I % |

¦¦'"mm
m

; . . • ¦ .'„•¦¦

•YARJE-VMVEKSITinr- ILIII3IBiraBr

DIVINITY SCHOOL
TROWBRIDGE LIBRARY

HULSEAN LECTURES, 1859.

HISTORICAL LECTURES

t *

pf4 ml ihy °$lm& Ihm ^iftrnt*

NOTES,' CEiTIGAL, HISTOEIOAL, AND EXPLANATOEY.

BY
C. J. ELLICOTT, D.D.,
BISHOP OF QLOUCESTEE AND BRISTOL, AUTHOR OF CRITICAL AND
GRAMMATICAL COMMENTARIES ON SI. PAUL'S EPISTLES.

%n'bab&x:
WARREN F. DRAPER.
1877.

Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1861, by
GOULD AND LINCOLN,
In the Clerk's Office of thu District Court of the District of Massachusetts

PREFACE

The following work consists of eight Lectures, of which
the first six were preached before the University of Cam
bridge in the year 1859. The two remaining Lectures are
added as giving a necessary completeness to the subject, and
as in substantial accordance with the will of the munificent
Founder. It is scarcely necessary to make any preliminary remarks
upon the text of the Lectures, as nearly all that seems re
quired in the way of introduction to the subject will be found
in the opening Lecture. It may, however, be desirable to
remind the reader that he has before him no attempt at a
complete Life of our Lord, but only Lectures upon it. These
it has been my object to make as complete as I have been
able in everything that relates to the connection of the events,
or that in any way illustrates their probable order and succes
sion. The separate incidents, however, have not in every
case been dwelt upon at equal length ; some being related by
a single Evangelist, and requiring no explanatory comments,
while others, from being related by two or more, and some
times appearing to involve discordant statements, have called
for somewhat lengthened considerations. Those portions in
which, for every reason, it has seemed desirable that some

X PREFACE.
regular continuity of narrative should be carefully preserved,
viz., the Last Passover, and the Forty Days, were not
required to be delivered from the pulpit, and have thus ap
proached more nearly to regular history. I have, however,
in both been most careful to preserve the same tone and char
acter which marked the rest, and I have been thankful that
the circumstances under which the others were written and
delivered have prescribed for me in these last two Lectures,
almost as a matter of course, that gravity and solemnity of
tone which is so especially called for in the recital of events
so blessed and so holy, yet withal so awful and so stupendous.
To adopt the usual tone of mere historical writing when such
subjects are before us, seems to me little short of profanity ;
and I have been taught, by the repulsiveness of some nar
ratives of the closing scenes of our Lord's ministry, written
in the conventional style of ordinary history, to be more than
usually thankful that the nature of my present undertaking
has at any rate prevented me from sharing in an error so great
and so grievous.
A few remarks must be made on the notes. In these it has
been my effort to combine two things which are not always
found in union — a popular mode of treating the question
under consideration, and accuracy both in outline and detail.
How far I may have succeeded, it is for others to judge. All
I will venture to ask the reader kindly to bear in mind is this :
that much time and very great care and thought have been
expended on these notes (more, perhaps, than might have been
needful if they had been longer or their language more tech
nical), and that thus they are not always to be judged of by
their brevity or the familiar list of authorities to which they
refer. In my references I have aimed solely at being useful,

PREFACE. XI
not to the special, but to the general student, and thus have
but rarely permitted myself to direct attention to any works
or treatises that are not perfectly well known and accessible.
I have not, by any means, attempted to exclude Greek from
my notes, as this seems to me, in such works as the present,
to savor somewhat of an affectation of simplicity ; but I have
still, in very many cases, either translated or quoted from the
translations of others the longer passages from the great Greek
commentators which form so considerable and so valuable a
portion of these notes. A similar course has been pursued
in reference to German expositors, though longer quotations
from them are only occasional. These latter writers are, as
it will be observed, often referred to ; but care has been taken
only to give prominence to the better class of them, and fur
ther to refer, where translations exist, to the work in its Eng
lish rather than its German form. In a word, my humble
aim throughout these notes has been to engage the interest of
the general reader, and I pray God that herein I may have
succeeded ; for much that is here discussed has of late years
often heen put forward in popular forms that neither are, nor
perhaps were intended to be, conformable to the teaching of
the Church. Of my own views it is perhaps not necessary
for me to speak. This only will I say, that, though I neither
feel, nor affect to feel, the slightest sympathy with the so-called
popular theology of the present day, I still trust that, in the
many places in which it has been almost necessarily called
forth in the present pages, I have used no expression towards
sceptical writings stronger than may have been positively
required by allegiance to catholic truth. Towards the honest
and serious thinker who may feel doubts or difficulties in some
of the questions connected with our Lord's life, all tenderness

xii PREFACE.
may justly be shown ; but to those who enter upon this holy
ground with the sinister intentions of the destructive critic, or
of the so-called unprejudiced historian, it is not necessary
or desirable to suppress all indication of our repulsion.
Marginal references have been added, as indicating the
authority for the expressions and statements of the text.
When these are not present, and guarded conjecture has been
resorted to, particular care has been taken to make this most
distinctly apparent.
It is not necessary to detain the reader with further com
ments ; and it only remains for me, with all lowliness and
reverence, to lay before Almighty God this attempt, this poor
and feeble attempt, to set forth the outward connection of
those incidents that inspired pens have been moved to record
of the life of His Eternal Son. May He pardon its many
failings and defects ; may He look with pity on efforts, many
of which have been made while the shadow of His hand has
rested darkly over him who strove to make them ; and may
He bless this partial first-fruits of a mercifully spared life, by
permitting it to minister, in its humble measure and degree, to
His honor and glory, and to the truth as it is in His blessed
Son.
TPIAS, MONA2, 'EAEH20N.
Cambridge, October, 1860.

CONTENTS.

LECTURE I.
Introbnttorg doimbiralitrns art the €^nxntttt'utua
ai the Joar (SjbbjjjIs.
Statement of the subject, 19. — Reasons for choosing it, 19.— Method adopted
in the Lectures, 24 sq. — Caution in applying the. principles laid down, 25. —
Sources of the history, 26. — Details mainly in reference to internal charac
teristics, 28 sq. — Necessity of recognizing the individualities of the four Gos
pels, 31. — Errors of earlier harmonists, 32 6q. — Individuality of St. Mat
thew's Gospel, 35. — St. Matthew's portraiture of our Lord, 36. — Individuality
of St. Mark's Gospel, 37. —St. Mark's portraiture of our Lord, 39. — Individ
uality of St. Luke's Gospel, 41. — St. Luke's portraiture of our Lord, 42.—
Individuality of St. John's Gospel, 44 sq. — St. John's portraiture of our
Lord, 45. — Conclusion, 47.

LECTURE II.
fht §}iri}j una §ttfantg of aux Jtorb.
General aspects of the present undertaking, 49. — Arrangement of the subject,
51. — The Miraculous Conception of our Lord; its mystery and sublimity, 52
eq. — The narrative of the conception considered generally, 54. — The narra-
2

14 CONTENTS.
tive of the conception considered in its details, 56 sq.— Self-evident truth of
the narrative, 58.— Journey of the Virgin to Elizabeth, 60 sq. — Internal
truthfulness of the two inspired Canticles, 63. — Keturn of the Virgin and
the revelation to Joseph, 64. — Journey to Bethlehem, and taxing under
Quirinus, 66 sq. — The Nativity and its attendant circumstances, 69 sq. — The
Presentation in the temple, 73 sq.— The visit and adoration of the Magi, 77.
— The guiding star, 78 sq.— The extreme naturalness of the sacred narrative,
80. — Flight into Egypt and murder of the Innocents, 83. — The silence ot
Josephus, 83. —The return to Judaea, 85 sq. — Conclusion, 87.

LECTURE III.
SChi darlg Quoxun Ipjusirg.
The early years of our Lord's life, 89. — Reserve of the Evangelists, 89. —The
brief notice of our Lord's childhood, 90. — Equally brief notice of our Lord's
youth, 91. — Visit to the temple when twelve years old, 93. — Search for and
discovery of the Holy Child, 94 sq. — Frivolous nature of the objections urged
against the narrative, 98. — Silence of the Evangelists on the next eighteen
years of our Lord's life, 99 sq. — The mental and spiritual development of our
Lord, 102. — The ministry of the Baptist and its probable effects, 104 sq. —
Journey of our Lord to the Baptism of John, 106 sq. — The nature of St.
John's recognition of onr Lord, 108. — The Temptation of our Lord; its true
nature and circumstances, 110.— The temptation no vision or trance, 111.—
The temptation an assault from without, 112. — The temptation addressed to
the three parts of our nature, 113. — The ministering angels, and the return to
Galilee, 115.— The testimony of the Baptist, 115. — The journey to and mir
acle at Cana in Galilee, 117. —Remarks on the miracle, 117 sq. — Brief stay
at Capernaum, and journey to Jerusalem, 121. — The expulsion of the traders
from the temple, 122. — Impression made by this and other acts, 124. — The
discourse of our Lord with Nicodemus, 124. — Our Lord leaves Jerusalem and
retires to the northeast parts of .Tudaja, 125. — The final testimony of the

CONTENTS. 15
Baptist, 126 sq. — Our Lord's journey through Samaria, 129 sq. — The further
journey of our Lord to Galilee, 131. — Our Lord's return to Jerusalem at the
feast of Purim, 132 sq. — Main objection to this opinion, 135 sq. — The miracle
at the pool of Bethesda, 136. — Distinctive character of this epoch, 138. — The
termination of the early Judxan ministry, 139. — Concluding remarks and
exhortation, 141.

LECTUKE IY.
%\t HTunsirji in €astent (§%,Yi\zz.
Resumption of the subject, 143. — Brief recapitulation of the events of the Ju-
daean ministry, 143 sq. — Two preliminary observations, 146. — The exact
period of time embraced in the present Lecture, 146. — The variations of order
in the three synoptical Gospels, 147. — The order of St. Mark and St. Luke
followed in this Lecture, 149 sq. — Appearance of our Lord in the synagogue
at Nazareth, 152. — Departure to and abode at Capernaum, 154. — Special
call of the four disciples, 155. — Healing of a demoniac iu the synagogue at
Capernaum, 156. — Continued performance of miracles ou the same day, 157.
— The nature of our Lord's ministerial labors as indicated by this one day,
159. — Probable duration of this circuit, 161. — The return to Capernaum, and
healing of the faithful paralytic, 162. —The call of St. Matthew, and the feast
at his house, 164. — Further charges; the plucking of the ears of corn, 165. —
The healing of a man with a withered hand on a Sabbath, 167- — Choice of
the twelve Apostles, and Sermon on the Mount, 169. — Probable form of the
Sermon on the Mount, 170. — The healing of the centurion's servant, and
raising of the widow's son, 171 sq. — The Baptist's message of inquiry, 173. —
Short circuit; fresh charges of the Pharisees, 174. — The teaching by parables
176.— The passage across and storm on the lake, 177.— The Gergesene de
moniacs, 178. — The raising of Jairus' daughter, 179. — The second visit to the
synagogue at Nazareth, 181. — The sending forth the twelve Apostles, 182 sq.
*-»The feeding of the five thousand, 184. —Concluding remarks, 185-6.

16 CONTENTS.
LECTURE Y.
%\t Pfinistrg in ^axi\txxt (Szlilzt*
General features of this part of our Lord's history, 187. — Special contrasts and
characteristics, 185. — Chronological limits of the present portion, 188. — Pro
gressive nature of our Lord's ministry, 189. — Contrasts between this and pre
ceding portions of the narrative, 190. — Teaching and preaching, rather than
miracles, characteristic of this period, 191. — Such a difference probable from
the nature of the case, 193. — The return across the lake; our Lord walks on
the water, 193 sq. — Return to Capernaum; our Lord's discourse in the syna
gogue, 196 sq. — Healings in Gennesareth, and return of the Jewish emis
saries, 199 sq. — Journey to Tyre and Sidon, and the miracle performed there,
201. — Return toward Decapolis and the eastern shore of the lake, 203. —
Journey to Decapolis ; healing of a deaf and dumb man, 204. — The feeding of
the four thousand, 205. — Not identical with the feeding of the five thousand,
206. — Return to the western side of the lake, 207. — Journey northward to
Caesarea Philippi, 208. — The locality and significance of the Transfiguration,
210. — The healing of a demoniac boy, 211. — Return to and probable tempo
rary seclusion at Capernaum, 212 sq. — Conclusion and recapitulation, 215 sq.

LECTURE VI.
ftfc* goanwgings iofoarb ^ixu&uhm.
General character of the present portion of the inspired narrative, 218. — Limits
of the present section, 219. — Harmonistic and chronological difficulties, 219
sq- — Precise nature of these difficulties, 221.— Comparison of this portion of
St. Luke's Gospel with that of St. John, 223 sq. — Results of the above consid
erations, 225. — Brief stay at Capernaum; worldly requests of our Lord's
brethren, 226 sq. —Journey to Jerusalem through Samaria, 228. —Our Lord's

CONTENTS. 17
arrival and preaching at Jerusalem, 230. — The woman taken in adultery;
probable place of tbe incident in the Gospel history, 232. — Further teaching
and preaching at Jerusalem, 233 sq. — Departure from Jerusalem, and mission
of the Seventy, 235. — Further incidents in Judsea recorded by St. Luke, 236.
— Our Lord's visit to Jerusalem at the Feast of Dedication, 237 sq. — The
Lord's message to Herod, and preparation to leave Peraaa, 240. — Probable
events during the last two days in Peraea, 242 sq. — Apparently confirmatory
notice in St. John, 244. — Effect produced by the raising of Lazarus, 245. —
Incidents in the last journey to Judaea, 247 sq. — Onward progress toward
Jerusalem, 250.— Arrival at Jericho, 251. —Conclusion, 253.

LECTURE VII.
&\t fast f assofeer.
Introductory comments, 254. — Characteristics of the preceding portion of the
narrative, 255. — Characteristics of the present portion, 256. —* The journey
to and supper at Bethany, 257. — The triumphal entry into Jerusalem, 259
sq. — Reflections on the credibility of the narrative, 263. — Our Lord's entry
into Jerusalem, 265. — The cursing of the barren fig-tree (Monday), 266 sq. —
The cleansing of the temple, and works of mercy performed there, 268. —
Answers to the deputation from the Sanhedrin (Tuesday), 270 sq. — Con
tinued efforts on the part of the deputation, 273. — The question about the
duty of paying tribute to Caesar, 274 sq. — Exposure and frustration of the
stratagem, 277. — The question of the Sadducees touching the resurrection,
278. — The question of the lawyer about the greatest commandment, 280. —
The question relative to the woman taken in adultery, 281. — Our Lord's
question respecting the Son of David, 283. — The offering of the poor widow,
285. — The request of the Greek proselytes, 286 sq. — The departure from the
temple, and the last prophecies, 288. — Consultation of the Sanhedrin, and
treachery of Judas (Wednesday), 290.— The celebration of the Last Supper
(Thursday), 291 sq. — The agony in Gethsemane (Thursday night), 296 sq.—
The betrayal of our Lord, 299. —The preliminary examination before Annas,
2*

18 CONTENTS.
300. — The examination before the Sanhedrin, 302 sq. — The brutal mockery of
the attendants, 305. —The fate of Judas Iscariot, 306.— Our Lord's first ap
pearance before Pilate, 307 sq. — The dismissal of our Lord to Herod, 310. —
Second appearance before Pilate ; his efforts to set our Lord free, 311 sq. —
Scourging of our Lord; renewed efforts of Pilate, 314 sq. — The Ckuoimx-
iom, 317. — Occurrences from the third to the sixth hour, 319. — The darkness
from the sixth to the ninth hour, 320 sq. — The portents that followed our
Lord's death, 323. — The removal from the cross, and burial of the Lord's
body, 325 sq, — Conclusion, 328.

LECTURE VIII.
Kfce ,#nrig gags.
Introductory comments, 331. —Doctrinal questions involved in this portion of
the history, 331 sq. — Characteristics of the present portion of the narrative;
number of the accounts, 334. — Their peculiarities and differences, 335 sq. —
Resumption of the narrative, 338. —Visit of the women to the sepulchre, 339
sq.— The appearance of the angels to the women at the sepulchre, 343. —The
two Apostles at the tomb, 344. — The Lord's appearance to Mary Magdalene,
346 sq. — Probable effect produced on the Apostles by Mary's tidings, 349. —
The Lord's appearance to the other ministering women, 350 sq. — The appear
ance of our Lord to the two disciples journeying to Emmaus, 852 sq. — Ina
bility of the disciples to recognize our Lord, 355. — Appearance to the ten
Apostles, 857 sq. — Disbelief of Thomas; our Lord's appearance to the eleven
Apostles, 361. — Appearance by the lake of Tiberias, 362 sq. — Reverential
awe of the Apostles, 365.— Appearance to the brethren in Galilee, 367. —The
Lord's Ascension, 369 sq. — Conclusion, 371 sq.

THE

LIFE OF CHRIST.

LECTURE I.

INTROL-UCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE CHARACTER
ISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS.
THESE ABE WRITTEN, THAT YE MIGHT BELIEVE THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST,
THE SON Off SOD; AND THAT BELIEVIMG TE MIGHT HAVE UOTE THROUGH
his if ame. — St. John, xx. 31.
These words, brethren, which, in the context from which
they are taken, allude more particularly to
the miracles of Christ, but which I venture ^s^mento/s^
here to extend in application to the whole
evangelical history, will in some degree prepare you for
the subject that I purpose laying before you in this series
of Lectures. After serious meditation on the various sub
jects which the will of the munificent founder of these
Lectures leaves open to the preacher, it has appeared to
me that none would be likely to prove more useful and
more edifying than the history and connection of the
events in the earthly life of our Lord and Master, Jesus
Christ. Two grave reasons have weighed with me in choosing
this momentous subject; one more exclusively
relating to the younger portion of my audi- *£**"*»*
ence, the other relating to us all.
The first reason has been suggested by the feeling, which .
I believe is not wholly mistaken, that these
" First reason.
Lectures are too often liable, from the nature
of the subjects to which they are restricted, to prove un«

20 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE Lect. I.
attractive to the younger portion of those among us. It
is but seldom that the young feel much interested in the
debated questions of Christian evidence. Nay, it is natural
that they should not. With the freshness and warmth of
springing life, with the generous impulses of yet unchilled
hearts, they are ready for the most part to believe rather
than to doubt, to accept rather than to question. The calm
and impartial investigation, the poised judgment, the sus
pended assent, which must all characterize the sober dis
putant on Christian evidences, and which we of a maturer
age may admire and appreciate, are, I truly believe, often
so repulsive to our younger brethren, that after having sat
out a sermon or two, they company with us no more. This
applies with still greater force, as has been thoughtfully
suggested to me, to the new comers in the October term,
whose first entrance into the Church of this our mother
University is commonly during the second part of the
course of the Hulsean Lecturer. They have thus all the
disadvantage of coming among us in the middle of a
course ; and when to that is added a consciousness of de
fective sympathy with the theme of the preacher, they are
tempted, I fear, thus early to withdraw from what they
deem unedifying, and so to lay the foundation of the evil
habit of neglecting attendance at this Church, and of treat
ing lightly the great Christian duty of assembling ourselves
together in the house of God.
It has thus seemed desirable to choose a subject which,
if properly treated, ought to interest and to edify the very
youngest hearer among us, and which may admit of such
natural divisions as may cause the later hearers to feel less
sensibly the disadvantage of not having attended the ear
lier portion of the course.
My second reason, however, for the selection of this pe-
secmdreason. culia.r subJect "» one that applies to us all,
and is still more grave and momentous. It is
based on the deep conviction, that to the great questions
connected with the life of our Redeemer, Jesus Christ, the

Lect. I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. 21
Son of Adam, the Son of God, all the controversies of these
latter days are tendinsr noticeably to con-
' . . ° J Luke iii. 38.
verge. Here it is that even the more abstract
questions, that try the faith of our own times, — questions
as abstract as the degree of inspiration of the Written
Word,1 or the nature of the efficacies of the Atonement2
which that Word declares to us, — must seek for their ulti
mate adjustment. Here is the battle-ground of the pres
ent, here, perchance, the mystic Armageddon of coming
strife. Already forms of heresy more subtle than ever Ebi-
onite propounded or Marcionite devised, — forms of heresy
that have clad themselves in the trappings of modern his-
1 In every complete discussion on the Inspiration of the Scriptures, the nature
of the more special references of our Lord to the Old Testament must be fully
and fairly considered. To take an extreme case: when our Lord refers, dis
tinctly and explicitly (Matt. xii. 39, 40), to " the sign of the prophet Jonas," have
we any escape from one of two alternatives, either, (a) that, in spite of all that
has been urged to the contrary, and all the scarcely disguised contempt with
which the history of Jonah has been treated by modern criticism (comp. Hitzig,
Kleinen Propheten, p. 361 sq. ), the narrative is notwithstanding true and typical,
and referred to by our Lord as such ; or, (b) that it is fabulous, and that our
Lord wittingly made use of a fabulous narrative to illustrate His Resurrection?
Modern speculation does not hesitate to accept (6), and to urge that it was not a
part of our Lord's mission to correct all the wrong opinions, more or less con
nected with religion, which might be prevalent in the minds of those with
whom He was conversing (comp. Norton, Genuineness of Gospel, Vol. ii. p. 477).
If we rest contented with such unhappy statements, we must be prepared to
remodel not only our views of our Lord's teaching, but of some of the highest
attributes of His most holy life : consider and contrast TJllmann, Unsundlichlceit
Jesu, § 19 (Transl. p. 8, 75, Clark). The assertion that "the sign of Jonah " was
not referred by our Lord to His resurrection, but to His whole earthly life, seems
distinctly untenable (see esp. Meyer on Matt. xii. 40); but were it otherwise, it
could scarcely affect the above considerations.
To contemplate a rejection of these words from the inspired narrative in the
face of the most unquestioned external evidence (Maurice, Kings and Prophets,
p. 357) cannot be characterized as otherwise than as in the highest degree arbi
trary and uncritical.
2 Everything which tends to derogate from the Divinity of our Lord tends, as
Priestly long ago clearly perceived (History of Corruptions, Vol. i. p. 153), to do
away with the idea of an atonement, iu the proper sense of the word, for tltt
sins of other men. (Comp. Magee, Atonement, Dissert. 3.) So, conversely, all
limitations of the atonement, all tendencies to represent our Lord's sacrifice as
merely an act of moral greatness (comp. Jowett, Romans, Vol. ii. p. 481), will be
found inevitably to lead to indirect denials of the Catholic doctrine of the union
of the two natures in our Lord, and to implied limitations of His Divinity.
(Compare, but with some reserve, Macdonell, Lectures on the Atonement, Donel-
lan Lectures, p. 61 sq.)

22 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE Lbct. I.
torical philosophy,1 and have learned to accommodate them
selves to the more distinctly earthly aspects of modern
speculation, have appeared in other Christian lands, and
are now silently producing their influence on thousands
and tens of thousands who bear on their foreheads the bap
tismal cross of Christ. Already, even in our own more
favored country, humanitarian views with regard to the
Person of our Redeemer are thrusting themselves forward
with a startling and repulsive activity, — intruding them
selves into our popular literature as well as into our popu
lar theology,2 yea, and winning assent by their seductive
appeal to those purely human motions and feelings within
us, which, while we are in the flesh, we can harldly deem
separable from the nature of even sinless man. Already
too a so-called love of truth, a bleak, barren, loveless love
of truth, which the wise Pascal3 long since denounced, — a
love of truth that like Agag claims to walk delicately, and
to be respected and to be spared, — is gathering around it
self its Epicurean audiences ; already is it making its boast
of -fabled civilizations that rest on other bases than on
Christ and His Church,4 daily and hourly laboring with
1 For a clear statement of the two problems connected with the Gospel history
(the criticism of the evangelical writings, and the criticism of the evangelical
history), and the regular development of modern speculation, see the Introduc
tion to the useful work of Ebrard, Wissenschaftliche Kritik der evangelischen
Geschichte, } 2—7, p. 3 sq. (ed. 2).
2 See Preface to Commentary on tlie Philippioms, Colossians, and Philemon,
p. x.
3 The following remark of this thoughtful writer deserves consideration : " On
se fait une idole de la verite meme : car la verite hors de la charite n'est pas
Dieu; elle est son image, et une idole qu'il ne faut point aimer, ni adorer; et
encore moins faut-il aimer et adorer son contraire, qui est le mensonge." Pen
ates, II. 17. 74, p. 297 (Didot, 1846).
4 It does not seem nnju6t to say that the views advocated in the most recent
history of civilization that has appeared in this country (Buckle, History of Civ
ilization, Lond. 1858) cannot be regarded as otherwise than plainly hostile to
Christianity. There is a special presupposition in viewing the history of Christ
in its relation to the world, which such writers as Mr. Buckle unhappily either
scorn or reject,— a presupposition which a historian of a far higher strain has
well defined as the root of all our modern civilization, and as that from which
civilization can never separate itself, without assuming an entirely changed
form; "it is the presupposition that Jesus is the Son of God, in a sense which
cannot be predicated of any human being,— the perfect image of the supreme

Lect. I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. 23
that restless energy that belongs to " the walkers in dry
places," to make us regard as imaginary or illusory those
holy prepossessions in reference to the Evangelical history,
that ought, and were designed by God himself, to exercise
their unquestioned influence and sovereignty over our
whole inner life.1
It is this feeling that has more especially led me to fix
upon the Life of our Lord and Master as the subject of
these Lectures. It is the deep feeling, that every effort,
however humble and homely, to set forth the groupings,
the harmonies, and the significances of that holy History,
is a contribution to the spiritual necessities of our own
times, that has now moved me to enter upon this lofty
theme. Here it is, and here only is it, that our highest
ideal conceptions of perfection find only still higher prac
tical realizations. Here it is that, while we humbly strive
to trace the lineaments of the outward, we cannot fail, if
we be true to God and to our own souls, to feel the work
ings of the inward,2 and while the eyes dwell lovingly on

personal God in the form of that humanity that was estranged from Him ; the
presupposition that in Him appeared the source of the divine life itself in
humanity, and that by Him the idea of humanity was realized." Neander,
Leben Jesu Chr. p. 5 (Transl. § 2, p. 5, Bohn). Contrast with this the unhappy
and self-contradictory comments of Hase. Leben Jesu, § 14, p. 16.
1 It has been well said by Ebrard, " We do not enter on the Evangelical His
tory, with spy-glass in hand, to seek our own credit by essaying to disclose ever
fresh instances of what is contradictory, foolish, or ridiculous, but with the
faithful, clear, and open eye of him who joyfully recognizes the good, the beau
tiful, and the noble, wheresoever he finds it, and on that account finds it with
joy, and never lays aside his favorable prepossession till he is persuaded of the
contrary. We give ourselves up to the plastic influence of the Gospels, live in
them, and at the same time secure to ourselves, while we thus act in the spirit of
making all our own, a deeper insight into the unity, beauty, and depth of the
Evangelical History." — Kritik der Evang. Geschichte, § 8, p. 38.
2 It is satisfactory to find in most of the higher cla6s of German writers on the
Life of our Lord a distinct recognition of this vital principle of the Gospel nar
rative : "As man's limited intellect could never, without the aid of God's revela
tion of Himself to the spirit of man, have originated the idea of God, so the
image of Christ could never have sprung from the, consciousness of sinful
humanity, but must be regarded as the reflection of the actual life of such a
Christ. It is Christ's self-revelation, made, through all generations, in the frag
ments of His history that remain, and in the workings of His Spirit which
inspires these fragments, and enables us to recognize in them one complete

24 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE LbCt. I.
the inspired outlines of the history of Jesus, and of Him
crucified, to feel His image waxing -clearer in the soul, His
eternal sympathies mingling with our infirmities, and en
larging into more than mortal measures the whole spiritual
stature of the inner man.1
After this lengthened, but I believe not unnecessary in
troduction, let me, with fervent prayer for grace and assist
ance from the illuminating Spirit of God, at once address
myself to my arduous and responsible task.
MetM adopted (I.) And first, as to the method which,
in these Lectures. ^fa tne heJp Qf Q^ J inten(J to pUVSae.
My first object in these Lectures is to arrange, to com
ment upon, and, as far as possible, to illustrate, the prin
cipal events in our Redeemer's earthly history; to show
their coherence, their connection,2 and their varied and sug
gestive meanings ; to place, as far as may be safely attempt
ed, the different divine discourses in their apparently true
positions, estimated chronologically,3 and to indicate how
whole." — Neander, Leben Jesu Clir. p. 6 (Transl. § 3, p. 4, Bohn). See further the
eloquent remarks of Dr. Lange, in the introduction to his valuable work, Das
Leben Jesu noch den Evangelien, 1. 1. 6,Vol.i. p. 71 sq. (Heidelb. 1844), and com
pare the introductory comments of Ewald, Geschichte Christus', pp. xi. xii. -
1 The admirable introductory exhortation of Bp. Taylor, prefixed to his Life
of Christ, deserves particular attention. The prayer with which it concludes is
one of the most exalted of those rapt devotional outpourings which illustrate
and adorn that great monument of learning and piety.
2 On the two methods of relating the events of our Lord's life, whether by
adhering strictly to chronological sequence, or by grouping together what seems
historically similar, 6ee Hase, Leben Jesu, § 16, p. 17. The latter method is
always precarious, and in some cases, as, for example, in the Leben Jesu Christi
of Keander, tends to leave the reader with a very vague idea of the real connec
tions of the history.
3 It may perhaps be safely affirmed, and many parts of the succeeding lectures
will serve to illustrate the truth of the remark, that the exact chronological
position of all our Lord's discourses can never be satisfactorily ascertained. One
of the most sharp-sighted and trustworthy of modern chronologers of our Lord's
life prudently observes: " I will not deny that the chronology of the discourses
of our Lord, and especially of all the separate discourses, is very hard to be
ascertained ; nay, the problem, viewed under its most rigorous aspects, owing to
the nature of the evangelical accounts that have come down to us, — I refer par
ticularly to the Gospel of St. Matthew, in which especially so many of these
portions of discourses occur, — is perhaps never to be solved." — Wieseler, Ghro-
nologische Synopse, p. 287. Compare, too, Stier, Reden Jesu. Vol. i. p. xi (Transl.
Vol. i. p. 7, Clark).

Lect. I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. 25
they both give to and receive illustration from the out
ward events with which they stand in more immediate
connection. But all this must be, and the very nature of the subject
prescribes that it should be, subordinated to the desire to
set forth, in as much fulness and completeness as my limit:
may permit, not only the order and significance of the coi .
ponent features, but the transcendent picture of our Re
deemer's' life, viewed as one divine whole.1 Without thi
ulterior object all such labor is worse than in vain. With-
out this higher aim, the divine harmonies of our Master's
life become lost in mere annalistic detail; the spiritual
epochs of His ministry forgotten in the dull, earthly study
of the varied problematical arrangements of contested his
tory. These last points the nature of my present office may
compel me not to leave wholly untouched ; ¦ nay, I trust that
those who are acquainted with the nature of such investiga
tions will hereafter perceive that I have not shrunk from
entering into this very difficult and debatable province of
our subject, and that opinions are not put forth without some
knowledge of what has been urged against them. Still, the
details will not appear in the text of the Lectures, or ap-
pear only in affirmative statements that are subordinated to
the general current and spirit of the narrative.
O, let us not forget, in all our investigations, that the
history of the life of Christ is a history of
redemption, — that all the records which the ^X^tT6'"
Eternal Spirit of truth has vouchsafed to us
bear this indelible impress, and are only properly to be seen
1 " It is the problem of faith," says Dr. Lange, " to introduce into the church's
contemplation of the life of Jesus, viewed as a whole, more and more of the
various features of the gospel narrative, regarded in their consistent relations
with one another. On the contrary, it is the problem of theological science to
endeavor to exhibit more and more, by successive approximations, the com
pleted unity of the life of Jesus from the materials ready to its hand." — Leben
Jesu, i. 7. 2, Vol. i. p. 233. Some thoughtful .remarks on the contrast between
the ideal and the outward manifestation of the same (Gegensatz zwischen der
Idee und der Erscheinung) in the lives of men, but the perfect harmony of this
ideal and phenomenal in Christ, will be found in Neander, Leben Jesu Chr. p. 9.
3

26 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE Lect. I
and understood from this point of contemplation.1 It is
the history, of the Redeemer of our race that the Gospels
present to us ; the history, not of Jesus of Nazareth, but of
the Saviour of the world ; the record, not of merely ideal
ized perfections,2 but of redemptive workings, — "My
Father worketh hitherto, and I work ; " and he
who would presume to trace out that blessed
history, without being influenced by this remembrance in
all his thoughts and words, must be prepared to find him
self adding one more unhonored name to the melancholy
list of those who have presumed to treat of these myste
ries, with the eclectic and critical spirit of the so-called
biographer, — the biographer s (O, strangely inappropriate
and unbecoming word) of Him in whom
Col ii 9 dwelt the whole fulness of the Godhead.
Sources of our /JJ \ Jn tne nex£ place a feW \y"Ords HlUSt
history. > ' L
on this occasion necessarily be said both on
the sources of our history, and our estimate of thei
divinely ordered differences and characteristics.
1 Some very valuable remarks on the true points of view from which thfe
Evangelical History ought to he regarded hy the Christian student, will befounfl
in the eloquent introduction of Lange to his Leben, Jesu: see esp. Book i. 4. 6.
Vol. i. p. 141 sq.
2 Compare Lange, Leben Jesu, i. 1. 5, 6, Vol. i. p. 41 sq. It has been welt
remarked by Meander, in answer to Strauss, that the picture of the Life of Christ
does not exhibit the spirit of the age in which it appeared ; nay, that "¦ the image
of human perfection thus concretely presented stands in manifold contradiction
to the tendencies of humanity in that period j no one of them, no combination
of them, dead as they were, could account for it." — Ze&en<7i3sw,p.6,note (Transl.
p. 4, Bohn). The true conception of the mingled divine and human aspects of
oar Lord's life has been nowhere better hinted at than by Augustine, — "Ita
inter Deum et homines mediator apparuit, ut in unitate persona? copulans utram-
que naturam, et solita sublimaretinsolitis et insolita solitis temperaret." — Epist*
cxxxvii. 3. 9, Vol. ii. p. 519 (ed. Migne).
3 The essential character of biography is stated clearly and fairly enough by
Hase (Leben Jesu, § 12, p. 15), but the proposed application of it to the life of our
Lord can scarcely be defined as otherwise than as in a high degree startling and
repulsive. This cold, clear, but unsound -writer seems to imagine that some
height can be reached from which the modern historical critic can recognize the
individualizing characteristics of the life of Christ as the Evangelists desired to
portray them, and may sketch them out in their true (?) relations to the time
and age in which they were manifested. Compare the somewhat similar and
equally objectionable remarks of Von Ammon, Geschichte des Leben Jesut Vol.
s p. vii. (Preface).

Lect. I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. 27
Our sources are the four Gospels, four inspired narratives,
so mysteriously overruled in their interdependence, that,
regarded from the point of view in which the history of
our Lord alone ought to be regarded, — viz., as a history of
redemption, — they are all, and more than all, that our most
elevated conceptions of our own spiritual needs could have
sought for or devised. Such words, perchance, may sound
strange in an age that has busied itself in noting down
the seeming deficiencies of the Gospels, rather than recog
nizing their divine fulness ; that looks out for diversities,
rather than accordances,1 and that never seems to regard
its historical criticism with more complacency than when
it presents to us the four inspired witnesses as involved
in the discrepancies of a separate story.2 Such words, I
say, may sound strange, but they are the words of sober
ness and truth ; and I will be bold to say that no patient
and loving spirit will ever rise from a lengthened investiga
tion of the four evangelical records without having arrived
at this honest conviction, — that though here there may
seem difficulty because faith is to be tried,3 there a seeming
discrepancy because we know not all, yet that the histories
themselves, no less in their arrangements and mutual rela
tions than in the nature of their contents, exhibit vividly

1 A popular but sound article (by Prof. C. E. Stowe) on the nature of the
modern assaults upon the four Gospels will be found in the Bibliotheca Sacra
for 1851, pp. 503 — 529. The details are well sketched out by Ebrard, Kritih der
Ev. Geschichte, § 3 — 7, p. 5 sq.
2 The early Church was fully aware of the discrepancies, not merely in detail,
but even in general plan and outline, that were deemed to exist between the
Gospels, but she well knew how they were to be estimated and regarded : ou5e
•yap robs eua77eXioTas <pairj/j.^v o\v inrevavrla irotelv hXh4\hois, otl ol fief toj
ffapKiKty too Xpiorou irKeov ivno'xoK'iiSriio'av, ol Se T77 &eo\oyia Trpoffefino-av
kcu ol juev 4k twv ko£f rjfias, ol 5e e/c too virep T)fias iirovfiaavTO rty apxhw
ovrta to K-fipvyfia 5ie\6fievoi irpos rb xp4}ffi[j.ov ol^iat rols dexo/J.4vots, Kal ovrta
irapa too eV avrols rvrrrovfieyoi Iliielrfj.aTos. — Greg. Naz. Orat. xx. Vol. i. p. 365
(Paris, 1609.)
3 " Ipsa enim simplici et certa fide in illo permanere debemus, ut ipse aperiat
fidelibus quod in se absconditum est : quia sicut idem dicit apostolus, In illo sunt
omnes thesauri sapientia! et sciential adsconditi. Quos non propterea abscondit,
ut neget, sed ut absconditis excitet desiderium." — Augustine, Serm. li. 4, Vol. v.
p. 336 (ed. Migne).

