
Roman, Greek, or Christian, in the presentation of the
Gospel.
In General. The careful reader will note the entire
absence of such explanations of Jewish customs, as that
which Mark gives of the religious washing of the hands
before eating, and of " the washing of cups, and pots,
brazen vessels, and of tables " (Mark vii. 2-5), which
were necessary for the stranger of Roman birth.  There
are no such explanations of Jewish topography, as that
which Luke gives of the " village called Emmaus, which
was from Jerusalem  about threescore furlongs " (Luke
1 Principal Tulloch, Lectures on Renan's'Vie de Jesus.'




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.         131
xxiv. 13), and which were necessary to the strangers
of Greek birth and philosophic turn of mind. There is
an absence of such explanations of Jewish facts, as that
which John gives of the enmity of the Jews to the Samaritans (John iv. 4), and which were necessary for the
Christians over the world after the destruction of Jerusalem and the desolation of Judaea. For the Jew, at home
in Jerusalem, or often visiting it, there was, at the date
of Matthew's writing, no need of any of these things.
From Mark. The same careful attention will reveal
the fact that the first Gospel uniformly omits those vivid
details and scenic representations of events, which will be
seen to abound in and to characterize the second Gospel,
and which fitted it for the Roman, the man of power and
action.
From Luke. Still more marked is the omission of
those eminently human features, in which Luke's Gospel
will be seen to abound; and of the facts of the ministry
of Jesus in Persea, with those universal aspects and relations of Christ's teachings and work, which furnish so
large a portion of the third Gospel (ix. 51-xviii. 30),
features and facts which fitted that Gospel for the Greek,
the man whose ideal was the perfect man of human development, and who was the representative of universal
humanity. To one who duly considers this omission by
Matthew of what constitutes the very heart of Luke's
Gospel, and of what has been to mankind at large the
most precious of all the teachings of the first three Gospels, it will never cease to be regarded as a marvelous
thing, and a thing which can be explained only by the
consideration that the one Evangelist wrote for the Jew,
the man of the covenant and of prophecy, and the other
for the Greek, the man of world-wide sympathies and
aspirations.
From John. Most remarkable of all is the absence




132      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
of the ministry in Judea, to the true Israel, and those
preeminently spiritual discourses which constitute the
greater part of the fourth Gospel, and which fitted it for
the Christian, the man already united to Christ by a
living faith. One might at first suppose that these teachings were exactly suited to the wants of the Jewish race,
since they were addressed directly to those who belonged
to that race. But more careful consideration will make
it plain that, as they were in the main addressed to that
small class of Jews who held the advanced ground on the
doctrine of the Messiah, and were possessed of more or
less of the true spiritual insight, so they could have
proved to the mass of the Jews only a stumbling-block,
and were therefore fitted to form a part of that Gospel
only which was prepared by John distinctively for the
Christian.
All these things, had Matthew embodied them in his
Gospel, would have done little toward commending Jesus
to the attention and interest of the mass of the Jews,
who were waiting for the advent of the Messiah of the
Scriptures, and holding peculiarly Jewish and unspiritual
views regarding the nature of his person, character, and
coming. They could, therefore, properly have no place
in a Gospel for the Jews.
But notwithstanding all these omissions, the Holy
Spirit has guarded the first Gospel against being justly
charged with presenting Jesus as exclusively the Saviour
of the Jews.
He is the descendant of Abraham, but four Gentile
women find place in the genealogy: Tamar of Timnath;
Rahab of Jericho; Ruth of Moab; and Bathsheba of
Gath (ch. i.). He is born King of the Jews, but those
who first seek him to worship him are not Jews, but
w' ise men from the East," the first fruits of the Gentiles (ii.). He chooses twelve Apostles and sends tiheiL




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.           133
forth first to " the lost sheep of the house of Israel," but
only one of them, Judas Iscariot, or Judas the man of
Kerioth, is of Judmaa, while all the rest are Galileans (x.).
The final commission reads: " Go ye therefore and teach
all nations" (xxviii.).
The Gospel, in Matthew's view, is first a Gospel for
the Jews, that it may ultimately become a Gospel for
mankind. In short, the omissions of Matthew, while
they mark his production as distinctively for the Jews,
do not by any means confine salvation to the Jews, but
extend it to all the race.
II. The Additions of the First Gospel.
The first Gospel gives even better evidence of its
special Jewish aim in what it adds to the records of the
other Evangelists than in what it omits of that which is
to be found in them.
Additions in Form. It has been remarked, of late,
that Matthew adds an important feature to the form of
his Gospel, in the careful and systematic grouping of his
material, -a feature that especially adapted it to the
Jewish mind.
There is scarcely a more systematic production to be
found. This will appear clearly from an examination of
the outline view given. With reference to this point,
Lange has remarked, that " it is a characteristic of this
Gospel, which is increasingly recognized, that a careful
grouping of events prevails throughout."
This feature may be regarded as resulting from any
one or all of three causes: the character of the contents
of the first Gospel, as a comparison of the historic Jesus
and the prophetic Messiah to establish their identity;
the practical business training, already adverted to, of
Mlatthew, the publican; or the characteristic needs of
Jewish readers, who were trained to such systematic use




134     MIATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
of reason and memory by their entire religious system
and practice. Doubtless all three influences had to do
with the result under consideration.
This careful grouping may be observed in all the more
characteristic portions of the Gospel: in the genealogy
(i.); in the Sermon on the Mount (v.-vii.); in the three
series of miracles (viii.-ix.); in the charge to the twelve
(x.); in the parables of the kingdom  (xiii.); in the
series of rejections (xiii.-xvi.); in the three successive
predictions of the death of Jesus (xvi. 21; xvii. 22; xx.
17); and in the final conflict of Jesus with the authorities (xxi.-xxii.).
It is not at all strange, considering the character of the
rationalistic criticism, that this peculiarity has been made
use of in the attempt to sustain the hypothesis, that the
original Gospel of Matthew consisted only of a collection
of fragmentary sayings; but in the outline view, already
given, it may readily be seen that there was a rational
motive in the mind of the Evangelist for grouping them
as they are. Matthew has, in short, given us the most
systematic of the Gospels, because his plan and purpose
called for it. His arrangement fits his Gospel to appeal
most powerfully to the Jewish soul and to fix itself permanently in the Jewish memory. Indeed, the Jew who
once took its truths and facts into his mind could not get
them out again, for it connected the. name of Jesus of
Nazareth indissolubly and forever with all the religious
knowledge and hopes of the descendant of Abraham, and
with all the glories of his past national history. Its system was, doubtless, divinely ordained to serve this very
purpose.  The rational aim, human and divine, leaves no
place for the rationalistic conjecture.
Additions to Material. Still more clearly do the additions, which the first Evangelist makes to the material of
the other Gospels, appear to be made to fit his production. for Jewish readers.




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.          135
By that mechanical analysis, which has always played
so prominent a part in the study of the Scriptures, it has
been shown that, if the Gospel according to Matthew be
regarded as made up of 100 parts, 42 of these are peculiar
to itself, and 58 common to this with one or more of the
other Gospels. A much more important fact - and one
that can readily be shown to be a fact, although it has
been overlooked —is, that all the 42 parts peculiar to
Matthew are precisely adapted to the Jewish aim of the
Evangelist.
This may be shown by passing in review the narratives, discourses, and groups of events of which Matthew's
additions are made up. They all have such a special
Jewish reference as is not to be found in the material of
the other Evangelists.
The origin of Jesus as Messiah (i.-ii.), is peculiar to
Matthew.
The genealogy given (i. 1-17) is that of Jesus, through
Solomon and Joseph, as heir to the throne of David;
while that of Luke (Luke iii. 23-38) is that of natural
descent through Nathan and Mary, which did not necessarily entitle him to the throne, but which was of interest
to the Gentile world as giving his actual lineage. It
should also be remarked that the first Evangelist traces
back the line of Jesus only to Abraham, the father of the
covenant people; while the third traces it to Adam, the
father of the race.
The Jew would not listen to any one who had not the
prophetic origin of the Messiah. The one line, of all
possible opening lines, best fitted to attract and fix the
attention of the Jew, was that with which Matthew opens
his Gospel. The genealogy which it introduces gives the
official pedigree of Jesus. It is documentary evidence,
drawn from the Scriptures and from the public records,
which the Jew could examine for himself. Its threefold




136      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
division connected it with the greatest events of Jewish
history, - the covenant, the monarchy, and the captivity.
The divine origin and human birth of Jesus (i. 18-25)
is in accordance with' prophecy, and distinctively for the
Jew. The Anointed of God was to be " God with us,"
divine as well as human. Hence Matthew presents, in
connection with the espousal of Mary and Joseph, the
divine origin of Jesus by the power of the Holy Ghost,
and his actual human birth of the virgin, - holding him
up to the Jew, as not only the son and heir of David,
but as named by God himself "Jesus," Jah-Hoshea, the
Jehovah-Saviour, "Emmanuel."  The families of Joseph and Zacharias were competent witnesses of the
facts.
The narrative of events from. the birth until the settlement in Nazareth (ii.) is given for the Jew, and was
absolutely necessary for his conviction of the Messiahship of Jesus. The Jew would naturally and inevitably
fall back upon the objection, that Jesus was from Nazareth of Galilee, and therefore had not the birthplace of
the Messiah. Hence Matthew proceeds to establish the
fact that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, and to show how
and why the misconception had arisen. That he was
actually born in Bethlehem and not in Nazareth, appeared
front a train of events which had already passed into history, and which found their best and only sufficient explanation in his birth in the former place. When this
Gospel was written, the notable coming of the Magi to
Jerusalem, at the very time when Messiah ought to have
appeared, was doubtless still remembered; the record
of tile meeting and the decree of the Sanhedrim called
by Ilerod doubtless still remained; the flight into Egypt
and tile murder of the babes had still their living witnesses; and the residence in Nazareth is at last fully accounted for by the divine command to settle there and




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.          137
the prophecy that the Messiah should be called a Nazarene.
The Sermon on the Mount (v.-vii.), is peculiarly
adapted to the Jew.
It is assumed here, in accordance with the view of many
of the best authorities, that the Sermon given by Matthew was delivered on a different occasion and to a different audience from the so-called Sermon on the Mount of
Luke (Luke vi. 17-49), which should rather be called
the Sermon on the Plain. But the Sermon illustrates
equally well on either supposition the point here to be
kept in mind.
If the two are abstracts of the same address, then the
fitness of Matthew's abstract for the Jew is seen in his
preserving the Jewish features and references, which
Luke so entirely omits.
But regarded as an independent discourse, it will be
seen at once that the Sermon on the Mount, in presenting the constitution of the kingdom of heaven, keeps constantly in view the Law and the Prophets, and the condition and needs of the Jew of Christ's day. It might
readily be shown in detail how it acknowledges the preeminence of the Jew by divine choice, and yet rebukes
his unrighteous and arrogant pretensions, reveals his perversions of the Scriptures, tears off the mask of hypocrisy,
and presses upon him the only way of righteousness and
life by the most solemn and emphatic appeals to the
issues of the final reckoning. Every sentence of it was
aimed directlv at the Jew.
The original mission of the Twelve (x.) was to the
Jews (x. 6, 23), and in consequence of their spiritual
destitution as witnessed in Galilee (ix. 35-38); and the
charge given them had primary reference to their work
for Israel, as may be seen by an examination of it.
The same peculiar features may be traced in the other




138      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
discourses of our Lord, added by Matthew, either wholly
or in part, to the Gospel material: in the upbraiding of
the cities of Galilee (xi. 20-30); in the answer to the
Scribes and Pharisees who demanded a sign (xii. 38-45);
in the divine compassion for the lost, and the law of
Church censure and forgiveness (xviii. 10-35); in the
judgment of the Scribes and Pharisees and of Jerusalem
(xxiii. 1-39); and in the description of the day of judgment (xxv).
Besides the capital fact, emphasized by Matthew, that
Jesus changed from plain teaching to parabolic because
of the blindness and obduracy of the Jews (Matt. xiii.
10-16), it may be shown that most of the long list of
parables contained in the latter half of the first Gospel
are especially condemnatory of the Jews. This is true
of the parable of the unmerciful servant (xviii.), which
opposes the boundless forgiveness required in the kingdom, to the teaching of the Jew which confined the forgiveness of an offending brother to three successive offenses; that of the laborers in the vineyard (xx.), which
lifts the Gentile to the same level of divine privilege with
the Jew; that of the two sons (xxi.), which exalts the
Gentile above the Jew; that of the marriage of the
king's son (xxii.), which threatens that the kingdom shall
be taken wholly from the Jewish people and given to the
Gentiles; that of the ten virgins (xxv.), which contrasts
true piety with Jewish formality; that of the talents
(xxv.), which opposes productive spiritual activity to
Jewish obduracy and barrenness.
The Jewish adaptation is also manifest in the great
groups of events and teachings given by Matthew: in
the three series of miracles (viii. 1-ix. 35); in the parables of the kingdom of heaven (xiii. 1-53); in the
progressive stages of awakened doubt and opposition
(xi. 2-xii. 50); in the series of rejections (xii. 54



INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           139
xvi. 12); and in the series of conflicts (xxi. 18-xxiii.
39).
The examination of all these various passages might
be entered into with thoroughness, and extended to the
most minute particulars, and always with accumulating
evidence and increasing conviction that they were all
added by the Evangelist, under the special guidance of
the Holy Spirit, to commend Jesus of Nazareth to the
Jews as the Messiah their Saviour. Everything bears the
plainest marks of the Jewish aim.
SECTION IV.
THE JEWISH ADAPTATION IN THE INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS OF THE FIRST GOSPEL.
The adaptation of Matthew's Gospel to the Jewish
needs appears in the incidental variations and peculiarities throughout the entire production.
I. Incidental Variations.
Different writers, in recording the same facts or events,
under the influence of different aims, always exhibit their
subject with manifold incidental variations. This feature
is very marked in the Gospels, and in the case of each
Evangelist it will be found that these variations always
bear the marks of his special aim.
Narrative Changes. This will appear in comparing
Matthew's mode of treating some portions of the evangelic facts with the mode adopted by the other Evangelists.
The mission of the Baptist is recorded or referred to
in all the Gospels. In Matthew he heralds Jesus as the
Messiah of the Jews, coming in fulfillment of prophecy.
He who shall come after this heralding is to appear as the
Lord Jehovah in person, to set up the kingdom of heaven




140      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
among men, and the Jews are called to repentance as a
preparation for his appearance. In Mark, the work of
the Baptist is introduced to exhibit by contrast the
mightier power of the Son of God, who comes to set up
the kingdom of God. In Luke, the work of the Baptist
brings Jesus forward as the one perfect man, placing himself on a level with all men by coming to be baptized
" when all the people were baptized." In John, the
Baptist witnesses to Jesus, before the Church and the
world, as the divine, eternal, only-begotten Son of God,
the Lamb of God sacrificed to take away the sin of the
world, the life and light of men.
The temptation of Christ appears only in the first
three Gospels, but in each of these with characteristic
differences. Matthew, commending Jesus as king to the
Jew, presents the temptations in one order of the threefold relation of Jesus: first, to human wants; secondly,
to dependence on God; and, thirdly, to the sovereignty
of the world, - closing thus by showing that the king,
the second Adam, would win the kingdom by obedience
to the law given to man and transgressed in the first
Adam. Luke, commending Jesus to the world as the
perfect man and Saviour, presents the temptations in a
different order of the same threefold relation of Jesus:
first, to human wants; secondly, to the sovereignty of
the world; and, thirdly, to his human dependence on
God, - closing thus with the preservation of the just relations of the divine-human Saviour to God. Mark,
commending Jesus to the Roman, as the mighty God,
the almighty worker and conqueror, gathers all up into
a single sentence, and adds to the victory over Satan that
over the terrors of the wilderness, thereby vastly increasing the impression of the power of the Son of God.
All the Evangelists set out from the Baptist in introducing their readers to the ministry of Jesus, but the dif



INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.            141
fererces in procedure are characteristic. Mark, keeping
in view the Roman, merely makes the imprisonment of
the Baptist the starting-point of a wonder-working ministry of Jesus in Galilee, into the marvels of which he
hurries us at once, without even hinting at its prophetic
relations. Luke, in tracing for the reasoning Greek the
orderly development of the life and work of Jesus, opens
with the ministry in Galilee, as the natural sequence of
that of the Baptist, but does not emphasize the connection.  John, writing for the Christian, sets out with the
Baptist, as preparing the way for that private ministry
of Jesus in Judiea which preceded the public ministry in
Galilee, and which, as being directed to the true Israel
and dealing with high spiritual themes, is passed over in
silence by the other Evangelists, but brought forward in
the Gospel for the Christian, the spiritual man, as eminently fitted to further its peculiar aim. Matthew, with
his eye on the Jew, starts with the public ministry of
Jesus in Galilee, - which, strictly speaking, could begin
only when that of the Baptist, the forerunner, closed, -
and presents Jesus at once and most prominently in his
Messianic character, fulfilling prophecy.
Or, passing on to the scenes of Calvary, and the closing career, it will be observed that the only one of the
seven sayings of Christ on the cross which is recorded by
the first Evangelist is that from Psalm xxii.: " Eli! Eli!
lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, My God, why
hast thou forsaken me?" That is distinctively the
Psalm of the suffering Messiah. He may have repeated
it all. At all events, it must have passed through his
soul at that hour. Ages before the inspired psalmist
had drawn the picture, and it was the one Scripture of
all to bring home and explain that scene on Calvary to.he Jewish soul. The agony, the forsaking by God, the
coffing of men, the exhaustion and death, the piercing




142      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
of hands and feet, the casting of lots for the garments,
are all there in the Psalm as distinct as the reality itself. The triumph and the glory are there, too, just as
distinct. "' All the ends of the world shall remember
and turn unto the Lord: and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee. For the kingdom is the
LORD'S, and he is the governor among the nations." So
the Psalm (xxii. 27, 28) advances from the wail of the
sufferel to the triumphant shout of the Messianic Conqueror and King. "All power is given unto me in
heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you."
So the Gospel rises to the same triumphant Messianic
note (Matt. xxviii. 18-20).
Such examples might be extended to cover all the
facts and events which Matthew records in common with
one or more of the other Evangelists, and would everywhere be found to exhibit the same characteristics.
Slighter Additions. But passing over these, there is
a very large and important class of incidental additions,
made by Matthew, in connection with materials common
to two or more of the Gospels.
Matthew alone brings out the fulfillment of Messianic
prophecies in connection with the great outward events of
our Lord's life: in the place, time, and extraordinary
circumstances of his public ministry (iv. 13-25); in the
noiselessness of his work (xii. 17-21); in his rejection
(xiii. 13-17); in his teaching by parables (xiii. 33-35);
and in the miracles in the temple (xxi. 14-16).
It is from Matthew that we learn that the conflict of
opinion, which resulted in the death of Jesus, had already
begun as early as the healing of the two blind men and
the dumb demoniac in Capernaum (ix. 27-34); that the




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           143
Sanhedrim plotted his destruction in public assembly
(xxvi. 3-5); that the price given the traitor was that of
a common slave (xxvi. 16); that Judas repented, returned the money, and committed suicide, fulfilling
prophecy (xxvii. 3-10); that Pilate washed his hands of
the blood of Jesus, and all the people said, " His blood
be on us, and on our children " (xxvii. 24, 25); and that
the enemies of Jesus made his sepulchre sure (xxvii.
62-66), and afterwards invented the report that his disciples stole his body away (xxviii. 11-15).
Matthew alone tells us that Jesus declared John to be
the Elijah who was to come (xi. 12-15); that he characterized the Jew and the Gentile in the parable of the
two sons (xxi. 28-32); that he forced the Jewish leaders
to pronounce judgment upon themselves, and then added
his own (xxi. 40-44); and that he predicted the connection of his death with the Sacrifice of the Passover
(xxvi. 2).
It is to Matthew that we owe the fact that after the
resurrection of Jesus many saints came forth from their
graves in testimony of his divine mission and power
(xxvii. 52, 53); and that he was worshiped by the disciples on the mountain in Galilee, and then assumed the
divine authority of the Messiah (xxvii. 17-20).
Such variations have an increased importance from the
fact that they furnish incidentally, and in way not to be
resisted, just the credentials needed in presenting Jesus
as Messiah to the Jews.
Word Changes. There is another class of variations,
slighter, perhaps, but no less characteristic, often involved in the change of a single word, which deserves
notice as illustrating the same Jewish reference of the
first Gospel.
Only Matthew tells us, in narrating the temptation,
that Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wildernessfor




144      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
the express purpose of being tempted by the devil (iv. 1).
The Jew alone felt it to be a necessity that the second
Adam, in his work of fulfilling the law and restoring
man, should meet and overcome the tempter by whom
the first Adam fell. So Matthew tells us that the devil,
in preparing for the second temptation, takes Jesus to the
holy city of the Jew (iv. 5), and there makes his second
assault upon him. Luke says the devil brought him
to Jerusalem (Luke iv. 9). To the Greek, the former
expression would have been unintelligible without explanation; to the Jew it was the cherished form of speech,
and his delight in Jerusalem was because it was the holy
city.
Matthew's account of the triumphal entry of Jesus into
Jerusalem  bears like marks. of the writer's aim. He
alone tells us that the disciples brought both a colt and
an ass to the Mount of Olives (xxi. 2, 5, 7); and this he
repeats in three forms, showing that it was in exact fulfillment of prophecy (Zech. ix. 9). Mark and Luke
speak of the colt only (Mark xi. 2; Luke xix. 30), as
that on which Jesus rode; while John, in the language of
prophecy, mentions the ass's colt (xii. 15). It is also
worthy of remark that only the Evangelist who had a
supreme interest in the Jews mentions the fact that all
Jerusalem  was moved at the entrance of Jesus the
prophet of Nazareth of Galilee (xxi. 10, 11).
Or passing on to the arrest of Jesus in Gethsemane,
could anything be more marked than the variations of
Matthew's account from the accounts of the other Evangelists? Only he tells us of Christ's curse upon the use
of the sword in his cause: "for all they that take the
sword shall perish by the sword" (xxvi. 52). It was
the needed caution to the Apostles, whose Jewish nature
was always leading them to put the temporal in the place
of the spiritual. And as Matthew had before taught the




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           145
Jew most clearly that the sacrifice of Jesus was entirely
voluntary, as a ransom for sinners (xx. 28), so here that
Evangelist alone represents Jesus as declaring, and that
with the most solemn emphasis, that he made it voluntarily to fulfill the law and the prophets, when all the
forces of heaven were at his command (xxvi. 53, 54).
These are but instances of those slighter changes found
throughout the first Gospel, and everywhere showing its
Jewish aim and coloring.
II. Other Peculiarities.
From the entire survey, as pursued thus far, it is further obvious that the first Gospel exhibits certain other
marks, in matter entirely peculiar to itself, which can
only be explained by its Jewish aim.
Jewish Assumptions. Matthew assumes, and everywhere acts upon the assumption of what have been
shown to be the characteristics of the Jews as distinguished from the other men of that age.
He acknowledges the Jews the chosen people of God,
as in the words concerning the faith of the centurion
(viii. 10-12); in the charge to the Twelve (x. 5, 6); and
in the words of the Canaanitish woman (xv. 24); while,
in the very same connection, he rebukes their exclusiveness and wicked pretensions.
He assumes that to them belonged the oracles of God,
while he everywhere exhibits, corrects, and denounces
their perversions of the great practical doctrines. He
admits that they possess the only true forms of religious
worship, while he unveils and denounces with merciless
severity their hypocritical formalism. He proceeds, as
has been abundantly shown, upon their familiarity with
the doctrine of the Messiah, while he exposes their carnal and worldly views of his kingdom, and presents it
in its true spiritual aspects.
10




146      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
Jewish Expressions. There still remain certain expressions and features of the first Gospel which may be
noticed as bringing out for the Jew with peculiar clearness the spiritual character of Messiah and his kingdom.
Here was the one most insidious dream of the age, which
needed, therefore, most of all to be dissipated.
The first of these expressions is the kingdom of heaven,
or of the heavens, as the original has it. Matthew uses
it no less than thirty times. He alone of all the Evangelists uses it. The Baptist's call was, " Repent ye, for
the kingdom of heaven is at hand " (iii. 2). The opening proclamation of Jesus was, " Repent, for the kingdom
of heaven is at hand" (iv. 17). So throughout the
Gospel the phrase is used.
The phrase clearly expresses the idea that it is a kingdom distinct from all those kingdoms of this world after
which the Jew had fashioned his idea of Messiah's dominion. Its origin is in the heavens where God dwells:
its throne, the seat of its king, is there; its highest present and prospective glories are there.
This simple phrase taught that the kingdom of Messiah
was to be a spiritual and heavenly kingdom, unlike the
old theocracy with its temple and throne in Jerusalem;
unlike the magnificent empire patterned after Rome,
which the worldly Jew was dreaming of; wholly unlike
the temporal empire of the Papacy long after established.
Matthew uses the equally significant and spiritual expression, the Church. The other Evangelists never use
it.
The Church, the ecclesia, is the body of Christ's followers, called out from the unspiritual world, from the
kingdom of darkness, and brought into spiritual obedience
to him as their head. Matthew represents Jesus as identifying the Church with the kingdom of heaven, and
giving it his divine authority: "And I say also unto




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.            147
thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build
my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against
it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom
of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall
be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on
earth shall be loosed in heaven " (xvi. 18-20). This
authority of the Church is also reaffirmed in connection
with the statement of the law of offenses in the kingdom
(xviii. 18-20). The kingdom of heaven, as manifested
in the Church, is thus clearly seen to be a spiritual organization, independent of all temporal and worldly
organizations.
Lest there should still be room for the dangerous Jewish error of confounding the kingdom of Messiah with
the kingdoms of this world, Matthew represents Jesus as
still more clearly distinguishing between the two by his
plain teaching that the two are distinct, - each being
supreme in its own sphere. When the Herodians and
Pharisees tempted him to teach sedition, by the crafty
question, "Is it lawful to give tribute unto Cesar or
not? " Mark and Luke represent him  as saying " Bring
me a penny; " and it has been alleged that his admirable
reply, when it was brought to him, "Render therefore
unto Casar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God
the things which be God's," was only an ingenious evasion of the question put to him; but as Matthew puts it,
he said, " Shew me the tribute money," so that it was with
the penny in his hand as tribute money that his reply
was given; and accordingly it was no evasion, but an explicit inculcation of the duty of payment.1
If there is still doubt, let it be remembered that Jesus
actually paid tribute, and on one occasion wrought a miracle to provide the means of paying it (xvii. 24-27),
a fact which Matthew alone records.
1 For a suggestive summary of facts on this and other points, see The
Four Evangelists, by Rev. Edward A. Thomson, pp. 41-46.




148      MATTHEW, THE GOSPEL FOR THE JEW.
Still further, it will be found by examination, that in
the first Gospel only is the authority of Pilate, the civil
ruler, distinctly recognized. In this Gospel alone he is
the governor. Moreover, in this Gospel only, as has been
shown, is there added to the rebuke to the unlawful resistance of Peter, recorded also by John, "Put up thy
sword into his place," the significant words, "For all
they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."
The foundation of the kingdom upon righteousness
rather than force, its existence in the midst of the kingdoms of this world, its rejection by the great leaders and
rulers of men, complete the evidence of its spirituality,
and give the death-blow to all the carnal expectations of
the Jews. It is to be a universal kingdom established by
the preaching of the Gospel throughout the world (xxviii.
18-20).
SUMMARY.
To one casting a final glance back, from the point now
reached, over the entire course of investigation pursued,
the Jewish adaptation of the Gospel according to Matthew cannot fail to appear clearly.
It has been shown to be a historical fact that Matthew,
a Jew eminently fitted for the task, wrote this Gospel
for the Jews, the men chosen by God to be the custodians
of both the doctrines and forms of the true and divine
world-religion, and the men from whom and to whom the
prophets had ages before declared that the Messiah was
first to come. This is the historical foundation of the
true theory of the Gospel.
It has also been shown that the first Gospel itself
everywhere bears the marks of its Jewish origin and aim.
This appears in its entire plan, which is the unfolding of
the central idea that Jesus is the Messiah of the Prophets.
It appears likewise in the omissions and additions made
by the Evangelist, both of which have been shown to




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.            149
have been made to adapt it to the Jewish soul and its
needs. It appears no less clearly in all its incidental variations from the others, and in all its incidental, at first
view almost accidental, peculiarities, — the entire production being moulded and shaped and colored, in its narratives, sentences, and words, by its Jewish reference and
adaptation.
It is not, therefore, too much to claim, that the historical and critical views of the Gospel combine to establish the theory that Matthew was originally the Gospel
for the Jew, and to demonstrate that this theory is the
true key to the Gospel.




PAiRT III.
MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
"Sole victor from th' expulsion of his foes
Messiah his triumphal chariot turn'd;
Son, Heir, and Lord, to Him dominion given,
Worthiest to receive."
JOHN MILTON.
" The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the SON OF GOD; as it
is written in the Prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face,
which shall prepare thy way before thee. The voice of one crying in the
wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD; make his paths straight."
MARK i. 1-3.
"Secundus Marcus, interpres apostoli Petri, et Alexandrinse ecclesimi
primus episcopus, qui Dominum quidem Salvatorem ipse non vidit, sed ea
quae magistrum audierat praedicantem, juxta fidem magis gestorum narravit quam ordinem."                                     JEROME.
CHAPTER 1.
HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE ROMAN ADAPTATION OF THE
SECOND GOSPEL.
SECTION 1.
ORIGIN AND DESIGN OF THE SECOND GOSPEL.
FOLLOWING the order laid down in the investigation
of the Gospel according to Matthew, it becomes necessary to ask and answer the questions: What was the




ORIGIN AND DESIGN.             161
actual origin of the Gospel according to Mark? For what
class of readers was it immediately designed?
The latter question has seldom been asked, but a vast
amount of time and effort has been expended upon the
construction of d priori and imaginative theories of the
origin of the second Gospel.
Perhaps the most popular of these theories is that of
the critics who would have us believe that this Gospel
is only a very awkward rehash of that according to
Matthew, with the occasional addition, no less awkward,
of some statement from Luke. The remarkable resemblance of the first and second Gospels seems at first sight
to give probability to the theory, but it will be shown
subsequently that this resemblance is to be accounted for
in a different manner. The hasty and sometimes shabby
treatment of the second Gospel by many of the commentators has done not a little to foster, in the minds of common readers, a view too closely allied to that of these
critics.
A careful study of the Gospel itself, with a wise reference to the age in which it was produced and to the actual history of its origin, will reveal the fact that it has a
distinct aim and an independent unity of its own. Such
study will scarcely fail to convince the candid mind that
Matthew is quite as likely to be a rehash of Mark, as
Mark is of Matthew. At the same time, much more accordant with a due reverence for the four Gospels, as produced by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost and forming
together one part of a great plan of that Being who never
really wastes material, is the theory that each one of the
Evangelists, in writing what he wrote, was directed by
infinite wisdom to perform an essential and distinct service for the world.
From the historical point of view, it can be shown conclusively that the second Gospel was written for the Ro



152       MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
mans, the second of the three great representative races
of which the civilized world of Mark's day was made
up.
Witnesses. The most ancient direct testimony here,
as in the case of Matthew, is that of Papias, as preserved
by Eusebius. Papias recorded what he learned by inquiry from the disciples of the Apostles. "Mark, the
interpreter of Peter, wrote carefully down all that he
recollected, but not according to the order of Christ's
speaking or working. For, as I think, he neither had
heard Christ, nor was a direct follower of him.  But
with Peter, as already said, he was afterward intimate,
who used to preach the Gospel for the profit of his
hearers, and not in order to construct a history of the
sayings of the Lord. Hence Mark made no mistake, since
he so wrote some things as lie was accustomed to repeat
them from memory, and since he continually sought this
one thing, - neither to omit anything of those things
which he had heard, nor to add anything false to them." i
The character of Papias, his method, and the value of
his testimony, have already been considered under the
origin and design of the first Gospel. The considerations
there adduced apply with equal force here. Irenaeus
confirms the testimony of Papias. He states that, after
the departure of Peter and Paul from Rome, " Mark, the
disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to
us in writing what had been preached by Peter." 2
Tertullian of Carthage, who wrote later, agrees with
Irenaeus, declaring incidentally that the Gospel "which
Mark published may be affirmed to be Peter's, whose interpreter Mark was." 3
Clement of Alexandria, who flourished in the latter
1 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 39.
2 Irenseus, Against Iheresies, iii. I; iii. 10; Euseb. Hist. Eccles. v. 8.
8 Tertullian, Against Marcion, iv. 5.




ORIGIN AND DESIGN.             153
part of the second century, brings out more explicitly the
Roman aim of the second Gospel. His scholarly attainments, wide acquaintance with the Church, and nearness
to apostolic times, all combine to make him a most valuable witness in this matter: his scholarly attainments,
for, having studied first with the various philosophers, and
afterwards with the distinguished Christian teachers, in
Syria, Palestine, Greece, Italy, and Egypt, and having
profited in all, he had scarcely an equal in his century,
and so had readiest access to all the written opinions of
the age; his wide acquaintance with the Church, - for his
travels and studies brought him into contact with wellnigh its whole extent from east to west, and gave him
opportunity to learn the traditions on all such points; his
nearness to apostolic times, - for his life reached back so
far as to need but a single link to connect it with the
passing away of the last of the Apostles. With these
facilities for arriving at the truth on that point, he makes
his statement touching the aim of Mark's Gospel as an
undisputed fact, and does it at a time when, if contrary
to fact, it would have been the easiest thing conceivable
to expose its falsehood.
His statement was originally made in the sixth book
of his Institutions, a writing not now extant but quoted
by Eusebius. It is to the effect, that when the Gospel
was preached to the Romans " such a light of piety shone
into the minds of those who heard Peter that they were
not satisfied with once hearing, nor with the unwritten
doctrine that was delivered, but earnestly besought Mark
(whose Gospel is now spread abroad) that he would leave
in writing for them the doctrine which they had received
by preaching; nor did they cease until they had persuaded him, and so given occasion for the Gospel to be
written which is now called after Mark. The Apostle,
understanding this by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit,




154       MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
was pleased with the earnest desire of these men, and
commanded this Gospel now written to be read in the
churches." I
Clement elsewhere specifies some " Roman knights"
as having made this request.2
Origen, the pupil of Clement, agrees with his master
in his statement of the origin of the second Gospel. In
the first book of his Commentaries on the Gospel of Matthew, in giving the catalogue of the New Testament
Scriptures, he writes: " As I have understood from  tradition, respecting the four Gospels, which are the only
undisputed ones in the whole Church of God throughout
the world; the first is written according to Matthew, the
same that was once a publican, but afterwards an Apostle
of Jesus Christ, who having published it for the Jewish
converts, wrote it in the Hebrew; the second is according
to Mark, who composed it, as Peter explained to him,
who also acknowledges him as his son in his general
Epistle, saying,' The elect church in Babylon salutes you,
as also Mark my son;' the third is according to Luke,
the Gospel commended by Paul, which was written for
the converts from the Gentiles; and last of all is the
Gospel according to John." 3
At a later date, Eusebius the historian sums up the unvarying testimony of those who have gone before, and
gives his own indorsement to the statement that Mark
wrote his Gospel under the direction of Peter, at the request of the brethren at Rome, and with a special view
to circulation in Italy and among the Romans generally.4
Gregory Nazianzen confirms the main point in this
testimony, in his Theological Poems, for the instruction
1 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. ii. 15.
2 Adumbrat. in 1 Pet. p. 1007.
8 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. vi. 25; Orig. Comm. in Matt. i.
R Euseb. Hist, Eccles. ii. 15; vi. 14; vi. 25.




ORIGIN AND DESIGN.             155
of the Church, declaring that Mark wrote his account of
the miraculous works of Christ for Romans.1
Jerome writes that "the second Evangelist is Mark,
the interpreter of Peter, and the first bishop of the
Church of Alexandria, who did not himself see the
Saviour, but related those things which he had heard his
master preaching, and according to the belief of the reporters riather than in strict order." 2
The veracity of these witnesses on this point has never
been fairly impeached. No reasonable motive can be
assigned for their making the main statements in which
they agree, except the conviction that those statements
were founded in fact.
Pertinent Facts. We are therefore justified in accepting as undoubted facts, that Mark wrote the second
Gospel; that it was substantially the preaching of Peter
to the Romans; that the Gospel was written at the request of Romans, and was intended to give the preaching
of Peter a permanent form for them; and that it took
advantage of the Roman peculiarities, and was fitted to
commend Jesus, as the Saviour, to the Roman soul.
The theory advanced in the present work does not directly depend for its verification upon the establishment
of the fact that Peter was actually at Rome and had to
do with the founding of the church there; for the Gospel was preached to the Romans all over the ancient
world. The ease with which many writers throw aside,
as unworthy of belief, the Patristic traditions concerning
the connection of Peter and Mark with Rome, is, however, to say the least, exceedingly marvelous. It appears
all the more so when it is remembered that the Church
rests upon the testimony of these same ancient writers for
the most of her knowledge of the historic origin of the
1 Greg. Naz. Carmin. lib. i. sect. i. 12, vers. 32.
2 Hieron. Comment. in Evalg. Miatth. proleg. 3, 4.




156       MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
canon of the Scriptures and of the Christian religion.
The influence of the modern criticism is at present manifesting itself in the tendency to treat slightly the unvarying Patristic traditions touching the connection of
Peter with the Gospel of Mark. The methods, scientific
value, and inevitable results of such criticism have already
been adverted to, in considering the origin and design of
the first Gospel. The common-sense view, which is always in accordance with the truly scientific one, undoubtedly is that expressed by Principal Tulloch: " If the testimony of the Fathers is good for anything at all, this
connection (of Peter with Mark's Gospel) is as certain
as any historical fact can be, and not less important than
it is certain." 1
Indirectly, therefore, as was seen in discussing the fact
of a Hebrew original of Matthew's Gospel, the theory of
the historic origin of Mark does depend, in some measure,
upon the acceptance of these facts so clearly and unmistakably stated by so many of the Fathers of the early
Church; for the same false principles of criticism must
sweep away the entire basis of history and leave the present swinging loose from all the past.
The clearly ascertained historical facts concerning the
origin of the second Gospel, furnish the true startingpoint in seeking an adequate understanding of the Gospel.
SECTION II.
THE CHARAOTER AND NEEDS OF THE ROMAN.
If the second Gospel originated, as has been shown,
in the preaching of Peter, and was prepared through the
agency of Mark for Roman readers, the character and
needs of the Roman must furnish the key to this Gospel.
1 Lectures on'Vie de Jesus,' p. 109.




THE ROMAN CHARACTER.            157
The questions to be asked and answered here are:
What manner of man was the Roman? What were his
spiritual needs? The answers to these questions will
cast light upon whatever has been prepared under the influence of the Holy Ghost for the Roman race.
I. The Romans.
Certain characteristics clearly distinguish the Romans
from the other great historic races of the age of Christ.
They represented the idea of active human power in the
ancient world. They embodied that idea in the state or
empire, as the repository of law and justice. They came
in process of time to deify the state as the grandest concrete manifestation of power. With the consciousness of
being born to rule the world, they pushed the idea of
national power to universal empire.
Out of these characteristics, which made the Roman an
altogether peculiar man among men, came his spiritual
needs. Those needs were deepened and intensified by the
ultimate failure of the Roman race in its attempted work
for the world. Along the line of the peculiarities of this
race must accordingly be sought the correct understanding of their Gospel requirements in the time of Christ
and the Apostles.
Active Human Power. The Romans represented the
idea of active human power in the ancient world.
The liberty is here taken of assuming that, under
Providence, the history of each nation is, either consciously or unconsciously, the embodiment and working
out of some grand idea. That idea once seized upon
furnishes the key to the nation's character, conduct, and
mission, and shows what is needed, humanly speaking,
in order to commend Jesus Christ to that nation as the
divine deliverer of men.
This key to the character, career, and wants of the Ro



158      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
mans is found in the idea of power. In writing to the
Christians at Rome, therefore, Paul is " not ashamed of
the Gospel of Christ, because it is the power of God unto
salvation to every one that believeth" (Rom. i. 16).
What, then, was the Roman idea of power, in its essence,
modifications, and developments?
The horizon of Rome, broad as it was, was yet limited
to this world. The Roman was not, like the Jew, the
representative of supernatural and divine power, but of
power natural and human. Even this lower and narrower domain he did not wholly appropriate, but leaving
human power, as power of reason expressing itself in
thought, to the Greek, seized upon power of will, expressing itself in action, as his peculiar governing idea. The
Roman, as such, cared little for distinctively supernatural and spiritual power such as moved the Jew; he cared
as little for the logical and aesthetic power of the Greek;
his was the power of will, his the beauty of action, his
the logic of deeds. He became, accordingly, the mighty
worker of the world, casting up the highways across empires, and leaving behind him public improvements in
every form and of a grandeur fitted to astonish the race
to the remotest ages.
Power in State and Law. The Romans embodied
their peculiar idea of power in the state as the repository
of law and justice. The will of the individual was lost
in the will of the state, the Roman lost in Rome. Rome
regarded the race as being in a condition of anarchy, so
to speak, out of which it was her mission to bring it.
Her power was power ordered and organized, taking the
form of law and government, directing and controlling.
Law, and duty, or obedience to law, were ideas common to both Jew and Roman. But the Jew taught the
world law in its statical, divine, and eternal relations.
With him it was a divine precept revealed from heaven,




THE ROMAN CHARACTER.            159
pointing out the only way of blessedness and perfection
for man here and hereafter, waiting patiently for man to
come up to its requirements, and depending for its enforcement, not so much upon a present hand of power,
as upon divine sanctions drawn from prophecy and all
the working of providence and from the distant future.
It said to men: " God is long-suffering and can afford
to wait; but his law must be obeyed, for though the
punishment of rebellion and evil-doing may be long deferred it will surely come at the last, since God is supreme." The Roman, on the contrary, gave the world
law in its dynamic, governmental, and temporal aspects.
With him it was not a precept waiting for man to fall in
with it, but the expression of a present force, the organized and martial might of Rome, demanding submission
and remorselessly crushing men and nations into its iron
moulds. It said to men: " Rome is all-powerful and does
not choose to wait; therefore yield on the instant or die."
The career of the Roman was, therefore, one of conflict
and control; war and law were necessary results of his
nature. We are accustomed to say that he had a genius
for war and government.
The State, divine and universal. In time the Roman
deified the state as the grandest concrete manifestation
of power. It is easy to see how it came about. The
Jew had only the one God of revelation, Jehovah; the
Greek had as many gods as there were qualities good and
bad in human nature, and forces productive and destructive in physical nature; the Roman, at the first, accepted
the gods of the Greek, but afterwards remade them to
suit his own notions. With the growth of his power
he outgrew them. Jupiter, Apollo, Bacchus, et id genus
omne, became either insignificant or dead to him. The
day came when an active, mighty embodiment of force,
working triumphantly in the world's great changes, alone




160      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
could claim his submission; and then Janus, the god of
war, was exalted to the high place. As the last phase
of the worship of Olympus, Rome herself became the
god of the world in virtue of being the mightiest thing in
it, and Victory became the embodied symbol of national
power and success. Rome thus became to the Roman at
once the kingdom of god and god.
The Roman had the consciousness of being born to
rule the world. Under the special protection of his national divinities he pushed his way to universal empire.
The Embodiment of Natural Justice. In carrying
out this mission the man of power became the representative of natural justice in the world. In the early history of the republic he was narrow and unpractical.
His rule was then essentially one of caste, for it was
only the Roman who was in compact with heaven, only
the Roman to whom the gods of Rome vouchsafed special
protection. It is true that the broader and more humane
doctrines of Plato, and the marked providences which
prepared for the Advent, modified and somewhat mollified his views at a later date; yet it must still be admitted that, at the time of Christ, with something of the
same tenacity with which the Jew clung to the notion
that he had exclusive claim to the blessings of the covenant with Jehovah, the Roman clung to the opinion that
he alone was privileged and ordained of heaven to rule
mankind.
As his ideas broadened through contact with many
nations and by long experience, his entire system of laws
came to be mainly controlled by those principles of natural justice which come out so clearly in the divine administration of the world. It was thus that in pushing
forward the conquest of the world he became fitted to
consolidate those conquests, and appeared at the last as
the great organizer of the world into a single empire.




