MASTER NEGATIVE NO. 93-81180- MICROFILMED 1993 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES/NEW YORK as part of the "Foundations of Western Civilization Preservation Project" Funded by the NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES Reproductions may not be made without permission from Columbia University Library COPYRIGHT STATEMENT The copyright law of the United States - Title 17, United States Code - concerns the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or other reproduction is not to be "used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research." If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of "fair use," that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copy order if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of the copyright law. A UTHOR: NARES, ROBERT TITLE: VERACITY OF THE EVANGELISTS PLACE: LONDON DATE: 1819 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGET Master Negative # Original Material as Filmed - Existing Bibliographic Record 239. His llri'^iLQ-jS.r 19yvIU^^' - ^7<^B- oLe/wurvo- 1C|+-30I13.0. Restrictions on Use: TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA REDUCTION RATIO: FILM SIZE: i_ij2.^__ IMAGE PLACEMENT: lA © IB ^B DATE FILMED: i:i£_-_1_3 INITIALS__22'_ ^:^_ FILMED BY: RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS. INC WOODBRIDGE. CT n^ c Association for Information and Image Manageme nt 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1100 Silver Spring. Maryland 20910 301/587-8202 Centimeter 1111 in I IT ^TI'T'tITiTiT't'I'I' Inches 4 iliiiili 111 6 7 8 iliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiil 10 T TTTTT 1.0 I.I 1.25 iiiiiliiiiiiiiiliiiii ■ 10 Hi m itt m 1 3.6 1.4 TTT 11 12 13 14 2.5 2.2 2.0 1.8 .6 I I I I I I 5 15 mm 4, MONUFRCTURED TO PIIM STRNDRRDS BY RPPLIED IMRGE, INC. I C/as:. Bo.'k J^lG Madison Ave. and 49th Street, New York. B-side tlu main topic, this book also treats of S$iifjeciN0» On/agi Subject No. On page pi if\ THE VERACITY OF THE EVANGELISTS DemonieitrateD, BT A COMPARATIVE VIEW OF THEIR HISTORIES. THE SECOND EDITION, WITH ADDITIONS. • BY THE REV. ROBERT NARES, A. M. F.R.S. &c. lonnon x PRINTED FOR F. C. AND J. RIVINGTON, NO. 02, ST. Paul's church-yabd ; AND AT NO. 3, WATERLOO-PLACE, PALL MALL. 1819. TO THE HONOURABLE AND RIGHT REVEREND SHUTE, LORD BISHOP OF DURHAM. ^. 4c. 4^c, t 50G58 29FEB-84 Printed by R. Gilbert, St. John^s Square, London, MY LORD, It will not be asked, by any reasonable person, why a book, intended to illustrate the evidences of Gospel truth, should be dedicated to the Bishop of Durham: neither would it be an object of enquiry, why my personal gratitude should thus be expressed, were it known how much, and how long, I was indebted to your Lordship's kind A 2 encou- lY DEDICATION. encouragement and support, under the most arduous labour of my life, the conduct of the British Critic Review. PREFACE. That the present volume, though small, may not prove altogether un- worthy of the same protection, is the very ardent and anxious wish of. My Lord, Your Lordship's most obedient. And most obliged, humble Servant, St. Mary*s, Reading, Dec. 25, 1815. ROBERT NARES. There is a great advantag^e in collecting our ideas^ and drawing general conclusions from known premises. Many persons delight to trace the facts of his- tory^ but few to reduce them into classes, and to take a careful view of the results. Yet is this the noblest object of the study. In contemplating the important history of our blessed Lord, this method is peculiarly useful; it is even necessary, to a right comprehension of the whole. The nar- rative is heard, for the most part, in de- tached and broken portions; or, if perused A 3 with VI PREFACE. with more connection, still the facts them- selves are separated, in four distinct his- tories ; sometimes coinciding, and some- times relating' to different circumstances. Thus it is not easy to consider them in one comprehensive view. To obviate this difficulty, works called Diatessarons and Harmonies have been formed, by learned and pious men, in all ages of Christianity. It may be necessary to inform some readers wherein these differ from each other. A Diatessaron is one connected narrative formed out of the words of the four Evangelists, skilfully blended to- gether * ; but so blended as not to admit of • The name is derived from Ata rga-a-a^uv, (Dia 7\ssaron),meiimng from four, in Greek; and we read of their formation in ver\ early periods of the PREFACE. VII any repetitions; always inserting the words of that writer who gives the fullest account ; and supplying from the others such circumstances as he may have omitted : thus forming, as it were, a new history ; but still in the very words of the sacred historians. A Harmony, so called, because it points out clearly the agree- ment of the several writers, disposes all the words of the four Evangelists into four distinct columns, (or any other con- venient mode of arrangement) in such a manner, that all the narratives proceed together, when all relate the same things ; or three, two, or only one, according as the case may require. Both these me- the failii. An excellent Diatessaron was pub- lished in Greek, by the late Professor White, of Oxford ; and reproduced in Latin and English, by the Rev. T. Thirlwall. thods fill PREFACE. PREFACE. IX thods have their uses : but it may be feared, that neither are sufficiently con- sulted by Christians, who are not also students. Of these two methods, the former enables us to sec, in one connected view, the sum and substance of all that the Evangelists have related. But it is attended with a difficulty of distinguishing the parts which belong to each. The latter assists us in examining and comparing the several ac- counts, with an accuracy not easily ob- tained in any other way. The present tract is chiefly drawn from the contem- plation of an excellent Harmony * ; and I • The best Harmony, as far as my knowledge goes, is that of Archbishop Newcome. But it is a large folio, and is also in Greek. To English readers am much mistaken if it present not to the minds of some, perhaps of many readers, results and conclusions which, in their own attention to the Gospels, they had not anticipated. It has been said of modern works in general, that they consist chiefly of old materials, thrown into a new arrange- ment. The present publication pretends readers therefore, not conversant in the original language, I would recommend an English Har- mony, in octavo, founded principally upon that of Newcome. It was published in London, in 1802, by W. Phillips, in George-yard, Lombard-street. But the compiler, though evidently an able one, has withheld his name. It is an excellent, and very useful work. A specimen of such a Harmony is given at p. 171, in the three narratives of the Para- ble of the Sower ; and in the Appendix, No. V, as applied to another history. to I! f * PREFACE. to little more. The materials are taken fippm the Gospels alone. The compari- tons have been chiefly nmde by the assist- ance of harmonized Gospels. If there be any thing new, which in Divinity it is pecuharly difficult to produce, it consists principally in the conclusions drawn from these particular views. It appeared to me a useful plan^ to view the several por- tions of our Lord's history, in a collective manna-. His infancy ; the beginnings of his ministry; but more particularly, his Miracles, his Parables, his divine Dis- courses, his Prophecies, and his represen- tations of himself; and to examine in what way all these are delivered to us by the four sacred historians. It seemed desira- ble to observe, whether all their narratives are conceived in the same spirit of vera- city ; and whether it can be believed, that they PREFACE. XI they copied at all from each other; or all from any common record *. The result has been the present Ma- nual; for such it truly is in size, and I hope will be found in use. In it, I trust, is shown, that the scrupulous adherence of the four Evangelists to plain, unorna- mented truth, is the principal cause of those resemblances which have been thought to indicate copying; (a notion which reduces their four testimonies to little more in value than one) while a tnore exact and close examination, of their minute and verbal differences, completely overthrows that notion. It is shown, if * In doing tliis, it has been no part of the au- thoi*s object to oppose any person of eminence ; but merely to serve, as it appears to him, the cause of truth. * I have M I xu PKEFACE. 1 have not failed in my design, that tliey have all agreed in delineating a character, which neither one nor all of them could possibly have invented ; that they are all remarkable for teaching things^ in the name of their Lord, which, of themselves, they never could have taught; for pub- lishing Discourses as his, which they could not possibly have composed themselves; and for recording Prophecies, the fulfil- ment of which they could not, by any human means, have anticipated. If these views be useful, they are, how- ever, no discoveries. Most of them have been suggested in some work or other. But have they ever been so brought toge- ther? — If not, the very arrangement of them may be of service, and the object of producing them will be answered. To i vl PREFACE. ^lii To render these collective remarks more intelligible, I have thrown together, at the end of the work, a set of lists, or tables, illustrative of the principal topics. First, a list of our Lord's Miracles; 2dly, Of his Parables ; 3dly, Of his preceptive Discourses; 4thly, Of his Prophecies: and I have added to each article in these lists, a reference to the Evangelist or Evange- lists, by whom each fact, parable, dis- course, or prophecy, is recorded. These tables may, in some respects, answer the purpose of a Harmony, so far as they go ; but a good Harmony is still more useful ; and whoever possesses such a work, may render them still more convenient, by adding, in the margin, references to the pages of that book. By means of these tables also^ every a reader t I Xiv PREFACE. PREFACE. XV reader may at pleasure pursue the argu- ment further, and discover for himself new illustrations of the principles here laid down. For I have by no means endeavoured to exhaust the various sub- jects; but only to suggest a few import- ant conclusions, leaving the rest to be formed, as they may occur in rea -ing, or in comparing the sacred texts. The accu- mulation of arguments, altogether similar to each other, would have become tediotfs ; but the application of such as are stated, to other cases and examples, may prove a pleasing, as well as an edifying employ- ment, to the reader. which would not occur, but under a pecu- liar mode of consideration; these are offices analogous to those which every preacher attempts to fulfil in his dis- courses. But there are topics which can- not well be comprehended in discourses from the pulpit; and for these we may allowably endeavour to find a more ex- tended consideration, by addressing them to the public at large. In either case, the ol:gect is to do good, if possible ; and to convey to the minds of others, with effect, those trutlis which we ourselves believe to be most certain, most important, and most sacred. ll To add even a small portion of illus- tration to sacred truths, or of confirmation to sound faith ; to make what was known, »ore clear; or to suggest arguments which Q ! it CONTENTS. n I \ - TAGE IXrUODUCTION CIIAPTCR I. The Character of Jesus Christ could not have been invented , , ^ ^ ^ ^ „ CHAPTER If. On the K vaiijjelists as Historians 13 CHAPTER HI. or the Style of the Evangelists 28 CHAPTER IV. On the Beginnings of the Four Gospels 39 CHAPTER V. Of John the Baptist ^^ j^yiJi CONTENTS. CHAPTER VI. ^ _ PACE Birth and Infancy of Christ • "^^ CHAPTER VII. Fublic Ministry of Christ S® CHAPTER VHI. Of the Baptism and Temptation of Jesus 104 CHAPTER IX. The Calling of the Apostles ^^ CHAPTER X. Miracles of our Lord CHAPTER XI. - , 153 Parables of our Lord CHAFfER XII. 1 197 Discourses of our Lord CHAPTER Xlll. . • , 223 Prophecies of our Liora CHAPTER XIV. Our Lord's Representations of Himself 238 CONTENTS. XIX CHAPTER XV. PAG I Of our Lord's Appearances after his Resurrection 266 Conclusion 277 Appendix, No. I. . . .^ 283 , — II ^... 287 , —III .^....... 390 , -IV 294 • — , — V , , 297 -, —VI 301 i THE VERACITY OF THE EVANGELISTS DEMONSTRATED, &c. INTRODUCTION. To write a Life of Christ cannot be ne- cessary. Several of acknowledged ex- cellence already exist; they are in the hands of the pious in general; and they must all be drawn from the same divine source, the Gospels. But it has appeared to me that some general reflections, of considerable importance, may still be made upon those sacred histories; tend- ing to throw light upon the whole, and B upon ? i 2 Introduction. ♦ ,i upon particular parts. To these reflections therefore I hasten, without fatiguing the reader with the form of a regular exor- dium. For considerations on this subject, the religious will no more require an apo- logy, than the impious and the thought- less will admit of any. The more we reflect upon the Gospel- History, taken altogether, in its various features and peculiarities, the more firmly we must feel convinced that it cannot pos- sibly be the history of a mere man ; nor can have been produced by the common powers of human nature. The principal character, Jesus Christ, is a personage who has no prototype or resemblance in the history of the world *. He could not possibly have any; • The Editors of the British Critic say (October, 1816, p. 392) that the creations of Shakespeare have no prototype in nature. This is a mistake, for they have all their foundation in the human character, Ti- taniais a jealous aod capricious wife ; Caliban a gross and Introduction. 3 any ; for a man without a fault was never seen, and he had none. If there had been faults in his character, an honest historian would have recorded them, as Moses told his own ; and the Evangelists those of themselves, and their brethren, even when most disgraceful to them. But they could not entirely have concealed the faults of their Master, even with the utmost desire to do it, had there been any in his character. They would have been traced in the circumstances of the narrative; they would have been elicited from the facts themselves, by the careful and acute reader, however studiously suppressed or and brutal wretch, but who might be a man, if the poet had not chosen to feign other\vise. But besides, the merit of Shakespeare's supernatural fictions is, that they fall in with the general ideas of men, ap- plied to such subjects. Every one feels that they have a kind of truth, though feigned. But the character of Jesus contradicts every common or previous idea of men, concerning the probable de- meanour of so exalted a human -Being, I '. B 3 palliated N ■"i I I 4 Introduction, palliated by the historians. Ambition, for instance, would have appeared in his con- duct ; or pride ; or the love of worldly glory ; or cruelty, or violence of temper. Whatever, in short, marks the character of a public man, through his public actions, could not wholly have been hidden : and if some more secret vices had been stu- diously suppressed, the virulence of those adversaries, who made crimes even of his miracles, and prophetic speeches, could not have failed to trace them out, and to urge them strongly against him. But he was without fault : and this is the more certain, because his proper his- torians have never directly said it. They have written the most simple of all narra- tives. They have not even attempted to draw his character, or to venture an opi- nion of their own upon it. They have apologized for nothing; they have merely told what their Master said and Introduction. 5 and did, on such oc«::asions as they thought proper to record ; and have left thei^ readers to discern his character in the facts. They have acted most wisely in so doing. They have thus avoided every thing that could give a suspicious appearance to their history ; all partizanship ; all plead- ing of a cause. But observe, that this very thing is what was never done by any other historians in the world. It is then at least a reason for distinguishing the Evangelists from all other writers * : and this is no small matter. tPP" But the history of a man without a fault, or even the suspicion of an infirmity, is as remote from the experience of mankind, as any thing that is most miraculous. Of those who have been celebrated for any famous acts or works, the general history has been, that some great qualities have * We may except perhaps some other sacred writers ; but that rather corroborates than weakens the pretensions of these. B 3 been 6 Introduction, been counter-balanced by faults equally ^eat; or by infirmities which make us blush for our common nature. It would be an irksome enquiry to pursue, but the exceptions to this assertion could not be numerous, nor, probably, any; except such as arose from the imperfectness of our accounts. The examples, on the other hand, are many, striking, and well known. CHAPTER I. THE CHARACTER OF JESUS CHRIST COULD NOT HAVE BEEN INVENTED. But I proceed further, and say, with the utmost conviction of the truth of the assertion, that, supposing the most ardent desire to impose upon the world the picture of a man without a fault, such . a character as that of Jesus Christ, could not have been drawn from fancy or in- vention, by any person or persons who ever lived in this world, before that cha- racter had actually appeared. The rea- son for this is so plain and certain, that I cannot conceive it to admit even of a cavil. It is simply this : That the ideas or principles, upon which that character is formed, did not then exist in the world. b4 CHAP. 8 The Character of Jesus Humility, meekness, forgiveness of inju- ries, universal benevolence were not, any where, at that time, esteemed as virtues, or as exalted features of character. No man who ever lived, in any country of the world, would have proposed patience un- der insults, as a part of an illustrious cha- racter ; or would have thought of uniting mild forbearance with powers superior to human nature, and an origin derived from heaven. Dignity of character indeed we see in the evangelical picture of our Saviour, the simplest yet sublimest dignity; but it is a dignity totally un- mixed with pride ; consequently it was a species of dignity never before seen on earth. It was a species of dignity which could not possibly have been conceived, since it arose from circumstances, in which a mere man could not possibly have stood ; from an inherent and intrin- sic elevation, depending neither upon the accidents of life, nor the opinions of men ; but I could not have been invented, 9 but upon something extraneous, even to human nature itself. Such a character could not, I say, have been imagined, for the circumstances which produced it were wholly incon- ceivable. The people of Israel, though they expected their Messiah at that time, expected only a mortal, a descendant of David : or if some among them, from those various prophecies, which certainly intimate a higher character, had expected God incarnate *, how was the imagination of man to form such a union for itself? Few persons, I believe, will venture to deny, that if they had imagined such a personage, they would have figured to themselves a very different being from the mild and humble Jesus; born in a low situation of life, though of the predicted royal origin ; living obscurely for the « « The Lord himself shaU suddeal^ come to bis Temple," Mai, iii. 1, b5 greater 10 The Character of Jesus greater part of his time; and, even in the period of his public celebrity, without a regular home, or any ostensible means of daily support. The Jews, more especially, could not have had such a conception ; since it is demonstrable that their ideas ran wholly upon power, and splendor, and conquest ; deliverance from the Roman yoke ; and indeed, no less than universal dominion over other nations. A Messiah, formed by Jewish imaginations, would undoubt- edly have been a mighty general, a con- queror, and a king. One whose arms, if not sufficiently potent by human strength, would have been seconded by miraculous agency. Their ideas would infallibly have recurred to the sword of God and of Gideon, or the irresistible progress of Joshua ; except that they would have ex- tended their heroes victories upon a more magnificent scale, making the whole world their theatre, instead of the con- fined could not have been invented, II fined and inconsiderable territory of Ca- naan. The indications of this disposition may be traced even in the chosen twelve; but most remarkably when, after the re- surrection of Jesus, they presumed to ask him, " Lord, wilt thou, at this time, re- '' store again the kingdom of Israel * ?" But I say, yet more generally, that nei- ther the Jews, nor any other human beings, could possibly have had a conception of such a personage and such a character as Jesus Christ, as he appears throughout the several Gospels ; nor could they have drawn or collected it, except from the reality presented to their observation. The illustration of this important truth, in various points of view, will form the chief subject of these remarks ; which, if they convey to any other minds the con- viction impressed by them upon that of the • Acts i. 6« b6 author. IS The Character of Jesus, tsc. author, cannot fail to be of considerable use. Let me premise some observations on the general character of the Evange- lists, considered as historians. CHAPTER II. ON THE EVANGELISTS AS HISTORIANS. CHAF. iN'the case of historians in general, three or four M^riters, agreeing independently to relate the same facts, are usually admitted to afford undeniable proof of the truth of the history. They mutually support each other; and the credit which might be denied to a single witness, is amply given to their united testimony. It is not, per- haps, sufficiently considered, that the Evangelists stand completely in this situ- ation : and that the majority of the fact related by them are thus attested by three or four witnesses. Perhaps an obscure notion, that they conspired together to form the narratives which they have left. 14 The Evangelists as Historians. left, or that they copied one from the other, may have deprived them of this advantage, which is allowed to all other historians. Yet there is sufficient proof that they wrote at different times, and probably in very distant places : and the frequent coinci- dence of their expressions may be ac- counted for by other means; very dif- ferent from an}' kind of copying, or mu- tual communication*. St. Matthew has been generally supposed to have writ- ten his Gospel in the Hebrew or Syriac language, for the use of the Jewish con- verts in Palestine. Whether in one lan- guage or another, it is almost certain that he wrote particularly for the Jews, and while he lived among them. St. Mark is • The theories which suppose them to have copied from each other, or from some unknown original, have more inconvenience than advantage. They all copied, as will be shown hereafter, from one authentic document, the truth; which was the natural cause of all their resemblances, and all their coincidences. understood The Evangelists as Historians. 