28 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE Lect. I.
the pervading influence of that Spirit which it was declared
should guide, aye, and infallibly has guided,
their writers into all truth.1 But let us carry
out these observations somewhat in detail.
Omitting, on the present occasion, all investigations into
the more distinctly external characteristics
*£££«7f£! of the Gospels, whether in regard of the
ternai characteris- generai aSpect 0f these inspired documents,
or the particular styles in which they are com
posed, let us turn our attention to the more interesting sub
ject of their internal peculiarities and distinctions. And
yet we may pause for a moment even on the outward ; for
verily the outward is such as can never be overlooked; the
outward differences and distinctions are indeed such as
may well claim the critical reader's most meditative consid
eration. We may note, for example, the pervading tinge
of Hebrew thought and diction2 that marks, what we may
perhaps correctly term, the narrative3 of St. Matthew;
1 The language of Augustine on the subject of the plenary inspiration of the
Gospels is clear and decided : " Quidquid ille [Christus] de suis factis et dictis nos
Iegere voluit, hoc scribendum illis tanquam suis manibus imperavit. Hoc uni-
tatis consortium et in diversis ofhciis concordium membrorum sub uno capite1
ministerium quisquis intellexerit, non aliter accipiet, quod narrantibus discipulis
Christi, in Evangelio legerit, quam si ipsam manum Domini, quam in proprii
corpore gestabat, scribentem conspexerit." — De Consensu Evang. i. 35, Vol. iii. p
1070 (ed. Migne); comp. in Joann. Tract, xxx. 1, Vol. iii. p. 1632.
2 Nearly all modern critics agree in recognizing, not merely in isolated words
and phrases, but in the general tone and diction of the first Gospel, the Hebraiff
tic element. The "physiognomy of this first of our Gospels," to use the Ian
guage of Da Costa, "is eminently Oriental:" the language, though mainlj"
simple and artless, not unfrequently rises to the rhythmical, and even poetical,
and is marked by a more frequently recurring parallelism of words or clauses
(comp. Lowth, Prelim. Dissert, to Isaiah, p. viii. Lond. 1837) than is to be found
in the other Gospels: compare, for example, Matt. viii. 24— 27, with Luke vi.
47—49, and see Da Costa, The Four Witnesses, p. 28 sq. (Transl. Lond. 1851).
3 Perhaps the term narrative may be more correctly applied than any other
to the Gospel of St. Matthew : it neither presents to us so full a recital of details
as we find in St. Mark, nor the same sort of historical sequence which we
observe in St. Luke, nor yet again the same connection in our Lord's discourses
which we observe in St. John, but to a certain extent combines some distinctive
features of all. Antiquity well expressed this feeling in the comprehensive title
rh \6yta (Papias, ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iii. 39), which we may perhaps suitably
paraphrase, as Papias himself seems to suggest (by his subsequent use of the
terms ran Kvpuutuv Xoylav, — but the reading is not certain), as to imb Xp«r-

Lbct.I. CnARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. 29
we may observe the more isolated though more unqualified
Hebraistic expressions,1 and even the occasional Latinisms,2
that diversify the graphic but more detached memoirs* of
the exponent of the preaching of St. Peter; 4 we may trace
the Hellenic coloring that gives such grace and interest
to the compiled history of St. Luke f we may recognize
rod Aex&eVra $) 7rpax^eWa: see LUcke, in Studienu. Kritiken for 1833, p. 601
sq., Meyer, Xommentar. ilber Matth. p. 4, note, and Lange, Leben Jesu, i. 5. 2,
Vol. i. p. 161. The general structure of this Gospel has been well investigated in
a programme by Harless, entitled Lucubrationum Evangelia Canonica spectan-
Hum Pars ii. Erlang. 1842. As essays of this character are not always accessible;
it may be worth noticing that the learned author finds in the Gospel five
divisions: the first, ch. i. — iv., ver. 23—25 forming the epilogue; the second,
ch. iv. — ix., ver. 35—38 similarly forming the epilogue ; the third, ch. x. — xiv. ;
the fourth, ch. xv. — xix. 1, 2; and the fifth, ch. xix. 3 to the end. See pp. 6, 7.
1 We may especially notice the occasional introduction of Aramaic words,
most probably the very words that fell from our Lord's lips; comp. ch. iii. 17,
fioavepyes- ch. v. 41, ra\&h /cou/uj ch. vii. 34, £(ptbc&a\ ch. xiv. 36, hfifSa.. See
Da Costa, Four Witnesses, p. S9.
2 These have been often specified; it may be enough to notice, o"jr€Kov\&TO)pt
ch. vi. 27 ; |effT^s, ch. vii. 4, 8 ; Kei/rvplcov, ch. xv. 39, 44, 45, and the use of %a.\~
kos for money, ch. vi. 8. Some good remarks on other peculiarities of the style
of St. Mark, especially in reference to his adoption of less usual words and forms
of expression, will be found in Credner, Einleitung in das JV. T. § 49, p. 102 sq.,
and in the Introd. of Fritz, Evang. Hard, p. xlv. sq. The assertion that this
Gospel was originally written in Latin, and the appeal to a so-called Latin orig
inal, have beeu long since disposed of. See Tregelles and Home, Introduction to
theN. r.Vol.iv.p.438.
3 This term may perhaps serve to characterize the general aspects of the Gospel
of St. Mark, and to distinguish it from the more distinctly historic Gospel of St.
Luke; it also seems well to accord with the spirit of the statements preserved by
Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. in. 39. A few remarks by De Wette on the characteristics
of this Gospel will he found in the Studlen u. Kritiken for 1828, p. 789. See also
Lange, Leben Jesu, i. 7. 2, Vol. i. p. 247; and for details, Da Costa, Four Wit
nesses, p. 87 sq., Guerike, Einleitung in das -V. T. § 39. 3, p. 258 (ed. 2).
4 It is perhaps unnecessary to substantiate this assertion by special quotations,
as the connection between the second Evangelist and St. Peter seems now dis
tinctly admitted by all the best modern critics. The most important testimonies
of antiquity to this effect are Papias, ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. in. 39, Irenajus,
Hmr. in. 1, Clem. Alex. ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. vi. 14, and Origen, ap. lb. vi. 25.
5 If in the first Gospel we recognize the Oriental tinge of thought and diction,
and if in the second we detect some traces of the influence of Latin modes of
thought, and of a primary destination for Roman converts, we can scarcely fail
to acknowledge in the third Gospel the impress of Greek thought and culture
(comp. Jerome, Comment, in Esaiam, vi. 9), and in its well-ordered and often
flowing periods to discern the hand of the Greek proselyte; comp. Col. iv. 14,
and notes in loc; and see further, Da Costa, TJie Four Witnesses, p. 148, Lange,
Leben Jesu, x. 7. 4, Vol. i. p. 253 sq., and for some details in reference to Ian*
guage, Credner, Einleitung, § 59, p. 132 sq., Guerike, Einleitung, $ 40. 4, p. 278,
3*

30 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE Lect. L
the marvellous and divine simplicity of the longer and
more collective discourses ' that form the bulk of the spir
itual2 and, in some respects, supplemental3 Gospel of St.
John. All these things may well suggest to us medita
tions of the freshest interest ; but as they belong to the
critical essay, rather than to the popular lecture, we shall be
wise, perhaps, to confine ourselves now only to the more
strictly internal peculiarities, more especially those which
characterize the different pictures presented to us of oui
blessed Lord and Redeemer.
Let us, however, never forget that in every effort to set
Patritius, de Evangeliis, i. 3. 5, Vol. i. p. 83 sq. In those parts (e g. ch. i.\
where we find a clearly marked Hebraistic coloring, it seems natural to conclude
that we have before us, in perhaps not greatly changed forms, trustworthy docu
ments, supplied either by the blessed Virgin (in the chapter in question) or other
privileged eye-witnesses (comp. ch. i. 2) and ministers of the word. Compare
Gersdorf, Beitrage z. Sprachcharacterisiik des N. T. p. 160 sq., Patritius, de
Evangeliis, I. 3. 4, Vol. i. p. 80 ; and for some general comments on St. Luke, the
good lecture of Dr. Wordsworth, New Test. Vol. i. p. 130.
1 The discourses of our Lord, as recorded by St. John, have been defined by
Schmidt {Biblische Theologie, § 3, p. 23) as ¦' central," in contrast with those of
the Synoptical Gospels, which he calls more "peripherisch." The observation is
fanciful, but perhaps has some truth in it: in St. John the Lord's discourses
certainly seem to turn more on His own divine person and His true relation to
the Father, and the ideas and truths which flow therefrom, while those in the
Synoptical Gospels relate more frequently to the general facts, features, and
aspects of the kingdom of God. Comp. Ebrard, Kritilc der Evang. Gesch. § 35,
p. 143.
2 Compare Clem. Alex. ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. vi. 14, rbv ueVroi 'laawnv
%axaTOV TvvtS6i'Ta on ra. trta^unlKa. 4v Tots eitayyeKiols SeS^AwTtu, irporpa-
•nivro. {nth rail/ yvopifitav, Hi/ev/j.aTi Seotpopri&evTa, ir v e v fiar lkov Troirjaat
evayyektov. The same distinction is preserved by Augustine : — " Tres isti Evan
gelistas in his rebus maxime diversati sunt quas Christus per humanam carnem
temporaliter gessit: porro autem Joannes ipsam maxime divinitatem Domini
qua Tatre est iequalis intendit." — De Consensu Evang. i. 4, Vol. iii. 1045 (ed.
Migne). 3 This character of St. John"s Gospel has of late been denied, but, as it would
seem, wholly unsuccessfully. That this was not the special object of that sub
lime Gospel may be fully conceded (see Luthardt, das Johaiu Evang. iv. 1, Vol.
i. p. 109 sq.), but that St. John wrote with a full cognizance of what his three
predecessors had related, that he presupposed it in his readers, and enlarged
upon events not recorded elsewhere, seems almost indisputable. That this was
distinctly the belief of antiquity is fully conceded by L'ucke. Comment, nber
Johan. in. 13. Vol. i. p. 187 (ed. 3). See especially Euseb. Hist. Eccl. in. 24;
Jerome, de Viris Ulustr. cap. 9; and compare the expressions in the Muratorian
fragment on the Canon, reprinted in Routh, Iteliq. Sacrce, Vol. iv. p. 3 sq.
led.l).

Lect. I. CHARACTERISTICS OP THE FOUR GOSPELS. 31
forth the life of our Master, our whole superstructure not
only rests upon the four Gospels, but has to
i r. -, , r. ., i , . , ., The Individuali-
be tormed out ot the elements which they tiao/the/ow gos-
supply, and that unsymmetrical will it be and ^S/'"
incongruous, unless, like wise master-builders,
we learn to appreciate the inner and essential distinctions
between the precious materials which we are presuming to
employ. Here has been the grave error of only too many
• of those who have taken in -hand to draw up an account
of those things that are fully believed among
us. Here harmonies have failed to edify ; here
critical histories have often proved so lamentably deficient.
Nay, I believe that there is no one thing which the long
roll of harmonies and histories, extending from the days of
Tatian down to our own,1 teach us more distinctly than
this, — that no true picture of the earthly life of our Re
deemer can ever be realized, unless by God's grace we
learn both to feel and to appreciate the striking individu
ality of the four Gospels in their portraiture of the life of
Christ, and are prepared to estimate duly their peculiar and
fore-ordered characteristics.2
That antiquity failed not to recognize these individu
alities, we are reminded by the admirable treatise of Augus
tine on the Consent of the Evangelists,3 — a treatise from

1 A full list of these will be found in the useful but unsound work of Hase,
Leben Jesu, § 21, p. 21 sqq., and a shorter and selected list in the Harmonia
Evangetica of Tischendorf, p. ix. 6qq. Those which most deserve consideration
seem to be, Gerson, Concordia Evangelistamm (about 1471) ; Chemnitz, Harmo
nia Quatuor Evangelistamm (vol. i. published in 1593); Lightfoot, Harmony,
etc. of the N. T. (Lond. 1655); Lamy, Harmonia sive Concordia Quatuor Evan-
gelistarum, Paris, 1689; Bengel, Richtige Harmonie der vier Evangelien, Tubing.
1733; Newcome, Harmony of Gospels, Dubl. 1778; Clausen, Tabulce Synopticce,
Havniie, 1829 ; Greswell, Harmonia Evangetica, Oxon.1840; Robinson, Harmony
of the Four Gospels, Boston, 1845, and (with useful notes) Lond. (Relig. Tract
Society); Anger, Synopsis Evangeliorum, Lips. 1851; Tischendorf, Synopsis
Eoangelica, Lips. 1851 ; and, lastly, the voluminous work of Patritius, de Evan
geliis. Friburg, 1853.
2 See some good remarks in the Introduction to Lange, Leben Jesu, especially
I. 3.1, Vol. i. p. 98 sq.
3 We might also specify, as illustrative of this view of the individual character
of the four Gospels, the ancient and well-known comparison of the tour Gos-

32 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE Lect. I.
which, though we may venture to differ in details, we can
never safely depart in our general principles of combina
tion and adjustment.1 No writer has more ably maintained
the fundamental position, that the four evangelical records
in their delineation of the life of Christ have noticeably
different characteristics, — that they present our Redeemer
to us under different aspects,2 — and that these four histo
ries (to use the simile of another ancient writer),8 though
flowing from one paradise, go forth to water the earth with
four currents of different volume and direction.
It was the neglect of these principles that made so many
of the laborious harmonies of the sixteenth
saZZmLe"r""' an^ seventeenth centuries both valueless and
unedifying, and not improbably served to call
out that antagonistic criticism which in these later days
has acquired such an undue, and, it must be said, undesira
ble prominence.4 These earlier efforts we may have never

pels to the four living creatures mentioned in the Apocalypse (Irenseus, Hozr. in.
1). Though later writers (Athanasius, Augustine, Jerome, al.) varied somewhat
in their adaptations of the symbols (see Wordsworth, Greek Test. Vol. i. p. 51),
this fourfold comparison may be considered as the practical manifestation of the
belief of the ancient Church in the distinct individuality of the four Gospels.
The more usual order and application of the symbols is stated by Sedulius in the
following lines, which may bear quotation : —
Hoc MatthtBus agens, hominem generaliter implet,
Marcus ut alta fremit vox per deserta Lucius,
Jura eacerdotii Lucas tenet ore juvenei,
More volans aquila.' verbo petit astra Joannes.
1 Augustine appears, from his own statements, to have taken especial pains
with this treatise. He alludes to it twice in his commentary on St. John (Tract.
cxii. 1, Vol. iii. p. 1929, and again Tract cxvii. 2, Vol. iii. p. 1945), and in both
cases speaks of it as composed with much labor: compare also his Betractationes,
Book n. ch. 16.
2 See especially Book I. 2, 3, 4 (Vol. iii. p. 1044, ed Migne), where the different
aspects under which our Redeemer was viewed by the Evangelist are specially
noticed. What we have to regret in this valuable treatise is the somewhat low
position assigned to St. Mark's Gospel, the author of which, according to Augus
tine, is but the "pedissequus et breviator" of St. Matthew (ch. 2). Modern
criticism has strikingly reversed this judgment.
3 Jerome, Prof, in Matth. cap. 4, Vol. vii. p. 18 (ed. Migne).
4 I regret to have to express my dissent from the views of my friend, Dean
Alford, in the Introduction to his Neiv Testament, Vol. i. § 7. Careful investi
gation seems to justify the opinion that between the forced harmonies, which

Lect. I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. 33
seen, perhaps never heard of. We may smile perhaps at
the luckless sedulity that deemed it necessary to assign to
St. Peter nine denials of our Lord,1 and we may perhaps
scarcely believe that such abuses of Evangelistic harmony
could have been originated by one who cooperated* with
Luther, and whose works were not without influence on
his contemporaries, and on them that followed him. We
rnay.perhaps now smile at such efforts; but still, if one only
looks at some of the harmonies of the present century, it
seems abundantly clear that these influences are even now
not wholly inoperative;2 and that efforts to interweave por
tions of the sacred narrative, without a proper estimate of
the different objects and characteristics of the Evangelists,
still find among us some favor and reception. In our de
sire, however, to reject such palpably uncritical endeavors,
let us, at any rate, respect the principle by which they
appear to have been actuated, — a reverence, mistaken it
is truej but still a reverence for every jot and tittle of the
written word ; and let us beware, too, that we are not
tempted into the other extreme, — that equally exagger-
found favor in older times, and the blank rejection of evangelical harmony,
except in broadest outlines, which has been so much advocated in our own
times, there is a safe via media, which, if followed thoughtfully and patiently,
will often be found to lead us to aspects of the sacred narrative which are in
the highest degree interesting and instructive. Variations are not always neces
sarily inaccuracies: could we only transport ourselves to the right point of view,
we should see things in their true perspective ; and that we can more often do so
than is generally supposed, has, I venture to think, been far too summarily denied.
For some good remarks on Gospel harmony, see Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 5
sqq., Da Costa, Four Witnesses, p. 1 sqq. (Transl.).
1 Osiander, Harmon. Evang. p. 128 (Bas. 1561). This rigid and somewhat
arrogant divine was born A. B. 1498 : he was educated at Wittemberg, and after
wards at Nuremberg, in which latter city he became a preacher at one of the
churches. He warmly supported Luther in his attack on Papal indulgences;
but afterwards fell into errors respecting the application of Christ's righteous
ness and the divine image, which he appears to have defended with undue con
fidence and pertinacity. See Mosheim, Eccl. Hist. iv. 3. 2. 1, Vol. iii. p. 357 (ed.
Soames); Tholuck, Lit. Anzeiger for 1833, No. 54; and for a short notice of his
life, Schrockh, Kirchengeschichte (Reformation), Vol. iv. p. 572.
2 I fear I must here specify the learned and laborious work of Dr. Stroud
[New Greek Harmony of the Four Gospels), in which in this same case of St.
Peter's denials the event is recounted under different forms seven times j. see the

Introduction, p. clxxxix. j^^\^c'XXV of th

t

34 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE Lect. I.
ated view of modern times, that the discordances of the
sacred writers are such as defy reconciliation,1 and that all,
save the great events in the history of our Redeemer, must
ever remain to us a collection of confused and incon
sequent details.
In one word, let us remember, that though it is uncriti
cal, unwise, and even presumptuous to fabri-
Judicious combi- , . .. i_ a •.*. • t-
tmtionthetrueprm- cate a patchwork narrative, yet that it is not
only possible, but our very duty to endeavor
Judiciously to combine? Let us remember that we have
four holy pictures, limned by four loving hands, of Him
who was " fairer than the children of men,"
Pstil xlo. 2. and that these have been vouchsafed to us,
that by varying our postures we may catch fresh beauties
and fresh glories.3 Let us then fear not to use one to see
more in light what another has left more in shade; let us

l For some useful observations on and answers to the extreme views that
have been maintained on the supposed discrepancies or divergences that have
been found in the Gospel history, see Ebrard, Kritik der Evang. Geschichte,
§ 19, p. 71 sqq.
2 Modern writers on harmonistic study commonly draw distinctions between
Synopsis and Harmony, and again between Chronology and Order of Events
{Akoluthie). Such distinctions are useful, and serve to assist us in keeping clearly
in view the principles on which our combination is constructed. The problem,
however, we have to solve can really be regarded under very simple aspects :
it is merely this, (1) to determine, where possible, by reference to chronological
data, the order and connection of events ; (2) to reconcile any striking diver
gences we may meet with in accounts of the same event; compare Chemnitz,
Harmon. Quatuor. Evang. Proem, cap. 5. In regard of (2) we must be guided
by the results of a sound exegesis of each one of the supposed discordant pas
sages, combined with a just appreciation of the apparently leading aims, objects,
and characteristics of the inspired records to which they respectively belong.
In regard of (1), where chronology fails us, we can only fall back on the prin
ciple of Chemnitz : — uNos quajrimus ordinem, cujus rationes, si non semper
certae et ubique.. manifests;, probabiles tamen nee absurdae nee vero absimiles
reddi possunt." — Harmonia Evang. Vol. i. p. 18 (Hamb. 1704).
3 Compare with this the judicious observations of Da Costa: — "To picture
Christ to the eye in equal fulness, that is, as an actual whole, and that in all His
aspects, one witness was very far from being sufflcient ; but Divine wisdom
could here accomplish its object by means of a fourfold testimony and a four-
sided delineation. In order to this, it was meet that each of four Evangelists
should represent to us, not only the doings and sayings, but the very person of
the Saviour, from his own individual point of view, and in harmony with his
own personal character and disposition."— The Four Witnesses, p. 118 (Transl.).

Lect. I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. 35
scruple not to trace the lineament that one has left unex
pressed, but another has portrayed. Let us do all this,
nothing doubting; but let us beware, O, let us beware,
lest in seeking to work them up mechanically into what
might seem to us a well-adjusted whole, instead of order
we bring in confusion, distortion instead of symmetry,
burning instead of beauty.
Let me conclude with a few illustrations of those inter
nal characteristics and individualities of the
four Gospels, especially in reference to the *££%£«.
picture of our Lord's life, to which I have ff1?8 c*""'e aJ-
L J luded to.
alluded, and so prepare ourselves for thought
ful recognitions, in future lectures, of divinely ordered dif
ferences, and for wise and sober principles of combination.
How striking is the coincidence between the peculiar
nature of the contents of the Gospel of St. Individuality of
Matthew and what Scripture relates to us of st. Matthew's gos-
the position of him that wrote it. How natu
rally we might expect from him who sat at the receipt of
custom on the busy shores of the lake of Gennesareth, and
who had learnt to arrange and to methodize in the callings
of daily life, — how naturally we might expect careful
grouping and well-ordered combination.1 And how trujy
we find it ! To leave unnoticed the vexed question of the
exact nature of the Sermon on the Mount,2 — to whom save
to St. Matthew do we owe that effective grouping of par
ables which we find in the thirteenth chapter,3 wherein
1 See the thoughtful comments of Lange, Leben Jesu, ±. 7. 2, Vol. i. p. 237 6q.
It may perhaps be urged that we are here tacitly assuming that the details of the
office of a Te\tavns were more in harmony with modern practice than can
actually be demonstrated. That an a.pxrre\03vns (sub magistro) was especially
concerned with administrative details can be distinctly 6hown, but that the
simple collector {portitor), such as St. Matthew probably was, had any duties of
an analogous nature, may be regarded as doubtful. The very necessities of the
case, however, imply that the "portitor" would have to render constant
accounts to his superior officer, — and this seems quite enough to warrant the
comments in the text. See Smith, Diet, of Antiq. s. v. " Publicani ; " Jahn ,
Archazolog. Bibl. § 241 ; Winer, RealwQrterb. s. v. " Zoll," Vol. ii. p. 739 sq.
2 See the comments on its probable structure in Lecture iv.
8 In this chapter we have the longer parables of the Sower (ver. 3—9) and of

36 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE Lect. I.
each one by its juxtaposition imparts additional force and
clearness to those with which it stands in immediate con
tact? Whose hand was it save the wise publican's that
wove into narrative that glorious garland of miracles of
which the eighth and ninth chapters are nearly entirely
composed?1 Who but he has brought together in such
illustrative combinations the Lord's last prophecies, and the
partially prophetic parables that usher in that most solemn
revelation of our Redeemer to His Church, which con
cludes with the twenty-fifth chapter?2
But to narrow our observations to that
Especially in Jus . ,
portraiture of our with which we are more especially concerned,
— with what force and effect are the contrasts,
which such habits of combination naturally suggest,3 em
ployed in presenting to us vivid and impressive aspects of
our Redeemer's history. In what striking antithesis do the
the Tares and the Wheat (ver. 24 — 30), and the shorter comparisons of the King
dom of Heaven with the grain of Mustard Seed (ver. 31, 32), Leaven (ver. 33),
the Treasure in a field (ver. 44), the Merchantman and the Pearl (ver. 45, 46),
and the Net cast into the sea (ver. 47, 48). The illustrative connection that
exists between these parables can hardly escape the notice of the observant
reader. We have, as it were, seven varied aspects of the kingdom of God on
earth. In the first parable we have placed before us the various classes in the
visible Church ; in the second we contemplate the origin and presence of evil
therein, and its final removal and overthrow ; in the third we see the kingdom
of God in its aspects of growth and extension; in the fourth in its pervasive
and regenerative character; in the fifth and sixth in reference to its precious
ness, whether as discovered accidentally or after deliberate search; in the
seventh in its present state of inclusiveness combined with its future state of
selection and unsparing separation. See Wordsworth, New Test. Vol. i. p. 39;
and compare Knox, Bemains, Vol. i. pp. 407 — 425.
1 In these two chapters we have the narrative of the cleansing of a leper (viii.
2 — 4); the healings of the centurion's servant (viii. 5 — 13), of St. Peter's wile's
mother (viii. 14, 15), and of numerous demoniacs (viii. 16); the stilling of the
winds and sea (viii. 24—26); the healing of the demoniacs of Gadara (viii. 28—
34); of the paralytic on his bed (ix. 2—8), and of the woman with an issue of
blood (ix. 20— 22); the raising of Jairus' daughter (ix. 23—25), the healing of
two blind men (ix. 28—30), and the dispossession of a dumb demoniac (ix. 32—34).
2 Especially the similitude of the Unready Servant (xxiv. 43—51), and the
parables of the Ten Virgins (xxv. 1—12). and of the Talents (xxv. 14—30.)
3 Compare Lange, Leben Jesu, i. 7. 2, Vol. i. p. 240. The outlines and general
construction of St. Matthew's Gospel are described by Ebrard, Kritik der Evang.
Geschichte, § 22, p. 86 sq., but not under any very novel or suggestive aspects.
For some remarks on the characteristic peculiarities of this Gospel, see Davidson,
Introduction to N. T. Vol. i. p. 52 sq.

Lect. I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. 37
opening chapters set before us the new-born King of Peace
and the savage Herod ; the mysterious adora- cA. ;,-, lt 3.
tion of the Magi, and the hasty flight for life
into a strange land; the baptism, with the <*.«.u.w.
opened heavens and descending Spirit, and
the temptation, with all its circumstances of c/Jt.Ts" °3' ""*
satanic trial. Observe too, how, thus height
ened by contrast as well as heralded by prophecy, the
Lord appears to us as the Son of David and
the Son of Abraham, the spiritual King of
spiritual Judaism, the Messiah of the Israel of God.1 Yet
withal observe how the Theocratic King and the suffering
Messiah pass and repass before our eyes, in ever new and
ever striking interchange, and how a strange and deep tone
of prophetic sadness blends with all we read, and prepares
us as it were for Gethsemane and Calvary; and yet again,
when the Lord has broken the bands of death, whose save
St. Matthew's is that inspired pen that records that out
pouring of exalted majesty, " All power is given me in
heaven and in earth"? To whom save to the
« t-i t , t /» Matt, xxviii. 18.
nrst Evangelist owe we the record 01 that
promise which forms the most consolatory heritage of the
Church, " Lo ! I am with you alway, even
unto the end of the world"?
No less strongly marked is the individuality of St. Mark's
Gospel. No less clearly in this inspired rec
ord can we trace the impressible and fervid individuality of
x St. marks Gospel.
character which we almost instinctively Actsxn.12.
ascribe to John Mark, the son of Mary (for I
hold the identity of the Evangelist with the nephew of

1 Compare the fragments of Irenams, taken from Possini, CatenaPatrum, and
cited in the various editions of that ancient writer (Grabe, p. 471; Massuet, Vol.
i. p. 337); it is as follows: To ko.to. MaT&aiov eva.yye\wy trphs 'lovdalovs
iypdtbv' ovroi yap iire&vaovv travv fftpodpa e/c atrepfiaros AajBIS Xpio"roV. 'O
5e Mar&dios, Kal en fxaWov otpodporepay %x<»v rfyv Totavrrjp itri^vfilav, irav-
roitas cmrei/Se irh-npotyopiav irapsx^tv alnois, &s etn £k crirep/iaros Aaj81S 6
XpiaToV. Aib ical atrb yevetreus avrov fjp^aro. Compare Ebrard, Kritik der
Evang. Geschichte, s 21, p. 85. 4

38 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE Lect. I.
Barnabas),1 — to him that seems to have been so forward
in action, and yet, on one occasion at least, too ready to
fall away. I say on one occasion at least, for there are
many whose judgment demands our respect who also find
in the young man with the hastily caught-up
linen garment, who followed but to flee, him
who alone has handed down to us that isolated notice.2
Time would fail me if I were to name all the many
touches that stamp this impress of individuality on the
work of the second Evangelist. Do we not recognize his
graphic pen and his noticeable love of the objective and
the circumstantial in almost every event, and especially in
every miracle, which he has been moved to record ? Isnot
this plainly apparent in the narrative of the healing of the
paralytic, in that of the Gadarene demoniac,
m^v'.Vsqq' in tne account of the gradual recovery of the
Marhmu.^ssqa. ^imfj man 0f Bethsaida, and in the striking
Mark ix. 20 sqq. ' p
description of the demoniac boy ? Is not this
to be felt in the various touches that diversify almost every
incident that finds a place in his inspired record ? 3 Is it not
1 This opinion has of late been considered doub**"! (see Kienlen, Stud. u. Krit.
for 1843, p. 423), but apparently on insufficient &ivuuds. The silence of Papias
as to the connection with Barnabas, on which an argument has been based, can
not fairly be pressed, as in the passage in question (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iii. 39)
Papias appears occupied not with the question who St. Mark was, but simply with
the nature of the testimony which he delivered and his dependence on St. Peter.
Ecclesiastical tradition seems to have recognized three bearing this name, — the
Evangelist, John Mark, and the nephew of Barnabas; but for such a distinction
still less can be said. Comp. Coteler, Constit. Apost. n. 57, Vol. i. p. 265. The
opinion of Da Costa (Four Witnesses, p. 114 sq.), that St. Mark was the devout
soldier who attended on Cornelius (Acts x. 7), is a mere fancy, wholly destitute
of even traditional testimony.
2 Such was the opinion of Chrysostom (in loc), Gregory the Great (Moral.
xiv. 23), and one or two other ancient writers. It may, however, justly be con
sidered very precarious, as the common and not unnatural supposition that the
young man was a di&ciple does not seem to accord with the comment of Papias,
ofae yap tftcovaz rov Kvplov, oSVe 7rap7jKo\ou$7j<r«' ahrip, ap. Euseb. Hist.
Eccl. ni. 39.
3 These touches are very numerous, but are perhaps more easily felt than speci
fied. We may notice, however, the effective insertion on three occasions of the
very Aramaic words that our Lord was pleased to use (ch. v. 41, vii. 34, xiv. 36),
of the emphatic okouetc prefixed to the parable of the Sower (ch. iv. 3), and of
the words of power addressed to the winds and sea (ch. v. 39). Sometimes

Lect. I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. 39
St. Mark that presents to us our Master amid all the lone
liness and horrors of the wilderness, "with the wild beasts"?
Is it not he who brings up, as it were before our
_ n i i Mark i. IS.
very eyes, our Redeemer on the storm-tossed
lake, " in the hinder part of the ship asleep on a pillow " ?
Is it not he who so frequently and precisely
,. . . -, Markiv.Sa.
notes almost every distinctive gesture and
look,1 and is it not to him that we owe the last touch, as it
were, to that affecting picture of our Lord's
-i tt 7 Markx.lS.
tenderness and love, when He " took up the
young children in Sis arms, and put His hands upon
them, and blessed them"?
But still more does this individuality appear — and with
this we are now most concerned — in the
. Especially in Jlis
broad and general picture which this Evangel- portraum of our
ist presents to us of his heavenly Master. If
in the first Gospel we recognize transitions from theocratic
glories to meek submissions, in the second we see our
Redeemer in one light only, of majesty and power. If in
St. Matthew's record we behold now the glorified and now

details are brought out by the introduction of a single word (ch. xv. 43, ro\pAj-
o~as), sometimes by the simple use of a stronger expression than is found in the
corresponding passage in the other Gospels (compare, for instances, Mark i. 10,
o'x'Co/ueVouy robs ovpavo&s, with Matt. iii. 16, Luke iii. 21 ; ch. i. 12, itcfiaWei,
with Matt. iv. 1, Luke iv. 1 ; ch. ii. 12, itf-o-ratrAai, with Matt. ix. 8 ; ch. iv. 37,
•yffii^o-Stai, with Matt. viii. 24, Luke viii. 23; ch. vi. 46, anoTa^aaevos, with
Matt. xiv. 43; ch. xiv. 33, iK&ap$e'to-&ai ital aftnixoveiv, with Matt. xxvi. 37),
while at other times we seem made conscious, perhaps merely by a repetition of
a word or phrase (ch. i. 14, 15, ii. 16, iv. 1, xi. 28, al.), perhaps merely by a
strengthened form (e. g. cognate accus., ch. iii. 29, iv. 41, v. 42, vii. 13, xiii. 19),
of that graphic vigor which so peculiarly characterizes the record of the second
Evangelist. The single parable which is peculiar to this Gospel (ch. iv. 26 sq.)
may be alluded to as bearing every impress of the style of St. Mark.
1 Many instances of this could be cited : we may pause to specify the all-
embracing look (irept&XeTreo'&at) of our Lord, which, with the exception of
Luke vi. 10, is noticed only by this Evangelist (ch. iii. 5, 34, v. 32, x. 23, xi. 11),
the expression of inward emotions on different occasions (ch. vii, 34, viii. 12. x.
14, 21), and the very interesting fact of our Lord's heading His band of disciples
on the last journey to Jerusalem, mentioned in ch. x. 32. Compare Da Costa,
Four Witnesses, p. 121; Lange, Leben Jesu, I. 7. 2, Vol. i. p. 179 sq.; Guericke,
Einleitung, J 39, 3, p. 258 note; and Davidson, Introduction to N. T. Vol. i. p.
150.

40 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE Lect. I.
the suffering Messiah, in St. Mark's vivid pages we see only
the all-powerful incarnate Son of God; the voice we hear
is that, of the Lion of the Tribe of Judah. With what
peculiar variety of expression does this inspired writer
notice the awe and amazement no less of the familiar cir-
Markx.32. <&e of tne disciples than of the more impres-
Mark ix. ii; xi. ^e multitude. With what circumstantial
18- touches does he put before us Him on
whose lips the multitude so hung that they had scarce
Martiv.i. room to stand, or time to eat, — Him that
nark iu. 2o; vi. nought such wondrous works that all men
Markv.w. did marvel, yea, and unbelieving Nazareth
Markvi. 2. was astonished, — Him whose fame was spread
Markvii.se. aji tne more that He sought to conceal it, —
" Him before whose feet, "whithersoever He
entered, villages or cities," the sick were laid out, and laid
out only to be made whole.
These things can escape the observation of no attentive
reader, nor will they, perhaps, fail almost to convince him, as
they have almost convinced me, that he whose narrative,
like Stephen's glance, penetrates beyond the clouds, and
tells us how the Lord " was received up into
heaven and sat down at the right hand of
God," was John Mark the Evangelist.1

1 It is right to speak with diffidence on a point on which modern critics and
commentators (even Dr. Wordsworth) have judged differently. It is not desira
ble here to enter upon a criticism of external evidence, which will be found
clearly and ably stated elsewhere (see especially the critical notes to the new
edition of Tischendorf s Greek Testament; Meyer, Comment on St. Mark, p. 170
sqq.; and Tregelles, Printed Text of the N. T. pp. 246—261), except to remark
that the only clear and unqualified external evidence against the passage is now
reduced to B, the Latin Codex Bobbiensis, some old MSS. of the Armenian
Version, an Arabic Version in the Vatican, and perhaps we may add Severus of
Antioch and Hesychius of Jerusalem (see Tischendorf, I. c), — the testimonies
of Eusebius and Jerome being not so certain (see Wordsworth, Four Gospels, p.
127). As a set off against the arguments founded on differences in the use of a
few words and expressions (see Norton, Genuineness of the Gospels, Vol. i. p. 219,
ed. 2), we may certainly plead the circumstantial tone of ver. 10 (mvStovaiv koX
Khatovo-iv), of ver. 12 {ev eTeptf /loptbrj, iropeuo/«Vois els ayp&v), the specifica
tions, of ver. 17 sq., — against which the objections commonly urged seem mOBt
noticeably weak,— and the conclusion of ver. 19. Why may not this portion

Lect. I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. 41
Still more clearly, if it be possible, can we recognize
the individuality of the Gospel of St. Luke.
Here the coincidences between the nature of ^.S^a^i"'
the history and what we know of him who
wrote it, — the wise physician of Antioch,1 — the proselyte
as it has been thought of the gate, — the only one of the
four Evangelists who bore in his body the mark of belong
ing to the wide world that was not of the stock of Abra
ham,2 — meet us again and again, and press themselves upon
our attention, in ever new and ever suggestive combina-'
tions. I may allude in passing to the frequent and char
acteristic statement of the circumstances or reasons that
gave rise to the events or discourses recorded,3 which we
have been written by St. Mark at a later period, when mere verbal peculiari
ties might have altered, but when general sentiment and style might, as we
seem to observe is the case, remain wholly unchanged? To speculate on the
causes which led to the interruption at the end of the 8th verse is perhaps idle.
The terrible persecution under Nero, A. r>. 64, is, however, somewhat plausibly
urged as a possible period when the Evangelist might have suddenly sought
safety by flight, leaving the record, which he had been so pressed to write
(Euseb. Hist. Eccl. n. 15, vi. 14), unfinished, and to be concluded perhaps in
another land, and under more peaceful circumstances. Comp. Norton, Genuine
ness of the Gospels, Vol. i. p. 221.
1 Compare Euseb. Hist. Eccl. in. 4, — AovkSs to pXv yivos tiiv tuv aV
'AvTiox^las ', see also Jerome, Catal. Script, cap. 16. . This statement has been
recently considered doubtful (Winer, BWB. Art "Lucas," Vol. ii. p. 35; Meyer,
Einleitung, p. 182); and due merely to a mistaken identification of the Evange
list with Lucius (Acts xiii. 1), but apparently without sufficient reason. The
recent attempt to identify St. Luke with Silas has been noticed, but refuted by
Dr. Davidson, Introduction, Vol. ii. p. 20.
2 This has been usually and, as it would seem, correctly inferred from Col. ir,
14, where St. Luke and Demas are named by themselves, and, with Epaphras,
not included in the list which preceded (ver. 10, 11) of those who were of the
circumcision ; see notes in loc.
3 This may be observed especially in the way in which the parables, peculiar to
this Evangelist, are commonly introduced into the sacred narrative. Compare
ch. vii. 39 sq., x. 30 sq., xii. 13 sq., xviii. 1. and very distinctly, xix. 11. We
may also here specify St. Luke's account of the outward circumstances that led
to our Lord's being born at Bethlehem, the valuable clew he gives us to one of
the significances of the Transfiguration (ch. ix. 31), the notice how St. Peter
came to be armed with a sword (ch. xxii. 38), the mention of our Lord's being
first blindfolded, and then bidden to prophecy who struck Him (ch. xii. 63;
compare Blunt, Coincidences of the Gospels, No. xn. p. 47); and, to conclude a
list which might be made much longer, the allusion to the circumstance which
led to our Lord's being taken before Herod (ch. xxiii. 6 sq.). Compare also
Lange, Leben Jesu, 1.7.2, Vol. i. p. 256. 4*

42 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE Lect. I.
find so strikingly in this Gospel. I may notice the pecu
liarly reflective, and, if I may use the term, psychological
comments,1 which the thoughtful physician so often passes
on the actors or the circumstances which he brings forward
in his inspired narrative.
These things we can here only allude to in passing;
we may, however, with profit to ourselves
««• x°rrf.ai!Kre ^ Pa«se somewhat on the portraiture of our
Redeemer as presented to us by this Evan
gelist. If, as I said, St. Matthew presents to us our Re
deemer more especially as the Messiah, the Son of Abra
ham and the Son of David ; if St. Mark more especially
presents Him to us as the incarnate and wonder-working
Son of God, assuredly St. Luke presents Him to us in the
most wide and universal aspects2 as the God-man, the
1 We may specify a few instances ; e. g. the passing comment on the as yet
imperfect perceptions of Joseph and Mary, ch. ii. 50, 51; the notice of the
expectancy of the people, ch. iii. 15 ; the glimpse given us of the inward thoughts
of the Pharisee, ch. vii. 39 ; the passing remark on their spiritual state generally, .
ver. 30; the brief specification of their prevailing characteristic, ch. xvi. 14; the
sketch of the principles of action adopted by the spies sent forth by the chief
priests and scribes, ch. xx. 20 ; the notice of the entry of Satan into Judas, ch.
xxii. 3, and the significant comment on the altered relations between Pilate and
Herod, ch. xxiii. 12. We may remark in passing that the difference between
these comments and those which we meet with in St. John's Gospel is clear and
characteristic. In St. John's Gospel such comments are nearly always specially
introduced to explain or to elucidate (comp. ch. iii. 23, 24, iv. 8, 9. vi. 4, 10, 23,
71, vii. 39, xi. 2, 13, al.); in St. Luke's Gospel they are rather obiter dicta, the
passing remarks of a thoughtful and reflective writer, called up from time to
time by the varied aspects of the events which he is engaged in recording.
Comp. Lange, Leben Jesu, I. 7. 2. Vol. i. p. 256 sq.
2 The universality of St. Luke's Gospel has been often commented on. Not
only in this Gospel do we feel ourselves often, as it were, transported into the
domain of general history (comp. Da Costa, Four Witnesses, p. 154), — not only
can we recognize the constantly recurring relations or contrasts of Judaism and
Gentilism (Ebrard, Kritik der Evang. Gesch. § 31, p. 120), — not only may we,
with most modern critics, see this universality very distinctly brought out in the
notice of the mission of the Seventy Disciples (Credner, Einleitung, § 60, p. 144),
but we may trace the same characteristic in some of the recitals of leading
events, in some of the miracles and parables, and in several of our Lord's iso
lated comments and observations. Consider, for example, ch. ii. 31, 32 ; iv. 27 ;
ix. 1—6 (especially when contrasted with Matt. x. 6—6), ix. 62 sq. x. 30 sq., xvi.
16, xvii. 11 sq., xix. 38 (as contrasted with Matt. xxi. 9, Mark xi. 9, 10, John
xii. 13, — in all of which the reference is to the theocratic rather than to the
universal King), xxiv. 47 ; and compare Patritius, de Evangeliis, 1. 3. 5. 80, Vol. i.
p. 92.