THE ROMAN CHARACTER.            161
The Ideal Roman. The grandest Roman, the ideal
man of the race, was therefore the mightiest worker,
conqueror, organizer, and ruler, - the man who as Ccesar
could sway the sceptre of universal empire. Csesar and
Caesarism were the inevitable last result of Roman development.
II. The Key to Mark's Gospel.
If the Roman was, as thus shown, the man of action,
of law and justice, of state worship, of universal empire,
these characteristics must furnish the key to the Gospel
intended for him.
Setting apart from all other men this man of power,
— in the day when his splendid visions of empire had
begun to fade, when disappointment and unrest were
taking possession of his soul, and when he had been made
to feel most deeply that natural justice in the hands of
a human despot is a dreadful thing for sinful men, -
the Holy Ghost proposes to commend to his acceptance
Jesus of Nazareth as his Sovereign and Saviour, the expected deliverer of the world.
How shall it be done? Evidently - according to that
law of divine fitness manifested everywhere in God's
working -in that way which is best suited to the character and antecedents of the Roman. A Gospel for the
Roman must be moulded by the Roman idea.
Scriptures and prophecy, so potent with the Jew, would
count for little with the Roman; he was ignorant of both.
Reason and philosophy, so convincing to the Greek, would
be scoffed at by the Roman; he had no appreciation of
either. Before the beginning of faith he was blind to
the grand doctrines so precious to the Christian. The
Gospel for him nmust present the character and career of
Jesus from the Roman side, or point of view, as answering to the idea of divine power, work, law, conquest, and
11




162      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
universal sway. It must exhibit Jesus as adapted, in
his power and mercy, in his mission and work, to the
wants of the Roman nature and world. To the Roman
these are the credentials of Jesus, no less essential than
prophecy to the Jew, or philosophy to the Greek. Without them there could not even be a reasonable hope of
arresting his attention.
At the same time, while making the most of everything correct in the Roman idea, the Gospel must aim to
correct the errors in it, and lift it to the level of the divine idea.
SECTION III.
THE AUTHORSFIP OF THE SECOND GOSPEL.
The divine adaptation of the second Gospel to the Roman race is seen in the selection of its author and in his
preparation for his task.
i. Mark.
John Mark was the chosen instrument, in connection
with the Apostle Peter. He was the son of an influential
Christian matron of Jerusalem, named Mary, in whose
house the believers at Jerusalem were wont to assemble
(Acts xii. 12). He was evidently already known and esteemed in the Church and identified with it, when Luke
wrote the Acts of the Apostles, or that Evangelist would
not have introduced the mother to notice by naming the
son.
Career and Character. He early devoted himself to
the missionary work, accompanying Paul and his uncle
Barnabas on their return from Jerusalem to Antioch
(Acts xiii. 25). He also set out with these two men
on their joint missionary journey (Acts xiii. 5), but
turned back when they came to the more difficult and
dangerous part of their work, and returned to Jerusalem




THE AUTHORSHIP.              163
(Acts xiii. 13). When they were about to set out on
a second journey to strengthen the churches, and extend
the Gospel, Mark was at Antioch, and his uncle proposed
that he should again accompany them, but Paul, remembering his former ignominious desertion, refused to allow
it, and separated from Barnabas when he insisted upon
it (Acts xv. 37).
This so pointed and vigorous rebuke seems to have
had a salutary effect. We find Mark afterward at Rome
with Paul during the imprisonment of the latter. The
Apostle sends salutations from him to the Colossians
(Col. iv. 10). In the second Epistle to Timothy he
sends for him because he has found him a valuable assistant (2 Tim. iv. 11). In his Epistle to Philemon he
mentions him among his fellow-workers and sends greeting to him (Philemon 24).
The same Mark is also found associated, probably at a
later period, with the Apostle Peter. He sends greeting
by Peter from Babylon (1 Pet. v. 13). The traditions
of the early Church affirm that he afterward accompanied the same Apostle to the westward, and even to
Rome. After the death of Peter, he is said to have
preached in Africa, especially at Alexandria, where he
suffered martyrdom in the most terrible manner.
In these facts are found clear indications of the character of the Evangelist. Although the son of a Jewess,
and bearing a name of special significance to the Jew
(John, gift of Jehovah), it may, perhaps, be justly inferred from the prevailing use of his Roman name, Mark,
that he was preeminently Roman in his nature and development. He was, like Peter, originally a man of action rather than of deep and abiding principle, a man of
fervor and enthusiasm rather than of persevering effort;
but he was transformed, by the power of the same Christ
who transformed Peter, into the man of rapid, contin



164      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
ued and effective effort in the missionary work of the
Church.
The change in character for the better is very manifest in what is known of his history. If, as has been supposed, the young man who followed Jesus into the city,
having a linen cloth about him (Mark xiv. 15) was Mark,
the hasty and impulsive character appears in both the
following and the flight. It appears again in the ready
entrance upon the missionary work, with Paul and Barnabas, and in the equally ready desertion. But the old
enthusiasm  revives and brings him  back to Antioch
again, and he engages anew in the work and makes such
progress in energy and principle and steadfastness as to
become one of Paul's most trusted and successful helpers.
After endearing himself still more to the Apostle Peter
in their mutual work across the Roman world, he at last
bravely dares and endures the martyr's fate.
Special Training. It is certain that his training was
eminently adapted to prepare him to exert an influence
on the man of power and action.
Three men had to do chiefly with the shaping of his
character after the Roman ideal. He was made to feel
the influence of the gentle and merciful spirit of Barnabas, whose fellow-worker for Christ he was in his early
life. He received the impress of the tremendous sustained energy of Paul, whose companion he was in the
Apostle's earlier ministry, and again at Rome during his
captivity (Col. iv. 10; Philemon 24). He was moulded
by the restless, unwearying activity of Peter, whose convert he probably was (1 Pet. v. 13), whom he accompabnied in his mission to Babylon (1 Pet. v. 13), and
whose interpreter he was (according to the Fathers) in
the mission to Rome in which the Apostle suffered martyrdom.
While being thus fashioned in character by these great




THE AUTHORSHIP.               165
Apostles and preachers, he was providentially brought
into the widest and most varied contact with the Empire, in its customs and language, in its law and legions,
from the centre of authority at Rome to its remotest
limits.
It likewise seems strikingly providential that one who
had come so largely under the influence of the two men,
Peter and Paul, who represented the Christian idea of
the conquest of the whole world for Christ and the establishment of his universal kingdom (Gal. ii. 7-9),
should be chosen to write the Gospel for the Roman, the
man of universal empire.
II Peter.
But the instrument, so fitted in character and training
for the work of commending Jesus to the man of power,
needed still to be supplemented. Mark was probably not
personally cognizant of the facts of the Gospel, save perhaps the later ones. Peter, the man of deeds rather
than words, was therefore appointed to supply in his
preaching, out of his vivid memory, and after his strik-ing manner, the materials for the Gospel, while Mark
was appointed, under the influence of the Holy Spirit,
and in accordance with his character and training, to
give it final shaping.
Career and Character. No more remarkable character appears in Gospel history than Simon Peter. Nor is
there a more remarkable instance of the transforming
power of Jesus Christ.
The first words addressed to him by Jesus laid open
his character, as he was at that time, and predicted what
he should become through his acknowledgment of the
Messiah (John i. 42): " Thou art Simon the son of
Jona," the hearkening, timid one, the unstable man;
"thou shalt be called," and, according to the Hebrew
idea, shalt become, " Cephas," rock, the stable man.




166      MARK, TIIE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
Peter had the prime quality of the man of action,his thoughts had the closest possible connection with the
nerves of voluntary motion. With him for a thought to
come into his mind was to have it express itself on the
instant, at the end of the tongue, in the hand, or by the
feet. He was the impulsive man.
But in the earlier part of his career he had also a
marked defect, which went far toward making his activity
mere unprincipled and irrational motion instead of rational, noble action, — the want of a settled purpose and
grand governing motive pervading and controlling all
the workings of his mind. Jesus, the Christ, was to
furnish him with that, and thus to change the unstable
Simon Jona into the stable Cephas.
In his early course instability, fickleness,was his most
prominent characteristic. When Jesus came to the disciples, walking on the water, it was Peter that made
haste to meet him, but whose faith failed on the instant
(Matt. xiv. 28-31). It was Peter who, in Christ's extremity, declared that he would die rather than forsake
his Master, but who in the midst of peril denied him
thrice and with added profanity before the cock crew
(Matt. xxvi. 33-35, 69-75). It was the impulsive Peter
who ran to the sepuchre, at the report of the women, and
rushed past John into the tomb to examine the burial
vestments (John xx. 3-10); but it was also Peter who
in ten days was ready to propose a return to the old occupation on the Lake of Tiberias (John xxi. 3), as if
despairing of anything from Jesus of Nazareth. When
Jesus came to the shore of Tiberias where the disciples
were fishing, it was Peter who, seeing his Lord, jumped
into the sea and swam ashore to him. After his Master,
thrice addressing him as Simon Jona, to fix the old sin
and fickleness in his heart, had restored him to the place
of grace and apostleship from which he had fallen, it was




THE AUTHORSHIP.               167
Peter who almost immediately asked that prying question, " And what shall this man do? " which called forth
again the sharp rebuke of the Saviour. Even long after
he had entered upon the full work of an Apostle, when
the question of the circumcision of the converted heathen
came up, Peter was the waverer and Paul was forced to
withstand him to the face (Gal. ii. 11; Acts xv. 7-11).
Special Training. Nevertheless one cannot run in
thought along his career without the growing conviction,
that he made constantly increasing progress in stability
of character and fixedness of purpose all the way to the
last. It was Peter who stood up at Pentecost, and in
that recorded sermon distinctly accused the Jews of
murdering Jesus of Nazareth, and boldly proclaimed his
resurrection and Messiahship (Acts ii. 22-36). It was
Peter who in the days of persecution dared to defy the
magistrates, at the peril of his life, in that noble assertion of liberty of conscience: "Whether it be right in
the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto
God, judge ye" (Acts iv. 19). It was Cephas of whom
Paul wrote as one of the pillars of the mother church at
Jerusalem (Gal. ii. 9). According to tradition, Peter,
when about to be crucified, besought that it might be
with his head downward, since he who had once denied
the Master was unworthy to die as the Master had died.
So fully did Jesus, the Christ, infuse into his soul that
one grand purpose which camne to control all his life.
The remarkable development of his faculty for practical work and organization is equally manifest. His quick,
impulsive nature prepared him to be a leader of men.
The infusing of a grand governing principle was also a
requisite for leadership. It is evident that *Christ took
advantage of these characteristics and made him, in a
sense, a leader in the early Church. The natural impulse
to leadership comes out in such instances as Peter's pro



168      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
posal to build tents on the Mount of Transfiguration
(Matt. xvii. 4), and to elect a new Apostle in the place
of Judas (Acts i. 15-22); and in many of the incidents
just referred to as illustrating his original character.
The divine calling to leadership appears from the representative place given to Peter in conferring upon the
Church the power of the keys (Matt. xvi. 18, 19); from
the prominent place accorded him in the wonderful
events of Pentecost (Acts ii. 14, 38); and from the inspired acknowledgment of his relation to the Jewish
world by Paul (Gal. ii. 7-9). It is therefore manifestly
true that, as the Head of the Church has in all ages since
selected and trained men for the special work of organizers, so in the apostolic age he selected and trained
Peter for such a work. It was in this way that Jesus
completed the character of Peter, the man of action.
His thought still remained so closely connected with the
power of action, the man the quick impulsive man still;
but the profound Christian principle which had been infused brought the thought to be always true, the impulse
to be always right, so that consistent and continued action at length made him  in large measure the genuine
representative of the unwearying, all-conquering, allorganizing Roman.
It was this Apostle, who loved action better than logic,
who saw deeds rather than heard doctrines, who felt the
need of earnest and consistent activity more than of a
profound and harmonious creed, - this Apostle whose intense personal affection for Jesus had made him watch
every act and gesture and look and word of his divine
Master, - that was chosen to preach that Gospel which
Mark was commissioned to record for the Romans.
These two, Mark and Peter, formed the one perfect instrument, the one complete medium for introducing Jesus to the favorable consideration of the Roman race of




THE GENERAL PLAN.            169
that age. No other men, equally fitted for embodying
the Gospel in permanent form for the man of action and
control, can be pointed out in connection with the apostolic body.  Neither of these men could have accomplished the work alone; for, even if Mark was of Roman
birth and nature, he had not the facts of the Gospel;
and even if Peter was a man of action and trained as
such, he was at the same time of Jewish birth and nature. The two were indispensable. The impulse which
led the Romans to ask for the permanent record of the
Gospel, and that which led Mark and Peter to accede to
their request, were both from the Holy Ghost, the Spirit
of all wisdom and power. Doubtless, out of all the men
of that age, the Holy Ghost chose the men best fitted in
their character and experience to prepare and write the
Gospel for the Roman world.
CHAPTER II.
CRITICAL VIEW OF THE ROMAN ADAPTATION OF THE
SECOND GOSPEL.
IN examining the second Gospel, in the light of its
ascertained origin, design, and authorship, its peculiar
adaptation to the needs of the Roman of that age will
become apparent. The order adopted in treating of the
first Gospel will be followed in treating of the second.
SECTION I.
THE ROMAN ADAPTATION IN THE GENERAL PLAN OF
THE SECOND GOSPEL.
The propriety of seeking for a plan of the Evangelist,
different from that given by the division into sixteen




170      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
chapters, has already been shown, in preparing the way
for the analysis of Matthew's Gospel.
By examining the second Gospel with the aid of its
known origin and aim, it will be seen that it may be naturally and conveniently divided, as that of Matthew was
divided, into three principal parts,- presenting the successive stages of the work of Jesus, the Divine Conqueror, in establishing his universal empire, the kingdom
of God, — with an appropriate introduction and conclusion.
In these divisions the character and career of Jesus are
unfolded, not from the Jewish point of view, but in those
aspects which are peculiarly Roman.
OUTLINE OF THE SECOND GOSPEL.
INTRODUCTION.
The Advent of the King and Conqueror. The Evangelist brings forward the Almighty King in his Divine
Person and Kingdom. i. 1-ii. 12.
Section 1. Jesus is exhibited as being the Divine Son
of God. i. 1-13.
A. In his name and heralding. 1-8.
B. In his divine recognition at the baptism, and in
the subjection of Satan, the wild beasts, and the angelic
world, at the temptation. 9-13.
Section 2. Jesus is exhibited mightily proclaiming the
kingdom of power. i. 14-ii. 12.
A. In his opening proclamation of the kingdom of God
in Galilee, and the call of the first subjects. i. 14-20.
B. In his opening works of power in Galilee, rising
gradually to the authoritative pardon of sin, foreshadowing the future of the kingdom, and rousing the people.
i. 21-ii. 12.




THE GENERAL PLAN.              171
a. The authoritative teaching in the synagogue at Capernaum, the manifold works of power there, and the
rising fame. i. 21-34.
b. The morning of solitary prayer, followed by the
circuit of Galilee, with innumerable works of power, resulting in blazing abroad his fame. i. 35-45.
c. The subsequent return to Capernaum, the preaching
of the word, the assumption of the divine prerogative of
forgiving sin, amazing the people and leading them to
glorify God. ii. 1-12.
PART I.
The Conflict of the Almighty King. The Evangelist
exhibits Jesus in the teaching, work, and conflict of the
period of public ministry devoted to the continued proclamation of the coming Kingdom of Power. ii. 13viii. 26.
Section 1. He presents the teachings of Jesus concerning the foundations of the kingdom of God. ii. 13v. 43.
A. In the subjects and law of the kingdom. ii. 13iii. 35.
a. They are sinners, and not formalist Pharisees. ii.
13-iii. 12.
b. The first subjects are called out of all classes, and
include all those whose law is the will of the Father. iii.
13-35.
B. In the law of growth and development in the kingdom. iv. 1-34.
a. By the quiet outgrowth of truth in the heart (the
Sower). 1-25.
b. Yet independent of the will and effort of man (the
Seed-corn). 26-29.
c. And destined to fill the whole earth with its greatness (the Mustard-seed).  30-34.




172       MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
C. In the power of the King, who is omnipotent. iv.
35-v. 43.
a. Power over nature, in stilling the storm. iv. 35-41.
b. Power over the world of spirits and of irrational
beings, in healing the Gadarene demoniac and destroying
the swine. v. 1-20.
c. Power over the kingdom of disease and death, in
healing the woman with the issue of blood, and in raising the daughter of Jairus. v. 21-43.
Section 2. He presents Jesus, in the activity of the
work of the kingdom, passing through a series of conflicts and withdrawals.  vi. 1-viii. 26.
A. Conflict in Nazareth with his old neighbors, leaving
them in unbelief. vi. 1-6 (a).
B. Conflict in Galilee, in connection with the mission
of the Twelve, and resulting in withdrawal across the
Sea of Galilee. vi. 6 (b)-52.
a. The mission and work of the Twelve. 6 (b)-13.
b. The terror of Herod at the report of it, and the
reason for that terror. 14-29.
c. The return and withdrawal of the Twelve, with
the symbolical miracles of power and mercy,- the
loaves and fishes and walking upon the storm-tossed lake.
30-52.
C. Conflict renewed in Galilee (in Gennesaret), resulting in rejection by Jerusalem Scribes and Pharisees
and withdrawal to Gentile borders. vi. 53-viii. 9.
a. The return to Gennesaret, the miracles, and the controversy concerning unwashen hands. vi. 53-vii. 23.
b. The withdrawal to the Gentiles, and the miracles
of grace, in healing the daughter of the Syro-Phenician
woman in the borders of Tyre and Sidon, and in restoring the deaf and dumb man and feeding the four thousand beyond the Sea of Galilee. vii. 24-viii. 9.
D. Conflict renewed in Galilee, in Dalmanutha, with




THE GENERAL PLAN.              173
the local Pharisees, and the withdrawal and work of
mercy on the blind man in Bethsaida Julias. viii. 1026.
PART II.
The Claim of the Almighty King. The Evangelist
exhibits Jesus, the Almighty Conqueror, as distinctly
claiming the right to the Kingdom of Power, to be won
through suffering and rejection, and both explaining and
maintaining his claim. viii. 27-xiii. 37.
Section 1. He presents Jesus teaching his followers
that the kingdom is to be won by triumph over suffering
and death. viii. 27-x. 45.
A. In a first revelation, occasioned by the confession
of Peter, foretelling the rejection of " the son of man "
by the Jewish Sanhedrim, followed by exhibitions of divine glory, and by exertions of divine power which are
traced to the secret source of all power. viii. 27-ix. 29.
B. In a second revelation, foretelling the treachery of
his own followers, and followed by a period of instruction
in the duties of subjects in the kingdom. ix. 30-x. 31.
C. In a third revelation, foretelling his death by the
Roman rulers, and followed by instruction concerning
the way for the subjects to rise to power in the kingdom.
x. 32-45.
Section 2. He presents Jesus claiming the right to
the kingdom of power, in the city of David, and establishing his claim, although rejected by the Jews. x. 46xiii. 37.
A. In his public advent as the almighty heir of David, and in the accompanying works of power. x. 46xi. 26.
a. At Jericho listening to the appeal of Bartimeus.
x. 46-52.
b. At the triumphal entry into the Holy City. xi. 110.




174       MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
c. In cursing the fig-tree and assuming royal authority
in the temple, and in revealing anew the source of all
true power. xi. 11-26.
B. In his conflict with and overwhelming triumph over
the various leading classes. xi. 27-xii. 44.
a. Jesus on the defensive, - against the Sanhedrim,
the Pharisees and Herodians, the Sadducees and the
Scribes. xi. 27-xii. 34.
b. Jesus taking the offensive, warning against the doctrine of the Scribes, and contrasting with their religion
the genuine piety of the poor widow. xii. 35-44.
C. In his prophetic unfolding, for his disciples, of both
the near and remote future of Jerusalem and his kingdom. xiii. 1-37.
a. The events preceding the future coming. 1-23.
b. The coming of the king in power and glory and the
urgent call for watchfulness and prayerfulness. 24-37.
PART III.
The Sacrifice of the Almighty King.  The Evangelist exhibits Jesus, preparing for the setting up of the
Kingdom of Power through his sacrificial sufferings and
death. xiv. 1-xv. 47.
Section 1. He presents the preliminary preparation
for his death. xiv. 1-41.
A. In the plotting of the Sanhedrim, the anointing for
the burial, and the treachery of Judas. 1-11.
B. In the Passover supper, when Jesus puts himself
symbolically in the place of the paschal sacrifice. 12-26.
C. In the sorrow over the foreseen desertion, and in
the struggle with the terrors of death in Gethsemane.
27-41.
Section 2. He presents Jesus in the hands of his
enemies, the sinful leaders and rulers of the Jewish nation. xiv. 42-xv. 47.




THE CENTRAL IDEA.             175
A. In his betrayal and apprehension. xiv. 42-52.
B. In his trial before the Sanhedrim. 53-72.
C. In his trial and delivering up by Pilate. xv. 1-15.
D. In the hands of the executioners, the Roman soldiers, - in the Praetorium, on the way to Golgotha, and
on the cross. 16-41.
E. Under the power of death. 42-47.
CONCLUSION.
The Universal Empire established.   The Evangelist exhibits Jesus, the Almighty King, conquering
death and taking the universal Kingdom. xvi. 1-20.
Section 1. He presents him as rising from the dead
and convincing his disciples of his identity. xvi. 1-14.
Section 2. He presents him as actually establishing
the universal kingdom. xv. 15-20.
A. In the Great Commission with its promise of grace.
15-18.
B. In the assumption of divine authority in heaven. 19.
C. In cooperating with his disciples in the fulfillment
of the Great Commission. 20.
SECTION II.
THE ROMAN ADAPTATION IN THE CENTRAL IDEA OF
THE SECOND GOSPEL.
The outline thus given may be left to witness for itself
that the second Gospel was prepared by Mark for Roman
readers. In connection with its systematic exhibition of
the material of the Gospel, it may more readily be shown
how the central idea and general drift of Mark's production confirm the historical testimony regarding the Roman aim of the Evangelist.




176       MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
I. The Central Idea.
It is a principle, now coming to be generally admitted,
that in all literature the organic idea will give shape to
the characters, incidents, metaphors, diction, and phraseology, - to the entire tone and tenor of a production, -
a principle that holds not less clearly in Matthew's or
Mark's Gospel than in Shakespeare's Hamlet. One of
the very first inquiries, therefore, must be: What is the
central or organic idea of the second Gospel?
The central idea of the Gospel according to Mark is
found in the opening verse: " The Gospel of Jesus
Christ the Son of God (Mark i. 1). The Evangelist,
accordingly, presents Jesus, not as the fulfillment of a past
divine revelation, as does Matthew; nor as the satisfaction of present human yearning, as does Luke; nor as the
foundation of the future Church, as does John; but as
the personal embodiment of the Son of God, in the fullness of his present, living energy, demonstrating himself
the Son of God by his divine working. Everything, from
the opening with the mission of the Baptist to the closing
vision of Jesus exalted to the throne of God, is so shaped
as to deepen the impression of his almighty power.
This Gospel represents him as proclaiming and establishing a kingdom, but it is a kingdom of power, and not
of prophecy. While, therefore, Mark has so much in common with Matthew that many insist that he is a mere
copyist or abridger, there is yet this wide difference, that
whereas Matthew rests wholly on prophecy, Mark is so
entirely independent of prophecy that, after the opening
verses, he never even records the words of a prophet, except as he quotes from the mouth of Jesus.
For the Roman, the mighty worker and conqueror of
the world, Jesus is held up as the divine almighty worker
and victor. While Matthew furnishes us with the an



THE CENTRAL IDEA.              177
cient types of Christianity, Luke with its inmost connection with the unchanging heart of humanity, and John
with its deeper spiritual mysteries, Mark holds up "the
picture of the sovereign power of Jesus, battling with
evil among men swayed to and fro with tumultuous passions."
Lange, in the Introduction to his Commentary on this
Gospel, has attempted — and with success —to show
that the Gospel may be divided into " a progressive series
of victorious conflicts," beginning with the conquest of
the four chosen Apostles and ending with the final subjection and possession of the whole world. Through
perpetual victory - victory even in seeming defeat, - the
King, the incarnation of almighty power, moves on to
realize the Roman ideal of universal dominion. It is
therefore the almighty conqueror, and not the servant
(symbolized by the ox of prophecy) as the allegorical interpreters would have it, that appears in Mark's delineation of Jesus.
But since the Roman had felt the crushing power of
the iron kingdom and the remorseless cruelty of theferocious beast of prophecy, Mark presents with peculiar distinctness the diviner aspects of the kingdom of God, -its
spirituality and mercy no less than its power and righteousness.  This great world-conflict and conquest, so
realizing the Roman idea and yet so surpassing it, is
everywhere represented as carried on with spiritual forces
and weapons, and for spiritual ends. In retirement from
men and in communion with the heavenly world the king
is girded for the battle. No noise of spear or battle-axe
is heard, for the contest is waged against the devil, his
(lemons and his human agents in the world. The removal of the miseries of the world is sought through the
forgiveness and eradication of sin.  The Conqueror
crushes into fragments the old social world,'but he
12




[178      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
crushes it in mercy; and he reconstructs it not as the
Roman has done -in the moulds of resistless and savage
justice, - but by the law of righteousness and charity.
The false Roman idea of power, weapons, conflict, victory,
and empire are discarded, and true spiritual ideas made
increasingly prominent from the opening of the Gospel
to the close.
There are suffering and death in the kingdom, as in
the earthly kingdom, but they are transformed. The
suffering is not inflicted upon the vanquished, but endured by the victor for the sake of the victory of mercy
and blessing. The death is borne by the conqueror to
furnish the foundation and the beginning of a higher life
of blessedness for all the king's subjects. To the Roman,
with his deepening sense of misery under the stern reign
of natural justice, as imperfectly embodied in Rome,
Mark makes his exhibition of the kingdom of God in the
fullest signification a Gospel, by portraying the career
of the King and his conquering hosts as subordinately
a career of humble service, of kindly ministrations, of
boundless sacrifices, of cheerful suffering, and even of voluntary death, in order to save the perishing race from its
heavy woes.  The complete triumph is reached in the
final conquest of death and the world.
In the great features of both character and career,
Jesus eclipses all that is mightiest and best in the old
Roman ideal, while at the same time correcting and
exalting it.
II. The Gaeneral Drift.
The influence of this central Roman idea is manifest
throughout the second Gospel, in a general movement
and drift quite unlike that of the other Gospels.
Rising above all the details of the Gospel according to
Mark, Da Costa has clearly pointed out certain pecul



THE CENTRAL IDEA.              179
iarly Roman and soldierly features that characterize it as
a whole. By a deliberate comparison lie finds that its
style bears a close resemblance to that of Caesar's Commentaries,- both exhibiting the same emphatic repetition combined with the same rapidity of movement, the
same copiousness of description with the same dramatic
effect, so that even the word straightway (EvOCow) —
which is so characteristic of Mark, being employed in his
Gospel about forty times  appears in the writings of
the great Roman captain in the ever-recurring celeriter.
No work of old Roman, in short, was ever more Roman
in its rhetorical movement than the Gospel according to
Mark.
With an aim differing from that of the present work,
and yet in a form suited to the present purpose, the same
distinguished author has called this Gospel, "The brief
and terse narrative of that three years' campaign, so to
speak, of the supreme Captain of our salvation - whose
name from  of old was Warrior as well as Prince of
Peace, - carried on and completed, for the deliverance of
our souls, the bruising of Satan,; the glorifying of the
Father, in his labors, his sufferings, his death, his resurrection and final triumph." 1
This moulding of the entire material by the Roman
aim of the Evangelist may be traced through the Gospel.
In the Introduction, Jesus is brought forward at once
as the Son of God, and by a few rapid and graphic strokes
is exalted to the very throne of the God of power.
To follow these rapid strokes in detail: a mighty
prophet appears to herald the coming of one infinitely
mightier, the Lord; at the baptism of that mightier One
the heavens are rent open in acknowledgment of his
Divinity; and when the Spirit has driven him into the
wilderness three worlds gather round him. John is cast
1 The Four Witnesses, pp. 111, 135.




180      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
into prison, and the wonder-working activity of this Son
of God begins at once. He proclaims the kingdom of
God at hand. He calls men, and they straightway follow
him. He enters the synagogue at Capernaum on the
Sabbath, and at once begins to teach; the audience is astonished at the authority of his teaching; a demon recognizes his divinity and proclaims it, and is expelled by his
power. Men are amazed at the omnipotence of his command, and his fame immediately spreads through Galilee.
And in this same life-like manner he is hurried from
miracle to more notable miracle, from fame to more general fame, and from power to still greater power, until,
in the space of forty-four verses, we find him exalted to
the place of God, the righteous, moral Governor of the
universe, forgiving the sins of the poor paralytic, while
the people, in their amazement, glorify God, who is revealed there as they had never seen before.
Although all the main facts of this Introduction appear
in the other Gospels, yet it is as different from them all
as if every one of its facts were new. Everything in it
is falnillar as possible, and yet the delineation is as vivid
as if everything were strange as possible. Throughout
there is just the logic to attract the attention and arouse
the interest of the man of power, who is too much given
to making history to stop to interpret prophecy, too much
engaged in rapid doing to pause for slow philosophizing,
and too much absorbed in reorganizing and remoulding the present visible world to be disposed directly to
give heed to the facts of an invisible and spiritual world,
-. just the logic for the Roman.
Part First of Mark's Gospel, exhibiting the foundations
of the kingdom of God, miay be looked upon as corresponding in part to Matthew v, 1-ix. 35, to Luke vi.-vii.,
and to John iii. Comparing it with these, there is noth




THE CENTRAL IDEA.              181
ing in it of that reference to Judaism as the basis of the
law of the kingdom, in which Matthew abounds; nothing of the philosophic presentation of the world-embracing law of charity to which Luke - writing for the universal man - devotes his space; nothing of the theology
of the new life in which John delights. In short, Mark
drops entirely the form of connected discourse in which
the other Evangelists present the fundamental ideas of
the kingdom and gives the character of the subjects, the
law of growth and the power of the King, by a rapid
succession of incidents, parables, and miracles, in what,
for ease of execution and vividness of effect, must be acknowledged an incomparable picture.
In the Introduction and Part First, Jesus appears as
the Son of God, wielding almighty power in its most tangible forms, in the former exercising the prerogatives of
God himself, and in the latter demonstrating himself
Lord of the universe. The Roman, the man of power, is
thus as irresistibly attracted toward him, as the Jew, the
man of prophecy, is by the genealogy of Messiah and
other opening features of Matthew, and as the Greek,
the world-man, is by the philosophic development of the
life of the marvelous divine man by Luke, and as the
Christian, the man of faith, is by the different opening,
concerning the eternal Word, by John.
Part Second, in delineating the kingdom of power in
the activity of its conflict, still holds the attention of the
Roman by miracles second in grandeur to none of those
which have preceded; yet, in the fourfold withdrawal
from enemies, - from Nazareth, from Herod, from the
Jerusalem Scribes and Pharisees, and from the local
Pharisees of Dalmalnutha,- it gives rising prominence to
the spiritual weapons and influences by which the victory
is to be gained, and which in the remainder of the Gospel are to hold the chief place.




182      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
Part Third, with its lesson of conquest by suffering,
records in its opening section, after the confession of the
Twelve, the transcendent miracle of the transfiguration
with its divine recognition of the Son of God, and also
the healing of the dumb demoniac at the foot of the
mountain; but the spiritual element, exalted in the consequent revelation of the secret source of power in the
kingdom in prayer and fasting, predominates from this
point onward.
The presentation of the public claim of the King in
Jerusalem has at the outset the restoring of sight to Bartimeus and the symbolic cursing of the fig-tree; but from
that point forward the miracles of power, - the healing
in the temple, the healing of the ear of Malchus, and all
the wonders that gathered about the cross except the
rending of the temple veil, - disappear from Mark's
record, leaving only the miracles of foresight.  The
scenes of the last days are left to depend for their impressiveness upon the power of the naked facts of the
final struggle with the Jewish authorities and the death
upon the cross, - facts depicted with the life-like touch
of an eye-witness, and fitted to draw from every true
Roman the exclamation of the centurion at the cross,
"Truly this man was the Son of God! "  The narrative
thus makes manifest that this Son of God, who wields at
pleasure almighty power, is not to establish his kingdom
by that, but by the ministrations of love, and the suffering of death in the sinner's stead, - thus conquering by
a new power infinitely mightier than that embodied in
old Rome.
It only remains at this point for the Evangelist to
sketch the victory over death and the doubts of the
amazed disciples, and the establishment of the universal
kingdom by the new spiritual forces and weapons; and
this Mark does in the final chapter, the appropriate con



OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.         183
elusion of this Gospel, in which the almighty King is enthroned and the work of conquest -organized and pushed
to its completion.
All this was just what was needed to commend Jesus
as a Saviour to the Romans. It was, moreover, a true
view of the man of Nazareth, in whose many-sided character was found not only the Messiah, the ideal Jew, but
also the universal Conqueror and King, the ideal Roman.
This Jesus, the inheritor of all the true power and manhood found in the Roman nature, and adding to this a
divine power and manhood, is the Jesus represented by
Mark.
SECTION III.
THE ROMAN ADAPTATION IN THE OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS OF THE SECOND GOSPEL.
The Roman design of the second Gospel is manifest as
well from that which the Evangelist omits of what is
found in the other Gospels, as from that which he adds
to what is found in them.
I. The Omissions of the Second Gospel.
It will be seen on examination, that Mark omits whatever is distinctively Jewish, Greek, or Christian, and
would therefore be of little if any service in his work of
presenting his Gospel to the Roman. Any one even tolerably familiar with the evangelical records will remark
how very extensive these omissions are.
From Matthew. As compared with Matthew's Gospel, which it most resembles, the omission throughout
the second Gospel of the Jewish features will at once
appear even to a cursory reader.
The long discourses which make up so large a part
of Matthew are not found in Mark. According to the
testimony of Papias, Mark gives an account of "things




184       MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
both said and done "1 by Jesus; but the "things said"
were rather incidental or brief sayings than systematic
and extended discourses. The sermon on the Mount
(Matt. v.-vii.); the charge to the Twelve (Matt. x.);
the discourse to his disciples exhorting them to watchfulness and activity in waiting for his coming to judgment
(Matt. xxiv.-xxv.), are not in the second Gospel. Aside
from the fact that the Roman appreciated deeds rather
than discourses, these discourses would have been to him
peculiarly devoid of interest, since they deal so largely
with Jewish ideas, and aim so directly to correct Jewish
errors or to guide Jewish life.
But besides these great omissions, it has been remarked
that there is in this Gospel a general freedom from Jewish
references, and from everything that the Jew alone could
fully understand and appreciate.
There is almost nothing in Mark of the Messianic origin and prophetic preparation of Jesus, to which Matthew
devotes his entire introduction of more than three chapters (Matt. i. 1-iv. 11); and even that which does appear
is with a different aim from Matthew's, - to give an inpressive picture of Christ's opening work. John the Baptist comes forward in the wilderness in picturesque garb
as the herald of Jehovah, the mighty coming Conqueror;
Jesus appears at the baptism and is acknowledged by
God as his "'beloved Son; " and is then immediately
driven into the wilderness, where Satan appears to tempt
him, the wild beasts to terrify him, and the angels to
minister to him (Mark i. 1-13).
Mark omits the parables of special Jewish significance.
Of the series of seven, delivered on the sea-side, only
two are retained: that of the sower (Mark iv. 1-25), as
containing a truth equally applicable to all men concerning the proclamation of the Gospel and the growth of the
1 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 39.




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.         185
kingdom of God; and that of the mustard-seed (Mark
iv. 30-34), which exhibits, in a peculiarly Roman aspect,
the world-wide growth of the kingdom. The remaining
five, as meant especially for the Jew, are passed over;
that of the tares (Matt. xiii. 24-35), as representing the
field of the Messiah's work as not confined to the Jews as
they suppose, but as extending to the whole world; that
of the leaven (Matt. xiii. 33), as exhibiting the influence
of the Gospel not as Jew-transforming merely, as the
Jews thought, but as world-transforming; that of the hid
treasure (Matt. xiii. 44), and that of the pearl (xiii. 45),
as representing that the kingdom of heaven is not to be
found and won easily by the king as something embodied
in the Jewish institutions, as the Jews vainly believed,
but rather as something concealed from the gaze of men,
to be sought diligently by the divine King and to be purchased by him at the greatest cost (John i. 11); and that
of the draw-net (Matt. xiii. 47-50), as teaching a mixed
condition of things in the kingdom, rather than the exclusiveness of their own national election, of which the
Jews boasted.
The reader of Mark's Gospel will also note the absence
of the numerous parables condemnatory of the Jews,
found in the latter half of Matthew's Gospel. The Jewish lessons of these parables would have been lost upon
the Romans. There is doubtless the further reason for
their omission, that, as the parabolic form of instruction
was adopted by our Lord for the purpose of partially
hiding the truth from the blinded Jews (Matt. xiii. 1016), it could scarcely have been at all intelligible to
Romans, who were entirely unaccustomed to deal with
highly figurative forms of speech.
The same thing is illustrated by Mark's treatment of
the first of the three series of miracles, given by Matthew
to confirm the authority of Jesus as the Messiah, - the




186      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
series designed to show the relation of Jesus to the Jewish
ceremonial law (Matt. viii. 1-17).  The first miracle, the
healing of the leper, is recorded by Mark (i. 40-45) in
bringing out the wonderful power and fame of Jesus, the
Roman aspect of his work. The second, the healing of
the centurion's servant, is omitted, as it chiefly presents
the contrast of Gentile faith with Jewish unbelief. The
third, the healing of Peter's wife's mother, with the
added works of power, is recorded by Mark (i. 29-34),
as exhibiting the excitement in the city and the marvelous power of Jesus over diseases, demons, and men; but
the reference which Matthew (viii. 16, 17) makes to
prophecy is omitted.
A notable exception to the general freedom of Mark
from Jewish references appears, however, in the record
of the conflicts of Jesus, with the disciples of John and
the Pharisees, at the feast of Levi, about fasting (Matt.
ix. 10-17; Mark ii.'15-22); and with the Pharisees
about the desecration of the Sabbath (Matt. xii. 1-14;
Mark ii. 23-iii. 6). It has been already seen, in the portraiture of the Roman character, that the genuine Roman-born man was, on his religious side, the Pharisee of
the empire, considering himself - as did the Pharisee of
Judaea - the only favored child of heaven. It was true
of his religion, that it was a mere empty form and tradition, nay, more, an acknowledged hyprocrisy, for the
priests of the Pantheon could not look each other in the
face without laughing outright at the farce they were
enacting. The Roman needed, therefore, to be taught, by
Christ's treatment of Jewish caste, the true doctrine of
equality on the basis of manhood, in the kingdom of God,
and, by his treatment of Jewish formality and hypocrisy,.the true doctrine of the spirituality and sincerity of the
religion of the kingdom. Yet it must be observed that
even these incidents are stripped of everything that a




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.        187
Jew only could understand, and the passage in which
they occur is completed by Christ's demonstration, in the
healing of the withered hand, of his Lordship over the
Sabbath.
From Luke. As compared with the third Gospel, the
omission of the merely Greek features is equally apparent.
There is nothing in Mark of the marvelous coming
down of heaven to earth, and of that human developmen{ of Jesus as the divine and perfect man, to which
the introduction of Luke is devoted (Luke i. 1-iv. 13).
These matters, which will be seen to be of such absorbing interest and such eminent appropriateness for the
Greek, were not in place for the man of deeds.
The part of this material which Mark uses has reference to the baptism of John and the temptation, and
is all comprised in ten verses. In the record which
Matthew makes of the Baptist's mission, the fulfillment
of prophecy is the prominent feature; in that of John,
the testimony of the Baptist to the Lamb of God, the
light and life of men; in that of Luke, the salvation of
God for all flesh is the new thought brought out; in that
of Mark, the mighty herald before Jehovah, the almighty
conqueror.  Equally characteristic is the omission by
Mark of the human experience of Jesus in the temptation, as given by Luke and Matthew, while he only aims
to bring out for the Roman reader, in the most graphic
manner, the situation of the Saviour in the wilderness.
Indeed, the absence of those universal and human features, which will be shown to be so essential to the third
Gospel, cannot fail to be noted throughout the second.
The successive stages of the life of Jesus, upon which
Luke dwells, are not even mentioned by Mark. Jesus
appears at once with his powers full-summed and at their
highest, and engages without delay in his work as the




188      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
almighty Victor. For the Roman there is but one stage
in his career.
The entire ministry in Peraea, constituting almost one
half of Luke's Gospel, and presenting the divine mercy
in its most tender aspects to universal humanity, has no
place in Mark. That which was fitted to move and
mould the gentle Greek, with his thoughtful and beautiful soul, was not suited to influence the stern and martial
Roman, who had in his nature as little as possible of
beauty and sentiment. There are therefore wanting in
the second Gospel the great parables of Luke, the favorites of all ages: the two debtors, the good Samaritan,
the friend at midnight, the rich fool, the barren fig-tree,
the great supper, the lost sheep, the lost piece of money,
the prodigal son, the unjust steward, the rich man and
Lazarus, the unprofitable servants, the unjust judge, the
Pharisee and the publican, and the pounds; besides the
other rich instructions addressed to the heathen people
in Perma, or the country across the Jordan (Luke ix.xix.), and suited to the man of universal sympathies.
From John. As compared with the fourth Gospel,
the omission of the distinctively Christian features is
apparent everywhere in the second.
Strictly speaking, Mark gives nothing of the great
Christian discourses that make up the Gospel according
to John. In a missionary Gospel aiming at the conversion of the Roman, they would have utterly failed to be
appreciated.
These two Gospels have little in common save a few
striking facts. These appear in Mark as facts in the
wonder-working power of the conqueror, or as facts centring in the cross and essential to redemption. The
former kind comprises the feeding of the five thousand
(Mark vi. 32-44; John vi. 1-14), and the walking of
Jesus on the water (Mark vi. 45-56; John vi. 15-21).