15 understood to have written at Rome, for the Roman converts. St. Luke addressing his Gospel to a Greek*, most probably wrote in Greece; either Proper Greece, or among the Asiatic settlements, where some of the most illustrious Churches the^^ were f ; and if not before the Evangelists Matthew and Mark J, at least before their Gospels had reached the places in which he taught. He therefore, not being an Apostle, had collected the facts for him- self, by a long and careful research from the testimony of those who were best in- formed. This he says himself, in his short address to Theophilus ; and he wrote the history, professedly, because less qualified persons were then attempting it, and with much less perfect means. That St. John wrote after all the rest, and partly with a * Theophilus. + St. Jerom says that he wrote it on the borders of Achaia and Boeotia. X As the late ingenious and learned Mr. Dunster endeavoured to prove. view 16 The Evangelists as Historians. view of supplying some things which the others had omitted^ has been generally agreed ; and may indeed be deduced, in some measure, from his Gospel itself. — He probably wrote in x\sia, where his principal abode is known to have been. The Evangelists therefore were by no means persons who conspired together, in one place, to form a history ; but men who in different ways collected their materials, and at different times and places composed their narratives. St. Matthew and St. John were themselves eye-witnesses of all the principal transactions of our Lord's public ministry. They were continually with him, and St. John more particu- larly and confidentially so than any other Apostle ; not excepting St. Peter. St. Mark and St. Luke, familiarly connected .with St. Peter and St. Paul, after our Lord's departure, from them principally, and from other Apostles and holy persons in part, must have learned the facts which The Evangelists as Historians. 17 which they related*. Here then is no pretence for supposing that they could conspire together, had they been so dis- posed, situated as they were, in Jerusa- lem, at Rome, at Greece, and in Asia. They are clearly separate and indepen- dent historians; and their close agree- ment, in the most important circumstances of their narratives, forms a coincidence of collateral testimonies, which cannot be pa- ralleled in any other example. Consider also the peculiar circumstances of their situation, which are all in favour of their veracity. Historians in general give no pledge for the truth of their ac- counts, except their regard for their own character, as honest men ; and the pub- • It has been suggested, with much probabihty, that St, Luke was one of the two disciples with whom our Saviour walked to Emmaus; and Mr. Dunster has well supported this idea in his DtV cursory Considerations, published, 1806. lie 18 The Evangelists as Historians. lie notoriety of the facts which they relate. But the Evangelists were all teachers of holiness ; of a morality, superior to what had ever been professed before ; men who held and declared themselves accountable to God, as well as man ; not only for their adherence to truth, but for the perfect up- rightness of their conduct in all respects. They were also exposed constantly to danger, for teaching and insisting upon the very facts which are related in their Gospels. The circumstances which they record were indeed, for the most part, of public notoriety, in the places where they hap- pened; and it is certain that they were never contradicted by any contemporary witness. Yet, had these writers ven- tured to depart in the least from the truth, Ihey were more exposed to contradiction than any other historians. Of the four Evangelists, two only were Apostles*, The Evangelists as Historians, 19 they were therefore only two persons out of twelve ; and there were at least ten other witnesses * of the very same facts and discourses. Nor were these inert or forgetful witnesses; for they were actu- ally going about, at the very same time, declaring and teaching what they also remembered, under the same pledge of sanctity of character. Had there been then any material disagreement or contra- diction, in the reports of these numerous witnesses, all professing to teach what they knew and remembered, of those most ex- traordinary events, the exposure of their errors must have been certain and in- evitable. So far was this from being the case, even in the smallest degree, that the most per- * lu fact many more. Matthias and all the others who constantly companied with the Apostles, (as St. Peter expresses it in Acts. i. 21) were equally witnesses of the same things. feet ♦ Matthew and John. they 11^ so The Evangelists as Historians. feet agreement appears uniformly to have subsisted^ among all these teachers. The narratives of St. Mark and St, Luke, so far as they proceed from men who were not always eye-witnesses of the events, may be considered as collected from the reports of those who had been present ; from the mouths of those among the twelve Apostles, with whom the writers had chiefly associated ; or from other com- petent witnesses, such as the mother of Jesus, and many more persons who might easily be enumerated. Yet is their agree- ment with the other Evangelists com- plete and satisfactory; and neither do these two contradict the rest, nor do they meet with any contradiction from the ac- tual attendants of the Lord. It is perfectly clear and certain, that the world has never seen another history attested as this is, or approaching to it, in any proportion or degree. For how are histories The Evangelists as Historians. 21 histories in general written ? I mean con- temporary histories, . for such alone can stand in any way of parallel. Some one person takes upon him to note down events as they happen, and to collect in- formation concerning them. Some things he puts down from his own knowledge ; where that fails, he applies to the best sources within his reach, for correct in- formation. Of persons not so employed, that is, who are not collecting materials for an history, or engaged in writing one, some are careless and inattentive spectators or hearers of the facts ; the great majority, indolent and forgetful. When therefore the connected history appears before the public, there are few, besides the historian himself, who can call to mind the whole series of facts. But one circumstance is remembered by one reader, another by some others ; and thus by their detached and broken testimonies, casually compared together, the writer, if accurate, in time obtains the credit due to his veracity and care; Ml 22 The Evangelists as Historians. care ; or if otherwise, is detected and ultimately depreciated. But in the Gospels we have a history of a distinct and separate kind. The events of an extremely short period of time, form here the subject of four distinct narratives ; and they are events of so remarkable a nature, that they could not well escape the recollection of any person who had been present. All these were transacted, generally before twelve witnesses at least, (sometimes many more) all of whom had reasons for being anxiously desirous to keep in memory, not only the circum- stances which happened, but the very words which were spoken. Had any one of this number attempted to give a narra- tive, which had been at all incorrect, all the rest would not only have been ready to contradict him, but in duty bound to do so : or if they had not publicly exposed him, even their own verbal accounts would have furnished abundant contradiction. For The Evangelists as Historians. 23 For none of that number, particularly the Apostles, were accustomed to be silent upon the subject; all were continually re- peating what they remembered of their Lord, to those whom they instructed in the faith. It may be observed then, that even laying aside the idea of inspiration, (which cannot really be laid aside) the Evangelists were placed under circumstances very dif- ferent from those of any other historians. Which of the four wrote first, has been dis- puted, but is not, to our present question, of much importance. The general voice of antiquity gives the precedence to St. Mat- thew : but it seems clear from the preface of St. Luke, that, if any other authentic Gospel had then been produced, it was , at least unknown to him : owing perhaps to the remoteness of his situation at the time. He clearly states that others had merely attempted, what he purposed to do in a more perfect manner. But this he 24: The Evangelists as Historians he would not have said, with reference to either of the Gospels which now stand before his, in the collection *. The ex- act agreement of these four authors in many facts and discourses, is fully ac- counted for, from the studious care of each to retain and set down the very truth itself: while the minute differences, which, may also be observed, prove only that there was no copying of one from the other; and that inspiration itself did not so over-rule the natural powers of the writers, as to make them merely passive instruments, in the hands of a superior agent. The supposition of a common document or previous Gospel, as it must be es- • A most respectable modern author (Mr. D mi- ster) has very strenuously argued for the priority of St. Luke : but perhaps the general tenor of tradition, and the opinion of the times nearest to the Apostles, must be allowed to have more force than any recent arguments. teemed The Evangelists as Historians. 25 teemed, from which all the Evangelists copied, has been supported with all the force and acuteness, that a mind peculi- arly gifted with ingenuity and powers of reasoning could possibly bring to the illus- tration of any subject *. But the utter improbability of a prior document, never named, nor even suspected to exist by the earliest Christians; a document entirely anonymous, yet of such authority as to be respected, and in part transcribed, by all the Evangelists, is too stubborn an obstacle for any ingenuity to soften, or any powers of reasoning to subdue. Let us say then with the late learned and sa- gacious Bishop of London t, that the words and actions of our Lord were the only common document : but that the pe- culiar care taken to remember these with minute accuracy, under circumstances * By Professor Marsh, of Cambridge, (now Bi- shop of LlandafF,) one of the most learned and able divines of the present age, t Dr. Randolph, in his anonymous tract against l>r. Marsh's hypothesis. C perfectly f •*, 26 The Evangelists as Historians, perfectly peculiar, was the principal cause of such coincidences in the Gospels, as are unknown in other narratives. That this cause is fully adequate to produce the ef- fect, I am completely satisfied. With re- spect to the differences also observable in the accounts, on a more minute com- parison of the Evangelists together, I am quite convinced, that they are merely those of men relating the same facts more or less fully. The accounts are never inconsistent with each other, but some words or some circumstances are mentioned by one writer, which another has passed over ; a reason or explanation is given by one, which others have omitted. In short, they are in ge- neral such trifling variations, as even the same person, telling the same things, with the strictest desire to be accurate, would almost inevitably fall into, in repeating his own narrative at different times. Uie Evangelists as Historians. 27 Lord', brought back to their remem- brance all things necessary for them to recollect concerning him, we shall no longer wonder at the precision of their statements; or at their employing fre- quently the same order of narrative, and nearly, though not exactly, the same ex- pressions. Let Bs conclude then, without hesita- tion, that, as there never was such a subject for history as our Lord Jesus Christ, so neither were there ever such historians as the Evangelists ; so studious to tell the exact truth, so watched by col- lateral witnesses, of equal knowledge and accuracy with themselves, and yet so per- fectly unimpeached, in all that they have written or advanced. ' John xvi. 26. If we add to this, what we ought not certainly to omit, the aid of inspiration, which, according to the promise of their Lord, ct CHAP. ]i t , I I L' '• - 'I CHAPTER III. OF THE STYLE OF THE EVANGELISTS. That these four writers have also some characteristic diflferences, by which an attentive reader may distinguish one from another, is very true, and has been properly remarked by critics. These dif- ferences confirm the observation made in the close of the preceding chapter. They prove that inspiration suggested to the writers ideas rather than words ; and left them to express those ideas in such words as their habits, or other circumstances, might lead them to prefer. But much more remarkable are the one or two great characteristics, in which they all agree, and in which they have no rivals. These Of the Style of the Evangelists. 29 These are perfect simplicity, and a total abstinence from all remark or sug- gestion, which might be calculated to in- fluence the mind of the reader. There is all possible evidence, in the tenor of the histories themselves, that every one of the Evangelists dismissed completely all personal considerations, in writing his narrative. Not one of them ever mentions himself, as the writer of his own Gospel. It was not indeed necessary, for their names were known to the faithful from the first, and there has never existed a doubt about them. But this omission is peculiar. It differs from the general practice of other writers, yet is common to all these *. Not only so, but they make no reflections whatever, as from themselves. Excepting the short address of St. Luke to Theophilus, at the opening ♦ Xenophoa and Caesar speak of themselves in the third person. But they dwell, with no small complacency on their own words and actions. c3 of '/ 'i i i I. \ 30 Of the Style of the Evangelists. of his gospel*, and the few concluding words of St. John, at the end of his, the writer hardly once appears in any part of the Gospels. St. John, indeed, seems to intimate that he was himself the disciple whom Jesus loved, and of whom he spake to Peter, at his last interview with them ; but even there he suppresses the name of the disciple ; and it is only by putting circumstances together, that we discover hhn to have been the person. l^ The events related by all the four Evangelists, will be allowed to be suffi- ciently extraordinary. Yet not an excla- mation of surprise or admiration escapes from one of them. The thing which approaches nearest to it is the reflection, related to have been made by the Apostles in general, on the stilling of a storm by the word of Jesus ; " what manner of * He lias prefixed a similar address, to the same persou, to his History of the Acts of the Apostles. '' man Of the Style of the Evangelists. 31 *' man is this, that even the wind and the " sea obey him ' I"— Yet even this is given simply as the remark of those who were present ; consequently not at all the remark of St. Mark and St. Luke, who could not have been there. Is this for- bearance credible, in persons who had any reason whatever for writing, except the simple desire to communicate the truth r Is it any where to be paralleled ? If any where, the similitude must be sought for in the Old Testament ; and by that comparison no advantage can be gained to an objector. Is it possible that, in relating the things which they have recorded in the Gospels, the Evangelists should have thought that they were not telling any thing extraor- dinary ? that they were recording nothing but what every reader would at once receive, without asseveration or expla- * Matth. viii. 27. Mark iv. 41. Luke viii. 25. c4 natory :> i 32 Of the Style of the Evangelists. natory remark ?— They could not think so. But they might, and I doubt not did thinks that their veracity would never be questioned by those who knew their characters ; and as for the facts, extraor- dinary as they are in themselves, they felt that they could not reasonably be deemed incredible^ when it was recollected that the agent who performed them was the Son of God. One such historian, so disinterested, so totally free from personal motives, who should undertake to relate any series of remarkable events, would not easily be found. He would be a prodigy. But here are four ; four who wrote at differ- ent times^ and probably in very distant countries; without comparison of notes, or communication of ideas. Yet do their narratives agree, in a manner that to some readers has given the notion of copying; but which singular and un- paralleled resemblance is fully accounted for Of the Style of the Evangelists. 33 for, by reasons already specified. If, therefore, no separate historians ever so minutely agreed, in any other instance, let it only be remembered, that no other writers ever have been so circumstanced. For copying from each other, they could not have a motive. For as each acknowledged the authority and veracity of the others, when their narratives were known, they could not have been so absurd as to repeat, what had been already rightly told. Had they then written successively, with knowledge of each others writings, it is probable, nay, it is almost certain, that each subsequent author would have set down only, or at least chiefly, what his predecessors had happened to omit. To repeat in substance, but in different words what another had sufficiently told, might have been practised by writers who valued themselves upon their own peculiar style of expression, or their own mode of compilation. But to copy the c 5 very ■J P i • ! ,^ •I I 1 h I n 34 Of the Sti/le of the Evangelists. very words of another, whose account we do not mean to supersede, and to introduce them in the very same manner, is an idle and superfluous task, which no man in his senses would ever undertake *. That the two Evangelists, St. Mark, and St Luke, who were not eye-tVitnesses of the facts, and heard not the discourses of Christ pronounced, relate them nearly in the same words with those who were actually present, appears to me to prove, that the narratives of all the witnesses perfectly agreed. That what one wrote others had told, and each precisely in the same manner. The witnesses had all taken such care to remember, with minute exactness, the principal discourses of their Lord, and the occasions pn which they were • If I follow another writer, and copy the sub- stance of his account in other words, I make it my own, and become responsible, as a second witness ; but if I take his very words, my account is resolv- able into his, and it is still but one testimony. " spoken, :t . jii '■'. Of the Style of the Evangelists. 35 spoken, and were so often called upon to re- peat them, in making and confirming con- verts to the faith, that a precision was ob- tained in relating these particulars, of which, if no other example occurs in the annals of the world, the reason is, because no other relators of facts and discourses were ever so situated. No other men ever had such words and actions to re- late ; such frequent occasion to repeat them ; or so many powerful reasons to relate them with the strictest accuracy, on every possible occasion. From this cause it naturally arose, that they who wrote as original witnesses, and they who wrote from the testimony of such wit- nesses, agreed, not only substantially, but almost verbally. The exact and literal truth, without alteration or embellishment, was equally delivered by them ; as when several perfect mirrors reflect the same object, the images will be the same in form, at the first or second reflection. €6 lam i '■ :* m 36 Of the Style of the Evangelists. I am greatly deceived in my manner of viewing these things, if considera- tions of this kind do not much better account for the peculiar circumstances of the four Gospels, than any theories of common documents, or intenlional tran- scribing from each other. With reg-ard to the style of the Evangelists, in other re- spects, whether perfectly pure Greek, or otherwise, on whicli so much has been written, I do not here concern myself with the question, or enter into it. The cir- cumstance which strikes me, as most remarkable in their language, is its close similarity to the Greek of the Septuagint translation. This adds, most evidently, much value and authority to that work ; which, from this and other circum- stances, appears to have been fully ap- proved by the Apostles of Christ ; and perhaps even by our Lord himself This style seems also to have been peculiarly proper for the use of the Evangelists, as being a form of language already appro- priated to sacred use. It has also the advantage I i* *: Of the Style of the Evangelists. 