Lect. I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. 43
Friend and Redeemer of fallen humanity, yea, even as his
own genealogy declares it, not merely the Son of David
and the Son of Abraham, but the Son of Adam and the
Son of God.1 With what affecting delineation does He
who tenderly loved the race He came to save appear to us
in the raising of the son of the widow of
Nain, — in the narrative of her who was for- ca.t*.is.
given "because she loved much," — in the "*" ""' S7 "*'
, Ch. xv. 3s?.; oho
parables ot the lost sheep, the lost coin, and inMatt.xvm.io.
the prodigal son, — in the address to the ch.xv.ssq.
daughters2 of Jerusalem, — in the prayer for ' OT" g?'
l J Ch. xxiii. 27 sq.
those who had crucified Him, — in the gra- ra xxiJL Um
cious promise to the penitent malefactor, cft.rara.».
vouchsafed even while the lips that spake it
were quivering with agonies of accumulated suffering.
In all these things, and in how many more than these
that could easily be adduced, see we not the living picture
of Him who was at once the Son of Man in mercy and
the Son of God in power, whose grace and redemptive
blessings extended to both Jew and Gentile, and who,
even as He is borne- up into the clouds of heaven, passes
from our view in the narrative of St. Luke
blessing those from whom He is parting; —
" and it came to pass while He blessed them, He was
parted from them and carried up into heaven, and they
worshipped Him, and returned to Jerusalem with great
joy"? On the internal characteristics of the Gospel of St.
*
l This difference did not escape the notice of Chrysostom; fO fisv Mut&cuos,
tire 'JZ&paiois ypdtycov, ovfiev Tr\eov i^fjTTicre Belj-ai, 3) ori awb 'A£paa/A koX
AavtS fjw 6 Se Aovnas are KOivfj ir a a i Sta\ey6fi£VOS iced aewrepco rbv
\6yov av&yei, fi^xpt rov *ABa/i irpoti&i/, in Matt. Horn. 1. p. 7 (ed. Bened). See
also Origen, ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. vi. 25. and the comments on this Gospel of
Ebrard, Kritik der Ev. Geschichte, § 31, p. 120 sq.
2 It may be observed that consistently with the characteristic of universality
above alluded to, St. Luke brings before us, more frequently than the other
Evangelists, notices of pious and ministering women. Comp. ch. ii. 36, viii. 2,
xxiii. 27, 55; and see also vii. 37 sq. The same feature is especially noticeable in
the Acts. Comp. ch. i. 14, viii. 12, ix. 2, ix. 36, xii. 12, xvi. 1, 14, al. Comp. Da
Costa, Four Witnesses, p. 189 sq., Lange, Leben Jesu, Vol. i. 259.

44 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE Lect. I.
John, and the picture that is there vouchsafed to us of our
Lord, I need perhaps say but little, as that
individuality of blessed Gospel is to so large an extent com
posed of the Redeemer's own words, and as
modern thought no less than the meditations of antiquity
seem rarely to have missed seizing the true aspects of the
divine image of* the Son of God that is there presented to
us.1 The very words which I have chosen as my text
declare the general object of the Gospel, — even "that we
may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son
of God;" the very opening words suggest
the lofty sense in which that sonship is to be understood —
" the Word was with God, and the Word
was God." As in the synoptical Gospels the
Incarnate Son is mainly displayed to us in the operative
majesty of outwardly-exercised omnipotence, so in the
fourth Gospel is He mainly revealed to us in the tranquil
majesty of conscious unity with the eternal Father.2 Here
we are permitted to catch mysterious glimpses of the very
inner life of our redeeming Lord ; we behold the reader of
the thoughts and intents of the human heart,3 we note the
1 The excellent work of Luthardt (das Johanneische Evangelium, Niirnberg,
1852) may here be especially noticed. In this the reader will find lull and careful
notices of all that is peculiar and distinctive in this Gospel, an exposition of the
plan of development, and comments on the component parts of the narrative.
The writer is perhaps too much carried away by his theory of the regular and
dramatic structure of the Gospel, and sometimes too artificial in his analysis of
details, still his work remains, and will probably long remain, as one of the best
essays on St. John's Gospel that has ever appeared. For a review, see Reuter,
Bepertor. Vol. Ixxxv. p. 97.
A good essay on the life and character of the Apostle will be found in Liicke,
Comment, iiber Joh. § 2, Vol. i. p. 6 sqq., and some useful remarks on the general
plan and arrangement of the Gospel, in Ebrard, Kritik der Ev. Geschichte, $ 35,
p. 141 sq. See also Davidson, Introduction, Vol. i. p. 334.
2 Compare Augustine, de Consensu Evang. i. 5 : " Intelligi datur, si diligenter
advertas, tres Evangelistas temporalia facta Domini et dicta quae ad informandos
mores vitas presentis maxime valerent, copiosius persecutos, circa illam activam
virtutem fuisse versatos : Joannem vero facta Domini multa pauciora narrantem,
dicta vero ejus, ea prasertim qua? Trinitatis unitatem et vita; a-terna felicitatem
insinuarent, diligentius et uberius conscribentem, in virtute contemplative com-
mendanda, suam intentionem prtedicationemque tenuisse."— Vol. iii. p. 1046 (ed.
Migne). Compare Lange, Leben Jesu, I. 7. 2, Vol. i. p. 265 sq.
8 This seems a decided and somewhat noticeable characteristic of this Gospel.

Lect. I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. 45
ever-present consciousness of truest and innermost union
with the Father of Spirits.1 Tet we feel rather than see ;
we are made conscious rather than observe. Here, in the
stillness of our hearts, as we read those heavenly dis
courses, we seem to feel the Son of God speaking2 to us
" as a man speaketh with his friend ;" His
. , . , _ . JExodus xxiii. 11.
image seems slowly to rise up before us ; the
ideal picture gathers shape ; we seem to see, yea in exalted
moments we do see, limned as it were in the void before
our eyes, " the King in His beauty ; " heaven
^ n Isai. xxiii. 17.
and earth melt away from our rapt gaze, we
spiritually behold the very Redeemer of the world, we
hear the reassuring voice, and we say, with a conviction
deep as that of him whom this Gospel tells
us of, " My Lord and my God."
On the picture of our Lord which this Gospel presents
to us,3 1 am sure then I need say no more. I will only in

See, for example, ch. i. 47, ii. 24, iv. 17, 18, v. 42, vi. 15, 61, 64, xiii. 11 ; compare
xi. 4, 15. It may be observed that in some instances, e. g. our Lord's conversa
tion with Nicodemus, a remembrance of this characteristic will greatly assist us
in understanding the true force of our Lord's words. It would certainly seem,
in a few cases, as if our Lord was not so much replying to the words of the
speaker, as to the thoughts which He knew were rising up within. Compare
Meyer, on Joh. iii. 3; Stier, Beden Jesu, Vol. iv. p. 376 sq. (Clark).
1 Compare ch. iii. 16, 35 sq. v. 17 sq. vi. 57, viii. 42, x. 15, 30, xi. 42, al. It may
be further observed that it is in St. John's Gospel alone that we find the title
Hovoyeiii)s applied to the Eternal Son. See ch. i. 14, 18, iii. 16, 18, and compare
1 John iv. 9.
2 In this Gospel our Lord is truly to us what the significant appellation of the
inspired writer declares Him to be, — the Word. In the other Gospels our
attention is mainly centred on our Lord's acts, but in this last one he speaks.
See Da Costa, Four Witnesses, p. 240. It' may indeed be noticed as one of the
¦ striking features of this Gospel that it makes all its characters exhibit their
individuality to us by what they say rather than by what they do. We may
recognize this kind of self-portraiture partially in the case of Nathanael (ch. i.
47 sq.) and Nicodemus (ch..iii. 1 sq.), and very distinctly in that of the woman
of Samaria (ch. iii. 7 sq.) and of the man born blind (ch. ix. 1, 39). The very
enemies of our Lord appear similarly before us j all their doubts (ch. viii. 22),
divisions (ch. x. 19), and machinations (ch. xi. 47) are disclosed to us as it were
by themselves, and in the words that fell from their own lips. For some good
remarks on the individualizing traits and characteristics of those who appear on
the pages of St. John's Gospel, see Luthardt, Das Joharm. Evang. in. 2, Part
i. p. 98 sq.
B For some further notices and illustrations, see especially Luthardt, Das

46 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS ON THE Lect. I
conclusion call your attention to the mystical complete
ness which this Gospel gives to the evangelical history.
I will only ask you to -spend a moment's thought on that
everlasting wisdom by which it was fore-ordained that a
Gospel should be vouchsafed to us in which the loftiest
ideal purities and glories with which we might be able to
invest the Son of David, the Son of God, and the Son of
Man, might receive a yet loftier manifestation, and by
which the more distinctly historical pictures disclosed to us
by the synoptical Evangelists might be made instinct with
a quickening life, which assuredly they lack not, but which
we might never have completely realized if we had not
been endowed with the blessed heritage of the Gospel of
St. John.1
Johann Evang. in. 2, p. 92 sq., and for comparisons between the pictures of
our Redeemer as displayed to us in this and the three other Gospels, Lange,
Leben Jesu, i. 7. 2, Vol. i. p. 271 sq. Compare also Da Costa, Four Witnesses,
p. 286 sq.
l "We may, perhaps, profitably close this comparison of the characteristics of the
four Gospels with a brief statement of some of the distinctions which have either
been above alluded to, or may be further adduced as evincing the clear individu
ality of each one of the inspired records. In regard of (1) the External features
and characteristics, we are perhaps warranted in saying that (a) the point of view
of the first Gospel is mainly Israelitic ; of the second, Gentile ; of the third, univer
sal; of the fourth, Christian; — that(&) the general aspect and, so to speak, physi
ognomy of the first mainly is Oriental ; of the second, Roman ; of the third, Greek;
of the fourth, spiritual ; — that (c) the style of the first is stately and rhythmical j
of the second, terse and precise; of the third, calm and copious; of the fourth,
artless and colloquial; — that (d) the most striking characteristic of the first is
symmetry; of the second, compression; of the third, order; of the fourth, sys
tem; — that(e) the thought and language of the first are both Hebraistic; of
the third, both Hellenistic; while in the second the thought is often Occidental
though the language is Hebraistic ; and in the fourth the language Hellenistic,
but the thought Hebraistic. Again (2), in respect of Subject-matter and con
tents we may say perhaps (a), that in the first Gospel we have narrative; in the
second, memoirs; in the third, history; in the fourth, dramatic portraiture; —
(6) that in the first we have often the record of events in their accomplishment;
in the second, events in their detail ; in the third, events in their connection ; in
the fourth, events in relation to the teaching springing from them; — that thus
N(c), in the first we more often meet with the notice of impressions ; in the second,
of facts; in the third, of motives; in the fourth, of words spoken; — and that,
lastly (d), the record of the first is mainly collective and often antithetical; of
the second, graphic and circumstantial; of the third, didactic and reflective;
of the fourth, selective and supplemental. We may (3), conclude by saying that
in respect of the Portraiture of our Lord, the first Gospel presents Him to us
mainly as the Messiah; the second, mainly as the God-man ; the third, as the

Lect. I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. 47
And now I must close these meditations. Fain would
I dwell on some more practical applications, but the re
membrance that these are lectures rather than
.. , , _ Conclusion.
sermons, and that the time is tar spent, warns
me to say no more. Vet I cannot part from you, my
younger brethren, without simply yet lovingly urging you
ere we again meet in this church to spend a brief hour in
reviving your remembrance of the events in our Re
deemer's history which conclude with the return of the
Holy family to Nazareth, and precede the isolated notice
of our Lord's visit to the Temple when twelve years old ;
for thus far my next lecture will extend. I venture to
suggest this, for I feel that you will thus be enabled to
enter with a fresher interest into the meditations into
which, with the help of Almighty God, I hope to lead you
next Sunday afternoon. Yet withal remember, I beseech
you, that this is no mere investigation of chronological
difficulties, no dry matter of contested annals, but involves
an effort to see and feel with more freshness and reality
the significance of the recorded events inthe earthly life of
the Eternal Son.1 Remember that it implies a humble
endeavor, by the grace of the inworking Spirit, to gain a
more vital and personal interest in the inspired history of
Him who stooped to wear the garments of our mortality,
who submitted for our sakes to all the conditioning cir
cumstances of earthly life, was touched with a sense of
our infirmities, yea, as an inspired writer has told us, was
pleased to learn obedience "by the things
that He suffered," though himself the King
of kings and Lord of lords, God blessed for ever; Amen.
Redeemer; the fourth, as the only-begotten Son of God. For illustrations of
this summary the reader may be referred to the Four Witnesses of Da Costa, to
Davidson, Introduction to the N. T. Vol. i. ; Lange, Leben Jesu, I. 7. 2, Vol. i.
p. 234—281 ; Ebrard, Kritik der Evang. Geschichte, § 10—39.
1 For some excellent remarks on the unity of the Gospel history on the one
hand, and its fourfold yet organically connected revelation of our Redeemer's
Hfe and works on the other, see especially the eloquent and thoughtful work of
Dr. Lange, already several times referred to, Das Leben Jesu, vii. 1, 2, Book i.
p. 230 sq. — a work which we sincerely hope may ere long meet with a com
petent translator.

48 INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS. Lect. L
Such a work, if regarded under such aspects, and with
such remembrances, both is and must be blessed. Such
contemplations, if engaged in with a humble and loving
spirit, will add a strength to your faith, which, it may be, the
storm and stress of coming life will never be able success
fully to weaken, and against which those doubts and diffi
culties which at times try the hearts of the young and
inexperienced will be found both powerless and unpre-
vailing. O, may the grace of our Redeemer be with you;
may He quicken your young hearts ; may He show unto
you His glorious beauty ; may His image grow in your
souls ; and both in you and in us all may His life-giving
*.,.,. spirit enlighten the eyes of our understand-
ing, and fill us, heart and soul and spirit,
With all the fulness of God.*

LECTURE II.
THE BIRTH AND INFANCY OF OUR LORD.

AND THE CHILD GREW, AND WAXED STRONG IK SPIKIT, FILLED WITH WIB"
DOM : AUD THE GRACE OF QOD WAS UPON HIM. — St. Luke ii. 40.

The text which I have just read, brethren, forms the
concluding verse of that portion of the Evan-
. . . « .. General aspects
gehcal history to which, with God's assisting of the present m-
grace, I purpose directing your attention this
afternoon. We may now be said to have fairly entered
upon the solemn subject which I propose treating in these
lectures ; and we shall do well at once to address ourselves
to its discussion. And that, too, without any further pre
liminary matter, as I trust that my remarks last Sunday
will have so far prepared us for the sound and reverential
use of the four sources of our Redeemer's history, that we
need no longer delay in applying the principles which
were there alluded to.
I will pause only so far, to gather up the results of our
foregoing meditations, as to remind you that, if our obser
vations on the general character and relations of the four
inspired records were in any degree just and reasonable, it
would certainly seem clear that our present endeavor to
set forth a continuous and connected life of our Master
must involve a constant recognition of two seemingly op
posite modes of proceeding. On the one hand, we must
regard the four holy histories as to a great degree inde
pendent in their aims, objects, and general construction, —
as marked by certain fore-ordered and providentially-
marked characteristics ; and yet, on the other hand, we
must not fail to observe that they stand in such relations
5

50 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. n.
to each other as may both sanction and justify our combin
ing them in a general delineation of the chief features of
our Redeemer's earthly life. While we may shrink from
mere cold and sometimes forced harmonizing on this side,
we must not, on that, so exaggerate seeming differences1 as
to plead exemption from the edifying task of comparing
Scripture with Scripture,2 and of supplying from one
inspired writer what another might have thought it meet
to leave unnoticed or unexplained. Nay, more, we must
not shrink from noting even seeming discrepancies,3 lest
we fail to learn, by a more attentive consideration of them,
how they commonly arise from our ignorance of some un
recorded relations, and how the seeming discord is due
only to the Selahs and silences in the mingled strains of
Evangelical harmony.4
l This, which Augustine (de Consensu Evang. I. 7. 10) well calls " palmare
vanitatis," has been far too much the tendency of modern commentators and
essayists, especially in Germany. We may observe this not merely in the repul
sive productions of men like Strauss and his followers, but even in the com
mentaries of more sober and thoughtful writers. I may specify, for instance,
the otherwise valuable commentary of Dr. Meyer. Here we have not only the
fewest possible efforts to adjust or account for differences in the order of events
in the Gospel history, but only too often a tendency to represent them greater
than they really are found to be. Compare, for example, this writer's objection
able remarks on Luke v. 1—11, Kommentar, p. 263. The results of the modern
destructive school are stated fairly and clearly by Ebrard, Kritik der Evang.
Gesch. 1 114—118, p. 608. See especially p. 641.
2 Some judicious remarks on the true Christian method of estimating, com
paring, and criticizing the inspired records of the four Evangelists, will be
found in the introduction to Lange's Leben Jesu. See especially Book I. 4. 7,
Vol. i. p. 141 sq.
3 The duty of the critic in this respect is well stated by Dr. Lange in the work
above referred to : " The Evangelist," he says, " may certainly, nay, must appear
to contradict himself; for the appearance of such contradiction is the mark of
life, depth, and freshness. Nature appears a thousand times over to contradict
herself. If a critic finds a difficulty in such an appearance of contradiction,
and demands from the Gospels the precision of notaries, he clearly enough
evinces his own incapability of forming a just estimate of them." Leben Jesu,
I. 4. 7, Vol. i. p. 144. See also some brief but good remarks on seeming dis
crepancies in the introduction to Chrysostom's Homilies on St. Matt. I. p. S
(ed. Bened.)
4 " But if in recounting the wonders (of the Gospel history) all did not men
tion the same things, but one mentioned this set of incidents and another that,
do not be disturbed thereby. For if one had related everything the rest would
*»ve been superfluous; or if all had written new and peculiar matter in refer-

Lect. n. OF OUR LORD. 51
But let us delay no longer, for the subject before us is
so extended that it will fully occupy all our
time, and so varied that it will require some *£**»«"<**'
adjustment to adapt it to the prescribed
limits of these lectures.
As the present course of the Hulsean Lectures is limited
in its duration to one year, and consequently will, at the
very utmost, only afford me eight opportunities of address
ing you,1 it will perhaps be best to adopt the following
divisions. In the present lecture we will consider the
events of the Lord's infancy. Next Sunday we will med
itate on the single recorded event of our Lord's boyhood,
and that portion of the history of His manhood which
commences with His baptism and concludes with the mir
acle at the pool of Bethesda, — in a word, what may be
roughly though conveniently termed our Lord's early
Judcean ministry. A fourth and a fifth lecture may be
devoted to the ministry in Galilee and the neighboring
districts; a sixth may contain a brief account of the
Lord's last three journeys to or towards Jerusalem; a
seventh may well be given exclusively to the events of the
passover, — that period of such momentous interest, and
so replete with difficulties of combination and arrange
ment ; — and a concluding lecture may embrace the history
of the last forty days.
In the present portion, if we leave out the commence
ment of St. John's Gospel and the early history of the
Baptist,2 the first recorded event is of an importance

ence to one another there would not have appeared the present evidence of
agreement." — Chrysostom, ib. p. 6. See further some judicious remarks in the
introduction to The Four Witnesses of Da Costa, p. 1 sq.
1 Owing to recent regulations, this number of Lectures has been finally reduced
to six. The last two Lectures were thus not preached, but are added both for
the sake of still maintaining some conformity to the will of the founder, and
also for the sake of giving a necessary completeness to the subject.
2 These portions of the inspired narrative are not commented on. The former
belongs more to the province of dogmatical theology, the latter to the general
history of our Lord's times, into neither of which our present limits and the
restricted nature of our subject will now permit us to enter. The student will

52 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. It
that cannot be over-estimated, — that single event in the
history of our race that bridges over the stu-
¦ne miraculous Den(jous chasm between God and man. That
conception of our i
Lord; its mystery f;rst event is the miraculous conception of
and subHmity. our Redeemer.1 It is related to us both by
the first and third Evangelists,2 and by the latter with
such an accuracy of detail, that we may bless God for
having vouchsafed to us a record which, if reverently and
attentively considered, will be found to suggest an answer
to every question that might present itself to an honest
though amazed spirit. Yea, and it is a subject for amaze
ment.8 Dull hearts there may be that have never cared
to meditate deeply on these mysteries of our salvation,
and to which the wonder and even perplexity of nobler
find an elaborate and, in most respects, satisfactory article on the Baptist, in
Winer, Bealw'irterb. Vol. i. p. 585 — 590; and some good comments on his minis
try in Greswell, Dissert, xix. Vol. ii. p. 148 sq.
1 Some good remarks on this profound subject will be found in Neander, Life
of Christ, p. 13 sq. (Bohn). The student will there find an able exposure of the
mythical view, as it is called, of this sublime mystery, and brief but satisfactory
answers to current objections. The main position of Neander is, that the mirac
ulous conception was demanded dpriori, and confirmed dposteriori. As regards
any explanation of the special circumstances of this holy miracle, all that can be
said has been said by Bp. Pearson, Creed, Art. in. Vol. i. p. 203 (ed. Burton). See
also Andrewes, Serm. ix. Vol. i. p. 135 sq. (A.-C. Libr.). The dignity of the con
ception is well touched upon by Hilary, de Trinitate, Book II. p. 17 (Paris, 1631).
2 The objection founded on the assumed silence of St. John is wholly futile.
If our view of St. John's Gospel be correct (see above, p. 30), it may be fairly
urged that a formal notice of an event which had been so fully related by one
Evangelist and so distinctly confirmed by another would have seemed out of
place in a Gospel so constructed as that of St. John. What we might have
expected we meet with, — the fullest and most unquestioned statement of this
divine truth (ch. i. 14, comp. ver. 13), nay more, reasoning which depends upon
it (ch. iii. 6), but no historical details. See Neander, Life of Christ, p. 17, note
(Bobn), and compare Da Costa, Four Witnesses, p. 286. The similarly assumed
silence of St. Paul (Von Ammon, Gesch. des Lebens Jesu, i. 4, Vol. i. p. 186) is
abundantly confuted by Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 2, 4, Vol. ii. pp. 72, 73.
8 Well may Augustine say : " Quid mirabilius virginis partu ! concipit et virgo
est; parit et virgo est. Creatus est de e% quam creavit: attulit ei fecunditatem,
non corrupit ejus integritatem."— Serm. clxxxix. 2, Vol. v. p. 1605 (ed. Migne).
So, too, Gregory of Nazianzus, in a fine sermon on the nativity : Xlpoe\&&>i/ Se
&ebs p.era Trjs irpotr\in\ieois ev 4k Svo t&v ivavrioiv, capitis Ka\ XlveipoTTOS-
£v to fiev faeojae, to Be iSreib&t!. *n Tijr Kamris fn.l£<sas, & Trjs irapaS6^ov
updo-etas, S iiv yivtrai, Kal o uktuttos Krlfercu, koX 6 axiiprrros x"P&rat out
fteVrjs tyvxris voepas fieo-rrevoio-ns &eoT7jTi /col crapubs iraxuTijTi. — Orat.
xxxviii. p. 620 (ed. Morell).

Lect. II. OF OUR LORD. 53
spirits may have seemed unreasonable or inexplicable.
Such there may be ; but who of higher strain, as he sees
and feels the infirmities with which he is encompassed, the
weakness and frailty of that flesh with which he is clothed,1
the sinfulness that seems wound round every fibre, and
knit up with every joint of his perishing body, — who has
truly felt all this, and not found himself at times over
whelmed with the contemplation of the mystery of Em
manuel,2 — the everlasting God manifested in, yea taber
nacling in, this very mortal flesh? Wild heathenism, we
say, may have dreamed such dreams. The pagan of the
"V^est may have vaunted of his deified mortality and his
brother men ascending to the gods ; the pagan of the East
may have fabled of his encarnalized divinities, and of his
gods descending to men ; s but this mystery of mysteries,
that the Eternal Son of the Eternal Father, He whose
out-goings had been from everlasting, whose hands had
laid tBe bases of the hills and spread out the floods, that
He should become incarnate, should take upon Him our
nature and our infirmities, — can it be ? Can such a
thought have found an expression in prophecy ? i Can it
l " What say you to flesh? is it meet God be manifested therein? ' Without
controversy ' it is not. Why, what is flesh? it is no mystery to tell what it is ; it
is dust, saith the patriarch Abraham. It is grass, saith the prophet Esay ; fcenum,
1 grass cut down, and withering.' It is ' corruption,' not corruptible, but even
corruption itself, saith the Apostle Paul. . . . We cannot choose but hold this
mystery for great, and say with Augustine, Deus ; quid gloriosius ? Caro ; quid
villus ? Deus in came; quid mirabilius?" — Andrewes, Serm. ill. Vol. i. p. 37
(A.-C. Libr.).
2 " O, the height and depth of this super-celestial mystery! " says the eloquent
Bishop Hall, " that the infinite Deity and finite flesh should meet in one subject,
yet so as the humanity should not be absorbed of the Godhead, nor the Godhead
contracted by the humanity, but both inseparably united ; that the Godhead is
not humanized, the humanity not deifled, both are indivisibly conjoined ; con
joined so as without confusion distinguished." — Great Mystery cf Godliness, § 2,
Vol. viii. p. 332 (Oxf. 1837). Chrysostom has expressed very similar sentiments
and with equal eloquence. See Horn, in Matt. n. p. 21 (ed. Bened.).
3 This thought is well expressed and expanded by Dr. Dorner in his valuable
work on the Person of Christ, Vol. i. p. 4 sq. (ed. 2, 1845).
< The prophecies of the Old Testament relating to the miraculous conception,
so often and so recklessly explained away or denied, will be found calmly and
critically, though not in all respects satisfactorily, discussed by Hofmann, Scliriftr
beweis, n. 1. 5. 3, Vol. ii. p. 54 — 69. 5*

54 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. II.
have become realized in history ? Say, — can it be ? Can
the world produce a narrative that can make such a con
ception imaginable? Is there a record that can make such
an event seem credible, seem possible, we will not say to
a doubting, but even to a receptive and to a trustful spirit ?
Yea, verily, blessed be God, we have that narrative, and
on that narrative, not only in its general outlines, but its
most special details, we may rely with a confidence which
every meditative reading will be found to enhance and to
corroborate. Let us pause a moment to consider a few of the more
striking portions of the narrative, especially
The narrative of from the point of view in which we are for
the conception con- , - , .
stdered generally. the moment regarding it, — that or supplying
the fullest conviction to every honest but
anxious, every longing but inquiring, heart. Does the
idealizing spirit that views the transcendent event in all
the circumstances of its widest universality, — that seems
to recognize the mysterious adaptations of earthly domin
ion,1 to read the tokens of the fulness of the times, and
to discern the longings pervading, not only the chosen
1 The state of the world at the epoch when our Lord appeared was exactly that
which, according to our mere human conceptions, might seem most fitted for the
reception of Christianity. Judaism, on the one hand, had lost all those external
glories and prerogatives which, at an earlier period, would have prevented any
recognition of the Messiah, save as a national ruler and king. There would have
been no Israel of God with chastened hearts and more spiritualized expectancies
waiting, as we know they now were, for a truer redemption of Israel. Heathen
ism, on the other hand, had now gained by its contact with Judaism truer con
ceptions of the unity of God; and many a proselyte of the gate was there who,
like the centurion of Capernaum (Luke vii. 5), loved well the nation that had
taught him to kneel to the one God, and could bear to receive from that despised
people a knowledge of his own and the world's salvation. Compare Jost, Ges
chichte des Judenthums, in. 1, 4, Vol. i. p. 330, and Milman, Hist, of Christianity,
ch. I. Vol. i. p. 21 sq. When we add to this the remembrance of the recent con
solidation of the power of Rome (see esp. Merivale, Hist, of Bomans, ch. xxxix.
Vol. iv. p. 383 sq.), and recognize a political centralization which could not but
aid, however unwittingly and unwillingly, the pervasive influences of the new
faith, we may well feel that the very appearance of Christianity, at the time when
it did appear, is in itself an indirect evidence of its divine nature and truth. See
some good remarks on this subject in Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 1. 1, p. 15 sq. ; and
for a fairly candid statement of the relations of Judaism to Christianity, the
learned work of Jost, Geschichte des Judenthums, m. 3 11, Vol. i. p. 394 sq.

Lect. H. OF OUR LORD. 55
people,1 but the whole wide realms of the Eastern world,2 —
does such a spirit, meditating thus loftily and perchance
blamelessly upon the mighty coincidences of time and
place and history, seek in vain for some features in the
record of the incarnation of the Son of God that shall
respond to such feelings ? Does not the
direct message from Jehovah, the angelic Lukei.w.
ministration, the operative influence of the xutei. 28.
Eternal Spirit, all tend to work a conviction Luketss.
that to the receptive heart becomes of inex
pressible strength ? s Or again, to the more humble and
meek spirit, that seeks only by the holy leadings of simple
narrative to gain for itself a saving knowledge of the his
tory of its own salvation, is there not here disclosed, in
the many notices of the purely human and outward rela
tions of those whom the opening of the Gospel brings be
fore us, those artless traits of historic truth that on some
minds work such a fulness of conviction ? Yes, let us
take the very objections of adversaries or sceptics, and see
in this portion of St. Luke's Gospel the more direct agen
cies of the spiritual world, and in the short notice of St,

1 The gradual development of this feeling, and the circumstances which
helped to promote it, are well noticed by Ewald, Geschichte Christus', pp.
65—96. 2 It has been recently considered doubtful whether the well-known passages
from Tacitus (Hist. v. 13) and Suetonius ( Vespas. 4) relating to the feeling that
pervaded the whole Eastern world, and the attention that was directed to
Judaja, may not have been imitated from Josephus (Bell. Jud. vii. 5, 4). See
Neander, Life of Christ, p. 28, note (Bohn), and compare Whiston, Dissert, in.,
appended to his translation of Josephus, esp. Vol. iii. p. 612 (Oxford, 1839). Such
an imitation does not seem clearly made out; still, even if in part we concede it,
we have only thus far weakened the testimony from without as to consider it an
acceptance of a statement made from within, because that statement was felt to
be correct.
3 " Our own idea of Christ compels us to admit that two factors, the one natu
ral, the other supernatural, were coefiicient in His entrance into human life;
and this, too, although we may be unable, d priori, to state how that entrance
was accomplished. But at this point the historical accounts come to our aid, by
testifying that what our theory of the case requires, did in fact occur." — Nean.
der, Life of Christ, p. 13 (Bohn), — a loose, but substantially correct representa.
tion of the original (Leben Jesu Christi, p. 15). Compare Bp. Taylor, Life qf
Christ, 1. ad sect. 1. 4, Vol. i. p. 28 (Lond. 1836).

56 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. II.
Matthew's Gospel their more mediate workings,1 — let us
accept the statement, and see in it only one more proof, if
proof be needed, of the diverse forms in which Evangeli
cal Truth is presented to the receptive mind, let us recog
nize in it only one more example of the varied aspects of
the manifold wisdom of God.
Let us now substantiate the foregoing remarks by a
brief notice of the details of the inspired
The narrative of
the Conception con- history.
siderediniisdetails. ,.,. . . -, , , • , i
What a vivid truth, speaking humanly,
there is in the narrative of St. Luke ! With what a mar
vellous aptitude to human infirmity do things, divine and
human, mingle with each other in ever illustrative and ever
confirmatory combinations. With what striking persua
siveness do mysteries seemingly beyond the grasp of
thought blend lovingly with the simplest elements, and
become realizable by the teachings of the homely relations
of humble and sequestered life. With what a noble yet
.circumstantial simplicity — a simplicity that in the lan
guage, no less than in the facts related, bewrays the record
of her who saw and believed2 — is the opening story told

l See, for example, Von Ammon, Gesch. des Lebens Jesu, I. 5, Vol. i. p. 194.
We do not in these lectures notice, nor do we consider it either useful or edify
ing to notice, the repulsive opinions of writers like Strauss (Leben Jesu), Weisse
(die Evang. Geschichte), or Gfrorer ( Geschichte des Urchristenthum): their gen
eral tendencies are so simply destructive, their unhappy criticisms so almost
judicially infatuated, and their progressions in doubt and denials (see Ebrard,
Kritik der Ev. Gesch. § 6, 7) such melancholy instances of a very fJLe&oStia
rrXavvs (Eph. iv. 14), that we may well leave them to themselves, and to their
own mutual confutations. Writers of the character of the one above alluded
to may, however, sometimes be profitably referred to, as evincing, as Von
Ammon especially does in respect of this narrative (see pp. 190, 191), what an
Amount of unhappy effort it takes to resist the impression of its vital truth
which the evangelical history makes upon doubting minds that will consent to
be reasonable and candid.
2 See Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 2. 6, Vol. ii. p. 93. We can, perhaps, hardly go so
far with this able writer as positively to find in the recital of the events a diction
that belongs rather to a woman than to a man ; but. when we mark the speci
alities of the narrative, the preservation of the exact expressions of the sacred
eanticles, and, above all, the tone of artless reality which pervades the whole,
Ve seem perfectly justified in believing that we have here,, partly perhaps in
¦flibstance, partly in precise terms, a record that came to St. Luke, mediately or

Lect. II. OF OUR LORD. 57
of man's redemption ! The angel Gabriel, he who stood
among the highest of the angelic hierarchy, and whose
ministrations, if it be not too bold a thing to affirm, appear
to have been specially Messianic, just as those of Raphael
might have pertained to individual need, and those of
Michael to judicial power,1 — that blessed Spirit, who a few
months before had been sent to announce the future birth
of the forerunner, is now sent from God to a
rude and lone village in the hills of Galilee,
— Nazareth the disesteemed,2 and to a betrothed virgin,'
whose name was Mary. Of the early history of that
highly favored one we know nothing. Yet, without bor
rowing one thought from the legendary notices of apocry
phal narrative,4 it does not seem a baseless fancy to recog
nize in her one of those pure spirits that in seclusion and
loneliness were looking and longing for the theocratic King,

immediately, from the lips of the Virgin herself, — her Son's first evangelist.
And with such a belief the peculiarities of the diction seem fully to coincide.
While throughout we can trace the hand of St. Luke (see esp. Gersdorf, Beitrdge,
p. 160 sq.), we can also see in the transition from the studied dedication to the
simple structure of the ancient Scriptures just that change which a faithful
incorporation of the recital of another would be certain to introduce. Compare
Mill, on Pantheistic Principles, Part n. p. 23 sq.
1 This remark (valeat quantum) is due to Lange (Leben Jesu, n. 2. 2, Vol. ii.
p. 46), whose whole chapter on the subject of angelic ministrations deserves
perusal. Por further references on the nature of angels, see notes on Eph. i. 21 ;
and for a most able confutation of the arguments against this portion of the
sacred narrative, founded on angelic appearances, Mill, Obss. on Pantheistic
Principles, Part II. 4, p. 52 sq.
2 See Stanley, Palestine, chap. x. 1, p. 361 (ed. 2), and compare John i. 46, and
the notes of Meyer in loc. The savage act recorded by St. Luke (ch. iv. 29) is a
good commentary on the meaning of Nathanael's question. For an interesting
description of Nazareth, especially considered with reference to {he Gospel his
tory, see Robinson, Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 333 sq. (ed. 2).
3 " So it was that the Virgin was betrothed, lest honorable marriage might be
disreputed, and seem inglorious, by a positive rejection from any participation
in the honor."— Taylor, Life of Christ, 1, ad sect. I. 6, Vol. i. p. 29 (Lond. 1836).
Other, and some of them singular, reasons are assigned by the older writers.
See Spanheim, Dub. Evang. Part I. p. 116. The use of the word rieuvi)trT(Vfi4i'Tiv
is investigated with much learning by Bynajus, de Natali Jes. Clir. x. p. 28 sq.
4 The history of the Virgin is told at great length in the Protevangelium of
James, and in the so-called Gospels de Ortu (Pseudo-Matt.) and de Nativitate
Maria. See Tischendorf, Evang. Apocrypha (Lips. 1853); and for a connected
history formed out of these apocryphal writings, the laborious work of Hof-
mann (R), das Leben Jesu nach den Apocryphen (Leipz. 1851).