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.           189
The latter kind embraces many of the incidents of the
last Passover week, and some of those after the resurrection. It will be seen, however, that the great Christian lessons, which John connects with or draws from
these facts, do not find place in Mark's Gospel.
II. The Additions of the Second Gospel.
The Gospel according to Mark gives equally conclusive
evidence of its Roman aim in what it adds to the records
of the other Gospels.
A mechanical criticism has shown that, if the Gospel
of Mark is regarded as mlade up of one 100 parts, 7 of
these are peculiar to itself, and 93 common to it with one
or more of the other Gospels. Substantially the same
fact appears in the statement that there are but twentythree or twenty-four verses in Mark which are not found
also in Matthew or Luke.
The historical origin of the Gospels, as already exhibited, opens the way to an explanation of the resemblances
as well as the differences of the first three Gospels. Both
Matthew and Peter were Apostles and familiar with the
facts of the career of Jesus of Nazareth.  Luke and
Paul doubtless learned the facts and discourses either
directly or indirectly from the Apostles, except so far as
Paul was taught by Christ himself (Gal. i. 12).
The verbal coincidences between the first three Gospels, which have led to the many ingenious hypotheses
regarding their common origin, can better be accounted for
without these elaborate imaginings. Mr. Westcott has
observed that " they occur most commonly in the recital
of the words of our Lord or of others, and are 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 records of the




190      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
words of others." 1 The recitative portions - discourses,
parables, etc. —came from the lips of Jesus himself,
were fixed in the minds of the Apostles, were reproduced
in their preaching and embodied in the Gospels, which
therefore could not fail to be alike in these respects. The
narrative portions were given their shape in each case by
the individual Apostle or Evangelist, and therefore could
not but be different. There is, therefore, no call for any
elaborate hypothesis.
The extraordinary resemblance of Mark's Gospel to
that of Matthew has led to three hypotheses of their
connection: a first, that Matthew is an enlargement
of Mark; a second, that Mark is an abridgment of
Matthew; a third, that both had a common basis in an
oral Gospel which existed in the Church at the time of
their origin and from which they alike drew their material.
But there is hardly a necessity for arbitrary conjecture
in accounting for this most extraordinary resemblance,
since history with the aid of common sense furnishes a
far better explanation of the facts. Matthew and Peter
were both personally cognizant of the great facts which
they recorded, and they both first entered upon the work
of preaching the Gospel to the Jews in Judeaa. There
is doubtless so much of truth in the theory of a common
oral Gospel. The idea of power had its attractions, as
has been seen, for both the Jew and the Roman. When
Peter went abroad to proclaim the Gospel over the world,
it was therefore natural that he should retain the exhibitions of the miraculous power of Jesus with which the
preaching in Judeea had made him so familiar. It was
equally natural and necessary that, in seeking to reach
and influence hearers moulded by the Roman civilization,
he should drop the references to prophecy which were un1 Westcott, Introduction, p. 203.




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.           191
intelligible to the Romans, and give to everything that
increased vividness and picturesque effect without'which
their attention could not be won and retained.
From the small additions and large subtractions of the
second Gospel, the mechanical critics have inferred the
want of any great special significance of this Gospel. In
their view it is the least important of all, in fact, of almost no value to those who have Matthew's Gospel. The
inference warranted is, rather, that the criticism which
sees so little difference and is content with looking only
at outward dissimilarity is itself insignificant and worthless.
A true and worthy criticism cannot fail to demonstrate
that the number of verses in which Mark's Gospel outwardly differs from the others is no proper measure of
the real and essential difference. The score of verses,
more or less, which he adds to the records of the other
Evangelists, forms the least of all his contributions to
the Gospel treasure. The greater additions will appear
under the incidental changes and variations of this Gospel.
But even the slighter and less important direct additions may be shown to have aided materially in adapting
the second Gospel to Roman readers.
The portions usually reckoned additions to this Gospel
are the following: the parable of the seed-corn (Mark
iv. 26-34); the healing of the blind man of Bethsaida
(viii. 22-26); the healing of the deaf man of Decapolis
(vii. 31-37); and the form of the last commission (xvi.
15-18).
The longest of all these is the parable of the seed-corn,
occupying nine verses. Mark has altogether only four
parables, and this is the only one peculiar to his Gospel.
One of the four, that of the wicked husbandmen (xii. 112), is introduced by Mark, as also by Matthew and




192      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
Luke, in its proper place in connection with the series
of conflicts in which Jesus engaged with the leading
classes. The remaining three constitute Mark's group
of parables.
The three can best be understood together. They
have nothing to do with portraying the world-wide
mercy to which Luke's parables, occurring later in his
Gospel, are devoted; nor with the spiritual truth and
the blessed relations of Christ to his people, which those
of John exhibit; nor with the inward, subjective influences, to the setting forth of which a part of those in
Matthew's first great group are devoted; but are all employed in unfolding the growth of the kingdom as an
outward, objective thing. The first (the sower) contradicts the false Roman idea, by putting the invisible,
spiritual power of truth in the place of the visible, material power of the Casars; the second (the seed-corn)
presents a development as independent of human will
and as inevitable as that of Rome herself according to the
most Roman conception; the third (the mustard-seed)
completes the sketch of the development of the kingdom,
by depicting its rapid growth into that universality which
Rome, alone of all the worldly empires, had even imperfectly realized.
The next addition, the healing of the deaf and dumb
man of Decapolis (vii. 31-37), comprises seven verses.
There is another, the healing of the blind man of Bethsaida (viii. 22-26), which is not unlike it. The two are
among the most striking of the miracles of Jesus, and,
through the symbolical acts connected with them most
eminently fitted to make a deep impression on the nmin
of deeds. In the former miracle, the great Healer put
his finger into the ears of the man, and spitting touched
his tongue with the spittle, by these signs to awaken the
faith of the man and arouse his expectation of blessing.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.          193
In the latter miracle, Jesus performed a progressive cure,
- first spitting upon the blind man's eyes and putting
his hands upon him, thereby bringing him to " see men
as trees walking; " and afterward putting his hands
again upon his eyes, and making him to " see every man
clearly." Both miracles furnish striking symbols of the
dealings of divine grace with sinful man; both picture
Christ's saving power for the easy comprehension of the
man of action.
The last of these added passages in the second Gospel,
the great commission, in a form quite peculiar (xvi. 1520), presents not only the warrant of the followers of
Christ for the conquest of the whole world,- the orders
of the army of the great conqueror for its marching and
action, - but also the promise of miraculous, divine coiperation, through the exaltation of the risen and ascended
Son of God with his Father on the throne of the universe.
It closes with the record of the actual pushing out into
all the world, by the followers of our Lord, of the work
of universal conquest (verse 20). It is the true Gospel
commission for the man of action and of universal empire,
the Roman.
Both the omissions and additions of the Evangelist
were eminently fitted to commend Jesus to the Roman
world of that age.
SECTION IV.
THE ROMAN ADAPTATION IN THE INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS OF THE SECOND GOSPEL.
The adaptation of Mark's Gospel to the Roman needs
appears even more clearly in the incidental- variations
and peculiarities throughout the entire production. In
these features, as already intimated, are to be found
Mark's most important contributions to the Gospel treas13




194      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
ure. He has added something of value to almost every
line which he has given in common with the other Evangelists. By variations of incident, by touching, shaping,
or coloring, and by new and fresh grouping of the facts,
he has produced out of apparently old material an original Gospel, into the entire tone and movement of which
he has infused, by the aid of the Holy Spirit, a living
energy born of Jesus, the divine and almighty worker
and conqueror.
I. Incidental Variations.
It has often been noticed that Mark's is the Gospel of
minute and vivid details.
Through Peter, whose amanuensis or interpreter he is,
in a sense, to be regarded, the Evangelist takes the position of an eye-witness and ear-witness, and renders everything life-like by the thousand varied and delicate touches
fitted to make past events become present realities again.
In recording ordinary occurrences, while he omits much
of the didactic matter preserved by Matthew and Luke,
he adds some circumstance of condition or of place. In
picturing the extraordinary events, he alone of the Evangelists dwells upon the looks and gestures and, in general,
upon the outward expressions of feeling on the part of
Jesus. In describing the miracles, he dwells upon the
instrumental or accompanying acts. By these processes
which the careless reader may pass over almost without
observing them, the plain narratives of the other Evangelists are transformed by Mark into living pictures. In
truth, he must be acknowledged as being, among the
Gospel authors, the "exclusive master of the pictorial
and scenic in describing what took place."
Narrative Changes.  This peculiarity of the second
Gospel may be illustrated by any of the narratives given
by it in common with some other Gospel.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           195
The meeting of Jesus with the rich young man and
what occurred in immediate connection with it are recorded by the first three Evangelists (Matt. xix. 16-30;
Mark x. 17-31; Luke xviii. 18-30). Only Mark brings
out the earnestness of the young man by mentioning that
he came running and kneeled to Jesus when he asked
him the momentous question concerning eternal life.
The touching incident, that Jesus, before pronouncing
the decisive words given by the three Evangelists, One
thing thou lackest, looked upon him and loved him, without in any wise softening the severity of his declaration
on account of this natural amiability, is recorded only by
Mark. He alone adds, immediately afterwards, to the
follow me, which he has in common with Matthew and
Luke, the important words, taking up the cross. As
only Mark relates that Jesus looked round about, when
he uttered those terrible words: How hardly shall they
that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! - so he
alone follows this up with an account of the astonishment
of the disciples, and the Master's repeated yet explanatory saying: And the disciples were astonished at his
words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them,
Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to
enter into the kingdom of God! And when our Lord adds
that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a
needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God,
and the still more astonished disciples say among themselves, Who then can be saved? it is Mark who records,
in the most forcible yet simple manner, that saying so full
of comfort to the heart truly in search of salvation, in repeating the expression of God's almighty power in man's
salvation, for with God all things are possible. When,
shortly afterwards, Jesus promises to the disciples, that
whatever any one shall have forsaken on earth for his
sake he shall have restored to him an hundred-fold, and




196      MARK, THE GOSPEL IOR THE ROMAN.
that he shall receive eternal life in the world to come,
Mark adds what might have been but too easily forgotten, that this recompense, in so far as this life is concerned, shall be coupled with persecutions.
The account of the poor widow's mite is found in Mark
(xii. 41-44) and Luke (xxi. 1-4). In the four verses of
his Gospel Mark adds to the parallel account of Luke:
that Jesus sat over against the treasury; that he saw
the people cast in their gifts; that many that were rich
cast in much; that the widow's two mites make a farthing (a quadrant, a well-known Roman coin); that he
called unto him his disciples and told them that the
poor widow had cast more ill than all they which have
cast into the treasury. Add to this the constant repetition of the words, cast in, and there is furnished
the material which makes all the difference between the
sober statement of Luke, designed to be read by the
thoughtful Greek, and the vivid picture of Mark, designed to make the active Roman see the event itself.
These examples might be extended to cover all the
events which Mark records in common with one or more
of the other Evangelists, and would exhibit throughout
the same characteristic features that so adapted this Gospel to the man of action.
Slighter Additions. The same distinguishing feature
of the second Gospel may be illustrated by a large class
of incidental additions made by Mark in connection with
materials common to two or more of the Evangelists.
He usually gives the names and surnames, and mentions the relations, of the persons whom the other Evangelists mention more generally. The blind man restored
near Jericho is Bartimeus, the son of Timeus (x. 46).
The high-priest from whom. David received the shexv-bread
as food is Abiathar (ii. 26). The Jewish name of the
publiean Matthew is Levi, and he is the son of Alpheus




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           197
(ii. 14). The sons of Zebedee are surnamed by Jesus
Boanerges, which is the sons of thunder (iii. 17). Simon
of Cyrene was the father of Alexander and Rufus (xv.
21), one of whom seems to have been a well-known person in the circle of Roman Christians (Rom. xvi. 13).
He takes peculiar pleasure in giving the identical Aramman words used by Jesus. In the accounts of the young
woman's restoration to life, Matthew mentions the bare
fact, Luke gives our Lord's words in Greek, but Mark
tells us (v. 41) that our Lord said to her: " Talitha,
Cumi, which is being interpreted, Damsel, I say unto
thee, arise." So in the account of the healing of the deaf
and dumb man in the region of Decapolis (vii. 34), we
have the word of Jesus: "JEphphatha," and have it interpreted for the Gentile reader, -" that is to say, Be
opened."  In Gethsemane we have the Syriac " Abba"
(xiv. 36); and, in answer to the Jerusalem Scribes and
Pharisees, the Hebrew " Corban," caught from the lips
of Jesus (vii. 11.) The cry of agony on the cross is given
by Mark in the precise Aramne'an words in which it was
doubtless uttered: " EJloi! Eloi! lama sabachthani?"
By Matthew it is given in the original Hebrew - then
already a dead language - " Eli! Eli! " etc.
But this point is perhaps best illustrated by some of
those characteristic details by which Mark casts a flood
of light upon the daily life of our Lord.
The account of the storm on the Sea of Galilee is found
in Matthew (viii.), Mark (iv.), and Luke (viii.). Mark
alone tells us, that " they took him even as he was in the
ship" (iv. 36), -that is, exhausted by his labors and
without any preparation for the comfort of the voyage.
All three of the Evangelists tell us that while the terrible mountain storm was sweeping down over the waters,
Jesus lay sleeping in the little ship. But Mark adds a
circumstance equally picturesque and significant: " And




198      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
he was in the hinder part of the ship asleep upon the
bench," - for so, as is now generally admitted, must the
last word be translated. He lay sleeping upon the bench
covered with leather, on which the rowers were accustomed
to sit, and nbt upon a pillow. " No convenience brought
on board for that purpose, but only what the place itself
offered, served for some moments as a couch to him who
otherwise, on his own earth, had not where to lay his
head."
Da Costa, who has given a detailed account of the
characteristic differences of the Gospels, brings out another very striking feature in connection with Nazareth,
the town in which Jesus was brought up. All the first
three Gospels show that his doctrines and miracles had
given rise to great astonishment and offense among the
Nazarenes. Luke (iv.) tells us that they became so enraged that they thrust him out of the city and attempted
to cast him headlong from the precipice on which the
town was built. Matthew (xiii. 54, 55) records the questions of amazement, skepticism, and contempt: " Whence
hath this man this wisdom and these mighty works? Is
not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother's name
Mary?  And his brethren, James,and Joses, and Simon,
and Judas? and his sisters, are they not all with us? "
But Mark (vi. 3) writes, " Is not this the carpenter, the
son of Mary?  This difference between the Gospels, apparently so unimportant, clearly reveals to us two striking
circumstances in the private life of Jesus: first, that he
himself, along with his father, and apparently until his
baptism in Jordan, followed at Nazareth the trade of a
carpenter; secondly, that in those days Joseph, the husband of Mary, must have long been dead. And thus it
is that the Lord from heaven, he by whom the heaven
and the earth were created, is found in his human nature
exercising a trade on this earth, and by that trade, that




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           199
labor of his own hands, providing, as a son and support,
for Joseph's widow, the daughter of David, whose eldest
son he was according to the flesh."
Word Changes.  The word changes, occurring in
every paragraph of the second Gospel, bear the same
characteristic mark of adaptation to the man of deeds.
By means of these the expressions of the other Evangelists are strengthened and intensified and their bald statements transformed into living realities.
Matthew and Luke tell us that at the baptism of Jesus
the heavens were opened unto him; Mark tells us that
Jesus saw the heavens rent open (i. 10). Matthew and
Luke tell us that after the baptisri Jesus was led up, or
led, into the wilderness for the temptation; Mark says
that the Spirit driveth him (i. 12). In describing the
feeling awakened by the healing of the paralytic, Matthew (ix. 8) says they marveled; but Mark (ii. 12) says
they were all amazed (literally, beside themselves).
In the description of the storm at sea, Matthew (viii. 24)
says the ship was covered with the waves; Mark (iv. 37),
the ship was full.  Matthew (xxvi. 37) says that in
Gethsemane our Lord began to be sorrowful; Mark (xiv.
33) uses a stronger expression: to be sore amazed.
Mark likewise makes use of that repetition of words
which is a form of figurative energy so common in the
Latin tongue. This may be illustrated by such expressions as that used concerning the disciples, after the storm
on the sea (iv. 41), " and they feared exceedingly " (literally, they feared with a great fear); that used concerning the people when the daughter of the ruler was restored to life (v. 42), " and they were astonished with a
great astonishment;" and that used in speaking of the
sin against the Holy Ghost (iii. 28), " blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme." This usage may be
even better illustrated by the emphatic repetition of the




200       MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
exact words and phrases. In this way the Evangelist
uses the words cast in seven times, in giving the account
of the widow's mites (xii. 41-44). In like manner he
repeats the Gospel and the kingdom of God (i. 14, 15);
the words eat and publicans and sinners (ii. 16, 19);
and the word sea (iv. 1).
These are only specimens of the variations that are to
be found throughout the entire Gospel. The possessor
of an English Harmony of the Gospels - still better, of
a Greek Harmony - can readily examine them in detail
for himself. They will everywhere be found to bear the
Roman stamp.
II. Other Peculiarities.
The survey taken of the second Gospel brings to light
other and incidental variations, not to be classed with
those already referred to, but which can only be explained
by the Roman aim of the Evangelist.
Roman Assumptions.  As already indicated, Mark
has furnished the Gospel of action, and especially of the
divine activity of Jesus. This assumes the point of view
of the Roman, the man of action.
Although so much the shortest of the Gospels, it has
nearly as many miracles as Matthew. It deals but little
with logic save the logic of facts. Mr. Westcott has
called it " a series of perfect pictures;" and again, " the
living portraiture of Christ in the clearness of his present
energy." The teaching of mighty fact everywhere outruns that of verbal statement.
Its very brevity, resulting from these characteristics,
would, as Canon Wordsworth has suggested, " commend
it to the acceptance of a great body of the Roman people,
especially of the middle classes, engaged in practical business, legal affairs, commercial enterprises, and military
campaigns, and migrating in frequent journeys from




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           201
place to place. Such an Evangelical manual as this
would be particularly appropriate and serviceable to
them." 1
It is true that Mark nowhere represents Jesus as
being addressed as Lord- as the other Evangelists so
often do - but the authority of Lord and God is exhibited
in all his career as it is not by any other Evangelist. It
is Mark that has given us the God speaking out most
clearly through the man in all the relations of life. Tangible forms, material symbols, were a necessity in a Gospel for the matter-of-fact Roman. To him an abstract
God was no God at all. While Luke, writing for the
so-human Greek, dwells upon the perfect humanity of
Jesus as it appears exalted into union with the Divinity;
Mark, for the Roman, strives to make visible through the
manhood of Jesus, the invisible and Almighty God.
The fact has been often signalized, that the second
Gospel gives with special fullness many of the events in
the experience of Peter.
There are throughout abundant indications of the intimate connection of Peter with its authorship. It begins with Peter's first acquaintance with Jesus, at the
preaching of the Baptist. Simon Peter is incidentally
seen to be a central figure in it, as may be shown by comparing statements of Mark with those of the other Evangelists. Where Luke (iv. 42), writes: " And when it
was day, he departed, and went into a desert place; and
the people sought him, and came unto him, and stayed
him, that he should not depart from  them;" Mark (i.
35, 36) says: "And in the morning, rising up a great
while before day, he went out, and departed into a solitary place, and there prayed. And Simon, and they that
were with him, followed (Greek, hunted) after him." In
the narrative of the fig-tree that was cursed, Matthew
1 Introduction to St. MIark's Gospel.




202       MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
(xxi. 20) represents the disciples as exclaiming, " How
soon is the fig-tree withered away!" but Mark (xi. 21)
represents Peter as first calling to remembrance the curse
and making the exclamation. Matthew (xxiv. 3) writes
that the disciples asked our Lord about the time when
the temple should be destroyed; Luke (xxi. 7), that
some asked him; Mark (xiii. 3), that Peter, James,
John, and Andrew asked him privately. While Mark
alone adds that strikingly significant circumstance that
the cock crew twice before the Apostle's conscience was
aroused;  he alone adds to the expression of Matthew
(xxviii. 7), in the message of the angel after the resurrection, that equally striking and significant closing name of
the denier: " But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter
that he goeth before you into Galilee (Mark xvi. 7).
It is a still more striking fact, that things recorded in
the other Gospels, which reflect peculiar honor upon Peter,
are modestly passed over in this. Matthew alone records
the attempt to walk upon the sea (Matt. xiv. 28-32).
There is nothing said of the bitterness of Peter's weeping after his denial of his Master.2 But most remarkable of all - considering the fact that Mark wrote for
the Roman, and that the later Rome built its pretentious
and inquisitorial hierarchy chiefly upon this one statement - is the absence of the benediction given to Peter
on the occasion of his explicit confession of the Messiahship and Divine Sonship of Jesus: " Blessed art thou,
Simon Bar-jona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it
unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say
also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I
will build my Church; and the gates of hell shall not
prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of
1 Compare Matt. xxvi. 34, 75; Luke xxii. 34, 61; John xiii. 33, xviii.
27; with Mark xiv. 30, 63, 72.
2 Compare Mark xiv. 72, with Matt. xxvi. 75, and Luke xxii. 62.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           203
the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind
on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou
shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."l Could
anything more clearly mark the guidance of inspiration?
It seems like a divine protest ahd provision against the
Papal perversion of the passage with its doctrine of the
keys, that it should have been omitted in the very Gospel
for the Roman.
It is likewise worthy of note that Mark, in his treatment of themes connected with the geography of Palestine and with Jewish rites and customs, seems always to
assume such a reader as the Roman undoubtedly was.
It has already been made evident, that there is, in general, in the second Gospel as compared with the first, a
paucity of references to all matters that would require
a Jewish reader, or copious explanations for the Gentile
reader, in order to make clear the point and drift of the
narrative; and as compared with the third, an absence of
the accurate geographic and historic statements so necessary to the reasoning Greek, whose character would impel
him to the mental reconstruction of the history and topography, but so useless to the Roman, intent only on
the incidents themselves as exhibiting the power of the
almighty conqueror.
With Mark the full impression designed to be made is
not ordinarily dependent upon a minute and accurate acquaintance with Jewish peculiarities and places. When
explanations of such things are introduced it is rather to
add vividness to the impression than merely to give information. But that he does not entirely withhold such
explanations because of the familiarity, either partial or
entire, of his readers with matters essentially Jewish -
as some one has asserted - may be seen at once from
his record of the discourse about unwashen hands (vii.
1 Compare Matt. xvi. 13-2Q, with Mark viii. 27-30, and Luke ix. 18-21,




204       MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
1-5), as compared with the parallel account of Matthew
(xv. 1-3). Evidently the reader for whom Mark wrote
that account was not familiar with Jewish customs; and
in this we have an unanswerable argument against the
hypothesis which represents the usual absence of explanations as arising from such familiarity. The explanation is
too elementary and superficial for the Greek; it was not
needed by the Jew; but it exactly met the needs of the
Roman.
Roman Expressions. While all the features thus
far noticed are best explained by the supposition that the
second Gospel was written, as history affirms, for the Romans, there are certain expressions and forms of expression which are, if possible, still more decisively Roman.
Of this nature is the employment by Mark of Latin
words in Greek form, a thing which is nowhere else found
in the New Testament. The paralytic when healed is
commanded to take up his bed. Here Mark (ii. 12)
uses the word KpafaT'OV, the Greek form of the Latin grabatum; instead of the pure Greek work KXIv?7 (Matt. ix.
6), or KXLVLGov (Luke v. 19, 24). In recording Herod's
sending for the head of John the Baptist, Mark (vi. 27)
uses the word (WEKoVXTWOp, which is translated executioner
in our English version, but which means a soldier of the
body-guard rather. It is the purely Latin word speculator spelled with Greek  letters.   The word  $&YTr7J
(Mark vii. 4), translated pots, is doubtless simply a corruption of the Latin sextus or sextarius, meaning the
sixth part of some larger measure, and nearly corresponding to the English pint measure, mug, or bowl.
Mark, and he only, explains the two mites of the widow,
XEA7rT 85o (xii. 42), by the word Xop8p)'Tv7rq, a Greek spelling of the Latin quad)rans, the fourth part of the wellknown Roman coin, the as. The centurion who had
charge of the crucifixion is called by Matthew and Luke.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           205
in pure Greek, KaTrovTadpX-r, but Mark (xv. 39, 44) calls
him KE1iUvptV, which is the Latin centurio in Greek letters.
These Latin words would have been unintelligible to
readers of a purely Greek culture.
Of like character is Mark's use of the Roman division
of the night into four watches, - evening, midnight,
cock-crowing (Latin, gallicinium), and morning.  An
examination and comparison of the various Gospels will
show that this is peculiar to Mark, the other Evangelists
retaining the ordinary Jewish division into three watches.'
Such incidental features, the consideration of which
might be extended indefinitely, can only be satisfactorily
explained by the theory that the second Gospel was written for Roman readers.
SUMMARY.
From the point now reached, taking into account not
only the weight of the separate. indications of a Roman
aim, but also the combined force of all the considerations
adduced, the Roman adaptation of the second Gospel cannot reasonably be denied.
It has been seen to be a historical fact, that Mark, a
Roman in character and probably by birth, prepared this
Gospel from the preaching of Peter, for Roman readers,
the men who were the workers, conquerors, and rulers of
the world. This is the stable historical basis of the
theory.
It has also been shown that the second Gospel itself
everywhere bears the marks of its Roman origin and
aim. This is manifest in its entire plan, which involves
the presentation of the divine power and activity of our
Lord, and which views his life as one career of conflict
and conquest ending in the universal sway of the kingdomn of God. It is no less manifest in the omissions and
1 Compare Matt. xxiv. 42-46 with Mark xiii. 35, and Luke xii. 38.




206      MARK, THE GOSPEL FOR THE ROMAN.
additions made by the Evangelist, all of which have been
shown to be explained by his Roman design. It is
equally clear in all the incidental variations of the Gospel, everything in it receiving its tone and color from the
Roman aim with which it was produced.
It is not, therefore, too much to claim that the historical
view combines with the critical, that Irenaeus and Clemnent and Jerome join with the general plan, the particular
scope, and the minute details of the Gospel itself, in
establishing the theory that Mark was originally the
Gospel for the Roman; and not too much to affirm
that this theory furnishes the true key to the Gospel.




PART IV.
LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
"Thou seemest human and divine,
The highest, holiest manhood thou."
ALFRED TENNYSON.
"Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a dec.
laration of those things which are most surely believed among us, even
as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eye-witnesses, and ministers of the word; it seemed good to me also, having had
perfect understanding of all things (rather, having traced down everything) from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent
Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty of those things,
wherein thou hast been instructed."                 LUKE, i. 1-4.
"Tertius Lucas medicus, natione Syrus Antiochensis (cujus laus in
Evangelio), qui et ipse discipulus apostoli Pauli, in Achaise Bmeotisque
(Bithyniheque) partibus volumen condidit (2 Cor. viii. 18, 19), qusedam
altius repetens, et ut ipse in procemio confitetur, audita magis, quam visa
describens."                                            JEROME.
CHAPTER I.
HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE GREEK ADAPTATION OF THE
THIRD GOSPEL.
SECTION I.
ORIGIN AND DESIGN OF THE THIRD GOSPEL.
WHAT was the actual origin of the Gospel according to
Luke? For what class of readers was it originally designed?
Manifestly the third Gospel was immediately addressed




208       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
to the same Theophilus (Luke i. 3) to whom the Acts of
the Apostles was addressed (Acts i. 1). The name is
Greek, meaning lover of God. Who he was can only be
conjectured. Some have supposed, from the meaning of
the name, that it was used, not to represent any particular person, but Christians in general; others have concluded that he was probably an honored Greek with
whom the Evangelist had been at some time intimately
associated; while most have agreed that he was only the
representative of a large class to whom the Gospel had
been preached, and with whom Luke, under the influence
of the Holy Ghost, desired to leave it as a permanent
treasure.
But although the Gospel was addressed immediately
to Theophilus, yet, when the subject is investigated from
the historical point of view, the statements of most trustworthy witnesses make it sufficiently clear that Luke
wrote it for the Greek, the representative of the Gentile
world at large.
Witnesses.  The first witness to the fact is Irenoaus,
who flourished in the second century, and was, in his day,
the most celebrated teacher in that school of teachers in
Asia Minor, which may be traced back to the labors of
the Apostle John, and which was at once the most intelligent and orthodox of the early schools of Christianity.
Ireneus is a most competent and credible witness. His
teacher was Polycarp. He received the great facts concerning our Lord and his Apostles as Polycarp had received them from the lips of the Apostle John.1
Irenmus, in the same passage in which he states the
origin of the first and second Gospels, declares that
"Luke, the companion of Paul, put down in a book the
Gospel preached by him  (Paul)." 2 Farther on, Tre1 Iren. Against Heres. iii. 3-4; Euseb. Itist. Eccles. v. 20.
2 Iren. Against Heres. iii. 1.




GRIGIN AND DESIGN                209
naus states that " Luke, who always preached in company with Paul, and is called by him' the beloved physician,' and with him performed the work of an Evangelist, and who was intrusted to hand down to us a Gospel,
learned nothing different from him (Paul)."  This testimony is confirmed by Eusebius." 2
Origen, who flourished, as has been seen, in the first
half of the third century, and whose wide and familiar
acquaintance with the churches of Palestine and Asia
Minor, gave him ready access to the best tradition of the
early Church on this subject - affirms that the Gospel
according to Luke was written for the sake of those
Greeks who turned to the faith, and that it was also
commended by Paul.3
Gregory Nazianzen, called also the Theologian, bishop
of Constantinople in the fourth century, in his didactic
and theological poems, affirms, for the edification of the
Church, that " Luke, the companion of Paul, that great
servant of Christ, wrote the wonderful works (in his
Gospel) in Greece;" and also " for the Greeks." 4
Jerome, in the prologue to his commentary on the
Gospel of Matthew, in recording his view of the origin
of the four Gospels, says: " The third is that of Luke,
the physician, a native of Antioch, in Syria (whose praise
is in the Gospel); who was also himself a disciple of the
Apostle Paul; and who produced his work in the regions
of Achaia and Boeotia, repeating some things more amply,
and, as he confesses in his preface, describing what he
had heard rather that what he had seen."  According to
another reading, the Gospel was produced " in the regions
of Achaia and Bithynia." 5
1 Against fleres. iii. 14, 1.'2 Hist. Eccles. vi. 25.
3 Origen, as given by Euseb. Hist. Ecc'es. vi. 25.
4 Carmin. lib. i. sect. i. 22, vers. 1; sect. i. 12, vers. 32.
5 Hieron. Comment. in Evang. Matth. proleg. 3, 4.
14




210      LUKE. THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
Pertinent Facts. The chief facts touching the origin
and design of the third Gospel, as presented by these
witnesses, are, that Luke wrote the Gospel which bears
his name; that it was substantially that which he and
Paul had proclaimed to the Greek world; that it was
produced and published among Greek peoples; and that
while addressed formally to Theophilus, it was really
written for the Greeks as representing the Gentile world,
and suited to commend Jesus to them as their Saviour.
The main statements thus brought to light seem to
have been received, almost without question, in the early
centuries of the Church. The witnesses are substantially
the same as those cited in Matthew and Mark, and are in
general the writers on whom the Church depends largely
for the settlement of the historical questions upon which
our faith in the canon of the Scriptures ultimately rests.
The considerations already presented, touching their character and competency, have equal weight in their application to the origin of the third Gospel.
In fine, it cannot be reasonably maintained that their
statements are not in agreement with history, and that
they did not arise out of history. Luke undoubtedly
prepared his Gospel for the Greeks, for the purpose of
commending to them Jesus as their Saviour.
SECTION II.
THE CHARACTER AND NEEDS OF THE GREEK.
If the third Gospel originated in the preaching of Paul
as moulded by the agency of Luke, and was prepared for
Theophilus as a representative Greek, and for Greek
readers in general, then the character and needs of the
Greek must furnish the key to this Gospel.
What manner of man, then, was the Greek?  What
were his spiritual needs? Correct answers to these ques



THE GREEK CHARACTER.            211
tions will render luminous the Gospel prepared under the
influence of the Holy Ghost for the Greek race.
I. The Greeks.
The Greeks are clearly distinguished from the other
great historic races by certain marked characteristics.
They were the representatives of reason and humanity
in the ancient world. They looked upon themselves as
having the mission of perfecting men. They were the
cosmopolites of that age. They made their gods in the
likeness of men, in their own likeness, and therefore joined
to human culture utter worldliness and godlessness.
Out of these peculiar characteristics, as modified by the
age and circumstances, arose those spiritual needs of the
Greeks which were to be met by the Evangelist. Along
the line thus marked out must be sought the adequate
understanding of the Gospel prepared by Luke.
The Representative of Reason. The Greek was
the representative of reason and humanity in the ancient
world. Every great race shows some part of man's nature
in unusual development. In the old Jewish race, the
spirit, or that part of man which links him to God, was
the predominant element. The Jew belonged to the race
of Shem, which has never done what is considered the.
world's great intellectual work, but which has, nevertheless, made all the grandest ventures out into the domain
of the infinite, and as a result has given mankind those
three systems of theism, - Judaism, Christianity, and
Mohammedanism, - which contain the highest expression
of the human soul from its spiritual and heavenly side.
In the old Roman race, the will, or that part of man which
pushes to action, and enables him to control and mould
nature and mankind, was the predominant element. His
herculean tasks and his universal empire furnish the
highest expressions of the human soul as the repository




212       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
of the energy for shaping the world to law and order.
In the old Greek race, the humanity, especially as embracing intellect, taste, and feeling, was the prominent
feature. The Greek belonged to that family of Japheth
which has done all of what is usually regarded the world's
great intellectual work, has given it all those grand secular literatures which contain the highest expression of the
soul from its human and earthly side.
The Perfecter of Man. The Greek looked upon himself as having the mission of perfecting man. Through
all the ages, in literature and art, in statecraft and gymnastics, he was working toward his one great idea of the
perfect man. In his ideal, intellect and taste held the
supreme place. His aim was not the beautiful man in the
lower sense merely, but thinking, reasoning man, with his
intellect full-summed, farthest reaching, most gracefully
working. He accordingly bequeathed to the world the
grandest models of beauty and of thought that the unaided
human mind has ever produced. Counting the great
poets of all lands and ages on the fingers of the right
hand, Homer is among the number. Plato and Aristotle
have contended until the present day for the place of
authority in philosophy. Demosthenes has never yet
been placed second on the roll of eloquence.
The Worshiper of Man.  The Greek made his
gods in the likeness of man, of himself. In his view of
the universe, man was exalted above all other beings, and
the Greek man wore the crown of perfectness. His
religion was the highest of the idolatries, the most attractive of the polytheisms. The Hindoos asked men to
worship monstrous emblems of physical power; the
Egyptians, life in all its forms down to the most repulsive; the Roman, Rome and the Emperor. The Greek
was broader than all these, the Greek idea nobler. Humanity seemed most divine to him — diviner than all




THE GREEK CHARACTER.           213
physical forces, than all physical life, than empires and
emperors; man himself diviner than all his own works,
and than all the world. The man on earth, with the
grandest power of thought and beauty of speech and
action, was the highest man for the Greek, and nearest
the place which he thought the gods ought to occupy.
The Universal Man. These characteristics of the
Greek brought him into sympathy.with man as man, and
made him in the ancient world the representative of universal humanity. The Jew and the Roman were by
nature exclusive. The Jew could fraternize readily with
him  only who came from  Abraham and received the
prophets; the Roman with him only who wielded power
in the empire, or was born to a place in the empire.
The full-grown Jew was a Pharisee; the fuill-grown Roman a Caesar; but the full-grown Greek was a worldman. Every man had something —and that among the
chief things in his manhood - in common with the Greek.
Man is a thinking, reasoning being. He was made to
seek the true, to love the beautiful, to sympathize with
human kind. All men could, therefore, meet the Greek
as they could not the Jew or the Roman. The Greek
could meet all the world on the common platformof
humanity as the Jew and Roman could not.
The Worldly and Godless Man. It is evident that
there were some fearful defects in that old Greek view of
things.
His religious system provided for taking out all the
virtue from the world. The Greek deified all of man,
- what was base as well as what was truly noble and
godlike. To him, the passions —even to the basest —
were as godlike as the virtues; Venus and Bacchus and
Pluto as much gods as Jupiter and Apollo and Minerva.
It was the ever-recurring and always unsuccessful attempt of poor fallen man, unaided of Heaven, to make a




214      LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
god in his own image, that should satisfy the wants of
his soul. His was a system that held, planted in its very
heart, the seeds of moral decay and death, and which must,
therefore, end in debasing man and in perishing of internal corruption.
It left no room for spirituality. In deifying man, it
brought God down to the level of man and to the baseness of man. Man was made in the image of God, and
there is a sense in which he must make his god for himself in his own image; but he must do it by an upward
sweep of thought, reaching the true idea of God by
removing the limitations, casting aside the defects, and
exalting the excellences of his own nature. The Greek
attempted it by making his gods just like himself.
There was nothing heavenly and spiritual about them;
they were "of the earth, earthy."  His gods made his
religion base and unspiritual as themselves. His "sweetness and light " became the bitterness and shadow of
sin and death.
His religion had in it a kind of attractiveness, but it
took all the grandeur out of the universe. Instead of
seeing the supreme God and Father everywhere and in
all things - shining in the beauty, dazzling in the glory,
giving in the fruitfulness, speaking in the truth- he
saw himself imaged there. It was man's universe, not
Jehovah's. He humanized the clouds, the forests, the
rivers, the seas; peopled them with deities and half deities, with satyrs and fauns, with muses and nymphs, each
of which represented some side of man's nature. He set
upon everything his own image and superscription. If
there was any real and mighty God, any power irresistibly making for righteousness and yet overflowing with
love, the Greek had pushed him afar off and out. At
best there remained but a horrible dream of God in his
conception of all-comprehending and relentless fate.




THE GREEK CHARACTER.            215
The altar "to the unknown god" became the only
Greek altar which was in any sense an altar to the true
God.
In short, the Greek theory blotted out the other and
higher world, and left him utterly worldly, "' having no
hope and without God in the world." This world was
his province, his home, his grave. He sought his happiness in it. His only wish was that it might last forever. "The more the Greek attached himself to this
world," says F. W. Robertson, "the more the unseen
became a dim world of shades. The earlier traditions
of the deep-thinking Orientals, which his forefathers
brought from Asia, died slowly away, and any one who
reminded him of them was received as one would now be
who were to speak of purgatory. The cultivated Athenians were, for the most part skeptics in the time of
Christ. Accordingly, when Paul preached at Athens
the resurrection of the dead,'they mocked.' This bright
world was all. Its revels, its dances, its theatrical exhibitions, its races, its battles, its academic groves where
literary leisure luxuriated, these were blessedness, and
the Greek's hell was death. Their poets speak pathetically of the misery of the wrench from all that is dear and
bright. The dreadfulness of death is one of the most
remarkable things that meet us in those ancient writings." 1
II. The Key to Luke's Gospel.
In the character and condition of the Greek civilization
in the apostolic age is to be found the key to the third
Gospel.
The Greek thought and culture had been the common
possession of mankind for four centuries, when Luke sent
forth his Gospel from Antioch. It had done its best for
1 Sermons. First Advent Lecture, " The Grecian."