37 advantage of enabling us by the one to illustrate the other*. By the very diligent researches of many learned men+, it has been shown, that almost all the phrases and expressions in the New Testament, which have been at • Thus KtJpio?, in the Septuagint, being regularly used for nin» Jehovah, the constant application of it to Christ in the N. T. cannot easily be mistaken. See on this subject, the excellent remarks of the il- lustrious scholar, Jo. Aug. Ernesti, in his Opmcula Philologica, p. 336. Others have remarked this, but not with equal force. But, say the Editors of the British Critic, October, 1816. " Kt5p»o? often meant no more than 5tr;" but there are multitudes of passages in the Gospels, where nothing like that meaning can be given to it. As in Luke xix. 31. where Jesus bids the disciples say to the owner of the colt, " the Lord hath need of him," and they repeat it, on which the owner immediately lets it go. It may seem a trivial remark, yet it is surely worthy of notice, that on a colt, whereon never yet man sat, it might not have been safe for a common person to ride ; even if it was an ass's colt, t Raphelius, Krebsius, Palairet, and others. times e l'Ci 1 1' 1 • I 8 i 'I 111 38 Of the Style of the Evangelists. times objected to, as not pure Greek, may be justified by the use of some Greek writer of good times. Still, that there is a colour of Hebrew style in these writings, in common with the Septua- gint translation, must be perceived and felt by every discerning reader ♦. But what the purity of the style, as Greek, can have to do with the sacredness of the matter, is not very conceivable ; unless it be supposed that one object of the inspi- ration, which assisted the Evangelists and Apostles, was to give rhetorical or critical examples, according to the approved rules of the Greek Grammarians. The Evangelists and Apostles wrote a Ian- guage which was familiar to the majority of their converts; particularly to those who read the Old Testament in the Greek Ver- sion ; and this was abundantly sufficient. I shall make therefore, no further re- marks on the style of these sacred writers. * Sec note p. 291. CHAP. f CHAPTER IV. ON THE BEGINNINGS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. Let it be observed first, for it is well worthy of observation, that these four re- markable histories have hardly any thing like prefatory or introductory matter. The very short address of St. Luke to Theophilus, at the beginning of his Gos- pel, is all that can properly be considered as of this nature. This aflfords a striking instance of that unexampled simplicity, with which these histories are written. The opening of St. John's Gospel is in- deed sublime in matter, though simple in manner. It is an assertion of the eternal dignity of the Son of God, of whose ap- pearance t 40 On the Beginnings V i; I I ■ I I r: pearance on earth the author was about to write. But it is not what is usually called prefatory matter. That is, it has no re- ference to the writer, the causes of his undertaking to write, or the plan of his work. It is a grand exordium to the subject, but nothing to the book as a composition, or to the undertaking of the Evangelist, as a man. It tells us, however, clearly this ; that the person, of whom the author wrote, was called by him the Word, which in Greek is Logos. Now it has long ap- peared to me that St. John is not, as is commonly thought, the only Evangelist who thus speaks of the Word, or Logos, as a person *. St. Luke surely personifies • In the opening of the Revelations, it is particu- larly said of St. John, that he bore witness to Ihe Logos. *0? *>«p%'f»}cri ToyA^you r^ 01,5, x«» rnf f^uf^ Ivfiat Ivio-e Xf»?. In our translation — " The *' book of the generations," &c. While I doubted whether 44 On the Beginnings these coincidences may be merely acciden- tal, and I do not prelend that any particu- lar consequence can be drawn from them. I mention them only as curious. St. Mark simply says, '' The beginning of the Gos- *' pel of Jesus Christ *, the Son of God ;*' which, though very dignified, is as far as possible removed from ostentation or flourish. of the Four Gospels, 45 observe, that they both bear witness to the persuasion of the writers, as Jews, that the promised Messiah was to be of the line and family of David ; and consequently that Jesus was beyond all doubt, the person, so very splendidly foreshown by any of the prophets. ■ • d On the genealogies in St. Matthew and St. Luke, I make no particular remark. Their difficulties have been suflSciently discussed, and ably solved. I shall merely whether this remark was worth preserving, I found that a writer, nearly two hundred years ago, had thought it worthy of being put into verse. Genesis et Evangelium St, Matthtsi. Explicat liic Christi Genesin liber, alter Adami. Incipit a Genesi Lex, et Evangelium. Owm Epigr. ad Henr, Princ, Lib. ii. Ep. 76. • Observe, however, that St. Mark does not call him the Son of Man, as in humility he often called himself, but the Son of God. observe. CHAP. CHAPTER V. OF JOHN THE BAPTIST. It is worthy of remark, that three of the Evangehsts, Mark, Luke, and John, be- gin their histories with the account of this personage. The fourth (St. Matthew) takes him up later ♦, and not till the time when he began to baptize. They all agree in representing him as the messenger, fore- told by the prophets, who was to prepare the way of the Lord. This messenger, however, had not been so clearly foretold, as that four Jews, separately writing upon the subject, should all have thought it necessary to introduce him as a leading personage, unless they had been induced to • Namely in chap. iil. d« I Of John the Baptist, 47 cc ie do so by the real importance of his charac- ter. The most distinct prophecy on the subject is that of Malachi. — '' Behold I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me ' :'* from which, by ad- ding another passage of the same prophet, it might be concluded, that this messenger was to appear, *^ in the spirit and power of Elijah/' '' Behold I will send you Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the chil- " dren to their fathers, lest I come to smite '^ the earth with a curse*." The other prophecy, which the Baptist always ap- plied to himself, is less clear, as it makes no mention of a person, but only of a Voice, the Voice of one crying in the wilder- ness, prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway '' for our God ^" €C i< ce cc a f Elias, [i. e. Elijah] to turn the hearts tf the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just * :** which words are, in part, the very ex- pressions of Malachi ; and in part a paraphrase or interpretation of them; * MtL iv. 5. Luke i. 17. explainin S Of John the Baptist. 53 explaining children, by those who are froward or disobedient; and fathers, as those who are wise and just. Thus was the prophecy of Malachi applied by the angel Gabriel. When at length John was born, and Zacharias was permitted and inspired to speak, he also, after dwelling on the dig- nity of that personage whom his son was to announce, adverted to the peculiar office of John himself. " And thou, child, '' shalt be called the prophet of the " Highest, for thou shalt go before the *' face of THE Lord*, to prepare his <' ways. To give knowledge of salva- • Kvpitf, that is, as was before observed, of Jehovah. Let those who doubt of Christ's high dignity observe these passages, in which H* whose ways are prepared by John, (that is Jesus) is called the HIGHEST, and the Lord, while the Jews are stiled his people. Nothing but the clumsy, and absurdly daring way, of denying the authenticity of these passages, can surely elude the force of them. D 3 '' tion 54 Of John the Baptist. I i€ tion unto his people, by the remission " of their sins." Hence Christ is also said by the Evangelist St. John to have '' come to HIS own." Chap. i. 11. Here then is the peculiar office of John, and his identity with the prophetic Elias, declared and made known before his birth, and again immediately after it. We may observe, that all these particulars must have been written by St. Luke, long after the death of John the Baptist, who was murdered by Herod, even before the termination of our Lord's ministry. Pro- bably also, long after the death of Zacha- rias and Elizabeth, his father and mother who were both advanced in years when he was born. The person from whom his intelligence was most likely to be gained was therefore the Virgin Mary; who lived in the house of John the Evangelist, after the passion of Christ. If it be said that, in such case, St John ;i-, Of John the Baptist. 55 John was the most likely person to have recorded these particulars, having most opportunities of learning them from the blessed Virgin, I answer, that, as St. John certainly wrote long after all the rest of the Evangelists, he had probably seen the narrative of St. Luke; and finding it complete and accurate, in these par- ticulars, had no occasion to add to it, nor any disposition to repeat the same things, without necessity. But with the import- ance of the Baptist's character and testi- mony, it is evident that the mind of the Evangelist John was very strongly im- pressed. He begins with it, before he records a single circumstance of the life of Jesus. '' John,'' he says, '' bare wit- " ness of him [the Word] and cried " saying, this is he of whom I spake^ " He that cometh after me is preferred '' before me : for he was * before me" : rj ♦ Certainly not in this world, for he was born some months after, but in his eternal pre-existence. D 4 V. 15. S6 Of John the Baptist r. 15. He adds, ^^ No man hath seen '' God at any time * ; the only begotten '' Son, which is in the bosom of the " Father, he hath declared him." To proceed with what relates to John Ae Baptist. When the time of his preaching begins, the three Evangelists, who wrote separately, and in distant coun- tries, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, all give an account of it, very similar to each other; as to the words of his first invitation to the people, almost the same ; because in fact, they each remembered the very words of his preaching, only repeating them more ©r less at large. St. John who wrote after these three, thought it unnecessary to repeat what they had all told, and is • But God is said, in the Old Testament, to bave appeared to Adam, to Abraham, and others, consequently it was God the Son, ** the only be- •* gotten of the Father," who then declared him, as well as afterwards, and was the God who ap- peared to those patriarchs. 111. therefore Of John the Baptist. 57 therefore silent on this part of the subject. The same observation applies to the Bap- tism of our Saviour in the River Jordan. But on the declarations of the Baptist concerning himself, and his full and ample testimony that Jesus was ''the Son of " God*," — ''the Lamb of God, which " taketh away the sin of the world f/' — on these circumstances, as they had been passed over by the others, he is full and exact. He adds also, that the Baptist de- clared that he knew not Jesus personally, but by divine intimation X I confirmed by that miraculous appearance of the Holy Ghost §, which the other Evangelists had recorded, but to which he merely alludes. Thus, though the Evangelist John doeg not actually relate the Baptism of Jesus, because it had been told by his three pre- decessors, yet the principal circumstance in it, the visible appearance of the Holy n f \i ♦ John i. 34. I Ibid. i. 33. t Ibid. i. 29. 36. § Ibid i. 32. D 5 Ghost, 69 Of John the Baptist. Of John the Baptist. 59 *t it Ghost^ is fully confirmed by his testimony also; for he thus relates the words of the Baptist, ''and he bare record" saying*, '' I saw the Spirit of God descending " from Heaven like a dove, and it abode " upon him: And I knew him not: but *' he that sent me to baptize with water, ** the same said unto roe, Upon whom thou shalt sec the Spirit descending and remaining on him, the same is he " which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. " And 1 saw, and bare record, that this '' is THE Son of God *.'* The Baptist twice says, '' I knew him '' not f/' — that is, I had no previous knowledge of him; but it is plain that when he first approached to receive bap- tism, John had a strong presentiment w,ho he was, by his saying, '' I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me % ?"— and this presentiment, ♦ John i. 32, 33, 34. f Ibid. i. 31. 33. I Matt. ill. 14. or cc i€ or secret suggestion, was fully confirmed by the predicted manifestation of the Holy Ghost. Prom this moment, the Baptist bore direct testimony to the Lord, in those most solemn words, '' Behold the '' Lamb of God, which taketh away the '« sin of the world *. At this period we find the history of the Evangelist St. John remarkably connected with his own personal knowledge of the facts. For he tells us, that on a second day, when the Baptist again bore strong testimony to Jesus, there were two of his (the Baptist's) disciples standing with him; when -looking on Jesus as he '' walked, he said-Behold the Lamb of '^ God t ;*' upon which his two disciples immediately left him, and followed Jesus. This was the consequence of his own in- structions, for he had said, '' I am not the '' Christ, but only the voice to prepare • John i. 29. t ll>i^- >• 20. 23. d6 '^ the (J 60 OfJahn the Baptist ti' " the way before him */' But who were these two disciples, who thus changed their master ? St. John tells us expressly that '' one of the two which heard John " speak and followed Jesus, was Andrew, '' Simon Peter's brother f/' Who the other was he says not, nor mentions any more about him. Whence the conclusion of all attentive readers, in all ages, has been, that it was John the Evangelist himself; — the beloved disciple,— who ne- * It should not be overlooked that St. Paul, speaking to the Jews at Antiocb, confirmed the accounts of tlie Evangelists, as to the preaching and declaration of John respecting Jesus. " Of ** this man's [David's] seed hath God, according " to his promise, raised unto Israel a Saviour, " Jesus ; when John had first preached, before his ** coming, the baptism of repentance to all the " people of Israel. And as John fulfilled his "•* course he said, whom think ye that I am ? I am *• not he. But behold there cometh one after me, ** whose shoes of his feet I am not worthy to " loose." Acts xiii. 23, 24, 25, f John i. 40t ver Of John the Baptist. 61 ver mentions himself by name, though he often writes his own personal testimony. This, as already noticed^ is consonant to the practice of other sacred writers. Thus do we learn an interesting fact in the history of the beloved disciple, that he was one of the very first who joined themselves to the Lord ; and that he had been before a disciple of John the Baptist. That he was so, was of itself a testimony of his good disposition ; since though multitudes flocked to the preaching and baptism of John, it is probable that only the most zealous and best disposed of his hearers became his constant followers, or disciples. That the calling of John hap- pened in this way, is the more certain, because, we do not find it otherwise re- lated, either by himself or by the other Evangelists ; and certainly the calling of so distinguished an Apostle was not likely to be passed in total silence. It is further to be presumed that this conclusion is right. 62 Of John the Baptist, Of John the Baptist, 63 % right, because no other reason can well be conceived why St. John, mentioning ex- pressly that one of the two was Andrew, should have said nothing of the other ; ex- cept this reason of modesty, in not di- rectly naming himself. Another testimony borne by John the Baptist to Jesus, and recorded by the same Evangelist, shows us the manner in which the former instructed his followers. Some of them came and said to him, " Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond '' Jordan, to whom thou barest witness., *' behold the same baptizeth*, and all ^' men come unto him f/* This was a fair opportunity for John completely to explain the ditference between his own mission and that of Christ ; and we find that he did not pass it by. He shows also that he had always made the same dis- * Not literally himself, but by his disciples ; as the Evangelist explains afterwards. Chap. iv. 2. f John iii. 20. tinction. (( t< tinction, for his answer was, '' A man can " receive nothing except it be given him ^' from Heaven *. Ye yourselves bear ^' me witness that I said, / am not the " Christ, but that I am sent before him. '^ He that hath the bride is the bride- '' groom; but the friend of the bride- '^ ffroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly, because of the bridegroom's voice; this myjoy there- " fore is fulfilled. He must increase, " but I must decrease. He that cometh '^ from above is above all. He that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth. He that cometh from Heaven *' is above all'\." ♦ John iii. 27. f Is it possible more clearly to distinguish the superior origin and nature of Jesus ; so superior in the opinion of even John the Baptist, whom Christ himself pronounced the greatest of all prophets? John was of the earth, and Christ was from Hea- ven. Yet say the Unitarians, he was mere man. That is, they know better than either John the Baptist, or John the Evangelist. Is {< &c. X Luke iii. 4. John i. 23. tion. of John the Baptist. 69 tion, and, by implication, the still higher pre-eminence of Christ himself. " Verily " I say unto you, among them that are '* born of women, there hath not risen a *' greater prophet than John the Baptist ; " notwithstanding, he that is least in the ^^ kingdom of Heaven, [or of God] is '' greater than he*." Our Lord marks also the separation between the two cove- nants, showing that John was the last prophet under the Law. " For all the " prophets and the Law prophesied until '' John." He concludes by asserting, what we have seen asserted before, that John was the prophet termed Elias by Malachi. " And if ye will receive it, this *' is Elias which was for to come." A similar testimony our Saviour bore again to his disciples, after the death of John, when they enquired of him concerning the coming of Elias, according to the doctrine of the Scribes, which they taught * Matt. xi« and Luke vii. united. from 70 Of John the Baptist. 1'^ i <( €€ €C from the prophecies. " I say unto you that Elias is come already, and tliey knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they hsted *." *' Then/' adds the Evangelist, '' the disciples under- " stood that he spake unto them of John " the Baptist f." This comprehension, however, must have arisen chiefly from the recollection of things which Jesus had before said on the subject : for these words were hardly sufficient to convey it, with- out further illustration : whence we may fairly conclude, that the character and office of the Baptist were more frequently spoken of by our Saviour, than the Evan- gelists have recorded. * On the whole, such a character, as that of the Baptist was certainly not likely to be invented by any set of historians ; and still less likely to have been assumed by any individual, for the purposes of fraud. |M * Matti xvii. 11. f Ibid, xvii, 3. A life Of John the Baptist. 71 A life of hardship in the desert, with a commission to announce the glory of ano- ther, not his own; these were objects not very inviting to the ambition of a man beginning his career; and though he was, for a short time, much honoured as a prophet, he plainly foresaw that he was soon to *' decrease ;'* and his course was accordingly arrested by imprisonment, and terminated by a violent death. It is quite clear, from this representation, that John the Baptist actually lived for no other purpose but to call men to repentance, and to prepare them for the appearance of the Lord. That four writers should have agreed separately, or should have con- spired together, to invent such a per- sonage, if he had not really existed, is one of the most palpable impossibilities that can be imagined. 1 CHAP. CHAPTER VI. BIRTH AND INFANCY OF CHRIST. The miraculous circumstances preceding the birth of Christ are told exclusively by St. Matthew and St. Luke : those more remote by St. Luke, and those more im- mediate by St. Matthew. Both, how- ever, agree that his mother was a virgin * ; and both, that he was named Jesus before his birth, by angels ; St. Luke relating it at the time of the vision seen by Mary f ; and St. Matthew, in the later vision, vouchsafed to Joseph, to remove his doubts respecting his espoused wife J. Certain nominal Christians, who reject • Luke i. 26. Matt. i. 18. 23. t Luke i. 31. \ Matt. i. 2L the Birth and Infancy of Christ. 73 the most fundamental doctrine of Christi- anity, the divine nature of the Redeemer, have endeavoured to throw the whole of these narratives into doubt or discredit, by denying the authenticity of the chief part of the first two chapters of St. Matthew and St. Luke *. But their arguments are so futile and inconsistent, and have been so completely answered by various oppo^ nents f, that I sliall here take leave to ne- glect them. To a person, who has no inte- rest in making captious objections, it is suf- ficient proof of the authenticity of these chapters, that they are extant in all copies at present known, in all the most ancieut versions, and are quoted and alluded to, as genuine, by Christian writers of almost every age. In correcting profane authors ♦ The persons alluded to are the editors of what they presume to style au Improved Version of the New Testament ; but calculated, iu fact, to under- tome the faith of Christians. f Dr. Laurence, Dr.Nares, and Mr.Rennell; al- 60 the Editors of the Quarterly Review, and others. E some It ' 74 Birth and Infancy of Christ some little latitude is allowed to ingenious conjecture, but, in the Sacred Writings, to alter a single word, without positive au- thority from manuscripts, is justly deemed unwarrantable. What then are we to think of the audacity which expunges whole chapters, on the surmised authority of some obscure heretics, endeavourins: at the same time to elevate them into true Christians? It has been the practice of heretics, from the very eariiest times, to endeavour to reject those books which contradicted their peculiar fancies ; and the practice, we see, is not yet relinquished. The general testimony of the Church, however, has most powerfully overborne these partial and disgraceful attempts, and I hope will always have sufficient weight to produce the same effect. This then we may fairiy disregard, as a desperate effort made in a desperate cause *. St. ♦ The desperateness of the cause is strongly proved by the extravagance of the supposition. That £irth and Infancy of Christ. 