58 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. n.
and that, deeply imbued, as we see the Virgin must have
been, both with the letter and with the spirit of the Old
Testament, were awaiting the evolution of
Luke i.is-5 . ^e highest of all its transcendent prophecies.
Rapt as such a one might well have been in devotion, or in
Messianic meditation,1 she sees before her, at no legendary
spring-side,2 but, as the words of the Evangelist seem
rather to imply, in her own humble abode,
the divinely-sent messenger, and hears a salu
tation which, expressed in the terms in which it was
expressed, "Hail, highly favored one! the
Lord is with thee," and coming as it did from
an angel's lips, must well have troubled that meek spirit
and cast it into awe and perplexity.3
What persuasive truth there is in the nature of the
terms in which the announcement is con-
sey-evident truth Teye(i. To that highly favored one, that per-
of the narrative. J ° J r
chance had long communed in stillness on
the prophecies of the Messianic kingdom, to her is Jesus
the Son of the Highest portrayed in that form, which, par
tially Israelitic in general outline, yet Christian in essence,4
1 Bp. Taylor censures any speculation of this kind ; but it seems, to say the
least, harmless, and not inconsistent with the meditative spirit which reveals
itself in the Virgin's inspired canticle. Bengel hints at the time as evening,
comparing Dan. ix. 21.
2 Compare Protevang. cap. 11, Hist, de Nat. Marias, cap. 9, and compare Hof-
mann, Leben Jesu, p. 74. The expressions of inspired narrative (ver. 28) seem
in this particular to justify the statement made in Suidas s. v. 'Introvs, where the
Virgin is related as specifying, — eltre?&u)i* 4v § %y.y)v otK'fjfiaTi. The spring in
question is alluded to and briefly described by Stanley, Palestine, p. 362 (ed. 2).
3 The addition of the participle ISovtra in the received text, though not with
out great external support (see Tischendorf in loc. ), must still be considered as
somewhat doubtful. Even if retained, we may perhaps more naturally refer the
troubled feelings of the Virgin simply to the terms in which the salutation was
couched : observe the specific sir! -rip \6ya>, and the concluding clause, Kal
Sle\ayl£eTO iroraTrbs elv t\o-iratTfj.bs oZtos.
4 We seem to recognize this distinction in the expressions of ver. 33. — If, on
the one hand, the heavenly messenger declares, in continuation of the image at
the concluding part of the former verse, that the Eternal Son " shall reign over
the house of Jacob for ever ;" he, on the other hand, seems to imply, by the very
seeming repetition, " And of His kingdom there shall be no end," a reference to
a still more universal dominion. Comp. Dan. vii. 14, and see Bynaus, de Natali
Jes. Chr. xxxvi. p. 117 sq.

Lect. II. OF OUR LORD. 59
must have begun to work in her the most lively conviction.
Yet how characteristic is the question, "How ( M
shall this be ? " the question not of outwardly j^ L w.
expressed doubt, like that of Zacharias, or of Gen. xva. xt.
an inwardly felt sense of impossibility, like 0m.tam.i2.
that of Abraham and Sarah in the old and typical past,
but of a childlike innocence, that sought to realize to itself,
in the very face of seeming impossibilities, the full assurance
of its own blessedness. No, there was no lack of real faith
in that question.1 It was a question to which the heavenly
messenger was permitted to return a most explicit answer,
and to confirm by a most notable example, even that of her
kinswoman Elisabeth, that with God no word
was impossible,2 — no promise that was not
to receive its completest and most literal fulfilment.
With these words of the angel all seems to have become
clear to her in regard of the wonder-working power of
God ; much, too, must have already seemed clear to her on
the side of man. With the rapid fore-glance of thought,
she must have seen in the clouded future, scorn, dereliction,
the pointed finger of a mocking and uncharitable world,
calumny, shame, death. But what was a world's scorn, or
1 The utmost that can be said is that the Virgin felt the seeming impossibility,
and that in avowing the feeling she sought for that further assurance which she
also felt would not be withheld, and would at once allay her doubts. Even the
following excellent remarks of Jackson attribute to the Virgin somewhat more
mistrust than the words and the case seem to imply : " It is far from my dispo
sition at any time, or my purpose at this, to urge further to aggravate the
infirmity of a vessel so sanctified, elect, and precious : and I am persuaded the
Evangelist did not so much intend to disparage hers, as to confirm our belief,
by relating her doubtful question, and the angel's reply; the one being but
Sarah's mistrust, refined with maidenly modesty, the other Sarah's check, miti
gated and qualified by the angel." — Creed, Book vn. 1. 12, Vol. vi. p. 209 (Oxf.
1844). The earlier commentators, though perhaps they slightly overpress the
irebs in the Virgin's question (em^nrovtra rov rpiirov rov irpayfiaros, Theoph.),
have in most cases rightly appreciated the true state of feeling which prompted
the question. Comp. Lange, Leben Jesu, 11. 2, 3, Vol. ii. p. 66
2 It is usual to consider p?ifJ.a in this text as coextensive in meaning with the
Hebrew 12 *T, and as implying " thing," " matter " (Wordsworth, in loc). This
is now rightly called in question by the most accurate interpreters ; the meaning
is simply as stated by Euthymius, — rrav 0 Keyet, irav 0 iirayye\eTai. Sea
Meyer, Komment. uber Luk., p. 203.

60 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. II.
a world's persecution, to those words of promise ? Faith
sustains that possible shrinking from more than mortal trial,
and turns it into meekest resignation : " Behold the hand
maid of the Lord ; be it unto me according to thy word."
From that hour the blessed Virgin seems ever to appear
before us in that character, which the notices of the Gos
pels so consistently adumbrate,1 meek and pensive, medita
tive and resigned, blessed with joys no tongue can tell, and
yet, even in the first hours of her blessedness, beginning to
feel one edge of the sword that was to pierce
Luken.u. through her loving and submissive heart.
The last words of the miraculous message seem to pre
pare us for the next event recorded by the
^Si* Evangelist, -the hasty journey of the Vir-
gin to her aged relative Elisabeth,2 in the hill-
country of Judaea: "and Mary arose and went into the
hill-country, with haste, unto a city of Juda."
* '• 89' But why this haste ? Why this lengthened,
and, as far as we can infer from national custom,3 unusual
journey in the case of a young and secluded maiden? Are
we to believe, with a recent and eloquent writer of _a life of
1 The character of the blessed Virgin, as far as it can be inferred from the
Scriptures, has been touched upon by Niemeyer, Character, Vol. i. p. 54 sq.
Some thoughtful notices, as derived from St. John's Gospel, will be found in
Luthardt, das Johann. Evang. Vol. i. p. 114 sq.
2 It seems impossible to state confidently the nature of this relationship. It
has been thought possible that the Virgin may have been of the tribe of Levi,
and thus connected with Elisabeth, who we know was of that tribe; so the
apocryphal document called the Testamentum xii. Patrum, § 2, 7, and Faustus
Manichseus, as referred to by Augustine, contra Faust. Manich. xxiii. 9, Vol.
viii. p. 471 (ed. Migne). The more probable opinion is, that the Virgin was of
the tribe of Judah, and that the relationship with Elisabeth arose from some
intermarriage. Such intermarriages between members of the tribe of Levi and
members of other tribes can be shown to have occurred in earlier periods of
sacred history (comp. 2 Chron. xxii. 11); and in these later periods might have
been far from uncommon. See Bynaeus, de Natali Chr. I. 1. 47, p. 141; and
comp. Mishna, Tract, " Kiddushin," iv. 1 sq. Vol. iii. p. 378 sq. (ed. Surenhus.).
3 Passages have been cited from Philo, de Legg. Spec. in. 31, Vol. i. p 327 (ed.
Mangey). and Talm. Hieros. Tract, "Chetuboth," vii. 6, which would seem to
imply that such journeys in the case of virgins were contrary to general custom.
"The journey," says Lange, " was not quite in accordance with Old-Testament
decorum ; the deep realities of the cross, however, give a freedom in the spirit of
the New." — Leben Jesu, Vol. ii, p. 85.

Lect. II. OF OUR LORD. 61
our Lord, that it was in consequence of a communication
on the part of the Virgin, and a subsequent rejection on the
part of Joseph?1 Are we to do such a wrong to both our
Lord's earthly parents ? Are we to make that righteous son
of Jacob the first Ebionite ? Are we to believe that the
blessed Virgin thus strangely threw off that holy and pen
sive reserve, which, as I have remarked, seems her charac
teristic throughout the Gospel history ? It cannot be. That
visit was not to receive consolation for wrong and unkind-
ness from man, but to confer with a wise heart on trans
cendent blessings from God, which the unaided spirit even
of Mary of Nazareth might not at first be able completely
to grasp and to realize. And to whom could she go so nat
urally as to one toward whom the wonder-working power
of God had been so signally displayed. Nay, does not the
allusion to her " kinswoman Elisabeth," in the
angel's concluding words, suggest the very
quarter to which she was to turn for further spiritual support,
and for yet more accumulated verification? To her, then, the
Virgin at once hastens. A few days 2 would bring the un
looked-for visitant to the " city of Juda," —
whether the nearer village which tradition
still points to as the home of Zacharias and Elisabeth,3 or
1 See Lange, Leben Jesu, i. 2. 5, Vol. ii. p. 84 sq. ; fully and satisfactorily
answered by Ebrard, Kritik der Ev. Gesch. § 45, p. 214 sq. There seems no suffi
cient reason for placing, with Alford and others, what is recorded iu Matt. i.
18 — 25 before this journey. The discovery noticed in Matt. i. 18 ( e u p <= & 17 pe
€t7re Sia to airpoo-S6tcT]Toif. Euthym.),and the events which followed, would seem
much more naturally to have taken place after the Virgin's return. So rightly
August, de Consensu Evang. 11. 17, Vol. iii. p. 1081 (ed. Migne). Comp. Tischen
dorf, Synops. Evang. p. xxi.
2 If Hebron (see below) be considered the Virgin's destination, the distance
could not have been much short of 100 English miles, and would probably have
taken at least four days. We learn from Dr. Robinson's Itinerary that the time
from Hebron to Jerusalem, with camels, was in his case 8h. 15m., and from Jeru
salem to Nazareth, with mules, 29h. 45m. The rate of travelling with the former
is estimated at about two geographical miles an hour, and with the later some
what less than three. See Robinson's- Palestine, Vol. ii. pp. 568, 574 (ed. 2). A
learned dissertation on the rate of a day's journey will be found in Greswell,
Dissertations, Vol. iv. p. 525 sq. (ed. 2).
3 Now called Ain Rarim, and a short distance from Jerusalem. Its claims are
strongly supported by Dr. Thomson in his excellent work, The Land and the
6

62 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. n.
the more remote town of Juta, or perhaps, more probably,
ancient and priestly Hebron,1 which Jewish tradition has
fixed upon as the birth-place of the last and greatest scion
of the old dispensation.2 There she finds, and there, as St.
Luke especially notices, she salutes, the future
Mcei'4a- mother of the Baptist. That salutation, per
chance, was of a nature that served, under the inspiration
of the Spirit, in a moment to convey all. Elisabeth, yea,
and the son of Elisabeth, felt the deep significance of that
greeting.3 The aged matron at once breaks forth into a
mysterious welcome of holy joy, and with a
loud voice, the voice of loftiest spiritual exal-
Ver 42. tation, she blesses the chosen one who had
come under the shadow of her roof, adding that reassur
ance which seems to supply us with the clew to the right
understanding of the whole, " and blessed is she that be
lieved : for there shall be a performance of
Ver. 45. L
those things which were told her from the
Lord."
We need not pause on this inspired greeting, and on the

Book (Vol. ii. p. 537), and seem to rest mainly on the concurrent traditions of the
Greek and Latin Churches. See, however, below, note 2.
1 This last supposition, which is that of Grotius, Lightfoot, and others, is per
haps slightly the most probable, as Hebron appears to have been preeminently
one of the cities of the Priests. See Josh. xxi. 11, and comp. Lightfoot, Hor.
Hebr. on Luke i. 39, Vol. ii. p. 386 (Lond. 1684). The second supposition is due to
Reland, (Palrnst. p. 870), and is adopted by Robinson (Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 206,
ed. 2), who identifies it with the modern Yutta. The supposition that 'IoiSSa is
only a corrupted form, by a softer pronunciation, of 'Iouto (Eeland), is highly
questionable ; no trace of such u, reading occurs in any of the ancient manu
scripts. 2 See Otho, Lex. Babbin. p. 324, and compare Joshua xxi. 11, where Hebron is
specially defined as being "in the hill-country of Judah." This general defini
tion of locality is perhaps slightly less suitable to the first-mentioned place, Ain
Karim, which, though in the uplands of Judaea, is scarcely in that part which
seems commonly to have been known as "the hill-country." Sepp (Leben Chr.
Vol. ii. p. 8) cites Talm. Hieros. "Schevith," fol. 38, 4, — " Quodnam est monta-
num Judasse? mons regalis."
3 It has been well, though perhaps somewhat fancifully said by Euthymius i
'O jUev Xpttrrbs £tp&4y£a.To Sta rov ffrSparos ttjs ISlas iutjtooV 6 Se 'luydvpris
tftcovae Sta tGiv &rtav ttjs ometas fw]Tp6s, Ka\ tTriyvobs. inreptpvws rby eavrov
Seo-n-6rt\v tj.veK^pv\ev avrbv t$ OKipr^fiaTi. — Comment, in Luc. I. 41.

Lect. II. OF OUR LORD. 63
exalted hymn of praise uttered in response by the Virgin,
save to protest against the discreditable, and,
1 ° Internal truthful-
to use the mildest term, the unreasonable ness of the two m-
attempts that have been made to throw
doubt on the credibility of the sacred narrative, by ap
pealing to the improbability of these so-called lyrical effu
sions1 on the part of Mary and Elisabeth. Lyrical
effusions ! What ! are we to say that this strange and un
looked-for meeting on the part 'of the mother of the Fore
runner and the mother of the Redeemer was as common
place and prosaic as that of any two matrons of Israel
that might have met unexpectedly under the terebinths2
of Hebron? Are we so utterly to believe in those wretched
Epicurean views of the history of our race, as to conceive
it possible that the greatest events connected with it were
unmarked by all circumstances of higher spiritual exalta
tion? If there be only that grain of truth in the Evangeli
cal history that our adversaries may be disposed to concede ;
if there be any truth in those ordinary psychological laws,
to which, when it serves their purpose, they are not slow
to appeal ; then, beyond all doubt, both Elisabeth and the
Virgin could not be imagined to have met in any way less
striking than that which is recorded; their words of greet
ing could have been none other than those we find assigned
to them by the Evangelist.3 Every accent in the saluta
tion of the elder matron is true to the principles of our
common nature when subjected to the highest influences;
1 Compare Schleiermacher, Essay on St. Luke, p. 24 ; well and completely
answered by Dr. Mill in his admirable comments on these inspired hymns. See
Observations-on Pantheistic Principles, Part II. 3, p. 39 sq.
2 Kitto, Cycl. s. V. " Alah."
3 " Such a vision of coming power and light and majesty as these hymns indi
cate, — a picture so vivid as to the blessedness of the approaching reign, so indis
tinct and void as to the means by which that blessedness was to be realized, — in
which, while the view of faith is so concentred on the Source of salvation, then
initially manifested the whole detail of His acts and the particulars of His
redemption continue closely wrapped up iu the figure and symbol which repre
sented them in the ancient dispensation, — such a vision could belong only to
the particular position assigned to it, in the boundary of the old and new cove
nants."— Mill, Observations, Part II. 3, p. 51.

64 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. n.
every cadence of the Virgin's hymn is in most life-like
accordance with all we know of the speaker, and with all
we can imagine of the circumstances of this momentous
meeting. O no, let us not hesitate to express our
deepest and heartiest conviction that the words we have
here are no collection of Scriptural phrases, no artful com
position of an imaginative or credulous writer, but the
very words that fell from the lips of Mary of Nazareth, —
words which the rapture of the moment and the inspiration
of the Holy Ghost alike called forth, and alike imprinted
indelibly on the memory both of her that spake and her
that listened.1 All speaks truth, life, and reality. On the
one hand, the diction of the Old Testament that pervades
this sublime canticle, — the reminiscences perchance of the
hymn of Hannah, type of her who spake ; on the other
hand, the conscious allusions to mysterious blessings that
Hannah never knew, — all place before us, as in a por
traiture of most living truth, the rapt maiden of Nazareth,
pouring forth her stored-up memories of history and
prophecy in one full stream of Messianic joyfulness and
praise. After a few months' sojourn with Elisabeth the Virgin
, , returns 2 and then, or soon after it, came the
Return of the _ ' ' '
rirgin.andtherev- trial of faith to the righteous Joseph. This
elation to Joseph. .
bt. Matthew relates to us briefly, but with
some suggestive and characteristic marks of living truth
to which we may for a moment advert.
1 Even without specially ascribing to the Virgin, as indeed we fairly might do,
that spiritually-strengthened power of recollection which was promised to the
Apostles of her Son (John xiv. 26), we may justly remind our opponents that the
rhythmical character of these canticles would infallibly impress them on the
minds of both the speakers with all that peculiar force and vividness which, wo
must often observe, metre does in our own cases. Comp. Mill, Observations, p. 42.
2 It has been doubted whether the notices of time may not lead us to suppose
that the Virgin staid with Elisabeth till the birth of the Baptist, and that St.
Luke has specified the return of the Virgin, in the place he has done, merely ta
connect closely the notices of her journey and her return. See Wieseler, Cliron.
Synops. I. 3, p. 151. There is some plausibility in the supposition; but, on the
whole, it seems more natural to conceive that the events took place in the ordel
in which they are described. Comp. Greswell, Prolegomena, Cap. iv. p. 178.

Lect. II. OF OUR LORD. 65
How very striking is the fact that, while to the Virgin
the heavenly communication is made directly
by an angel, the communication to the handi- w*r«*fi>™ °f
•/ o ' tJie dimne messages.
craftsman of Galilee l is made by means of a
dream of the night. How suggestive is it Matt. %. 20.
that, while to the loftier spirit of Mary the
name of Jesus is revealed with all the prophetic associa
tions of more than David's glories, to Joseph, perchance
the aged Joseph,2 who might have long seen and realized
his own spiritual needs, and the needs of those around
him, it is specially said, " thou shalt call his name Jesus ;
for He shall save Sis people from their
J £-£-•/ Ver. 21.
sins." Surely, brethren, such things cannot
be cunningly devised ; such things must work, and ought
to work, conviction ; such things must needs make us feel,
and feel with truth, that' this and the following holy chap
ters, so carped at by the doubting spirits both of earlier
and of later days, are verily what the Church has ever
held them to be, — the special, direct, and undoubted reve
lations of the Eternal Spirit of God.3
1 Chrysostom notices the different nature of the heavenly communications,
assigning however what scarcely seems the true reason, — the faith of Joseph
{ttuttos 5\v A avfjp, /col ovk eSeiTo tt)s (tyews ratirns). If we may venture to
assign a reason, it would rather seem referable, first, to the difference of the sub
jects of the two revelations, — that to the Virgin needing the most distinct exter
nal attestation (Euthym.); secondly, to some difference in the respective natures
of Joseph and Mary, and in their powers of receiving and appreciating divine
communications. Comp. Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 2, 5, Vol. ii. p. 89.
2 Without referring to the apocryphal writers, or seeking to specify with the
exactness of Epiphanius ('Jrpeo'fSvTns by^oi\KOvra irwv irKeioi $) e'AdVrrw, Hcer.
li. 10), it may perhaps be said that such seems to have been the prevailing opin
ion of the early Church. That he died in the lifetime of our Lord has been
justly inferred from the absence of his name in those passages in the Gospels
where allusion is made to the Virgin and the Lord's brethren. See Blunt,
Veracity of Evangelists, § 8, p. 38 j and for notices and reff. as to the supposed
age of Joseph at our Lord's birth, see the curious but often very instructive
work of Hofmann, Leben Jesu nach den Apocryphen, $ 10, p. 62.
3 It is painful to notice the hardihood with which the genuineness of these
chapters has been called in question, even by some of the better class of critics.
See, for example, Norton, Genuineness of Gospels, Note a, § 5, Vol. i. p. 204 sq.
When we remember (1) that they are contained in every manuscript, uncial or
cursive, and in every version, eastern or western, that most of the early Fathers
cite them, and that early enemies of Christianity appealed to them (Orig. Cels. ±.
6*

66 THE BIRTH AND rSTFAUCY Lect. IL
And now the fulness of time was come. By one of
those mysterious workings whereby God
Journey to Beth- , , i -i 1 • i? i. •
uhem, and taxing makes the very worldlmess ol man bring
under On™**. about the completion 0f His own heavenly
counsels, the provincial taxing or enrolment of the per
sons or estates l of all that were under the Roman sway, —
a taxing almost proved by independent his
torical induction to have been made even as
St. Luke relates it, during the presidency of Cyrenius2 —
38, ii. 32) ; when we observe (2) the obvious connection between the beginning
of ch. iii. and the end of ch. ii., and between ch. iv. 13 and ii. 23; and when
we remark (3) the exact accordance of diction with that of the remaining chap
ters of the Gospel, — it becomes almost astonishing that even d priori prejudice
should not have abstained at any rate from so hopeless a course as that of
impugning the genuineness of these chapters. To urge that these chapters were
wanting in the mutilated and falsified gospel of the Ebionites (Epiph. H<zr. xxx.
13), or that they were cut away by the heretical Tatian (Theodoret, Hozr. Fab. I.
20), is really to concede their genuineness, and to bewray the reason why it was
impugned. For additional notices and arguments, see Griesbach, Epimetron ad
Comment. Grit. p. 47sq.j Gersdorf, Beitrdge, p. 38; and Patritius, de Evangeliis^
Quasst. viii. Vol. i. p. 29 sq.
l This point is so doubtful and debatable that I prefer adopting this more
general form of expression. Compare Wieseler, Chron. Synops. 1. 2, p. 75 sq.,
and Greswell, Dissert. No. xiv. Vol. i. p. 541 sq. On the general lexical distinc
tion between airoypcKpfy and airoTl/A7)ats no great reliance can be placed: in
Joseph. Ant. xvii. 13. 5, xviii. 1. 1, the words appear used interchangeably. See
Wieseler, I. u., and Meyer in loc. This much may perhaps be said, that if it was
at first only an enrolment per capita, it was one that had, and perhaps was per
fectly well known to have, a prospective reference to property.
2 Without entering at length into this vexed question, we may remark, for the
benefit of the general reader, that the simple and grammatical meaning of the
words, as they appear in all the best MSS. [B. alone omits y before aTroyptMpi}],
must be this: "this taxing took place as a first one while Cyrenius was gov
ernor of Syria; " and that the difficulty is to reconcile this with the assertion of
Tertullian (contr. Marc. rv. 19), that the taxing took place under Sentius Satur-
ninus, and with the apparent historical fact that Quirinus did not become Presi
dent of Syria till nine or ten years afterwards. See the Cenotaphia Pisana of
Cardinal Norisius, Dissert, n., and the authorities in Greswell, Dissertations, No.
xiv. Vol. i. p. 466 sq. (ed. 2). There are apparently only two sound modes of
explaining the apparent contradiction (I dismiss the mode of regarding irpdrri
as equivalent to irporepa as forced and artificial), either by supposing, (a) that
7iyefxovGvovTO$ is to be taken in a general and not a special sense, and to imply
the duties of a commissioner extraordinary, — a view perhaps best and most
ably advocated by the Abbe Sanclemente, de Vulg. JErce. Dionys. Emend. Book
iv. ch. 2, but open to the objection arising from the special and localizing term
ttjs Guptas (see Meyer, Komment. uber Luk. p. 221); or by supposing, (5) that,
under historical circumstances imperfectly known to us, Quirinus was either de
facto or de jure President of Syria exactly as St. Luke seems to specify. In

Lect. II. 0E OUR LORD. 6T
brings the descendants of David to David's own city.
Idle and mischievous doubts have sought to
° Ver. 4.
question the accuracy of this portion of the
Evangelical history, to which we can here pause only to
return the briefest answer.1 But this I will presume to
say, that I feel certain no fair and honest investigator can
study the various political considerations connected with
this difficult question, without ultimately coming to the
conclusion, not only that the account of St. Luke is re
concilable with contemporary history, but that it is con
firmed by it, in a manner most striking and most persua
sive. When we remember that the kingdom of Herod
was not yet formally converted into a Roman province,
and yet was so dependent upon the imperial city 2 as to be
practically amenable to all its provincial edicts, how very
striking it is to find, — in the first place, that a taxing
took place at a time when such a general edict can be

favor of this latter supposition we have the thrice-repeated assertion of Justin
Martyr (Apol. I. ch. 34, 46, Trypho, ch. 78), that Quirinus was President at the
time in question, and the interesting fact recently brought to light by Zumpt,
( Commentationes Epigraphicae, Part II. Bert. 1844), that owing to Cilicia, when
separated from Cyprus, being united to Syria, Quirinus, as governor of the first-
mentioned province, was really also governor of the last-mentioned, — whether
in any kind of association with Saturninus (see Wordsw. in loc), or otherwise, can
hardly be ascertained, — and that his subsequent more special connection with
Syria led his earlier, and apparently brief, connection to be thus accurately
noticed. This last view, to say the least, deserves great consideration, aud has
been adopted by Merivale, Hist, of Romans, Vol. iv. p. 457. The treatises and
discussions on this subject are extremely numerous. Those best deserving con
sideration are, perhaps, Greswell, Dissert. No. xiv. j Huschke, uber den zur Zeit
der Geburt Jes. Chr. gehaltenen Census, Bresl. 1840 ; Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p.
73 sq. (in these Trp&rn is explained away) ; and Patritius, de Evangeliis, Dissert.
xviii. Book in. p. 161, where (a) is advocated.
1 The main objections that have been urged against this portion of St. Luke's
narrative are well examined and convincingly refuted by Wieseler, Chron.
Synops. I. 2, pp. 75 — 122. The most important work for general reference on
the historical and political circumstances connected with this event, beside the
above work of Wieseler, is that of Huschke, uber den zur Zeit u. s. w., referred
to in the foregoing note.
2 See Wieseler, Chron. Synops. I. 2, p. 93 sq. Passages which prove the
dependence of Judaea, especially as tributary to the Roman government, are
cited by Greswell, Dissert. No. xxiii. Vol. ii. p. 375. For further facts and
reference, see Winer, BWB. Art. " Jud'aa," Vol i. p. 630.

68 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. n.
proved to have been in force ; 1 and, in the next place, to
find that that taxing in Judsea is incidentally described as
having taken place according to the yet recognized cus
toms of the country, — that it was, in fact, essentially im
perial and Roman in origin, and yet Herodian and Jewish
in form. How strictly, how minutely consistent is it with
actual historical relations to find that Joseph, who under
purely Roman law might, perhaps, have been enrolled at
Nazareth,2 is here described by the Evangelist as journey
ing to be enrolled at the town of his forefathers, " because
he was of the house and lineage 3 of David."
This accordance of the sacred narrative with
the perplexed political relations of the intensely national,
yet all but subject Judaea, is so exact and so convincing,
that we may even profess ourselves indebted to scepticism
for having raised a question to which an answer may be
given at once so fair, so explicit, and so conclusive. It
seems almost idle to pause further on this portion of the
narrative and to seek for reasons why the Virgin accom
panied Joseph in this enforced journey to the city of his
fathers.4 Is it positively necessary to ascribe to her some
1 See the Monumentum Ancyranum, as cited and commented on by Wieseler,
Chron. Synops. p. 90 sq., and compare Bynaeus, de Natali Jes. Chr. I. 3, p. 300;
Spanheim, Dub. Evang. No. viii. Vol. ii. p. 162.
2 This is the objection stated in its usual form; but it seems very doubtful if,
even on merely general historical data, it can be substantiated. In fact Huschke
(uber den Cens. p. 116 eq.\ has apparently demonstrated the contrary, and proved
that in every Roman census each individual was enrolled where he had his
" forum originis." This, however, need not be pressed, as the journey of Joseph
is so much more plausibly attributed to the Jewish form, in accordance with
which the census was conducted. Comp. Bynaeus, de Natali Jes. Chr. I. 3, p.
337, and a good article by Winer, BWB. " Schatzung." Vol. ii. p. 398—401.
3 The terms here used, oIkos and itarpia, seem to be specially and exactly
chosen. The latter is used with reference to the r^t-lEan or gentes, which
traced their origin to the twelve patriarchs, the former to the rVinx nia or
familue, of which these latter were composed. See Winer, BWB. Art.
" Stamme," Vol. ii. p. 513 sq.
4 If the census had been purely Boman in its form, it would seem that the
presence of the Virgin would certainly not have been needed, the giving in of
the names of women and children being considered sufficient. Comp. Dionys.
Halic. iv. 15; Huschke, uber den Cens. p. 121. As, however, in accordance with
the view taken in the text, it is to be considered rather as Jewish in form, the
presence of Mary is still less to be accounted for on any purely legal reasons.

Lect. H. OF OUR LORD. 69
inheritance which required her presence at the enrolment
at Bethlehem ? Is it really not enough for us that St.
Luke relates that she did take this journey ; and is it so
strange that at that time of popular gatherings, and per
haps popular excitement,1 she should brave the exhaustion
of a long journey, rather than lose the protection of one
to whom she must have been bound by ties of the holiest
nature, and who shared with her the knowledge of a mys
tery that had been sealed in silence since the foundations
of the world ? On such subordinate and bootless inquiries
we need, I am sure, delay no longer.
And now the mysterious hour, which an old apocryphal
writer has described with such striking yet
Y ! The Nativity and
such curious imagery,2 was nigh at hand, its attendant <*-
Very soon after the arrival at Bethlehem,
perchance on the self-same night, in one of the limestone
caverns, — for I see no reason for rejecting the statement
of one who was born little more than a century afterwards,
and not forty miles from the same spot,3 — in one of the

The favorite hypothesis that she was an heiress, and possessor of a real estate at
Bethlehem, and so legally bound to appear (Olsh. in loc), is now generally, and
as it would §eem rightly, given up. See Winer, B WB. Art. "Schatzung," Vol.
ii. p. 401.
1 Compare the sensible remarks of Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 128.
2 The sort of pause, as it were, in all things that marked this most momentous
period in the world's history is thus curiously described in the Protevangelium
Jacobi, cap. 18: " And I Joseph was walking, and yet was not walking; and I
looked up into the sky, and I saw the sky in amazement ; and I looked up to
the pole of heaven and I saw it standing still, and the birds of the air in tran
quil calm; and I directed my gaze on the earth, and I saw a bowl-like table,
and laboring men around it, and their hands were in the bowl, and they who
had meat in their mouths were not eating, and they that were taking up food
raised it not up, and they that were bringing it up to their mouths were not
bringing it up ; but the countenances of all were directed upwards. And I saw
sheep in the act of being driven, and they were standing still ; and the shepherd
was raising his hand to smite them, and his arm remained aloft. And I gazed
on the torrent-course of a river, and I beheld the kids lowering their heads
towards it and not drinking, and all things in their courses for the moment
suspended " (ed. Tisch. pp. 33, 34). Compare Hofmann, Leben Jesu, p. 110.
3 The statement of Justin Martyr, who was born at Sichem, about A. D. 103, is
very distinct: Tevvq&evTOS Se Tore tov iraiSiov iv B-n&teefi, iireiS)] 'Iwo-fyd)
ovk ef^e" ef rrj KOtfin etceivri irov KaraAvaai, eV a trn \alq> ritti trvveyyvs
Trjs ttcfywji KareKvo-e. — Tryph. cap. 78, Vol. ii. p. 264 (ed. Otto). This ancient

70 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. It
caverns in that narrow ridge of long gray hill on which
stands the city of David,1 was the Redeemer born into a
world that rejected Him, even in His mother's womb.
How brief and how simple are the words that relate
these homely circumstances of the Lord's Nativity. How
surely do the mother's recital and the mother's stored-
up memories come forth in the artless touches of detail.2
And yet with how much of holy and solemn reserve is
that first hour of a world's salvation passed over by the
Evangelist. We would indeed fain inquire more into the
wonders of that mysterious night ; and they are not
wholly withheld from us. The same Evangelist that tells
tis that the mid-day sun was darkened during the last
hours of the Redeemer's earthly life, tells us
Luke tcxin. 44. ^
also that in His first hours the night was
turned into more than day, and that heavenly
Luke ii. 9. glories shone forth, not unwitnessed, while
angels announce to shepherd- watchers & on the grassy slopes
tradition has been repeated by Origen ( Cels. i. 51), Eusebius (Demonstr. Evang.
vii. 2), Jerome (Epist. ad Marcell. xxiv.), and other ancient writers, and has
been generally admitted by modern writers and travellers as far from improba
ble. Comp. Stanley, Palest, p. 438. Dr. Thomson ( The Land and the Book, Vol.
ii. p. 507), though admitting the ambiguity of the tradition, opposes it on reasons
derived from the context of the sacred narrative, which are however far from
convincing. The Virgin might easily have been removed to the olxla specified
in Matt. ii. 11, before the arrival of the Magi. For further details and reff. see
Thilo, Codex Apocr. p. 381 sq.; Hofmann, Leben Jesu, p. 108; and a very good
article by Rev. G. Williams, in the Eeclesiologist for 1848.
1 The reader who may have an interest in the outward aspects of these sacred
localities will find a colored sketch of Bethlehem and its neighborhood in Rob
erts's Holy Land, Vol. ii. Plate 84. The illustrations, however, most strongly
recommended by an Oriental traveller of some experience to the writer of this
note, as giving the truest idea of the sacred localities, are those of Frith, and the
excellent views of Jerusalem and its environs executed by Robertson and Beato
(Gambart and Co.).
2 See above, p. 56, note 2, where this subject is briefly noticed.
3 Luke ii. 8, aypavXovvTts koX tpoXatrtroines tpvXanas -rrjs vvktSs ; the last
words defining the time and qualifying the two preceding participles. The fact
here specified has been often used in the debated subject of the exact time of
year at which our Lord's birth took place. But little, however, can really be
derived from it, as the frequently quoted notice of the Talmudical writers (see
Lightfoot on Luke ii. 8), that the herds were brought in from the fields about the
beginning of November and driven out again about March, is merely general,
and might include so many modifications arising from season or locality (see

Lect. II. OF OUR LORD. 71
of Bethlehem the tidings of great joy, and proclaim the
new-born Saviour. How mysterious are
the ways of God's dealings with men. The
Desire of all nations at length come, the Saviour born into
an expectant world, and — announced to village shepherds.
What a bathos, what a hopeless bathos to the unbelieving
or unmeditative spirit! How noticeable that the Apoc
ryphal writers, who spin out with the most dreary pro
lixity every other hint supplied by the sacred writers, pass
over this in the fewest possible words,1 and as something
which they could neither appreciate nor understand. And
yet what a divine significance is there in the fact, that to
the spiritual descendants of the first type of the Messiah,
Abel the keeper of sheep, the announcement is made that
the great Shepherd of the lost sheep of humanity is born

Sepp, Leben Christi, Vol. i. p. 213; Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 146), that it can
not fairly be urged as conclusive against the traditional date in December. Nay,
temporary circumstances — the large afflux of strangers to Bethlehem — might
have easily led to a temporary removal of the cattle into some of the milder val
leys to provide an accommodation of which at least the Holy Family were
obliged to avail themselves. Still, it must be said, the fact viewed simply does
seem to incline us towards a period less rigorous than mid-winter; and when we
join with this chronological data which appear positively to fix the epoch as sub
sequent to the beginning of January (see Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 145), and
further, considerations derived from the probable sequence of events, and the
times probably occupied by them, we perhaps may slightly lean to the opinion
that early in Febr. (most probably A.tr.c. 750 ; Sulpic. Sever. Hist. Sacr. Book
li. ch. 39) was the time of the Nativity. The question has been discussed from a
very early period. In the time of Clement of Alexandria (Strom. I. 21, Vol. i.
p. 407, ed. Pott), by whom it appears to have been considered rather a matter of
irepiepyia, the traditions were anything but unanimous (some selecting Jan. 6,
some Jan. 10, others April 20, and even May 20), and it was not till the fourth
century that December 25 became generally accepted as the exact date. See the
useful table attached to the valuable dissertation of Patritius, de Evang. Book
in. 19, p. 276. Out of the many treatises and discussions that have been written
on this subject, the following may be specified : Ittig, de Fest. Nativ. Dissert.
in. ; Jablonsky, de Origine Fest. Nativ. Vol. iii. p. 317 sq. (ed. te Water) ; Span-
heim, Dub. Evangel, xii. Vol. ii. p. 208 sq. ; Greswell, Dissert, xii. Vol. i. p. 38]
sq. ; Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 132. Compare also Clinton, Fasti Hell. Vol. iii.
p. 256 sq. ; and Browne, Ordo Sceclorum, § 23 sq., p. 26 sq. A distinct Homily
on this subject will be found in Chrysost. Homil. in Diem Natal. Vol. ii. p. 417 sq.
(ed. Bened. 1834).
1 See Pseudo-Matt. Evang. cap. 13; Evang Infant. Arab. cap. 4; and com.
.pare Hofmann, Leben Jesu, p. 117. Tradition affects to preserve their names —
Misael, Acheel, Cynacus, and Stephanus.