216       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
the world in bringing the races together and preparing
them for the grander Christian view of the brotherhood
of humanity; but it had, nevertheless, utterly failed to
help the Greek to attain to his ideal of the perfect manhood. The vices of the system had everywhere brought
decay and corruption. The old faith in it was gone beyond possible recovery. Its beauties and graces remained
in the memory of the race only as pleasant dreams or
poetic fancies.
Its polytheism, as always, had brought dissipation of
mind. When Paul entered Athens, he found that " all
the Athenians and strangers which were there, spent
their time in nothing else, but either to tell or to hear
some new thing;" and were ready to think him a "babbler" who should have aught to say of God and immortality. A thirst for something new, equaled only by the
despair of the old, had everywhere taken possession of the
mind of the age.
The indiscriminate worship of humanity had ushered
in the reign of materialism and sensuality, and the Greek
had almost ceased to be more than a reasoning animal.
The worship of the beautiful had ended, as always, in
putting the accomplishments in the place of all manly
and womanly virtues. In short, religion had become a
mockery, and virtue had perished.
There was nothing left to the Greek worth living for,
- no divine fatherhood to bear him comfort; no grand
mission in this world to gird and train him to power,
no golden age save in the distant past, no glorious immortality in the world beyond to open before him sublime reaches of progress and measureless heights of hope,
— nothing but the earth and the present, with failure
already crushing him, and death with its everlasting
sleep remorselessly pursuing him. Utter restlessness and
wretchedness had seized upon the greatest and purest




THE GREEK CHARACTER.            217
minds, and the old, undefined longing for some divine
man was everywhere verging toward despair, save as the
Jew had quickened and made it more hopeful by spreading abroad his idea of the Messiah, as the coming deliverer of the world.
When the Gospel went forth from Antioch for the regeneration of the Greek, it found the world-language
waiting to bear the world-religion to this longing and despairing but desperately corrupt race, and to all who had
been moulded to its ways of thinking and living.
It is, therefore, evident that the Greek must be reached
by a peculiar presentation of the Gospel, a presentation
shaped by these characteristics in his nature and condition.
As the Messiah of the prophets, Jesus of Nazareth had
an interest for the Jew; as the Son of God, the almighty
worker and conqueror, lie had an interest for the Roman;
but in neither of these aspects would he interest the
thinking Greek. A Gospel for the Greek must be shaped
by the Greek idea; mIust present the character and career
of Jesus of Nazareth froln the Greek point of view, as
answering to the conception of a perfect and divine humanity; must exhibit him as adapted, in his power and
mercy, in his work and mission, to the wants of the
Greek soul, and of humanity as represented in it.  It
must present Jesus as the perfect man, to meet the Greek
ideal; as the divine man, to cure the wretchedness of the
despairing Greek. It must bring God and the invisible
world near, to meet the wants of the longing Greek soul,
and elevate it above itself and into communion with
God; must open the eyes of the blind Greek to see
the sinfulness of sin and the beauty and desirableness
of virtue and holiness. Reason and beauty, righteousness and truth, dignity and earnestness, must be exhibited as they meet in Jesus in their full splendor, and
his divine tenderness and compassion must have univer



218       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
sal sweep. It must open the way to a mission grand
enough for man here, and must bring to light an immortality beyond. In short, the Gospel must meet the
true and correct the false in the Greek ideal.
Wordsworth has well said: " The universality of man's
apostasy from the primeval Law of God; the universality
of the guilt of mankind; the universality of the misery
in which the human race lay; the universality of their
need of a Redeemer and a Saviour; the. universality of the
redemption accomplished by Christ dying upon the cross
for the sins of the world; the universality of the Christian Church, constituted by him to be the dispenser to all
nations of all the means of grace flowing from his sacrifice; and the preparatory and transitory character and
function of the Levitical law and priesthood, —these were
solemn topics on which all men needed to be instructed,
particularly the Gentile world." 1
To the Greek these are the credentials of Jesus, no
less essential than prophecy to the Jew, or power to the
Roman. Without them there could not even be a reasonable hope of arresting his attention, much less of leading him to submit to Jesus as his Saviour. The Greek
soul of that age furnishes the true key to the third Gospel.
SECTION III.
THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE THIRD GOSPEL.
The authorship of the third Gospel accords with the
historic facts concerning its origin and design. As Matthew was eminently fitted by his Jewish nature and culture to embody the Gospel for the Jewish race; MIark,
by his character, wide knowledge of the empire, and intimate association with Peter, the man of action, to do
1 Wordsworth, Introduction to St. Luke's Gospel, p. 161.




THE AUTHORSHIP.               219
the same work for the Roman race; and John, by his
rich and ripe spiritual experience and deep sympathy
with his Lord, to do like work at a later day for the
gathered Church; so it may be shown that Luke, in
connection with Paul, was~just the man to give literary
shape to the Gospel for the Greek race.
I. Luke.
Four things made Luke the proper instrument for
this work: that he was of Greek origin; that Antioch
was doubtless the place of his birth and residence; that
he was a physician by profession; and that he was the
disciple and companion of Paul, the Apostle to the Gentile world.
Trustworthy tradition, as preserved by Eusebius and
Jerome, has it that Luke was a native of Antioch in
Syria, or at least had his usual residence there, and that
he was a proselyte or follower of Paul.  Paul places
him among those of his fellow-workers who are not of
the circumcision, or who, in other words, are of Gentile
origin (Col. iv. 10-16). Both the Gospel which bears
his name and the Acts of the Apostles abundantly show
that his culture was Grecian.  He belonged to a profession which was at that day almost exclusively in the
hands of the Greeks. From the earliest times it has been
the general opinion that he was probably a Greek proselyte, first to Judaism, and afterward to Christianity.
Epiphanius asserts that Luke was one of the seventy
disciples sent out to preach to the Gentiles in Peraea
(Luke x. 1).  Theophylact declares that he was not
only designated by some as one of the seventy, but that
he was the one who, with Cleopas, met with the risen
Saviour on the way to Emmaus. The fact that Luke
alone describes the mission of the seventy and the journey to Emmaus tends to confirm  this tradition.  It is




220          LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
certain that he was possessed of that Greek nature which
would bring him into sympathy with the Greek soul, and
enable him to understand its wants.
That he was a physician appears from the tradition
cited above, from the statement of Paul in the Epistle
to the Colossians (iv. 14), and from abundant indications of his knowledge of the profession, found in his
Gospel and in the Acts of the Apostles.1 This was an
important element in his preparation for the work of
the Evangelist of the Gentiles. His profession required
him to be a man of culture, gave him influence with
the more refined classes of society, brought him into sympathy with suffering humanity, made possible such a companionship as that which existed with Paul, and made
him at once a fit amanuensis of that Apostle, and a fit
co-laborer with him in giving the Gospel to the Greek
world.
It has been remarked that his Greek culture fitted him
to prepare a Gospel, to which the objection, sometimes
urged against the other Gospels, that they are the productions of ignorant and credulous men, cannot possibly
apply. He was both able and disposed to apply to all
the facts before him the scientific tests properly applicable to them, and he did actually apply those tests.
His birth or residence at Antioch had a still more im1 Luke constantly looks-upon things with the eye of a physician. For
example the maladies that are mentioned in this Gospel are described with
more detail, and partly indicated by their proper technical names. The fever
of which Peter's wife's mother was sick is spoken of by Luke only (iv. 38) as
a strong, a great fever, in accordance with a scientific distinction still found
in Galen. Several similar illustrations gcur in the Acts of the Apostles,
as in the Greek terms used to describe the obscuration of vision in the
sorcerer Elymas (Acts xiii. 11), the disease (.fever and dysentery) of which
Paul cured Publlius at Malta (Acts xxviii. 8), and the ailment (an eating
by worms) of which Ilerod Agrippa died (Acts xii. 23). It has often been
remarked that Luke alone looks upon the sins and sufferings of men and
the scenes on the cross with the eye of a physician.  See Da Costa, The
Four Witnesses, p. 146.




TIIE AUTIHORSHIP.              221
portant bearing upon his mission.  It was there that the
work of the Gospel among the Greek Gentiles was first
begun by those who were scattered abroad by the persecution in which Stephen lost his life (Acts xi. 19, 20);
there that the disciples were first called Christians (Acts
xi. 26); there that Paul was trained for his life-work
(Acts xi. 25) as the Apostle to the Gentiles, and sent
forth to that work (Acts xiii. 1-3). Antioch was the metropolis of the Seleucid dynasty; in culture the rival of
Corinth and Alexandria. It became the capital of Gentile Christendom, as Jerusalem was of Jewish Christen-.
dom. It was the city in which the great missionary
impulse of that age was given, and in which the sympathy of Christianity with all the perishing world
reached, under the fostering and moulding influence of
Barnabas, Saul, and their co-laborers, its greatest breadth
and depth. To live in Antioch in that age, and to come
into sympathy with the Christian missionary spirit there,
would give an essential part of the preparation necessary
to fit Luke to be the Evangelist for the Gentile world.
Most important of all, in its bearing upon his work,
was the association of Luke with Paul in the actual missionary work.  When the call came from  Macedonia,
" Come over and help us," it came to Luke as well as
Paul (Acts xvi. 10), and lie was with the Apostle in
that first entrance of the Gospel into Europe.  All
through the later missionary work of Paul, "'the beloved physician " appears from time to time as a most
cherished companion and fellow-laborer, accompanying
him in his most perilous journeys,' and standing by hint
in the critical moments of the Apostle's final struggle for
the faith when all others forsook him (2 Tim. iv. 11).
1 This appears in the Acts, in the use of the plural of the pronoun of
the first person, we, xvi. 9-17; xx. 5-38; and thence to the end of the
book.




222       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEKS.
II. Paul.
Paul, who played so important a part in the preparation of the Gospel for the Gentile world, was preeminently fitted to furnish, with the aid of Luke, the
complete instrument for that work. No more striking
example of the fitness of the means devised for the.accomplishment of divine ends can be found even in Sacred
History.
His was the soul for the world-apostle.
There are a few men who in grandeur of soul tower
above all others. It is easy to pick them out along the
ages; in truth, the venerable names rise unbidden, —
Moses, Plato, Aristotle, - any one can complete the list.
Among these confessedly belongs the man Paul. The
world may be challenged to find his superior in simple
power of soul. Judged by the thought in his writings,
he stands unsurpassed. There is nothing like them in
iron logic, in profound insight, in comprehensive breadth,
in all-embracing grandeur of view.  There is nothing
like them in their expression of a great human heart, in
its compassion for man, in its love for God, in its devotion to Jesus Christ, - bearing the burden of the apostate and perishing Jew, reaching out after the dying
Gentile, and in visions of the ineffable glory anticipating
the ecstacy of heaven. Where in all the centuries has
there ever appeared another such indomitable will?
Those best fitted to judge have not hesitated to affirm
that, estimated by his work, Paul's was the grandest,
merely human spirit that ever walked embodied among
men.
His was the culture for the world-apostle.
He was born and lived a Roman citizen, - a free-born
citizen of the one universal Empire of all ages, and so a
citizen of that great world to which he was to bear the
Gospel.




THE AUTHORSHIP.                223
His birthplace was Tarsus, which at that time, as we
learn from Strabo, was the rival of Athens and Alexandria as a place of learning and philosophical research.
The entire Greek civilization was thus opened to him in
his very childhood and youth; and one of the greatest
authorities, Dr. Bentley, does not hesitate to affirm, that
" as Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, so it is manifest from the twenty-seventh chapter
of Acts alone, if nothing else had been now extant, that
St. Paul was a great master in all the learning of the
Greeks." That was just the point where the culture of
the heathen world was at its highest; and in the full
blaze of that Greek civilization, which even now furnishes us with some of the great models of poetry and
the grandest models of eloquence, Paul was born and
spent his early life.
Born of Jewish parents, he went early to Jerusalem,
the great centre of Judaism.  He there became a disciple of Gamaliel (Acts xxii. 3), a distinguished teacher
of the law, - doubtless the person of that name celebrated in the writings of the Jewish Talmudists as the
first of the seven teachers to whom the title of " Rabban,"
great master, was given, and who was also known as " the
glory of the law,"'1  one of the seven preeminently wise
teachers. Judaism, of his knowledge of which we have
such evidence in his Epistle to the Hebrews, was unfolded to him,,by this its greatest teacher, in its length
and breadth and in its sublimest form. He himself
affirms that he "profited more than all his equals in the
Jew's religion " (Gal. i. 14).
One other thing is needed to complete the view,- his
relation to Christianity.  Such was his situation in Jerusalem, and such his connection with the Pharisee party,
that he must have had extraordinary opportunities for
1 See Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, article " Gamaliel."




224       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
knowing the character, work, and fate of Jesus Christ.
He must have been thoroughly acquainted with the sect
of the Nazarene to be so bitter a hater and persecutor
of it.
In accordance with a law of Divine Providence often
illustrated in history, the man who was to combat the
errors of the world was born and educated as a worldman - Jew, Greek, and Roman at once - at the very
point in time and space where the brightest rays of Greek
and Roman paganism and of Judaism  and Christianity
all converged to a common focus.
His was just the human experience of salvation for the
world-apostle, - the widest possible.
He writes to Timothy (1 Tim. i. 15, 16), " This is a
faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ
Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I
am chief. Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that
in me first Jesus Christ might show forth all long suffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe
on him to life everlasting." This passage sums up his
qualifications as a saved sinner to preach salvation to all
the lost world.
He was the chief of sinners. His great soul and his
great light together rendered it possible that he should
be this. His obstinacy in unbelief, and rage in persecution confirm the fact that he was this. True, men have
attempted to explain away his words by making them
merely an expression of his modesty; but the attempt
has been a vain one. If ever in all history there was a
man who had no such modesty, that man was Paul. If
ill speaking or writing for his Master it became necessary
to set forth his great work for Christ, he did not hesitate
to declare, in the plainest and most forcible Greek at his
command, that he had endured more suffering and labored
more abundantly than all the other Apostles (1 Cor. xv.




THE AUTHORSHIP.               225
10; 2 Cor. xi. 23). If it became necessary to defend his
apostolic authority, he was neither slow nor weak in
showing that he was not one whit behind even the chief
of the Apostles. Moreover, there is no consistent meaning in the passage in which Paul's declaration, that he is
the chief of sinners, occurs, if it be not taken at its plainest sense. The whole force of the illustration that follows depends upon so taking it. One who will think of
his mighty soul, with its world of light, and then look
on him in his work of persecution, -as he stands, the
master spirit of the hour, with the garments of the righteous Stephen at his feet and consents to his death (Acts
viii. 1); as he moves on his way to Damascus, with a
soul " breathing out threatenings and slaughter" (Acts
ix. 1) against the innocent Christians,- will not think
it too much for him to say of himself by divine inspiration: " Of whom lam chief."
He was saved by the greatest of miracles of grace.
The story of his conversion is perhaps more familiar than
almost any other in the Bible except the story of Calvary.
All the features of the scene are familiar, - the company
journeying toward Damascus; the sudden light from
heaven at midday, surpassing the brightness of the sun;
the voice of Jesus speaking with authority to his persecutor; the answering question and response; Saul struck
to the ground, blinded, and overcome; the three days of
suspense; the coming of Ananias as the messenger of the
Lord, and Saul's baptism and mission, - every child can
fill up the outline. Saul, the chief of sinners, was saved
and brought back to God, to appear as Paul the saint,
prep-ared to do his grand work for the Gentile world, and
to go up at the last to wear his everlasting crown of
righteousness.  Amazing fact, that he, the chief of sinners, was saved by Jesus Christ! Jesus Christ showed
forth all long-suffering in this man's salvation! Who
15




226       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
does not see the marvelous patience of God with Paul,
the persecutor and blasphemer, the Pharisee of the Phari-sees, through those long years? Has there been anything else equal to it in all the past ages? And lest the
fact should not be brought prominently enough before
perishing men, this same story of Paul's conversion is
written in three different places in the New Testament
(Acts ix.; xxii.; xxvi.), that all the world may know
it.
The greatest of sinners saved by the greatest of grace
was just the man to illustrate and to preach the worldsalvation to the universal man, and to push the work with
resistless energy out toward the ends of the earth. Who
could so preach Christ to all men, even the worst, as he?
Unlike Peter, Paul from the beginning had all the essential requisites of the man of action. With him all
thought was nearest possible to the powers of motion.
With him the thought and motive were grand and the
will indomitable even from the first; but when Jesus
Christ took possession of his being, the grandest of all
thoughts, feelings, and purposes filled his soul, and he
went forth an intelligent and divinely-guided co-worker
with God in his infinite plan for human redemption,to weep and plead and labor for lost men, under the deepest possible sense of sin and salvation and under the
greatest weight of gratitude that ever rested upon a human soul; to brave danger and death with a purpose that
never faltered because he had a profound and abiding
consciousness that the life which he lived was the life of
Christ living in him.
Such was the great Apostle whose coadjutor Luke
was. They went forth together to the conflict and conquest, the hearts of both throbbing with a sympathy and
love that reached out beyond the Jew to all mankind.
It is the unvarying testimony of the early Church, that




THE GENERAL PLAN.             227
Luke's Gospel originated in his companionship and work
with Paul, and that it was moulded and inspired by that
great Apostle, who combined the Jewish soul with the
culture of the Greek, the world-citizenship of the Roman,
and the undying devotion of the chief of sinners saved by
grace. No other men could have been found at all equal
to these two in their fitness for reaching and influencing
the Greek world by the Gospel.
Such a nature, residence, culture, companionship, joined
with inspiration, fitted Luke to trace the life of Jesus
"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." 1 Matthew, Mark,
John, could not have prepared a Gospel suited to the
wants of the Greek nature, for that nature was not in
them; the Holy Ghost chose and prepared Luke in conjunction with Paul for that special work.
CHAPTER II.
CRITICAL VIEW OF THE GREEK ADAPTATION OF THE
THIRD GOSPEL.
The complete adaptation of the third Gospel to the
needs of the Greek world of the apostolic age will be
made clear by a careful examination of the Gospel itself
in the light of its origin, design, and authorship, as thus
historically ascertained.
SECTION I.
THE GREEK ADAPTATION IN THE GENERAL PLAN OF
THE THIRD GOSPEL.
The suitableness to the Greek is to be seen in the general plan of the Gospel according to Luke. It may be
1 See Westcott. Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, ch. iv. p. 241.




228       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
conveniently divided into three principal parts, - presenting the successive stages of the work of Jesus as the
divine man for the redemption of all mankind, - with
an appropriate introduction and conclusion.
In these divisions the character and career of Jesus are
unfolded in their appropriate connection with the necessities of the world as seen in the representative worldman of the age. The historical personage, Jesus of
Nazareth, is exhibited in the progress of his human development and of his work for mankind.
OUTLINE OF THE THIRD GOSPEL.
INTRODUCTION.
The Advent of the Divine Man. The Evangelist exhibits the origin, development, and preparation of Jesus
as the Perfect Man, for his work of Saviour of mankind.
i. 1-iv. 13.
Prologue. Statement of the literary aim. i. 1-4.
Section 1. Jesus, the perfect man, is presented in his
origin, birth, and manifestation to men. i. 5-ii. 20.
A. In the previous announcement from heaven of his
advent. i. 5-56.
a. The annunciation, to Zacharias, of the forerunner,
the Baptist. 5-25.
b. The annunciation to Mary, the visit to Elizabeth,
and the song of triumph. 26-56.
B. In the birth of his forerunner, and the poetic
prophecy of Zacharias. 57-80.
C. In his own birth, and in his manifestation, through
the angels, to the shepherds of Bethlehem. ii. 1-20.
Section 2. Jesus, the perfect man, is presented in the
development of his human nature under law, divine and
human. ii. 21-52.
A. In the circumcision and manifestation to the true



THE GENERAL PLAN.              229
Israel represented in Simeon and Anna, in the temple.
ii. 21-38.
B. In his visit to Jerusalem at twelve years of age,
and in his later life of subjection and growth at Nazareth. ii. 39-52.
Section 3. Jesus, the perfect man, is presented in his
special preparation for his work as Saviour of the world.
iii. 1-iv. 13.
A. In the work of the forerunner, John the Baptist,
till the baptism of Jesus. iii. 1-22.
B. In the descent, traced back to Adam and God. iii.
23-38.
C. In the temptation by the devil in the wilderness.
iv. 1-13.
PART I.
The Work of the Divine Man for the Jewish
World. The Evangelist exhibits Jesus as the fully developed Divine Man, in his work of divine power for
Israel, and in his laying the foundations of the Kingdom
of God. iv. 14-ix. 50.
Section 1. He presents the work of divine power in
connection with the teaching in the synagogues of Galilee, resulting in rejection. iv. 14-vi. 11.
A. In Nazareth, where his gospel for the poor and
suffering is rejected with violence. iv. 14-30.
B. In Capernaum and its neighborhood, where his
works of power include the raising of the dead, the pardon of sin, and lordship over all the natural and spiritual
world, - compelling the acknowledgment of his divinity,
but leading the Jews to rage and plotting., iv. 31-vi. 11.
Section 2. He presents, in connection with the work of
divine power and mercy, the teachings of Jesus concerning the constitution and development of the kingdom of
God. vi. 12-ix. 50.




230       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
A. The kingdom of God and its constitution. vi. 12viii. 3.
a. Originating in communion with heaven, by the call
of the Twelve, and the proclamation of its constitution in
the Sermon on the Plain. vi. 12-49.
b. Based on the faith of man (healing of the centurion's servant), and the compassion of Christ (raising of
the widow's son). vii. 1-15.
c. Embracing all classes: the people at large; the
Baptist and publicans and sinners, but not the Jewish rejecters of the forerunner; the penitent sinner (the
woman), but not the proud Pharisee; the ministering
women. vii. 16-viii. 3.
B. The development of the kingdom. viii. 4-56.
a. From the seed of the truth (the sower). viii. 4-18.
b. Through obedience to the word of God (the coming
of the relatives). viii. 19-21.
c. By faith in the divine power of Jesus (the storm;
the demoniac and the swine; the daughter of Jairus, and
the woman with the issue of blood). viii. 22-56.
C. The pressing of the claims of the kingdom upon
the Galilean Jews and disciples. ix. 1-50.
a. In the mission of the Twelve, and the resulting fame,
withdrawal, and miracles. 1-17.
b. In the confession of Peter, the attendant prediction
of death, and the subsequent transfiguration and miracles.
18-43.
c. In the second prediction of death, and the rebuke of
ambition and exclusiveness. 43-50.
PART II.
The Work of the Divine Man for the Gentile
World. The Evangelist exhibits Jesus as the Divine
and Universal Man, in his gracious work for the Gentile
world, chiefly in heathen Peraea and on his last journey
to Jerusalem. ix. 51-xviii. 30.




THE GENERAL PLAN.              231
Section 1. IHe records the beginning of the last journey and the sending out of the Gospel to the Gentiles.
ix. 51-xi. 13.
A. The gracious messengers to Samaria and their rejection; the terms of discipleship laid down; and the
sending out of the Seventy (under the law of evangelistic
effort). ix. 51-x. 24.
B. Mankind but one family (the good Samaritan);
but one thing needful (Mary and Martha); but one way
of securing it, by prayer for the Holy Spirit (the disciples
instructed). x. 25-xi. 13.
Section 2. He records the portrayal, judgment, and
condemnation by Jesus of the religious world of that age.
xi. 14-xiii. 21.
A. The malignant rejection of Jesus by the hypocritical Pharisees, in contrast with the required confession
(the dumb demoniac healed, and the dinner eaten with
unwashed hands). xi. 14-xii. 12.
B. The worldliness and covetousness of the Jew in
contrast with the heavenly mind and the faithful stewardship (the rich fool). xii. 13-53.
C. The signs of the impending judgment of this world
for sin and formality (the barren fig-tree), in contrast
with the mercy of the kingdom of God (healing of woman
with infirmity on the Sabbath), and its expansive and
transforming growth (the mustard-seed and the leaven).
xii. 54-xiii. 21.
Section 3. He records the teachings concerning the
number of the saved, - showing that the grace of salvation is universal to sinners. xiii. 22-xv. 32.
A. The question, on the journey, and the answer, presenting the urgency of salvation (the shut door), and the
bringing in of the Gentile and the apostasy of the Jews
(the man with the dropsy, and the great supper). xiii.
22-xiv. 24.




232       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
B. The strict terms of salvation and the danger of
losing it (self-renunciation and cross-bearing), in contrast
with the free offer to all sinners and the desire of the Son
(the shepherd and the lost sheep), the Holy Ghost in the
church (the woman), and the Father (the father of the
prodigal), for their salvation. xiv. 25-xv. 32.
Section 4.. He records the teachings concerning the
life in the kingdom of God. xvi. 1-xviii. 30.
A. It is a life of faithful stewardship in the things of
this world, ending in the rewards of the heavenly world
(the unjust steward and the rich man and Lazarus).
xvi. 1-31.
B. It is a life of forgiveness (the law of offenses), humility (the master and servant), faith and gratitude (the
Samaritan leper), and of waiting for the spiritual coming
of " the Son of Man " in his glory. xvii. 1-37.
C. It is a life of prayer, believing and humble (the,unjust judge, and the Pharisee and Publican), of childlike resting in God, and of obedience and self-denial (the
rich young ruler), ending in present joy and everlasting
salvation. xviii. 1-30.
PART III.
The Sacrifice of the Divine Man for all Mankind.
The Evangelist exhibits Jesus, as the Divine Man, voluntarily suffering and dying for all the lost world. xviii.
31-xxiii. 49.
Section i. He presents the preparation for the sacrifice. xviii. 31-xxii. 38.
A. In the prediction of his death, the approach to
Jerusalem, and the public entry as Messiah. xviii. 31xix. 46.
B. In teaching daily in the temple, and there vindicating his authority as Messiah before the plotting rulers
and the rejoicing people. xix. 47-xxi. 4.




THE GENERAL PLAN.               233
C. In predicting to his disciples his second coming,
with the rejection of the Jews and the bringing in of the
Gentiles. xxi. 5-36.
D. In the progress of the conspiracy, in connection
with the teaching in the temple and the keeping of the
Passover. xxi. 37-xxii. 38.
Section 2. He presents Jesus, the compassionate divine man, voluntarily yielding himself up to his enemies
and to the sacrificial death on the cross. xxii. 39-xxiii.
49.
A. In the agony, betrayal, arrest, trial, unjust sentence, and delivery to his enemies to be crucified. xxii.
39-xxiii. 25.
B. In the crucifixion, - with the lamentations of the
people, the compassionate prayer for the scoffing murderers, the saving of the dying thief, the supernatural
darkness and rending of the veil of the temple, and the
verdict of innocence by the centurion and the people.
xxiii. 26-49.
CONCLUSION.
The Divine Man, Saviour of all Nations. The
Evangelist exhibits Jesus in his triumph over death, as
the Saviour of all nations. xxiii. 50-xxiv. 53.
Section 1. In his burial by a just man, and in his rest
in the grave of humanity. xxiii. 50-56.
Section 2. In his resurrection, in fulfillment of his own
prediction concerning himself as the Son of man. xxiv.
1-12.
Section 3. In his manifestation to his disciples, in
teaching that his death is part of the one great plan of
God, in sending them to preach repentance and remission of sins in his name among all nations beginning at
Jerusalem, and in his parting blessing and ascension.
xxiv. 13-53.




234       LUKE. THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
SECTION II.
THE GREEK ADAPTATION IN THE CENTRAL IDEA OF
THE THIRD GOSPEL.
With the aid of the outline, which clearly bears the
marks of the Greek aim, it may now be shown how the
Gospel according to Luke, in its organic idea and general
tenor, falls in with the testimony of history that it was
produced and published especially for Greek readers.
I. The Central Idea.
It is a familiar fact in literature, that unity of plan
and aim does not necessarily preclude the existence of a
twofold idea in any production, an external and an internal, provided one be subordinate to the other. Hence
some have viewed the Julius Coasar of Shakespeare as a
historical tragedy, others as a character tragedy. It is
both at once, - for the poet evidently intended to give a
view of the external movement of events in one of the
greatest crises in all history, the one that hastened the
preparation of the Roman world for the Advent; and at
the. same time to delineate the internal but deadly struggle of the ideas of the old Rome and the new, of the Republic and the Empire, as embodied in the noble and
patriotic but weak Brutus and the mighty but ambitious
Cmsar. The true unity is found in the subordination of
the external to the internal.
The Gospel according to Luke may be regarded as
having such a twofold idea, and as maintaining real
unity in a similar way.
The External. The central idea of the third Gospel,
in its outward aspect, is found in the opening verses of
the first chapter. It is the presentation of an accurate
history of Jesus of Nazareth. This may be called the
literary aim of Luke.




THE CENTRAL IDEA.               235
As clearly as we recognize in the first Gospel a perpetual comparing of the person of Jesus Christ with the
prophecies concerning the Messiah, for the Jew; and in
the second Gospel, the exhibition of the mighty deeds of
the conqueror of the world in compressed, graphic, and
living form, for the Roman; so clearly do we recognize
in the third Gospel the presence of the historian, preparing for the accurate and philosophic Greek. The author states at once the two main objects of the historical writer: to draw up a continuous narrative, derived
from a careful scrutinizing of the testimonies of eye-witnesses and ministers of the word; and to commit it to
writing in chronological order (Luke i. 1-4).
The historical structure is found in Luke, with the
greatest definiteness in dates and events, the clearest and
most accurate knowledge of Jewish and Gentile contemporaneous history, and with the widest and firmest grasp
of the workings of the human soul and of the condition
and wants of mankind. These features may readily be
illustrated and verified from the Gospel itself.
The third Gospel manifestly takes the form of complete historical narrative. It does not, like that of Matthew, "content itself with a short notice of our Lord's
conception and birth.  It carries events farther back in
their sublime continuity; it leads us to the first beginnings, and, as it were, to the very dawn of our Lord's
coming in the flesh; it commences with various details
relating to the annunciation, the conception, and the
birth, not only of our Lord himself, but also of his forerunner, the Baptist (Luke i.). It opens with an expression (i. 5) which subsequently occurs above sixty times
in the two compositions of St. Luke; there was. or it
happened that." l The use of this expression is signifi1 See Da Costa, The Four Witnesses, p. 150.




236       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
cant of the historic point of view maintained by the
Evangelist throughout.
The attention to dates, so requisite to history, is found
everywhere in Luke. From the very opening he carefully determines the dates of the great events which he
narrates. It was in the days of Herod, the king of
Judaeia, that a certain priest named Zacharias, of the
course of Abia, while officiating in the temple in the
order of his course, received from the angel Gabriel preannouncement of the birth of John Baptist (i. 5-20).
It was in the sixth month after that the angel Gabriel
was sent to Nazareth to make to Mary the pre-announcement of the birth of Messiah (i. 26).  The date of the
entrance of the Baptist upon his public ministry is given
with even greater accuracy: "Now in the fifteenth year
of the reign of Tiberius Cmesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Jud.aa, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and
his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturmea and of the region of
Trachonitis, and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene, Annas
and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God
came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness" (iii. 1, 2). With respect to our Lord himself, it is
also Luke alone who speaks of his being circumcised on
the eighth day (ii. 21); of his being brought into the
temple after the days of the purification were fulfilled
(ii. 22, and following verses); of Jesus, at the age of
twelve years, as sitting in the midst of the doctors in the
temple (ii. 42, etc.).  He is also the only Evangelist
that informs us of Jesus' being of the age of thirty years
when he received the rite of baptism at the hands of
John, and from the Holy Spirit from heaven (iii. 23).1
No other Evangelist enters so deeply into the Jewish
history of those times. He alone, for example, records
our Lord's allusion to the massacre of the Galileans by
1 See The Four Witnesses, p. 152.




THE CENTRAL IDEA.              237
Pontius Pilate at one of the festivals, and to the fall of
the tower of Siloam which caused the death of eighteen
persons (xiii. 1-4). Luke, in addition to what the other
Evangelists relate of the connection of Herod Antipas
with John the Baptist, connects him with Jesus himself.
He alone tells us that there came certain of the Pharisees
and said to him: "' Get thee out, and depart hence, for
Herod will kill thee;" and that Jesus answered them:
" Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold I cast out devils, and
I do cures to-day and to-morrow, and the third day I
shall be perfected" (xiii. 31, 32). IHe alone records the
fact that Jesus, when on trial, was sent to that same
Herod, and that the murderer of the Baptist became a
reviler of the Son of God, and at the same time one of
the witnesses of his innocence (xxiii. 5-12; Acts iv.
27). It is from Luke, also, that we learn that among
the godly women who ministered to the wants of Jesus
with their substance, "there was Joanna, the wife of
Chuza, Herod's steward " (viii. 3).
Probably no books of antiquity contain so many, varied,
and wide-reaching references to the institutions, customs,
geography, and history of their times, as do the two
books written by Luke. They were written at a time
when it would have been the more difficult for any one
but a contemporary to maintain perfect accuracy and
fidelity to the truth, along with such detail and definiteness of statement and allusion, in proportion as the
period was marvelously "fertile in great events, in
changes in governments and in the boundaries and
names of countries and peoples." And yet the result
of the most searching scrutiny of these writings, " sifted
fact by fact, detail by detail, expression by expression, in
the light of all that the most civilized and the most
enlightened antiquity directly witnesses or incidentally
suggests to our researches," has vindicated for them such




238       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
a claim to the faith of the world as no secular histories
of that or the succeeding ages can pretend to urge for
themselves,- so that Luke is justly and preeminently
called the historian.
The history is still better adapted, by the selection of
the material, to suit the esthetic Greek. It is not made
up of dry, dead facts. Poetry and song flash out from its
pages. The profound wisdom of the parable and the
rapt inspiration of eloquent discourse combine to chain
the attention. The beauty of this world in which the
Greek delighted, and the glories of the heavenly world of
which he had scarcely dreamed, unite to charm the soul.
The revelations of new and sublime conceptions of the
universe, of human duty and destiny, and of the Deity,
expand and exhaust the powers of the most capacious
imagination.  In short, the Gospel combined in itself
everything that could attract and absorb the true Greek
soul.
The Internal. The central idea of the third Gospel,
in its internal aspect, appears throughout. It is this:
Jesus is the perfect, divine man, the Saviour of the world.
Luke takes the point of view of the Greek and maintains it to the end.' The perfect manhood of Jesus with
the consequent mercy and universality of his covenant,
rather than the temporal relations or the eternal basis
of Christianity, furnishes his central subject. " 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 suffering, tempted in all points as
we are, but without sin, -so that each trait of human
feeling and natural love helps us to complete the outline
and confirms its truthfulness." 1
The Gospel seizes upon the humanity of Jesus as the
idea most attractive to the mind of the Greek. Jesus
1 Westcott, Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, p. 371.




THE CENTRAL IDEA.              239
is preeminently man, the man. He is neither Roman,
Greek, nor Jew. He rises above the conditions of time
and place. What the Greek blindly strove to reach,
what Paul in some measure approximated, that Jesus
illustrated in its perfection, - the universal man, the
pattern and brother of all the race. This man, Luke exhibits in the various stages of his human development; in
his intellectual grasp of things earthly and heavenly; in
his marvelous sympathy with all of human kind; in
his matchless work as the one who was to give light
to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death;
in his consummate genius, his lofty enthusiasm, his divine
inspiration.
Especially does the third Gospel present the universal
grace of God. A very large portion of it is taken up
with what is now quite generally acknowledged to be
Christ's ministry in Permea, or across Jordan, and on his
last journey to Jerusalem (ix. 51-xviii. 30), - a ministry
to a Gentile race, and therefore peculiarly suited to the
Greek and to all the world represented by him. The
grace of God for all men, foreshadowed in the song of the
angels of the annunciation (ii. 10-14), is made luminous
in the teachings, especially in the parables, of this heart
of the third Gospel.
At the same time, as will subsequently appear more
fully, the Evangelist intelligently aims to correct the
false Greek notions.  He shows him man as he really
is. He reveals his true position and destiny. By contrast with the truth he exhibits the shallowness and
absurdity of the Greek theogony and theology. He unveils the invisible and future worlds to him. He shows
him God as he really is, not in relentless Fate, but in
the person of Jesus, the God-man, as the infinitely compassionate and gracious One.
The external form and historical aim of the Gospel,




240       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
so far front being out of harmony with this its internal
idea, furnish rather the perfect vehicle for its presentation. The Evangelist prepares for the Greek - as he announces his purpose to do - an accurate and systematic
exhibition of the facts of the career of Jesus; but this
is only the more perfect frame-work for the exquisite
portraiture of the perfect man, who is himself the pledge
of the blessedness of faith and the exaltation of the lowly,
and who appears in the world to give light to them that
sit in darkness and in the shadow of death.
II. The General Drift.
The influence of this central Greek idea, in its twofold form, is made apparent by a general movement and
drift peculiar to the third Gospel.
No one call mistake the presence and moulding power
of the esthetic and philosophic spirit, in the choice of
materials and in their embodiment in literary form. The
entire plan, the parts, even the sentences and the words
show it. This will appear in every phase of the present
investigation.
The human and universal aim will also be everywhere
manifest to the careful reader. It is brought out clearly
in the general drift of the Gospel, as seen by the help of
the outline view.
In the Introduction, after the Evangelist has stated
the literary aim of his work, he presents Jesus the perfect man, first, in his origin, birth, and manifestation to
men; secondly, in the development of his human nature
under law, human and divine; and, thirdly, in his special
preparation for the work of the Saviour- of the world.
This is the true unfolding of the manhood of Jesus in its
relations to all mankind, and is just the view adapted to
the Greek mind.
In Part First, the Evangelist proceeds to exhibit that




THE CENTRAL IDEA.             241
first work of Jesus, as the fully developed divine man, in
which the world at large was interested, -the work of
divine power for Israel, in laying the foundations of the
kingdom of God. This work is illustrated, in its beginnings, by the manifestation of Christ's power and wisdom in Nazareth, his native city, where his Gospel for
the poor and suffering is rejected with violence; and
in Capernaum and its neighborhood, where he raises the
dead, pardons sin, and exercises lordship over all the
natural and spiritual world, thereby compelling the acknowledgment of his divinity, but driving the Jews to
rage and conspiracy. In its later stage, it is illustrated
by continued works of divine power and mercy, connected
with the teachings of Jesus concerning the constitution
and development of the kingdom of God. That kingdom, originating in communion with heaven, constituted
by the call of the Twelve, based on the faith of man
and the compassion of Christ, and embracing all classes,
is to be developed from the seed of the truth, and by
faith in the divine power of Jesus; and the pressing of
its claims upon the Galilean Jews and disciples, together
with the results, is delineated.
In Part Second, the Evangelist presents the second of
the stages in Christ's public work in which all the world
is interested, - the gracious work of the divine and universal man, chiefly in heathen Peraea and on his last
journey to Jerusalem, for the Gentile world. In the
course of this presentation he records, first, the beginning
of the last journey, and the sending out of the Gospel by
messengers to the Samaritans, and by the Seventy to the
Gentiles at large; and the teaching in the parable of the
good Samaritan that there is but one family of mankind.
He gives, secondly, the portrayal and judgment, by Jesus,
of the religious world of that age, dwelling upon the
malignity and hypocrisy, the worldliness and covetous16




242      LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
ness, of the Jew, in contrast with'the true spirit of the
children of God, and upon the signs of impending destruction. He unfolds, thirdly, the wonderful teachings
of Jesus which show that the grace of salvation is offered
to sinners universally. He depicts, fourthly, from the
teachings of Jesus, the life in the kingdom of God, in the
fidelity of its stewardship, in the breadth of its charity,
and in its pervading spirit of prayerfulness, faith, and devotion. These are the great central facts and truths of
the public work of Christ that were best fitted to commend him to the Greek race.
In Part Third, the Evangelist unfolds the voluntary
suffering and death of Jesus the divine man for all the
lost world, -showing how everything is colored by the
human perfection and compassionate tenderness, and by
-the divine compassion and saving power, exhibited to all
classes of -men.
The Conclusion sets forth the experience of the divine
man in his triumph over death, and as the Saviour of the
world, showing the place of his career in the plan of God
and sending out his followers with salvation to all nations.
This was just what was needed to commend Jesus as a
Saviour to the man of Greek soul. It was at the same
time a true view of the Prophet of Nazareth, whose
many-sided character embraced not only the Messiah, the
ideal Jew, and the almighty worker and victor, the ideal
Roman, but also the divine and universal man, the ideal
Greek. This Jesus, the inheritor of all the real perfection and manhood, of all the natural reason and culture
found in the Greek nature, and adding to all these a divine perfection and manhood and a supernatural reason
and beauty, is the Jesus represented by Luke.




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.:243
SECTION III.
THE GREEK ADAPTATION IN THE OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS OF THE THIRD GOSPEL.
I. The Omissions of the Third Gospel.
It will appear in the light of a careful examination,
that Luke omits so much of the facts and teachings given
by the other Evangelists as does not suit his special aim
of commending Jesus -as the Saviour of the world to the
Greek mind.
The distinctively Jewish, Roman, and Christian portions of the general mass of Gospel material are passed
over as being of comparatively little value for his purposes. The comparison of the historic Jesus with the
prophetic Messiah, which was the one thing for the Jew
in whom the hope of the coming deliverer foretold in the
prophets had been growing in power and definiteness for
ages, could have only a minor and subordinate interest
for the man of reason who had scarcely heard of prophecy.
The picture of the wonderful and universal conflict and
conquest of the Son of God, which was just the thing to
command the attention of the Roman, in whom the wildest dream of universal dominion had been realizing itself
for ages, could have little weight with the man of reason
whose devotion to philosophy and art, which had enabled
him to shape the thought and culture of the world, had
made him despise the pomp and circumstance of outward
sovereignty. The supernatural and divine, in their
higher spiritual aspects, which were just what the Christian, the man regenerated, transformed, and lifted into
sympathy with heaven, delighted in, were as yet almost
meaningless to the man who had dwelt for ages only in
the natural and human, and who was to be transformed
from the godless man into the godly.




244      LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
From Matthew. Luke omits the distinctively Jewish
narratives and teachings given in the first Gospel.
This is illustrated by a comparative view of the introductions to the first and third Gospels. To the careless
reader they might seem to cover the same ground and to
embrace the same material. The truth is, however, that
so far is this from being the case, that, while the first
Gospel presents the origin and preparation of the Messiah, the third gives the human origin and development
of the perfect man. But what is more remarkable is,
that the material used by the two is almost totally different, since Luke omits the most of what Matthew gives.
By following the narratives it will be seen that he passes
over the royal lineage by Solomon and Joseph; the prophetic divine origin; the coming of the Magi; the massacre of the innocents; the flight into Egypt and the return to Nazareth; while he retains the mission of the
Baptist and the temptation. The portions omitted have
exclusive reference to prophecy and to Jewish wants.
Passing on to the public ministry of Jesus, it will be
observed that Luke does not record the opening of the
ministry in Galilee (Matt. iv.), in which prophecy is
fulfilled and all Syria roused; it was a Gospel for the
Jew only, and therefore of subordinate interest to the
Greek.  So the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. v.-vii.)
finds no place in the third Gospel; it was on its very
face a proclamation of the constitution and character of
the kingdom of heaven for the Jewish hearers. The
portion of Luke's Gospel that has sometimes been confounded with the Sermon on the Mount (Luke vi. 1749) is entirely without the marked Jewish references
found in that prbduction as given by Matthew.
Still more noteworthy is the absence from the third
Gospel of all those discourses recorded by Matthew,
which are especially condemnatory of the Jews, and




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.          245
which in so many instances exalt the Gentiles above the
Jews. These were absolutely essential in a Gospel designed to open the eyes of the descendants of Abraham
and lead them to a deep sense of their need, and to a
cordial spiritual reception of God's Messiah. But they
would undoubtedly have been a source of evil to the Gentile readers of Luke, and that for a twofold reason,that they did not at all reveal their own besetting sins,
and that the preaching against other men's sins would
have led - as it always leads - to spiritual pride rather
than spiritual profit. So Luke passes over the upbraiding of the cities of Galilee (Matt. xi. 20-30) which
had been the centre of Christ's mighty works, together
with the comparison with the Gentile cities of Tyre and
Sidon and Sodom, and the gracious invitation to salvation. He likewise passes over the discourses connected
with the Pharisees' charge against Jesus of collusion with
Beelzebub in casting out demons, and with the demand
of the Scribes and Pharisees for a sign (Matt. xii. 2245); and the discourse on the treatment of the little
ones and the law of forgiveness in the kingdom of heaven
(Matt. xviii. 10-35), aimed at Jewish implacability
and Jewish longing for a temporal kingdom. He gives
barely a sentence (Luke xx. 45-47) of that most terrible
discourse ever uttered in the ears of men, which Matthew
(xxiii. 1-39) records fully, - the final woes pronounced
upon the Scribes and Pharisees and upon Jerusalem itself.
Turning from discourses to parables, it will be found
that the third Evangelist deals in like manner with the
parables aimed directly at the Jew. Of the parables of
the kingdom (Matt. xiii.), three out of the seven are
retained, -the sower (Luke viii. 4-15) as illustrating
productiveness in the kingdom; and the mustard-seed
and the leaven (xiii. 18-21), as portraying the outward




246-      LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
growth and the inward change of the kingdom; while
four are left out,-the tares and the drag-net, as illustrating the mixed condition of things in the Jewish
world and the Church; and the hid treasure and pearl of
great price, as setting forth the search and sacrifice required of Messiah in order to secure the true kingdom,
which the apostate Jews vainly supposed themselves to
constitute.  Of the later parables of Matthew, Luke
drops those of the laborers (Matt. xx. 1-16), of the
two sons (xxi. 28-32), and of the marriage of the king's
son (xxii. 1-14), as presenting the exaltation of the
Gentiles over the Jews in such a light as to develop the
pride and self-righteousness of the former rather than
conduce to their salvation. He also leaves out those
closing parables, of the ten virgins and of the talents,
and the judgment scene (Matt. xxv.), which were allimportant to the Jew who had almost lost out of his
ideas of life all true fidelity in watching, all sense of need
of the inward grace of God, all feeling of responsibility
for well-directed, productive effort to the extent of his
powers for God, and all sense of a judgment strictly in
accordance with human conduct toward humanity and
Christ in humanity; but which might have been of no
real profit to the Gentile, who already overestimated
works and therefore needed first to learn the lessons of
prayer and faith.
This investigation might be extended to the smaller
and less prominent parts of the first Gospel omitted by
Luke, - such as the healing of the blind man (Matt. ix.
27-34), Peter's confession (xvi. 17-20), the temple tax
(xvii. 24-27), and others,- but the student of the Scriptures can examine them for himself. However extended
the examination, the same evidences of a Gentile, as distinguished from a Jewish, aim will be readily detected in
Luke's omissions from Matthew's Gospel.