75 St. Matthew and St. Luke alone give any account of the birth of our Saviour, and of the circumstaaces preceding and following it. That all the historians of our Lord have been silent upon this subject, which would be the case if these chapters were expunged, is utterly incredible. The birth of an illustrious man, though nothing- very remarkable attend it, is not usually passed over by his biographfers. St. Luke is much more copious in this part of his narrative, but the manner of the agree- ment between him and St. Matthew, is more remarkable than the difference. St. That any persons should have had the power, the opportunity, the audacity, or the impiety, to add or take out a single verse or sentence, in a work so closely watched, so justly revered, and so sacred in itself, as the New Testament, has with reason been thought extraordinary, and hardly credible. But that, at any period since the publication of the Gos- pels, whole chapters could have been foisted in, had even the impious wish been formed, nothing but the most bigotted credulity of unbelief , (if I may be allowed the expression), could possibly admit, E 2 Matthew :>l ! if i 76 Birth and Infancy of Christ. ! Matthew, in very few words, touches all the most important topics which St. Luke more diffusely relates. That the mother of Jesus was an espoused virgin, but not yet united to the man to whom she was betrothed. Both agree that her concep- tion was a miracle, produced by the crea- tive influence of the Holy Ghost. St. Luke relates the angelic salutation to Mary, which gave the first expectation of the wonderful event ; St. Matthew the divine vision vouchsafed to Joseph, which 'emoved his doubts and apprehensions. But the latter alone applies the celebrated prophecy of Isaiah, *' Behold a Virgin " shall conceive, and bear a Son \" li ' This application demands particular notice, being a remarkable and undoubted instance of double sense in a prophecy; in the first sense, it applied to a child to be born in the time of Isaiah, and to be a sign to Ahaz of his deliverance from two ■ Isaiah vii. 14. invading Birth and Infancy of Christ. 77 invading kings. In the latter, it referred to the Messiah. In the former birth there was nothing miraculous. The child was to be born of .one who was a virgin when the prophecy was given, but not so after- wards. In the second, the mother was to be still a virgin when the child was born. The first application is marked by the limited time fixed by the prophet for the deliverance of the land. '' Before the " child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land shall be for- saken of both her [rather the] kings \" The second application is marked, beyond all possibility of mistake, by the name /m- manuely which was never given to the first child, and which means, as St. Mat- thew interprets it, '' God with us/' The nature of double senses in genuine prophecy, how naturally they arise out of prophetic types, and how impossible it is for either to be imitated by false prophets, ' Isaiah vii. 15. E 3 I have ({ <( K \> ■ 'I I ^ Birth and Infamy of Christ. I have fully explained in the 3d and 4th sermons of my Warburtonian Lectures, to which I venture to refer the reader of this tract, for further satisfaction, on those important points. The doctrine of double senses has certainly had some strong op- ponents, but their reasons will hardly be convincing, to those who set a due va- lue upon the authority and practice of the Evangelist St. Matthew. That the birth of Jesus was miracu- lous, is then sufficiently proved by the con- curring testimony of St. Matthew and St. Luke; and confirmed by the universal agreement of the Church, in all ages and countries,^ to call his mother, the blessed Virgin. That she always continued a virgin, has been also a very prevalent per- suasion among Christians from the earliest times*; and if so, the persons called • It is even made an Article of Faith in the Homish Church. brethren Birth and Infancy of ChrisL 79 brethren and sisters of Jesus, in the Gospels, must have been children of Joseph by a former marriage, or other very near relations. But this appears to be of less importance. That Jesus was clearly de- scended from David, according to the prophecies, is sufficiently attested by these Evangelists. — Our Saviour also himself once intimated that David pro- phesied of him when he called him Lord ; and the Jewish doctors understood him then to speak of the Messiah, the Son of David, which Jesus did not contradict*. This testimony, both to his own dignity, and to his relationship to David, was thought important by three of the Evan- gelists, who have related it almost in the «ame words. It is not a little remarkable how very few events, relating to the infancy of ' Matt. xxii. 24. Mark xii. 36. Luke xx. 42. E 4 Jesus, < f • . 80 Birth and Infancy of Christ, Jesus, the Evangelists have thought it ne- cessary to record. St. Mark and St. John pass over the subject entirely, and begin with his public ministry; St. Matthew and St. Luke supply a few circumstances, in themselves sufficiently remarkable, but among them all, only one that can be considered as a personal action of Jesus ; and that is, his conversing with the doc- tors in the Temple, at the age of twelve * years. The fact, beyond all doubt, was, that, in his earlier years, he performed no mi- racles ; nor exhibited any thing likely to distinguish him, except that habitual course of good conduct to all, which made him, ' as he increased in wisdom and stature, *^ to increase also in favour with God and *' man f ." But '' he increased in wisdom J* • Luke, only, ii. 40 — 52. i Luke, supr^. How Sirth and Infancy of Christ. 81 How was that, if he was from the first a divine person ? How it was we shall never know, till it be revealed to us, perhaps, iu another woiid. But the fact seems un- doubted, that as an infant he was like other infants ; as a child, like other children, evil propensities excepted; nor could he have been truly said to have been made man, or to have partaken the general properties of human nature, had it been otherwise. He performed no miracle till after his baptism in Jordan, with which his public ministry commenced ; and that which he performed at the marriage in Cana is expressly called, by St. John ', ** the beginning of miracles *. ' John ii. 11. * His fast of forty days in the wilderness, which seems to have preceded this, was certainly miracu- lous ; but it was not an act of his own. It was a suffering, which he was divinely empowered to bear, as mere human prophets had been iu other instances. Moses fasted forty-days. Exodus xxiv. 18, and again Deut. ix. 18. Daniel twenty-one days, x. 2, 3. E 5 AU 82 JBirth and Infancy of Christ. All this, I say, is perfectly consistent, when we consider it in the proper light ; but it is what no one could have conceived before-hand, and consequently what no human being would ever have invented. The inventions of men are consonant to the general ideas of men ; and a person- age so extraordinary as the expected Messiah, had he been described according to human imaginations, would infallibly have had an infancy and youth as extraor- dinary as his manhood afterwards proved ; or at least such as should clearly have an- nounced what his manhood was to be. So predominant was this feeling, that, even after the truth had been published to tlie world, some Christians, (not ill mean- ing, perhaps) could not be at rest, till they had invented histories of Christ's infancy, and of his early youth. Two or three Apocryphal Gospels are still extant, and many more once existed, pretending to supply, what the authors doubtless con- sidered Birth and Infancy of Christ. 83 sidered as a defect in the genuine Gospels. Of these fictitious books, one called the 'f Pre-Gospel" [wowljuayAA/ov] is pretended, in the book itself, to be written by St. James, the brother of Christ, and first Bishop of Jerusalem. Another, ''the '• Gospel of Infancy," is attributed to St. Thomas*. Both these abound with such absurd, nonsensical^ and almost blas- phemous fictions, as show most strikingly the difference between the modesty of truth, and the wildness of human imagi- nations. These clumsy forgers have not even attended to what the genuine Gos- pels told them, nor have in the least caught the spirit of those divine histories. They represent our Lord not only as per- ♦ These, and other spurious works, and fragments of the same kind, have been collected and published, in Greek and Latin, so far as they can be recovered, by that most learned and laborious man Jo, Albert Fabricius ; under the title of " Codex Apocryphus Novi Testamenti," a useful work for scholars, but neither capable nor worthy of translation. E 6 forming > !l 84 Birth and Infancy of Christ. forming miracles in his infancy and child- hood, but such miracles as he never per- formed in his actual ministry ; miracles for punishment and revenge of offences- These legends would indeed be wholly unworthy of notice, but that, by the con- trast, they curiously illustrate the truth of the authentic Gospels ; and show of what nature fiction would have been, had it had any admission into the history of Jesus. If the forgers who had the Evangelists before them could not learn to do better, what would have been the inventions of illiterate Jews, without any such models to follow ? The things which St. Matthew and St Luke have related, concerning this pe- riod of our Saviour's life, are few, but very important. His miraculous concep- tion and birth, with the circumstances at- tending each*; his nativity at Bethle- hem*, and the reasons for it; the ado- ' Luke iu * Matt. ii. 13. 23. ration Birth and Infancy of Christ. 83 mtion of the shepherds and the Magi ; the apprehensions of Herod respecting a child said to be born King of the Jews; the flight into Egypt ; the rage of Herod at being baffled ; and the consequent murder of the male children* at Bethlehem. The return of Joseph and his family after the death of Herod, and their establishment at Nazareth. The circumstances told by St. Luke alone ', illustrative of the extraordinary wisdom which appeared in the child Jesus, at the age of twelve, are in many re- spects remarkable, but in none extrava- * The masculine article added to the Greek word signifying children, [tovj Trat^a?] shows plainly that the male infants only were slain. Why indeed should he have put tiie females to death ? They could not be kings of Israel. This however ought to be marked in translations. Learned men have pointed out that this extraordinary cruelty of Herod is noticed by a heathen author, MacroMus, I Luke ii. 40—52. gant. -H 86 Birth and Infancy of Christ. gant. There is no miracle performed, no premature declaration of his yet concealed dignity. But the love of his parents to him, their great anxiety for his safety, his general submission to them, and the en- tire singularity of the instance, in which he even seemed to have done any thing that could give them concern, are all most strongly intimated in the narrative. The gentle reproof of Mary, " yf\\y hast thou " dealt thus with us ? Thy father and I " have sought thee sorrowing,'' implies every thing most amiable both in parents and child. While the ambiguous answer of Jesus*, without having any thing pe- tulant in it, intimates a consciousness of his divine origin ; and must have left an excellent subject for meditation in the • The words, in the Greek, may signify equally, •' knew ye not that I must be in my Father a " House*' meaning the Terajile, or ** about my " Father's Imsiness.** Our English translators have preferred tlie latter, some others the former ; but the choice seems not very material. minds , ...f, Birth and Infancy of Christ 87 minds of his parents, one of whom, at least, applied them to that use ; for so the Evangelist has said. After this, we have no notice of the personal actions or dis- courses of Jesus, till the commencement of his public ministry. H €HAP, 11' '' r 'I.' CHAPTER VII. PUBLIC MINISTRY OF CHRIST. We are now to fix our eyes upon the Saviour, in the exercise of his ministerial office ; and in what we may call his proha- tionary state upon earth. Let not any reader be alarmed at the latter expression. The mysterious union of the divine nature with the human, it would be presump- tuous to attempt to explain, or even to hope to comprehend ; because the Scrip- tures have no where explained it. But that, notwithstanding this incomprehen- sible union, the human nature of Jesus underwent probation or trial, is beyond all possibility of doubt. Nor was the Man Christ Jesus fully glorified, till this trial Cf John i. ^fh * Ib'd. 43, &c. boats, The Calling of the Apostles, 111 boats, and working a miracle to confirm them in their resolution to abandon their occupation'. The miracle, which is that of the miraculous draught of fishes, is re- lated exclusively by St. Luke*; but the other circumstances are common to the three Evangelists. We may observe, however, that when Jesus went into Simon's ship, he went as to a person al- ready known to him, and without par- ticular introduction. Of the three Apos- tles, here mentioned, Simon, James, and John, the first had been made known to Jesus before. Andrew also, Peter's bro- ther, was probably joined with James and John, who are said to have been partners with him, as fishermen '. From this time, we may presume, they entirely left their secular calling, and were constantly in at- tendance upon their Lord and Master. The calling of Matthew, or Levi, the « Matt. iv. 18. Mark i. 16. Luke v. 1. » Luke V. 3—10. ^ Luke v. 10. publican, H I !l 'vfl S t u i liil 1 12 The Calling of the Apostles. publican^ happened not long after, and is told by himself, as well as others'. Of the calling of the other disciples, be- sides these seven, (Simon, Andrew, Philip, Nathanael, James, John, and Matthew,) we have no particular ac- count; but they are all soon after enu- merated together, with the addition of Thomas^, James, the son of Alpheus, Lebbeus, surnamed Thaddeus*, Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot. In which lists this is remarkable, that Philip is constantly joined with Bartholomew, which confirms the conjecture that the latter was the very Nathanael whom Philip invited to Christ; and either the brother, or the particular friend of Philip. As some other Apostles are also mentioned ' Matt. ix. 9. Mark ii. 14. Luke v. 27. • Matt. X. 2. Mark iii. 10, Luke vi. 14. * Called also Judas or Jude, the brother of the James last mentioned. See Acts i« 13. under The Calling of the Apostles. 1 IS under two names, this conjecture acquires the more probability. Here let us briefly ask ourselves a ques- tion, which has indeed been frequently asked, but should not at this time be wholly past by. Would any human teacher so have chosen his principal sup- porters and attendants ? Jesus must al- ready have attracted the notice of some considerable persons. Those who were present at the marriage feast in Cana, were probably not of any inferior class. Such do not usually, in any country, either give nuptial feasts, or receive invitations to them. The nobleman of Capernaum, Miiu ucuevea mm on his word, and re- ceived the life of his son as a reward for his faith'; and even Nicodemus, though ** a master of Israel */' and afraid of being put out of his situation, might probably have been won over to an open declara- tion of their faith^ had Jesus condescended ' John iv. 50. * Ibid. iii. 10. to 114 The Calling of the Apostles. to work a miracle for that purpose. These, and such as these, were the in- struments that any mere man would have sought to employ ; and they were just the persons whom Jesus would not choose. He wanted no aid either from human wis- dom or human power. They would even have been suspicious instruments. Plain integrity, and honest simplicity were the qualifications which he sought; and he found them more easily in the fishing ves- sels of the sea of Galilee, than in the ban- quetting rooms or splendid houses on the shore. One alone, out of fhe twelve, proved unworthy ot riis choice, ana ht; wtto lo u^k a tremendous part, well suited to his de- praved character. That he was at last a consummate hypocrite appears from his speech about the precious ointment * : and • "Why was not this ointment sold for three " hundred pence and given to the poor I This he " said," The Calling of the Apostles. 1 15 and depraved he must have been, in the highest degree of mental corruption, who could follow such a master for sinister mo- lives, see such miracles without being overawed, and hear such discourses with- out being touched at the heart 1 His hy- pocrisy doubtless deceived others, for the time, Jesus it could not possibly de- ceive. [John vi. 64.] But he chose him, because for an evil work an evil instru- ment must be found : and he thought fit to show how wickedness and hypocrisy can work out their own destruction, even with all the means of salvation withii^ their reach ! That Jesus was not deceived " said," adds St. John, " not that he cared for the *< poor, but because he was a thief, and had the « ba- and bare what was put therein." John xii b.Q. St. John probably knew not this at the time, but afterwards, when the character of the traitor had been developed. Avarice seems to have been his besetting sin, for in the last instance he sold his master. It is no great encomium of money, that the care of the bag was entrusted to such a personage. 1 U ■ I if ' ' i i 116 Hie Calling of the Apostles. in him, is plain from his saying, at an early period, '* Have not I chosen you " twelve ', and one of you is a devil * ?*' Dishonesty, avarice, hypocrisy, ingrati- tude, treachery, these qualities at least he had, and they are sufficient to make up a character in no small degree diabolical. Of the reform of such a heart, there could be little hope, and the perdition of Judag Iscariot, could hardly be aggravated by the final consummation of his villainy. Yet granting to our Lord, either by na- tural or supernatural means, the power of detecting the real character of Judas, as we find he did, would he have continued such a man among his followers, had he not had very different views from those of men in general ? namely, the view of ful- filling the prophecies, even by the sacri- fice of his own life. It is most probable however, that Judas was not a depraved * John vi. 70. • The Evangelist, probably, in this case as in the other, knew not the whole truth, till afterwards. character The Calling of the Apostles. 1 17 character at the time of his calhng, but p-radually became so, by giving up his mind to worldly, instead of heavenly views, founded on the power of his master ; and through impatience that those views had not been more quickly gratified. Of all the Apostles, Levi, or Matthew, was, as far as we know, the only one who was called from a thriving worldly situa- tion ; though, at the same time, one which was considered as infamous in the eyes of his countrymen. It was that of a publican or receiver of taxes for the Romans ; and his wealth may be presumed from the great feast which he gave at his own house S to publicans and others, when he was about to quit their fraternity *. Neither his wealth nor his occupation appears to have corrupted his heart. His modesty and hu- mility were exemplary ; since, in relating the fact of his calling, he speaks of himself in the third person, merely as " a man V ■ I * Luke V. 29. » Matt. ix. 10. " named I ,1 1 18 The Calling of the Apostles. " named Matthew ';* and says nothing of his relinquishing- any lucrative office for Christ's sake ; it is St. Luke onlv who tells us that '' he left all ;" and as to the great feast which he gave, Matthew says merely of it, that they were sitting at meat in his house. Few, who have written of their own actions, have ever been so reserved. But of all the twelve, no one appears io be more worthy of notice and admiration than John, the beloved of his Lord, which is surely the highest encomium ; the most explicit asserter of his divinity ; the sup- plier of discourses and events omitted by the three other Evangelists ; the writer not only of a Gospel, but of three Epistles, in which his amiable spirit shines forth with increased lustre; reserved, according to the explicit promise of his Blessed Master, tb witness his coming again in judgment upon the Jewish nation; and surviving even that, to close the canon of the Holy * Matt. ix. 9. The Calling of the Apostles, 119 Scriptures by a prophetic book, connecting them with the end of the world, and even with the day of Judgment, and a period far beyond that day. To John, therefore, the first called, probably *, and the latest preserved of the Apostles, distinguished in so many ways, I cannot but look with love and reverence, as the chief of the whole number; though Peter, from the interest of a sect, has been exalted to a pre-eminence not intended to be given by our Lord to any Apostle. He even expli- citly refused to name a chief among them, and silenced their disputes on that subject by a powerful lesson of humility. The sons of Zebedee, James and John, were certainly distinguished among the attendants of- the Lord ; and it was pro- bably a perception of the favour shown to these sons of thunder/, (as Christ himself had named them) which led their • See above, p. 110, ■ Mark iii. 17. ill \ \ m 1 Scrip' mother I M 120 The Calling of the ^ipostles. mother into the presumption of requesting that they might sit on the right hand and on the left of their Lord in his kingdom. Notwithstanding this, they continued in favour, and James was afterwards dis- tinguished by being one of the three permitted to behold the transfiguration of their Lord. When St. Paul was miraculously called to the place and dignity of an Apostle^ and particularly commissioned as the Apostle of the Gen- tiles, he said of himself, that he pre- sumed he " was in no respect behind " the chiefest of the Apostles;*' and when we recollect that he withstood Peter to his face, and even pronounced him to be wrong * we cannot have much respect for that pre-eminence of Peter, which is attributed to him by those, who would found their own authority upon it. It should be observed, that there were • " I withstood him, because he was to be •* blamed." Galat. ii. 11. many The Calling of the Apostles. 