72 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. II.
into the world.1 What a mysterious fitness that that
Gospel, of which the characteristic was that
Mat. xi.5.. , n
it was preached unto the poor, was nrst pro
claimed neither to the ceremonial Pharisee, who would
have questioned it, nor to the worldly Sadducee; who
would have despised it, nor to the separatist Essene,2 who
would have given it a mere sectarian significance, but to
men whose simple and susceptible hearts made them come
with haste, and see, and believe, and spread abroad the
wonders they had been permitted to behold.3 Shepherds
were the first of men who glorified and praised God for
their Saviour ; shepherds were the first earthly preachers *
of the Gospel of Christ.
How far their praises and the wonders they had to tell
1 "It fell not out amiss that shepherds they were; the news fitted them well.
It well agreed to tell shepherds of the yeaning of a strange Lamb, such a Lamb
as should ' take away the sins of the world ; ' such a Lamb as they might ' send
to the Ruler of the world for a present,' mitte Agnum Dominatori terrm, —
Esay's Lamb. Or if ye will, to tell shepherds of the birth of a Shepherd,
Ezekiel's shepherd : Ecce suscitabo vobis pastorem, ' Behold, I will raise you a
Shepherd,' 'the Chief Shepherd," the Great Shepherd,' and 'the Good Shep-
herd that gave His life for His flock.' "— Andrewes, Serm. v. Vol. i. p. 65 (A.-C.
Libr.). 2 The spiritual characteristics and relations of these three 6ects are Driefly
but ably noticed by Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 1. 1, Part i. p. 17. The Pharisee cor
rupted the current and tenor of revelation by ceremonial additions, the Saddu
cee by reducing it to a mere deistic morality, the Essene by idealizing its historical
aspects, or by narrowing its widest principles and precepts into the rigidities of
a false and morbid asceticism. Superstition, scepticism, and schism alike found
in the cross of Christ a stone of stumbling and a rook of offence. For further
notices of these sects and their dissensions, see Jost, Geschichte des Judenthums,
u. 2. 8, Vol. i. p. 197 sq.
3 " Why was it that the Angel went not to Jerusalem, Bought not out the
Scribes and Pharisees, entered not into the synagogues of the Jews, but found
shepherds  and preached the gospel to them? Because the former were
corrupt and ready to be cut to the heart with envy; while these latter were
uncorrupt, affecting the old way of living of the patriarchs, and also of Moses,
for these men were shepherds." — Origen ap. Cramer, Caten. Vol. i. p. 20. Com
pare, too, Theophylaot in loc. For some further practical considerations, see
Bp. Taylor, Life of Clirist, Part i. ad Sect. 4, Vol. i. p. 45 sq. (Lond. 1836).
4 The first preachers, as Cyril rightly observes (Comment, on Luke, Serm. n.
Vol. i. p. 13, Trans]., Oxf. 1859), were angels, — a distinction faintly hinted at by
the very terms of the original : &s atrfi^ov air' avwwv els -rbv ovpavbv ol Sfyt-
a.oi, koX ol avStpairoi oliroifiives elirov k. t. \. Here it need scarcely be
said we have no more idle periphrasis ("homo pastor," Drus.), but an opposi
tion to the preceding term &yye\ot. See Meyer in loc.

Lect. n. OF OUR LORD. 73
of wrought on the hearts of those who heard them, we are
not enabled to say. The holy reserve of ...
^ * The circumcision
the Virgin mother, who kept all these say- and presentation in
i ¦. ,-,,.,, ,1 the Temple.
mgs 4 and pondered them in her heart, would JM:e (i 1T
lead us to believe that at any rate the his-
~ , . . . Ver. 19.
tory of the miraculous conception was not
generally divulged ; and that the Lord's earthly parents
spake not beyond the small circle of those immediately
around them. • The circumcision, from the
• n . r. , t-i t it Luke ii. 21.
brief notice of the Evangelist, would cer
tainly seem to have taken place with all circumstances of
privacy and solitude, — in apparent contrast to that of the
Forerunner, which appears to have been with gatherings
and rejoicings,2 and was marked, by marvels that were
soon noised abroad throughout all the hill
n t -i -v-r , Zukei.65.
country of Judaea. Nay, even at the presen
tation in the Temple, more than a month afterwards,8 the
Evangelist's remark, that Joseph and Mary
„ c- , , , •, Lukeii.SS.
marvelled at Simeon s prophecy, would seem
distinctly to show that no circumstances from without had.
as yet proved sufficient to prepare them for the mysterious
welcome which awaited the infant Saviour in His Father's
temple. 1 The expression tos p-hfiara ravra (Luke ii. 19) is rightly referred by most
modern commentators, not to the circumstances generally (to. trpdy/iara ravra,
Theoph.), but to the things mentioned by the shepherds; so rightly Euthym.
in loc. — to irapa -riiv iroifievuv Aatoi&fVra. On the reasonableness of this
reserve, see Mill, on Pantheistic Princ n. 1. 2, p. 212.
2 Even if we limit, as perhaps is most grammatically exact, the subject of
%\&op (Luke i. 59) to those who were to perform the rite of circumcision, the
context would certainly seem to show that many were present.
3 The exact time in the case of a male child (in the case of a female it was
double) was forty days, during seveu of which the mother was to be accounted
unclean ; during the remaining thirty-three days she was " to continue in the
blood of her purifying; " she was " to touch no hallowed thing, nor come into
the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled." Lev. xii. 4. For
further information see Michaelis, Law of Moses, § 192, B'ihr, Symbolik, Vol. ii.
p. 487, Winer, BWB. Art. "Reinigkeit," Vol. ii. p. 315 sq. ; and for a sound
sermon on the subject, Frank, Serm. xxil Vol. i. p. 340 (A.-O. Libr.), and esp.
Mill, Univ. Serm. xxi. p. 400. The iudication of the comparative poverty of
the holy Family supplied by the notice of their offering (Luke ii. 24, Lev. xii. 8)
has often been observed by modern, but seldom by ancient, expositors.
7

74 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. IL
But what a welcome that was, and how seemingly at
variance with all outward circumstances.
The devout, and let us add, inspired Simeon,1
whose steps had been led that day to the Temple by the
Holy Spirit,2 saw perchance before him no more than two
unnoted worshippers.3 But it was enough. When the
eyes of the aged waiter for the consolation
of Israel saw the Holy Child, he saw all.
^rhere in helpless infancy and clad in mortal flesh was the
Lord's Christ, — there was the fulfilment of
Ver. OS. . .
all his mystic revelations, the granted issue
ov all his longings and all his prayers.4 Can we marvel
that his whole soul was stirred to its depths,
that he took the Holy Child in his arms, and
poured forth, in the full spirit of prophecy,5 that swan-song

1 The history of this highly favored man is completely unknown. Some
recent attempts (Michaelis, al.) have been made to identify him with Rabban
Simeon, the son of Hillel, and father of Gamaliel, who was afterwards president
of the Sanhedrin (Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in loc. ; Otho, Lex. Babbin. s. v. " Sim
eon," p. 605): such an identification, however, has nothing in its favor, except
the name, — a sufficiently common one, and this against it, that Rabban Simeon
could not have been as old as the Simeon of St. Luke is apparently represented
to be. For some notices of Rabban Simeon, see Sepp, Leben Christi, ch. xvn.
Vol. ii. p. 52 sq.
2 This seems implied in the words ^A.&ei/ eV rtp Tlvev'p.aTL els to Up6v, Luke
ii. 27, — the preposition with its case marking the influence in which and under
which he was acting, " impulsu Spiritus " (Meyer, on Matt. xxii. 43), and though
not perfectly identical with, yet approximating in force to, the instrumental
dative ; tg? nvetJjuaTi ™ aylto Ktirn&eis, Euthym. in loc. So, too, Origen, even
more explicitly, — " Spiritus sanctus eum duxit in templum." — In Luc. Horn.
xv. Vol. iii. p. 949 (ed. Bened.).
3 One of the apocryphal writers has represented the scene very differently,
and iu suggestive contrast to the chaste dignity of the inspired narrative : " Turn
videt ilium Simeon senex instar columnar lucis fulgentem, cum domina Maria
Virgo mater ejus de eo laatabunda ulnis suis earn gestaret : circumdabant autem
eum angeli instar circuli celebrantes, tanquam satellites regi adstantes." —
Evang. Infant. Arab. cap. vi. p. 173 (ed. Tisch.). The Pseudo-Matt. Evang.
keeps more closely to the inspired narrative. See cap. xv. p. 78.
4 For an essay on the character of this faithful watcher, see Evans, Script.
Biogr. Vol. i. p. 326; and for some good comments on his inspired canticle,
Patritius, de Evang. Dissert, xxvi. Part ill. p. 304. In the early Church Sim
eon appears to have been designated by the title, 6 ^eoSo^os, in memory of the
blessing accorded to him. Comp. Menolog. Grcec. Feb. 3, and the oration of
Timoth. Hieros. in the Bibl. Max. Patrum, Vol. v. p. 1214.
5 npotp-nTinfj x&pin Tennrinevos, Cyril Alex. ap. Cramer, Caten. Vol. ii. p. 23,

Lect. II. OF OUR LORD. 75
of the seer of the Old Covenant, to which our Church so
justly and so lovingly assigns a place in its daily service ?
Can we marvel that with the Holy Child still in his arms1
he blessed the wondering parents, though the spirit of
prophecy that was upon him mingled with that blessing
words that must have sunk deep into the heart of the Vir
gin,2 words often pondered over, yet perchance then only
fully understood, in all the mystic bitterness of their truth,
when, not a thousand paces from where she then was
standing, the nails tore the hands that she had but then
been holding, and the spear pierced the side she had but
then been pressing to her bosom?

and Serm. iv. Vol. i.) p. 25 (Transl.)- Ou the character of this and the other
inspired canticles in this part of the Scripture, see the good remarks of Mill, on
Pantheistic Principles? Part ii. 1. 3, p. 43 sq.
l Though we cannot, with Meyer and others, safely press the meaning of the
verb Keircu as implying "qui in uluis meis jacet"(Beng.), it would yet seem
highly probable from the context that this blessing was pronounced by. the aged
Simeon while still bearing bis Saviour in his arms. For a good practical ser
mon on Simeon's thus receiving our Lord, see Frank, Serm. xxiii. Vol. i. p. 360
eq. (A.-C. Libr.), and compare Hacket, Serm. x. p. 88 sq. (Lond. 1675).
2 The prophetic address of Simeon, which it may be observed is directed
specially to the Virgin (/cal el7re Trpbs Mapia,a rr\v fnfrepa avrov, Luke ii. 34), lias
two separate references, the one general, to the Jewish nation, and the opposed
spiritual attitudes into which the Gospel of Christ would respectively bring
those who believed and those who rejected (irrao'iv (xev, twv fjfy TriffrevdvTGfv,
avdaratrtj* 5e, ray trio-Tev^vrmv, Theophylact); the other special, to the Virgin
personally (koI gov 5e avrris k. t. A.., ver. 35), and to the bitterness of agony
with which she should hereafter behold the sufferings of her divine Son. So
rightly Euthymius: popu^aiay Se wvoixcure ttjv TyL7\TiKtoT6.T7\v ica\ b^elav ofivj/nv,
5j-m St^A^e t))v Kap^iav rrjs ®eopA)ropos, '6re b vlbs avTijs irpoa,w\<&&7i rep
o'ravpy. Compare also a good comment in Cramer, Caten. Vol. ii. p. 24, and
Mill, Univ. Serm. xxi. p. 415. The only remaining exegetical difficulty is the
connection of the final clause, oirws av tc. t. A. (ver. 35). According to the
ordinary punctuation, this would be dependent on ver. 34, the first clause of
ver. 35 being enclosed in a parenthesis; according, however, to the best modern
interpreters, it is regarded as simply dependent on what precedes : the myBtery,
that the heart of the earthly mother was to be riven with agony at the sufferings
of her divine Son, involved as its end and object the bringing out of the true
characters and thoughts of men, and making it clear and manifest — rls fiev 6
ayairav aur6v, Kal ^XPl ^awarov rfyv els ahrbv hydirnt/ ivBeiKj/vfievos' Tls 5e
6 iirlirkao'T ov %%<av r)]V els av*rbu irt<rrw, acavBaKov irhTipoa&els Sta, rov orau-
p6v. Cramer, Caten. Vol. ii. p. 25. So Augustine, in his answer to the queries
of Paulinus of Nola {Epist. cxlix. 33, Vol. ii. p. 644, ed. MignS), except that he
unduly limits the iroWuu KapStaiv BtaKoyiapol to the " insidia; Judasorum et
4iscipuIorum infirmitas."11

76 THE ElfiTH AND INFANCY Lect. U
Yet man was not alone to welcome the Lord ; one sex
was not alone to greet Him, in whom
Gat. m. 28. there was neither male nor female, but all
Lukei.38. were one. Not one sex only, for at that very
instant, we are told by St. Luke, the aged
and tenderly-faithful Anna 1 enters the place she loved so
well. Custom rather than revelation appears
Ver 37 to have brought the widowed prophetess
into the temple, but she too saw and believed, and returned
grateful praise2 unto the God of her fathers; and of her
this special notice has been made by the Evangelist, that
" she spake of the Lord to all them that
Luke ii. 38. , , . r- -i • -r , ,.
were looking for redemption in Jerusalem.
The daughter of Phanuel 3 was the first preacher of Christ
in the city of the Great King.
And her preaching was not long left unconfirmed.
What she was now telling in secret chambers4 was soon
to be proclaimed on the house-tops. The ends of the
earth were already sending forth the heralds of the new-
1 The tenderness and constancy of the aged prophetess to the memory of the
husband of her youth is slightly enhanced by the reading of Lachmann and
Tischendorf, — x^iPa *<»>s 4ru>v bySoT\Kovra Teo-ffdpwv, Luke ii. 37; but this
reading, though supported by A, B, L, the Vulgate, and other versions, is by
no means certain. The honor in which the " univira " was held by the Jews, is
shown very distinctly by the comments of Josephus on the persistent widow
hood of Antonia: Antiq. xviii. 6. 6. Compare Winer, BWB. Art. "Ehe,"
Vol. i. p. 299.
2 This perhaps is a fairly correct paraphrase of the peculiar term used by St.
Luke, aj/&o)/j.o\oyetTo. The remarks of the accurate Winer on this word are as
follows: "Possis existimare de celebrandi laudandique significatione ; . . . sed, ut
dicam quod sentio, addendum erat, celebrantis istius pietatem mulieris maxime
in gratarium actione positam esse. . . . Itaque h£ec videtur verbi a.v^ofj.o\oy vis
propria e6se, avrl enim manifesto referendi rependendique sensum habet, atque
ita facile perspicias, quod inter op.oKoy. &eo3 et oi/dojuoAo'y. ©e<p intersit." — De
Verb. c. Prcep. Fasc. in. p. 20, — a treatise unfortunately never completed.
s The special mention of the father and tribe of Anna was perhaps designed
to give to the narrative a still further stamp of historical truth. Anna, the
daughter of Phanuel, might have been a name still remembered by many:
imaevet 6 fvayye\io-TT)s tt; irepl Tris"Awns atpny/ieret, «al toj» irarepa Kai t)]V
tpvXfyv KardKeyow, 'tva fjLd&wfjLev on aA^&?j \syat, fidprvpas unravel iroAAoirs
irpoo-Kakoifievos. Theoph. in loc.
4 Anna's preaching was not general, but to?s irpotrSexofievois KvWptaffiv eV
'lepovaaK-liii, ver. 38. The local addition & '\epovtr. appears to belong specially
to the participle toIs irpaoSexofievots. See Meyer in loc.

Lect. n. OP OCR LORD. 77
born King. The feet of strange pilgrims and worshippers
were even now on the mountains of the Promised Land.
It would seem from the narrative that Joseph and Mary
had returned but a few days 1 to their tem
porary abode at Bethlehem,2 when sages, ^onoftuuZ-
bearing the already almost generic name of
Magi, arrive from some Eastern lands not specified by the
Evangelist, but probably remote as the Arabia which one
ancient tradition,3 or the Persia which another ancient
tradition,4 has fixed upon as their home. Witnesses were

1 According to one MS. of the Pseudo-Matt. Evangelium (cap. xvi. p. 79, ed.
Tisch,), two days afterwards; according to the text adopted by Tischendorf, the
completely improbable period of two years. See Wieseler, Chron. Synops. I. 2,
p. 59, note, who, however, himself (see below, p. 73, note 1) seems to press too
strongly the attb Sterovs ko) tcaToireptu, Matt. ii. 16. The Protev. Jacobi (cap.
xxi.) makes the visit of the Magi to have been made to the Holy Family while
yet in the cave, a statement distinctly at variance with Matt. ii. 11, eA&dVTes els
tV oIkiov. For chronological considerations substantiating the view taken in
the text, see Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 154 sq.
2 The narratives of St. Matthew and St. Luke have been here often regarded
as almost wholly irreconcilable. See Meyer and Alford in loc. Is this however
so certain? Why may not St. Luke have studiously omitted what he might pos
sibly have known had been recorded by another Evangelist, and thus have left
unnoticed the occurrences which intervened between this visit to the Temple
and the return to Nazareth, specified by St. Matthew, ch. h. 23? The reconcilia
tion adopted by Eu6ebius ( Quwst. ad Marin, ap. Mai, Bibl. Patr. Vol. iv. p. 253),
that Joseph and Mary went direct to Nazareth, and afterwards returned to
Bethlehem, is not very probable, as no reason can be assigned why the Holy
Family should have returned again to a place with which they appear to have
little or no connection. See Augustine, de Consensu Evang. n. 5. 16, Vol. iii.
p. 1079 (ed. Migne), Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 156.
3 Such is the older tradition, noticed and supported by Justin Martyr, Tryph.
cap. 78, Vol, ii. p. 263 (ed. Otto), Tertullian, adv. Jud. cap. 9, and adv. Marc. ill.
13. The objection to this view seems to be the term avaToK&v, which, in the
New Testament at least, can hardly be regarded as a natural designation of a
country which elsewhere is always specified by its regular geographical name.
See Winer, BWB. Art. " Stern der Weisen," Vol. ii. p. 523, but also contrast the
reff. of Patritius, de Evang. Dissert, xxvn. Part in. 317.
4 This somewhat later tradition is maintained by Chrysostom (in loc), Pseudo-
Basil (Vol. ii. 855, ed. Bened.), Ephrem (Cantic de Maria et Magis, Vol. iii. p.
601, ed. Assem.), the Christian poet Juvencus, and many other ancient writers,
and with considerable probability, as Persia and the adjoining countries appear
always to have been regarded as the chief seat of the Magian philosophy (see
the numerous confirmatory reff. in Greswell, Dissert, xviii.), and as the term
al avaroAal might naturally and suitably have been applied by the Evangelist to
the trans-Euphratean countries of which Persia formed a portion. Such, too, is
the opinion of apparently the majority of the more learned modern writers who
7*

78 THE BIKTH AND INFANCY Lect. II.
they, from whatever clime they came, of the wisdom ot
God displaying itself in the foolishness or misconceptions
of man.1 Witnesses were they of the cherished longings
of ancient nations ;2 bright examples of a faith that could
dignify even superstitions, and of hopes that grew not
cold when all must have seemed utter hopelessness.
But what could have brought these first-fruits of the
wisdom of the Eastern world from their own
hem trig star, fa^t&nt iand8? Even that which was most cal
culated to work in them the liveliest belief and conviction.
A new star,3 which the tenor of the narrative wholly pre-

have touched upon this subject ; we may pause to specify the celebrated Orientalist,
Hyde {de Relig. Vet. Pers. cap. xxxi. 383), who particularly notices their ctjuntry
as Parthia; the learned Dr. Thomas Jackson (Creed, Book vii. Vol. vi. p. 261, Oxf.
1844), and the no less learned Dr. Mill (Obs. on Pantheistic Principles, Fart n.
pp. 365, 375). For further information the student may be referred to Spanheim,
Dub. Evang. xviii.— xxiv. Part ii. p. 255 sq., the excellent Dissertation of
Patritius above referred to (de Evangeliis, Part in. pp. 309—354, where every
question relating to these sages is fully discussed), Greswell, Dissert, xviii. Vol.
ii. p. 135 sq., Hoffmann, Leben Jesu, p. 125, and especially the sound and valua
ble comments of Mill, on Panth. Princ. Part n. 3. 1, p. 364.
l See the excellent remarks of Mill on the true physical influence and true
significancy of the heavenly bodies, and the counterfeit Bcience of astrology
with which it was adulterated. — Observations on Pantheistic Principles, Fart n.
3 2, pp. 364, 365. Compare also a learned and not uninteresting dissertation on
judicial astrology in Spanheim, Dub. Evang. xxxiii. Part n. p. 334 sq.
2 It has long been a matter of discussion what precisely led these Magi to
expect a birth so prefigured. See Spanheim, Dub. Evang. xxxiv. Part n. p.
366 sq. Was it due to a carefully preserved knowledge of the prophecy of
Balaam (Numb- xxiv. 17 — 19), an opinion maintained by Origen (contr. Cels.
Book i. p. 46, ed. Spencer), and the majority of the ancient expositors; or was it
due to prophecies uttered in their own country, dimly foreshadowing this divine
mystery (see the oitations from the Zend-Avesta, below, p. 77, note 1, and com
pare Hyde, de Relig. Pers. xxxi. p. 389 sq.)? Perhaps the latter view is the
most probable, especially if we associate with it a belief, which the sacred narra
tive gives us every reason for entertaining (Matt. ii. 12), that these faithful men
received a special illumination both to apply rightly what they had remem
bered, and to recognize its verification in the phenomenon of which they were
now the privileged observers. Compare Mill, Observations, Part n. 3. 2, p. 368.
3 Thus far, at least, correctly, Origen (contr. Cels. Book i. p. 45, ed. Spencer):
Tbv otp&evra ao~repa iv rr} ava.ro\y} Kaivov elvai vofxi^o/xev xai fiT^Bep}
t 5>v trvvfj&wy 7r a p air \-fj a i o v afire ra>v iv rr} airAai/et otfre rajy iv reus
Karwrepw atyaipais. This great writer seems only to err when in his subsequent
remarks he supposes it to be of the nature of a comet. On this star much, and
that not always of a satisfactory nature, has been written by both ancient and
modern commentators. That it was not a star in the usual astronomical sense
(Wieseler, Chron, Synops. j. 2, p. 59) seems clear from the special motions appar

Lect. II. OF OUR LOED. 79
eludes our deeming aught else than a veritable heavenly-
body moving apparently in the limits of our own atmos
phere, and subject not to astronomical, but to special and
fore-ordered laws, had suddenly beamed, not many months
before,1 upon the eyes of these watchers in their own East
ern lands,2 and, either by cooperating with dormant proph
ecy or deep-seated expectation, leads them to that land,
with which either their own science,3 or, more probably, the
ently attributed to it in the sacred narrative (see Mill, on Panth. Princ. Part II.
3. 2, p. 369, note); that it also could not be a mere conjunction of the greater
planets (Milnter, Stern der Wiesen, Keppler, and similarly Ideler, Handbuch der
Chronol. Vol. ii. p. 399 sq.,— both following or expanding the older view of
Keppler) seems also still more certain from the use of the definite term atrrrip.
We therefore justly fall back upon the ancient opinion, that it was a luminous
body, possibly of a meteoric nature, but subject to special laws regulating its
appearance and perhaps also its motion. The literature of the subject, which is
very extensive, will be found in Winer, B WB. Art. u Stern der Wiesen," Vol. ii.
p. 523 sq.
l The date of the appearance of the star is a question that has been often
entertained, and cannot easily be decided. Wieseler ( Chron. Synops. I. 2, p. 69)
urges a period of two years previous to the arrival of the Magi, pressing the sort
of date afforded by Matt. ii. 16. See above, p. 77. As, however, Greswell (Dis
sert, xviii. Vol. ii. p. 136, ed. 2) has fairly shown that the term awb Sierovs xal
Kartarepu} need not be understood as necessarily implying the extreme limit, and
as it is also probable that Herod would be certain to secure to himself a wide
margin, we may, with almost equal plausibility, select any period between thir
teen and twenty-four months. Patritius (de Evang. Dissert, xxvn. Part m. p.
334) urges, with a little show of probability, a period of eighteen months, which,
according to the rough date of the Nativity adopted in these lectures, would
have to be reduced to sixteen. The time of the miraculous conception seems to
commend itself as the exact epoch, but causes us either to reduce somewhat
unduly the atrb Sierovs, or (with Greswell) to assume an interval of nearly three
mouths between the Presentation and the arrival of the Magi, which is not only
improbable in itself, but absolutely incompatible with the date, (A. u. c. 750, the
death-year of Herod), which we have above fixed upon as the probable year of
the Nativity. See p. 77, note 1.
2 A few interpreters of this passage, and among them our own expositor
Hammond (on Matt. ii. 2) and the German chronologer Wieseler (Synops. p. 59),
regard eV ff avaTO\rj as used with an astronomical reference, "at its rising."
This seems at needless variance with the use of the same words in ver. 9, where
iv T7? avxroXij and ov ^v to iraiSlov seem to stand in a kind of local antithesis,
and is in opposition to the apparently unanimous opinion of the Vulgate, Syriac,
Coptic, and other ancient versions. For yet another view see Jackson, Creed,
Book vii. Vol. vi. p. 262 (Oxf. 1844).
3 Much has been said about the astrological association of the constellation of
the Fish with the land of Judaea. See Munter, Stern der Wiesen, p. 55 sq., Ideler,
Handb. der Chronol. Vol. ii. p. 409, and Wieseler, Chron. Synops. i. 2, p. 56. As,
however, this is more or less associated with the doubtful views as to .the nature
of the star above alluded to, we make no use of such precarious elucidations.

80 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. II.
whole feeling of the Eastern world,1 tended to associate
the mystery of the future. Can we not picture to our
selves the excitement and amazement in Jerusalem, as
those travel-stained men2 entered into the city of David
with the one question8 on their lips, "Where is he that is
born King of the Jews?" Can we wonder
that the aged man still on the throne of
Judaea was filled with strange trouble and
perplexity? Can we be surprised at the course that was
immediately followed? Let us only consider the case in its sim-
The extreme nat-
urainess of the so- plest aspects. Here was a question based
cred narrative. . . . c ,
on celestial appearances coming irom the
lips of those in whom it would have seemed most porten-
l This general feeling has been above alluded to. See p. 55, note 2, and com
pare Mill, on Panth. Princ. Part ii. 3. 1, p. 366.
2 Some interesting notices of the probable time which it would have taken the
Wise Men to travel from Persia to Jerusalem will be found in Greswell, Dissert.
xviii. Vol. ii. p. 138 sq. From the calculations there made it would appear that
they could not have been much less than four months on the road. It has been
computed by Chrysostom, in reference to the journey of Abraham, that the time
occupied in a journey from Palestine no further than Chaldaea would be about
70 days. Ad Stagir. ii. Vol. i. p. 188 (cited by Greswell).
3 The terms of this question deserve some notice, as they serve incidentally to
show the firm belief of the Magi that the expected King was now really born
into the world, and yet their complete ignorance, not only of the place of His
birth, but, as it would seem, also of its mysterious nature and character. Comp.
Greswell, Harmony, Dissert, xvm. Vol. ii. p. 144, but see contra Theoph. in loc.
They go naturally to Jerusalem, for where, as Jackson says ( Creed, Book vii. p.
258), " should they seek the King of the Jews but in His standing court? " and
they put forward a question which shows their conviction that a great King had
been born in the land they were visiting, though, at present, who or where
they knew not (opposed to Theoph. in loc). In the sequel, they were probably
permitted to behold some glimpses of the true nature of Him whom they came to
reverence; so that, as Bp. Taylor well says, " their custom was changed to grace,
and their learning heightened with inspiration ; and God crowned all with a
spiritual and glorious event " — Life of Clirist, Part j. 4, 4. Though then in the
first irpoaic vvrj&at (ver. 2) no more perhaps might have been designed than the
outward worshipful reverence of Persian usage (Herod. I. 134), we may well
believe that in the subsequent performance of the act (ver. 11) there was some
thing more, and may not incorrectly believe with Tertullian (adv. Jud. cap. 9),
Origen (contr. Cehum, Lib. I. p. 46, ed, Spencer), and indeed the whole early
Church, that with a deepening though imperfect consciousness these faithful
men adored the Infant at Bethlehem as God, no less than they prostrated them-'
selves before Him as man. See the copious reff. in Patritius, de E.vangt Pissert.
xxvii. 2, Part in, p. 348. *

Lect. II. OF OUR LORD. 81
tous, — the Magi of the East, the ancient watchers of the
stars. When with this we remember how rife expectation
was, and how .one perhaps of that very council, which the
dying king1 called together, could tell of his own father's
mysterious prophecy of the coming Messiah * — when we
add to this the strange rumors of the Child of Bethlehem,
fast flying from mouth to mouth beyond that narrow circle
to which Anna had first proclaimed Him, — can we won
der at all that followed ? How natural the description of
the probably hastily-summoned council, and of the ques
tion publicly propounded to it touching the birth-place
of the Messiah. How natural, too, the pri
vate inquiry about the star's appearance made
specially to the Magi, and how accordant with
all that we know of Herod, the frightful hypocrisy with
which they were sent to test and verify the now ascertained
declaration of prophecy, and the murderous
sequel. How natural, also, the description of
the further journey of the Wise Men, their simple joy
1 The death of Herod appears almost certainly to have taken place a few days
before the Passover of the year A. u. o. 750; apparently, if retrospective calcu
lations can be depended on, towards the end of the first week of April. See
Wieseler, Chron. Syn. p. 57, and compare Clinton, Fasti Hell. Vol. iii. p. 254,
Browne, Ordo Sox. § 31, p. 31. If, then, we suppose the Saviour's birth to
have been in late winter, say, at the beginning of February, the arrival of the
Magi would have taken place about three weeks before Herod's death, and a
very few days before his removal to the baths at Callirrhoe (Joseph. Antiq.
xvii. 6. 5). Comp. Browne, Ordo S&c 5 28. If we adopt Dec. 25, A. tj. o. 749, a
date which, as has been above implied (p. 70, note 3) is perhaps not quite so
probable (compare Wieseler, Chron. Syn. p. 134 sq.), the interval between the
present event and the death of the wretched king will be proportionately longer,
and in some respects, it must be admitted, more chronologically convenient.
2 If, as seems reasonable to suppose, the 60n of R. Nehumiah ben Hakkana
was present at the council, he could scarcely have forgotten the prophecy said
to have been uttered by bis father, — that the coming of the Messiah could not
be delayed more than fifteen years. See Sepp, Leben Christi, Vol. ii. p. 24, and
the curious work of Petrus Galatinus, de Arcanis Cathol. Verit. cap. 3, p. 8
(Francof. 1608). The opinion that this was a special meeting of the Sanhedrin
(Lightfoot) is perhaps slightly the most probable; the omission of the third
element, the irpeo-flvTepoi rov \aov, is similarly found in Matt. xvi. 21, xx. 18.
See Meyer in loc. On the ypaauarets rov \aov here mentioned, see Spanheim,
Dub. Evang. xxxviii. Part II. p. 392 sq., Patritius, de Evang. Dissert, xxix.
Part in. p. 366, and on the Sanhedrin generally, Selden, de Synedriis, II. 6, Vol
ii. p. 1316 sq. Jost, Gesch. des Judenth. ii. 3. 14, Vol. i. p. 273.