OMISSIONS ANDt ADDITIONS.         247
From Mark. Luke omits the distinctively Roman
features found in the second Gospel.
The historic and philosophic spirit, in which the third
Gospel was written, almost precluded the presence of
those vivid details and scenic representations which are
the distinguishing feature of Mark's production. The
absence of this feature may be illustrated by comparing
almost any of the narratives common to the two. This
peculiarity of Mark has already been brought out in connection with the two mites of the poor widow (p. 196).
Luke gives it as a simple narrative, stripped of all the
picturesque features: "And he looked up, and saw the
rich men casting their gifts into the treasury. And he
saw also a certain poor widow casting in thither two
mnites. And he said, Of a truth I say unto you, that this
poor widow hath cast in more than they all; for all these
have of their abundance cast in unto the offerings of God;
but she of her penury hath cast in all the living that she
had " (xxi. 1-4). It will be observed at once, that Luke,
as a historian, "has recorded the matter more concisely,
rather avoiding anything like scenic effect; but his narrative compensates for this by the touching expression,
applied from the nature of its contents to the treasury:
the offerings of God."
A cursory examination will make it clear that Luke's
omission of the teachings peculiar to Mark is in harmony
with his Greek aim. The parable of the seed-corn (Mark
iv. 26-34), the healing of the blind man of Bethsaida
(viii. 22-26) and of the deaf man of Decapolis (vii. 3137), and the form of the last commission (xvi. 15-18),
all are marked, as has already been seen, by those striking
features that suited them to the man of action and of universal dominion.
From John. No less striking is Luke's omission of the
distinctively spiritual and Christian portions- of Gospe
teaching found in John's Gospel.




248       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
With the rare exception of an incidental statement, such
as that concerning the work of Christ in Galilee (Luke
iv. 14, 15; John iv. 43-46), Luke omits everything
that John records, up to the last passover week. From
that point onward he passes over all that spiritual instruction which John preserves from the last hours of the
Saviour's intercourse with his disciples. The unspiritual
Greek was not yet prepared for such lessons when Luke
gave the Gospel permanent form for him.
Of the events of that last week Luke has nothing in
common with John, saver the record of some of the facts
common to all the Evangelists, as centring in the sacrifice of Christ, - such as the entry into Jerusalem (Luke
xix. 29-44), — with perhaps the single exception of a
very brief statement of Peter's first visit to the sepulchre
(Luke xxiv. 12; John. xx. 3-10). Then, as now, the
man who deified reason and gloried in a merely human
culture was the least in sympathy with the true Christian
spirit. John's Gospel, if given to the Greek before
Luke's, would have been in the profoundest sense foolishness to him (1 Cor. i. 23).
II. Additions of the Third Gospel.
The Greek bearing of the extensive additions of the
third Gospel is still more manifest.
A mechanical analysis has shown that the portion of
the entire Gospel material peculiar to the third Gospel is
much larger than that peculiar to either the first or
second, in fact, much larger than that of both these combined. If this Gospel be regarded as made up of 100
parts, 59 of these are peculiar to itself, and only 41 common to it with one or more of the other Gospels. The
important point, however, in this connection, is, that all
the 59 parts peculiar to Luke may be shown to be especially appropriate to the Greek soul and its needs.




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.          249
The additions resulting from the historic and philosophic
aim with which Luke prepared his Gospel, and appearing
mainly. in the literary form, have already been noted. So
important are they, that even if the Evangelist had used
precisely the same facts and teachings with the other
Evangelists, his Gospel would have been a very different
one from theirs. Luke's view given of Jesus of Nazareth,
while in real harmony with that of Matthew or Mark,
would yet have differed from them as greatly as Plato's
delineation of Socrates differed from that of Xenophon.
But such additions, arising from the spirit and aim of a
writer, cannot be clearly expressed in words; they must
be intuitively discerned by the soul of the appreciative
reader, if they are to be known at all.
But the fifty-nine parts peculiar to Luke are tangible
additions and may be examined in detail. The scope of
the present discussion leaves space for only a cursory examination. This, however, is all that is needed for the
present purpose.
To any one familiar with this Gospel, it will at once
occur that there are two very extensive portions of it
almost entirely its own: the Introduction, and Part Second.
The wonderful apparent likeness, with the equally wonderful real difference, of the Introductions of the first
and third Gospels, has been remarked in considering the
omissions of Luke, from the common Gospel material.
There is not even the appearance of likeness between the
opening chapters of Luke and those of Mark and John.
Luke's introduction is exactly suited to the Greek. It
starts out with a clear and concise statement of the literary aim. It is chiefly occupied with the presentation of
every stage in the development of the veritable humanity
of our Lord, beginning from the counsels of God and ending with the completed manhood of the Son of God, the




250       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
Saviour of the world. Luke alone records those revelations from heaven, concerning the forerunner and the
Messiah, which preceded their birth, and indicate the
special and intense interest of the invisible and spiritual
world in the coming Son of man, - including the poetic
outpouring of the souls of Mary and Zacharias, and the
song of the angels at the Advent. Luke alone gives
the Gospel of the infancy and youth of Jesus, - including the wonderful events, natural and supernatural, accompanying the birth and cradling in the manger; the
strange recognition attending the circumcision and the
first presentation of the child in the Temple; the unique
experiences marking the subsequent visit of the child at
twelve years of age to his Father's house; and the law
of progress in his human development, in the family at
Nazareth, toward the perfect manhood. The perfecting
of the man Luke then represents as completed in the
baptism of John, which introduces him as the Jehovah
of prophecy, the teacher of the world, and the beloved
Son of God; in the genealogy, which traces his descent
from Adam and God; and in the temptation, which is
his conquest over the great foe of humanity. Every line
will be seen to bear the Greek mark.
The second of the extended portions peculiar to Luke
(ix. 51-xviii. 30), known as the record of Christ's gracious work for the Gentile world, chiefly across the Jordan, in heathen Peraea, and on his last journey to Jerusalem, is no less characteristic. The fact that it is the
record of a work for Gentiles demonstrates its fitness for
the representative of the Gentile world. Leaving out of
view the aim of the third Gospel, it would most certainly
be a marvelous thing, in short, perfectly inexplicable, that
all the other Evangelists should have wholly passed by
this period of Christ's work; while Luke draws almost
half of his entire Gospel - two thirds of the heart of it.




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.          251
-from its unique work and doctrine. But the Greek
design of the third Gospel once admitted, this choice of
its main material at once commends itself as in agreement
both with the human reason and the divine guidance
which entered into the preparation of- the -Gospels. The
rejected messengers of mercy to the Samaritans and the
mission of the Seventy to the Gentiles; the picture of
the sinfulness of the apostate religious world of that age
in contrast with the true faith in the kingdom of God;
the universal reach of the offer of God's salvation; and
the portrayal of the spiritual life in the kingdom; all
these things, as brought out clearly and fully in this record of the Perman ministry, were precisely adapted -to
the wants of the Greek world.
But besides these extended portions of Luke's Gospel,
which contain most of its peculiar teachings, there are
other and briefer sections, given by this Evangelist alone,
that equally bear the marks of his Greek aim. These
are found either in connection with the Galilean ministry
of Jesus, or with those final events of his career which
find their centre in the cross.
Of the former additions, the bearing may readily be
seen. Luke alone gives an account of the early rejection
of Jesus at Nazareth (iv. 16-30), which led him  to
change his abode to Capernaum. He tells us that Jesus,
after reading Isaiah's prophecy (lxi. 1, 2), concerning
the anointing of the Messiah to preach a gospel of grace
to the poor and needy, declared that the prophet referred
to him, and was thereupon rejected by the Nazarenes,
because he was one of themselves. The Evangelist adds,
that Jesus then enraged them by showing that, even in
the times of Elijah and Elisha, the Gentiles were sometimes preferred before Israel in the dispensation of God's
blessings. Luke alone records the teaching from  the
ship on Gennesaret, when, by the miraculous draught of




252       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
fishes, so deep an impression was made upon Simon
Peter of his own sinfulness, and he was called to becolme
a fisher of men, and when he and James and John forsook all and followed Jesus (Luke v. 1-11). He alone
gives the Sermon on the Plain (vi. 17-49), in which are
unfolded the great principles that should govern men as
men in the kingdom of God, and in following which they
shall ultimately attain to complete salvation. He alone
preserves the account of the raising of the widow's only son
at Nain (vii. 11-17), and the manifestation of the tender
compassion of Jesus toward the poor widow, in the presence of the disciples and all the people. Luke alone records the anointing of Jesus by the penitent woman, in
the house of Simon (vii. 36-50), and the application of
the parable of the two debtors called out by that event,
and teaching the boundless love of Christ to great sinners and their boundless gratitude in return for his forgiveness, as illustrated in that one sinner. All these
passages bear the marks of the tenderness and humanity
of Jesus, and contain hints of his later revelations of
himself as the Saviour of the whole world.
The later additions give evidence of a like spirit and
aim. This is manifest in the story of Zaccheus the publican, and the parable of the pounds (xix. 1-27), showing how freely Jesus received publicans and sinners; in
the account of the strife among the disciples at the last
supper (xxii. 24-30), probably over the washing of each
other's feet (John xiii. 1-20), teaching the lesson that true
greatness in the kingdom is to be attained by humble
service for humanity; in the account of the trial before
Herod (xxiii. 6-12), depicting the treatment of Jesus by
the representatives of the Jewish and Gentile worlds;
and in the narrative of the walk of Jesus with the two
disciples toward Emmaus (xxiv. 13-35), portraying the
intense sympathy with God and man of him who could:




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.          253
so scan the farthest-reaching purposes of the former, and
so set on fire the inmost hearts of the latter. All these
gospel teachings are found in Luke alone, and they are
all in perfect harmony with his Greek spirit and aim.
The more carefully both the omissions and the additions of the third Evangelist are examined, the more
clearly will it appear that they were eminently suited
to commend Jesus to the Greek world of that age.
SECTION IV.
THE GREEK ADAPTATION IN THE INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS OF THE THIRD GOSPEL.
A careful examination of the incidental variations and
peculiarities of the third Gospel will make still clearer its
Greek adaptation. The Greek spirit and purpose will
be found to pervade the entire production, shaping both
its teaching and its forms of expression.
I. Incidental Variations.
It has been shown that Luke was preeminently the
historian and man of culture among the Evangelists, and
at the same time the one most fully in sympathy with
Paul the world-apostle. His production bears the marks
of all these characteristics, throughout the entire extent
of its variations from the other Gospels. The influence
of the historic and philosophic spirit have already been
sufficiently illustrated, so that there is necessity for only
a brief consideration of this branch of the subject.
Narrative Changes. Almost every passage in which
Luke records something in common with one or more of
the other Evangelists will illustrate with equal clearness
and force his distinctive peculiarities.
He gives, in common with Matthew and Mark, the




254        LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
account of the ministry of the Baptist. By comparing
the three narratives, it will appear that a large part of
Luke's is made up of materials not given by the others.
He alone names the exact date of the opening of John's
ministry, " in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius
Ccesar;" and makes it still clearer by naming all the contemporary rulers, Jewish and Galilean, civil and ecclesiastical (iii. 1, 2). He alone continues the quotation
from the prophet (iii. 4-6) till it includes the capital
sentence for the Gentile world: " And all flesh shall see
the salvation of God." He also adds that passage, - of so
much wider than Jewish application, - unfolding the
duties of the people, and especially of publicans and
soldiers, in preparation for the coming of the kingdom:
"And the people asked him, saying, What shall we do
then?  He answereth and saith unto them, He that hath.
two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he
that hath meat, let him do likeuise.  Then came also publicans to be baptized, and said unto him, Master, what
shall we do? And he said unto them, Exact no more
than that which is appointed you. And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do?
And he said unto them, -Do violence to no man, neither
accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages" (iii.
10-14). So Luke alone tells us that it was " as the people were in expectation, and all mused in their hearts of
John " (iii. 15), that the Baptist uttered the clear and
decisive-declaration concerning the coming of the mightier
one, the Messiah; and he alone adds to what is common
to the first three Evangelists, as if to complete the historic form: "And many other things in his exhortation
preached he unto the people " (iii. 18). At the same
time he passes over the prophetic credentials of the forerunner (Matt. iii. 4), and transforms what in Mark is a
vivid picture into a sober historic account.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           255The account of our Lord's experience in Gethsemane
is also given by the first three Evangelists. While Matthew maintains his habit of careful grouping of events,
and Mark his of intense and vivid expression, and both
record the fact that Jesus went thrice from his disciples
and repeated the prayer to his Father; Luke represents
the whole as a season of prayer, connected with a great
crisis in the spiritual experience of Jesus, in which the
agony increased in power until it reached the intensest
pitch; and he alone adds: "And there appeared an
angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. And
being in an agony, he prayed more earnestly; and his
sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to
the ground " (xxii. 43, 44). So only Luke tells us, with a
touch of human tenderness, that Jesus found the disciples " sleepingfor sorrow."
These examples might be extended to cover all the
narratives of events common to Luke with some other
Evangelist; and, however far extended, would always
bear the marks of special adaptation to the Greek, the
man of universal human sympathies.
Slighter Additions. The same characteristics appear
in the slighter incidental additions found throughout the
third Gospel.
There are indications here and there of Luke's sympathy with Paul in his well-known predilection for the
number three, as the symbol of perfection, which often
influenced that Apostle even in the construction of his
sentences, and which manifests itself in his Epistles " in
his constantly tracing back all doctrine to the most Holy
Trinity of God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost; and,
in the practice of the Christian life, to the trinity of
Faith, Hope, and Charity."   Where Matthew  (vii.
9, 10) gives two similitudes intended, to animate to be1 Da Costa, The Four Witnesses, p. 176.




256       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
lieving prayer, Luke (xi. 11, 12) at the same time that he
emphasizes thefather, adds a third similitude: " If a son
shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he
give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish
give hltm a serpent? or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer
him a scorpion?"  Where Matthew (xxiv. 40, 41) gives
two examples of the difference that the great day of his
coming would make in the condition of persons most resembling each other externally, Luke (xvii. 34-36) adds
a third: "Itell you, in that night there shall be two men
in one bed; the one shall be taken and the other left.
Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be
taken, and the other left. Two men shall be in the field;
the one shall be taken, and the other left."  So it has
been observed, that whereas Matthew (xviii. 12-14) illustrates the restoration of the wandering sinner to favor by
the parable of the lost sheep, Luke (xv.) adds the still
more striking ones of the lost piece of silver and the prodigal son; and where Matthew (viii. 19-22) records two
examples of what is required in following Jesus, Luke
(ix. 57-62) adds a third.
There are likewise remarkable evidences of the tenderness toward the chosen people Israel, which Paul exhibits
so strikingly in his Epistle to the Romans (ix. 4, 5; xi.
18, 28), and which was so becoming to one who, like
Luke, had the breadth of the Greek soul while he owed
all his hope of salvation to the Jews. The Evangelist
delights to record the recognition by Jesus of the sons and
daughters of Abraham whom he had benefited. He alone
gives an account of the conversion of Zaccheus, adding
his nationsality: "This day is salvation come to this house,
forasmuch as he also is a son of Abraham" (xix. 9). It
is Luke (xiii. 16) who gives our Lord's defense of the
woman who was bowed together, addressed to the hypocritical ruler of the synagogue: " Ought not this woman.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           257
being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound,
lo, these eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the
Sabbath-day? "
While Luke is distinctively the Evangelist of the Greek
world, he shows the spirit of the universal man, in his
appreciation of the relation of salvation to the Jews. It
is he that writes, in giving the announcement of the angel
concerning the Baptist (i. 16): "And many of the children of Israel shall be turned to the Lord their God;" and
in the announcement concerning Jesus (i. 32, 33): "The
Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father
David, and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever."
It is true also that Luke alone records all three of Christ's
lamentations over the doomed Jerusalem (xiii. 34, 35;
xix. 41-44; xxiii. 27-31). "Finally, it is Luke who, in
addition to the detailed prophecy of the destruction of
Jerusalem, given by all the three synoptical Evangelists,
records the hint that was given of the restoration that
she might one day expect. In his Gospel alone, we read,
in the prediction uttered by Jesus on the mount of Olives,
these significant words (xxi. 24):' And they shall fall by
the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into
all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the
Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.'" 1
Word Changes. The Grecian drift of the third Evangelist may also be traced throughout his Gospel, in his
departure from the usage of the other Evangelists in the
employment of words.
The prominence given by Luke to the word sinner in
its various forms will be alluded to elsewhere. His use
of the word people will still better illustrate the point
under consideration. He uses it oftener than all the
other Evangelists. A single example will suffice. In
relating the healing of the blind man of Jericho, Matthew
1 The Four Witnesses, p. 183
17




258       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR- THE. GREEK.
(xx. 29) says that "a great multitude (crowd) followed
him," and rebuked the blind men when they cried for
mercy (31); Mark, that " he went out of Jericho with his
disciples and a great number of people " (x. 46), and,
that when the blind man cried out, "many charged him
that he should hold his peace " (48); Luke, that " they
which went before " rebuked the blind man (xviii. 39),
and that all the people when they saw it gave praise unto
God (43). That definite and, so to speak, organized
body, the people, thus takes the place of the indefinite
crowd, many, and great number.
The examination might be extended to the entire Gospel with like results. The moulding presence of the
Greek aim and spirit would be everywhere manifest, and
that in proportion to the thoroughness of the investigation.
II. Other Peculiarities.
The survey, thus far taken, of the third Gospel, has
prepared for the more definite presentation of some of
those incidental features, in assumption or expression,
which demonstrate most clearly its Greek adaptation.
These features may be brought out in connection with
the character of Jesus as the perfect man, and with the
revelation of God and the invisible world.
Jesus the Universal Man. It has already appeared
that Jesus bears in the third Gospel the character of the
perfect, divine man, the Saviour of the world. This may
be more fully demonstrated by tracing the progress of
his human development, and bringing out the elements of
complete manhood and the distinctive features of his
work as the Saviour of the world, as these things are
presented in the Gospel according to Luke.
The Evangelist records the early human development
of Jesus.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           259
In this Gospel alone do we read of the salutation of
Elizabeth, " Blessed art thou among women, and blessed
is the fruit of thy womb" (i. 42); that the babe " was
wrapped in swaddling clothes " (ii. 7); that the child was
" circumcised on the eighth day " (ii. 21); that he "was
presented to the Lord in the Temple " (ii. 27); that "the
child," or lad, "grew  and waxed strong in  spirit"
(ii. 40); that" the grace of God was upon him" (ii. 40);
that when he was twelve years old his parents took him
with them, after the custom of the Jews, to Jerusalem, to
the feast of the Passover (ii. 41, 42); that after his interview with the doctors he gave to his mother that wonderful answer, indicative of the dawning consciousness in
the child's soul of his mission (ii. 49); that then he
" went down " again with his parents, and "came to
Nazareth and was subject to them " (ii. 51); that he " increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God
and man" (ii. 52); that when he was baptized by John
he " began to be about thirty years of age " (iii. 23).
But besides giving so minutely his early human development, Luke, throughout his whole Gospel, is constantly tracing and dwelling upon the peculiar marks of
our Lord's humanity to the end of his career. In Luke
alone do we read of "the paps which he had sucked"
(xi. 27); of his "rejoicing in spirit" (x. 21); of his
weeping over the city (xix. 41); of his kneeling down in
prayer (xxii. 41); of the appearance of an angel from
heaven in Gethsemane strengthening him (xxii. 43);
that being in an agony he prayed more earnestly, and his
sweat was, as it were, great drops of blood falling down
to the ground (xxii. 44); that like "a righteous man,"
which the centurion is here said to have called him, he
cried with his latest breath, " Father, into thy hands I
commend my spirit " (xxiii. 46); that after his resurrection, he verified his resurrection-body to his disciples by




260       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
sitting at meat with them, by taking a piece of broiled
fish and of a honey-comb and eating it before them, and
by bidding them to handle him and see that it was himself; that he said, " It is I myself; for a spirit hath not
flesh and bones as ye see me have" (xxiv. 39); that he
made the hearts of those two disciples burn within them
by the power of his human sympathy, as he walked and
talked with them on their way to Emmaus (xxiv. 32).
These features, brought out in this Gospel alone, are
enough to tell the complete and connected story of the
development of the veritable man Jesus. They are but
surface indications on the great current of his life, as
presented by the Gentile Evangelist for the Greek.
It is no less remarkable that all the elements of a complete manhood are brought out in the third Gospel with
wonderful distinctness.
Keenly incisive as were the thoughts of Jesus of Nazareth, he was no " clear, cold, logic engine." The reality
of his human sympathies and affections is exhibited in an
almost exhaustless variety of interesting details, while he
is shown to be possessed of a depth and breadth and intensity of human feeling before unknown to the world.
This element in his character is seen to the best advantage in the relations which Luke represents him as holding to those classes of humanity for which the age cared
the least: to children; to woman; to the outcasts from
society.
The other Evangelists tell us of our Lord's blessing
children, but Luke commonly adds something that brings
out the tenderness of his regard for them. He alone tells
us that they were infants that were brought to Jesus
when he so graciously and winningly presented himself
as the children's Saviour: " And they brought unto him
also infants that he would touch them " (xxiii. 15);
that the daughter of Jairus was only a child: " one only




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           261
daughter about twelve years of age" (viii. 42); that
the demoniac healed at the foot of the Mount of Transfiguration was a child: " Master, I beseech thee, look
upon my son, for he is mine only child " (ix. 38). Taking such incidents in connection with Luke's remarkable
presentation of the childhood of the Baptist and of Jesus
in the opening chapters of the Gospel, it is easy to understand why this should have been called the children's
Gospel.
The affectionate regard of our Lord for woman is an
equally marked feature of this Gospel. Luke tells us of
" certain women which had been healed of evil spirits and
infirmities, Mary, called Magdelene, out of whom went
seven devils, and Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Herod's
steward, and Susanna, and many others which ministered
unto him of their substance" (viii. 3); of the penitent
woman who anointed him at the feast in the house of Simon the Pharisee (vii. 46); of certain women who lifted
up their voices and blessed him (xi. 27); of his address to
the women of Jerusalem who followed him to the cross
weeping (vii. 38); of the restoration of the son of the
widow of Nain (vii. 11-16). It is Luke who first introduces us to those typical women of all ages, Martha and
Mary, the one cumbered with much serving, and the
other sitting at the feet of Jesus, while he teaches both
herself and the sister who rebukes her, the true mission of woman, and her real glory in devotion to him
(x. 38-42). Such incidents as these, in connection with
the tender regard so often exhibited for the widowed and
bereaved, and, more than all, in connection with those
wonderful events in the lives of Elizabeth and Mary,
unfolded only here, by bringing Jesus into closest sympathy with true womanhood, and by exalting the glory of
true motherhood through her who was " blessed among
women (i. 28, 42)," entitle this Gospel to be called in a




262       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
peculiar sense, the Gospel of woman, for whom that old
Greek world had no Gospel.
More wonderful still was the affectionate sympathy of
our Lord, depicted in this Gospel, with the poor, despised,
suffering, outcast classes of society. While he constantly
rebuked and warned the hypocrite, the self-sufficient, the
self-righteous, the rich, the luxurious, the frivolous, and
the thoughtless, - as in the case of the ruler of the synagogue who found fault with him for loosing the woman,
on the Sabbath, from the spirit of infirmity which had
bowed her together for eighteen years (xiii. 11); in the
case of those who complacently told him of the Galileans
whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices (xiii.
1); in the case of the Pharisees who derided his teaching concerning man's stewardship, and whose character
and destiny he unfolded in the parable of the rich man
and Lazarus (xvi. 19-31); and in the case of the rich
man who had much goods laid up for many years (xii.
19), - he is yet everywhere presented as the friend of
the poor and the needy. In Luke's Gospel alone the
beatitudes all become blessings to the poor and suffering
(vi. 20-22); the most precious of the parables, - as the
great supper, the marriage feast, Lazarus and the rich
man, the good Samaritan, and the prodigal, - all mark
this Gospel as pre6minently for the poor. The experience of our Lord himself is presented as that of one of
the poor, since he became poor, was laid in a manger,
and his parents were obliged to offer at his presentation
in the Temple the offering of the poor, " a pair of turtle
doves or two young pigeons " (ii. 24).
But Luke makes the sympathy of Jesus with the absolute outcasts to stand out still more clearly. It appears
in the friendly recognition of publicans; in the parable
of him who went up to the Temple to pray, and standing afar off with downcast eyes smote his breast and




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           263
prayed, " God be merciful to me, a sinner" (xviii. 13);
in the story of Zaccheus (xix. 1-10); in the treatment of
the sinful but penitent woman who anointed him (vii.);
in the parables of the lost piece of money and the lost
sheep (xvi. 11); in that wonderful "Gospel within the
Gospel," -the parable of the prodigal (xv.); in the
memoir of the penitent malefactor on the cross (xxiii.
42, 43). It is no marvel, then, that this Gospel, more
than all the others, may be said to have given birth and
inspiration to all the great reformatory movements, —
the care for the poor, the deaf, the dumb, the insane, the
maimed, the widowed and orphaned, the aged, even the
criminal, - which distinguish modern Christendom. The
third Gospel is in a peculiar sense the Gospel of those
for whom in all ages this world has had no Gospel.
But the expressions of this limitless tenderness and
compassion, on the part of Jesus, reach their height in
his treatment of the apostate and- doomed Jews. Luke
alone twice records Christ's weeping over Jerusalem (xiii.
34, 35; xix. 41-44), bringing out with graphic power
those sadder features of the coming ruin which Matthew
does not present (Matt. xxiii. 37-39). Luke alone records the compassionate address of Jesus to the women
of Jerusalem, who made lamentation over him as he went
forth to Calvary with his cross (xxiii. 27-31), with its
equally graphic picture of the impending ruin of the
doomed city. He alone records the prayer for the forgiveness of his defiant and scoffing and cruel murderers
(xxiii. 34). He who died upon that cross could weep
over the remediless ruin of the worst of apostate and
doomed races, and could pray for the forgiveness of the
most cruel and guilty murderers of all ages.
This man of such matchless sympathies, so tireless in
his beneficent activities, so boundless in his self-sacrifice
for others, Luke exhibits as combining perfect moral pu



264       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
rity with an unapproached and inapproachable faith,
piety, and devotion toward God.
This, most of all, was needed to correct the Greek
idea of manhood. Not all in man is divine, nor even, in
the noblest sense, manly. From that hour when Luke
sent forth his Gospel, the character of Jesus of Nazareth became the perpetual condemnation of the appetite
and passion, and the earthliness and godlessness, of the
Greek world. In Jesus appeared a conscious and constant dependence on God, expressing itself in prayer,
which is found linked with all the great events of his career, from the descent of the Holy Ghost at his baptism,
to that last act by which he yielded up his spirit to God
on the cross; a perfect devotion to God, which never faltered in all that weary way from the manger to the
grave; and that perfect, conscious freedom from taint of
sin, in which he stands alone in all the ages, and by
which he realized that ideal of perfect manhood of which
the highest Greek thought, the profoundest Greek philosophy, and the noblest Greek art, were at the best but
anxious and troubled dreams. All the elements of a true
and complete manhood thus unite in the Jesus of the
third Gospel, to attract to him the Greek soul wherever
it is found.
This true and perfect man is also presented as the universal man, the one " Son of Man," whose human interest and sympathy and affection and mission are bounded
only by the race.
That Luke wrote his Gospel for universal humanity,
and not for Jew, Roman, or Christian, appears abundantly in what has already been said; but it likewise appears everywhere in the Gospel, from the announcement
that he shall be " a light to lighten the Gentiles " (Luke
ii. 32), and that he shall "bring peace on earth" and
" good will to men " (Luke ii. 14), until that last decla



INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           265
ration to the disciples, that "repentance and remission of
sills shall be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem" (Luke xxiv. 4?). The genealogy here given (Luke iii. 23-38) is not that of his legal,
royal, and covenant descent, as Messiah by Joseph from
David and Abraham, which was needed for the Jew;
but his actual, natural descent from Mary, traced all the
way up to the one father of the great human brotherhood,
to Adam, "which was the son of God" (iii. 38); and
which would show the Greek that man was not autochthonous, or sprung from the earth, as he vainly supposed,
but of divine origin. Here, in the latter half of this
Gospel, are gathered together all those gracious parables
found nowhere else, which present the freeness and fullness of God's love to all the suffering and sorrowing
world, and which have always been esteemed the choicest
treasure of the nations: the good Samaritan, the great
supper, the lost sheep, the lost piece of money, and the
prodigal. Here alone do we find the sending out of the
Seventy, and the work of our Lord himself among that
heathen people in Perwea, which were the precursors and
promises of like work for all mankind, and the events
and teachings of which furnish nearly all of the second
ten chapters of this Gospel. Here alone the last great
struggle, in which Jesus is borne to the cross, is fully represented as being, what it was in fact, not simply a struggle between Jesus and the Jewish people, but also a
struggle between the leading classes at Jerusalem, who
envied and hated Jesus, and the people who followed him,
heard him gladly, rejoiced in him, and went back from
the crucifixion beating their breasts for grief at his death
(xxiii. 48), -a struggle in which the leaders succeeded
in accomplishing their bloody purpose, only by making a
compact with one of the followers of Jesus (xxii. 4), by
taking advantage of the darkness and by calling in the




266       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
Roman power to aid them (xxiv. 1, 7). Thus, from beginning to end, does this Gospel everywhere prove itself
to be in very truth the Gospel of universal humanity.
This universal man, brother of human kind, is presented in Luke's Gospel as being at once both God and
man, the divine man.
It has been shown by a modern writer how difficult a
thing it is to dramatize, and to represent in action, a
character embracing the human and divine, in an imperfect world.  There never has been a successful attempt to do it except in the Gospel history of Jesus of
Nazareth. Each of the Evangelists achieves the difficult
task; but in the Gospel according to Luke it is achieved
in the face of greater difficulties than in the other Gospels, for the reason that he brings out the humanity of
our Lord most fully. While he makes the humanity
so prominent, he makes the Divinity scarcely less prominent. Jesus is brought forward as Jehovah, in the
angelic message to Zacharias (i. 11-21), in the poetic
prophecy of Zacharias (i. 67-80), in the annunciation by
the angels to the shepherds (ii. 13), and in the preaching of the forerunner (iii. 3-17). He appears as the
"Son of the Highest,"' and as the "Son of God," in
the message of the angel to the Virgin Mary (i. 26-38),
and is acknowledged to be the " Son of God" by the
Father at the baptism (iii. 22), and by the world of evil
spirits (iv. 41; viii. 28). He is represented as claiming
to be God by assuming the prerogative and exercising the
power of the almighty Moral Governor in forgiving sin,
and then as establishing his right and power to do it
by healing the palsied man (v. 18-26). He is exhibited
as going through life, performing works of power that are
possible to God only. God was everywhere in the perfect man, Jesus. Here, certainly, was just the Saviour
the Greek needed. He wanted some living image of God




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.          267
in some truly perfect man. He had striven after this in
his poor blind way; but the end was only godlessness, or
the altar to " the unknown God." He had longed for humanity in its perfection and glory, for a God who should
be a son of man. Jesus was that. So Luke portrays
him. Jesus was Deity taking human form. Through
that deep heart and matchless intellect and marvelous
sense of the beautiful God himself shone. In that spotless character and that active life of love, God himself
lived and wrought. Jesus was most human, the great
and perfect brother, and yet most divine, the great and
perfect God.
The Revelation of God and the Invisible World.
The third Gospel is equally unique in the fullness and
vividness of its revelation of God and the spiritual world,
both in themselves and in their relations to man and this
present world.
In Luke's portrayal of the divine man, that God, whom
the Greek had put far off to the utmost, bounds of the
universe, and whom he regarded as taking no interest
in the affairs of men, is brought very near, and shown
to have the deepest interest in human affairs, and the
closest sympathy with man in his joys and sorrows, in
his life and death.
In truth, this Gospel swept away all the gods of Greece.
"There is but one God," was the voice of the word. It
swept away nymphs, satyrs, and fauns, furies, fates, and
muses, -everything with which the Greek imagination
had peopled mountain and forest, land and sea, the
depths of the earth and the expanse of the sky. It took
the life out of much of Grecian art, made mere airy
fancies of the finest works of Phidias and Praxiteles, of
Homer and Eschylus, of even Plato and Aristotle; but
it revealed an invisible world, with its hosts of heavenly
beings far more pure and beautiful than any creation of




268       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
man's art or thought, and engaged as messengers of God
in ministries of love to men. God himself is interested
in the sorrow of Zacharias and Elizabeth, and the heavens open and Gabriel descends with the promise of blessing; He would make the virgin " blessed among women,"
and the heavens open again and the angel comes down to
crown her with perpetual honor and joy; He would give
glad tidings to the sorrowing earth, and his glory bursts
the barriers of the skies and shines upon the lowly shepherds, and the angel of the annunciation proclaims to
them the tidings of great joy, while the angelic host becomes visible joining the first "glory in the highest"
with peace and good will to men.  The nearness and
tenderness of God are made evident in all the compassionate work of Jesus, his incarnate Son; in the teachings
of all the great distinctive parables of this Gospel; in
short, in its whole matter and manner.
But this revelation of the powers of the unseen world
is represented to the Greeks as having a great and beneficent design.
Luke exhibits, with a distinctness and fullness not approached by the other Gospels, the ruined and miserable
condition of human nature as sinful and corrupt; the
twofold possible destiny of man; and the design of God
to lift him out of his condition of evil, and bring him into
union and communion with himself.
The Greek required especially to be taught the true
condition of human nature. The idea and nature of sin
needed to be made familiar to him, and a sense of his
own sinfulness to be aroused in him. He had been accustomed to find the cause of his failure to become the
perfect man, and the cause of the weakness and the suffering in the world, in human limitation or misfortune;
before he could be saved he must be taught to find it
in human sin.  Luke, therefore, unfolds, in a manner




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.          269
equally striking and peculiar to himself, the sinfulness of
man. He uses the word sinner oftener than all the other
Evangelists combined. Any one who will carefully examine this Gospel for himself with this point in view,
will be astonished to see how the ideas of righteousness
and unrighteousness, sin and holiness, repentance and remission, color all its teachings, from the opening scene,
where it is declared that Zacharias and Elizabeth " were
both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless " (i. 6); all
through the vivid presentations and clear condemnations
of the prevalent forms of sin,- such as hypocrisy,
formality, and covetousness, - which abound in the body
of the Gospel; to the conclusion, where the work to
which the disciples are sent is to preach "'repentance
and remission of sins " (xxiv. 47) among all nations.
In harmony with all this is the portrayal of the sad
state of man, in those inimitable pictures, the parables of
the prodigal and the good Samaritan. In the latter parable, " the wretched condition of human nature, straying
from God's presence, and swerving from obedience to
his law, is displayed in the person of the traveler going
forth from Jerusalem, the holy city, to Jericho, the city
of the world. In its way it falls among thieves. Human
nature was encountered by the arch-thief, Satan, and
was stripped of its original righteousness, and was left
half dead. The priesthood came by, and the law came
by, and cast a transitory glance upon it; but they only
showed its misery and evinced their own inability to heal
it, by leaving it where it was and passing by it on the
other side. But at last the Samaritan came. He had
compassion on it, and bound up its wounds, pouring in
the oil and wine which he had with him, and laid it on
his own beast, and brought it to the inn and took care
of it. Christ, the good Samaritan, came from heaven on




270       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
a blessed journey, and saw mankind lying helpless in the
road of this world, stripped and naked, full of bruises
and putrefying sores. He bound up its wounds, and
poured in the oil and wine of his own cleansing and
sanctifying blood, and lifted it up from the ground and
put it on his own beast. He himself bore our griefs and
carried our sorrows. He himself bore our sins in his own
body on the tree. He brought us to the inn and has
given us to the keeping of the host, with a charge to take
care of us; and at his departure he provided for us, and he
has promised to come again and demand an account of
our treatment." 1 Equally pertinent and graphic, as
might readily be shown, is the parable of the prodigal.
And throughout this Gospel that wondrous love and grace
of God, which Luke delights to trace, and the aim of
which is to deliver humanity from its sad condition,
bring out more strikingly by force of contrast this heavy
background of sin and misery.
The Greek required that the future destiny of man
should be made clear to him.  "' The state of the disembodied soul was a question on which the mind of the
Greek world had indulged in many inquisitive speculations, and on which it needed instruction. The terrors
of Tartarus and the joys of Elysium, which had been displayed in the writings of their poets, exercised a dominant
influence on the imagination and practice of heathendom;
and, in the apostolic age, they had a strong hold on the
popular mind, and alarmed it with superstitious fears, or
mocked it with illusory hopes. Men, indeed, of a more
philosophical temper, looked on with skeptical indifference, and treated these representations as legendary
fables, and denied the resurrection of the body and the
doctrine of future retribution. Therefore, the healing
art of the beloved physician, St. Luke, might well be
1 Wordsworth, Introduction to St. Luke's Gospel, p. 161.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.            271
employed in providing a remedy for this spiritual malady.
Accordingly, we see that he has taken care to record two
sayings of our blessed Lord, which reflect the clearest
light on this mysterious subject, -the state of the soul
immediately after death, and during the interval of its
dissolution and the day of resurrection and of judgment.
He has done this in his recital of the history of the rich
man and Lazarus, and in the speech of our Lord to the
penitent thief on the cross,' To-day thou shalt be with
me in Paradise.' He also, alone of the Evangelists, in
his recital of the miracle of the raising of the daughter of
Jairus, has taken care to specify the fact that her spirit
came back to her again (viii. 55). He thus corrected
the erroneous notions of popular belief and philosophical
incredulity, and revealed to the Greeks the great doctrinal and practical truth, that the human soul, on its
separation from  the body by death, passes immediately
into a place of joy or of sorrow; and that it remains
there until the last day, when it will be reunited to the
body, and be admitted to the full fruition of heavenly
bliss, or be consigned to the bitter pains of everlasting
woe." 1
The Greek needed to have the way opened for him to
God and heaven. Luke, therefore, taught him how communication is to be had with God and the world of invisible realities, and how man is to reach up after the perfect manhood here, and the immortal manhood of glory
hereafter. The prayer of faith is the great agency. The
Greeks must be taught to fall down on their knees and
pray, and so to reach out after the invisible but living
Father. " Their temples were not houses of prayer.
Their worship consisted mainly in sacrifices, or in religious pomps and processions, or in theatric shows. But no
ritual or liturgy of heathenism has been preserved to
1 Wordsworth, Introduction to St. Luke's Gospel, p. 159.