121 many persons called disciples, who w^ere not Apostles, and that some of these were nearly, if not quite, as constant in their at- tendance upon the Lord, as the Apostles themselves. Out of this number, it was particularly proposed by St. Peter that the two should be chosen, who were to be candidates for supplying the place of Judas Iscariot, after the fatal termina- tion of his wicked career. The number of these, including the eleven, amounted at that time to about an hundred and twenty ', whom the Apostle describes as men " who " had companied with them, all the time " that the Lord Jesus was with them *, be- ginning from the baptism of John, unto the day when he was taken up into hea- '' ven from them." These were men par- ticularly tried ; for there were times, when offended at some of his discourses '' many '' of his disciples went back, and walked " no more with him ^ :" The seventy ■ Acts L 15. » Ibid. 21, 22. ^ John vi. 66. Q disciples cc cc i 123 The Calling of the Apostles. disciples, whom our Lord sent out two by two, to the cities which he intended to visit, were probably also of this faithful number, since our Lord told them that *' their names were written in heaven '." Out of these approved disciples, when the election of a new Apostle was to take place, the eleven selected two, Joseph called Barsabas, and also surnamed Justus, and Matthias ; when, by a divine direction of the lot, the latter was finally chosen *. It is most probable, that both had been of the number of the seventy ; and that both were highly qualified for the office, since the Apostles would not pretend to decide be- tween them^ without divine assistance. Thus was the appointed number of twelve again filled up ; which would have re- mained for ever unaltered, no human power presuming to interfere in what Christ had appointed, had not Jesus him- The Calling of the Apostles, 125 self personally appointed and qualified Paul to be a thirteenth Apostle, namely, the Apostle of the Gentiles, To him Christ appeared in person, on his journey to Damascus, and on other occasions ; to him he condescended to speak ; and, by divine visions, informed him fully of all those facts, which the other Apostles knew by the evidence of their senses, and the tes- timony of their divinely assisted memory. Much evidence of divine power appears in all these transactions, but they form a part of the subject with which we are not at present concerned. I return to the contemplation of our Lord's own ministry. m N ' Luke X. 20* * Acts i. 20. self G 3 CHAP. IIP ■A CHAPTER X. MIRACLES OF OUR LORD. Whoever takes a collective view of all the miracles of our Lord, recorded in the Gospels, will see abundant evidence that human invention had no part what- ever in making out the list. None of them dictated by vanity, or the love of glory, none suggested by any human passions or local prejudices. All, or nearly all, directed by the purest benevolence, to remove or alleviate the sufferings of the miserable. I say boldly, and without fear of receiving any rational contradiction, that the mi- racles of our Lord are such as no human creature, writing an imaginary history, would ever have invented or feigned. The miracles themselves, if they were supposed Miracles of our Lord. 125 supposed by the spectators to happen, must have been real; for they are of such a nature that no possible delusion could have been practised in them : sud- den and public cures of all the most inve- terate disorders, defects, and maladies, mental and bodily ; and sometimes, even restoration of life. But supposing that there could be a doubt, which there can- not, that our Lord performed such works, I say that no human writer that ever lived would have invented them. For proof of this, look at all the miracles which have ever owed their supposed exist- ence to human invention. Examine the false Gospels, or the extravagant legends of the Romish saints; read the fables of St. Fran- cis of Assise, or of Ignatius Loyola, and say what you there find. Are they not, for the most part, childish inventions, desti- tute, not only of probability but of dignity ? Some are intended, manifestly, to support a particular opinion, or the interests of particular men ; yet in themselves are to- . ^ ^ G 3 tally m I 186 Miracles of our L(ffd. tally incredible. Others, better testified, are such as might easily have been con- trived by art or collusion ♦. Yet all these were obtruded upon the world, long after the genuine miracles of the Gospels had been published. These miracle-mongers therefore had not even the good sense, or good taste, (if we may so speak) to see what real miracles ought to be ; to catch even a shadow of the dignity and propriety of our Lord's miraculous actions. If then human inventors bungled thus, with not only the Gospels, but the history of the Apostles before them as examples, what would they have done if the subject had come under their hands new and un- touched. Doubtless their attempts would have been even more miserable, if more could be, than these are seen to be. What men ever lived, before the Evan- ♦ See the Criterion, by the late Bp. Douglas : a most entertaining, as well as acute and excellent work; republished io 1807, by his son the Rev. W. Douglas, Prebendary of Westminster, &c. gelists, Miracles of our Lord. 127 gelists, into whose minds it would have entered, that the proper dignity'of such a superior being, as the Son of God, should consist in mildness, benevolence, and mercy ; in working miracles of mercy only ; in pardoning insults, and forbearing to hurt his enemies ? Certain it is, beyond all doubt, that his Apostles and Evangelists would not have had such ideas, had they not been so instructed by the conduct of their Master. Nor did they learn this holy lesson with ease; since two of the most favoured among them, the brothers James and John, the latter afterwards an Evangelist, were the very persons who exhorted Jesus to permit them to work a miracle of vengeance, by calling down fire from heaven, to destroy a village of the Samaritans, which had refused to re- ceive them. They even justified their wish by the example of a prophet *, which must have given them full confidence in ♦ Elias, i. e. Elijah. Q 4 the -1 ■ ffV ir 128 Miracles of our Lord the propriety of it. Memorable, indeed^ was the iinswer and rebuke of their Lord, and such as fully showed how little they had entered as yet into the nature of his cha- racter, or the design of his miracles. " Yc *'*know not/* said he, "what manner of spirit yc are of. For the Son of Man is not come to destroy men's lives, but " to save them'.'* Such a character had, indeed, been fore- told of the true Messiah. '* Behold my *' servant whom I uphold, mine elect in whom my soul delighteth : I have put my spirit upon him. — He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be '' heard in the street. A bruised reed '* shall he not break, and the smoking " flax shall he not quench */' But who had noticed this sacred character? Cer-* tainly not the Apostles, at that period : not even the most favoured among them. t€ it tt * Luke ix. 55, 56. Is. xlii. 2, 3. Miracles of our Lord. 129 St. Matthew indeed refers to it afterwards, as characterizing his Lord ' ; but that was when he had become an Evangelist ; when he had seen that Divine Instructor's meek- ness to the end, under trials the most se- vere ; and when he had himself received the illumination of that same Spirit, which in Jesus abounded beyond measure. Mild- ness and benevolence would never have entered spontaneously into the idea of a superior character, in the mind of any hu- man creature. Dignity was always sup- posed to be mixed with more or less of haughtiness ; superior virtue with unre- lenting severity : and so, I hesitate not to assert, they would infallibly have been re- presented, by any man, living in any country, at the period of our Saviour's death ; if he had drawn the picture from his own fancy, or from his preconceived no- tions of fitness and propriety. Yet we have here not only one writer. St. « Matt. xii. 18. G 5 but 130 Miracles of our Lord. but four, of a nation not particularly dig- posed to mildness and forbearance, who all unite in giving to their Lord a cha- racter of unalterable gentleness, forbear- ance, and benevolence; and to his mi- racles the same stamp and spirit *. The miracles of our Lord, if we consi- der only those which are recorded at large, are about forty in number ; if we were to estimate the several instances in which we are told that he healed multitudes, who flocked to him with various diseases, they would be beyond number; especially since St. John tells us, that many more were per- formed than are in any way recorded. Yet nearly all these were miracles of mercy. They were calculated, not only to relieve the present sufferings of those who labour- ♦ The first miracre of severity was that which punished Ananias for his fraud. Acts v. 5. Not one of that kind was wrought by Christ himself. They were afterwards very rare. Works, nol of choice, but necessity. eel Miracles of our Lord. 131 cd under disease, but for the still more merciful purpose of preparing their minds to receive, in due time, the seeds of the Gospel. However they might have been puzzled and confounded by the latter cir- cumstances of our Saviour's life, it can hardly be thought possible that the per- sons who had found themselves instantly relieved by his divine word, from painful and dangerous complaints, or from such disabilities as want of sight, hearing, or speech, should fail to recollect those mer- cies, when they heard his Gospel preached, his resurrection asserted, his ascent into heaven testified ; and saw new miracles daily performed by his disciples, through the efficacy of his mighty name. Of such persons, it is highly probable, was prin- cipally formed that primitive Church in Jerusalem, over which St. James presided as Bishop : persons who remembered with compunction the benefits they had re- ceived from the Saviour's goodness, and accused themselves with bitterness, and G 6 certainly r (I 133 Miracles of our Lord. certainly with justice, for having ever doubted of his power. Of the very numerous miracles, per- formed by our blessed Lord, there is but one that carries with it the smallest sem- blance of severity ; and the subject of that was an inanimate being, a tree*. When the barren fig-tree withered at his word, there was given at once an implied lesson ag-ainst unproductive uselessness; and probably an intimation, necessary to his disciples at the moment, of the power to perform acts of severity, which he could exert, were he so disposed. The life of a barren fig-tree could not surely stand in competition with such objects *. " Matt. xxi. 18, &c. Mark xi. 12, &c. * Some futile difficulties have been raised about its being said to be uot yet the time of (igs. His command might easily have anticipated the time. Lad he not chosen rather to give a h sson to his Apostles, than to work a miracle for his own relief, which was a step very contrary to bis practice. It m Miracles of our Lord, 133 It is not perfectly clear whether there was any exertion of miraculous power in the two instances, when he drove the traders out of the Temple. The one, which took place at his first passover, is recorded by St. John alone ' ; the other, after the third passover, is related by the three other Evan^^-elists. It seems probable that the persons collected in the Temple, must, in both instances, have been at least mira- culously overawed. We cannot other- wise suppose, that so many persons, as seem to have been there collected, would have «'iven way to the authority of a sin- gle man, unarmed, or suffered him to overturn their tables and their scats, and to drive them out *. Whether these acts were miraculous or not, there was more of severity in them, and in the words by ' i u * John ii. 13, &c. • St. John says that he made a scourge of small cords, to drive them out ; ii. 15. but this was not in itself a weapon of any terror. which 134 Miracles of our Lord. which they were accompanied, than in ge- neral belonged to the character of Jesus. But it was in vindication of the honour of God's house, that he so exerted himself: and it reminded his disciples, even in the first instance, of the prophetic text, '* the " zeal of thine house hath eaten me up '/' l"^! But what is most to the purpose of the present discussion is to appeal to the feel- ing's of every reader, whether this mode of exerting his authority was such as would have been invented by any writer, endea- vouring to describe such a personage as Jesus Christ. Most certainly not. Every human imagination would have armed him with more terror, and much more severity. Something in the way of punishment would have been inflicted on the offendino- traders, worse than the overthrow of their tables, or a few casual strokes from a lash of small cords. This would have been ' John ii. 17. consistent ii* Miracles of our Lord 135 consistent with the ideas of men ; but the narrative of the Evangelists is consistent only with that real character of Jesus, which no human imagination could ever have conceived '. The permission given to the devils, to enter into the herd of swine, operated col- laterally as a punishment to the possessors of those forbidden animals : but it sliowed yet more strongly his irresistible power over spiritual beings ; even to the extent of making their requests completely de- feat their own purposes. The devils must certainly have hoped to remain in the swine; and they were driven out again immediately, by the sudden destruction of those animals ** A few, t J n « Matt. viii. Mark v. Luke viii. • We have here one of those few instances in which the Evangelists do not completely agree in the circumstances of their narrative. St. Matthew mentions 136 Miracles of our Lord. A few, and indeed a very few, of our Lord*8 miracles seem principally intended to give a just idea of his power. Of this kind we may, in part, esteem his first miracle atCana in Galilee \ the conversion of the water into wine. It showed, indeed, at the same time, that lie was not un- willing; to promote the indulgence of an in- nocent hilarity ; and that he approved of rejoicing at a marriage, as proceeding- from a reasonable cause of joy. It showed at once that he was averse to all that morose severity, which human pretenders to superior sanctity have generally as- mentions two persons possessed, St. Mark and St. Luke only one. The existence of two, however, includes the one ; and one might be rather more re- markable than the other. So also in his teutJi chap. V. 30, St. Matthew speaks of two blind men, where St. Mark (chap, x.) and St. Luke (chap, xviii.) mentions only one. These are differences indeed, but cannot be esteemed contradictious. ' John ii. ], Miracles of our Lord. 137 sumed, and which probably every inventor of such a character would have attributed to him. It displays him to us, in the very opening of his career, with that kind and sociable mildness, which never ceased to distinguish him. It showed moreover, in a striking manner, the power which he possessed over the elements of nature ; a power well worthy of him by whom those elements had their various offices assigned, and hardly conceivable to belong to any other. The miraculous draught of fishes', which preceded the calling of Peter and others, was principally a display of power ; but calculated particularly to impress the minds of those whom the Saviour was about to call to his service : though it might be allegorized, and was indeed ap- plied by himself, to the winning of converts to the Gospel. n ! I t t sumed. ' Luke V. 6. When •^* IS8 Miracles of our Lord. When our Lord walked on the sea^, and afterwards caused the ship to arrive at once at the place of its destination^ hi» principal object seems to have been to instruct his Apostles *, and to try their faith. When he stilled the tempest by his word', there was yet a greater object included, the preservation of their lives from danger. Their remark upon it was such as must naturally arise in the minds of men so preserved. " What manner of " man is this ? for he commandeth even " the winds and the sea, and they obey " him !" — What manner of man indeed ! Certainly not such a one as some modern teachers would make of him ; nor such as any inventor of specious fables would ever hate ventured to feign. This august act of divine power, so calmly exercised, and with such unaflected dignity, sunk doubt- less very deep into the minds of all who ' Matt. xiv. 25. Mark vi. 48. John vi. 19. * John vi.21. ^ Matt. viii. Mark iv. Lukeviii. beheld Miracles of our Lord, 139 beheld it. Three of the Evangelists have therefore described it, as nearly in the same words as could be done without copy- ing ; and yet with such minuter differences as would arise from the independent recol- lections of different minds. But how have they described it ? Without an exclama- tion, or any mark of wonder, except so far as is expressed in the recorded words of the beholders. This is characteristic at once of simplicity and truth. What was the full intention of the sub- lime scene of the Transfiguration, to which only some select Apostles were ad- mitted, we do not perhaps yet know: though two writers of celebrity*, have shown the probability of its being intended to give an insight into the glorified state of human bodies, when the trials of this world shall be past. That it was in- ♦ Dr. Holmes, late Dean of Winchester, Collator of the Septuagint, in a Sermon preached at Oxford, in 1777, and the late Bp. Porteus. tended 1^ Miracles of our Lord. tended for the instruction of the three Apostles is beyond a doubt. But the Di- vine Voice from heaven, " this is my be- *' loved Son in whom I am well pleased, '' hear ye him '," while it impressed the Apostles with the perfect knowledge of their Master*s heavenly origin, might be designed also as an encouragement to the man Christ Jesus, whose great scene of difficulty was now approaching. It might be a mark of divine approbation for what had passed already of his human ministry, and an earnest of complete success in that which was to follow. There is hardly any thing more sublime, in all the great sublime of Scripture, than the whole of this extraordinary scene. The marvellous change of our Saviour's form, the shining of his raiment, the appear- ance of two glorified persons with him, who, by some secret intimation, were known to be Moses and Elias ; the over- * Matt. xvii. Mark ix. Luke ix. shadowing Miracles of our Lord, 141 shadowing cloud ; the voice from heaven ; whatacollectionofamazingcircumstances! No wonder that Peter was confounded, and knew not what he said. It must have been a bold, as well as a fertile imagina- tion, which could have feigned these thinffs : and what did the writers know, but from this very fact, of glorified bodies ; or of the state in which the just are to sub- sist after death ? It might even be urged that writers of a fictitious Gospel, would hardly have introduced into this scene Moses, whose revelation they hoped to supersede. But it is superfluous. Enough for us that we have three competent, dis- tinct, and most holy witnesses for this great transaction *. Let us add, as well we may, such witnesses, for vemcity and up- rightness of character, as never were united in giving testimony to any facts upon earth, except those which relate to Jesus Christ. ♦ We have had, in fact, four ; for it should not be forgotten that St. Peter also witnesses the same. See below, p. 255, note^ Out 't n V i'l ■ : 1 i .1 (1 142 Miracles of our Lord. Out of the astonishing number of our Savioui^s miracles, these few are all that are not simply and primarily benevolent : and even with these also benevolence is, • in fact, more or less united. Of the first we have already seen, that, though it be- longs not tosohiffhan order of beneficence, as that which alleviates or removes the sufferings of men, it is founded altogether on condescending kindness, and indulg- ence for their innocent gratifications. The others, in the mildest manner, either cor- rect offences, or give important instruc- tions. The prodigious mass of miracu- lous interferences, excepted from this short list, consists altogether of diseases healed, devils cast out, dead persons re- stored ; things no less worthy of a hea- venly Saviour to perform, than impossi- ble for a human agent to imitate. Im- possible, I will add, for any writer to feign, who published his account while the events were fresh in memory. For of these wonderful works, very few were pcr- Miracles of our Lord, 143 performed in secret; they were done in general before multitudes, with a word or a touch, from which the effect was immediate, visible, and complete. Had they not then been reall}^ performed, it would have 'jeen matter of public notoriety, when the Gospels were first published, that no such things were recollected by any one; and all persons, then living in Ju- dea or Galilee, would have been able to contradict the assertions. Bold, indeed, must have been the writers who should have ventured to tell whole nations of people, that they saw, what in fact they did not see, and received miraculous bene- fits, of which they had no knowledge or recollection, nor any traces remaining among them* How numerous these miracles of mercy really were, can only be estimated, as already suggested, by looking to the in- stances in which the Evangelists tell us. that •r I * .« 144 Miracles of our Lord. that he healed multitudes. Thus in Gali- lee they tell us, that, after healing Peter's wife's mother, in the evening, '' all they '' that had any sick with dr/ers diseases, " brouo-ht them unto him; and he laid *' his hands on every one of them, and " healed them'/' So says St. Luke; and so also, in substance, but in their o?vn words, say St. Matthew and St. Mark *. The former of these tells us, more expli- citly than the other, that Jesus continued to do the same throughout Galilee ; and that even from all parts of Syria, they brou^-ht persons who were sick, lunatic, or possessed, and received the same mira- culous benefits. In consequence of this, it is added, " tliere followed him great " multitudes of people, from Galilee, and " from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judea, and from beyond Jor- « dan '." All these then were prepared, » Luke iv, 40. * Matt. iv. 10. Mark i. 32. i Matt iv. 25. not t£ Miracles of our Lord* 14f not to contradict, but to confirm the re- ports of the Evangelists, when given to the world. In another instance, when he withdrew from the persecution of the Pharisees and others, who were mad to destroy him, for healing a leper on the Sabbath-day, both St. Matthew and St. Mark tell us that great multitudes followed him and *' he *.^ healed them all' r that is all who re- quired healing ; which is even more than equivalent to St. Mark's expression, that " he had healed many\" The latter also adds, " insomuch that they pressed " upon him for to touch him, as many as '' had plagues ;"— which touch, wearetold in other places, was always efficacious.