82 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY .Lect. n.
when, on their evening mission to Bethlehem, they again
see1 the well-remembered star, and find that
' " the very powers of the heavens are leading
them where Babbinical wisdom2 had already sent them.
How full must now have been their conviction ; with what
opening hearts must they have worshipped ; with what holy
joy must they have spread out their costly
gifts; how they must now have felt, though
perhaps still dimly and imperfectly, that they were kneel
ing before the hope of a world, — One greater than Zoro
aster had ever foretold, a truer Eedeemer than the Sosiosh
of their own ancient creed.3 No marvel was
it, that with prompt obedience they fol
lowed the guidance of the visions of the night, and re-
l This seems the only natural meaning that we can assign to the words ko! ISoi
[surely an expression marking the unexpectedness of the reappearance], o atrr^jp
tv cJSov iv rr} avaroKy irporryev avrovs, Matt. ii. 9. Whether the star preceded
them the whole way to Jerusalem, and then disappeared for a short time, or
whether it only appeared to them in their own country, disappeared, and now
reappeared, must remain a matter of opinion. The definitive 1>v elSov iv t ,J
avarohfj, and still more the unusual strength of the expression which describes
their joy at again beholding the star, — ixdpnaav xapav p-eyd\nv trtpoSpa (ver.
10), — seem strongly in favor of the latter view. So Spanheim, Dub. Evang.
xxix. Part n. p. 320, Jackson, Creed, Book vn. Vol. vi. p. 261, and Mill, Obser
vations, n. 2. 3, p. 369.
2 The recent revival of the older anti-christian view, that the prophecy of
Micah (ch. v. 2) cited, by the Evangelist, either refers to Zorobabel (a view
unhappily maintained by Theodorus of Mopsuestia), or, if referring to the Mes
siah, only alludes to His descent from David, whose seat Bethlehem was, has
been ably and completely disposed of by Mill, Observations, n. 2. 3, pp. 391 —
402. On this and other supposed difficulties connected with this prophecy, 6ee
Spanheim, Dub. Evang. xix— xlvi. Part II. p. 406; Patritius, de Evang. Dis
sert, xxx. Part in. p. 368 sq.
s According to the statements of Anquetil du Perron, in his Life of Zoroaster,
prefixed to his edition of the Zend-Avesta (Vol. i. 2, p. 46), Sosiosh was the last of
the three posthumous sons of Zoroaster, and was to raise and judge the dead and
renovate the earth. See leschts Sadds, xxviii., " Lorsque Sosiosch paroJtra, il
fera du bien au monde entier existant" (Vol. ii. p. 278); Boundehesch, xxxi.,
" Sosiosch fera revivre les morts " (Vol. ii. p. 411); and similarly, ib. xi. (Vol. ii.
p. 364); ib. xxxiii. (Vol. ii. p. 420). Whatever may be the faults or inaccuracies
of Du Perron's translation (many of which have been noticed in Burnof 's Com-
mentaire sur le Yagna, Paris 1833), it can at any rate now no longer be doubted
that Zend has its proper place among the primitive languages of the Indo-Ger-
manic family (see Eask's Essay, translated by Von der Hagen, Berl. 1826), and
that the Avesta must have existed in writing previously to the time of Alexan
der. See Donaldson, New Cratylus, § 86, p. 144 sq. (ed. 3>

Lect. II. OF OTJR LORD. 83
turned to their distant home by a way by which they
came not.
No sooner had they departed, than the heavenly warn
ing: is sent to Joseph1 to flee on that very
& _ , . „ Flight into Egypt
nio-ht2 into Egypt from the coming wrath or ana murder of the
Herod. And that wrath did not long linger. >',mcm^ ^
When the savage king found that his strange
messengers had deceived him, with the broad margin that
a reckless ferocity left a matter of no moment, he slays
every male child in Bethlehem, whose age could in any way
have accorded with the rough date which the first appear
ance of the star had been judged to supply.3
On this fiendish act we need dwell no fur- j0^>ehmBaence of
ther, save to protest against the inferences
that have been drawn from the silence of a contempo
rary historian.4 What, we may fairly ask, was such an

l Again, it will be observed, consistently with the notice of the preceding
divine communication vouchsafed to Joseph (Matt. i. 20), — by an angelic visita
tion in a dream. See again ver 20, and compare the remarks made above, p. 65,
note 1. Some curious remarks on the nature of angelic visitations in dreams
will be found in the learned work of Bynseus, de Natali Jes. Chr. I. 2. 14, p. 210.
2 Probably on the same night that the Magi arrived ; for there seems every
reason against the view of a commentator in Cramer (Caten. Vol. i. p. 14), that
the star led them iv ri/tipa pion. At any rate the Holy Family appear to have
departed by night : the words, iyep&els irapoAajSe, seem to enjoin all prompti
tude, — " surge accipe," Syr.
3 See above, p. 79, note 1. As Herod made his savage edict inclusive as regards
locality (iv Bij&\ee/A Kal iv irafftv rols bpiois outtjs, ver. 16), so did he also in
reference to time: he killed all the children of two years and under (airb Sierovs,
soil. iraiS6s, not XpoVou, as apparently Vulg., " a bimatu "), to make sure that
he included therein the Divine Infant of Bethlehem ; -robs fiev Sterels avatpei,
iVo exv ir\dros 6 xpoVos. Euthym. on Matt. ii. 16, p. 81 (ed. Matttai).
4 It seems doubtful whether we need go so far as to say, with Dr. Mill ( Obser
vations, n. 3. 1, p. 345), that this silence is remarkable. The concluding days of
Herod's life were marked by such an accumulation of barbarities that such an
event might easily have been overlooked or forgotten. At any rate the refer
ence of the well-known passage of Macrobius (Saturnal. n. 4) to this murder of
the Innocents, though often denied or explained away (" aus der Christlichen
Tradition geflossen ist," Meyer, Kommentar. p. 80), seems now clearly established
and vindicated. See Mill, ib. p. 349 sq.; and compare Spanheim, Dub. Evang.
I.XXVI. Part n. p. 534 sq. It is worthy of notice that if, as seems nearly certain,
the son of Herod alluded to in that passage was Antipater, the date of the mur
der of the Innocents may be roughly fixed as not very far distant from that of-
the execution of the unhappy man referred to, and this latter event, we know,

84 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. II.
act in the history of a monster whose hand reeked with
the blood of whole families and of his nearest and dearest
relations? What was the murder of a few children at Beth
lehem in the dark history of one who had, perchance but
a few days before, burnt alive at Jerusalem above forty
hapless zealots who had torn down his golden eagle?1
What was the lamentation at Rama2 compared with that
which had been heard in that monster's own palace, and
which, if his inhuman orders had been executed, would
have been soon heard in every street in Jerusalem ?8 Even
doubters have here admitted that there is no real difficulty; *
and why should not we? Is the silence of a prejudiced
Jew to be set against the declarations of an inspired
Apostle ?
The events of this portion of the sacred narrative come
to their close with the notice of the divinely ordered jour
ney back from Egypt on the death of Herod, and the final

was Jive days before the death of Herod. See Joseph. Bell. Jud. I. 33. 8; and
compare above, p. 81, note 1.
1 See Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 6. 2, Bell. Jud. i. 33. 2. This was an outbreak
caused by the harangues of two expounders of the law, Judas and Matthias,
and resulted in the destruction of a large golden eagle of considerable value
which Herod had erected over the gate of the temple. From the tenor of the
narrative (/ZaaiKebs Se KaraS-fitras avrovs i^irreairev els 'leptxovvra, i 3),
and the subsequent oration in the theatre (comp. Antiq. xv. 8. 1), it would seem
that Herod was at this time in Jerusalem. The date of the execution of these
unhappy zealots, which probably almost immediately followed their apprehen
sion, can be fixed with certainty to the night of March 12—13 (A. u. c. 750), as
Josephus mentions that on the same night there was an eclipse of the moon
(loc. cit. 5 4). See Ideler, Handb. der Chronol. Vol. ii. p. 28, and comp. Wieseler,
Chron. Synops. i. 2, p. 56.
2 For some excellent critical remarks on the citation from Jeremiah in reference
to Eachel weeping for her children, see Mill, Observations, n. 3. 1, p. 402 sq. ;
and for a good sermon on the text, Jackson, Creed, Vol. vi. p. 277 (Oxf. 1844).
3 It is distinctly mentioned by Josephus that this frantic tyrant had aU the
principal men of the nation summoned to him at Jericho and shut up in the
hippodrome, and that he gave orders to his sister Salome and her husband
Alexas to have them executed immediately he died, that as there would be no
mourners for, there might be some at, his death. Antiq. xvii. 6. 5.
4 See Schlosser, Universalhistor. Uebers. der alten Welt, Part m. 1, p. 261,
referred to by Neander, Leben Jesu Chr. p. 45. For several questions connected
with the murder of the Innocents, including some characteristically guarded
remarks on their number, see Patritius, de Evanq. Dissert, xxxiii. Part m D.
375. V

Lect. II. OF OUR LORD. 85
return to Nazareth. Warned by God in a dream of the
death of Hei-od, Joseph at once1 brings back
' L ° The return to
the Holy Child and His mother; and thus, «™.
after. a stay m Egypt of perhaps far fewer
days2 than Israel had there sojourned years, the word of
ancient and hitherto unnoted prophecy receives its com
plete fulfilment,3 the mystic Israel comes up to the land
of now more than promise, — out of Egypt
God has called His Son.
To what exact place of abode the blessed Virgin and
Joseph were now directing their steps is not specially
noticed by the Evangelist. We may, however, perhaps
reasonably infer from St. Matthew's Gospel that this home-

1 If the remark made above (p. 83, note 2) be correct, the same inference must
be made in the present case', that the heavenly command required a similar
promptitude on the part of Joseph, and that the faithful guardian delayed not.
We may observe, however, that it is now iyep&els trapaXafie Kal rrope&ov, not
iyep&els iropoAojQe tccU tpevey, as in ver. 13. This did not escape the observation
of Chrysostom.
2 If the dates we have adopted are approximately correct, it would seem that
little more than a fortnight elapsed between the flight into Egypt and the death
of Herod, and that consequently we must conceive the stay in Egypt- to have
been comparatively short. Greswell, by adopting April, A.u.o. 750, as the date
of the Nativity, and 751 A.c.c. as the death-year of Herod, is compelled to
assume a stay there of about seven months. See Dissert, xii. Vol. ii. p. 392.
The apocryphal writers still more enlarge this period ("exacto vero triennio
rediit ex Egypto," Evang. Inf. Arab. cap. xxvi.; compare Pseudo-Matt.
Evang. cap. xxvi.), almost evidently for the purpose of interpolating a series of
miracles. 3 This citation from ancient prophecy has been much discussed. Without
entering into the detail of objections which have in many cases proved as frivo
lous as they are irreverent, we may observe, (1) that it seems certain that Hosea
xi. 1 is the passage referred to. See Jerome in loc, Eusebius, Eclog. Proph. p.
46 sq. (ed. Gaisford) ; and (2) that little doubt can be entertained that the catho
lic interpretation which makes Israel and the promised Seed stand in typical
relations {i\ex&V i'ffl TV ^-a$ Tvirucws, HZefin Se elsrbv Xpiarbv a.\7i&tvws, —
Theoph. in loc, in substance from Chrysostom) is no less true and correct than
it is simple and natural. St. Matthew, as writing principally to Hebrew readers
and to men who felt and knew that the nation to which they belonged was the
truest and most veritable type of their Lord, specifies a passage which they had
perhaps considered but simple history, but which, with the light of inspiration
shed on it, assumes every attribute of mysterious, and, let us add, to them at any
rate, of most persuasive prophecy. For further references and information,, the
reader may profitably consult Spanheim, Dub. Evang. lxii. — lxx. Part II. p.
474 sq., Deyling, 06s. Sacr. Vol. iv. p. 769, and Mill, on Pa/nth. Principles, n. 3.
1, p. 409. 8

86 THE BIRTH AND INFANCY Lect. IL
ward journey would have terminated at Bethlehem, — that
new home now so dear to them from its many marvellous
associations, that home which now might have seemed
marked out to them by the very finger of God, had not
the tidings which reached Joseph, that the evil son of an
evil father,1 the Ethnarch Archelaus, was
natt.n.22. now rujjng over Judaea, made that faithful
guardian afraid to return to a land so full of hatred and
dangers. While thus, perhaps, in doubt and perplexity,
the divine answer is vouchsafed to his anxieties,2 and
Joseph and the Virgin are directed to return to the safer
obscurity of their old home in the hills of Galilee ; and the
spirit of ancient prophecy again finds its fulfilment in the
designation the Messiah receives from his earthly abode,
"He shall be called a Nazarene."3

l The language of the Jewish deputies to Augustus fully justifies this remark:
" he seemed to be so afraid," they said, " lest he should not be deemed Herod's
own son, that he took especial care to make his acts prove it." See Joseph.
Antiq. xvii. 11. 2. *
2 This seems to lie in the word XPVP-tr'O'^ls (ver. 22). Though we may not
perhaps safely, either here or ver. 12, or indeed in the New Testament generally,
press the idea of a definite foregoing question, we may yet so far retain this
usual meaning [xprifiarl^ev airoicpiveTat, Suid.) as to regard the doubts and
fears of Joseph as the practical question to which the divine answer was
returned. See Suicer, Thesaur. s. v. Vol. ii. p. 1521.
3 The very use of the inclusive Sta twv irpotjyntwv ought to prepare us to expect,
what we find to be the case, that this is no citation from any particular prophet,
but expresses the declarations of several : " pluraliter prophetas vocando, Mat-
thseus ostendit non verba de Scriptuns a se sumpta sed sensum." — Jerome in loc.
We seem justified then in assigning to the word Nafapouos all the meanings
legitimately belonging to it, by derivation or otherwise, which are concurrent
with the declarations of the prophets in reference to our Lord. We may there
fore, both with the early Hebrew Christians (see Jerome) and apparently the
whole Western Church, trace this prophetic declaration, (a) principally and pri
marily, in all the passages which refer to the Messiah under the title of the
Branch (^.3.) of the root of Jesse (Isaiah xi. lj compare Jerem. xxiii. 5,
xxxiii. 15; Zech. vi. 11); (6) in the references to the circumstances of lowliness
and obscurity under which that growth was to take place (comp. Isaiah liii. 2);
and perhaps further (c) in the prophetic notices of a contempt and rejection
(Isaiah liii. 3), such as seems to have been the common and, as it would seem in
many respects, deserved portion of the inhabitant of rude and ill-reputed Naza
reth. See above, p. 57, note 2, and for further information and illustrations,
Spanheim, Dub. Evang. xc— xon. Part n. p. 598 sq., Deyling, 06s. Sacr. xl.
Vol. i. p. 176, Patritius, de Evang. Dissert, xxxvii. Part III. p. 406, Mill,
Observations, n. 3. 1, p. 422 sq.

Lect. II. OF OUR LORD. 87
I must now at once bring this lecture to a close, yet
not without two or three sentences of earnest exhortation
to you, brethren, who form the younger portion of this
audience. If there be ought in these hasty outlines of contested por
tions of Evangelical history that has arrested
.... n t -, . Conclusion.
your attention, and deepened your convic
tions, I will pray to God that it may yet work more and
more in your hearts, and lead you to feel that there is
indeed a quick and living truth in every sentence of the
blessed Gospel, and that they who read with a loving and
reverential spirit shall find it in its fullest measures. O,
pray fervently against the first motions of a spirit of doubt
ing and questioning. By those prayers which you learned
at a mother's knees, by that holy history which, perchance,
you first heard from a mother's lips, give not up the first
child-like faith of earlier and it may be purer days, — that
simple, heroic faith, which such men as Niebuhr1 and Nean
der2 knew how to appreciate and to glorify, even while
they felt its fullest measures could never be their own.
Remember that when faith grows cold love soon passes
away, and hope soon follows it ; and, O, believe me, that
the world cannot exhibit a spectacle more utterly mourn-
1 It must be regarded as very striking, that the great historian who could
express himself with such strength and even bitterness of language against
much that, however exaggerated it may have been in the case in question, was
really fundamentally sound in pietism (see Letter cclxxx.), could yet feel it
right to educate his son in a way that must have led to the deepest reverence for
the very letter of the inspired records. These are Niebuhr's own words : " He
[his son] shall believe in the letter of the Old and New Testaments, and I shall
nurture in him, from his infancy, a firm faith in all that I have lost, or feel
uncertain about." — Life and Letters, Vol. ii. p. 101 (Transl. 1852).
2 After some comments on extreme views as to what is termed, not perhaps
very correctly, " the old mechanical view of inspiration," this thoughtful writer
thus proceeds: "But this [existence of chasms in the Gospel history] only
affords room for the exercise of our faith, — a faith whose root is to be found,
not in demonstration, but in the humble and self-denying submission of our
spirits. Our scientific views may be defective in many points; our knowledge
itself may be but fragmentary ; but our religious interests will find all that is
necessary to attach them to Christ as the ground of salvation and the archetype
of holiness." — Life of Jesus Christ, p. 9 (Bohn), — a paraphrastic, but substan
tially correct representation of the original.

88 BIRTH AND INFANCY OF OUR LORD. Lect. n.
ful, more full of deepest melancholy, than a young yet
doubting, a fresh yet unloving, an eager yet hopeless and
forsaken heart.
May these humble words have wrought in you the con
viction, that if with a noble and loving spirit.
Acts xvii. 11. o r >
like the Beraaans of old, we search the Scrip
tures, we shall full surely find, — yea, verily, that we who
may go forth weeping to gather up the few scattered ears
of truth that might seem all that historical scepticism
had now left us, shall yet return with iov.
Ps. cxxvi. G. J J" J 5
and bring with us the sheaves of accumulated
convictions, and the plenitudes of assurance in the ever
lasting truth of every part and every portion of the Gos
pel of Jesus Christ.

LECTURE III.
THE EARLY JUDSEAN MINISTRY.
AHD JESUS INCREASED IH WISDOM AHD STATURE, AHD IH SAVOR WITH GOD
ADD mam. — St. Lulee ii. 52.
In my last lecture, brethren, we concluded with that
portion of the sacred narrative which briefly
notices the return of the Holy Family to ofour^/siiZ'
Nazareth, and the fulfilment of the spirit of
ancient prophecy in the Redeemer of the world being
called a Nazarene. Between that event and the group of
events which will form the subject of this afternoon's lec
ture, and which make up what may be termed our Lord's
early Judsean ministry, one solitary occurrence is recorded
in the Gospel narrative, — our Lord's second appearance
in the Temple at Jerusalem, his second presentation in His
Father's house.
With the single exception of the notice of this deeply
interesting event, the whole history of the
Saviour's childhood, youth, and even early Euan^L.0
manhood, is passed over by all the Evangel
ists with a most solemn reserve. Even he of them who
appears to have received so much, directly or indirectly,
from the blessed Virgin herself,1 and from whom we might
have expected some passing notices of that mysterious
childhood, — even he would seem to have been specially
moved to seal all in silence, and to relate no more than
this one event which marks the period when the Holy One
was just passing the dividing line between childhood and
l See the remarks above, p. 29, note 5.
8*

90 THE EARLY JUT) M AN MINISTRY. Lect. III.
youth. Both periods, that preceding and that succeeding
this epoch, are described in two short verses,
Luke ii. 40 and 52. ,,..... . -. J ,.
closely simuiar in expression, and tending
alike to show that the outward and earthly development
of our Redeemer was in strict accordance with those laws
by which those He came to save pass from childhood into
youth, and from youth into mature age.1
In regard of the first period, that of the childhood, one
short clause is graciously added to warn us
The brief notice ,. n . , . _
of our zorovs chud- from unlicensed musings upon the influences
of outward things upon the Holy Child,2 —
z«*eu.». one clause only, but enough, — "and the
grace of God was upon Him."
In regard of the second period, that of the Lord's youth
and early manhood, one event at its commencement, which
shows us how that grace unfolded itself in heavenly wis-

1 It is well said by Cyril of Alexandria: "Examine, I pray you, closely the
profoundness of the dispensation; the Word endures to be born in human
fashion, although in His divine nature He has no beginning, nor is subject to
time. He, who as God is all-perfect, submits to bodily growth : the Incorporeal
has limbs that advance to the ripeness of manhood. . . . The wise Evangelist did
not introduce the Word in His abstract and incorporate nature, and so say of
Him that He increased in stature and wisdom and grace, but, after having
shown that He was born in the flesh of a woman, and took our likeness, he then
assigns to Him these human attributes, and calls Him a child, and says that he
waxed in stature, as His body grew little by little, in obedience to corporeal
laws." — Comment, on Luke, Part i. p. ^9, 30 (Transl.). So, too, Origen: "Et
crescebat, inquit, humiliaverat enim se, formam servi accipiens, et eadem virtute
qua se humiliaverat, crescit." — In Luc. Horn. xix. Vol. iii. p. 953 (ed. Bened.).
2 On this subject see more below, p. 99 sq. Meanwhile, we may justly record
our protest against the way in which a most serious and profound question is
now usually discussed, and the repulsive freedom which many modern writers,
not only in Germany, but even in this country, permit themselves to assume
when alluding to the mental development of the Holy Child. See, for example,
the highly objectionable remarks of Hase (Leben Jesu, § 31, p. 56), in which this
writer plainly tells us at the outset that " the spiritual development of Jesus
depended on fortunate gifts of nature" (glxtcklichen Naturgaben); and that
these, though enhanced by the purposes and circumstances of His after-life, still
never went beyond the culture of the time and country, and never " transcended
the limits of humanity." Compare, too, Von Ammon, Leben Jesu, 1. 10, Vol.
i. p. 236, where the highly questionable views of Theodorus of Mopsuestia find a
ready defender ; and for an example from writers of our country of eloquent
and attractive but still painfully humanitarian comments on this mysterious
subject, see Robertson, Sermons, Vol. ii. p. 196.

LECT. III. THE EARLY JUDiBAN MINISTRY. 91
dom,1 is made fully known to us, — one event, but one
only, to which one short verse, that of our
* . Equally brief no-
text, is added, to teach us how that wisdom uce of our Lord's
waxed momently more full, more deep, more
broad, until, like some mighty river seeking the sea, it
merged insensibly into the omniscience of
His limitless Godhead. One further touch
completes the divine picture, — " in favour with God and

1 On this subject the following are the sentiments of Gregory of Nazianzus :
" He waB making advance, as in stature so also in wisdom and grace. Not by
these qualities receiving increase, — for what can be more perfect than that
which is so from the very beginning? — but by their being disclosed and revealed
by little and little."— Orat. xx. p. 343 (Paris, 1609). It may, however, be justly
doubted whether these statements, — especially the negative assertion, —though
confessedly in close accordance with some expressions of Athanasius (Trpo/ctJir-
tovtos rov ffd>p.aTOS TrpoetzoiTTev iv avTG} KaX rj <pavep<aais ttjj ffredrnros tois
Spaaa-iv. Adv. Arian. in. 29. 14), and other orthodox writers, are not unduly
restricted, and whether the words of the inspired Evangelist do not clearly
imply (to use the language of Waterland) that our Lord's increase in wisdom is
to be understood in a sense as "literal, as His increasing in stature is literal "
(Script, and Arians Compared, Vol. iii. p. 298). While then with these catholic
writers we may certainly acknowledge a gradual and progressive disclosure of
the Lord's divine wisdom, we must certainly, with other equally catholic writers,
recognize a regular development and increase in the wisdom and grace of the
reasonable soul, i. e., — to spea^fe with psychological accuracy, of the ^fv^h and
fovs-j the true and complete statement being, — "Christum secundum sapien-
tiam divinam, hoc est earn, quae ei competit tanquam Deo, non profecisse:
secundum sapientiam autem humanam, hoc est earn, quae ci ut homini competit,
vere profecisse, hominis quidem more, sed tamen supra modum humanum." — ¦
Suicer, Thes. Vol. ii.p. 269 (appy. from Bernh. de Consid. Book n.). In a word,
then, as Cyril of Alexandria (in loc.) briefly says, " the body advances in stature
and the [reasonable] soul in wisdom." See Ambrose, de Incarn. cap. 72 sq. Vol.
ii. 1, p. 837 (ed. Mign6), Epiphanius, Rcer. lxxvii. 26, Vol. i. p. 1019 (Paris, 1622),
and the good note of the Oxford Translator ( J. H. Newman) of Athanasius,
Select Treatises, Disc. in. Part n. p. 474 (Libr. of Fathers).
2 This simile, though merely intended to illustrate generally a profound mys
tery, and not to be pressed with dogmatic exactness, is still, as it would seem,
substantially correct. The fact of the present verse (Luke ii. 52) being one of
those urged by the heretical sect of the Agnoetaa, as tending to show limitations
even in our Lord's divine nature, was not improbably the cause of its having
received some interpretations (see above) so rigid, as to favor by inference the
Apollinarian statement that the Word itself was in the place of vovs (Pearson,
Creed, Vol. ii. p. 122, ed. Burton). The whole subject, and a scholastic discus
sion, "de Christ! scientia et nescientia et profectu secundum humanitatem," will
be found in Forbes, Instruct. Hist.-Theol. Book in. ch. 19, 20. See Petav.
Dogm. Tlieol. (de Incarn. xi. 2) Vol. vi. p. 39, Suicer, Thesaur. s. v. A6yos, Vol.
ii. p. 268, and the sensible remarks of Boyse on our Lord's omniscience, Vindic.
of our Saviour's Deity, Vol. ii. p. 23 sq. (Lond. 1728).

92 THE EARLY JUVMAN MINISTRY. Lect. III.
man," perchance designed to hint to us that the out
ward form corresponded to the inner development, that
the fulness of heavenly wisdom dwelt in a shrine of out
ward perfection and beauty,1 and that the ancient tradi
tion,2 which assigned no form or comeliness to "the fairest
l Upon this point, it need scarcely be said, nothing certain can be adduced.
From the Gospels we seem to be able to infer that our Lord's outward form, ou
one occasion at least, sensibly struck the beholders with a, feeling of the
majesty and dignity of Him who condescended to wear the garments of our
mortality. Compare John xviii- 6. Perhaps, however, we may go so far as to
say, that there was still nothing that merely outwardly marked the Redeemer
of the world as strikingly different from the general aspect of the men of his
own time and country, otherwise it would seem strange that the Apostles who
beheld him by the lake of Gennesareth, and to whom He was near enough to
be easily heard (John xxi. 4 sq.), did not instantly recognize who it was. The
similar failure of recognition in the case of the two disciples going to Emmaus
(Luke xxiv. 13 sq.) can perhaps hardly be urged, owing to the Evangelist's own
remark (ver. 16), and the further illustrative comment of St. Mark (iv erep%
fAop<f>fi, ch. xvi. 12). This, perhaps, is all that can safely be urged. The more dis
tinct descriptions of our Lord's appearance, especially those in the Epistle of
Lentulus (see Fabricius, Codex Apocr. IT. T. Vol. i. p. 301 sq.), and the very simi
lar one of Epiphanius Monachus (p. 29, ed. Dressel, — and cited by Winer, RWB.
Art. " Jesus," Vol. i. p. 576, after a better text supplied to bim by Tischendorf),
appear clearly to be due to the imagination and conceptions of the writers. The
statue of our Lord said. by Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. vii. 18) to have been erected at
Caesarea Philippi by the woman with the issue of blood (Matt. ix. 20), might per
haps be urged as showing that our Lord's appearance was not unknown to the
early Church, if it did not appear probable from historical considerations that
the statue in question really never represented our Lord, and was never erected
under the alleged circumstances. See the " Excursus" of Heinichen, in his edi
tion of Eusebius, H. E., Vol. iii. p. 396 sq. The student who is anxious to pursue
further this interesting but not very profitable subject, will find abundant notices
in Winer, RWB. Vol. i. p. 576, and especially in Hase, Leben Jesu, § 34, p. 62 sq.
(ed. 3), Hofmann, Leben Jesu, § 67, p. 292 sq. ; and may consult the special work
of Reiske, de Imaginibus Christi (Jen. 1685). Some curious remarks of Origen in
reference to a supposed diversity in our Lord's appearance to different persons,
will be found in the Latin translation of that great writer's commentaries on
Matt. § 100, Vol. iii. p. 906 (ed. Bened.). Comp. Norton, Genuineness of Gospels,
Vol. ii. p. 274 (ed. 2).
2 See Justin Martyr, Trypho, cap. 14, Vol. ii. p. 52 (ed. Otto): Twv re \6ymv
rovrwv Ka\ toiovtwv, etpnl'j.4vwv vftb tSjv irpo'pnrwv, eKeyov fi> Tpv(pavt ot fxev
eXpnvrai els r^v irpdnnv Ttapovalav tou Xptarov, iv $ na\ arifxos teal a e i 5 fy s
teal frvyrbs <paw{}o~eo&ai KeKt)pvy(xevos iorlv, ol Be els rfyv Bevrepav avrov
irapovffiav. So still more distinctly Clem. Alex. Pcedag. nr. 1. 3: Tbv Be Kvpiov
aitrbv rfyv 6\\/tv alaxpbv yeyovevat Sta 'Hvaiov to Tivevp.a fxaprvpei. Compare
Strom, in. 17. 103, Orig. Cels. vi. p. 327 (ed. Spencer), —where the concession is
made to Celsus, and Tertull. de Came Chr. cap. 9, adv. Jud. cap. 14. This
opinion, however, soon began to be modified. See Augustine, Serm. cxxxyai.
Vol. v. p. 766 (ed. Mignd), and Jerome, Epist. lxv. Vol. i. p. 380 (ed. Vail.), who
well remarks, — "Nisi habuisset et invultu quiddam oculisque sidereum, nun-

Lect. III. THE EAELY JOD-EAN MINISTRY. 93
of the children of men,"1 was but a narrow and unworthy
application of the merely general terms of
Isaiah's prophecy.
Thus waxing strong in spirit and in the grace of His
heavenly Father, the Holy Child, when
J ' . . Visit to the Tern-
twelve years old, goes up with both his pa- pte when twelve
rents to the Passover at Jerusalem, not, how
ever, as a worshipper, nor as yet even what Hebrew phra
seology has termed a " Son of the Law," though possibly
as a partaker in some preparatory rite which ancient cus
tom might have associated with that age of commencing
puberty.2 We observe that it is incidentally noticed that
the blessed Virgin, not only on this occasion,
. T Luke ii. 41.
but every year, went up with Joseph to the
great festival of her nation. Like Hannah * s™' u- w>
o comp. i. 7.
of old, year after year, though compelled
neither by law nor by custom,3 she might have longed to

quam eum statim secuti fuissent Apostoli, nee qui ad comprehendendum eum
venerant, corruissent."
1 Chrysostom lightly urges this indirect prophecy : OuSe yap ffravfiarovpyuv
%v ^avaaffrbs uovov, ,a\Acfc Kal tpaiv6{j.evos iroWris eyeue x&PLT0Si Ka^ tovto 6
irpotp'ftr'ns Srjkttiv e\eyev 'tipouos itdwei irapa. robs vlobs t«c av&pojirav.
Horn, in Matt, xviii. 2, Vol. vii. p. 371 (ed. Bened.).
2 This perhaps is the critically exact statement, as it would certainly seem that
the age of puberty was not considered as actually attainedtill the completion of
fbe thirteenth year. See Jost, Geschichte des Judenth. in. 3.. 11, Vol. i. p. 398
(where the statement of Ewald is rectified) ; and compare Greswell, Dissert, xn.
Vol. i. p. 396, and ib. xviii. Vol. ii. p. 136. It has been doubted, then, whether
on this occasion our Lord was taken up to celebrate the festival, or whether it
was merely to appear before the Lord in company with His parents, and perhaps
take part in some introductory ceremony. The patristic commentators (e. g.
Cyril Alex. " upon the summons of the feast," Part I. p. 30, and probably Ori
gen, Horn, in Luc. xix.) appear rather to advocate the former opinion, and
would lead us to think that our Lord, either in compliance with the wishes of
His parents, or more probably in accordance with His own desire (comp. ver.
49), attended the festival as an actual worshipper. The latter opinion, however,
seems most correct, and most in accordance with what we know of Jewish cus
toms. See Greswell, I. c. Vol. i. p. 397. The rule appears to have been that all
males were to attend the three great festivals, "Exceptis surdo, stulto, puerulo
.... puerulus autem ille dicitur, qui, nisi a patre manu trahatur incedere non
valet." — Bartoloeci, Biblioth. Bobbin. Vol. iii. p. 132. Compare Lightfoot, Hor.
Hebr. (in, loc.) p. 499 (Eoterod. 1686).
s See the very distinct quotation adduced by Schoettgen (Hor. Heb. Yol. i. p.
266), from which it would appear that the injunction of Hillel, that women

94 THE EARLY JUDiEAN MINISTRY. Lect. III.
enter into the more immediate presence of the God of
Israel, and, though but dimly conscious of the eventful
future, might have felt with each revolving year a mys
terious call to that Festival, of which the Holy Child
beside her was hereafter to be the Lamb and the sacrifice.
After the paschal solemnities were celebrated, most
probably on the afternoon of the eighth day,1
eiscoven, of the the Virgin and Joseph turn their steps back
wards to Galilee, — but alone. They deem
the Holy Child was in another portion of the large pil
grim-company, — perhaps with contemporaries to whom,
after the solemnities they had shared in, ancient custom
might have assigned a separate place in the festal caravan,2
and they doubt not that at their evening resting-place
among the hills of Benjamin (not improbably that Beeroth
which tradition has fixed upon),8 they shall be sure to find

should once attend the passover, was not binding, and indeed self-contradictory.
Such a habit on the part of the blessed Virgin must be referred to her piety.
Schoettgen quotes from the tract, "Mechilta,"a similar instance in the case of
the wife of Jonah, — "Uxor Jonse ascendit ad celebranda festa solemnia" (loc.
cit.). 1 It has been correctly observed by Lightfoot (Hor. Hebr. in loc. p. 740), that
the expression TeKetwadvrav ras ryiepas (Luke ii. 43) 6eems certainly to imply
that the Holy Family staid the full time of seven days at Jerusalem. During
this time it is not improbable that the youthful Saviour had been observed by
some of the members of the venerable assemblage among whom he was subse
quently found. Perhaps even, with Euthymius, we might further attribute the
Lord's prolonged stay to a desire to consort longer with those on whom the
words of grace and wisdom which fell from His lips could not but have produced
a startling and perhaps long-rejnembered eifect : i/ireaeive Se, eXrovv inreXeltpfrq
iv 'lepovcaK'lifji, fiov\6/j.evos 0-vp.fil^ai rots StSatrtcdKots (Vol. ii. p. 279, ed.
Matt.). 2 Greswell urges, on the authority of Maimonides (de Sacrif. Pasch. n. 4), that
a paschal company could not be composed of "pueri impuberes." This would
seem certainly correct (comp. Mishna, " Pesachim," vn. 4, p. 118 of De Sola's
transl.) ; but it does not seem to militate against the assumption in the text, that
in returning a separate company might be formed of those who had gone
through the preliminary ceremony which Maimonides himself seemB to allude
to. Comp. de Sacr. Solemn, ii. 3 (cited by Greswell, Vol. i. p. 397).
3 The usual resting-place for the night appears to have been Sichem, which,
though in Samaria, was not forbidden as a temporary station : " Terra Samarita-
norum munda est, et fontes mundi, et mansiones munda:," Talm. Hieros. " Abo-
dah Zarah," fol. 44. 4, cited by Sepp, Leben Christi, Vol. ii. p. 45. But tradition
and probability appear to prevail in favor of Beer or Beeroth, a place distant,

Lect. III. THE EARLY JUD.EAN MINISTRY. 95
Him. But they find Him not. Full of trouble, they turn
backwards to Jerusalem ; a day is spent in anxious search,
perhaps among the travelling companies which would now
in fast succession be returning homeward from the Holy
City ; yet another day they search in vain.1 On the third
they find the Holy Child, but in what an unexpected
place, and under circumstances how mysterious and un
looked-for. In the precincts of the temple, most probably
in one of the rooms3 where, on Sabbath days and at the
great festivals, the Masters of Israel sat and taught, they
find Him they had so long sought for. They find Him
sitting in the midst of that venerable circle ; Lukeii.4S.
sitting, yet at no Gamaliels feet, but, as the
words would seem to imply, spontaneously raised to a
position of equal dignity ; not the hearer only, but the
indirect teacher by the divine depth of His mysteri
ous questions.4 No wonder that the Evangelist should

according to Robinson (Palest Vol. i. p. 452), about three hours from Jerusalem.
Comp. Winer, BWB. s. v. " Beer," Vol. i. p. 146.
1 The exact manner in which the time specified was spent has been differently
estimated. It seems most reasonable to suppose that one day was spent in the
return and search on the road, a second in fruitless search in Jerusalem, and
that on the third the Holy Child was found. The remark of Bengel is curious:
" Tres. Humerus mysticus. Totidem dies mortuus a diBcipulis pro amisso habi
tus est." If there be anything in this, we might feel disposed to adopt rather
the view of Euthymius : " One day they spent, when they went a day's journey
and sought for Him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance ; a second, when, in
consequence of not having found Him, they returned to Jerusalem seeking Him ;
in the course of the third day they at length found Him." — Comment, on Luke
ii. 44. The expression ue& ryiepas rpeis seems, however, rather in favor of the
first view. Comp. Meyer in loc.
2 We learn from the Talmudic gloss cited by Lightfoot (in loc), that there was
no Synagogue " nea* the court, in the mountain of the Temple." Comp. Dey-
ling, Obs. Sacr. xxx. Vol. iii. p. 283, Reland, Antiq. I. 8. 6. Here, or in one of
the many buildings attached to the Temple, apparently on its eastern side, we
may conceive the Holy Child to have been found. See Sepp, Leben Chr. 1. 16,
Vol. ii. p. 47, and Jost, Gesch. des Judenth. n. 1. 2, Vol. i. p. 140.
3 The Talmudic statement, cited by Lightfoot, that scholars did not sit, but
stand ("a diebus Mosis ad Rabban Gamalielem non didicerunt legem nisi
stantes," " Megillah," fol. 21. 1), is apparently untenable (see Vitringa, de
Synag. Vol. i. p. 167), and not to be pressed in the present passage. The words
Ka&e£6'[i.evov iv fiitrtp rav StSao-Kd\u}V seem, however, to bear out the view
adopted in the text, and are so interpreted by De Wette in loc.
4 This is the patristic and, as it would seem, correct statement of the exact

96 THE EARLY JUILEAN MINISTRY. Lect. HL
tell us that His parents when they saw Him "were
amazed;" no wonder that even the holy
'''"'"" ' mother when she gazed on that august as
semblage, when she saw, as she perchance might have seen,1
the now aged Hillel the looser, and Shammai the binder,2
and the wise sons of Betirah, and Rabban Simeon, Hillel's
son, and Jonathan the paraphrast, the greatest of his pupils,
— when she saw these, and such as these, all hanging on the
questions of the Divine Child, no wonder that she forgot
all in the strange and unlooked-for circumstances in which
she found Him she had so sorrowingly sought
for. All the mother speaks out in her half-
reproachful address,3 all the consciously incarnate Son. in
relation in which the Holy Child now stood to those around Him: " Quiapar-
vulus erat, invenitur in medio non eos docens, sed interrogans et hoc pro KtatiB
officio, ut nos doceret, quid pueris, quamvis sapientes et eruditi sint, conveniret,
ut audiant potius magistros, quam docere desiderent, et se varia ostentatione
non jactent. Interrogabat inquam magistros, non ut aliquid disceret, sed ut
interrogans erudiret." — Origen, in Luc Horn. xix. Vol. iii. p. 955 (ed. Bened.).
" Those very questions," 6ays Bp. Hall, were " instructions, and meant to teach."
Contempt, n. 1. The view taken by Bp. Taylor (Life of Christ, I. 7), that the
present exhibition of learning was little short of miraculous, seems far less nat
ural, and less consonant with the tenor of the sacred text.
1 The names mentioned in the text belong to men who are known to have
been alive at the time, and who occupied conspicuous places among the circle of
Jewish Doctors. For further information respecting those here specified, see
Sepp, Leben Christi, 1. 17, Vol. ii. p. 47 sq., and the notices of Petrus Galatinus,
de Arcan. Cath. Ver. cap. 2. 3, p. 5 sq. (Francof. 1602). There may be some
doubt about Hillel being still alive; but if our assumed date of this event (A.u.c.
762) is correct, and the dates supplied by Sepp (toe cit.) are to be relied on, we
seem justified in believing that that venerable teacher was one of those thus
preeminently blessed.
2 " Shammai ligat, Hillel solvit." Comp. Lightfoot, in Matt. xvi. 19, p. 378.
For an account of the general principles of teaching respectively adopted by
these celebrated men and their followers, see Jost, Gesch. des Judenth. II. 3. 13,
Vol. i. p. 257 sq.
3 The prominence which the Virgin-mother gives to the relation she bore to
the Holy One that vouchsafed to be born of her can hardly be accidental, —
t4kvov ti iiroiria-as rifuv ovrtos, ver. 48. The emphatic position of the irpbs
avrbv might also almost lead us so far to agree with Bp. Hall ("it is like that
she reserved this question till she had Him alone," Contempt, n. 1) as to think
that it was addressed to the Divine Child in tones that might not have been
heard, or intended to have been heard, by those around. All the patristic exposi
tors comment on the use of the term ol yovels avrov, and o irariip trov in refer
ence to Joseph, and none perhaps with more point than Origen : " Nee miremur
parentes vocatos, quorum altera ob partum, alter ob obsequium, patris et matris

Lect. IH. THE EARLY JUD.2EAN MINISTRY. 97
the mysterious simplicity of the answer, that reminds the
earthly mother that it was in the courts of His heavenly
Father's house1 that the Son must needs be found, that
His true home was in the temple of Him whose glories
still lingered round the heights of Moriah. And yet
with what simple pathos is it noticed by the Evangelist
that " He went down, and came to Nazareth, Ver. 51.
und was subject to them." As that Holy
One left the glories of heaven to tabernacle with men, so
now in retrospective shadow and similitude* he leaves the
blessedness of His Father's temple for the humble home
of earthly parents, and remains with them as the loving
and submissive son, the sharer, perhaps, in His reputed
father's earthly labors,2 the consoler, and perchance sup
porter, of the widowed Virgin after the righteous son of
Jacob, who henceforth appears no more in the history, had
been called away to his rest.3

meruerunt vocabula." — In Luc. Horn. xix. Vol. iii. p. 955 (ed. Bened.). So
Augustine, though with a further and deeper reference: "Propter quoddam
cum ejus matre sanctum et virginale conjugium, etiam ispse [Joseph] parens
Christi meruit appellari." — Contr. Faust. Manich. in. 2, Vol. iii. p. 214 (ed.
Migne). 1 The exact meaning of the words iv rots rov irarpds aov has been differently
estimated. Common usage (see exx. in Lobeck, Phrynicus, p. 100), and still
more the idea of locality, which would seem naturally involved in an answer to
the preceding notice of the search that had been made, may incline us to the
gloss of Euthymius, — iv rip otntp rov irarpis pov. So also the Peshito-Syriac
and Armenian versions; the Vulgate, Coptic, and Gothic are equally indeter
minate with the original.
2 This statement is perhaps partially supported by Mark vi. 3, ou% oZrSs iffrtv
6 t4kto>v, — a reading which, even in spite of the assertion of Origen in reply
to Celsus, that our Lord is never described in the four Gospels as a carpenter
( Contr. Cels. vi. 36), must certainly be retained. See Tischendorf, in loc. When
we add to this the old tradition preserved by Justin Martyr ( Trypho, cap. 88),
that our Lord made " ploughs, yokes, and other implements pertaining to hus
bandry," we seem fully warranted in believing that our Redeemer vouchsafed to
set to us this further example of humility and dutiful love. The silly legends of
the apocryphal gospels hardly deserve to be noticed. See, however, Evang.
Thorn, cap. 11, Evang. Inf. Arab. cap. 38, 39.
8 See above, p. 65, note 2. According to a simple comparison of two passages
in the apocryphal Historia Josephi (cap. 14, 15), this took place in the eighteenth
year of our Lord. Upon such authority, however, no further reliance can be
placed than, perhaps, as the expression of a belief in the early Church that
Joseph did not, as Ambrose seems distinctly to imply (de Instit. Virg. cap, 7,
9

98 THE EARLY JUD-ffiAN MINISTRY. Lect. HL
And this is the narrative, this narrative so simple and
so true, in which modern scepticism has fan-
o/1hel°ol^m cied it can detect inconsistencies and incon-
3a«"ri"s' iht gruities.1 And yet what is there so strange,
what so inconceivable ? Does the age of the
Holy Child seem to preclude the possibility of such contact
with the Masters of Israel, when the historian Josephus,
as he himself tells us,2 was actually consulted by the high
priests and the principal men of the city at an age but
little more advanced than that of the youthful Saviour?
Are we to admit such precocity in the case of the son of
Matthias and deny it in that of the Son of God ? Or,
again, is the assumed neglect of the parents to be urged
against the credibility of the narrative,8 when we know
so utterly nothing of the arrangement of these travelling
companies, or of the bands and groupings into which, on
such solemn occasions as the present, custom might have
divided the returning worshippers ? But I will not pause
on such shallow and hapless scepticism ; I will not do such
dishonor to the audience before which I stand as to assume
that it is necessary for me to make formal replies to such
Vol. ii. 1, p. 318, ed. Migne), survive our Lord, or even the times of His public
ministry. 1 For some notices of these objections, see Ebrard, Kritik der Evang. Gesch. §
50, p. 247.
2 " Moreover, when I was a child," says the historian, (l and about fourteen
years of age, I was commended by all for the love I had to learning; on which
account the high priests and principal men of the city came then frequently to
me together, in order to know my opinion about the accurate understanding of
points of the law." — Life, ch. 2, Vol. I. p. 2 (Whiston's transl.). Such a state
ment would seem inconceivable, if it were not remembered that so much, espe
cially of interpretation of the law, turned on opinion and modes of reasoning,
rather than on accumulations of actual learning. See especially Wotton, Dis
courses, ch. iv. Vol. i. p. 24 sq.
3 Much has been said by a certain class of writers about the want of proper
care for the Holy Child previously evinced by Joseph and Mary. Such remarks
are as untenable as they are clearly designed to be mischievous. Even Hase
remarks that the Lord's staying behind in Jerusalem is perfectly conceivable
without attributing any carelessness to His parents. Leben Jesu, § 30, p. 65.
Comp. Tholuck, Glaubwurd, p. 214 sq. Bede (in loc. Vol. iii. p. 349, ed. Migne)
suggests that the women and men returned in different bands, and that Joseph
and Mary each thought that the Holy Child was with the other. This, however,
seems " argutius quam verjus dictum."