272       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
us." In a word, the Greek mind was to be schooled in
the duties of devotion. Hence, Christ appears as the
great example of prayer and its power over the unseen
world. He prays at his baptism and the Holy Ghost descends upon him (iii. 21). He withdraws into the wilderness and prays before he heals the palsied man and
forgives his sins, and engages in the conflict with the
Scribes and Pharisees (v. 16). He prays all night and
then chooses his disciples (vi. 12). He prays on the
Mount of Transfiguration and the glory of heaven comes
down upon him (ix. 29). He prays alone in his retirement from his public work and the disciples, with Peter
in the lead, make their first full confession of his
Messiahship (ix. 18). He prays in the garden before
he goes to the cross; and, being in an agony, he prays
still more earnestly and an angel comes down to
strengthen him (xxii. 41-45). Even on the cross he
prays for his murderers (xxiii. 34), and in his last
words commits his spirit into the hands of his Father
(xxiii. 46).
And in harmony with this wonderful example is the
not less wonderful teaching, given in this Gospel only.
Twice is he represented as saying, " Men ought always
to pray."  The effects of urgent prayer by man are here
exhibited, not only by the promise, " Ask, and it shall be
given you," and that peculiar promise of the Holy Spirit
for the asking (xi. 1, 3); but also in the two parables,
of the friend coming for bread at midnight (xi. 5-8),
and the widow before the unjust judge (xviii. 1-8). He
teaches how to pray in that form everywhere known as
the Lord's Prayer (xi. 1-4), given only here and in
Matthew; and by that inimitable incident of the two
men who went up to the Temple to pray (xviii. 9-14),
which has, perhaps, had a more powerful influence in
directing man to the true prayer than any other teaching
of the Bible.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           273
But the Greek needed to be taught that prayer is more
than the power which brings heaven down to men; that
it is also the power by which man's soul is to go out in
gratitude toward heaven, and by which it is to mount up
toward heaven. " The duty and blessedness of thanksgiving to God for benefits received from him, supplied
another subject on which the Gentile world needed instruction. They'glorified him not,' neither were they' thankful,' is the sentence pronounced upon them by St.
Paul. A beautiful picture of gratitude, and of its reward, is displayed by St. Luke, and by St. Luke alone,
in the record of our Lord's miracle of mercy wrought
upon the ten lepers who stood afar off (xvii. 12). The
blessing pronounced upon the one who returned, and with
a loud voice glorified God, and fell down at his feet, giving him thanks, is made more striking and emphatic by
its juxtaposition with the divine command,' Go show
yourselves to the priests'; and brings out more prominently the paramount obligation and exceeding felicity of
the moral act of thanksgiving, because it is put in contrast with an express command to discharge a ritual duty
of the Levitical law.  That, also, was to be done; but
the first thing to be done was to glorify God." 1
Da Costa has suggested that, if it be true that the distinctive character of the facts and doctrines collected by
Luke is, that they, in the most marked and profoundly
interesting manner, place over against the depths of
man's sinfulness, wretchedness, weakness, and poverty,
in strong relief, mercy, compassion, charity, salvation,
prayer and answers to prayer, faith, grace, and joy, -
then there is no word better fitted to convey an impression of all this, than unction.
" The Gospel of the beloved physician and Evangelist,
the fellow-laborer of Paul, is emphatically a Gospel full
1 Wordsworth, Introduction to St. Luke's Gospel, p. 160.
18




274       LUKE, THE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
of unction. But that very word involves a new suggestion with respect to the harmonies to be found among
these writings. Unction, according to the writers of the
Old Testament, but still more according to those of the
New, proceeds from the Holy Ghost." 1
As compared with the first Gospel, or the second, it
will be found that the third gives peculiar prominence to
tile Holy Ghost, and his gifts, operations, and divine personality. The very opening of the Gospel, in the promise made to Zacharias and Elizabeth, declares of the Baptist: "He shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and
shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall
be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's
womb " (i. 15). The literal accomplishment of this prediction is recorded in the same chapter (i. 41-44). The
miraculous conception of Jesus by the power of the Holy
Ghost is recorded with peculiar fullness by Luke (i. 35);
Elizabeth, Mary, and Zacharias, being filled with the Holy
Ghost, spoke and sang as inspired by him (i. 41, 46, 67).
The Holy Ghost was upon the aged Simeon, and revealed
to him that he should not see death until he had seen the
Lord's Christ, and moved him to go into the Temple just
as the child Jesus was brought in for his presentation
according to the law (ii. 25-27). Luke emphasizes the
descent of the Holy Ghost in a bodily shape, at the baptism of Jesus (iii. 22), and the fact that Jesus, when he
went to the temptation, was full of the Holy Ghost (iv. 1).
So Luke alone, in the encouragement which Jesus gives
to prayer, defines the good things which Matthew (vii.
11) declares that the heavenly Father is so ready to give
for the asking, as being the Holy Ghost (Luke xi. 13).
If sinners of the Greek world were to be lifted up into
union with God and the things invisible, the unction from
this Holy One was a prime necessity. For ages they
1 The Four Witnesses, p. 198.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.          275
had enjoyed the inspiration of genius, and it had made
them learned, and wise, and eloquent, and cultivated, and
beautiful, according to the standards of this world, but
it had brought only moral wreck, and wretchedness, and
deformity, and death. In the Holy Ghost Luke reveals
to them the agent who shall assist them to attain to the
heavenly wisdom, and beauty, and perfection, and life.
In fine, this whole Gospel is throughout a delineation
of the way for the sinner of the Gentile world to the perfect, holy, blessed, and immortal manhood, which was to
be reached by the grace of God alone, which grace could
be secured by the prayer of faith alone, and which alone
could satisfy the Greek soul. Walking in the way of the
returning prodigal, wrestling with God like the poor
widow and the humble publican, resting in the Saviour
like the penitent thief upon the cross, treading in the
footsteps of the good Samaritan the divine man of Nazareth, aided by the Holy Ghost, even the chief of Gentile
sinners might hope to reach the perfection of manhood
on earth, and to be lifted with Lazarus to Abraham's bosom, or rapt with Jesus himself into the paradise of God.
SUMMARY.
Taking into account all the various facts brought to
light in the survey of the third Gospel, and giving to
them their due weight, its peculiar fitness for the Greek
mind of that age cannot reasonably be denied.
It has been shown to be a fact of history, that Luke, a
Greek in birth, character, and culture, prepared this
Gospel, with the aid of Paul, for Greek readers, the
men who were the representatives of the race at large.
This is the historical basis of the theory.
The adaptation to the Greek soul and its needs has
been shown to furnish the satisfactory explanation of




276       LUKE, TIlE GOSPEL FOR THE GREEK.
the various peculiarities of this Gospel, - in its general
plan, in its central idea and general movement, in its
omissions and additions, and in its incidental variations.
In fine, it is not too much to affirm that the third Gospel is so suited to the wants of the Greek soul as to
prove that it must in reality have been prepared, as tradition testifies, for the Greek as the representative of
universal humanity. In distinction from Matthew, the
Gospel for the Jew, the man of prophecy; from Mark,
the Gospel for the Roman, the man of power; and from
John, the Gospel for the Christian, the man of faith;
Luke is the Gospel for the Greek, the world-man.




PART V.
JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
"Deep strike thy roots, 0 heavenly Vine,
Within our earthly sod,
Most human and yet most divine,
The flower of man and God!
" We faintly hear, we dimly see,
In differing phrase we pray;
But, dim or clear, we own in thee
The Light, the Truth, the Way!"
JOHN GREENLEAF WHITTIER.
"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the
sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not
of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."
JOHN i. 12, 13.
"And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples,
which are not written in this book: but these are written, that ye might
believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye
might have life through his name."               John xx. 30, 31.
"Ultimus Joannes apostolus et evangelista, quem Jesu amavit plurimum,
qui supra pectus Domini recumbens (Joann. xiii. et xxi.), purissima doctrinarum fluenta potavit, et qui solus de cruce meruit audire: Ecce mater
tua (Joann. xix. 27). Is cum esset in Asia, et jam tunc heereticorum  semina pullularent, Cerinthi, Ebionis, et caeterorum qui negant Christum
in carne venisse (quos et ipse in epistola sua antichristos vocat, 1 Joann.
ii. 18), et apostolus Paulus frequenter percutit (Rom. iii.; 2 Cor. v.), coactus est ab omnibus pene tunc Asiae episcopis, et multarum Ecclesiarum
legationibus, de divinitate Salvatoris altius scribere, et ad ipsum (ut ita
dicam) Dei Verbum, non tam andaci, quam felici temeritate prorumpere."
JEROME.




278      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
CHAPTER I.
HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE CHRISTIAN ADAPTATION OF
THE FOURTH GOSPEL.
SECTION I.
ORIGIN AND DESIGN OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL.
WHAT was the actual origin of the Gospel according
to John? For what class of readers was it originally
designed? It is clearly a fact of history that the fourth
Gospel was prepared and given to the Church long after
the other three had been completed, and with a different
purpose.
Witnesses. Until recently no testimony of Papias concerning the origin of the fourth Gospel was supposed to
be extant, as none has been preserved by Eusebius. But
during the visit of Professor Tischendorf to Rome, in
1866, an extract from the work of Papias was found in a
Latin manuscript of the Gospels in the Vatican Library.
In this manuscript, in a prologue to the Gospel of John,
it is said that the " Gospel of John was proclaimed and
given to the Church while he was yet living, - as Papias
of Hierapolis, the beloved disciple of John, declared at
the close of the fifth book of his exposition of the oracles
of our Lord." 1
Of almost equal antiquity is the evidence furnished by
the fragment of the Canon of Muratori, or the list of canonical books of the Scriptures which Muratori found
in an old manuscript in the library of Milan. " That
priceless document of the second century," as Van Oosterzee styles it, declares that " John wrote in answer to
1 See Tischendorf, The Origin of the Gospels, p. 199; also Lange's Com.
on John, p. 26




ORIGIN AND DESIGN.              279
the express application of his fellow disciples and bishops." 1
Irenseus makes a similar statement concerning the origin of the Gospel in the preaching of John. In accordance with the polemic purpose of his work, he adds that
one object of the Gospel was "to remove that error
which by Cerinthus had been disseminated among men,
and a long time previously by those termed Nicolaitans,
who are an offshoot of that'knowledge' falsely socalled," and " to put an end to all such doctrines, and to
establish the rule of truth in the Church." He says,
" John excels in the depth of divine mysteries. For sixty
years after the Ascension he preached orally, till the end
of Domitian's reign; and after the death of Domitian,
having returned to Ephesus, he was induced to write
(his Gospel) concerning the divinity of Christ, co-eternal with the Father; in which he refutes those heretics,
Cerinthus and the Nicolaitans." 2
Clement of Alexandria gives still more explicitly the
origin of the fourth Gospel, in the celebrated passage
quoted by Eusebius.  Ile used to say that, " last of all,
John, observing that in the other Gospels those things
were related that concerned the body (of Christ) and
being persuaded by his friends and also moved by the
Spirit of God, wrote a spiritual Gospel." 3
Eusebius, the historian, besides adopting the statements of many of those who wrote before his time, and
in measure summing up the past testimony, makes additions of his own. Among other things he gives the origin of John's Gospel substantially as follows: "While
Matthew prepared his Gospel for the Hebrews, and Mark
and Luke published their Gospels, they say that John in
1 Van Oosterzee, St. John's Gospel, p. 104.
2 Ireneus, Against Heresies, iii. 11.
8 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. vi. 14.




280      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
all that time preached without writing. When the books
of the three Evangelists were spread throughout the
world, and came into his hands, he approved them and
acknowledged them a true testimony; but wished that
the declaration of those things which were done at the
first preaching of Christ had been made in their books." i
He therefore wrote his Gospel recording the ministry in
Judaea and the early miracles.
Jerome, in the same passage in which he declares the
origin of the first three Gospels, testifies no less explicitly
of the fourth.  " The last is John, the Apostle and
Evangelist, whom Jesus loved the most, who, reclining
upon the bosom of our Lord (John xiii. and xxi.), drank
the purest streams of doctrine flowing forth from it, and
who alone was worthy to hear from the cross:' Behold
thy mother' (John xix. 27). When he was in Asia, and
the seeds of the heretics, Cerinthus, Ebion, and others,
who denied that Christ has come in the flesh, had already
sprung up, he was compelled by all the contemporary
bishops of Asia, and by messages from many churches,
to write more fully concerning the Divinity of the Saviour, and, with a presumption not so bold as happy to
reach, so to speak, in his presentation of the Gospel, the
very' Word of God.' "2
Gregory Nazianzen teaches that "Matthew wrote the
wonderful works of Christ for the Jews; Mark for the
Romans; Luke for the Greeks; John, a herald who
reaches the very heavens, for all." 3
The great Augustine writes: " The three former Evangelists had narrated our Lord's temporal acts and the
sayings that were of most avail for regulating the conduct of this present life, and which specially concerned
1 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 21.
2 Hieron. Comment. in Evang. Matth. Proaom.
8 Greg. Naz. Carmin. lib. i. sect. i. 12, vers. 31-33.




ORIGIN AND DESIGN.             281
the inculcation of active duties. St. John relates fewer
acts of Christ, but is more full and minute in recording
his sayings, particularly concerning the unity of the ever
blessed Trinity and the felicity of life everlasting, and
applies himself to the commendation of contemplative virtue. Hence the three other living creatures, by which
the three other Evangelists are symbolized in the book
of Ezekiel and in the Apocalypse, the lion, the man, and
the calf, walk on the earth, because the three other Evangelists were principally occupied ill relating those things
which Christ wrought in the flesh, and the practical precepts which he delivered to those who are in the flesh;
but St. John soars, like the eagle, above the clouds of human infirmity, and contemplates the light of never-waning truth with the keen and steadfast eye of faith; he
gazes at the Divinity of Christ, by which he is equal
to the Father, and endeavors to present it in his Gospel." 1
Pertinent Facts. Such testimonies might be multiplied indefinitely, but those already given are sufficient
for present purposes. They justify the belief in the following facts: that the Apostle John wrote the fourth
Gospel at the close of the first century; that it was substantially the embodiment of his preaching to the early
Church, of those spiritual doctrines and experiences which
had come from his most intimate communion with Jesus,
and which, in an important sense, supplemented the other
Gospels; that it was written, not for the Jew, Greek, or
Roman, as such, but for the Church; and that it was
fitted to commend Jesus to Christians in the Church, as
the divine Son of God, the light and life of the world.
Some of these facts have been disputed by modern writers, who have introduced their own crude hypotheses in
their places. Especially has this been the case with the
1 August. de consens. Evang.




282      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
facts concerning the date of the origin of the Gospel and
concerning its design.
The facts themselves may be better understood and the
false hypotheses more fully appreciated in the light of the
historic changes of the times. It was almost half a century after the Gospel according to Luke, the last of the
missionary Gospels, was given to the Greek Gentile world,
that John wrote the Gospel which bears his name. In
this interval of time the Apostles had preached the Gospel throughout the world, and they had all fallen asleep
except John. Jerusalem had been taken by the Romans
and the Jewish system overthrown. The Temple had
been destroyed and its sacrifices and ritual had been abolished. The great telegraphic system which had been
constituted by the Temple and the synagogues had passed
away. The Christian religion as embodied in the Church
of Christ had taken the place of the Jewish and was extending itself into all lands.
The first great missionary work had therefore been
done, and John in writing his Gospel addressed a generation that had been taught the historical truths recorded
by the other Evangelists and the doctrines of the Epistles
and the Apocalypse. In fact they had in their hands all
the books of the Old and New Testaments except the
fourth Gospel, and were thoroughly acquainted with the
doctrines, the sacraments, and the worship of the Christian system.
The last Evangelist, therefore, wrote for a generation
of Christians. The earlier Gospels, intended for men
unacquainted with Christian truth, intentionally presented
to their readers only the simpler ideas concerning God
and Christ and redemption; but John, writing for the
Christian Church as a whole and for the world at large,
could take for granted their familiarity with the earlier
truths, and present the profounder aspects of the Gospel




ORIGIN AND DESIGN.              283
for which their previous training had filled the entire
Christian Church with an intense longing.
Design. In the light of this unique history and experience of the age and the Church the design of the fourth
Evangelist may best be made clear. Various aims have
been attributed to him, most of which find some show of
justification in the statements of the early writers.
It has been held by some that the original design of
this Gospel was polemic or controversial. Various heresies arose in the early Church even before the death of
the last of the Apostles. Prominent among these was
Gnosticism, which taught that all natures, intelligent and
material, are derived by successive emanations from the
Deity. Against these, we are told, John was commissioned to write. In fact, Irenmeus expressly says that it
was John's purpose to confute the Gnostic Cerinthus.
Now it is obvious that in any full development and
presentation of the truth it must come into necessary antagonism with error in all its forms, so that in John's
Gospel we cannot fail to find an express opposition to all
the theological and christological heresies of that age and
of later ages. It is certainly true, in a very intelligible
sense, that this Gospel was designed to meet these heresies. It may even be admitted that one object before
the mind of the Evangelist was to meet the particular
heresy of Cerinthus. But, as Tholuck has well remarked,
there is certainly no pervading controversial aim. Still
more to our point is it that John distinctly declares his
chief aim to be a different one (xx. 30, 31).  The controversial aim must, therefore, have been a subordinate
one.
It has been held by others that the main object of the
Evangelist was to supplement what had been already
written. He undertook to supply the facts passed over
in the other Gospels.




284       JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
That John assumes that his readers are familiar with
the ordinary traditional circle of Gospel truth is clear
from many passages that presuppose the accounts of
events as given in the other Gospels. It is evident, for
example, that his declaration: "For John was not yet
cast into prison" (iii. 24), assumes the knowledge, on
the part of his readers, of the account of the imprisonment of the Baptist given by Matthew (xi.), Mark (vi.
14-29), and Luke (iii. 20).1
But that the historical completion of the three synoptical Gospels cannot be admitted to have been the specific
aim of John may be made equally clear. The unity of
the Gospel proves it impossible. " This Gospel," says
Hase, " is no mere patchwork to fill up a vacant space."
" Not even as a distinct subordinate purpose," says Tholuck, " kept in view by the Evangelist throughout, can we
perceive a design of filling out what had been omitted
by the others. It is in conflict with such a view, in fact,
that so much has been embraced in the fourth Gospel
which is also found in the first three; that not a few of at
least apparent contradictions to them occur, which might
have been harmonized; that, on the other hand, the apparent contradictions between the synoptical Gospels are
not cleared up; that, at the point where he declares his
purpose (xx. 30) some statement of this aim might
justly be looked for; and, finally, that to embrace this
view strictly would force us to think of a literary assiduity
of a comparatively modern stamp." The fact is that John
adds but very little of purely historical matter, except
the chronological outline which has been seen to be of
such great value. But besides this there must be noted
1 Compare also John xi. 2 with Matt. xxvi. 6-13, and Mark xiv. 3-9;
John i. 32 with Matt. iii. 13-17, Mark i. 9-11, and Luke iii. 21, 22; John
xviii. 2, 3 with Matt. xxvi. 14, 15, Mark xiv. 10, 11, Luke xxii. 3-6; John
xxi. 15 and xiii. 36-38 with Matt. xxvi. 33, and Mark xiv. 29, for further
illustrations of such assumptions.




ORIGIN AND DESIGN.             285
an entire absence of any express allusion to the other
Evangelists, which is simply unaccountable on the hypothesis that John was a historical supplementer.
These hypotheses take into account only the very
fewest of the facts, in short, scarcely more than a single
fact each. The true theory must be broad enough to
account for all the peculiar facts of the Gospel. The view
drawn from history meets these demands. The fourth
Gospel was written by John in response to an appeal
from the Church -already possessing the other Gospels
- for a spiritual Gospel, and written with the view of
furthering the spiritual life of the Church.
This accounts for the fact that the Gospel actually
meets the theological and christological heresies of that
and after ages, - since a full development of Christian
truth could not fail to do this. It explains the diverse
and supplementary nature of the Gospel, - since there
was no need for the reiteration of the facts already
recorded by the other Evangelists, and none for the
merely missionary aspects of Gospel truth; while there
was a demand for a Christian theology from the lips of
Christ himself.
Accordingly the Church in all ages has regarded this
as distinctively the spiritual Gospel, the special Gospel
treasure for the Christian. This view, impressed by the
Gospel itself, has been embodied by leading writers in
the different ages.
Says Origen: " We may presume then to say that the
Gospels are the first-fruits of all the Scriptures, and the
first-fruits of the Gospels is that of John, into whose
meaning no man can enter, unless he has reclined upon
the bosom of Jesus,.... and, as it were, become a
second John."
Says Augustine: " In the four Gospels, or rather in
the four books of the one Gospel, the Apostle St. John,




286      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
not undeservedly with reference to his spiritual understanding compared to an eagle, has lifted higher, and
far more sublimely than the other three, his proclamation, and in lifting it up he has wished our hearts also
to be lifted. For the other three Evangelists walked, so
to speak, on earth with our Lord as man — of his divinity
they said but few things; but John, as if it oppressed
him to walk on earth, has opened his words as it were
with a burst of thunder, has lifted himself not only above
earth and every sphere of sky and heaven, but even above
every host of angels, and every order of invisible powers,
and reaches to him by whom all things were made, as he
says:' In the beginning was the Word,' etc. He proclaims other things in keeping with this great sublimity
with which he begins, and speaks of the divinity of our
Lord as no other person has spoken. He pours forth
that into which he had drunk. For not without a reason
is it mentioned in his own Gospel, that at the feast he
reclined upon the bosom of his Lord. From that bosom
he had in secrecy drunk in the stream, but what he drank
in secret he poured forth openly."
In short no Christian can read the Gospel according
to John without being impressed with its preeminently
spiritual character. Accordingly, in all ages the Church
has regarded it as her chief Gospel treasure.
Nor can it be reasonably denied that this view is more
in harmony with the testimony which has been brought
from the early Christian writers. It will subsequently
be seen to be more in accordance with the structure anda
spirit of the fourth Gospel itself.
Date. Nor is there any good reason for doubting that
John's Gospel was written at the close of the first century.  The testimony of the Fathers is clear on this
point. The progress made by the Christian Church
rendered the Gospel necessary at that time. The argu



THE CHRISTIAN CHARACTER.            287
ment for a later date, drawn from the character of the
doctrine embodied in it, is utterly baseless. An able
writer has shown that the doctrinal system of John is
precisely that of the Epistles, while it is utterly unlike
the teachings of the writers of the second century! 1
To the candid historical critic the main facts have,
therefore, the very firmest foundation. It will at once appear that the witnesses cited are substantially the same as
those on whom we depend for our knowledge of the origin
of the first three Gospels, and on whom the Church depends chiefly for the establishment of the canon of the
Scriptures.  Their statements were received without
question in the early Church. There is no sufficient
reason for doubting them, since the witnesses were of the
highest character, had both the ability and opportunity
to ascertain the facts, and had no motive for perpetrating
or perpetuating such a fraud as would be implied by the
falsity of their statements.
It cannot be maintained with even a show of reason
that their statements are not in accordance with history,
and that they did not arise out of history.  John, undoubtedly, prepared his Gospel for the Church, for the
purpose of presenting more fully to the Christian heart
the character, work, and doctrine of Jesus as the light
and life.
SECTION II.
THE CHARACTER AND NEEDS OF THE CHRISTIAN.
If, as has been seen, the fourth Gospel had its origin
in the preaching of John, after the missionary Gospels
had been preached and the Church established throughout the world, then the character and needs of the Christian must furnish the key to this Gospel.
1 See The Doctrinal System of St. John, considered as Evidence for the
Date of his Gospel, by the Rev. J. J. Lias, M. A.




288      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
What manner of man was the Christian? What were
his spiritual needs? The answer to these questions will
cast light upon the Gospel prepared under the influence
of the Holy Ghost for the Church.
I. The Christian.
The Christian is readily distinguished by marked
characteristics from the natural man, whether Jew, Roman, or Greek. The Christian is the man who has heard
the great facts of the Gospel, and who has accepted
Jesus Christ as his Saviour. He has attained, through
faith in Christ, to a new life which is different in its
origin, motives, and aims, from the earthly life. This
life, originating in divine power, leads him to complete
submission to Christ and to entire devotion to him in the
cause of the Gospel. He lives this spiritual life of faith
and obedience by fixing his eyes upon the central fact of
the cross, and through guidance and help given in the
Scriptures or by the Holy Ghost directly from above,
which guidance and help he ever longs to receive in increased measure. He is reaching out toward that everlasting life of glory with Christ, of which this new life
is the beginning.
Out of these peculiar characteristics arose those spiritual
needs of the Christian Church which were to be met by
the Evangelist. By the aid of them must be sought the
full understanding of the Gospel prepared by John.
The Man of Faith. The starting point in the Christian life is found in the personal acceptance of Jesus
Christ as the Saviour from sin. This act involves the
knowledge of God and the relation of man as a sinner
to God, and of the incarnation, work, death, and resurrection of Jesus; the belief in his divine character and
mission; and the practical resting of the soul on him for
salvation. To this act the preaching of the Apostles and




THE CHRISTIAN CHARACTER.          289
the promulgation of the first three Gospels brought that
portion of the ancient world which at the close of the
first century was found fully prepared for God's deliverer. By the grace of God the true Israelite accepted
Jesus as his Saviour, because he found in him the Messiah, the fulfiller of the Law and the Prophets, the Emmanuel who was promised for his salvation; the true
Roman, because he found in him the Son of God, the
almighty and universal conqueror, who was able to save
him; the true Greek, because he met the Greek idea of
the perfect and divine man, who longed for the salvation
of the race, and who had the power to save it. Thus the
true men of all the races found in him the satisfaction of
their spiritual wants; and in the very act of accepting
him they were transformed in character and life.
The Man of the New Life. The transformation, resulting from the acceptance of Christ, introduced the
Christian of whatsoever national extraction to a new life,
different in its origin and motives from the mere worldly
life. The latter has its source in the natural birth; the
former in the birth from heaven by the Holy Spirit. And
when this new life in Christ is once begun, its motive
forces are found in things heavenly rather than in things
earthly. The Jew lost his narrow Jewish ideas, and
turned from the prophecies of Christ and the forms and
ceremonies to Christ himself; the Roman ceased to care
for the temporal king in finding the spiritual king and
deliverer. The Greek parted with his low, humanitarian ideas of perfection, in having his eyes opened to see
the divine and universal man. They were all brought
into one brotherhood, all alike recognizing in Jesus the
elder brother, the spring and moving power of their new
life, and being all alike linked in living union with him
through faith.
The Man of Christ. The Christian is the man who
19




290      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
finds the aim of his life in Christ, and who can say with
Paul " to me to live is Christ." If by his natural birth
a Jew, he yet sees that the Jewish life of form and ceremony is no longer worthy of his soul, since in Christ's
own example is the true ritual; if a Roman, he sees that
the Roman life of earthly industry and conquest and
supremacy is no longer worthy of him, since in Christ's
gracious work, in his victory over sin, and in his kingdom are to be found the true work and conquest and
empire; if a Greek, he sees that the Greek life of perfection sought through philosophy and art is no longer
worthy of him, since through faith in Christ, whose reason is divine, and whose beauty is divine moral excellence,
is to be realized the perfection of humanity. Whatever
his earthly nativity he follows Christ, obeys him, aims to
become like him, and devotes himself to him in the work
of advancing the kingdom of God in the conquest of sinners. He finds the centre of his system of faith and life,
and the centre of his Christ too, in the cross. The incarnate Son of God, crucified and raised from the dead,
is the ground of all his hopes. He receives the remission of sin through the blood of Christ. By faith he eats
of the broken body of Christ, and drinks of his shed blood,
partakes of the boundless grace of God to sinners, and
especially is made the recipient of the Holy Ghost who
-is given to enlighten, renew, and sanctify the children of
God.
The Man of Endless Divine Life. The Christian is
the man who expects an everlasting life with Christ beyond this present life on earth. In Christ life and immortality are brought to light. As by faith in him the
life is begun, so by continual faith in him it is sustained
and nourished on earth, and by faith in him as the resurrection and the life it is completed in the life of immortality. Even while waiting for the revelation of the




THE CHRISTIAN CHARACTER.           291
glory, he is evermore found living for the invisible, spiritual, and eternal, evermore reaching out after communion
with Christ his risen, ascended, and glorified Lord.
II. The Key to John's Gospel.
If the character of the Christian is such as it has been
represented, it will furnish the key to the Gospel intended
for him. That Gospel must be suited to meet his wants,
It was an age of great intellectual activity in which
John wrote his Gospel. Reason was asserting its power
and speculation was rife, and men who professed the
faith in Christ were called to combat the errors of philosophy. It was an age of equally great worldliness, when
there was need of asserting and vindicating the spirituality of Christianity against the prevailing earthliness.
The Gospel for the Christian must present Jesus as the
revelation of God, - the word, the truth, the light, which
the Christian needs in the new life. It must make plain
all the great essential matters concerning the Christian
course, so that in its light he may see clearly to avoid
the danger, error, and death. It is obvious that the missionary Gospels do not deal largely with these subjects,
-do not deal with them at all, except as they have to
do with leading men to the first acceptance of Christ and
the beginning of the divine life in him. They leave the
wants of this higher and peculiarly spiritual sphere for
some later hand to supply. The fourth Gospel must in
this sense be the supplement of the first three.
Most assuredly, if the Christian is to be in any high
degree intelligent, he especially needs light concerning
the divine life which, by the grace of God, he has undertaken to live, - concerning its nature; its relations to
God and Christ; its origin and beginnings; the modes of
sustaining it to its full vigor; its mission in this world
and its issues, after the death of the body, in the regions




292      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
of immortality. These spiritual needs become the great
ones with the Christian.
To the Christian these are the credentials of Jesus, no
less essential than prophecy to the Jew, or power to the
Roman, or the perfection of manhood to the Greek.
Without them his most pressing needs would be left unsupplied. There could, therefore, be no Gospel for him in
any production which should omit or pass slightly over
these grand themes of the divine and immortal life of
faith. The Christian soul of that age - essentially the
same as in all other ages —furnishes the key to the
fourth Gospel.
SECTION III.
THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL.
The author of the fourth Gospel was peculiarly fitted
to prepare the truth of the Gospel for the Christian.
There is no valid reason for doubting that the Church
from the beginning received it as the production of the
Apostle John.
Modern Doubts. It is only of late years that attemnpts have been made to destroy the faith in its genuineness. Individual skeptics, at the close of the last century, denied that it was the work of John; but their attack
merited and received but little attention. Bretschneider,
by his "Probabilia," published in 1820 with the special
" view of anew exciting and extending inquiry into the
genuineness of the Johannine writings," first made the
serious discussion of the question necessary.
The assault has since been renewed by the Tiibingen
school of critics with Baur at their head, and has lately
given rise to a more earnest and exciting controversy.
Assuming "the radical difference and hostility between
the Jewish and Gentile types of Christianity," -between




THE AUTHORSHIP.               293
the party of Peter and the other disciples, and that of
Paul, - these assailants represent John's Gospel as having
been written about the middle of the second century by
some Gentile Christian, who aimed to bring about peace
between the two hostile parties, and forged the name of
John to his writing in order to give it the weight of that
Apostle's character. Hence John's Gospel so-called is to
be rejected. The difference between it and the first
three Gospels is made an additional argument for its
rejection.
This is not the place to enter at length into the consideration of the genuineness of the fourth Gospel. Those
who wish to read a thorough discussion of the questions
involved may best gratify their desire by consulting some
one or more of the able and popular works devoted to
the subject.
It is sufficient to note that the arguments adduced
should have little weight with Christian men of average
common sense. They have no basis of fact to rest upon.
The clear testimony of all Christian antiquity is against
them. John's Gospel can be traced back to the close of
the first century. It exactly accords with his character.
The theological quarrel between the Petrine and Pauline
parties in the early Church is a myth. Moreover the
historic view, which it is the object of the present work
to set forth and vindicate, fully explains the characteristic differences of John's Gospel from the others, and
shows these differences to have been a necessity if the
practical wants of the Church, in that age, and in all subsequent ages, were to be met by the Gospel. So manifold
and conclusive are the evidences of the authorship, that
it would be as easy, perhaps easier, to prove that Shakespeare did not write " Hamlet," or even that Milton did
not write " Paradise Lost," or that Bacon did not write
the "Novum Organum," as to prove that the Apostle
John did not write the fourth Gospel.




294      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
Character and Career. That John was just the man
to give shape to the Gospel for the Christian Church may
readily be shown. His birth and early history; his character as transformed and exalted by the power of the
Gospel; his intimate union with his Master and his intense sympathy with him; his long and profound Christian experience and his wide acquaintance with the needs
of the Church, combined to make him the fit instrument
for the work to which he was divinely called.
The history of John, so far as it has been recorded, is
too familiar to require extended rehearsal. He appears
to have been born in Bethsaida of Galilee. His father,
Zebedee, was a respectable and well-to-do fisherman on
the Sea of Galilee able to possess his own boats and to
have hired servants. His mother, Salome, was one of
those women who ministered to Jesus of their wealth,
and who followed him  to the cross. She went with
the Marys on the morning of the resurrection to the
sepulchre to embalm the body of Jesus. Born of such
a mother, it is not surprising that John early became one
of the disciples of the Baptist, nor that when the Baptist
introduced hint to Jesus he at once followed him as the
Messiah.
Perhaps the character of no scriptural personage has
been more misunderstood than that of "the beloved disciple."  The idea formed of him is that he was a " soft,
tender, almost femininely affectionate spirit." So the
painters have manifestly conceived him, and so the
Church has too generally regarded him. Nothing could
be farther from the truth. Such a character would be
poorly as possible fitted to prepare a Gospel for the
Church. It has only the elements that win from strong
and earnest souls a mild contempt. John was in fact the
very best evidence, to the men of his day, of the power
of the Gospel to harmonize the most different and apparently contradictory elements of character.




THE AUTHORSHIP.                295
Says a late writer " The character of John is composed of two vastly differing elements, rarely found in
such combination except under the transforming power
of the Christian spirit, but found there in its perfection
and consummation. These two elements are, very great
masculine strength, joined with affections so overflowing
and tender, that the strength is concealed under their
profusion, except when occasions and elmergencies bring
it to the test. The granite is hidden under the tendrils
that overhang it with flowers. It is only by assuming
that these two elements are inconsistent with each other
that the critics have raised their objections against the
congruity of the canonical Johannean writings, whereas
to blend them together is the great achievement of Christianity in human nature, and the blending is most perfect when the disciple leans most intimately on the bosom
of his Lord. The combination does not impair the masculine intrepidity, but preserves and tones it, though concealing it sometimes under the mildest of womanly gentleness." 1
That this is the true view may readily be verified.
The rugged nature of John - sometimes verging almost
upon savageness - was embodied in the name, " Boanerges," sons of thunder, given to him with his brother
(Mark iii. 17); and was clearly manifested in the zeal
which prompted him to call down fire from heaven on
the Samaritan city that refused them its hospitality
(Luke ix. 54). It appeared in the ambition which led
himn, with his brother, to seek, through their mother, the
chief places in the magnificent temporal kingdom which
the disciples expected (Matt. xx. 21; Mark x. 37); in
the fact that when, at the arrest of Jesus in Gethsemane,
the other disciples fled for their lives, the youthful John
kept close to his master, and followed on to the judgment
1 Sears, The Fourth Gospel the Heart of Christ, p. 65.




296      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
scene (John xviii. 15); in the fact that at the cross, amid
the raging of the multitudes, John alone was standing
close by, ready to receive the dying message from his
Lord (John xix. 26). Later, it is John who, in his
Epistles, hurls the most terrible anathemas at the false
teachers of his day; and who, in the Apocalypse, pens
the visions of the melting universe, of the assembling
judgment, and of lost souls.
To all this terrible power, which, unsanctified might
have made almost a demon, his writings and history show
that he joined a depth of tenderness equally marvelous,
-the tenderness of no sentimentalist or weakling but
that of one of the very strongest natures.
Special Fitness. Such a nature, under the sanctifying power of that divine grace which softened the ruggedness and exalted the tenderness, was just the nature
needed in the man who was to prepare and present the
Gospel truth that should lead the Christian in making
the greatest attainments in the divine life. He was able
to understand the heights and depths of human temptations and trials, of human wants along the line of Christian struggle and endeavor, and to treasure up from his
Master's lips and appreciate the divine doctrines and motives needed to sustain and cheer the Christian onward
and upward toward the heavenly goal.
It might almost be said that no other man appears
in the original college of Apostles who could possibly
have accomplished this great task for the Church without a radical change of nature. Most certainly Matthew had too exclusive a regard to prophecy to do such
a work, and Peter and Mark were too exclusively active.
John alone had that combination of intuition and reason that was needed, and that fitted him for the work
provided he could. secure the other special requisites for
it, — such as close union with Christ and sympathy




THE AUTHORSHIP.               297
with him, and large acquaintance with the needs of the
Church.
It is a well known fact that he had the requisite union
and sympathy with Christ.
He belonged to that inner circle, consisting of himself,
Peter, and James, to the members of which alone Jesus
permitted a near view of the great crises in his life and
work on earth, - such as the transfiguration and the
agony. Among the three he was the beloved disciple,
the disciple who leaned on Jesus' breast at the table at
the last supper. He was one of the first to follow Jesus,
and he was the one to cling most closely to him to the end.
To him was intrusted the mother, with whom in his earthly
career Jesus had been so closely bounid, and from the affecting hour on the cross to the death of her whose heart
had been pierced with many sorrows, Mary and John
were as mother and son.
But more important still was the intense sympathy of
the beloved disciple with his divine Master in his highest
spiritual moods, views, aspirations, and purposes.
His peculiar nature, softened and elevated by grace,
fitted him to understand and bring forth something of the
secret of the spiritual life of Jesus, —to give to men
what Ernesti has called "the heart of Christ."
It is well known that when men, differing in temperament, culture, or experience, look upon the same landscape, each takes into his mind and carries away different
features. One sees in it the hills and valleys, lakes and'water-courses, that remind him of some other and perhaps more familiar scene. Another fixes upon the
grander features of forest and mountain, of gorge and
c:ltaract, which awaken in him a sense of power. A third
takes note of the various products of art and civilization,
the signs of the presence of man with the moulding forces
of his reason. A fourth grasps the higher harmonies of




298      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
nature and art, of earth and sky, in which a voice speaks
to men declaring the presence and glory of Him who is
of all Creator and Lord. Like these were the four Evangelists in what they saw in the grand and varied life of
Jesus of Nazareth. John was the last. He saw for all
the Church what the other three saw not at all, or saw
chiefly for themselves. He heard for every Christian
through the ages the higher truths which the others heard
not at all, or heard chiefly for their own edification. For
this he was fitted by his nature; to this he was called;
for this he was inspired.
Were it not for the so-called Johannean passages in
the other Gospels, there might almost have been a doubt
cast upon the existence of such a world of truth as John
presents.' But these glimpses of the same truth prevent
the doubt. In their missionary work the other Apostles
had little occasion to use these higher spiritual truths,
even if they knew and understood them.
Still another peculiar element of fitness in John, as the
instrument for preparing the Gospel of the Christian life,
was his long, varied, and profound Christian experience.
In this he was alone among the Apostles. If, as is
generally agreed, his Gospel was not written until almost
the close of the first century, he was ripened for it by an
experience of nearly seventy years. In him appears the
contemplative spirit of the early Church.  For half a
century he seems to have been comparatively silent concerning the higher truths of the Christian life, although
doubtless brooding over them, until God's hour came.
During three quarters of a century he lived upon the
words of his Master, the eternal Word, - in filial intercourse with Mary, in spiritual communion with the
Church, in living union with the ascended Christ, - until those words became the very thought of his thought
1 See Matt. xi. 25-27; Luke x. 21, 22, etc.




THE GENERAL PLAN.             299
and the very life of his life, and he could give them a
reality in the utterance such as no other man could ever
give them.  Hence it is that to-day men cling to the
Gospel of John as the very voice of the innermost soul
of the divine Redeemer.
His long and wide acquaintance with the needs of the
Church completed his fitting for his work. His knowledge of the temptations and trials, of the sufferings and
persecutions, of the rising errors in faith and practice, in
that age which had infolded in it the germs of all the
ages, brought him to the clearest apprehension and fullest
appreciation of the needs of the Christian Church, and
enabled him to speak as directly to the innermost soul of
the Christian as he spoke from the innermost soul of
Christ. For the regenerated man, whether Jew, Roman,
or Greek, he could embody in its highest form the doctrine concerning Jesus Christ as the light and life.
The impulse which led the Christian Church to ask for
the permanent record of John's Gospel, and that which
led the Evangelist to comply with the request, were both
from the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of light and life. Out
of all the men, of that age, connected with the apostolic
body, the Holy Ghost chose the man best fitted in Christian character and experience to prepare and write the
Gospel for the Christian world.
CHAPTER  II.
CRITICAL VIEW OF THE CHRISTIAN ADAPTATION OF
THE FOURTH GOSPEL.
The fitness of the fourth Gospel for the Christian
Church of the apostolic age will appear from an examination of the Gospel itself in the light of its origin, design, and authorship.




300      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
SECTION 1.
THE CHRISTIAN ADAPTATION IN THE GENERAL PLAN
OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL.
The Gospel according to John, may be divided into
three parts, - presenting the successive stages in the revelation of Jesus, the incarnate Word, as the light and
life, to the faith of men, - together with an appropriate
introduction and conclusion.
In these divisions the character and doctrine of Jesus
are exhibited in their connection with the necessities of
the Church, which had been gathered out of the world
by the proclamation of the earlier forms of the Gospel.
The eternal Word, as incarnate in Jesus of Nazareth, is
set forth in the progress of his highest spiritual work for
believers throughout the world.
OUTLINE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL.
INTRODUCTION.
The Advent and Incarnation of the Word. The
Evangelist opens his Gospel by exhibiting Christ the
Eternal Word, in his Divine Origin and in his manifestation to men in the Incarnation. i. 1-13.
A. His eternal, divine origin, and his pre-historic work
and manifestation. i. 1-5.
B. His manifestation to men in time. i. 6-13.
a. As heralded by the Baptist and commended to the
faith of the world. 6-8.
b. As the true light, but rejected by the world and by
his own. 9-11.
c. As giving to those who received him power to become the children of God through faith on his name.
12, 13.