— St. Luke particularly says, on another oc- casion, " and the whole multitude sought '^ to touch him : for there went virtue out n ft » i « Matt. xii. 15. ^ Mark iiL 10. €< of 146 Miracles of aur Lord. *' of him, and healed them alV T and as this instance appears to be different^ in various circumstances, from that above noticed in St. Mark, we may add it to the account of his extensive acts of heal- ing. ■t( When the two disciples of John came, as before mentioned, to enquire of Jesus, whether he were indeed '' He that should come," St. Luke says that, '' in that same hour he cured many of their in- firmities and plagues, and of evil spirits, and unto many that were blind he gave sight*;" and he himself thus reminded those disciples of what he had done before their eyes. '^ Go and show John again those things which ye do hear and see. The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear', the dead are raised ti €S €e €€ te €t II €S " Luke vi. l». * Luke ?ii. 21, » Matt. xi. 4. " upj Miracles of our Lord, 14T '» up*, and the poor have the Gospel '' preached to them '." At another time, when a great multi- tude followed him into the desert of Beth- saida, ** because they saw his miracles, '' which he did on them that were dis- '' eased*," we are told by three Evan- gelists that he received them, and be- gan to teach them many things, and spake to them of the kingdom of God, and healed their sickK Soon after that, in the land of Gennesaret, the people sent out into all the country round about, and collected the sick from all parts] and brought them even in beds; '' and '^ whithersoever he entered into villages, * 'f hough only three instances are circumstan- tiaUy recorded o£ our Lord's raising the dead, that of tht Widow's soil at Nain, the daughter of JairUs, and Lazarus, this passage seems to show, that evert that great miracle was performed by him on more occasions. » Luke vii. 22, &c. * John vi. 2. * Matt. xiv. 34. Mark vi. 13, Luke ix. 11. h3 !' 0]^ i J « 14r8 Miracles of our Lord, tt €€ CC €i OT city, or country, they laid the sick in the streets^ and besought him that they might touch, if it were but the border of his garment ^ and as many astouched " him were made whole *." Again, when he was near the sea of Galilee, and had retired to a mountain^ '' great multitudes " came unto him, having with them those " that were lame. Wind, dumb, maimed, " and many others, and cast them down '^ at Jesus' feet, and he healed them ^" Lastly, we find this benevolent teacher healing the blind, and lame, who came to him in the Temple at Jerusalem ♦. These are all the cdlective instances of healing, which I have been able to observe in the Gospels ; but, as each of these in- cludes multitudes, the amount of the whole must be prodigious. When we add to this^ that St. John, the last of the Evan- « Mark vi. 56. * Matt. xiv. 35. ' Matt. xv. 30. ♦ Matt. xxi. 14, ^elists. !fl i^. Miracles of our Lord. 149 gelists, assures us that many more things were done by him than were written by himself*, or any other person; or than could possibly be contained in any mo- derate number of books *, we cannot doubt that our Lord left behind him a vast ag- greg*ate of person*, who were able at least to bear witness to his mighty works, what- ever conclusion they might choose to draw from them. Let us not, however, quit the astonish- ing subject of his miracles, without re- marking upon one, of which all the four Evangelists have recorded the occasion, but St. Luke only the particulars. When the servants and emissaries of the high priest approached to seize him, Peter, ever too prompt to act upon the impulses of his own mind, drew a sword, and making a blow at a servant of the high priest, whose name was Malchus, cut c^ ' John XX. 30. * John xxi. 25. H 3 his t< l€ «( *( 150 Miracles of our Lord. his right ear. Our Lord, rebuking thif superfluous exertion of human power on his behalf, said immediately, " Put up *' again thy sword into his place— think- " est thou that I cannot now pray to my Father and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then shall the Scriptures be fulfilled * ?" To the wounded person he calmly said, " suffer ye thus far/' and re- paired the injury by a touch *. This was the conduct of an innocent man, who felt at the same time the indignity of being encompassed with swords and staves like a Ihief,— yet he repressed the opposition of his friends, and at once healed the wound of his enemy. Whoever can point out any code of law, morality, or opinion, then existing in the world, and accessible to the Evangelists, by which this mild and gentle dignity of character was recom- mended, might go far towards showing ■ Matt. xxvi. 52, &c. » Luke xxii. 50. that Miracles of our Lord. 151 that such a narrative might possibly be feigned. But thinking, as I do, that it was totally repugnant to the passions and prejudices of all men upon earth, I cannot but feel that it is a fact which carries the stamp of its own truth upon it. It never would have entered into the mind of man to conceive an action so sublime, if it had not actually been done, by him whose object was to show what man might become, under such a set of precepts and examples as he would give; but which never till that time existed in the world, nor had entered into the contemplation of any moralist. Among so vast a number of miracles im- puted, had any been invented, would not some of them at least have borne the stamp of human passions, or betrayed the feeble- ness of human judgment ? Would there not have been, to put it even at the best, some few that were trifling, or some that were vindictive? Look only into any account of spurious miracles, and the an- h4 svver 16S Miracles of our Lord. swer will meet you at once. Miracles un« tainted with human passions^ were never even invented in any other instance. Mi- racles of unmixed benevolence and mercy never were imagined upon earth, but in the case of Jesus. Instead of conceiving: such a character before-hand, men could not even copy it, when it had been faith- fully and beautifully drawn. CHAPTER XL PARABLES OF OUR LORD. CHAP. Having considered our Lord's actions^ we come next to the contemplation of his words ; which, for distinction's sake, I have thought proper to arrange under four heads: 1. That of his pa- rables ; 2. His discourses, or instructions in general; 3. His prophecies; 4. His representations of himself; which will be considered in this and three subsequent Chapters. Though neither all the acts of our Lord, as St. John expressly tells us, nor un- doubtedly all his words, were ^ver re- corded, yet it is astonishing* how few of u 5 either i V •♦ 1 54 Parables of our Lord. • either have been handed down to us, through any authentic channel, except in the narrations of the four Evangelists. From which, it is natural to conclude, that Christians were, in general, so fully satisfied with the sanctity and sufficiency of those records, as not to seek beyond them. St. Paul indeed has preserved, as wefl known in his time^ a short but holy sen- tence of our Lord's, which is not in the Gospels ; where he exhorts the Ephesian elders to " remember the words of the '* Lord Jesus, how he said. It is more *' blessed to give than to receive'," This, being in the form of a maxim, and therefore easily remembered, was probably caught up at the time, and never forgotten, by the faithful. A few words are also preserved by Cle- ment, Origen, and Eusebius, which hav« * Acts XX. 35» Parables of our Lord. 1 55 been conjectured to follow Matt. vi. 33. '' Seek things that are great, and the '' small shall be added to you ; seek hea- " venly things, and those that are earthly '' shall be added to you ♦." They agree, at least in sense, with that verse, and might have been said at that time, or on some similar occasion, but they are not extant in any MS. of the Gospels. A very remarkable part of our Saviour's divine discourses is that in which he de^ livers his parables. They are numerous and striking, and the introduction of them stamps a peculiar character on his instructions. Of many of these parables, a careful consideration not only authorizes, but compels us to say, that they could not have been invented by the persons, who have preserved them. They include too wide a range of thought, for such writers to attain ; they are often conversant in • Griesbach ia loco. u6 things 156 Parables of our Lord. Cbings of which they had no knowledge ; they are often prophetical^ and allude to things which they could not possibly foresee. Nor let us forget, though it is only an inferior part of the argument, that the very nature of an apologue, or parable, implies a skill and talent in composition, which by no means falls to the lot of ordinary writers ; and least of all to such as have had no exercise or instruction in literature. T« select fit circumstances, to unite, con- duct, and express them with propriety, to point them ultimately, with force, to the object intended to be illustrated, all these things require a talent and adroitness in the writer, of which we have no reason to be- lieve that any of the Evangelists could be possessed*. To St. Luke they might perhaps ♦ ** This way of teaching [in parables] hath a *' great advantage over any other, by reason it *' hath much more power in exciting the fancy and ** affections. Parables of our Lord, 157 perhaps with most probability be attri- buted, but he has not so many parables as St. Matthew. These historians were plain and simple men. The writers of apologues have generally been, and of necessity must be, men of skill and inge- nuity in writing. We have no reason to believe that any one of the Evangelists, could have invented or conducted any consistent parables. The reason assigned by our Lord, for speaking in parables, does not at first sight appear to consist with his usual be- *' affections. Plain arguments, and moral precepts, •* barely proposed, are more flat in their operation, " not so lively and persuasive, as when they steal *' into a man's assent, under the covert of a pa- ** rable. To be expert in this particular, is not •* til every mans power ; ' like poetry, it requires ** such a natural faculty as cannot be taught. But *• so far as it falls under the rules and directions of •^ art, it belongs to the precepts of oratory." — Bishop Wilkinss Secret and Swift Messenger, Chap. ii. p. 20. nevolencc. t t 158 Parables of our Lord. nevolence. He did so, he said, that they *' who were without/* that is, who were not disciples, might hear, and not under- stand, '' lest at any time they should be " converted, and their sins should be for- " given them'/' — Observe, however, that this slight fence of difficulty was opposed only to those who were careless and un- worthy hearers. These were the only persons against whom the prophecy of Esaias was pointed, that " hearing they " should hear and not understand, and '* seeing they should see and not per- " ceive * /' and in them only it was ful- filled. To all his disciples, that is, not only to the Apostles, but to all that were honestly inclined to follow him, and se- riously desirous to understand his words, our Lord was always ready to give the true explanation, and unfold the hidden meaning of his parables. The most re- markable instance of this occurs in the ' Matt. iv. 12. * Matt. ?iii. 14. Parables of our Lord. 159 parable of the sower, which three of the Evangelists have related', all subjoining the explanation, as given at the request of the disciples. It was not in fact, very often necessary to give such explanations; for the pa- rables were generally either themselves illustrations of some important truth, or of so easy application, that even the un- willing could hardly fail to comprehend them. Thus, of the parable of the wicked husbandmen, we are told, that the chief priests and pharisees perceived that he had spoken this parable against them, and were accordingly exasperated*. Some of the parables indeed are no more than mere comparisons, or illustrations, formed in allusion to objects in themselves com- mon and familiar. I shall notice only such as are in any respect remarkable. parable » Matt. xiii. Mark iv. Luke viii. • Luke XX. 19, &c. ■ -? When 1/' 160 Parables of our Lord. When Jesus compared those who should '' hear his sayings and do them V to a wise man who built his house upon a rock, and marked at the same time the miserable destruction of those who should be bearers only and not doers, he showed a confidence in the importance of his doc- trines, which well became his character; and on this occasion it is that St Matthew makes the remark, that the people were particularly astonished at his doctrine, be- cause '' he taught them as one having *' authority, and not as the scribes*." The scribes, or doctors of the law, were mere expounders of that which was writ- ten in the Old Testament, or commenta- tors upon it. They therefore, like other commentators, probably hesitated, and doubted, and disputed. But here was one who cut off all dispute, and pro- nounced with decision what was right. It * Matt. vii. 24. Lufc€ vi. 47* » Ibid. vii. 28, 29. Parables of our Loj*d. 161 was perfectly proper that he should do so, considering who he was ; but how was this anthoritative manner consistent with his g-eneral humility and modesty of demean- our? Or how couH the writers of his acts, had they been the inyentors also, have presumed to attribute to him qualiti^ so opposite, or have been led even to think of doing it ? The truth,— the truth only, ^vas their suggestion, and their warrant. Jesus taught with authority, because his doctrines were the Word of God'- He behaved with gentleness and humility, because he assumed to himself no au- thority, while his kingdom was not yet established, and himself not yet glorified. When asked to interfere respecting an inheritance, his reply was, '^ Man, who *' made me a judge or a divider over you * ? But when he delivered the precepts of his exalted morality or divine instruction, it > John viii, 28. Luke ui. 14. was was. 162 Parables of our Lord. was, '' Ye have heard that this or that was " said of old/' that is, by Moses or other inspired persons under the law, '' but I '' say unto j^om"— Do this or that. " Ye " have heard that it was said by them of " old time, thou shalt not kill— but I say " unto you, that whosoever is angry with '' his brother, without a cause, shall be in danger'."—" It hath been said*, whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorcement ; but i say unto you that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of *' fornication, causeth her to commit " adultery*." " It hath been said by « them of old time, thou shalt not for- « swear thyself,— but I say unto you, " swear not at all '." Here we see the au- thority of a divinely commissioned teacher, speaking with becoming dignity, but with- out insolence, because so far he was (€ C€ <€ (( €t ' Matt. V. 21. • Namely by Moses * Matt. V. 32. 3 Ibid. V. 33. already Parables of our Lord, 163 already authorized. To teach was his commission, as man,— to rule was not to be given to him till a later period. What our Lord says concerning an un- clean spirit, cast out and returning again, and making the state of the person pos- sesed ten times worse than it was at first, according to the report of two Evangelists, may be considered as a parable*; in which he intended to represent the des- perate state of the Jews at that time. St. Matthew indeed so applies it, for he con- cludes by saying, in the person of Jesus, '' Even so shall it be also unto this wicked " generation." St. Luke omits this ap- plication, though in other respects his ac- count is parallel. Our Lord had reproved the scribes and pharisees for requiring a sign ; he had told them that no sign should be given, but that of Jonas the prophet, TV Inch was figurative of his own death and Matt. xii. 43. Luke xi. 24. resur- ■■t M K.J q: i - * 164 Parables of our Lord. resurrection ; he had upbraided them with being harder of heart than either the men of Nineveh, or the queen of the South, though called upon by a person essen- tially superior both to Jonas and to Solo- mon ; and he concluded by teaching, from this parable, that, whatever tempo- rary amendment the people might derive from his instructions, they would collec- tively become, after all, much worse than ever; not only from the circumstance of having heard and then rejected him, but also by a gradual increase and accumula- tion of transgressions. Here then were two things taught, which never could have occurred to any persons who should have presumed to invent para- bles for Christ. In the first place, there is the prophecy of the increasing depravity of the Jewish nation; which we now know from history to have arrived at its heighth at the period of the siege of Jeru- salem by Titus ; an event which the two writers Parables of our Lord. 165 writers of these Gospels did not live to witness. In the second place, there is an implied knowledge of the actions of evil spirits, to which no man could reasonably pretend, but which was perfectly clear to him who knew all things. The Evan- gelists CQuld not have thought of illus- trating any declaration, by that which to them must have been more obscure than the thing declared. But our Saviour chose, in this instance, to make informa- tion of one kind the vehicle for conveying instruction of a different nature. This he did in several other instances. The state of separate spirits, the various transactions of the great day of Judgment, and such high topics, were introduced into some of his parables; though of such things no man could have knowledge or conception, but from his teaching. The awful parable against covetousness, in which the rich man vainly promises himself a long enjoyment pf his treasured stores. 166 Parables of our Lord. stores", carries on it the stamp of divine authority. The dreadful words of God, " Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be " required of thee" — are not such as any mortal would presume to invent. He to whom the secret counsels of God were open and familiar, could pronounce them boldly ; and the warning voice resounds through ages, to those who trust too far in worldly wealth, or worldly hopes. The parable in the same chapter, con- cerning the coming of the Lord, or of the Son of Man, '' at an hour when ye think " not * '* alludes in part to the final visi- tation of Jerusalem; which was yet to come, at the period when St. Luke wrote. The parable of the barren fig-tree at once illustrates the long-suffering of God \ and intimates the coming of vengeance, if re- pentance should be longer delayed. '' Let " it alone this year also, till I shall dig ' Luke xii. 10. * Ibid. xu. 36. ' Ibid. xiii. 6. *^ about Parable^ of our Lord. 16T « about it and dung it."-Our Lord was the labouring gardener, wbo was then em- ployed in digging and manuring round the barren fig-tree of Judea;— but it bore not its proper fruit, and the sequel of the pa- rable followed : '' after that thou shalt cut « it down." But 'whether Jerusalem would be cut down or not, St. Luke could not yet know, except from the information of his Lord. The parable of the sower is related by three Evangelists \ who all give also our Lord's explanation of it. Here then 1 would ask, as in many other places,— How could these three writers, composing their narratives in three remote countries *, so nearly agree in the very words of their ac- counts ? It is easy, but it seems to me very idle, to say that they might copy from each other. In the first place, it should ' Matt. xiii. Mark iv. 3. Luke viii. 5. » See above, pp. 14, &c. be 168 Parables of our Lord, be proved that it was possible for them to copy from each other, or from any com- mon source, situated as they were when they wrote. But, in the next, I insist (and we might put the proof upon this parable, as properly as on any other part of the Gospels, though it is evident in almost all the parallelisms that occur) that these pas- sages afford the most evident proof that the writers of them did not copy, either from each other, or from any written document whatsoever. I proceed to illastrate this position ; which to me is as plain as any assertion that can be made, on the subject of literary composition. The copying of one book from another is usually the resource either of ignorance or indolence. Of ignorance, when the writer has no knowledge of the facts, ex- cept what he derives from the author whom he copies: of indolence, when, though previously informed, he takes the statement of another, which he approves, to I il Parables of our Lord, 169 to save himself the thought and trouble, which would be required for forming an original narrative. With respect then to the Evangelists, above all other writers, we may surely ask, if they knew not of a certainty what they undertook to write, why did they undertake it ? But if they knew from their own recollection or enquiries, why should they copy from any other per- son ? If they thought a new narrative was wanted, why should they copy one which was already to be had } If they are sup- posed to have copied through ignorance, why did they presume to alter even a sin- gle word ? If they copied through indo- lence, the very same indolence would doubtless have led them to copy word for word, which is much more easy than to copy with variations, but which it never can be pretended they have done, for many lines together. I know but of one more supposition* which can be made, and that is so dis- I honourable ! ! 