Lect. III. THE EARLY JUDjEAN MINISTRY. 99
unmerited cavillings. I will only presume to make this
one mournful comment, — that if a narrative like the
present, so full as it is of life-like touches, so exquisitely
natural in its details, and so strangely contrasted with the
silly fictions of the Apocryphal Infancies,1 — if such a
narrative as this is to be regarded as legendary or myth
ical, then we may indeed shudderingly recognize what is
meant by the " evil heart of unbelief," what
J : Hab. Hi. 12.
it is to have that mind that will excogitate
doubts where the very instinctive feelings repudiate them,
and will disbelieve where disbelief becomes plainly mon
strous and revolting.
And now eighteen years of the Redeemer's earthly life
pass silently away ;2 a deep veil falls over that
-. , . , , . -, Silence of the
mysterious period, which even loving and Evangelists on the
inquiring antiquity has not presumed to raise, |%^£ T^s
save in regard to the brief notice of the
Saviour's earthly calling to which an early writer has
alluded,3 and to which both national custom and the

1 The simple evangelical narrative of our Lord's interview with the Doctors
has, as we might have imagined, called forth not a few apocryphal additions.
These will be found in the Evang. Infant. Arab. cap. 50 — 52, pp. 199, 200 (ed.
Tisch.). 2 This would seem the place, in accordance with the arrangement in the Gos
pel of St. Luke, for making a few comments on the genealogies of our Lord as
recorded in this Gospel and that of St. Matthew. Into this difficult subject,
however, it does not seem desirable to enter, further than to remark for the
benefit of the general reader, (a) that the most exact recent research tends dis
tinctly to prove the correctness of the almost universally received .ancient
opinion, that both are the genealogies of our Lord's reputed father; (b) that the
genealogy of St. Matthew is not according to lineal descent, but according to
the line of regal succession from Solomon, and that, in accordance with
national and scriptural usage, and possibly for the sake of facilitating memory
(Mill, p. 105), it is recorded in an abridged and also symmetrical form ; (c) that the
genealogy of St. Luke exhibits the natural descent from David through Nathan ;
(d) that the two genealogies can be reconciled with one another, and with the
genealogy of the house of David preserved in the Old Testament. For a com
plete substantiation of these assertions, see Mill, Obs. on Pantheistic Principles,
II. 2. 1, 2, p. 101 sq., Hervey (Lord A.) Genealogies of our Lord (Cambr. 1853);
and compare August, de Diversis Qwest. lxi. Vol. vi. p. 60, and contra Faust.
Manich. in. 1 sq. Vol. viii. p. 214 sq.
S See above, p. 97, note 2.

100 THE EARLY JUD^IAN MINISTRY. Lect. m.
examples of the greatest teachers, Hillel not excepted,1
lend considerable plausibility.
On this silence much has been said into which it is here
not necessary to enter. Instead of pensive
Providential na- T • .. i l • 'j. T_ 1 J 1. i
ture of this saence and mistaken longings, it should be to us a
Intma. a"dex~ subject of rejoicing and thankfulness that in
this particular portion of the sacred history
Scripture has assumed to itself its prerogative of solemn
reserve.2 Think only, brethren, how the narrative of
simple events of that secluded childhood would have been
dealt with by the scoffer and the sceptic. Nay, pause to
think only what an effect it might have had even on the
better portion of Christianity ; how our weak and carnal
hearts might have dwelt merely on the human side of the
events related, and how hard it might have seemed to
have realized the incarnate God in the simple incidents
of that early life of duty and love. I ground this obser
vation on the very suggestive fact recorded by St. John,
that our Lord's brethren " did not believe on
John vii. 5. XT. „ .
Him. However these words may be inter
preted; whether the word "believe" is to be taken in a
more general or more restricted sense ; whether the
brethren be regarded as sons of the Virgin, or,' as I
humbly believe them to be, sons of Mary her sister,8 affects

3 For numerous citations from the Rabbinical writers confirming the above
statement, see Sepp, Leben Christi, 1. 19, Vol. ii. p. 59 sq. The quotation in refer
ence to Hillel is as follows: " Num forte pauperior eras Hillele? Dixerunt de
Hillele seniore quod singulis diebus laborabat, conductus mercede mumnii." —
Tract " Joma," fol. 36. 1. Compare Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. p. 444.
2 A brief discussion of the question why so great a portion of our Redeemer's
life is thus passed over, will be found in Spanheim, Dub. Evang. xcvi. Part n.
p. 651. The contrast between this holy silence on the part of the Evangelists,
and the circumstantial and often irreverent narratives of some of the apocryphal
gospels, especially the Pseudo-Matt. Evangelium and the Evang. Infant.
Arabicum), is singularly striking and suggestive. See further comments, in
Camb. Essays, 1856, p. 156 sq.
S Upon this vexed question we will here only pause to remark, that the whole
subject seems to narrow itself to a consideration of the apparently opposite
deductions that have been made from two important texts. On the one hand,
if we rest solely on the rigid meaning of the word iiriorevov in John vii. 5, and
regard ol a.Se\cpol avrov as including all so designated, it would certainly seem

Lect. HI. THE EARLY JUD^IAN MINISTRY. 101
our present argument but little. This momentous fact
these words do place before us, that some of those who
stood in the relation of kinsmanship and affinity to the
Saviour, who saw Him as the familiar eye saw Him, were
among the latest to acquire the fullest measures of faith.
Though so many blessed opportunities were vouchsafed to
them of seeing the glory of God shining through the veil
of mortal flesh, yet they saw it not. Their eyes so rested
on the outward tabernacle that they beheld not the
Schechinah within. The material and familiar was a
hinderance to their recognition of the spiritual, — a hinder-
anee, be it not forgotten, which in their case was ulti
mately removed,1 but a hinderance, in the case of those
who could not have their advantages, which might never
have been removed, an obstacle to a true acknowledgment

to follow that none of them could be apostles, and that consequently James the
brother of the Lord was not identical with James the son of Alphaaus. On the
other hand, if we adopt the only sound grammatical interpretation which the
words of Gal. i. 19 can fairly bear, we seem forced to the conclusion that James
the Lord's brother was an Apostle, and consequently is to be identified with
James the son of Alptueus. If this be so, James the Apostle and his brethren,
owing to the almost certainly established identity of the names Alphajus and
Clopas (Mill, Observations, II. 2. 3, p. 236), mu6t be further identified with the
children of Mary (Matt, xxvii. 56 ; Mark xv. 40) the wife of Clopas and sister
of our Lord (John xix. 25), and so His cousins. We have thus two texts for
consideration, upon the correct interpretation of which the question mainly
turns. That Gal. i. 19 cannot be strained to mean " I saw none of the Apostles,
' but I saw the Lord's brother," seems almost certain from the regularly exceptive
use which el jufy appearB always to preserve in the New Testament That iitia-
Tevov, however, in John vii. 5, is to be taken in the barest sense of the word, or that
ol ade\<pol avrov includes all so named, is by no means equally clear. Even if
ovk itrtffrevov be understood in a sense in which it could not be applied to an
Apostle, we have still two of the aSe\tpo\, and perhaps more (see Mill), who
were not Apostles, and who, with the sisters, might form a party that might
reasonably be grouped under the roughly inclusive expression ol aSeAtpol avrov.
For further information and references, see notes on Gal. i. 20, and especially
Mill, Observations, II. 2. 3, p. 221 sq.
1 It has been pertinently observed by Neander, that for this very reason such
men are to be accounted still more trustworthy witnesses. The very fact that
they who so long resisted the impression wrought upon them by our Lord, did
at last yield, and acknowledge Him whom they accounted but as an unnoted
relative to be the Messiah and the Son of God, makes their testimony all the
more valuable. See Leben Jes. Chr. p. 49 (Transl. p. 33).
9*

102 THE EARLY JTJD.&A.N MINISTRY. Lect. IIL
of their Lord's divinity, against which faith might never
have been able to prevail.
Much again has been said upon the mental and spiritual
development of the Holy Child during these
The mental and „ , . , . . . ,, r,^
spiritual develop- silent years, upon which it is equally unpront-
mem of our Lord. able tQ enlarge_i "Whatever speculations .we
may in passive and meditative moments indulge in with
regard to those silent years, let us hold this as most fixed
and irrefragably true, that our heavenly Master received
nothing affecting His divine purpose and mission from the
influences of even the purer and more spiritual teaching
of those around Him. With what startling temerity has
the converse statement been urged and accepted;2 and
yet is there not tacit blasphemy in the very thought?
What was there for example in Pharisaism which could
have had its influence on Him who so spake against every
principle that marked it ? What was there in the anti-
eudasmonism,3 as it has been termed, — the desire placidly
to do good for its own sake, which has been attributed to
1 This subject and the probable " plan " of our Saviour's ministry are topics
which most of the modern lives of our Lord discuss with a very unbecoming
freedom. See Hase, Leben Jesu, § 31, 40 sq., pp. 56, 69 sq. In reference to the
former, and to the true nature of our Lord's advance in wisdom, enough has
been said above (p. 91, note 1); in reference to the latter it may be sufficient to
say, simply and briefly, that the only principle of action by which man may pre
sume to believe the Eternal Son to have been influenced was love toward man,
coBperating with obedience to the will of the Father (Heb. x. 9), — of Him with
whom He Himself was one (John x. 30). Comp. Ullmann, Unsundlichkeit Jesu,
sect. iv. p. 25 (Transl. by Park). Further remarks will be found in Neander,
Life of Christ, Book iv. p. 80 sq. (Bohn).
2 The various sources to which ancient and modern sceptical writers have
presumed to refer the peculiar characteristics of our Lord's teaching are speci
fied by Hase, Leben Jesu, § 31, p. 57.
3 See Neander, Life of Christ, p. -38 (Bohn) ; and compare Jost, Gesch. des
Judenthums, n. 2. 8, Vol. i. p. 215. The sentiment ascribed to the so-called
founder of this sect is found in the Mishna (Tract, " Pirke Aboth," I. 3), and is
to this effect : " Be not as servants who serve their master on the condition of
receiving a reward; but be as servants who serve on no such condition, and let
the fear of heaven be in you." It must be observed, however, that though the
above appears to have been one of the principles of early and even later Saddu-
caiism, the connection of the sect with Sadok, and of its doctrines with perver
sions of the original teaching of Antigonus Socho, is clearly to be regarded as a
very questionable hypothesis. See Winer, B WB. art. " Sadducaer," Vol. ii. p.
852 sq.

Lect. III. THE EARLY JUDiEAN MINISTRY. 103
the original creed of the Sadducee, — that could for one
instant be thought to have been assimilated by Him who
came to save His own creatures with His sufferings and
His blood, and whose ever-operative and redemptive love
was the living protest against the coldness and deadness
of a merely formal or self-complacent morality ? What,
lastly, was there in the much-vaunted spirit of Essene
teaching that we can trace in the Gospel of Jesus Christ?1
What was there in the spiritual pride of that secluded
sect that sceptical criticism shall think it can discern in
the active, practical, all-embracing covenant of Love ?
No, it cannot be. No finite human influences gave tinge
to those eternal purposes. No doctrines and traditions of
men added aught to the spiritual development of the Holy
Child of Nazareth. From that Father in John, i. 18.
whose bosom He had been from all eternity,
— from the fulness of that Godhead of which He Himself
was a copartner, — unmingled and uncontaminated, came
all forms of that wisdom in which, as man, and as subject
to the laws and developments of man's nature, the omnis
cient Son of God vouchsafed to advance and to make
progress. Thus, O mystery of mysteries, in that green basin in the
hills of Galilee,2 amid simple circumstances, and perchance

1 The connection of Christianity with Essene teaching has always been the
most popular of these theories. Comp. Heubner on Reinhard's Plan Jesu,
Append, v. How little similarity, however, there really is between the two sys
tems, and how fundamental the differences, is clearly enough shown by Neander,
Life of Christ, p. 38 (Bohn). For contemporary notices of the habits and tenets
of this sect, see Philo, Quod Omn. Prob. § 12, Vol. ii. p. 457, ib. de Vit. Contempt.
S i. Vol. ii. p. 471 (ed. Mang.), and Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 5. 9, xvi. 1. 5, Bell. Jud.
II- 8. 2 sq., and for a general estimate of the characteristics of Essene teaching
and its relations to Pharisaism, Jost, Gesch. des Judenth. II. 2. 8, Vol. i. p. 207 sq.
2 "The town of Nazareth lies upon the western side of a narrow oblong
basin, extending about from S.S.W. to N.N.E., perhaps twenty minutes in
length by eight or ten in breadth. The houses stand on the lower part of the
slope of the western hill, which rises high and steep above them  Towards
the north the hills are less high ; on the east and south they are low. In the
south-east the basin contracts, and a valley runs out, narrow and winding,
apparently to the great plain." — Robinson, Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 333 (ed. 2). See
also Thomson, The Land and the Book, Vol. ii. p. 131.

104 THE EARLY JUD^AN MINISTRY. Lect. III.
in the exercise of a humble calling, dwelt the everlasting
Son of God, — the varied features of that
The secluded , . . XT TT. ,/? i_ jj j n •
youth of the son of nature which He Himself had made so tair,
Gorf" the permitted media of the impressions of
outward things.1 His oratory the solitary mountains;
His purpose the salvation of our race ; His will the will
of God. Thus silently and thu3 mysteriously pass away
those eighteen years, until at length the hour is come, and
the voice of the mystic Elias is now heard sounding in the
deserts, and preparing the way for Him that was to come.
On the ministry of the Baptist my limits will permit me
to say but little. It would seem to have
the Baptist, and its preceded that of our Lord by some months,
probable effects. -, , 11, • l Ai ^
and not improbably occupied the greater
portion of the Sabbatical year, which came to its conclu
sion three or four months before our Lord had completed
His thirtieth year.2 The effects of the Forerunner's
ministry seem to have been of a mingled
Matt.iii.7. J , . ,
character. That St. John found some partial
adherents among the Pharisees and Sadducees3 seems cer-
1 For a notice of the fair view that must have met the Saviour's eye whenever
He ascended the western hill, specified in the preceding note, 6ee Robinson, Pal
estine, Vol. 11. p. 336 sq., and comp. the photographic view of Frith, Egypt,
etc., Part n.
2 We have no data for fixing the time when the ministry of the Baptist com
menced, unless we urge Luke iii. 1, which, as we shall see below (p. 106, note 1),
is more plausibly referred to another period of his history. We are thus thrown
on conjectures ; the most probable of which seems that as St. John was born six
months before our Lord, so he might have preceded Him in his public ministra
tions by a not much greater space of time. The further chronological fact (see
Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 204), that from the autumn of 779 a. v. c. to the
autumn of 780 was a sabbatical year, is certainly significant, and may addition
ally incline us to the opinion that perhaps in the spring or summer of 780 A. u. c.
St. John's voice was first heard in the wilderness of Judaea. For notices of the
outward circumstances under which the Forerunner appeared, the student may
be referred to Spanheim, Dub. Evang. xcvii.— c. Part 11. 654 sq., Huxtable,
Ministry of St. John, p. 8 sq. (Lond. 1848), and the exhaustive dissertation of
Patritius, de Evang. xliii. Book ill. p. 439 sq.
3 The supposition that the members of these sects came to oppose the baptism
of St. John is just grammatically possible (see Meyer in loc), but wholly con
trary to the spirit of the context. They might have come with unworthy
motives, from excited feelings, or from curiosity, but certainly not as direct
oppouents. See Neander, Life of Christ, p. 51 sq. (Bohn). Chrysostom perhaps

Lect. III. THE EARLY JTJD.2EAN MINISTRY. 105
tain from the express words of St. Matthew ; and that two
years after his death he, whom his Master had pronounced
as among the greatest of the prophets, was
to a great degree regarded as such by the
fickle multitude at large, seems equally certain from the
Gospel narrative. Yet that the Pharisees as
r Markxi. 32.
a body rejected his teaching, and that the
effect on the great mass of the people was but partial and
transitory, seems certain from our Lord's own comments
on the generation that would not dance to those that piped
unto them,1 and would not lament with those
that mourned. We may with reason, then, S'Sjlsa
believe that the harbinger's message might
have arrested, aroused, and awakened ; but that the gen
eral influence of that baptism of water was comparatively
limited, and that* its memory would have soon died away
if He that baptized with the Holy Ghost and with fire
had not invested it with a new and more vital significance.
John struck the first chords, but the sounds would have
soon died out into silence if a mightier hand had not
swept the yet vibrating strings.2

goes too far the other way when he says, ouSe "yip afia/rravSmas etSev aWk
lierafiaWouevovs. — Horn, in Matt. xi. Vol. vii. p. 173 (ed. Bened. 2).
1 This is also shown clearly by the remark of our Lord to the Jews on their
general reception of the Baptist's message, 7J&e\^<roTc uyo.\Aia£ri)vat irpbs
oj pav iv rtp tporrl auTou, John v. 35, where, though the chief emphasis probably
rests on the aydWio&rjvai (as opp. to lieravorto-at, see Meyer in loc), the irpbs
&pav is not without its special force : " It marks," as Chrysostom says, " their
light-mindedness, and the quick way in which they fell back from him." Com
pare too Matt. xxi. 32, though this perhaps more especially applies to those
(ol apxttptts teal ol irpefffivTepot rod Actor), ver. 23) to whom our Lord was
immediately speaking. On the effect of the Baptist's preaching compare,
though with some reserve, the well expressed estimate of Milman, History of
Christianity, I. 3, Vol. i. p. 143 sq.
2 This is the ancient, and, as it would seem, correct view of the relations of the
ministry of Christ to that of His forerunner. Though on the one hand we
must not rashly dissociate what undoubtedly stood in close relation to one
another, we still can scarcely go so far on the other as to say that St. John was
"absolutely the counterpart, and merely the forerunner of Christ" (Greswell,
Dissert, xix. Vol. ii. p. 156). The difference between St. John's baptism and
Christian, though treated as a needless question by Jackson ( Creed, vii. 41, Vol.
vi. p. 380), often occupied the attention of the early Church, and has never been

106 THE EARLY JTJD^AN MINISTRY. Lect. IH.
It was now probably towards the close of the year of
the City 780,1 after more than the time
Lord to the Bap- allotted to the Levite's preparation for " the
""" '' ' *'"u a" service of the ministry" had already passed
away,2 that the Holy Jesus, moved, we may
humbly presume, by that Spirit which afterwards directed

better stated than by Gregory of Nazianzus : " John also baptized, not, however,
any longer after a Jewish manner, for he baptized, not with water only, but
unto repentance. Still it was not yet after a spiritual manner, for lie adds not,
* with the Spirit.7 Jesus baptizes also, but it is with the Spirit." — Orat. xxxix.
p. 634 (Paris, 1609). See August, contr. Litt. Petil. u. 32. 75, Vol. ix. p. 284 (ed.
Migne), where the erroneous opinions of that schismatical bishop on this head
are very clearly exposed. Comp. also Thorndike, Laws oftlte Church, in. 7. 4,
Vol. iv. 1, p. 149 sq. (A.-C. Libr.).
X This date, it need scarcely be said, like all the dates in our Redeemer's history,
is open to much discussion. It has been selected after a prolonged consideration
of the various opinions that have been recently adduced, and certainly seems
plausible. If, as we have supposed, our Lord was born towards the close of
January or beginning of February, a. u. c. 750, He would now be thirty years
old and some months over, an age well coinciding with the tea el irav rpid-
Kovra apx^fievos of Luke iii. 23. The only difficulty, and it is confessedly a
great one, is the date previously specified by Luke, ch. iii. 1, the fifteenth year
of the reign of Tiberius. If we take the first and apparently plain sense of the
words, this fifteenth year can only be conceived to date back from the regular
accession of Tiberius at the death of Augustus, and will consequently coincide
with a.u.o. 781, — a date which not only involves the awkwardness of positively
forcing us to extend the age of our Lord to thirty-one or more, to make His birth
precede the death of Herod (certainly April, a.u. c. 750), but also forces us to
shorten the duration of His ministry very unduly to bring His death either to
the year a. d. 29 or a. d. 30, which seem the only ones that fairly satisfy the
astronomical elements which have been introduced into the question by Wurm
(Astrom. Beitrdge) and others. We must choose, then, between two modes of
obviating the difficulty ; either, (a) with Greswell (Dissert, vn. Vol. i. p. 334 sq.)
and others, we must suppose the fifteen years to include two years during which
Tiberius appears to have been associated with Augustus, — a mode of dating,
however, both unlikely and unprecedented (see Wieseler, Cliron. Syn. p. 172,
Browne, Ordo Scec. § 71, p. 76 sq.); or (6) we must conceive the fifteenth of Tibe
rius to coincide, not with the first appearance, but the captivity of John the
Baptist, — the epoch, be it observed, from which, in accordance with ancient
tradition (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. in. 24), the narrative of the Synoptical Gospels
appears to date (Matt. iv. 12, 17; Mark i. 14). This latter view has been well
supported by Wieseler (Chron. Syn. p. 172 sq.), and adopted by Tischendorf
(Synops. Evang. p. xiv. sq.), and is, perhaps, slightly the most probable. The
opinion of Sanclemente and Browne (§ 85) that the fifteenth of Tiberius was the
year of Passion, has much less in its favor.
2 The meaning of the words acel irwv rptaKOvra apx^p-evos (Luke iii. 23) has
been much discussed ; the doubt being whether the participle is to be referred (a)
to the age specified (" incipiebat esse quasi annorum triginta," Beza, Greswell), or
(b) to the commencement of the ministry. Whichever position of apx6p.evos we

Lect. III. THE EARLY JUDAA.N MINISTRY. 107
His feet to the wilderness, leaves the home of His child
hood, to return to it no more as His earthly abode, save
for the few days1 that preceded the removal to Caper
naum in the spring of the following year. It was now
winter,2 and the valley of Esdraelon was just green with
springing corn,3 as the Redeemer's path lay across it
toward the desert valley of the Jordan, either to that an
cient ford near Succoth, which recent geographical specu-
adopt (see Tischendorf, in loc.) it can scarcely be doubted that (6) is the correct
interpretation (so Origen and Euthym.), and that our Lord's ministry is to be
understood to have commenced when he was more than thirty, but less than
thirty-one years of age. For arguments (not very strong) in favor of u)trel imply
ing, not somewhat above, but somewhat under, the time specified, see Greswell,
Dissert, xi. Vol. i. p. 368.
1 When our Lord returned to Galilee after the Temptation, it would seem that
for the short time that preceded the pa6sover He did not stay at Nazareth, but at
Capernaum. See John ii. 12. On His next return to Galilee (December, A. u. 0.
781), He appears to have gone to and perhaps stayed at Cana (John iv. 46), a
place to which some writers have supposed that the Virgin and her kindred had
previously retired. See Ewald, Gesch. Clvristus, Vol. v. p. 147. Under any circum
stances we have only a short period remaining before the final removal to Caper
naum, specified Matt. iv. 13, Luke iv. 31.
2 The conclusion at which Wieseler arrives after a careful consideration of all
the historical data that tend to fix the time of our Lord's baptism, is as follows :
Jesus must have been baptized by John not earlier than February, 780 A. u. c.
(the extreme "terminus a quo " supplied by St. Luke), nor later than the winter
of the same year (the extreme " terminus ad quern " supplied by St. John). See
Chron. Synops. n. B. 2, p. 201. Wieseler himself fixes upon the spring or sum
mer of 780 A. u. c. as the exact date (p. 202); but to this period there are two
objections : First, that if, as 6eems reasonable, we agree (with Wieseler) to fix
the deputation to the Baptist (John i. 19 sq.) about the close of February, 781
A. u. c, we shall have a period of eight months, viz. from the middle of 780 to
the end of the second month of 781, wholly unaccounted for (Wieseler, Chron.
Synops. p. 258) ; secondly, that it is almost the unanimous tradition of the early
church that the baptism of our Lord took place in winter, or in the early part of
the year. See the numerous ancient authorities in the useful table of Patritius,
Dissert, xix. Book ntp.276, and comp. .Diss, xlvii. p. 485. The tradition of the
Basilideans, mentioned^ Clement of Alexandria (Strom, i. 21, Vol. i. p. 408, ed.
Pott), that the baptism of our Lord took place on the eleventh or fifteenth of
Tybi (Jan. 6 or 10), deserves consideration, both from the antiquity of the sect,
and from the fact that the baptism of our Lord was in their system an epoch of
the highest importance. See Neander, Church Hist. Vol. ii. p. 102 (Clark). The
ordinary objections founded on the season of the year are well and, as it would
seem, convincingly answered by Greswell, Dissert, xi. Vol. i. p. 371 (ed. 2).
s The harvest in Palestine ripens at different times in different localities ; but
as a general rule the barley harvest may be considered as taking place from the
middle to the close of April, and the wheat harvest about a fortnight later. See
Robinson, Palestine, Vol. i. p. 431 (ed. 2), and compare Stanley, Palestine, p.
240, note (ed. 2).

108 THE EARLY JUD.fiAN MINISTRY. Lect. HI.
lation1 has connected with the Bethabara or rather
Bethany of St. John, or more probably to the neighbor
hood of that more southern ford not far from Jericho,
round which traditions yet linger,2 and to which the mul
titudes that flocked to the Baptist from
Judaea and Jerusalem would have found a
speedier and more convenient access. There the great
Forerunner was baptizing; there he had been but just
uttering those words of stern warning to the
Lukeiu.7. mingled multitude, to Pharisee and to Sad-
Matt.m.7. ducee,3 which are recorded by the first and
third Evangelists; there stood around him
men with musing hearts, doubting whether that bold
speaker were the Christ or no, when suddenly,
unknown and unrecognized, the very Mes
siah mingles with those strangely-assorted and expectant
multitudes, and with them seeks baptism at the hands of
the great Preacher of the desert.
It has been doubted whether that lonely
jo^i's'"'recognfittak child of the wilderness at once recognized the
of our Lord. Holjr 0ne that wag now meekly standing be
fore him. It is, at any rate, certain, from his own words,

1 See Stanley, Palestine, p. 308, who both pleads for the reading Bethabara,
and for the more northern position of the scene of the baptism. With regard to
the reading, at any rate, there can be no reasonable doubt. All the ancient
authorities and nearly all the MSS. in the time of Origen (trx^Sbv itdvra ra
avrlypatba ) adopt the reading Bethany ; nor would Bethabara have ever found a
place in the sacred text, if Origen, moved by geographical considerations, had
not given sanction to the change. See Lilcke, Comment, uber Joh. i. 28, and the
critical notes of Tischendorf, in loc.
2 The traditional sites adopted by the Latin and Greek churches are not the
same, but both not far from Jericho. The bathing-place of the Latin pilgrims is
not far from the ruined convent of St. John the Baptist, that of the Greek pil
grims two or three miles below it. See Robinson, Palestine, Vol. i. p. 536. The
objection to the latter, and possibly to the former place, is the steepness of the
banks (see Thomson, The Land and the Book, Vol. ii. p. 445), but this cannot be
strongly pressed, as at the assumed time of year (when, as we learn from Robin
son [Vol. i. p. 541], the river has not yet been seen by travellers) partial or
local overflows might have given greater facilities for the performance of the
ceremony. See Greswell, Dissert, xix. Vol. ii. p. 184. See, however, Thomson,
The Land and the Book, Vol. ii. p. 452 sq.
8 See above, p. 104, note 3."

Lect. m. THE EARLY JUIX&AN MINISTRY. 109
that his knowledge of our Lord as the Messiah was not due
to a previous acquaintance,1 and it is also quite possible
that he might not have known his Redeemer even by out
ward appearance. But if he knew him not by the seeing
of the eye, he must have known of Him by the hearing of
the ear, and he must have felt within his soul, as the Lord
drew nigh, a sudden and mystic intimation that he was gaz
ing on Him of whose wondrous birth his own mother's lips
must oft have told him, and on whose future destinies he
might often have mused with a profound and all but con
sciously-prophetic interest.3 With strange memories in his
thoughts, and perhaps now still stranger presentiments
in his heart, the Baptist pleads against such
an inverted relation as the Son of Mary seek
ing baptism from the son of Elisabeth. He
pleads; but he pleads in vain. Overper-
suaded and awed by the solemn words which he might not

i This view, which is substantially that taken by the older commentators, has
been well defended by Dr. Mill, against the popular sceptical objections. See Obss.
on Pantheistic Principles, n. 1. 5, p. 79 sq. We certainly seem to gather from
the language of St. Matthew that the Baptist recognized our Lord, if not dis
tinctly as the Messiah, yet in a degree closely approaching to it, before the bap
tism, — for otherwise how are we to understand the language of Matt. iii. 14?
See especially Chrysost. in Joann. Horn. xvi. Whether this was due to a short
unrecorded-conversation (Mill), or, as suggested in the text, to special revelation
(ovk air' hv&poaTtlvns tpiKias %v avt-n [t) iiaprvpla], a\\' e| aTtoKaKviptiws,
Ammonius. ap. Cramer, Caten. in loc), cannot be decided. The facts at any
rate, as specified by the two Evangelists, are perfectly compatible with each
other ; on the one hand, St. John did recognize our Lord, just before the bap
tism (Matt. I. c); on the other hand, he himself declares \ John I. c.) that his per
sonal acquaintance, if such existed, was not in any degree concerned in his
subsequent complete recognition of Him as the Christ, the Son of God. So
rightly De Wette, on John, I. c, and similarly Huxtable, Ministry of St. John,
p. 60.
2 It has been well observed by Mill, that "the designation to which he bore
testimony unconsciously in the womb, and which his mother, with entire con
sciousness of its meaning, expressed reverently to the Virgin Mother of her
Lord, cannot have been kept secret from his earliest years; and however the
memory of the wonderful facts in question might fade, as would naturally be
the case, from the minds of many that heard them, .... the tradition of them
could not possibly thus pass away from him. Nor would his solitary life in the
desert, apart from his kindred, as from mankind in general, tend to impair the
recollection, but to strengthen it." — Observations on Panth. Principles, n. 1. 5,
p. 80. 10

110 THE EARLY JDD^iAN MINISTRY. Lect. in.
have fully understood, the Forerunner descends with his
Redeemer into the rapid waters of the now sacred river;
when lo, when the inaugural rite is done, the promised
sign at length appears, the Baptist beholds the opened
heavens, and the embodied form1 of the de-
Luke ia. 22. SOending Spirit ; he sees, perhaps, the kindled
fire, apt symbol of the Redeemer's baptism, of which an
old writer has made mention ;2 he hears the
Matt.m.16. Father's voice of blessing and love; he sees
and hears, and, as he himself tells us, bears
witness that this is verily the Son of God.
And now all righteousness has been fulfilled. Borne .
away, as it would seem at once, by the motions
ou^LoTd^trZ °f tne Spirit, either to that lonely and unex-
natweandcircum- piore(j chain of desert mountains of which
stances. Nebo has been thought to form a part, or to
that steep rock on this side of the Jordan
Marki. IS. r
which tradition still points out ; 3 there, amid
the wild beasts of the thickets and the caverns, in hunger

l The following is the ancient tradition referred to : "And then when Jesus came
to the river Jordan, where John was baptizing, and descended to the water, a
fire was kindled over the Jordan." — Justin Martyr, Trypho, cap. 88, Vol. ii. p.
302 (ed. Otto). So also, somewhat similarly, Epiphanius, Hatr. xxx. 13, and the
writer of a treatise, de Baptismo Hozreticorum, prefixed to the works of Cyprian
(p. 30, ed. Oxon.), who alludes to the tradition as mentioned in the apocryphal
and heretical Pauli Prmdicatio. Something like it has been noticed in the
Oracula Sibylla; (vii. 83) in Galland. Bibl. Vet. Patr. Vol. i. p. 387 0.
2 The distinct language of St. Luke, o-aifiaTiKip efiSei tbael irepusrspdv (ch. iii.
22), must certainly preclude our accepting any explanatory gloss, referring the
holy phenomenon to light shining " with the rapid and undulating motion of a
dove " (Milman, Hist, of Christianity, i. 3, Vol. i. p. 151). The form was real
For the opinions of antiquity on the manifestation of the Holy Ghost in this
peculiar form, see the learned work of the eloquent Jesuit, Barradius, Comment.
in Harmon. 1. 15, Vol. ii. p. 48 (Antw. 1617).
3 The place which the most current tradition has fixed on as the site of the
Temptation is the mountain Quarantana, which Robinson describes as "an
almost perpendicular wall of rock, twelve or fifteen hundred feet above the
plain." — Palestine, Vol. i. p. 567 (ed. 2). Compare Thomson, The Landand the
Book, Vol. ii. p. 450. It has been asserted by Robinson that this tradition does
not appear to be older than the time of the Crusades, but see Mill, Sermons on
the Temptation, p. 166. The supposition in the text seems better to accord with
the probable locality assigned to the baptism, but must be regarded as purely
conjectural.

Lect. HI. THE EARLY JUD^iAN MINISTRY. IU
and loneliness, the now inaugurated Messiah confronts in
spiritual conflict the fearful adversary of His kingdom and
of that race which He came to save. On the deep secrets
of those mysterious forty days it is not meet that specula
tion should dwell. If we had only the narrative of St.
Matthew, we might think that Satanic temp
tation only presumed to assail the Holy One
when hunger had weakened the energies of the now
exhausted body. If, again, we had only the gospels of St.
Mark and St. Luke, we might be led to con- a,.i.is.
elude that the struggle with the powers of ch.iv.2.
darkness extended over the whole period of that length
ened fast. From both, however, combined, we may perhaps
venture to conclude that those three concentrated forms
of Satanic daring, which two Evangelists have been moved
to record, presented themselves only at the close of that
season of mysterious trial.1 Upon the three forms of
temptation, and their attendant circumstances, my limits
will not permit me to enlarge. These three remarks only
will I presume to make. First, I will ven
ture to avow my most solemn conviction that J^n"^^.m
the events here related belong to no trance
or dream-land to which, alas, even some better forms
of both ancient and modern speculation have presumed
to refer them,2 but are to be accepted as real and literal
1 So perhaps Origen, who remarks: " Quadraginta diebus tentatur Jesus, et
qua? fuerint tentamenta nescimus." — Comment, in Luc Horn. xxix. Vol. iii. p.
966 (ed. Bened.). Most of the patristic commentators seem to consider that
the hours of hunger and bodily weakness were especially chosen by the Evil
One for his most daring and malignant forms of temptation. See Chrysostom
in Matt. iv. 2, Cyril Alex, on Luke iv. 3, and compare the excellent remarks of
Irenaeus, Bar. v. 21.
2 The opinion that, if not the whole, yet that the concluding scenes of the
temptation were of the character of a vision, was apparently entertained by Ori
gen (de Princip. rv. 16, Vol. i. p. 175, ed. Bened.), Theodore of Mopsuestia
(Miinter, Fragm. Patrum, Fasc. i. p. 107), and the author of a treatise, de Jejunio
et Tentat. Christi, annexed to the works of Cyprian (p. 36, Oxon, 1682). This
view in a more extended application has been adopted by many modern writers,
both English (Farmer, on Christ's Temptation, ed. 3, Lond. 1776) and foreign, but
it need scarcely be said that all such opinions, — whether the Temptation be sup
posed a vision especially called up, or a mere significant dream (see Meyer in Stud.