THE GENERAL PLAN.              301
PART I.
The Incarnate Word, the only Life of the World.
The Evangelist presents the spiritual revelations of the
Word during the public ministry in Judma.
Jesus appears as the Inca:rnate Son of God, full of
grace and truth, the only Life of the World.  The true
Israelites believe; but the false reject him, and prevent
the continuance of his work in Judea. i. 14-vi. 71.
Section 1. John records the testimony to the grace and
truth of the incarnate Word, -given before the first
Passover of the public ministry. i. 14-ii. 12.
A. By John the Baptist. i. 15-36.
B. By Jesus himself, - in personal intercourse and by
the miracle at Cana. i. 37-ii. 12.
Section 2. John records the manifestations of the spiritual truth and power at the foundation of the kingdom
of God, — and the rising faith between the first and
second Passovers of the public ministry. ii. 13-iv. 54.
A. In the special revelations of Jesus, as the Messiah,
the life and light, to the Jews, as the chosen people. ii.
13-iii. 36.
a. To the masses and rulers, - in cleansing the Temple,
teaching its spiritual design and presenting himself as the
true temple and passover. ii. 13-22.
b. To Nicodemus, a representative of the awakened
faith among the Jews, -in teaching the doctrine of the
new birth through the death and mediation of the Son
of God. iii. 1-21.
c. To the disciples of the Baptist, -in the Baptist's
public testimony to Christ as the Son of God, and made
by the Father, through faith, the only way of everlasting life. iii. 22-36.
B. In the special revelation of Jesus, as the Messiah,
the living water and the only Saviour of the world, to




302      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
the Samaritans, - to the woman at the well, and to the
men of Sychar. iv. 1-42.
C. In the special revelation of Jesus, as the author of
life, to the Galileans, - in the healing of the nobleman's
son. iv. 43-54.
Section 3. John records the greater subsequent manifestation of Jesus in connection with two successive Passovers, in which he proclaims himself the only bread of
eternal life, and in consequence of which many of his
disciples forsake him and the Jews seek to kill him. v.
1-vi. 71.
A. To the Jews,- in Jerusalem at the second Passover of his public ministry, -as the life of the world.
v. 1-47.
a. In healing the impotent man on the Sabbath. 1-15.
b. In the vindication of himself, - at the subsequent
judicial arraignment for Sabbath-breaking, - on the
ground of his being one with the Father and the true
Messiah of the Scriptures. 16-47.
B. To the multitudes, - by the Sea of Galilee, at the
time of the third Passover, - as the only bread of eternal life. vi. 1-71.
a. In the miraculous feeding of the five thousand and
the stilling of the storm. 1-21.
b. In the discourse of the following day, teaching the
doctrine of eternal life through faith in his flesh and
blood as the true bread of life from heaven,- leading to
the desertion of many disciples, to the confession of the
Twelve, and to his withdrawal from the open public
work in Judmea. 22-71.
PART II.
The Incarnate Word, the Life and Light, in Conflict
with the Spiritual Darkness. The Evangelist presents
some of the spiritual revelations of Jesus to the unbeliev



THE GENERAL PLAN.              303
ing Jews, during the period of occasional and private
visits to Jerusalem.
Jesus appears on various extraordinary occasions, presses
his claims as the Son of God, the only life and light of
the world, and rouses his enemies to successive attempts
to destroy him. vii. 1-xi. 54.
Section 1. John records the private visit of Jesus to
Jerusalem, at the Feast of Tabernacles (six months before the last Passover), - when he presents himself as
the water of life, the light of the world, and the only Saviour from the bondage of sin. vii. 1-viii. 59.
A. His first appearance in the Temple, - the only life
of the world. vii. 1-viii. 1.
a. Renewing his old claim to have come from the
Father and to be the water of life for the thirsting
world.
b. Thereby raising a conflict of opinions concerning
himself and leading the Sanhedrim to send officers to
take him.
B. His second appearance in the temple,- the only
light and deliverer. viii. 2-59.
a. Showing to the people, by the case of the adulterous
woman, the darkness and sin of the Scribes and Pharisees,
and contrasting himself, as the Son of God, the only Saviour of the world from the darkness and sin. 2-30.
b. Declaring to those who believed him to be the Messiah, that he, the Son of God ever-abiding with the Father,
alone can free them through the truth, from their bondage to sin and Satan, -thereby rousing their hatred and
leading them to attempt to stone him. 31-59.
Section 2. John records certain subsequent visits of
Jesus to Jerusalem, when he presents himself as the only
Healer of spiritual blindness, and the only Saviour of men
through his sacrificial death, — resulting in unbelief and
rage. ix. 1-x. 21.




304       JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
A. The restoring of sight to the man born blind, and
the revelation of Jesus to the blinded Jews as the one Sent
of God to heal their spiritual blindness through faith in
himself. ix. 1-41.
B. The claim of Jesus to be the Son of God, the Good
Shepherd, through the laying down of whose life the sheep
can alone find life. x. 1-21.
C. Still later, at the feast of Dedication, the claim of
Jesus - when urged to declare himself - that he and the
Father are one. x. 22-42.
a. The appeal to the works done in his Father's name
as proof of his claims, and the reiteration of his oneness
with the Father. 22-30.
b. Thereby leading to another attempt to stone him,
and to his escape across the Jordan to the Gentiles. 3142.
Section 3. John records the raising of Lazarus, when
Jesus presents himself as the Resurrection and the Life,thereby bringing the rage of his enemies to a crisis and
hastening his own death. xi. 1-54.
A. The death of Lazarus and the interposition of Jesus
as the resurrection and the life. xi. 1-44.
B. The results, - faith on the part of the people, and
the settled purpose to destroy him on the part of the Sanhedrim. xi. 45-54.
PART III.
The Incarnate Word securing the Life of the World
through his Sacrificial Death. The Evangelist presents
the bold public return of Jesus to Jerusalem, and the
clearer spiritual revelations connected with the close of his
career.
Jesus, claiming to be the Messiah, voluntarily sacrifices
himself on the cross, as the Passover of the world. xi.
55-xix. 42.




THE GENERAL PLAN.              305
Section 1. John records the public return and claim
of Jesus, together with the events which preceded and
brought about his sacrificial death. xi. 55-xiii. 30.
A. The crisis with the chief conspirators occurs when
Judas and the Sanhedrim are roused to enmity, by the
anointing for the burial at Bethany, and by the public
entry as Messiah into Jerusalem. xi. 55-xii. 19.
B. The crisis with the world at large is heralded by
the coming of certain Greeks, - calling forth a renewed
declaration of the claims of Jesus. xii. 20-50.
a. The public announcement to the people by Jesus,
that the hour of his glorification by the Father, and of
his lifting up to draw all men to him, has arrived. 2033.
b. His final appeal to the people, as the only light of
the world, the only representative of his Father, and the
only way of everlasting life, - resulting in unbelief and
rejection. 34-50.
C. The crisis with the disciples is reached at the feetwashing, at the Passover supper, when Jesus in his
boundless love teaches the lesson of humble service, and
singles out and sends away Judas the betrayer. xiii. 130.
Section 2. John records the last private teaching of
Jesus, during the evening of his betrayal, to his own true
disciples, containing the complete unfolding of the Christian life. xiii. 31-xvii. 26.
A. The discourse in the room, after the Passover supper, containing the announcement of immediate departure and glorification, and the consolations administered.
xiii. 31-xiv. 31.
B. The discourse on the way to Gethsemane, concerning the new life of reconciliation with the Father. xv. 1xvi. 33.
a. Its features, starting from the vine and branches,20




306      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
the living union of believers with Christ by faith; the
loving union of believers with one another; the accompanying hatred by the world. xv. 1-25.
b. Its development through the mission of the Holy
Ghost, the Comforter (Helper). xv. 26-xvi. 15.
c. The necessary preparation for it, in the departure of
Jesus by the cross, thus at once winning the boundless
favor of God the Father and overcoming the world for
those who believe on him. xvi. 16-33.
C. The intercessory prayer in which Jesus links the
everlasting life with the Father and concludes his special
spiritual revelation to his disciples. xvii. 1-26.
Section 3. John records the voluntary surrender and
sacrifice of Jesus, with the attendant evidences of his
being the Messiah, the light and life of the world. xviii.
1-xix. 42.
A. Jesus voluntarily surrenders himself into the hands
of his enemies the unbelieving Jews. xviii. 1-xix. 16.
a. The betrayal and apprehension,- in which he
shows his power over his enemies and his omnipotence,
and declares his purpose to drink " the cup of his Father."
xviii. 1-11.
b. The trial before the Jewish authorities, in the presence of John, the faithless Peters and others,- in which
he solemnly reiterates his claims made before the people
in his teachings. xviii. 12-27.
c. The trial before the Gentile ruler, Pilate, - to
whom he is revealed as Messiah, the King of the Jews,
by the power of truth, and as the Son of God possessing
all power; by whom he is repeatedly declared innocent
and yet is delivered up to the Jews to be crucified. xviii.
28-xix. 16.
B. Jesus voluntarily yields himself up to his executioners and is crucified as " Jesus of Nazareth the King
of the Jews," fulfilling the prophecies concerning Messiah




THE GENERAL PLAN.               307
in his experience in finishing the sacrificial work. xix.
17-30.
C. Jesus yields himself to death and the grave as
Messiah. xix. 31-42.
CONCLUSION.
The Incarnate Word, Crucified and Risen, the Saviour and Lord of all Believers. The Evangelist presents the manifestations of the risen Saviour to the faith
of his followers, - establishing his identity, and the reality of his presence of sympathy and power with his
Church in all ares. xx. 1-xxi. 25.
Section 1. John records certain appearances of Jesus
to the disciples, after his resurrection, designed to comfort them and to lead to faith in him and to life through
his name. xx. 1-31.
A. To Mary Magdalene, before his (first) ascension
to his Father, - to comfort her in her sorrow. xx. 1-18.
B. To the disciples, with Thomas absent, in secret
gathering in the upper chamber in Jerusalem, - to give
peace in their trouble and to assure them of the gift of
the Holy Ghost. xx. 19-23.
C. To the eleven disciples, in the same place, on the
next Lord's day, - to relieve the difficulties of the doubting Thomas. xx. 24-29.
D. To the disciples, with many other signs, not recorded, but intended to work faith in Christ as the Son of
God, and to lead to life through his name. xx. 30-31.
Section 2. John records the most extraordinary of
Christ's manifestations, - that by the Sea of Tiberias,
- completely establishing his identity and Messiahship,
and preparing for the future work of his Church. xxi.
1-25.
A. The miracle of the draught of fishes, revealing Jesus
to the faith of his disciples, who under the lead of Peter
had returned to their old occupation. xxi. 1-14.




308      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
B. The restoration of the backslidden Peter, and the
delineation of his future work and destiny. xxi. 15-19.
C. The career of John marked out, and his final testimony to the truth of his Gospel. xxi. 20-25.
SECTION II.
THE CHRISTIAN ADAPTATION IN THE CENTRAL IDEA OF
THE FOURTH GOSPEL.
The outline of the gospel according to John, with its
marks of the Christian aim of the Evangelist, will assist
in making it apparent that this Gospel agrees, in its central idea and general drift, with the testimony of history
that it was produced and published especially for Christian readers.
I. The Central Idea.
Starting out with this view of the aim of the fourth
Gospel, it is easy to trace the governing idea throughout
its extent and in all the prominent features.
The central idea of the Gospel, as stated by the Evangelist himself, is found in the divine life which has its
origin in faith in Jesus as the Christ, the incarnate Son
of God. He distinctly states that his selection of material was made with this end in view: " And many other
signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which
are not written in this book, but these are written, that ye
might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God;
and that believing, ye might have life through his name"
(xx. 30, 31).
It is evident from the needs of the Christian as already
presented, that the Evangelist who would lead him to a
higher and fuller life must present Jesus in his relations
to the life of faith. John accordingly presents his char



THE CENTRAL IDEA.                309
acter, not as the fulfillment of Messianic prophecy, nor
as the personal embodiment of the Son of God, the almighty worker and conqueror, nor as the perfect and universal man, but as the eternal, divine Word, incarnate,
crucified, and risen from the dead, the object of faith and
the source of life.
The contrast is doubtless sometimes too sharply drawn
between John, as the Gospel of the Son qf God, and the
other Gospels; for while in the former Jesus more expressly and frequently declares himself the Son of God,
the latter always assume his Deity, often demonstrate it,
and are utterly unintelligible except upon its admission.
Nevertheless the ground of the contrast is real.  The
Christian consciousness affirms that the same thing is
true of the contrast in spirituality between John's Gospel
and the others, - it may be too sharply drawn, but every
chapter and verse shows it to be real.  In short, the
fourth Gospel is everywhere the manifestation of Christ
as the spiritual light for the building up of the spiritual
life of believers. Ernesti might have said that it is the
heart of Christ in its most direct appeal to the faith of
the Christian heart, for every part of it bears the marks
of its Christian aim.
That this is the Gospel of the incarnate Son in his relation to the divine life in man is made manifest everywhere. Its teachings would have been unintelligible to
the men of that age without the more external and elemen-'tary teachings of the first three Evangelists. It presupposes the previous practical acceptance of Christ as the
Saviour by those to whom  it was addressed.  It is the
Gospel of faith, of life, of love.
This is the Gospel which gives the Christian the requisite instruction concerning the secret springs and laws
of the life of faith and obedience to God, and concerning
the mission of the Holy Ghost as man's divine helper in




310      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
that life. It is obvious that these teachings are given
nowhere else in the Gospels with such fullness, clearness,
and directness. In short, all the great moving and controlling principles of the Christian life are here alone given
in the form needed to prepare the way for an intelligent
Christian career.
This is peculiarly the Gospel of everlasting life. It
regards the divine life begun in the Christian soul as the
germ of an endless life of purity and blessedness. It
most clearly reveals in Christ the resurrection and the
life, and the lifting up of even man's body from the grave
to immortality.  It alone, therefore, meets the longing
of the renewed soul for the endless life in the heavenly
mansions in perfect union and communion with God.
This is the Gospel of the risen and living Christ. It
is to be remarked that in John's Gospel the perpetual
ministrations of the risen and living Christ are brought
out in the closing chapters as nowhere else in the Gospels. These chapters are accordingly among the most
precious treasures of the Word of God.
These varied relations of Christ to the Christian appear
throughout the fourth Gospel, as will be seen more
clearly in its further consideration.
II. General Drift.
The presence of this central Christian idea manifests
itself everywhere in the general movement of the fourth
Gospel. It may be seen in the entire plan and in all the
parts.
The Introduction exhibits our Lord, not as in Matthew,
the Son of David, not as in Mark, the mighty conqueror,
not as in Luke, the Son of man, but as the Son of God
incarnate. As such, he is the Word, the Life, the Light,
the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
He is the Only Begotten which is in the bosom of the




THE CENTRAL IDEA.              311
Father; in short, he is God. The Word is made flesh
and is rejected by many, but received by some who become in consequence the sons of God.
In these aspects he is presented throughout the Gospel.
In Part First, the Evangelist unfolds the spiritual manifestations of Jesus in the public ministry in Judaea. He
appears during this period, especially to the faithful in
the world, as the incarnate Son, the only life of the
world, revealing the glory of God and a supernatural
fullness of grace and truth, and meeting with rising faith
and unbelief. The faithful ones who were waiting for his
coming are found in the Baptist and his disciples, in such
believing Jews as Nicodemus, in the woman of Samaria
and her Samaritan neighbors, and in the Galilean nobleman; the enemies who meet him with persecution are
found in the Jews at Jerusalem and in Galilee, who by
seeking his life occasion his withdrawal from public work
in Judaea.
In Part Second, the Evangelist exhibits some of the
teachings of Jesus to the unbelieving Jews, during the
period in which he visits Jerusalem only occasionally and
privately. In these instructions Jesus presses upon them,
with ever-increasing plainness and energy, his claim to
be the Son of God, coequal with the Father, and through
his sacrificial death the only source of light and freedom
and life to men in their darkness and slavery and death,
the only hope of a lost world. These teachings enrage
the Jews beyond measure, and prepare them for his
murder.
In Part Third, the Evangelist gives those last and clearest manifestations of Jesus as the light and life, made in
connection with the close of his career. Jesus, as he
voluntarily moves toward the cross, presents his claims in
the fullest manner before all classes in Jerusalem, and re



312       JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
veals to his disciples on the evening of the betrayal the
great doctrines of the Christian system and life. He
then completes his sacrifice by yielding himself up to his
enemies, to the cross, and to the power of death and the
grave, - declaring with his closing breath that the work
of redemption is " finished."
The Conclusion furnishes a fit completion of what the
other portions have thus far carried forward. It manifests the risen Saviour to the faith of his followers,
establishing his bodily identity and the reality of his
divine and human sympathy and power with his Church
in all ages. These last two chapters of John, in presenting the risen Christ as the comforter of the weeping
Magdalene, the peace-giver to the troubled band of disciples, the helper of the doubting Thomas, the provider for the fasting fishermen, the restorer of the backsliddelln Peter, and the rewarder of the faithful John, have
ministered abundantly of like help to the faith of the
people of God in all ages, and made the Church certain
that it trusts not in a dead but in a living Saviour.
This Jesus, - who is not only the finisher of Judaism
and the inheritor of all Jewish perfections, not only the
satisfaction of the Roman idea in surpassing the best and
mightiest of the Cesars, not only the more than realization of the Greek ideal of manhood in being the perfect,
divine man, but also the Incarnate Word, the perfect Revealer of God and eternal Life to a lost world, - this
Jesus is the one whom John represents in his Gospel.




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.         313
SECTION III.
THE CHRISTIAN ADAPTATION IN THE OMISSIONS AND
ADDITIONS' OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL.
I. The Omissions of the Fourth Gospel.
The Christian aim of the fourth Gospel appears especially in its omissions of facts and truths made prominent
in the other Gospels.
As John contemplated the wants of the Church, in
which there was properly no longer a distinction between
Jew, Roman, and Greek, he had no need for the material
presented in the missionary Gospels, and especially designed to commend Jesus to sinners in the representative
races of the age. Even upon the assumption — at most
but partially warranted - that the Jewish, Roman, and
Greek Christians were still chiefly familiar with the
Gospel prepared for each of them respectively, it is still
true that the facts of the other and unfamiliar Gospels
were not absolutely necessary for those to whom they
had not been given. The peculiar facts of Mark and
Luke would have added little toward producing conviction in the mind of the Jew who had Matthew's Gospel.
The same is true of the facts of Matthew and Luke with
reference to the Roman who had Mark's Gospel; and of
those of Matthew and Mark with reference to the Greek
who had Luke's Gospel.
Accordingly we have almost a clear sweep of omission,
- none of the leading events detailed by the other Gospels, with a single exception, being recorded by John
until he reaches the history of the Passion and the
Resurrection, without which no Gospel could be written.
That exception, in which John coincides with the synoptic Gospels, is the feeding of the five thousand (vi. 1



314      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
24), retained in order to prepare for the discourse to
which it gave rise, and in which Christ presented himself as the bread of life given to the world from heaven
by the Father. Besides this the mere fact of the coming of Jesus to Bethany is retained (xii. 1), to explain
the treachery of Judas connected with it, and for the
instructive lessons conveyed in the anointing at that
place.
This almost entire omission of the material found in
the other Gospels is what would naturally be expected in
a later and spiritual Gospel. Quite another Gospel, as
Da Costa has said, must that one be which omits the
human genealogy and divine origin of Jesus as Messiah,
his early experience and preparation for his Messianic
work, the Sermon on the Mount, the- series of miracles
and parables, and all the other treasures embodied for
the Jew by Matthew in the first Gospel; the rapid and
vivid progress of the Captain of our salvation in his work
of conquering the world, as embodied by Mark for the
Roman; the coming down of heaven to earth at the
birth of John and Jesus, the marvelous exhibitions of
the human tenderness of the divine man, the matchless
system of parables unfolding the love of God to universal humanity, and all the other treasures embodied by
Luke for the Greek, - quite another Gospel, and yet a
Gospel with an aim just as marked and vastly higher.
It passes by these facts, which appeal to the senses of
the unspiritual man, to unfold that word of life which
speaks to the soul of the spiritual man.
II. The Additions of the Fourth Gospel.
Still more clearly does the Christian aim of John's Gospel appear from the additions which he makes to the material furnished by the other Evangelists. These additions may be looked upon as made up of narratives of




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.           315
works of power and words of instruction, or as the embodiment of the doctrines of the Christian theology.
Works of Power. The fourth Gospel is only subordinately a record of outward events. Only six of our Lord's
miracles are recorded in it; but these are all of the most
remarkable kind, and surpass all the rest in depth, in specialty of application, and in fullness of instruction. Of
these six, only one is found in the other three Gospels, -
the feeding of the five thousand (vi. 1-15). The reason
for John's recording it appears in another connection.
The peculiarities of the other five are very striking.
They furnish a higher display of power over the ordinary
laws and course of nature, than do the miracles of the
other Gospels.  John alone records the first of all the
miracles that Jesus wrought, the changing of water into
wine at Cana (ii. 1-11), in which without even the utterance of a word he transforms the very nature of the substance with which he deals. He records that of the nobleman's son (iv. 48-54), cured by Jesus at a distance from
Cana. Out of the many cures of the lame and the palsied by the word of Jesus, he selects that of the man who
had suffered from an infirmity thirty and eight years (v.),
a case of the most utter friendlessness and of the most
abject weakness, helplessness, and hopelessness. Out of
the innumerable cures of the blind he chooses the case of
the person who had been born blind (ix.), which was such
a case as men had never known to be cured (ix. 32). He
gives " the restoration of Lazarus to life, not from a deathbed, like the daughter of Jairus; not from a bier for the
dead, like the young main of Nain, but from  the grave,
when, having lain buried there for four days, he had already begun to sink into corruption (xi.).  Lastly, from
among the signs and wonders which Jesus did while still
upon the earth after his resurrection, and which are nowhere else recorded by the Evangelists, we have one ex



316      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
ample, in the miraculous draught of fishes on the sea of
Tiberias (xxi.), when the disciples, at the command of
their risen Lord, had thrown out the net on the right side
of the ship, and Simon Peter went up, and drew the net
to land full of great fishes, an hundred and fifty and three;
and for all there were so many, yet was not the net
broken." 1
Still, John does not record these works simply because
they are so wonderful; but because their extraordinary
character made them so much the better signs of the marvelous things of God, and led Jesus to connect with them
his profoundest spiritual reasonings, discourses, and conversations, alike with friends and foes, with his disciples
and with the multitude.
The miracle at the wedding in Cana furnished the occasion for Jesus to definee his relation, in his divine mission, to Mary, his earthly mother, and to exercise his creative energy in sanctioning the marriage relation and the
home; while showing forth his own glory, and confirming
the faith of his early followers. The healing of the man
at the pool of Bethesda, occurring on the Sabbath-day,
leads, not (as repeatedly happens in the case of the other
Evangelists) to a single saying, but to a whole series of
statements and instructions from the Saviour, respecting
himself and his relation to the Father. The account of
the opening of the eyes of the man born blind furnishes
the vehicle for all the eminently spiritual teachings contained in the conversations between Jesus and the man
whom he had healed, between the latter and the Pharisees, and between the Jews and the man's parents. With
the narrative of the raising of Lazarus from the dead, the
Evangelist has linked the clear and sublime teachings it
occasioned concerning the doctrine of the resurrection, the
account of the effect of the miracle upon the Jewish au1 The Four Witnesses, p. 238.




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.           317
thorities, and the story of the supper at Bethany when
Mary anointed him for his burial and Judas and the chief
priests determined upon his destruction. In short, one
half of that portion of the Gospel of John which precedes
the triumphal entry into Jerusalem is directly connected
with the first five of these extraordinary miracles. The
sixth and last, on the sea of Tiberias, prepares for the introduction of that wonderful conference of Christ with his
disciples, in which he restores the fallen Peter, and makes
his last revelation concerning the future of the Church.
Words of Instruction.  The statements brought out
in connection with the miracles of John's Gospel show
it to be more properly a narrative of spiritual instruction
than a record of historical events.
It will appear on examination that, with the exception
of the miraculous events already noticed and those centring in the crucifixion, the Gospel is made up of conversations and discourses of Jesus, and summations of truth
by the Evangelist himself. The latter may be illustrated
by the testimonies to the divine character of Jesus which
John gathers up from the Baptist and the early disciples
(i., iii.); and by the account of the intercourse with Jesus
after the resurrection (xx., xxi.). The former comprise
the conversations with Nicodemus (iii.), with the Samaritan woman (iv.); with the Jews in the Temple at the
feast of Tabernacles (vii., viii.), with the Jews in the
Temple in Solomon's Porch at the feast of Dedication
(x.); and the discourses concerning the shepherd and the
sheep (x.), and the great series connected with the last
Passover (xii.-xvii.).
But notwithstanding the predominance of instruction, it
will be apparent to the careful observer that the personal
and conversational element enters almost everywhere even
into the discourses. Nowhere in the Gospels does the intense personality of Jesus so impress itself upon every



318       JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
thing as in the last. He himself appears everywhere, in
the events and the teachings, as the way, the truth, the
life, the ever-present incarnate Son of God. In short,
though so preeminently spiritual, no production of any
age has ever been found more marked by a thorough and
all-pervasive realism.
It might readily be shown that the great spiritual
truths, which have been seen to be central to John, light
up everything in his Gospel and decide and give color to
every verse and sentence.
The Christian Doctrines. But pre6minently is the
fourth Gospel to be regarded as the embodiment of the
theology of the Christian Church. This aspect of it may
best be brought out by a systematic view of the truth in
connection with the work of redemption and the Christian life.
The great doctrines are those concerning God, Christ,
the condition of man, the redemption provided in the incarnation and propitiation, the mission of the Holy Spirit,
and the resurrection and final judgment. On all these
points the fourth Gospel is greatly in advance of the
other three, although in entire agreement with the teaching of the Epistles and the Apocalypse.
God. John teaches, from the lips of Jesus himself,
that " God is spirit" (not a spirit, for the article is
neither expressed nor implied in the original), meaning by
this, that He is the divine life-principle in itself (iv. 24).'
He is beyond the range of the mortal senses: "No man
hath seen God at any time " (i. 18; vi. 46).  " Ye have
neither heard his voice, nor seen his shape " (v. 37). It
needed the revelation of the only-begotten Son, who ex1 See Lias, The Doctrinal System of St. John, p. 17. The Greek word for
spirit (7rve/a) " means either (1) a life-principle of whatever kind; (2) the
Divine life-principle in itself; (3) the Divine life-principle in man." John
uses it here in the second sense.




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.           319
isted in his bosom from all eternity, to make him clearly
known to the world (i. 18). His worship is not, therefore, to be confined to one place, Mount Zion or Mount
Gerizim, but He is to be worshiped in spirit (or by
spirit and not by mere form) and in truth, and his real
temple henceforth is to be, not at Jerusalem, but wherever
true worshipers are to be found in the whole world
(iv. 21-24).
But God is not a mere abstract principle, underlying
the world; He is a person, a Father, capable of love,
care, tenderness (iii. 16). He is the source of all being
whether uncreated or created.  From him the eternal
Soil derives his being (v. 26). From him the Spirit of
truth is sent (xiv. 16). From him, through the instrumentality of the Son, all things have derived their being
(i. 3). As the Father he is the fountain of redemption:
"God (the Father, as the sense requires) so loved the
world that he gave his only-begotten Son" (iii. 16). He
sends the Son (v. 37), commits his prerogatives into his
hands (v. 22), bears witness to him (viii. 18). The Son
came into the world to do his will (vi. 38), his pleasure
(viii. 29), his work (xvii. 4). The Father and the Son
are one (x. 30), not in a unity of personal existence, but
in the possession of a common being and life (xvii. 11,
21, 22). The Father is the source of all life, ".the living
Father" (vi. 57). He has imparted this life to his Son,
and through him it is communicated to all creatures (v.
26; i. 4, 18). The children of God are born of his will
(i. 14). He is light, the power which illuminates the
whole being of maln.
So God the Father is the end of all being no less than
its source. The life flowing from him enfolds in the end
not only the Trinity itself, but all who are bound together
by the indwelling of God.  "The ultimate result of
Christ's work, as declared by himself in the fourth Gos



320        JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
pel, would seem to be a merging all the redeemed into
the being of God, not in a pantheistic annihilation of all
personality, but by bringing each personal soul, while in
full and glad realization of its own separate consciousness,
into a complete union, not only of will and affections,
hopes and desires, but of being also with the Infinite Author of all " (xvii.).
The Person of Christ.  Jesus is the Word (the Logos),
the Revealer of God (i. 1). The word is the revelation
of the thought, its incarnation, as it were, in order to
convey it to the mind of another. The word in the
Greek is also the reason of anything, " the unfolding of
its true nature and meaning to him who knows it not."
Jesus Christ claimed to be the Revealer of the Father
(xiv. 9; Matt. xi. 27; Luke x. 22), and this is best expressed by his title, the Word.
His relation to the Father is absolutely unique. He
came forth from the Father (xvi. 28), he ever turns his
face toward Him  (p~os ro'w ~o'v),1 and he is himself very
God (i. 1). In the bosom of the Father from all eternity, he is yet personally distinct from him (i. 1, 18;
viii. 58; xvii. 5, 24), the only-begotten Son (i. 14, 18;
iii. 16, 18). In his work he is subordinate to the Father
(xiv. 28), he is sent by the Father (iv. 34; v. 23, 24,
30, 37, 38; vi. 39, 44, etc.), receives his name, the symbol of his power and greatness, from the Father (xvii.
11),2 ascribes his power to the Father (v. 26, 19, 20, 22,
27; xvii. 22). Yet he declares himself one with the
1 Liddon, Bampton Lectures, Lect. v. p. 342. The Greek is not, "the
Word was with God," but " toward God," —" expressing the more significant fact of perpetual intercommunion.  The Face of the Everlasting
Word, if we may dare so to express ourselves, was ever directed towards
the Face of the Everlasting Father."
2 The Doctrinal System of St. John, p. 41. According to the best supported reading in John xvii. 11, the prayer of Christ is: "Holy Father,
keep them by thine own name which thou hast given me."




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.          321
Father and equal with him (v. 17, 18; x. 30, 33). The
Father is in himn and he in the Father (x. 38; xiv. 9, 10,
20; xvii. 21, 23). Though on earth he is in heaven
(iii. 13). Though from the Father he is yet self-existent (v. 26).
His relation to man evinces his unity with the Father.
The life for lost man was in him (i. 4), and communicated by him (iii.). He is full of grace and truth (i. 14),
lie preaches the truth (viii. 40, 45), and he is the truth
itself (xiv. 6). Whosoever has seen him has seen the
Father also (vi. 46; x. 15; xiv. 9). Through his union
with the Father, all power is given him  (iii. 35; xiii.
3; ii. 2), he gives life to whom he will (v. 22, 25), he
presents himself as an example for men to copy (xiii.
11), and he challenges the Jews to find a single blemish
in his character (viii. 46).
On the other hand he is represented as a human being, and subject to the ordinary weaknesses and wants
of men. When he fasted he was hungry and ate (ii. 1;
xiii. 2; xxi. 12). When he traveled he was thirsty
and weary (iv. 6). Being grieved he wept (xi. 35),
and being crucified he died. He had a peculiarly human
friendship and affection for the beloved disciple (xix.
26) and for the household in Bethany (vi. 5).  He
remembered the claims of filial duty even in that
hour of supreme solemnity on the cross (xix. 26, 27).
"'Woman, behold thy son,' is an exclamation which,
uttered at such a moment, places beyond a doubt that
the Gospel which sets forth most strongly the Divinity of
Christ was also penetrated with the most clear apprehension of his humanity."
The Condition of Man. Before the grace of God bestowed upon him the enabling power of the light of life,
man was in darkness, unprepared to appreciate or receive
the blessings Christ came to give (i. 5, 10, 11). Many
21




322       JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
even preferred darkness to light (iii. 19, 21), and were
moved to opposition to Christ's teaching and to persecution of his followers, by his works of divine power (xii.
37, 40), and by the elevation of himself and his followers
above the world (xv. 19; xvii. 14, 16). The state of
mind which leads to such results " John denotes by the
word flesh (oap$, iii. 6; viii. 15, etc.), and it is placed in
the sharpest antagonism to that possession of an inner
life, breathed into the heart by divine influence, which
is denominated by the word spirit (7rvYrEa, i. 13; iii.
5, etc.).  From  this condition of alienation from  God,
man cannot deliver hilnself; he needs an intervention
from above to rescue him from the empire of darkness." 1
Doctrine of the Incarnation.  Christ came to enlighten this darkness, and to deliver man from this living
death which it involved. " In him was life, and the life
was the light of men" (i. 4).'"The true light, which
lighteth every man, was now coming into the world" (i.
9). Such are the announcements with which the Gospel
opens. He came that men might have life, and " that
they might have it more abundaxltly" (x. 10).  He
gives life to whom  he will (v. 21).  He is himself the
life (xi. 25; xiv. 6). He is the light of the world (viii.
12; ix. 5; xii. 35, 3:6, 46). Such are the statements
with which the Gospel is filled.
In transforming the flesh into the spirit, Jesus Christ
imparts a breath from God to man to give him a new
life (xv. 26). In entering into the kingdom of God
man is born anew by the Holy Spirit (iii. 5), and his
entire nature and relation to God are changed (iii. 6, 7,
8). In connection with this new birth, even the words of
1 See The Doctrinal System of St. John, p. 67. The work of Professor Lias contains an admirable summary of the doctrines of the fourth
Gospel.




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.          323
Christ, being in a sense the breath of God, are endued,
though in an inferior degree, with a kind of divine vitality (vi. 63).
The foundations of this new life are laid in the flesh
and blood of Christ, that is, in his incarnation and in his
sacrifice on the cross (vi. 51-58).
It is by virtue of his incarnation, or his partaking of
human nature, that he becomes the source of life to the
world. He is the vine and his disciples are the branches
(xv.). A constant stream of life flows from him through
them, a life which is governed by the same laws as man's
natural life. It reaches its maturity by means of growth
through nourishment. Its food is Christ, the living
bread which came down from heaven (vi. 51), who is a
source of permanent life to the world (vi. 58). The
operating principle of this divine life is faith in Christ
(iii. 18, 36; vi. 29, 47; xx. 31). This faith leads to
good works. By union with Christ, the vine, alone, a
union effected by faith, can the branches become fruitful (xv. 4), and by abiding in him alone can they increase in fruitfulness (xv. 5, etc.). The new life of faith
leads to purity and truth (xiii. 10; xv. 3; xvii. 19), and
to mutual love (xiii. 35; xvii. 26). It makes men again
the children of God, and gives them a claim upon his love
(xvi. 26, 27), and access to him in prayer (xiv. 13; xv.
7, 16; xvi. 23-27). It makes them the channels of blessing to others (vii. 37), the representatives of Christ in a
mission for the saving of mankind (xiii. 20; xx. 21).
The kingdom of God, in John's view of it, assumes a
new and more spiritual form. Jesus no longer confines
himself to language which expresses only external relations. He does indeed speak of himself as a shepherd
and his disciples as sheep (x.), and of the gathering of
many flocks into one fold (x. 16); but he prefers to describe his kingdom as an organic whole7 and he constantly




324      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
recognizes " a deep interior unity, the result of the possession by its members of a life which they all enjoy in
common, and which they all derive fromn  himn" (xv.).
In the intercessory prayer (xvii.), he traces that union to
its highest source, in the unity of the Godhead itself.
He prays " that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art
in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us"
(xvii. 21). Herein in reality are to be found the commulion of saints and the kingdom of God, in the living
union of believers through Christ with the Father.
But back of the doctrine of the restoration of man
through the implanting of a divine life by the incarnation of Christ, there lies throughout John's Gospel the
doctrine of propitiation by the sacrifice of Christ. Sin
is regarded not simply as a disease, from which the infusion of a new life could save, but rather as deliberate
and willful disobedience to the righteous and everlasting
Ruler of the universe. Without shedding of blood there
is no remission of sin (Lev. xvii. 11; Heb. ix. 22). Hence
it is that John introduces Jesus to the reader in the
words of the Baptist: " Behold the Lamb of God that
taketh away the sin of the world " (i. 29). There was
an absolute necessity that the Son should be " lifted up"
(iii. 14, 15) if he should "draw all men unto him " (xii.
32). He lays down his life for the sheep (x. 11, 15).
He is identified with the Paschal Lamb (xix. 36), by the
sprinkling of whose blood upon the door posts the Israelites could alone be saved from  destruction (Exod.
xii. 13). He is the propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of
the world, so that by partaking of his flesh and blood
the world may be saved.
The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit. It has been seen
that Luke's teaching concerning the Holy Ghost is
greatly in advance of that of Matthew and Mark; but it
nowhere approaches the definiteness of John's. Wit'




OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS.          325
the latter he is the applier of the redemption wrought by
Christ. He is sent by Christ from the Father (xv. 26;
xvi. 7, 8). By John alone is he named the Paraclete, or
the Comforter, as our version has it, or the Helper, as the
word would, perhaps, be better rendered (xiv. 16, 26;
xv. 26; xvi. 7). He is a Person, associated with the
Father and the Son, sent into the world to convince men
of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (xvi. 8). He
is the Spirit of truth who is to lead the disciples of Christ
into all truth (xiv. 17; xvi. 13).  He is to give life to
all who enter into the kingdom of God (iii. 5). From
the time of Christ's ascension he was to be the present
source of power with Christ's followers (vii. 39; xvi. 7;
xx. 22, 23). He was to be the living water which should
spring up unto everlasting life in their souls (iv. 14; vii.
38). The mightier works which the disciples were to do,
after Christ's departure (xiv. 12), were to be done by the
power of the Holy Ghost. He was the divine Person
whom Christ went away to the Father to send, and without whose coming the work of redemption could not have
been carried out (xvi. 7).
The Resurrection and Judgment. John teaches most
clearly both the fact and the cause of the resurrection.
" Verily, verily, I say unto you, the hour is coming and
now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of
God and they that hear shall live " (v. 25). This is the
teaching throughout the Gospel (v. 28, 29; vi. 39, 40,
44, 54, etc.).  "I am the resurrection and the life: he
that believeth on me though he were dead, yet shall he
live: and whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall
never die " (xi. 25, 26).. That Christ is the cause of the
resurrection from the dead is the uniform doctrine of
John (x. 18; xii. 24; xiv. 6, etc.).
The fourth Gospel is equally clear on the doctrine of
the judgment and of the future life. "Marvel not at




326      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
this: for the hour is coming in the which all that are in
the graves shall hear his voice and shall come forth; they
that have done good unto the resurrection of life; and
they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation" (v. 28, 29). To come forth from the grave is,
therefore, to come forth to judgment, and there are but
two future estates. Those estates have their beginning
in this present life, the one in faith in Christ, and the
other in the rejection of him: " He that believeth on
him is not condemned; but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed on the
name of the only-begotten Son of God " (iii. 18). For
those who believe on him are the words of Christ: " In
my Father's house are many mansions. If it were not
so I would have told you. I go and prepare a place
for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will
come again and receive you unto myself; that where I
am, there ye may be also (xiv. 2, 3).
Such, in brief outline, is the doctrinal system of John's
Gospel. It is the profoundest of Christian theology, —its
truths ranging, in the revelations of the incarnate Word,
from the lowest depths of the dark and carnal condition
of humanity to the loftiest heights of Divinity, compassing, in the preexistent Word and the everlasting life, the
two eternities, and sweeping the whole horizon of Christian faith, purpose, endeavor, achievement, and hope. It
is the essential element in just the Gospel for the Christian, the man of faith in Christ.
Both the omissions and additions of this Gospel are
thus seen to furnish evidence of the Christian aim of the
Evangelist.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           327
SECTION IV.
THE CHRISTIAN ADAPTATION IN THE INCIDENTAL
VARIATIONS OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL.
The adaptation of John's Gospel to the Christian needs
appears also in the manifold minor variations and peculiarities.
I. Incidental Variations.
Narrative Ghanges. The Christian aim may be traced
in the narratives given by John in common with the
other Evangelists.
There is but one such narrative before the record of
the triumphal entry into the Holy City, — the miraculous multiplication of the loaves and fishes (Matt. xiv.
13-32; Mark vi. 32-51; Luke ix. 10-17; John vi. 115). A careful comparison of the four forms of this
narrative will bring out the distinctive touches of each of
the Evangelists. In that given by John it will be observed in particular, that certain explanatory clauses are
introduced for the benefit of the non-Jewish readers. He
tells us that Jesus " went over the sea of Galilee, which
is the sea of Tiberias" (vi. 1); that he "went up into a
mountain" (3); that "the Passover, a feast of the Jews,
was nigh " (4); that "there was much grass in the place "
(10), etc. Here and there by the way his pen touches
the spiritual and divine in Jesus and his mission. He
alone tells us of the solemn lifting up of the eyes of the
great Teacher (5); that even when Jesus asked Philip
about buying bread for the multitude, hewas omniscient
and did not need an answer: "And this he said to prove
him; for he himself knew what he would do " (6); that
"those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus
did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come
into the world.  When Jesus therefore perceived that they




328      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
would come and take him -by force, to make him a king, he
departed again into a mountain himself alone" (14, 15),
etc.
But most characteristic of all is the fact, already adverted to, that John, instead of pausing with the account
of the storm on the lake, as the rest of the Evangelists
do, proceeds to give - in double the space he devotes to
the event - that practical.and spiritual application of
the miracle (vi. 25-59), so much more important than
the mere event, the suln of which is found in the words
of Jesus: " I am the bread of life.  Whoso eateth my
flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life."
It has also been observed that the fourth Evangelist
has his own way of avoiding the parables and similitudes
in narrative form, which abound in the other Gospels;
while by means of the more vivid metaphor he brings
out with the gr'eatest clearness the spiritual truths involved. In the other Gospels he compares himself to a
shepherd who seeks after and brings back the stray sheep
(Matt. xviii. 12, 13; Luke xv. 3-7); in John he says, I
am the good shepherd. Tlle good shepherd giveth his life
for the sheep (xii.). In the other Gospels he compares
the kingdom of heaven to a vineyard and to a marriage
feast (Matt. xxi. 28-44; Mark xii. 1-11; Luke xx. 918); but in John Jesus is himself the vine and his Father the husbandman (xv. 1); he is himself the bridegroom (iii. 29).
These Christian features may be traced throughout all
those portions of the fourth Gospel that have anything
in common with the productions of the other Evangelists.
Slighter Additions. There are also to be found in
John's Gospel, in single sentences and minute touches,
the most remarkable elucidations and incidental confirmations of what is contained in the other three.
This may be illustrated by the false testimony men



INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.           329
tioned by Matthew (xxvi. 61) and Mark (xiv. 57, 58).
John alone tells us that, in the first cleansing of the Temple, after the opening of his ministry, when the Jews
asked Jesus for a sign of his authority, he "answered and
said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I
will raise it up " (ii. 19). That saying, uttered prophetically by Jesus, the false witnesses had interpreted as referring to the Temple at Jerusalemn: " We heard him say,
I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and
within three days I will build another made without
hands " (Mark xiv. 58).
So John alone tells us that the real cause of the flock.
ing together of the people and of their acclamations on
the entry into Jerusalem -facts recorded by Matthew
(xxi. 10, 11), Mark (xi. 8-10), and Luke (xix. 37) -
was the resurrection of Lazarus from the dead: " The
people therefore that was with him when he called Lazarus
out of his grave, and raised himfrom the dead, bare record.
For this cause the people also met him, for that they heard
that he had done this miracle " (xii. 17, 18).
It may be remarked incidentally that the other Evangelists could not give this cause. They did not record
this most notable of miracles, perhaps partly for the reason that, if they had done so, the Sanhedrim which had
" consulted that they might put Lazarus also to death,
because that by reason of him many of the Jews went
away and believed on Jesus " (John xii. 10, 11), would
have carried out their bloody purpose; and partly for the
reason that the teachings concerning the resurrection
were not suited to their unspiritual readers. When John
wrote, Jerusalem had been long. since destroyed and the
danger to the family of Lazarus -was past; while his Gospel would have been essentially incomplete without the
sublime instruction given on that occasion.
Only the fourth Evangelist tells us that, when Mary




330      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
anointed Jesus, " the house was filled with the odor of
the ointment" (xii. 3); that it was " one of his disciples,
Judas Iscariot, Simon's son " that said, " Why was not
this ointment sold for three hundred pence and given to
the poor " (xii. 4). He alone makes it appear fully that
it was avarice that moved the traitor's heart: " This he
said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was
a thief, and had the bag, and bare (that is, stole out)
what was put therein " (xii. 6).  Only he brings out the
real tenderness of the anointing by Mary and reveals her
faith, as surpassing that of the Twelve, by declaring that
she had kept the precious ointment for this occasion:
" Against the day of my burying hath she kept this "' ointment (xii. 7).
These are but specimens of the Christian touches by
which the beloved disciple adds to the fullness and beauty
and spiritual power of all the Gospel material which he
has in common with the other Evangelists.
Word Changes. But in a Gospel embracing so much
that is different in matter and in spirit from the contents
of the other Gospels, the greatest variations must evidently be found in the vocabulary as marking out the
range of new ideas. This is in part manifest from the
Johannean system of Christian doctrine already given;
but it may be made clearer by an examination of some of
the characteristic words and expressions.  John's is an
eminently Christian vocabulary.
Common Words. The comparative infrequency of those
words of theology and experience which properly have
special reference to the earlier contact of the soul with
Christ may first be noted. Matthew uses the word sinner
five times; Mark, six times; Luke, seventeen times;
John, four times. Matthew uses the words repent and
repentance five and three times respectively; Mark,
twice each; Luke, nine and five times; John, not at all.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.             331
Matthew  uses righteous nineteen times; Mark, twice;
Luke, eleven times; John, three times.  Matthew uses
justify twice; Luke, five times; Mark and John do not
use it. The fair inference from these and like examples
is that John does not deal largely with the ideas expressed
by these words, and that the ideas belong rather to that
earlier stage of the Gospel represented by the other Evangelists. In other words John's is not the Gospel that
deals with the fundamental conceptions of sin, repentance,
etc., in their simpler forms.
The frequent recurrence in John of the words which
belong to the later or higher phases of Gospel experience is still more marked. It is a fact that the whole
cycle of words connected with the Christian life is used
with remarkable frequency by John.
Judged by its vocabulary John's is preeminently the
Gospel of faith.  It is a favorite idea with certain skeptical writers, that the foundation of Paul's system is faith,
while that of John's is love. " We hear, on high authority," says a writer already referred to, " that the influence of St. Paul on Christian theology is destined henceforth to decline, and that the Christianity of the future
will be colored principally by the teaching of the Apostle
of love." 1 The truth is that, in the facts of the New
Testament, there is not the slightest foundation for such
a distinction.  Matthew  uses the word believe eleven
times; Mark, fifteen times; Luke, nine times; John, in
his Gospel alone, one hundred times, or almost as many
times as all the other New Testament writers- Paul ineluded-taken together. In fact, if such a distinction
is to be made - which we deny, on the ground of the
essential harmony of the two - John ought rather to be
called the Apostle of faith and Paul the Apostle of love;
1 The Doctrinal System qf St. John, p. 76. The authority referred to is
Matthew Arnold, " St. Paul and Protestantism."