170 Parables of our Lord, honourable to the Evangelists, that I think no sincere Christian could be induced to make it. It is this. That they copied indeed, through ignorance or indolence, Oi both, but inserted slight alterations, as they went on, for the purpose of disguising or concealing their thefts. Should an enemy even presume to say this, for surely no other would say it, to him 1 would boldly reply ; that if so, they were very awkward and blundering contrivers : for they altered so very little, that copying has been generally imputed to them : and yet sometimes so indiscreetly, that their dif- ferences have been, without reason indeed, but hastily, regarded as contradictions. These suppositions being dismissed, what then remains, but to observe the real fact, and to give these sacred writers all the credit they so amply deserve. They relate their narratives like men who had seen the same things done, or heard the same discourses delivered, and had studi- ously Parables of our Lord. 171 ously endeavoured to preserve them with exactness, aware of their great importance to every future age of the world. They had themselves seen and heard the transac- tions and discourses, in the case of St. Matthew and St. John ; or, in that of St. Mark and St. Luke, had collected the truth respecting them, from those who had been present; all parties concerned feeling the highest obligation to report both facts and words with precise exactness. But, as no two human minds ever proceed with an exact parallelism of ideas, or suggest an unvaried flow of the same words, so in reporting these things, with all their care, the Evangelists, like other men, made some minute variations. Substan- tially, their accounts are the same, and bespeak the same origin ; namely, truth, reality, and correct representation. In- spiration was doubtless a farther gua- rantee for this substantial agreement, though it went not to the length of sug- gesting words. In little matters therefore I 2 they 173 Parables of our Lord, they vary, so that one reports the same fact rather more fully, another more con- cisely ; one preserves more of our Lord's words, another fewer; one subjoins a reason or an explanation, which another did not feel to be necessary : and thus, we may be assured, would three of the most correct observers, and scrupulously exact reporters in the world do always, if they separately related what they had seen or heard the very day before. Probably each would do so if he twice related, in conversation only, the very same transac- tions or discourses *. Our daily experience may prove this to us. Narrations of the same facts, or of the same discourses always differ from • This is well illustrated by St Paul's two pub- lie narratives of his own conversion, which are now added in the Appendix, N^ VI, with the historical narrative of St. Luke to illustrate more fully this kind of difference and coincidence. each Parables of our Lord. 173 each other ; generally indeed, more than they ought to differ ; from carelessness, in- accuracy, or the love of embellishment. But, setting these causes aside, they still must differ. One person will relate rather more, another rather less of the facts or words ; one will try to explain as he goes, another to illustrate; and the expressions used will always savour, more or less, of the habitual mode of discourse peculiar to the individual. But in reporting speeches, the more care is taken to preserve the very words of the speaker, the less there will be, in that part, of the usual difference of expressions. Still, something there will always remain, because however careful a man may be to describe or imitate ano- ther, he is never able to put off himself. This then is the correct view, and I hesi- tate not to say, the only correct view, of the resemblances and differences in the Gospels. They agree as narratives will agree, whose common model is the truth. They differ as distinct narratives will al- I 3 ways f' 174 Parables of our Lord. ways differ, while men are men ; but they neither agree nor differ as copied narra- tives would, for the reasons already as- signed. Let us now consider the example before us, taking St. Matthew's narrative as the text, and observing the variations of the two otiier Evangelists. Parables of our Lord. m Maitheu} xiii. L Mark iv. 1* Luke vUi. 4> The same day, went Jtfsus out of the house fcad sat And he began again to teach by the sea-side, by the sea-side : 2. Atid and there was, great multitudes a great multitude were gathered together gathered unto him, «"*» ^^^oa And when much people were gathered together and were come to him out of etery city. so that he went into a ship, and sat, and the whole multitude stood on the shore. 3. And he spake many tilings unto them in parables, saying. Behold a sower went forth to sow ; 4. And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way-side, and the fowls came and devoured them up. 5. Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth : and so that he entered into a ship, and sat on the sea ; and the whole multitude -was by the sea on the land. 2. And he taught them many things IM spake by parables, and said by a parable. unto them in his doctrine. 3. Hearken, Behold there went out a sower to sow : CHAP. 4. And it came to pass, as he sowed some fell by the way-side. And the fowls of the air came and devoured it up. 5. And some fell on stony ground, where it had not much earth j and I 4 5- A sower went out to sow his seed ; and as he sowed some fell by the way-side : and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it. 6. And some fell upon a rock : 176 Parables of our Lord, Matthew. forthwith they spruog up iNccause they had no deepneM of •arth. 6. And when the san was up, Ihev were scorched, and because they had no root they withered away. 7. And some fell among thorns ; and the thorns sprung up and chaJced them. Mark. immediately it sprang up because it had no depth of earth. 6. But when the sun was up, it was scoiched and because it had no rooh it withered away. Luke* and as soon as it was sprung up» 8. But other fell into good ground and brought forth fruit, some an hundred fold, some sijtty fold, some thirty fold. 9. Who bath ears to hear, let lumhcar. 7. And some fell among thorns and the thorns grew up and choked it, and it yielded no fruiu 8. And other fell on good ground and did yield fruit that sprang up and increased, and brought forth some thirty and some sixty, and some an hundred. 9. And he said unto them. He that hath ears to hear, let Urn hear. it withered away, because it lacked moisture. 7. And soma fell among thurns and the thorns sprang up with it and choked it. 8. Aiid other fell on good ground. and sprang up bare fruit. and an hundred fold. And when he had said these things. he cried. Me that hath ears to hear« let him hear. Parables of our Lord. 177 I have taken this example without par- ticular choice, as one of the first which occurred, of three parallel narratives : but I put it boldly to the consideration of any intelligent reader, whether there is here any symptom of copying. There is a strong resemblance in the words, because the writers were all studious to tell the same matter with correctness. The accounts which most resemble each other are those of St. Matthew and St. Mark. But the few variations, even between these, are not such as copyists are likely to have made, but merely such minute differences of expression, as would naturally arise in the endeavour to use the same words, without comparing them together: that is, trifling variations, leaving the substance quite the same *• St. Luke's narrative is here • For what important, or even sensible reason, should one Evangelist speak of the seeds in the lingular, another in the plural number, if one co- pied from the other ? Matt. v. 4. The fowls came I 5 and 178 Parables of our Lord. here by far the most concise, and his omis- sions are such as he could have no induce* ment to make, had he seen, when he wrote, either of the other accounts. He speaks also of this parable alone, not of Christ teaching the multitude in parables. The request of the disciples to have the parable explained, and the explanation itself, are also given by the three, and with similar resemblances, and differences. But the passage already shown may suf- fice for a specimen. To any good Har* mom/ of the Gospels I refer my readers and devoured them up. Mark v. 4. The fowls of the air came and devoured it up : and so it is continued. It is the same in the Greek. Kals^ayu avra and Kali^yn avro, &c. Why should such a change be made by a copyist I lu other respects, there is certainly much more verbal agreement between St. Matthew and St. Mark, in this place, in the original than in the English ; and more indeed than is usual. St. Luke, however, omits very much which both the others have. Why so 1 if he followed and copied them ? Did he secretly condemn the fullness of their ac- counts 1 It can hardly be imagined. for 1 1 II Parables of our Lord. 179 for abundant examples of the same kind ; not doubting that every unprejudiced ex- aminer will agree with me, that there is nothing like copying in the resemblances of the Evangelists; and every thing in their differences to prove that they were neither made by design, nor do in the least diminish the consistency of the several accounts. I have given this specimen in the Eng- lish translation, for the sake of English readers*; and abundantly satisfactory it surely t I t ♦ But let not any one suppose that the original passages will not stand the same test. They are in fact only still more convincing in the Greek Gos- pels. For instance 5^ Matthew says o^^o* ^rox^ol. St. Mark says ox;?^o5 ^oAy^— One says tU ro irr.oUv liA,^(xi\a^ the other i/*j3«in« tU to w^oror. St. Mark throws in i, T? eaxacrcrt,, just as it appears in the English Ver- sion : but one Evangelist says that all the multitude lit) To» cilyict^of 8.'r^*i», the other wpo? 'vn* ^a,haa<7af fw* 7n« 7?? ^y* St. Matthew says, iAaXi!<7«» ayror? ^e^^« w 7r*f)«€o^«r,', the other, \U»ffKiv «^to^s «r I fuotfoi^ 180 Parables of our Lord. i surely is, for removing every idea of copying. For why should copyists have made such slight and useless alterations as appear in these three texts ? Had the dif- ferences been more important, we might have supposed some reasons for them; and should perhaps have imagined some reasons to exist, whether we could have discovered them or not. But here are variations, for making which a reasonable motive can neither be discovered nor sus- pected. If St. Matthew wrote first, and St. Mark followed him, why, in his first verse, should he have put in " on the sea/' ««paCe^a^f iroXAa. All these phrases being respec- tively equivalent in sense, why should the expres- sions have been changed? No one will pretend that, on either hand, they are so much more elegant than the words used by the other writer, as to have been changed for that reason. Nor were the Evangelists pickers of words, or cullers of phrases. The whole passage is inserted in the Greek at the end of the volume. Appendix, N°. V. that any com- petent enquirer may satisfy himself how completely every part confirms these observations. which Parables of our Lord. 181 which is equally implied in saying that he - sat in the ship.''— When St. Matthew had said that '' the whole multitude stood '' on the shore ;" why should his succes- sor have changed it to, '' was by the sea, on '' the land?"— These questions equally apply, if the order of writing be supposed the reverse ; for the spirit of the enquiry is, why should either writer, supposing him to copy from the other, alter the words, without making the least change in the sense? Is it not much easier to copy what is placed before you, than to make these little variations ? But we may go farther, and ask, why, if one had al- ready told the story, so nearly as the other would have told it, and the latter knew of it^_why, I say, should the latter have writ- ten it at all ? It would have been better evidently to have told some other part of the discourses of Jesus, than to repeat the same so nearly in the same words. No new evidence is gained by one man copy- ing from another. The whole is resolv- able it^ \ «- u 182 Parables of our Lord, able into the testimony of the first. The rest, however numerous, prove nothing but that they believed the first writer to be right, and thought him worthy to be fdlowed. Whoever will look carefully through the whole specimen, will see that similar observations will apply to every part. They are also equally valid, in a different mode of application, against the supposition of copying from any common document. But we have not yet quite done with this parable of the sower. It remains to be observed, that it is in some degree pro- phetical. It describes the various effects to be produced on different hearers, by the preaching of the Gospel. The heat of the sun, which scorches up the seed sown upon stony ground, alludes, accord- ing to our Saviour's own interpretation, to times of tribulation^ temptation, afflic- tion, and persecution. But of these the Evangelists could not yet know much, when Parables of our Lord. 183 when they drew up their several narra- tives. Not enough surely to know how fatal these trials would prove to multitudes, whose stony hearts gave ready admission indeed to the word, but afforded no place for it to take root, and obtain a vigorous growth. This then may be reckoned among the things that they could not have invented, at the time when they wrote, had invention been their object instead of accurate narrative. Of the next parable, which St. Matthew only has preserved, that of the tares \ I shall say no more, than that it is also pro- phetical ; and that its view extends even to the day of judgment*. How far St. » Matt. xiii. 24—30. • Observe too that a distinct and copious expla- nation of it is given, as from our Lord himself:— in verse 37—43. The words are very solemn. •* The Son of Man shall send forth his angels," &c. " Then shall the righteous shine forth," &c. But this belongs to a topic on which I shall more fully treat hereafter. Mat- 181 Parables of our Lord. Matthew, as a mere man, could be com- petent to take such a view, I leave the reader to decide. Much the same may be said of that parable, preserved by St Mark alone \ of seed sown, and growing to its ma- turity in a way not to be perceived ; with a reference to the distant harvest. The parable of the mustard seed foretells the wonderful increase of the Gospel, from beginnings so very unpromising*: an idea which appearances could neither au- thorize nor suggest, at the time when these Evangelists wrote. Of the same kind are several other parables, occurring in that part of the Gospels : and it is re- markable that though St. Mark does not give the explanation of them, as St. Matthew has done, yet he bears complete testimony to their having been all explained by their divine Author: " and when they were " alone, he expounded all things to his '' disciples '.^'— In the parable of the net " Mark iv. 26. ^ Matt. xiii. 31. Mark iv. 30. 3 Mark iv. 34. thrown Parables of our Lord. 185 thrown into the sea, the interpretation is united with the pamble. - The kingdom '' of heaven is like unto a net that was cast " into the sea, and gathered of every '' kind : which, when it was full, they <' drew to shore, and sat down, and ga- '' thered the good into vessels, but cast ^' the bad away. So shall it be at the '< end of the world : the angels shall come <' forth, and sever the wicked from among '' the just, and shall cast them into the '' furnace of fire : there shall be wailing '' and gnashing of teeth '."—Our Saviour knew most assuredly, not only that there will be a day of judgment, but also how it will be conducted, as appears from many of his discourses. But his disciples could not know it, except from him ; and would they have presumed to feign it? They were not surely, men of such a character ; nor, in truth, of such abilities. To pass over other parables which have * Matt. xiii. 47—50. less r u 186 Parables of our Lord. less application to my present train of rea- sonings let us attend a while to that of the good Samaritan'. When we consider that the great object of this parable is to recommend an universal benevolence ; to point out, in the strongest manner, the duty of succouring a fellow-creature in distress, in defiance of the most obstinate national prejudices, or even antipathies, ^ye cannot conceive it to be the production of any man bred up in Judaism ; unless we allow that the man had by some means learned to rise superior to all prejudices. Antipathies between different bodies of men, though unhappily too common in the world, have seldom been so strong as they were between the Jews and Samari- tans. The very suspicion that they might b^ going to Jerusalem was considered as sufficient reason, in a village of the Sama- ritans, for refusing to Jesus and two of his disciples, though unknown travellers, ad- ' Luke X. 30—37. Parables of our Lord. 187 mittaace into their houses '. There were, in the severest sense of the word, no dealings between them^ : not even the common intercourse of humanity, no not so slight as giving of a drop of water '. Yet here a Samaritan is made, by our Saviour, the hero of the parable, and preferred, by comparison, to a priest and a Levite of the Jews, for his readiness and kindness iu giving succour to a Jew. The only native of Judea, therefore, from whom this parable could originate, was he to whom St. Luke attributes it, our Lord Jesus Christ. That inimitable originality of thought and views, which appears also in the pre- ceding, and some other parables of our Lord, is no where more strikingly exem- plified, than in the beautiful apologue of the prodigal son*. Whether it contains a more touching and correct picture of hu- » Luke ix. 53. * John iv. 9. 4 Luke XV. 11—32. Ibid. mittance man i 188 Parables of our Lord. man nature, or a more profound and con- soling view of divine mercy, it is impos- sible to decide. The perverseness and profligacy of the son, his well deserved misery, and his bitter repentance, show us ourselves in a view aflectingly exact; while the tenderness of the father to the sincere penitent, his ready embrace, his hearty welcome, so figure to us that di- vine mercy, which is never weary of for- giving, that no man surely could have pre- sumed to invent it. He, to whom alone the counsels of the Father were known, he who descended from the bosom of the Fa- ther, he could give it, because he knew it: and from his mouth, beyond all doubt, the Evangelists derived it. The parable ^lay be considered also as prophetic of the reception of the Gentiles, the estranged and profligate sons of God. I approach with awe to the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, in which the heavenly teacher gives some insight into the Parables of our Lord. 189 the state of the invisible world ' : not in- deed a distinct view, or a particular reve- lation of facts, but enough to afford us full assurance of the melancholy doom of some mortals, and the blessedness of others. These are things, of which no human be- ing had yet presumed to open a view. But without dweUing upon the improba- bility of such a scene being attempted by the Evangelist, without authority, let us only fix our minds upon the great religious truth, with which the parable concludes. " If they hear not Moses and the prophets, «* neither will they be persuaded, though - one rose from the dead.'' This is in- deed teaching as one that had authority, and not as the Scribes. It is an oracle ; pronounced with firmness, and contammg pure and perfect truth. It conveys at once a complete justification of the pre- pamtory system of divine Revelation, which was sufficient to keep men from ' Luke xvi. 19—31. evil, • 'I 1 90 Para hies of our Lord. evil, if they would attend to it ; and dis- plays a perfect and unerring view of the human heart, always pretending to want superior aid, and yet neglecting what is actually bestowed. If the man ever lived who could have pronounced all this, with such distinctness, except Jesus Christ, I renounce all knowledge of the powers of man. He only could have said it, who, in announcing a new covenant declared, '' I '' came not to destroy the Law and the " Prophets, but to fulfil them \'' Who, besides him could see so deeply, at that time, into the great plan of the Gospel ? Certainly none of his disciples. Of* the parable of the PAansee* and Pmblican*^ I shall only observe, that if it bear not the stamp of the characteristic style and manner of the speaker, nothing ' Matt. V. 17. * Luke xviii. 9. • Observe that this parable of the publican, is not told by Matthew the publican, who might seem to have most interest iu it. The Evangelists com- mend not themselves, they leave that to others. ever Parables of our Lord. 191 ever did. I do not assert that no other person could have framed it, but I firmly think that no one had ever lived, at that period, who would have said, '' I tell you '* this man went down to his house jus- '' tified rather than the other : for every '' one that exalteth himself shall be '' abased ; and he that humbleth himself *' shall be exalted." If Christ had not said this, no one would ever have said it for him. f But we come now to a parable of a very different character, to one so entirely pro- phetical, that unless our Lord explained it, as he did so many parables, his Apostles themselves could not have understood it. This is the parable of the labourers in:\ the vineyard \ related only by St. Mat- ^f thew *. We distinctly learn from it, that though « Matt. XX. 1—16. • Upon the system of copying, which has not, in mv opinion, a foot to stand on, it would seem ut- . . terly I m-i 1 92 Parables of our Lord. though the Lord had called the Jews first into his vineyard, and in very early times, yet the same reward shall await those who were now called by Christ in person, and even those who should be called in the latest periods of the Gospel. Consequently, that their jealous plea, of being the ori- ginal people of God, would avail them nothing against the Gentiles, who should be equal partakers of the divine benevo- lence. When this was written by St. Matthew, it is most probable that the in- tention of Christ to call in the Gentiles was entirely unknown to his Apostles. We know with what difficulty St. Peter and St. Paul first took up the idea '. But yet more important is the parable, terly incredible, that the three other Evangelists should have neglected to insert this parable : which developes the whole system of God re- specting the two covenants. A most important in- struction ! * Acts X. 9, &C. 80 Parables of our Lord. 193 so admirably blending history and pro- phecy, of the iniquitous and cruel hus- bandmen, who refusing to produce the lawful profit of the vineyard, misused the successive messengers of their Lord " ; ^id finally rejected his own Son *, slaying him, and casting him out of the vineyard. So pointed was this allusion, in some of its parts, that the rulers of the Jews could not but peceive that it was spoken against them *. So important was it deemed by the Evangelists, that three of them have related it at large f. Yet, so far as it spoke of the murder of the Lord's Son, it was prophetical, when first delivered. The fulfilment of this part, the Evangelists had indeed seen when they wrote their n^^rra- « Matt. xxi. 33. Mark xii. 1. Luke xx. 9. • Where observe that he does not fail to notice that he had only one Son, his well-beloved, Mark xii. 6. * Matt. xxi. 45, and parallel. + Here also the comparison of the three narra- tives may be conveniently made, as abpve. K tivea. I > I fc €€ €€ 194 Parables of our Lord. lives. But the last awful sentence of the prophecy, " He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which " shall render him the fruits in their sea- " sons*/' was as yet unfulfilled, when these three Gospels were published : nor could any human foresight have suggested that it was tiien so near to its accomplishment So familiar, in the use of all the prophets, was the comparison of the Jewish people to a vineyard*, that no