332       JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
for, while the word love (dyad,7) occurs only seven times
in John's Gospel and seventeen times in his first Epistle,
it is found seventy-three times (often translated charity)
in Paul's writings. It remains indisputable that John
makes faith far more prominent than any other writer in
the Bible, so that if this one word were blotted out of his
Gospel, its harmony would he gone, and there would be
left little more than an unintelligible jargon.
It is nevertheless true that, as compared with the other
Gospels, the fourth is the Gospel of spiritual love. This
is another side of the many-sided truth, -its divine
rather than its human aspect.  Matthew uses the verb
expressing reverential love five times; Mark, once; Luke,
twice; John, thirteen times. Matthew makes use of love, as
expressing personal attachment, eight times; Mark, five
times; Luke, thirteen times; John, thirty-seven times.
From  this point of view everything may be said to be
comprehended in love. The Father loves the Son (John
v. 20). The Son loves his own; he loves them to the
end (xiii. 1).  The Father, in like manner, loves them,
and hath loved them (xvii. 23). Jesus loves them with a
special personal love, each by name. He loved Lazarus,
and Mary, and Martha, and the disciple who lay in his
bosom at the paschal table (xi. 5; xiii. 23). Upon the
one word love, in its two senses and its many relations,
the restoration of Peter, at the Sea of Tiberias, turned
(xxi. 15-17). It is in harmony with this feature that
John's is the Gospel of the Fatherhood of God. The
word Father, in its application to God, occurs in Matthew
forty-four times; in Mark, five times; in Luke, twenty
times; in John, one hundred and twenty-one times. In
no other Gospel, therefore, when God is spoken of, does
the name of Father, the Father, my Father, recur so often,
in its special and exclusive relation to Jesus. It is a
direct consequence of this relation of God as a Father,




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.            333
that John's is the Gospel of the giving grace of God.
"As all things in this Gospel are viewed and represented
in their highest causes, in their deepest foundations; in
like manner do we find in it the word and the idea of
God's gift and giving, occurring with the same frequency.
The first cause in all things is the gift of God. What
the Father hath given to the Son, what anew the Son
gives or hath given to men, to those who believe in him,
is again and again pressed on the attention."
So John's is in an important sense the Gospel for all the
world. It has been shown that Luke's is the Gospel for
the Greek, the representative of universal humanity in
its unrenewed condition. So it appears that John's is in
a peculiar sense the Gospel for renewed  humanity.
Matthew uses the word world nine times; Mark, three
times; Luke, three times; John, seventy-nine times.
John sometimes employs the word to express mankind
collectively as distinguished from or opposed to God their
Creator, as in the words to Nicodemus, " God so loved
the world " (John iii. 16); sometimes the majority of the
race as opposed to Israel or to believers, as in the Samaritan's exclamation, "We know that this is indeed the
Christ, the Saviour of the world" (John iv. 42); sometimes an indefinite multitude or extension, as in the exclamation of the Pharisees, "Behold the world is gone
after him " (John xii. 19). The use of the word in the
first two senses is so frequent as to demonstrate the universal reach and application of the last Gospel.
In like manner the fourth Gospel, judged by its vocabulary is the Gospel of spiritual truth, light, and life.
Matthew  uses truth once; Mark, three times; Luke,
three times; John, twenty-five times. The first three
Evangelists use the word true only once, while John uses
it twenty-one times. Men are freed from spiritual bondage and sanctified through the truth.  Christ before




334      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
Pilate declared himself to be a King, establishing a kingdom not of this world, - a kingdom of truth (xiv. 6).
Matthew uses the word light seven times; Mark, once;
Luke, six times; John, twenty-two times. Matthew uses
life seven times; Mark, four times; Luke, six times;
John, thirty-six times. Matthew uses everlasting life
three times; Mark, twice; Luke, three times; John,
seventeen times.  It has often been remarked that with
John these expressions bear a peculiarly mystical and
spiritual character. He links the life and the light with
each other and identifies Christ with the truth, the light,
and the life.
Peculiar Words. The spiritual truth and Christian
aim of the fourth Gospel appear with equal clearness in
words and expressions altogether peculiar to itself. The
Evangelist uses to some extent a vocabulary of his own
in speaking of Christ and his work.
In the opening sentence of the Gospel, Christ is thrice
designated as the Word (Logos). No one has shown this
Word to us, in his incarnation, in such a multiplicity
of aspects as John, — in contact and controversy with
men, arguing with sinful men, and enduring their reproaches and scoffs; called a Samaritan and one that
hath a devil; the hand of man incessantly lifted up
against him to seize him, to stone him, to crucify him.
John alone calls Jesus the Lamb of God. He alone
represents Jesus himself as declaring, that "as Moses
lifted up the serpent in the wilderness even so must the
Son of man be lifted up;" and that "I, if I be lifted up,
will draw all men unto me."
No other Evangelist uses the expression, TVerily, verily,
even once, but John uses it twenty-five times. As the
others make use of the single verily only, it has been suggested that the second word is John's own, "the response
of his faith to the faithfulness of his Lord, like the in



INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.            335
stantaneous echo by the rocks of a peal of thunder."
The careful observer, however, will note the fact that the
double word is uniformly connected with sayings peculiar to John, in short, with his expression of the great
life-and-death truths of Christianity. The double verily
is therefore better explained as being, what it purports to
be, an expression from the lips of Jesus himself, and intended to emphasize those great spiritual truths which do
not appear in the same form in the other Gospels. If
any one will write out the passages from John that are
prefaced by it, he will see that they sum up all the glorious and solemn verities of the Gospel in its relation to
life here and hereafter, so that, if John's Gospel is the
heart of Christ, the double verilies are the heart of the
heart of Christ.
II. Other Peculiarities.
In addition to these indications of the Christian aim
of John's Gospel, drawn from its'conceptions and doctrines, there are still others of a different character which
at the same time mark its late origin and fit it for the
Christian Church.
First of these may be noticed the manner in which
the Gospel deals with the Jewish Scriptures.
Unlike the Gospels according to Mark and Luke, that
according to John constantly refers to the Old Testament
Scriptures. In this respect it is like that according to
Matthew. It is therefore certain that John wrote for
those who were familiarly acquainted with the Scriptures.
This was true of the Christian Church throughout the
world at the close of the first century, while it certainly
was not true of the Romans and Greeks at the time when
Mark and Luke wrote for them.
That John did not write for Jews alone is proved by
the fact that he is careful to describe places in Judeea




336      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
(iv. 5; v. 2; xviii. 1); to explain the manners and customs familiar to all Jews (ii. 6, 13; iv. 9; v. 1; vi. 9;
x. 22; xi. 33, 44, 55; xix. 31, 39-42); and to interpret
Hebrew words (i. 38, 42; ix. 7; xix. 13, 17; xx. 16).
He must therefore have written for persons unacquainted
with the country, customs, and language of Palestine.
That he did not write merely for those who understood
the Greek language only, or best, appears from the fact
that, while the other Evangelists appeal for the most part
to the Septuagint or Greek version of the Old Testament, John appeals sometimes to it (i. 23; ii. 17; vi. 45;
x. 34; xii. 14, 15; xv. 35; xix. 24, 36); but sometimes
turns to the Hebrew original, as if to the final standard
of appeal (xii. 40; viii. 18; xix. 37).  He writes not
only for those who are acquainted with the Septuagint,
but for all the world of Christians.
It is likewise in conformity with this view and confirmatory of it, that John so often refers his readers to the
prophecies of the Scriptures. It has already been seen
that he makes a score or more of such references; that
these usually take for granted that the persons addressed
are acquainted with the Scriptures; and that, while in
the first half of his Gospel the references are chiefly confined to fact and law, in the second half they are confined
to the prophecies fulfilled in Christ's unfolding of the
Christian life and familiar to all Christians. Da Costa
has well remarked that these passages are "for the
greater part entirely new, and, so to speak, fresh in St.
John, never having been cited anywhere before in the
New Testament.  The form or manner of the quotation,
too, is somlehow differently modified, and lhas a depth
and subtlety not to be found in the other Gospels; Ias
when, at the purification of the Temple, after recording
the words of our Lord:' Take these things hence; make
not my Father's house an house of merchandise' (ii. 16);




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.            337
we find this followed by the quotation of one of the prophetical sayings in the book of Psalms:' And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine
house hath eaten me up' (Ps. v. 17)."  This peculiarity in
the manner of quotation is also illustrated in the discourse
with the Jews in the synagogue at Capernaum (vi. 44,
45); in the call on the last day of the feast of Tabernacles (vii. 37, 38); in Christ's reproof of the Jews for their
unbelief and hardness of heart (xii. 36-41); when the
traitor is pointed out at the supper (xiii. 18); in what
fell from Christ's lips at the paschal feast (xv. 25);
among the last words on the cross (xix. 28); and when
the legs of the malefactors were broken (xix. 36). It
will readily be seen that these passages also illustrate
with equal force the eminently spiritual view which
John takes of the various facts in the life of Christ to
which they refer. Of such references to prophecy it may
be said that none of them are made, as' are those in
Matthew, for the purpose of demonstrating for the Jew
the Messiahship of Jesus, but rather all of them for the
purpose of bringing out the profound spiritual truths involved and of supreme interest to the soul of the believer.
The student of the Gospels will readily observe for himself the same features in John's references to what was
prophetical in our Lord's own words, as when he compares
his approaching crucifixion and resurrection to a destroying and building up again of the temple of God (ii. 22),
and in the record of Pilate's sentence (xviii. 31, 32);
and again in the record of the unconscious prophecies of
enemies, as when Caiaphas urges the Sanhedrim to take
measures against Jesus (xi. 49-51), and when Pilate
places the title, in the three representative languages,
over the cross (xix. 19-22).
A second of these peculiar indications of John's later
22




338      JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
date and Christian aim is found in the manner in which
he deals with the Jewish people.. Matthew uses the appellation Jews, five times; Mark,
seven times; Luke, five times'; John, seventy-one times.
This furnishes evidence that the fourth Gospel was written
subsequently to the others, at a period when the Christian
body, whether Hebrew or Gentile, had crystallized into
the Church, and detached themselves entirely from the
apostate and hostile Jews, whom they regarded as a separate body, and who were then known over the world as
Jews.  "Throughout this Gospel," as Wordsworth has
said, " the Jews, represented by their leaders, the priests
and Pharisees, are contemplated ab extra, and are spoken
of in the third person as a separate body, such as they
had become after the fall of Jerusalem, when those who
adhered to Judaism were distinguished by bitter hostility
to the Church." 1
Moreover, the intimate connection of Judaism and
Christianity rendered it necessary that the Evangelist for
the Christian Church should explain the great and everywhere patent fact of the apostasy of the Jewish race,
which fact might else have furnished a powerful a priori
argument against Christianity itself. Hence it is that
in the fourth Gospel the conflict of light and life
with darkness and death takes shape in the conflict of
Jesus with the carnally minded Jews. The central and
closing portions of the Gospel are filled with the record
of the strife. The effort to bring Jesus to a judicial trial
is followed by attempts to mob and stone him, and these
again by the plottings of the great Jewish Council which
result in his apprehension and crucifixion. John's sketch
of the conflict between the blind, hypocritical, and malignant Jewish formalists, and the sincere, spiritual, and
divine Christ, was needed to strip the apostate Jews of
1 Wordsworth, St. John's Gospel, Introduction.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.             339
the power they would otherwise have possessed, and
which they would most certainly have exercised, to corrupt and destroy the Church of Christ.
Still another, and third, of these peculiar indications
of John's Christian aim is found in the complete unfolding of the Jewish practical religion exhibited in this
Gospel.
The old religion was the precursor of the new, and
contained its germ. The proper development of the old
was intended to lead to the new.  In other words, the
Jewish religion was the world-religion in its typical
and undeveloped form, while the Christian religion was
the same world-religion in its spiritual and developed
form.  " The law was given by Moses, but grace and
truth came by Jesus Christ." As the old Jewish religious life reached its perfection in connection with the religious institutions and festivals, it was both natural and
necessary that the new Christian life should first be developed in connection with these.
Da Costa has brought out the marked prominence of
the religious festivals in.the fourth Gospel, with great
clearness.  "While the other three Gospels speak of but
one of these, the Passover, and principally, if not solely,
of that Passover at which Jesus was crucified; our fourth
Gospel mentions many such festive occasions, and several
different paschal feasts." 1
Vastly more significant and important, however, is the
fact that John makes these religious festivals the central
points in the presentation of the truths of the Gospel for
the Christian soul.  The entire unfolding of spiritual
truth by Christ is thus connected with the central places
and movements of the Jewish religious life, which held
1 For the Passovers mentioned, see John ii. 23; v. 1; vi. 4; xii. 1.
John also mentions the feast of Tabernacles (vii. 2), and the feast of
the Dedication (x. 22).




840       JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CHURCH.
embodied the highest truth of the old dispensation.
He is the Lamb of God, himself the sacrifice, the fulfillment of all the sacrifices, the Passover. His lifting up
is therefore naturally and necessarily identified with the
Jewish Passover. The Jewish and Christian stages of
the world-religion were thus shown to be but parts of
the one plan of God, so that the latter could only appear
among men as it was unfolded from the former.
A fourth, last, and most conclusive of these indications
of the Christian aim of John is to be found in the prominence which his Gospel gives to the relations of Christ,
through his sacrifice, to the Christian life.
Jesus is the Lamb of God, the sin bearer of the world
(i. 29, 36), who gives his own flesh and blood for the life
of the world. Matthew and Mark speak once each of
the time of Christ's sacrifice as the hour: "' Behold the
hour is at hand and the son of man is betrayed into the
hands of sinners " (Matt. xxvi. 45); "It is enough, the
hour is come " (Mark xiv. 41). But in John's Gospel the
hour of the cross is regarded as the central hour in the
whole ministry of Christ, to which everything moves
forward and in which everything centres. This is seen
in his declining on various occasions to make a public
manifestation of his Messiahship, because his hour is not
yet come (John ii. 4; vii. 30; viii. 20).  It is the central hour of the world's history. At the last Passover
his hour is heralded by the coming of certain Greeks, as
representatives of the world, who desire to see him (xii.
23). It is the central hour in God's plan of all things,
and on this ground Jesus, in the opening of the intercessory prayer, bases his plea for his glorification (xvii. 1).
In the I ams which fell from the lips of Jesus himself,
as given by John, is summed up the fullest possible exhibition of his person and work, and of that perfect
satisfaction for the spiritual wants of all men which is to
be found only in him.




INCIDENTAL VARIATIONS.         341
To the woman of Samaria he said, " I that speak unto
thee am " the Messiah (iv. 26); to the disciples in the
storm  on the sea, "it is I (literally I am); be not
afraid " (vi. 20). To the Jews he declares, " I am the
bread of life " (vi. 36, 48); "I am the bread which came
down from heaven " (vi. 41, 51). In presenting his relation to the Father, he says, "I am from him and he
hath sent me."  "I am the light of the world " (viii.
12; ix. 5). "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before
Abraham was, I am " (viii. 58).
Still more tenderly does he present himself to his own.
"I am the door of the sheep" (x. 7, 9). "I am the
good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the
sheep " (x. 11, 14). " I am the resurrection and the life"
(xi. 25, 26). "Ye call me Master and Lord; and ye
say well; for I am" (xiii. 13). "1  am the way, and the
truth, and the life" (xiv. 6). "I am the true vine, and
my Father is the husbandman" (xv. 1). "I am the
vine, ye are the branches" (xv. 5). "Jesus saith unto
them, I am he. And Judas also which betrayed him,
stood with them. As soon, then, as he had said unto
them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the
ground " (xviii. 5, 6). " Thou sayest that I am a King"
(xviii. 37).
So completely does Jesus, according to John's Gospel,
present himself as the centre of all things, - of self-existence, of eternity, of immutability, of omnipotence, of
all the resources that are found in God; the source of all
things, — of light, of life, of comfort, of strength, of
blessedness, of immortality, of all the treasures that the
Christian soul can desire.
SUMMARY.
In the light of the survey which has been taken of
John's Gospel, its Christian aim and adaptation cannot
reasonably be doubted.




342       JOHN, THE GOSPEL FOR THE CIIURCH.
It has been shown to be a historical fact that John, the
beloved disciple, a man eminently fitted for the work both
by his character and experience, wrote this Gospel at the
end of the first century for the Christian Church, a spiritual organization made up of men saved out of all the
great races of the apostolic age through the instrumentality of the earlier preaching of the Gospel and by faith
in Christ. This is the firm historical basis for the true
theory of the fourth Gospel.
It has also been shown that the Gospel itself bears
throughout the evidence of its Christian origin and aim.
Its plan is but the unfolding of the central idea of the
Incarnate Word as the light and life of the world. Its
omissions and additions of material were made to suit it
to the Christian soul and its needs. All its incidental
changes, its doctrinal system, and its special peculiarities,
unite in demonstrating  its Christian adaptation.  In
short, the Christian idea shapes and moulds everything
in it from the organic idea down through the rhetorical
forms to the very vocabulary itself.
It may therefore be justly claimed, that the historical
and critical views combine to establish the theory that
John was originally the Gospel for the Christian, and to
make it plain that this theory furnishes the true key to
the Gospel.




CONCLUSION.
THE GOSPEL FOR ALL THE WORLD.
THE answer proposed to the question, Why four Gospels? is patent from the preceding studies of the Evangelists. It entered into the purpose of God from the
beginning, to give the divine religion of the Christian
revelation to all mankind. The great commission sent
the Apostles to preach the Gospel to every creature. In
its fulfillment it required just so many and just such
Gospels to meet the wants of the world of the apostolic
age in commending Jesus to all men as the Saviour from
sin. It is hoped that the view presented may commend
itself to the Christian reason, as not only simple and
satisfactory, not only based upon the sound principles of
philosophy and the undoubted facts of history; but as
also, and more than all, helpful to the better understanding of these precious portions of the Scriptures and of
the incarnate Word revealed therein, and to a quickened
progress in that divine life of faith which ever contemplates as a chief aim the conquest of the world for the
crucified and risen Christ.
In conclusion, it may be profitable to direct the attention to the two main facts of the Gospels, - the first, the
element common to all the four, and the second, the element peculiar to each, - as suited and doubtless intended
to give the productions of the Evangelists a perpetual
freshness and fitness for the race of man.




344                 CONCLUSION.
I. The Gospel for Man.
There is a central mass of fact and truth around which
Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John alike group their other
material.  This is the essential, fundamental element
which must make the productions of the Evangelists
Gospels, good news, to man the sinner wherever and
whenever they come to his hearing. These chief facts
and truths may be summed up in four particulars.
The first is found in the incarnation of the Son of
God. The four Evangelists set it forth in such a way as
to make it patent to every candid reader. With Matthew,
Jesus is Emmanuel, God with us, in fulfillment of prophecy; with Mark, he is the Son of God in human form
exercising his almighty power; with Luke, he is the descendant of Adam and the child of the virgin, yet the
Son of the Highest; with John, he is the eternal Word
made flesh.
The second is found in the life of the Son of God on
earth in human form and subject to human conditions
and laws. This makes up the central portion of each of
the Gospels. With Matthew, it is the life of Messiah;
with Mark, of the almighty worker and victor; with
Luke, of the divine and universal man; with John, of
the incarnate Word.
The third of these common particulars is found in the
death upon the cross. As this is the all-essential fact,
all the Gospels devote large space to it, delineating also
the events centring in it. In short, here is the ground
which all the Evangelists traverse most fully and carefully. They all give the triumphal entry into the Holy
City, which was the public claim of Jesus to be the Messiah, the Saviour of the world; the Passover supper,
which was his act of putting himself voluntarily in the
place of the Paschal Lamb, as the one whose sacrifice




THE GOSPEL FOR ALL THE WORLD.         345
alone could deliver from the destruction of sin; the agony and betrayal in Gethsemane, which marked his voluntary submission to drink the cup of his Father for the
salvation of the lost; the trial and condemnation, which
were at once the public vindication of the innocence of
the Redeemer, and his public rejection by the ancient
Jewish and Gentile world; the death by crucifixion,
which was his actual sacrifice for the sins of the world;
and his burial, which signalized his subjection to death
for a season. All these are the constituent parts of the
great fact of the cross, or of Christ's sacrifice for the sins
of mankind.
The fourth and last of these common features is
found in the rising of Jesus from the dead on the third
day, in his subsequent intercourse with his disciples, in
his giving to the Apostles their great commission to
preach the Gospel to all the world, and in his ascension
to heaven, at once establishing his claim to be the Saviour of mankind and organizing and beginning his saving work.
All these — the incarnation, the life, the death, the
resurrection -are the essential facts and truths of the
Gospel, those which at the first made it good news to
men. Without any one of them all it would cease to be
good news; for, without the incarnation, the Son of
God would have no part in our human nature; without
the life on earth, he could neither be our righteousness
nor our example; without the death he could not be our
sacrifice for sin; and without the resurrection and ascension his claims would be proved baseless and the world
would be left to perish without a Saviour. The Son of
God became incarnate, lived, died, rose from the dead, for
the redemption of the lost, - this cannot grow old but
must be glad tidings for man, the sinner, till the end of
time.




346                 CONCLUSION.
II. The Gospel for all Men.
There is an element of fact and truth peculiar to each
of the Evangelists. It was by means of this, as has been
seen, that the essential and fundamental Gospel truth
was brought by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, favorably before' the minds of the Jew, Roman, Greek, and
Christian, and Jesus of Nazareth commended to them all
as the Saviour of the World. It is this fourfold difference that completes the rounded, perfect fitness of the
four Gospels to constitute the perpetual Evangel for the
world of the ages subsequent to the apostolic.
Not only is it ever true that man is a sinner and needs
the good news of Christ's incarnation, life, death, and
resurrection; but it remains equally true that the world
of mankind is always divided into the same great classes
and always exhibits the same generic phases of thought.
In all ages the Jewish, Roman, and Greek natures reappear among men, and, in fact, make up the world of
natural men; while the Christian nature and wants likewise remain essentially identical. From age to age the
four Gospels appeal to the classes who, in temperament,
mental constitution, training, and modes of thought, are
like those for whom of old, in obedience to the inspiring
breath of God, they were prepared. Thus it is that
these brief but all-important productions have had power
to captivate men by a perpetual fitness and a perennial
freshness.
For the man with nature inclined to bow to authority,
to appreciate divine religious forms, to exalt the peculiar
position of the people of God, and to trace the marvelous
plan of God in the preparation for the Messiah and in
the progress of his kingdom, the Gospel which Matthew
wrote for the Jew must possess a permanent and absorbing interest.




THE GOSPEL FOR ALL THE WORLD.        347
For the man of power, reverencing law, given to action, fitted to be an actor or leader in pushing forward
the conquest of the world for Christ, the Gospel which
Mark wrote for the Roman must retain its old significance and an ever-potent inspiration as the battle-call of
the Almighty Conqueror.
For the man of reason and taste, of philosophic and
aesthetic culture, the man longing for the perfect manhood, cherishing a world-wide sympathy with mankind,
delighting to contemplate the universal reach of the grace
of God the Father to sinners, the Gospel which Luke
wrote for the Greek must maintain an increasing reasonableness and an undying influence as the voicing of the
infinite Reason of the one Divine Man.
For the man of faith saved by the incarnation and
atonement of the Son of God, the man of the new and
divine life of obedience and devotion to Christ, the man
enlightened, guided, and helped by the Holy Ghost, the
Gospel which John wrote for the Christian Church cannot fail to retain an immortal fascination and to furnish
a supreme satisfaction as the utterance of God's eternal
Word to the believing soul.
It is on this wise that the one Gospel of God in fourfold form, which was exactly fitted to commend Jesus of
Nazareth to the ancient world, and which could not then
have been put in other shape without a radical change in
the races and history of the apostolic age, is still so perfectly adapted to meet the wants of the modern world,
that it would require a revolution in the mental structure
and experience of man, before any other number of Gospels or any different ones from the four in the New Testament could meet the necessities of ruined and redeemed
humanity. God appears, therefore, in his Word no less
than in his world, as a God of order. The same perfect,
divine plan which science is finding in the latter, a ra



348                  CONCLUSION.
tional and reverential study finds in the former. The
Gospels are the perfect thought of God for the restoration of a lost world.
The four Gospels, therefore, in their essential unity
and harmony and in their fourfold difference and contrast, illustrate at once and equally well the wonders of
the divine love and the comprehensiveness of the divine plan, —a love reaching out after and laying hold
of all the great classes of sinners to be found in the
race; a plan comprehending and providing for the spiritual wants of all men to the end of time. In contemplating, in the writings of the Evangelists, this sublime
plan of the Heavenly Father, who " so loved the world
that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting
life," the devout soul must ever bow with a humble,
grateful adoration, growing with increasing knowledge,
and exclaim,To God alone be all the glory.




A NEW TEXT-BOOK ON MORAL SCIENCE.
CHRISTIAN ETHICS; OR, THE TRUE
MORAL MANHOOD AND LIFE OF DUTY. A
Text-book for Schools and Colleges. By
D. S. GREGORY, D.D., Professor of the
Mental Sciences and English Literature
in the University of Wooster, Ohio.








CONTENTS OF THE WORK.
INTRODUCTION- NATURE OF THE SCIENCE.
PART I.
THEORETICAL ETHICS.-THEOR Y OF THE LIFE OF DUTY.
Division I-The Nature of the Moral Agent,
CHAPTER I-GENERAL VIEW  OF THE PERSONAL AGENT.
SECTION 1. The Active Being.
SECTION 2. The Springs of Action.
SECTION 3. The Arbiter and Executor of Action.
SECTION 4. The Guides of Action.
CHAPTER II-SPECIAL VIEW  OF THE MORAL AGENT.
SECTION 1. Elements of the Moral Nature from Theories of the Moralists.
SECTION 2. Elements of the Moral Nature from Consciousness.
Division II-The Nature of Virtue, or the Dutiful in Conduct.
CHAPTER I-THE SUPREME END OF VIRTUOUS ACTION.
SECTION 1. Theories of the Supreme End.
SECTION 2. The True Theory Established.
CHAPTER II-THE SUPREME RULE OF RIGHTNESS.
SECTION 1. Unsatisfactory Theories of the Supreme Rule.
SECTION 2. The True Theory of the Supreme Rule.
CHAPTER  III-THE  ULTIMATE GROUND  OF RIGHTNESS, A  MORAL
OBLIGATION.
SECTION 1. Incorrect Theories of the Ground of Moral Obligation.
SECTION 2. Correct Theory of the Ground of Moral Obligation.
Division III-The Philosophy of the Life of Duty.
CHAPTER I-THE TRUE CONCEPTION OF HUMAN DUTY.
SECTION 1. The True Idea of a Virtuous Action.
SECTION 2. The True Idea of the Life of Duty.
CHAPTER II-THE  NATURAL REQUISITES FOR THE LIFE OF DUTY.
SECTION 1. The Broad Intelligence and the Moral Task.
SECTION 2. The Cultivated Conscience and the Moral Task.
SECTION 3. The Free and Holy Will and the Moral Task.
CHAPTER III-THE REQUISITE MORAL RECONSTRUCTION.
SECTION 1. The Moral Disorder of Man's Nature.
SECTION 2. The True Scheme of Moral Reconstruction.




PART II.
PRACTICAL ETHICS.-DUTIES IN THIE LIFE OF DUTY.
Division I-Individual Ethics-Duties Toward Self.
CHAPTER I-DUTY OF SELF-CONSERVATION.
SECTION 1. Self-Preservation-Life.
SECTION 2. Self-Care-Health.
SECTION 3. Self-Support-Well-Being.
CHAPTER II-DUTY OF SELF-CULTURE.
SECTION 1. Physical Self-Culture.
SECTION 2. Spiritual Self-Culture.
CHAPTER III-DUTY OF SELF-CONDUCT.
SECTION 1. Self-Control.
SECTION 2. Self-Direction.
Division II-Social Ethics-Duties Toward Mankind.
CHAPTER I-GENERAL ETHICS.  DUTIES TOWARD MEN IN GENERAL.
SECTION 1. Duty of Social Conservation.
SECTION 2. Duty of Social Improvement.
SECTION 3. Duty of Social Direction.
CHAPTER II-ECONOMICAL ETHICS. DUTIES IN THE HOUSEHOLD.
SECTION 1. Duties of the Marriage Relation.
SECTION 2. Duties of the Parental Relation.
SECTION 3. Duties of Master and Servant.
CHAPTER III-CIVIL ETHICS. DUTIES IN THE STATE.
SECTION 1. Duties of the State.
SECTION 2. Duties of the Citizen.
Division III-Theistic Ethics-Duties Toward God.
CHAPTER I-SUPREME DEVOTION OF THE INTELLECT TO GOD.
SECTION 1. The Binding Force of the Duty.
SECTION 2. The Range of the Duty.
CHAPTER II-SUPREME DEVOTION OF THE HEART TO GOD.
SECTION 1. The Binding Force of the Duty.
SECTION 2. The Range of the Duty.
CHAPTER III-SUPREME DEVOTION OF THE WILL TO GOD.
SECTION 1. Obedience Toward God.
SECTION 2. Worship of God.
SECTION 3. Acceptance of Moral Reconstruction.




FEATURES OF THE WORK.
THE work of Dr. Gregory possesses among others the following peculiar features:
1. It is the most complete and comprehensive treatise on
this subject that has been brought before the public, containing almost twice the matter of any other work similar
in aim and form.
2. A new, logical and systematic form has been given to
the whole subject, which makes the science at once easy to
master and to retain.
3. It is so constructed as to meet the wants of three classes
of pupils. Practical Ethics furnishes a complete text-book for
the younger and more immature, as in the Public Schools;
the book may be studied entire by ordinary Seminary or
College classes; or the matter in larger type may be made
the basis of a system of lectures for those who desire a Syllabus for guiding the investigations of mature minds.
4. By means of graded type, the relative importance and
dependence of the different parts, propositions and discussions,
are made to appear at once to the eye of the teacher and of
the pupil of average intelligence.
5. The entire treatment is fresh and abreast with the age,
dealing with the great ethical questions in living rather than
dead form and thereby arousing the natural enthusiasm of'
the youthful mind.
6. The work aims throughout to present the science of right
and noble living from the point of view of the enlightened
Christian conscience, so as to keep before the pupil the highest
attainable human character and life, and the most powerful
motives for attaining them.




6
The attention of educators is particularly invited to the
following points, usually either overlooked or hastily treated:
The elements of personal agency.
The thorough analysis of the moral nature.
The full discussion of the nature of virtue.
The scientific presentation in the philosophy of duty.
The full treatment of the great questions of the will.
The discussion of the problem of moral reconstruction, and
the testing of the various schemes proposed.
The new analysis of Practical Ethics.
The principles governing the choice of work in life.
The theory of education and its application, under selfculture.
The treatment, under Self-Conduct, of the great End of
Life, of the considerations which should influence in the formation of the plan for life, and of the principles which should
govern in the use of the personal powers, the forces of nature,
wealth, and time, in carrying out that plan and accomplishing
the grandest possible life-work.
The enlarged and unselfish view of duties to mankind.
The fresh discussion of such topics as the duties of the
State to the world and to God; of prayer; of the Sabbath, etc.




7
WHAT LEADING EDUCATORS SAY OF THE WORK,
President M. B. ANDERSON, D.D., LL. D., Rochester University, N. Y.
"'The book throughout shows the action of a clear, vigorous, and welldisciplined mind, strongly imbued with the loftiest conceptions of Christian morality. It is admirably fitted for a text-book and is exhaustive
in the range of the topics treated."
President JAMES McCoss, D.D., LL. D., Princeton College, N. J.
"Dr. Gregory's work is one of the very best of the few good books
that we have on Christian Ethics. It is at once philosophic and practical
expounding grand principles and applying them to particular precepts.'
President NOAH PORTER, D.D., LL. D., Yale College, New Haven, Conn.
"A  valuable addition to the manuals of instruction which we have.
It certainly does great credit to the scholarship and ability of the author."
Professor L. H. ATWATER, D.D., LL. D., Professor of Logic, Metaphysics and Political
Economy, in the College of New Jersey, Princeton. (From The Presbyterian Quarterly
and Princeton Review.)
"' A work of this kind is to be estimated according to two principal
standards: first, as a manual for teaching the science of which it treats,
and, next, as an exposition of or contribution to that science itself....
Professor Gregory's book very strongly exemplifies both sorts of excellencies. While it takes note of the views of others, and incorporates the
marrow of them, it combines with all this a vein of original thinking,
which brings the whole out as it has been fused and recast in the alembic
of his own mind. It is no mere combination or rehash. It is a construction of his own, which, illuminating with whatever light it can borrow from the great masters, gives many cross and side lights of its own
which are new.  While it has value so far as an original work, it has
still greater value in its plan and method as a text-book."




8
President MILTON VALENTINE, D.D., Pennsylvania College, (Lutheran Quarterly Review.)
"' It is a work of very great merit, and will doubtless soon take, as it
deserves, a prominent place among the manuals of instruction in academic
and collegiate institutions..... The work on the whole is so sound and
Christian, as well as so clear and well arranged, that we regard it the
very best manual now offered for instruction in Moral Science."
DR. H. L. WAYLAND, Editor of the National Baptist (late President of Kalamazoo College,
and son of Dr. FRANCIS WAYLAND).
4" The book is based upon a very rigid, logical, and comprehensive outline.... The author takes the highest possible ideal of life and duty,
and he discusses his theme with an enthusiasm and directness which are
sure to make an impression.
9" The book evinces great breadth of scholarship, and a familiarity with
all the recent literature upon the subject; and very frequently in evolving his own view, he will place side by side the views of those who differ
from him, and in this way he condenses into a paragraph the contents of
many volumes; and his criticisms bring the subject down to the present
year of grace.," But the cultus of the book does not surpass its outspokenness. The
author sees sin where sin is and does not tamper with it. The warm,
earnest, practical, dignified spirit of the volume is in perfect accord with
its scientific character.
" The spirit of the book corresponds to Dr. Lyman Beecher's definition
of eloquence, viz.:' Logic set on fire.' Dr. Gregory has set his logic on
fire with his pen. We doubt if his voice could better it."
COL. ROBERT D. ALLEN, Superintendent Kentncky Military Institute, and Member of
State Board of Education.
" I am persuaded that Gregory's Christian Ethics is the only work on
the subject, published in America, that is adapted to the class-room.
Every man that values knowledge on this subject should study this
splendid work with care."
Professor J. P. LACROIx, D.D., Ohio, Wesleyan University, translator of Wuttke's
Christian Ethics.
" This book presents the new ethics. It bears the science from God.
It gives a clear, positive, Christian solution to the great problems of
human life.




9
President THOMAS WARD WHITE, D.D., Greenboro Female College, Alabama.
" I do not hesitate to pronounce it superior to any production of the
kind which has come under my observation for years. It is more in
accordance with Scripture than Paley, more lucid than Alexander, much
more simple than Wayland, freer from professional technicalities than
Abercrombie; in short, a post bellumn production eminently suited for the
progressive development of physical and moral womanhood in the South.
" We shall adopt it, at once, in our classes, and would cordially commend it to those engaged in female education."
President THOMAS CHASE, Haverford College, Pennsylvania.
" I am impressed with the great excellence of the work. It is philosophical in its arrangement, sound in its teachings, and happy in its
practical applications of the great truths with which it deals."
President C. NUTT, D.D., Indiana State University.
" Such a book has been long needed. It is thorough and up with the
times. I shall adopt it as a text-book in this University."
Professor R. BETHUNE WELCH, LL. D., Union University, N. Y.
" It seems to me admirably adapted to its special purpose as a textbook; and, in this respect, cannot fail to meet an urgent need in the department of ethical instruction."
President KENDALL BROOKS, D.D., Kalamazoo College, Michigan.
" It is no discredit to Francis Wayland to say, that forty years after
the publication of his Moral Science, which has rendered admirable
service for so many years, another is issued better in some respects than
his. Dr. Gregory's book seems peculiarly adapted to the class-room."
President N. R. MIDDLETON, College of Charleston, S. C.
" It is a very complete and large-minded analysis of a subject so often
discussed in a narrow and sectarian spirit."




10
President OVAL PIRKEY, Abingdon College, Ill.
" It is the best text-book I have yet found on the subject of which it
treats. Condensed, systematic, and plain."
President B. HELING, D.D., Wittenberg College, Ohio.
" The wide range of topics presented, upon what he so fitly terms' the
science of right and noble living,' makes the book a real treasury of
truth and knowledge upon its special subject."
President John R. PARK, M.D., University of Deseret, Utah.
"In general plan, in arrangement, and in all that makes a text-book
effective in the class-room, I have yet seen nothing equal to it."
President R. L. ABERNETHY, Rutherford College, N. C.
"I am so well pleased with it that I shall adopt it as one of my textbooks in this college, next term. The book combines more of mental
with the normal of man's nature than any other book I have examined.
Its typography and manual execution cannot be easily surpassed."
Professor J. W. SCOTT, D.D., L.L.D., West Virginia University.
4" It seems well adapted to the purpose intended. As a text-book, better
than any of those in common use."
President L. A. DUNN, Central University, Iowa.
c" Decidedly the best of anything I have seen upon this subject."
Professor JAMES HARPER, D.D., United Presbyterian Theological Seminary,
Newburg, N. Y.
" I should be glad to know that the work had been adopted as a textbook in all our colleges, and outside of college walls. It is admirably
adapted to promote a high moral tone; while it furnishes powerful evidence in behalf of that Christianity toward which, by thoughtful steps
from first principles, it conducts the student."




Professor WM. ALEXANDER, D.D., Presbyterian Theological Seminary of the Pacific, Cal.
"The definitions are admirable, clear cut and distinct, and at the same
time comprehensive and complete. Another notable feature is, that the
author has ventured to depart from the beaten track without departing
from the truth. I am delighted with the boldness and directness with
which he pushes his principles to their just conclusion."
Professor C. S. REINKE, Moravian Theological Seminary, Bethlehem, Pa.
"I think it an admirable work."
Professor T. S. WYNKOOSS, Theological Seminary, Allahabad, India.
"'Tell Dr. Gregory that I take with me to India a package of his
Christian Ethics, and shall select the best of my young men and put them
through as thorough a course in it as possible."
Principal JOHN W. ARMSTRONG, State Normal School, Fredonia, N. Y.
" The book is uncommonly rich in material. The general impression
made by it is, variety and excellence in matter, thoroughness in investigation, and adaptation to the wants of the recitation room."
Principal J. ESTABROOK, State Normal School, Ypsilanti, Michigan.
"' I am delighted with it. The arrangement of topics is admirable, and
the discussion of them very able."
President C. R. POMEROY, D.D., State Normal School, Emporia, Kansas.
" The classification and arrangement under General Divisions, Chapters,
Sections, and Topics, are valuable helps to both teacher and scholar.
Add to this the aid afforded by the type, and we have little left to desire
in form for a model text-book. As to the discussion of the subject matter,
Part 2d, upon Practical Ethics, is especially valuable. Its careful study
cannot fail to ennoble character, and give a truer conception of the truth
and value of the Christian religion.




12
President J. H. BRUNNER, Hiwassee College, Tennessee.
"On receipt of Gregory's Christian Ethics, I laid the book aside as
being no better than what we already had in use; but subsequent events
led me to a thorough review of the book. In no otter work have I found
so many points of excellence.
" We make it a rule to use none but the best books we can find, in the
several departments of instruction. This rule will require us to place the
Christian Ethics in our course of study for the next year.
" I am at loss for language suitably to express my high appreciation of
the work, both as to its intrinsic matter and its typographical excellence
as a text-book."
PRICE, $1.50.
Liberal terms to Teachers and School Officers desiring copies for examination or first introduction.
PLEASE ADDRESS THE PUBLISHERS,
ELDREDGE & BROTHER,
17 NORTH SEVENTH STREET,
PHILADELPHIA, PA.