hearer, acquainted with the ancient Scriptures, could mis- take the application. St. Luke however alone has mentioned, of the Jewish priests and others, that, '* when they heard it, ■ Matt. xxi. 41. ♦ See those two sublime instances of it, in the Ixxxixth Psalm v. 8—16. and in Isaiah v. 1—7. Without copying the ancient prophets, Christ clearly shows, that the same Divine Spirit animated his expressions ; or, rather, that what he then de- livered by their agency, he now confirmed and ex- tended in person. '' thev Parables of our Lord. 195 " they said, God forbid ' !" So struck were they with the force of the applica- tion. But the three Evangelists unite in saying, that the priests perceived it to be spoken against them. They saw that it pointed at their iniquity, and intimated their merited punishment*. But to pro- nounce, first that they would slay the Son of their Lord, and then be miserably de- stroyed for that offence, was not, at that time, within the reach of any thing but prophetic inspiration, or still higher know- ledge *. » Luke XX. IG. * Matt. xxi. 45. Mark xii. 12. Luke xx. 19. • It is somewhat remarkable, that soon after this, the Sadducees put a parable to Jesus, concerning the woman who married seven brethren. This may show that parables were then used among the Jews, but not that they were composed by the common people. The Sadducees were subtle disputants, a kind of infidels. Our Lord's answer to them proved his vast superiority in knowledge ; and at the same lime exposed the shallow ignorance, so common in captious objectors. K 3 With 196 Parables of our Lord. With this, I shall conclude my observa- tions on the parables, wishing only to kave it impressed upon the minds of my readers, that they are all distin- guished by a style of allegorical con* trivance, invention, and various know- ledge, by no means within the reach of such men as Matthew, and his brother Evan- gelists ; and that many of them denote a knowledge which, at the time of writing, they could not possibly possess, except by inspiration ; which if we grant to them, in that degree, nothing eke will be liable to dispute. CHAP. 1 CHAPTER XII PISCOURSES OF OUR LORD. Besides the parables of Christ, there are also many of his other discourses re- lated in the Gospels, which lead us to very similar conclusions. They well de- serve a separate consideration. If these divine discourses at all resembled any that ever were delivered by man, there might be some pretence for considering them as the invention of men ; but since they have a style and character entirely peculiar to themselves, suited to the mysterious na- ture of Christ, and to no other, I cannot but regard it as infallibly certain, that they were actually delivered by him, and are faithfully reported by his Evangelists. K 3 These 1 198 Discourses of our Lord These discourses, very various in lengtli^ amount to no less than fifty ; after exclud- ing all those which consist of parables, and those which are direct prophecies. I must therefore, as in the case of the parables, confine my observations to a few of the most remarkable. Let us begin, with that which first occurs, his discourse with the woman of Samaria, at Jacob's well. In this we see at once the characteristic style of our Lord's discourses. Taking occasion from the water of the well, of which they were speaking, he begins a figurative allusion to the gifts of the Holy Spirit*, which he was to be- stow on those who should believe. This, however, was no new figure, invented by himself, but the accustomed language of the ancient prophets. Isaiah, in particular, exclaims *, '* Ho, every one that thirsteth " come ye to the waters *." The same figure was resumed by Jesus himself at the * John iv. 10. » Isa. Iv. 1. * See also Isa. xliv. 3. xii. 3, &c. feast i< i€ t( €( i€ Discourses of our Lord. 199 feast of Tabernacles, when he afterwards attended it. For St. John tells us that, '' in the last day, that great day of the feast *, Jesus stood, and cried. If any man thirst, " let him come to me and drink. He that believeth on me, as the Scripture hath said •, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water*:" and here the Evan- gelist explicitly interprets the allusion, ad- ding, ** but this he spake of the Spirit, *' which they that believe on him should «* receive '." Exactly in this style then, Jesus said to the woman of Samaria, '' Whosoever drinkcth of this water shall " thirst ag-ain : But whosoever shall drink *' of the water that I shall give him, shall *' never thirst : but the water that I shall '' give him shall be in him a well of wa- '* ter, springing up into everlasting life ^.'* ♦ On which tlie bringing in of water was an ac- customed, though not an enjoined, ceremony. ■ Is. Iviii. 7. * John vii. 37. ^ Ibid. 39. ♦ Ibid. 13, 14. K 4 St. John I 200 Discourses of our Lord. St. John alone records both these ac- counts ; evidently because, as in other in- stances, he was desirous to supply the omissions of the forner Evangelists, in matters which he justly considered as im- portant In the remainder of the dis* course, there are many things which could only have come from the authoritative teaching of Jesus. " God is a Spirit, and *' they that worship him must worship " him in spirit and in truth ' /' Could St. John have presumed to say what God is ? — he who also recorded the true declara- tion of Christ, that " no man knoweth the " Father but the Son ?" Certainly not. It must have been the declaration of the Son himself. .With equal authority does Jesus inform the woman, first, that ^' Sal- '' vation is of the Jews * ;' and yet that the hour was coming, when Jerusalem itself should no longer be the appropriated place for the worship of the Father ^ I » John iv. 24. * Ibid. 22. ^ Ibid. iv. 21. This Discourses of our Lord. 201 This intimation, belongs indeed to the pro- phetic declarations of the Lord, of which I mean separately to treat. But here it cannot be altogether omitted. The worship at Jerusalem was not yet abolished, when St. John wrote this account. How could he then, except by inspiration, know that it would so soon happen ? — But men inspired are not exactly those whom we should suspect of writing fictitious narra- tives. Inspired or not, however, he could not fail to be right, if he faithfully re- corded the words of his divine Master: and this, I contend, he certainly jlid, in the present, and all other instances. ' I pass on to the sermon on the mount, the most remarkable, in some respects, of all our Lord's discourses. This admirable collection of divine precepts, always ori- ginal, often sublime, what Christian does not know and revere ? If we say that no man ever lived, who could have framed or invented this discourse, we shall speak . K 5 not \ 1 1 1! J02 Discourses of our Lord, not only what must be felt by every con- siderate reader, but what may almost admit of positive proof. Most assuredly, no precepts or system of morality existed, in the time of the Apostles, from which these doctrines could have been extracted, or by which they could have been sug- gested. That which would have ap- proached the nearest to them might have been found in the ancient Scriptures. But even thence they could not have been drawn by any conscientious Jews, since, though they agree in fundamental points, there are manv instances in whicli the an- cient law is either improved or superseded by them. Thus, in the following passages. '* Ye have heard that it was said by them " of old time, thou shalt not commit adul- tery—hut I say unto you V' &c. " It hath been said whosoever shall put away his wife shall give her a bill " of divorcement, but I say unto you V €€ it t< ' Matt. V. 27. » Ibid. 31. it ti %C a t: Discourses of our Lord. 203 &c. *' It hath been said, thou shalt not " forsioear thyself, but I say unto you, " swear not at all ' r '' It hath been said an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth ; but / say unto you, that ye re- *' sist not evil \" It hath been said, thou shalt love thy neighbour and hate thine enemy, but I say unto you love your enemiesK'* In all these cases, already referred to for another purpose, there is clearly an addition or improvement made, by authority, to the commands of the first covenant. ' • • Whatever the Evangelists might have learned of the sublime morality of the ancient Scriptures, these things they could not have learned, for they are not there ; and the greater was their venera- tion for those inspired books, the less would they have ventured thus to deviate from them. It was impossible that they should ; since to improve upon them was &c. ' Matt. V. 33. * Ibid. 38. & 6 3 Ibid 43. beyond i 204 Discourses of our Lord. beyond the powers of man ; and to con- tradict them no pious person could have dared, who had not the authority of God, to deliver a more perfect law. If God per- mitted some things to the Jews, on account of the hardness of their hearts, who could presume that he would ever cease to permit them ? Who could foresee that he would at length abrogate his own indulgence, in contemplation of a purer system ? It re- quired the authority, as well as the wis- dom of the divine Jesus, to do tiiis ; nor could it have entered into the mind of any inferior person, bom in Judea, and edu- cated under the law of Moses. These parts of the sermon, therefore, speak de- cisively their own origin. But to be more particular. This di- vine discourse is noticed by two only of the Evangelists, St. Matthew and St. Luke '. The reports of these are very different • Matt. Y. 6, 7. Luke vi. 20—49. m Discourses of our Lord. 205 in extent. That of St. Matthew occu- pies three entire chapters; it gives the sermon in full detail, and probably con- tains the whole, or nearly the whole, of what our Lord delivered. St. Luke only touches upon some principal heads, but in the same order ; and so as to give, most evidently, fragments of the same discourse. It seems as if one historian had been an actual hearer of the whole, which, from the manner and circumstances, of its delivery, had sunk so deep into his mind, that every word of it was retained ; while the other had only caught up separate parts, as re- ported to him by one or more of the persons present, but had no means of preserving or obtaining the connection of the whole. Now this is precisely what would arise, in the most natural manner, from the circumstances of these two Evan- gelists. St. Matthew being a constant at- tendant and follower of Jesus, from the time of his being called as an Apostle, which was only a very short time before the deli- very 206 Discourses of our Lord. very of this sermon ; St. Luke^ only a disci- ple, and though ja;enerally a companion of the Apostles after his conversion, probably not so early attached, as to have been pre- sent on this occasion. St. Matthew, re- cently called, would naturally listen with the more eager attention to the first ex- tended discourse of his Master. St. Luke, who collected it long- after the time, would obtain only broken parts, deprived of some of their energy, and much of their original connection. Here also a new proof meets us that nothing like copying was practised by the Evangelists. For if St. Matthew wrote first, as is commonly supposed, it is not conceivable that St Luke would liave fol- lowed, with 80 much less perfect an ac- count of this memorable sermon. Or if St. Luke wrote first, such an account as he could collect from good information, and St. Matthew afterwards completed the re- port^ would not St. Mark also, on the copying I Discourses of our Lord, 207 copying hypothesis, have given us some- thing at least, of that which was so w ell deserving of everlasting remembrance. Nothing so completely reconciles all ideas on the subject, as the fact, which is con- firmed in so many different ways, that the Evangelists wrote separately and indepen- dently ; no one having yet seen what had been produced by another, when he com- posed his own Gospel ; except in the case of St. John, who confessedly wrote after all the rest. It belongs not to a plan like the pre- sent, to expatiate on the particulars of this divine discourse ; it would detain us much too long, and would perhaps divert our attention from our principal object, the veracity of the Evangelists. A few re- marks, directed chiefly to that point, will be most conducive to our purpose. St. Matthew gives us the scenery of ibis transaction. Our Saviour seated on f ~ a moun- 206 Discourses of our Lord, very of this sermon ; St. Luke, only a disci- ple, and though generally a companion of the Apostles after his conversion, probably not so early attached, as to have been pre- sent on this occasion. St. Matthew, re- cently called, would naturally listen with the more eager attention to the first ex- tended discourse of his Master. St. Luke, who collected it long after the time, would obtain only broken parts, deprived of some of their energy, and much of their original connection. Here also a new proof meets us that nothing like copying was practised by the Evangelists. For if St. Matthew wrote first, as is commonly supposed, it is not conceivable that St Luke would have fol- lowed, with so much less perfect an ac- count of this memorable sermon. Or if St. Luke wrote first, such an account as he could collect from good information, and St. Matthew afterwards completed the re- port^ would not St. Mark also, on the copying Discourses of our Lord, 207 copying hypothesis, have given us some- thing at least, of that which was so well deserving of everlasting remembrance. Nothing so completely reconciles all ideas on the subject, as the fact, which is con- firmed in so many different ways, that the Evangelists wrote separately and indepen- dently ; no one having yet seen what had been produced by another, when he com- posed his own Gospel ; except in the case of St. John, who confessedly wrote after all the rest. It belongs not to a plan like the pre- sent, to expatiate on the particulars of this divine discourse ; it would detain us much too long, and would perhaps divert our attention from our principal object, the veracity of the Evangelists. A few re- marks, directed chiefly to that point, will be most conducive to our purpose. St. Matthew gives us the scenery of this transaction. Our Saviour seated on a moun- V W ^ It I i 208 Discourses of our Lord. a mountain^ and his disciples gathered rounds to receive his sacred instructions. He begins with those beatitudes, which have been an inexhaustible source of sermons to the ministers of his Church ; a source which never can be exhausted, while Christian principles require to be iHusti-ated and enforced. These, which are much more fully given by St. Matthew than St. Luke, contain, among many holy instructions, some that are peculiarly fitted to our present purpose. They express thoughts, which never till then had en- tered into the mind of man ; thoughts as just as they are original ; and which con- vey, in fact, the very essence of the truths, which Christ was first commissioned to re- veal. Such are the blessings pronounced on meekness, humility, and poverty of spirit; the necessity for purity, the joy of affliction, the triumph of persecution ! Who shall persuade a man of reason and reflec- tion, that Matthew and Luke could or would have invented these things; or would Discourses of our Lord. 209 would have opened their system of pre- cepts, by denouncing worldly adversity, to that cause which they were most desirous to support ? Of the authoritative additions to the ancient law, which this «ermon introduces, I have already spoken. They are chiefly recorded by St. Matthew : but St. Luke unites in reporting that most remarkable among them ; '' But I say unto you which '' hear, love your enemies, do good to them " that hate you, bless them that curse you, " and pray for them which despitefully use " you'.*' This is not the voice of human nature, but of much higher wisdom, and superior purity. No man had ever lived, who would have invented this precept. The strongest passions of the heart op- pose it, the most inveterate prejudices of all nations and all climates disavow and contradict it. Commanded as it is by * Luke vi. 28, also Matt. v. 44. a divine I 1 210 Discourses of our Lord. a divine teacher, it is hardly possible even now to obtain any thing like obedience to it. Passion resists, and artifice evades it; and they who niost profess to follow it, cannot always so subdue themselves, as to practice what they promise. We may regard it as an absolute certainty, there- fore, that the invention of man would never have produced this precept ; and less perhaps than any other, the invention of a Jew, by whom hatred of some enemies was supposed to be a principle of duty. The very foundation for it was wanting, in all minds but that of Jesus ; till the doctrine of our being all brethren, sons of one Almighty Father, had been fully revealed and explained. On this part of the subject, both Evan- gelists expatiate, exhibiting it in various lights, and adducing for it various reasons ; as recollection brought back, or informa- tion supplied, the words of their divine teacher. St. Luke concludes this class of precepts I Discourses of our Lord. 211 precepts by saying, '' Be ye therefore '' merciful, as your Father also is merci- '' fuP." St. Matthew gives it, '' Be ye ** therefore perfect, even as your Father " which is in Heaven is perfect* ;" view- ing perfection, in that instance, only so far as it related to love, gentleness, and bene- volence. The commands that follow, against os- tentation in giving alms, in praying, and in fasting, are preserved by St. Matthew alone'. They extend to the whole of his sixth chapter, which includes also that invaluable model of general suppli- cation, the Lord's prayer*; and many .1 « Luke vi. 3fi. * Matt. v. 48. ^ Matt. vi. 1—34. ♦ St. Luke gives this prayer, in a different part of his history, (Ch, xi. 2.) nor can we think it ex- traordinary, that our Lord should more liian once deliver an instruction of such value and importance. Hence also some slight differences in the expres- sions, which perhaps might be made by Christ himself. holy \t 212 Discourses of our Lord. holy instructions to rely on God, instead of perplexing our minds too much with worldly cares. To believe that any part of these precepts could be the invention of man, and of a man who (according to the in- fidel's notion) must have been an impostor, requires a stretch of credulity, which nothing but the fatal determination to be- lieve any thing rather than the truth could possibly produce. Of the Lord's prayer, in particular^ we may safely say, that, as no man ever did compose a supplication to God, so brief, so comprehensive, so holy, — it cannot be unreasonable to believe, that no one ever could have done it ; with- out the aid of that wisdom and that spirit, which dwelt completely in Christ Jesus, and in none before or after him. The precepts on justice and judgment are given by both these Evangelists'. 1 shall not however at present make them • Malt. vii. 1. Luke vi. 37« the Discourses of our Lord. 213 the subject of remark ; except to recall to observation, that the great and funda- mental principle of all justice, between man and man, is here more clearly ex- pressed, than in any other system of mo- rality in the world. "All things what- " soever ye would that men should do to " you, do ye even so to them \" — '' For this," adds St Matthew, '' is the law and " the prophets." It is, in fact, the per- fect abstract, and vital essence of all their morality, and indeed of all morality. But by what powers these Evangelists looked so deeply into their meaning will never be explained, unless we refer their know- ledge to the actual teaching of their Lord. The pi'ecepts which follow are mixed, in St. Matthew's account, with intima- tions concerning future judgment, which • Matt. vii. 12. Luke vi» 31 • never f ^16 Discourses of our Lord. said, perhaps a few more general remarks may suffice. In every discourse attributed to our Lord, by any one of the Evange- lists, we find the same uniform character of dignity, authority, profound knowledge, and deep insight into the most secret counsels of God : with a frequent reference to the Father, in apostrophe or prayer, conceived in such terms, as would neither have become any other teacher, nor were ever attributed to any. They are the words of the incarnate Son of God, and would suit no other speaker. Thus, in our Lord's 5th discourse*, the denunciations of woe for incredulity, and the declaration of what would happen at the last day, have all the stamp of his authority. " Woe unto thee Chorazin ! " woe unto thee BethsaidaM" — ''it shall * An enumeratiun of our Lord's discourses, as here referred to, is given in the Appendix to this work. • Matt. xi. 20. ''be €C CC Discourses of our Lord. 217 *' be more tderable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of Judgment, than for you *." — In his sixth discourse «, who but Christ himself could have declared, with such decision, what sins should or should not be forgiven? We tremble while we read, on his authority, that there exists an offence which precludes all hope of par- don; but we derive comfort from the thought that, probably, it was also pecu- liar to that time and place f , and not, at this time, capable of repetition. But the knowledge which this declaration implied belonged to Christ alone : and this we may surely say, from our knowledge of • These words are reported also by St. Luke, as repeated when he sent out the seventy disciples. Luke X. 13. ' M^tt. xiL 31. Mark iii. 28. See also Luke xii. 10. t Namely, the Imputing of his mighty works to the power of the devil. For St. Mark adds to his account, ** Because they said, he hath an unclean " Spirit." I, human *i ^ ■f 218 Diuourses of our Lord. human nature^ that if any of his followers had been authorized to pronounce, what sin was the least capable of forgiveness, they would have fixed on an offence against their Lord, rather than ag-ainst the Holy Ghost. Of those numerous discourses, which have been preserved by St. John alone, we may say in general, that they are often con- ceived in a sublime strain of allegory, w hich no human teacher has ever equalled. Labour not for the meat which perish- eth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you ".** " I am " the bread of life ; he that cometh to me " shall never hunger, and he that bclieveth " on me shall never thirst*." But how- ever peculiar these things may be, they are the genuine peculiarities of Christ, and of no other person. His discourses, by