112 THE EARLY .THD A3 A 1ST MINISTRY. Lect. IH.
occurrences, — yea, as real and as literal as that final over
throw of Satan's power on Calvary, when the Lord reft
away from him all the thronging hosts of darkness,1 and
triumphed over them on His very cross of suffering.
Secondly, I could as soon doubt my own
m cL^aT'jroZ. existence as doubt the completely outward
"''""""• nature of these forms of temptation,2 and
their immediate connection with the personal agency of the
personal Prince of Darkness.8 I could as soon accept
the worst statements of the most degraded form of Arian
creed as believe that this temptation arose from any inter-
u. Krit. for 1831, p. 319 sq.), — clearly come into serious collision with the simple
yet circumstantial narrative of the first and third Evangelists; in which, not
only is there not the faintest hint that could render such an opinionin 'any degree
plausible, but, on the contrary, expressions almost studiously chosen (avhx^Vy
Matt. iv. 1 ; tfyero, Luke iv. 1. Comp. Mark i. 12, eK&d/\ket ; irpoae?&6v, Matt.
iv. 3; Trapa\afj,ftdv€ii ver. 5; avayay&v, Luke iv. 5; cwretrnj, ver. 13) to mark
the complete objective character of the whole. See, thus far, Fritzsche, Fritzs-
chior. Opusc. p. 122 sq., and Meyer, Komment. uber Matt. p. 114 sq., though in
their general estimate of the whole, the conclusions of both these writers are
distinctly to be rejected. For further notices and references on a subject, the
literature of which is perplexingly copious, the student may be referred, perhaps,
especially to Andrewes, Sermons (vii.) on the Temptation, Vol. v. p. 479 sq. (A.-C.
Libr.), Hacket, Sermons (xxi.) on the Temptation, p. 205 sq. (Lond. 1671), Span
heim, Bub. Evang. li. — lxv. Part u. p. 195 sq., Deyling, Obs. Sacr. xvii. Part
ii. p. 354, and Huxtable, The Temptation of our Lord {Lond. 1848), and for prac
tical comments on the circumstances and moral intention of the whole, Leo M.
Serm. xxxix. — l. Vol. i. p. 143 (ed. Ballerin.), Jones (of Nayland), Works, Vol.
iii. p. 157 sq.
l For a discussion on the meaning of anreKhvadixevos in the difficult text here
referred to (Col. ii. 15), and for a further elucidation of the view here taken, see
Commentary on Coloss. p. 161 sq.
2 One of the popular modes of evading the supposed difficulties in this holy
narrative is to assume that the whole series of temptations were really internal,
but represented in the description as external. See, for example, Ulmann, die
Unsundlichkeit Jesu, Sect. 7, p. 55 (Transl.). Most of such views arise either
from erroneous conceptions in respect of the mysterious question of our Lord's
capability of temptation, or from tacit denials of the existence or personal
agencies of malignant spirits. On the first of these points, see especially Mill,
Serm. n. pp. 26—39, and on the second, Serm. in. p. 54 sq. Some valuable
remarks on these and other questions connected with our Lord's Temptation
will be found in the curious and learned work of Meyer, Historia Diaboli, in.
6, p. 271 sq. (Tubing. 1780).
3 The monstrous opinion that the Tempter was human, and either the high-
priest or one of the Sanhedrin (comp. Feilmoser, Tubing. Quartalschrift for
1828) is noticed, but not condemned in the terms which so plain a perversion
deserves, by Milman, Hist, of Christianity, i. 3, Vol. i. p. 153.

Lect. III. THE EARLY JTJDiEAN MINISTRY. 113
nal stragglings or solicitations;1 I could as soon admit
the most repulsive tenet of a dreary Socinianism as deem
that it was enhanced by any self-engendered
enticements, or hold that it was aught else
than the assault of a desperate and demoniacal malice
from without,2 that recognized in the nature of man a pos
sibility of falling, and that thus far consistently, though
impiously, dared even in the person of the Son of Man to
make proof of its hitherto resistless energies.
Thirdly, I cannot think it an idle speculation addras^Tto"'^
that connects the three forms of temptation ^f™* of °"r
with those that brought sin into the world, s
• — the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eye, and the
pride of life ; nor can I deem it unnatural to
see in them three spiritual assaults directed
against the three portions of our composite nature.4 To
the body is presented the temptation of satisfying its wants
1 Such conceptions and suppositious, alas, only too often in this humanitarian
age secretly entertained, if not always outwardly expressed, are justly censured
by Dr. Mill (Serm. II. p. 38) as degrading and blasphemous. In all speculations
on this mysterious subject the student will do well to bear in mind this admirable
statement of Augustine : " Non dicimus nos Christum, felicitate carnis a nostris
sensibus sequestratas, cupidtiatem vitiorum sentire non potuisse, sed dicimus,
eum perfectione virtutis, et non per carnis concupiscentiam procreata came,
cupiditatem non habuisse vitiorum," — Op. Imperf. contr. Jul. IV. 48, Vol. x. p.
1366 (ed. Migne), — this great writer's last and unfinished work. In estimating
the nature of our Lord's tentability let us never forget the holiness of His
humanity, and the eternal truth of His miraculous conception.
2 On the question as to the form in which the Adversary appeared, whether
human or angelical (comp. Taylor, Life of Christ, i. 9. 7, Lange, Leben Jesu, n.
3. 6, Vol. ii. p. 217), all speculation is as unnecessary as it is more or less pre
sumptuous. All that we must firmly adhere to is the belief that the presence of
the Evil One "was real, and that it was external to our Lord." — Huxtable,
Temptation of the Lord, p. 78. Compare Mill, Serm. in. p. 64.
3 This is touched upon by Augustine (Enarr. in Psalm, vm. 14. Vol. iv. p.
116, ed. Migne) and others of the earlier writers, but nowhere more clearly and
convincingly stated than by Jackson, Creed, viii. 10, Vol. vii. p. 450 6q. See
also Andrewes, Serm. ii. Vol. v. p. 496 (A.-C. Libr.), Mill, Serm. in. p. 60.
4 For a discussion on the threefold nature of man, and a distinction between
the terms sou! and spirit, see The Destiny of the Creature, Serm. V. p. 99, and the
works there referred to (p. 167). The opinion of Mill that the seat of the second
temptation was " our higher mental nature " (p. 60), and of the third, the " high
est self-consciousness, by which man becomes to himself the centre of regard "
(ib.), is scarcely so simple or so exact as the reference to soul and spirit adopted
in the text. 10*

114 THE EARLY JUD^iAN MINISTRY. Lect. HI.
by a display of power which would have tacitly abjured
its dependence on the Father, and its perfect submission to
His heavenly will. To the soul, the longing, appetitive
soul1 (for I follow the order of St. Luke) was addressed
the temptation of Messianic dominion * (mere material
dominion would seem by no means so probable) over all
the kingdoms of the world, and of accomplishing in a
moment of time all for which the incense of the one sacri
fice on Calvary is still rising up on the altar of God. To
the spirit3 of our Redeemer, with even more frightful pre
sumption, was addressed the temptation of using that
power which belonged to Him as God to vindicate His
own eternal nature, and to display by one dazzling miracle
the true relation in which Jesus of Nazareth stood to men,
and to angels, and to God.4

1 This we may roughly define with Olshausen as " vis inferior [in homine] quae
agitur, movetur, in imperio tenetur" (Opusc p. 154), and may in many respects
regard as practically identical with KapSia, — the soul's imaginary seat and
abidingplace. See Comment, on Phil. iv. 6, Destiny of Creature, v. p. 117, and
Beck, Seelenlehre, in. 20, p. 63. On the order of the temptations, compare Gres
well, Dissert, xx. Vol. ii. p. 192, Mill, Serm. iv. p. 82 sq.
2 See Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 3. 6, Part n. p. 225, and compare Huxtable,
Temptation of the Lord, p. 87 sq. If with Dr. Mill we refer it to worldly
dominion generally (Serm. iv. p. 105), we must, with the same learned author,
suppose that Satan really did not fully know the exact nature of Him whom he
impiously dared to tempt (p. 63. Comp. Cyril Alex, on Luke iv. 3); a view,
however, which does not seem fully consistent with the opening address of the
Tempter. 3 This third and highest part in man we may again roughly define with Ols
hausen (compare note 1) as " vis superior, agens, imperans in homine " ( Opusc.
p. 154), and may rightly regard as in many respects identical with vovs. See
Comment, on Phil. iv. 6, Destiny of Creature, V. p. 115, and Delitzsch, Bibl.
Psychol, iv. p. 145.
* The third form of temptation, that of spiritual presumption, has been thus
well paraphrased by Dr. Mill : " Give to the assembled multitudes the surest
proof that thou art indeed their expected King, — the Desire of them and of all
nations, — at whose coming the Lord shall shake the heavens and the earth, and
make this house more glorious than the mysterious Shekinah made the first." —
Serm. p. 118. The exact spot {to irrepvytov rov Upov, Matt. iv. 5) which was
the scene of this temptation is not perfectly certain. The most probable opinion
is that it was the topmost ridge of the trroa 0aot\mii on the south side of the
temple (observe that in both evangelists it is rb trrepvytov rov I e pov, not
too yaov),the height of which is thus alluded to by Josephus: "If any one
looked down from the top of the battlements, or down both those altitudes, he
would be giddy, while his sight could not reach to such an immense depth."—

Lect. III. THE EARLY JTJDJSAN MINISTRY. 115
When every form of temptation was ended, the baffled
Tempter -departs, but, as St. Luke reminds
. The ministering
us, only for a season ; and straightway those angeu, and ae re-
,, -, ... , ... , p turn to Galilee.
blessed spirits, whose ministry but a lew mo- ra ft, 13
ments before the Devil had tempted Him to
command, now tender to their Lord's weakened humanity
their lovinsc and unbidden services.1 Sus-
. ... -r Ver. 11.
tained by these angelical ministries, our Lord
would seem at once to have returned backward to the
valley of the Jordan in his homeward way to Galilee, and
after a, few days — for here to assume, with a recent chro-
nologer, a lapse of several months,2 is in the highest degree
unnatural — to have had that second and noticeable inter
view with the Baptist at Bethany, or Betha
bara, which is recorded to us by St. John.
It was but the day before that the Fore- The testimony of
runner had borne his testimony to the dep- ihe ^"'19
utation of Priests and Levites that had come
to him from Jerusalem ; 3 and now, absorbed, as he well

Antiq. xv. n. 5 (Whiston). This, however, could scarcely be so clearly in the
sight of "the assembled multitudes" (Mill), — if indeed this be a necessary
adjunct, — as at other sites that have been proposed. See Middleton, Greek Art.
p. 135 (ed. Rose), and Meyer, Komment. ub. Matt. iv. 5, p. 110.
1 The nature of the services of these blessed spirits, owing to the use of the
general term StnKovovv (Matt. iv. 11), cannot be more exactly specified. If we
admit conjectures we may venture to believe that they came to supply sustenance
(" alia to cibo," Beng. ; comp. 1 Kings xix.), and possibly also to administer sup'
port and comfort ("ad solatium refero," Calv.; comp. Luke xxii. 43). See
Hacket, Serm. xxi. p. 406 (Lond. 1675).
2 See Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 258, and compare the remarks on the chro
nology of this period made above, p. 107, note 2.
3 This deputation, we are informed by the Evangelist, was sent by the 'lovSatot,
— a general name by which St. John nearly always designates the Jews in their
peculiar aspect as a hostile community to our Lord, and as standing in marked
contrast to the impressible vx^os. The more special and direct senders of this
deputation of Priests and their attendant Levites (John i. 19) were perhaps the
members of the Sanhedrin, by whom these emissaries might have been directed
to inquire into and test the Baptist's pretensions as a public teacher (comp. Matt.
xxi. 23), and to gain some accurate information about one who was drawing all
Jerusalem and Judsea to his baptism (Matt. iii. 5), aud in whom some even
deemed that they recognized the expected Messiah (Luke iii. 15). On the mes
sage generally, see Lange, Leben Jesu, II. 4. 1, Part n. p. 451, Lucke, Comment.
uber Joh. Vol. i . p. 381 ; and on the particular questions propounded to the Bap-

116 THE EARLY JTJDAiN MINISTRY. Lect. IH.
might have been, in the thoughts of Him to whom he had
so recently borne witness, he raises his eyes,
and lo! he sees coming to him the very sub
ject of his meditations ; he sees his Redeemer,1 and humbly
greets Him " as the Lamb of God that tak
eth away the sin of the world." With the
same significant words2 the Baptist parts from Him on
the morrow, — words that sank so deep into
Ver. 35. the hearts of two of his disciples, Andrew,
and not improbably the Evangelist who gives the account,
that . they follow the Lord, and abide with
Ver. 40. Him, to return back again no more. On the
morrow, with Simon Peter and Philip of Bethsaida, and
tist, Origen, in loc. Vol. iv. p. 108 (ed. Bened.), Greg. Magn. in Evang. i. 7, Vol.
i. p. 1456 (ed. Bened.).
1 The circumstances that led to this meeting are wholly unknown to us. That
it took place after our Lord's baptism seems certain; and that the preceding
interview with the Priests and Levite's also took place after the same event seems
to follow from the words " whom ye (fyueis) know not" (ver. 26), — an expres
sion which may be fairlyj-urged as implying by contrast some knowledge on the
part of the speaker. Now, as we learn from St. Mark (ch. i. 12) that the Tempta
tion followed immediately after the Baptism, we may perhaps reasonably believe
that our Lord was now on His homeward way to Galilee after the Temptation
(comp. August, de Consens. Evang. n. 17), and that He either specially went a
little out of His way again to see and greet the Baptist, or that the direction of
His journey homeward led Him past the scene of the previous baptism, where
John was still preaching and baptizing. If we fix the site of the Temptation at
Quarantana, the former supposition will seem most probable, if the mountains
of Moab (see above, p. 110, note 3), the latter. The deputation from the Sanhe
drin and the close of the Temptation would thus appear to have been closely
contemporaneous. See Liicke on John i. 19, Vol. i. p. 398, and compare Lampe
in loc, and Luthardt, Joh. Evang. Vol. i. p. 329.
2 Into the exact meaning of these words we will not here enter further than
to remark, (a) that the reference seems clearly not to the Paschal Lamb (Lampe,
Luthardt, al.), a reference sufficiently appropriate afterwards (1 Cor. v. 7), though
not now, but to Isaiah liii. 7 (Origen vi. 35), a passage which, to one so earnestly
expecting the Messiah as the holy Baptist, must have long been well-known and
familiar; (6) that the meaning of atpetv has nowhere been better expressed than
by Chrysostom, who in referring to a former part of the same prophecy (Isaiah
xxiii. 4) says: "He did not use the expression, 'He ransomed' (%\vo-ev), but
'He received and bare' (eKafiev nal i&dtTTutrev)', which seems to me to have
been spoken by the prophet rather in reference to sins, in accordance with the
declaration of John, ' Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the
world.' " Horn, in Matt. xvii. 1, Vol. vii. p. 370 (ed. Bened. 2). For further
information on both these points consult the elaborate notes of Liicke, in loc. VoL
j. p. 404 sq.

Lect. IH. THE EARLY JUDSEAN MINISTRY. 117
Nathanael of Cana added to the small company,1 the Lord
directs His steps onward towards the hills
r . Ver. U, 45.
of Galilee, perchance by the very path which
he had traversed in solitude a few eventful weeks before.
The immediate destination of that small company was
doubtless the Lord's earthly home at Naza-
* The journey to,
reth ; 2 but there, as we learn from the Evan- and miracle at,
, Cana in Galilee.
gehst, the Lord could not have tound the
blessed Virgin, as she was now a few miles off at Cana,'
the guest at a marriage festival. How natural then was it
that the Lord, with his five disciples, one of
* John axri. 2.
whom belonged to Cana, should at once pass
onward to that village, to greet her from whom He had
been separated several weeks. And how consistent is the
narrative that tells us that on the third day ch.u.i.
after leaving Bethany the Lord and His fol
lowers had become the invited and welcome ' ' "
guests of those with whom the Virgin was now abiding.
With the details of the great miracle
... ... . T -. , -, Remarks on the
which on this occasion our Lord was pleased miracle.
to perform, we are all, I trust, too familiarly
acquainted to need any lengthened narrative.4 We may,

l We can scarcely agree with Greswell (Dissert, xxiii. Vol. p. 284 sq.) in the
inference that the two disciples did not now permanently attach themselves to
our Lord. The express terms of the call given the next day to Philip, "follow
me " (ver. 44), and tyie certain fact that some disciples were with our Lord the
day following (John ii. 2), seem strongly in favor of the opinion that all the five
disciples here mentioned did formally attach themselves to our Lord, and went
with Him into Galilee. See Maldonatus on John i. 43 and ii. 2. The miracle that
followed had special reference to these newly-attracted followers. See John ii.
11, and compare Luthardt, Johann. Evang, Vol. i. p. 351.
2 Unless we accept the not very probable supposition alluded to p. 107, note 1.
3 On the position of Cana, which now appears rightly fixed, not at Kefr Kenna
(De Saulcy, Voyage, Vol. ii. p. 448), but at K&na el-Jelil, about three hours dis
tant from Nazareth. See Robinson, Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 346 sq., Vol. iii. p. 108
(ed. 2), and Thomson, Land and the Book, Vol. ii. p. 121 sq.
4 For details and explanatory remarks the student may be especially referred
to the commentaries of Maldonatus, Liicke, and Meyer, to the exquisite contem
plation of Bp. Hall, Book n. 5, to Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 96 sq., and
to the comments of Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 4. 4, Part n. p. 475. The supposed
typical relations are alluded to in a somewhat striking sermon of Bp. Copleston,

118 THE EARLY JTJD^IAN MINISTRY. Lest. HI.
however, somewhat profitably pause on one portion of
it, the address of the Virgin to our Lord, and the an
swer He returned, which has been thought to involve
some passing difficulties, but which a consideration of the
previous circumstances, combined with a due recognition
of Jewish customs, tends greatly to elucidate. In the
first place let us not forget, — if we may place any reliance
upon modern customs as illustrative of ancient,1 — that
the fact of guests adding contributions to an entertainment
which extended over several days is by no means singular
or unprecedented. With this let us combine the remem
brance that the Lord and His five disciples had, as it
would appear, come unexpectedly,2 a few hours only before
the commencement of the marriage feast. In the next
place let us reflect how more than natural it would be for
these disciples — two of whom, as we are
John i. 37. . , _,
specially told by the Evangelist, had heard
the significant announcement of the Baptist, " Behold the
Bemains, p. 256. Compare with it Augustine, in Joann. Tractat. ix. 5, Vol. iii.
p. 146 (ed. Migne), where very similar views will also be found.
1 The writer of this note was lately informed by a converted Jew on whom
reliance could be placed, that it was not at all uncommon for the guests at a
wedding-feast to make contributions of wine when there seemed likely to be a
deficiency, and that such cases had fallen under his own observation. Be this
as it may, it seems at any rate clear that the marriage-feasts usually lasted as
long as seven days (Judges xiv. 12, 15 ; Tobit xi. 10), and it is surely not unrea
sonable to suppose that in the present case the givers of the feast were of humble
fortunes (Lightfoot conjectures it to have been at the house of Mary, the wife of
Cleophas. Compare Greswell, Dissert, xvii. Vol. ii. p. 120), and, as Bp. Taylor
quaintly says, " had more company than wine." — Life of Christ, ii. 10. 5. For
further notices and references, see Winer, BWB. Art. " Hochzeit," Vol. i. p.
499 sq.
2 The only statement that might seem indirectly to militate against this is the
comment of St. John, iKh-fi&y Se koI b 'Itjo-ovs Kal ol p.a&r]Tcd avrov els yd/iov,
ch. ii. 2. If, however, we date the " third day " (ver. 1), as seems most natural,
from the day last-mentioned (ch. i. 44), and estimate the distance from Bethany
on the Jordan to Cana, our Lord could scarcely have arrived at the last-men
tioned place till the very day specified. Compare Wieseler, Chron. Synops. II. 3,
p. 253. The ^/cMjSbj then must be referred to the time when our Lord and His
followers arrived, and its introduction accounted for, as slightly distinguishing
the newly-arrived and just-invited guests from the Virgin, who had been there
perhaps for some little time. Comp. Meyer in loc, and Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 4.
4, Part n. p. 476, whose date, however, for the tj? -lifiepa, tij rpirn does not seem
tenable.

Lect. IH. THE EARLY JUDiEAN MINISTRY. 119
Lamb of God," and another of whom had recognized in
our Lord the very One whom prophets had
foretold — to have already made such com- '^
munications to the Virgin1 as might well
lead her to expect some display of our Lord's changed
position and relations. He who a few weeks before had
left Galilee the unnoted son of Joseph the carpenter,
now returns, with five followers, the more than accredited
teacher, yea, as one of those followers had not hesitated
to avow, as the Son of God2 and the King
of Israel. Wrought upon by these strange •»*»<¦«»¦
tidings, and with all the long treasured re-
f ,., ,. . . , , Lukeii. 19.
membrances of her meditative heart brought
up freshly before her,3 how natural, then, becomes that

l Though we are not positively constrained by the tenor of the narrative to
fix the miracle on the very day that our Lord arrived (comp. Wordsw. and
Liicke in loc), it must be admitted that on the whole such an adjustment
seems slightly the most probable. Compare ver. 10, in which the remarks of the
apxitplicMvos seem, to have reference to a single festal meal, the beginning and
end of which it contrasts. Even in this case, however, the disciples could easily
have had time to communicate to the Virgin enough of what they had heard,
felt, and observed in reference to their venerated Master to arouse hopes and
expectations in the mother's heart. Compare Theophyl. and Euthym. in loc,
both of whom, however, slightly over-estimate the Virgin's knowledge of what"
had recently happened.
2 Most modern, and some ancient expositors, explain away the title here given
by Nathanael to our Lord as implying no more than " the Messiah," or, to use
the language of Theophylact, one who " on account of His virtue was adopted
as the Son of God " (vlo&pniSrivTa rtp 0e(jj). Perhaps the further title assigned
by Nathanael, and still more our Lord's reply (ver. 51) may seem partly to favor
this view. It will be well, however, not to forget that this assertion was made
by Nathanael after our Lord had evinced a knowledge above that of man (ver.
48), which might well have awakened in the breast of that guileless Israelite some
feeling of the true nature of Him who was now speaking with him. So rightly,
Cyril. Alex, in loc., and Augustine, in Joann. Tract. VII. 20, 21.
3 Though we certainly must not adopt the rash and indeed anti-scriptural
view (comp. John ii. 11) spoken approvingly of by Maldonatus, and even par
tially adopted by Liicke (p. 470), that the Virgin had previously witnessed mir
acles performed by our Lord in private, we may yet with reason believe that she
ever retained a partial consciousness of the real nature of her Divine Son, and
that the mysterious past was ever freshly remembered, when the present served
in any way to call it up again : irdvra. avver-fipet iv ry KapSia avrris, ttal itc
tovtqiv iKoyl^ero rbv vlbv virep &v&punrov Svvatr&at. Theophylact in loc. (p.
584, Paris, 1631), — but with too definite a reference to an expected special
bav/MTovpyia. See below, page 120, note 2.

120 THE EARLY JUD-fiAN MINISTRY. Lect. in.
significant comment of the Virgin, "they have no wine,"
— a comment that may have alike implied that the free
hand of unexpected guests might supply a want in part
occasioned by them 1 (for this the order to the servants
may fully justify us attributing to the Virgin), and also
may have dimly expressed the hope that the Holy Jesus
would use these circumstances of partial publicity for the
sake of revealing His true character to the assembled
guests.2 Under these assumptions how full of meaning
does the Lord's answer now appear. How solemnly yet
how tenderly He reminds the mother that earthly rela
tions must now give place to heavenly,3 and that the
1 The comments of Luthardt on this exquisitely natural and strikingly char
acteristic remark of the Virgin-mother deserve here to be quoted. "It is a
delicate trait," says this thoughtful writer, " that she does no more than call
her Son's attention to the deficiency. She feels such confidence in Him, yea,
and such reverence towards Him, that she believes that she neither need nor
ought to say anything further. Of His benevolent nature she has already had
many an experience; and that He is full of wisdom, and can find ways and
means, where others mark them not, she knows full well. More, however, was
not necessary, — especially where there was this in addition, that the presence of
Jesus and His followers had helped to cause the deficiency, — than with humility
to direct His attention to it." — Das. Johann. Evang. Vol. i. p. 115. We may
here pause for a moment to advert to the number of the waterpots. Lightfoot
(Hor. Hebr. in loc) simply considers the wants of the " multitude jam praesens,"
and probably rightly ; it is, however, worth a passing consideration whether it
depended in any way on the six newly arrived guests.
2 This would seem to be a correct estimate of the exact state of feeling in the
mother's heart. As Bp. Hall well says, "she had good reason to know the
Divine nature and power of her son " ( Contempt, n. 5) : she felt that He could
display a more than mortal power, and she now longed that He would give
proof of it. We thus avoid on the one hand the over-statement of the earlier
commentators, that this was a definite exhortation to perform a miracle (els to
3 a.v/j.a irporpeiru, Cyril) ; and on the other we avoid the serious under-state-
ment of many modern writers (Luthardt even partly included), that it was a
request referring merely to assistance to be given in some natural way, — how,
the speaker knew not. See, for example, Meyer in loc, who states this latter
view in a very objectionable form.
3 It has been remarked by Luthardt (loc. cit.), and before him by Bp. Hall
(Contempt. I. c), that in His answer our Lord here addresses the Virgin nsyvvai
(ver. 4), and not f^rep, — a term which, though marking all respect, and subse
quently used by our Lord in a last display of tenderness and love (John xix. 26),
still seems to indicate the now changed relation between the Messiah and Mary
of Nazareth. That our Lord's words contained a tender reproof is certain, and
that it was felt so is probable ; but, as the Virgin's direction to the servants
clearly shows, it could not repress the longings of the mother, or alter the con
victions of the all but conscious Deipara.

Lbct. HI. THE EARLY JTJD^AN MINISTRY. 121
times and seasons in which the Eternal Son is to display
His true nature are not to be hastened, even by the long
ings of maternal love. The Lord's manifestation, however,
takes place, the miracle is performed, and its
immediate effect is to confirm the faith of
the five disciples, who now appear before us as the first
fruits of the ingathering of the Church.
Immediately after the performance of this first miracle
the Lord, with His mother, His brethren,
' ' Brief stay at Ca-
and His disciples, go down to Capernaum,1 a pemaum, and jow-
place, which, as the residence of one of His
followers, but still more as a convenient point for joining
the pilgrim-companies now forming for the paschal journey
to Jerusalem, would at this time be more suitable for a
temporary sojourn than the secluded Nazareth.2 After a
1 The exact site of Capernaum has been much contested. See Robinson, Pal
estine, Vol. iii. p. 348 sq. (ed. 2), where the question is discussed at considerable
length, and the site fixed at Khan Minyeh, a place not far from the shore of the
lake and at the northern extremity of the plain of Gennesareth. Comp. Vol. ii.
p. 403. On the whole, however, the name, ruins, position, and prevailing tradi
tion seem justly to incline us to fix the site at Tell Hfim, a ruin-bestrewed and
slightly elevated spot on a small projecting curve of the shore, about one hour in
distance nearer the head of the lake than Khan Minyeh. See esp. Thomson,
Land and the Book, Vol. i. p. 542 sq., Ritter, Erdkunde, Vol. xv. p. 339, Van de
Velde, Memoir (accompaning map) p. 302, and Williams in Smith's Diet, of
Geogr. s. v. Vol. i. p. 504.
2 This observation seems justified by the fact that the western shores of the
lake of Gennesareth were at that time extremely populous, and scenes of a
bustle and activity of hfe that could be found nowhere else in Palestine, except at
Jerusalem (see Stanley, Palestine, chap. x. p. 370); and further by the fact that
there were at least three routes of considerable importance that led from the
neighborhood of the lake to the south. The traveller of that day might join the
great Egypt and Damascus road, where it passes nearest to the lake (near Khan
Minyeh; see Robinson, Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 405, Van de Velde, Memoir, p. 226),
and leaving it two or three miles W. S.W. of Nain proceed south through Sama
ria; or secondly, he might journey along the lake to Scythopolis (Beisan), and
thence by the ancient Egypt and Midian road to Ginaea (see Winer, RWB. Art .
" Strassen," Vol. ii. p. 539, Van de Velde, Memoir, p. 238), and so onward by the
Jerusalem and Galilee road to Shechem and the south; or thirdly, he might take
the then more frequented but now little known route from the south end of the
lake through Peraea (comp. Van de Velde, Memoir, p. 233, Ritter, Erdkunde
(Paldstina), 1 13, Part xv. p. 1001 sq.), and across the Jordan to Jericho, and so
to Jerusalem. For further information on this somewhat important subject, the
student may be referred to Reland, Palaistina, II. 3, Vol. i. p. 404 (Traject. 1714);
Winer. BWB. (loc. cit.); the various itineraries in Kitter, Erdkunde (Paldstina),
Part xv. ; and the useful list of routes in Van de Velde, Memoir, pp. 183—258.
11

122 THE EARLY JUDiEAN MINISTRY. Lect. III.
stay of but a few days, our Lord and His disciples now
bend their steps to Jerusalem, to celebrate
johnu. 12. the passover>i — t^e first passover of our
Lord's public ministry.
The first act is one of great significance, the expulsion
of the buyers and sellers from the temple, —
The expulsion of * x
the traders fromthe an aet repeated two years afterwards with
Temple. ...
similar circumstances of holy zeal for the
sanctity of His Father's house.2 How strange it is that
the thoughtful Origen should have found any difficulties
in this authoritative act of the Messiah, or should have
deemed incongruous and unsuited to the dignity of his
Master what in the narrative of the Evangelist appears to
be so natural and intelligible.3 If we closely consider the
words of the original, we have presented to us only the
very natural picture of the Redeemer driving out from the
court of the Gentiles the sheep and oxen, that base huck
stering and traffic had brought within the sacred enclosure.
What is there here unseemly, what is there startling, in
finding that the Lord of the Temple not only drives forth

1 It is not mentioned positively that the disciples accompanied our Lord, but it
is certain that they were present at Jerusalem and witnessed the purgation of the
temple. See John ii. 17, where the iuvfiatprio-av is not to be referred to any
future time (Olsh.), but to the period in question. See Meyer in loc, and comp.
Origen, in Joann. Tom. x. 16, Vol. iv. p. 186 (ed. Bened.).
2 That this is not to be identified with the purgation of the temple mentioned
by the Synoptical Evangelists (Matt. xxi. 12 sq., Mark xi. 15 sq., Luke xix. 45
sq.), is the opinion of the patristic writers (see Origen, in Joann. Tom. x. 15,
Chrysost. in Matt. Horn, lxvii. init., and August, de Consensu Evang. n. 67),
and is rightly maintained by the majority of the best recent expositors. See
Meyer in loc, and Ebrard, Ev. Gesch. p. 488.
3 These difficulties are stated very clearly in his Commentary on St. John, Book
x. 16, Vol. iv. p. 185 sq. (ed. Bened.), and yet disposed of by no one better than
himself, when he indicates how actions which in a mere child of man, however
authorized, would have been met with resentment and resistance, were in the
case of our Lord viewed with a startled and perhaps reverential awe, — an awe
due to that rb-Gioripa rod 'Intro v Svvap.ts olov Te 6vros, ore iBov\ero, xal
&v(ibv ix&p&v ava.irr6ii.evov cr/SeVtu, KaX ptvpldStev iSWa x*P'T' rrepiyeveo-^at,
koi \oyurjj.obs &opv$oAvTwv StaffKeSdtrat. loc cit. p. 186. Comp. Jerome, in
Matt. xxi. 15, Vol. vii. p. 166 (ed. Vallars.) See some good comments on this
impressive act in Milman, Hist, cf Christianity, I. 3, Vol. i. p. 164 sq., and a,
quaint but sound, practical sermon by Bp. Lake, Serm. Part iv. p. 122 sq..

Lect. IH. THE EARLY JUD.EAN MINISTRY. 123
the animals,1 but overthrows the tables of so-called sacred
coin, tables of unholy and usurious gains, and, with a
voice and attitude of command, sternly addresses even
the sellera of the offerings of the poor, — offerings such as
His own mother had once presented, — and bids them take
them hence, and make not the house of His Father a house
of Mammon and merchandise ? The half-astonished, half-
assenting bystanders ask for a sign that might justify or
accredit such an assumption of authority, and
a sign is not withheld ; a sign which, though
not understood at the time, appears from subsequent
notices to have made no slight impression on those that
heard it,2 and to have been lovingly remembered and veri
fied when the dissolved Temple of their Master's body was
reared up again on the predicted day.
But not only by this authoritative act, and these words
of mystery, but, as St. John has specially recorded, by the
display of signs and wonders during the celebration of the
1 It seems not improbable that Meyer (in loc.) is right in referring irdvras (ver.
15) to rd Te irp6fiaTa /col robs fl6as, and that the translation should not be " and
the sheep and the oxen " (Auth. Ver.), but, " both the sheep and the oxen," as in
the Revised Transl. of St. John, p. 5. The true force of the Te — koi is thus pre
served (comp. Winer, Gr. § 63. 4, p. 389), and the sacred narrative freed from
one at least of the objections which others beside Origen have felt in the
Saviour's use of the tppayeWiov against the sellers as well as against the animals
they sold. It may be observed that our Lord speaks to the "sellers of doves,"
not perhaps that he regarded them with greater consideration, (De Wette), —
for compare Matt. xxi. 12, Mark xi. 15, — but simply because the animals could
be driven forth, while these latter offerings could only be removed.
2 That these words of our Lord referred to His body, which stood to the
Temple in the relation of type to antitype, is the distinct declaration of the
inspired Evangelist (John ii. 21), and has justly been regarded by all the older
expositors as the only true and possible interpretation of the words. To assert,
then, that the reference was simply to the breaking up of the older form of
religious worship and the substitution of a purer form in its place (Herder,
Liicke, De Wette), is plainly to contradict that Evangelist who was blessed with
the deepest insight into the mind of His divine Master, and further to substitute
what is illogical and inexact for what is clear, simple, and consistent. See esp.
Meyer in loc. (p. 95, ed. 2), who has ably vindicated the authentic interpretation
of the words. See also Stier, Disc of our Lord, Vol. i. p. 72 sq. ; and on the
eternal truth that our Lord did raise Himself, Pearson, Creed, Art. v. Vol. i. p.
302 sq. (ed. Burt.). The futile objection founded on the supposed enigmatical
character of the declaration is well disposed of by Chrysostom, in loc. Vol. viii.
p. 155 x (ed. Bened. 2).

124 THE EARLY JUDAAN MINISTRY. Lect. HL
festival, the deep heart of the people was stirred. Many
believed, and among that many was one of
iy'T^aZ It* the members of the Sanhedrin1 whose name
mtS'ch a 23 *s not unhonored in the Gospel history. He
who at this passover sought the Lord under
cover of night, and to whom the Lord was pleased to un
fold the mystery of the new birth,2 was so blessed by the
regenerating power of the Spirit as to be emboldened at
a later period to plead for the Lord in the open day, and to
do honor to His crucified body. On that
mysterious interview, which probably took
Ch. xix. 39. J 1 r J
The discourse of place towards the end of the paschal week,
°odrJZ?wUhNi°~ * cannot nere enlarge;8 but I may venture
to make one remark to those who desire to
enter more deeply into the meaning of our Lord's words,

l Of this timid yet faithful man nothing certain is known beyond the notices
in St. John's Gospel, here and ch. vii. 50, xix. 39. The title he here bears,
apxoiv ran 'lovSaiav (iii. 1), seems to show that he was a member of the San
hedrin (comp. ch. vii. 26, 50, Luke xxiv. 20; Joseph. Antiq. xx. 1 2); and the
further comment of our Lord (d SiSdffKaKos tou 'Icrpa^A, ver. 10) may favor
the ¦ supposition that he belonged to that portion of the venerable body which
was not of Levitical or priestly descent, but is spoken of in the Gospels under
the title of ypap.fia.Teis rov Kaov. See Knapp, Scripta Var. Argum. Vol. i. p.
200, note ; and comp. Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Matt. ii. 4, Vol. ii. p. 260 (Roterod.
1686). Tradition says that Nicodemus was afterwards baptized by St. Peter and
St. John, and expelled from his office and from the city. See Photius, Biblioth.
i 171. 2 Whether the word ava&ev (ver. 3) is to be taken (a) in a temporal reference,
and translated " anew " with the Vulgate, Fesh.-Syriac, Coptic, and Etbiopic
Versions, and with Chrysostom (who, however, gives the other view) and
Euthymius, or (6) to be taken in a local reference, and translated " from above,"
with the Gothic and Armenian Versions, and with Origen and Cyril, it is very
hard to decide. The latter is perhaps most in accordance with the usage (ver.
31) and general teaching of St. John (see Meyer in loc), the former with the
apparent tenor of the dialogue.
3 For a good general exposition of this mysterious discourse of our Lord with
the timid ruler, see generally, of the older writers, Chrysostom, in Joann. Horn.
xxiv. — xxviii., Cyril Alex., in Joann. Vol. iv. p. 145 — 156, Augustine, in Joann.
Tractat. xii. cap. 3, Euthymius and Theophylact in loc; and of the modern
expositors, Knapp. Script. Var. Argum. Vol. i. p. 199 — 254, Meyer, Kommentar.
p. 101 sq., Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. iv. p. 359 sq. (Clark), and the excellent
work of Luthardt, Johan. Evang. Vol. i. p. 364 sq. Some good remarks on the
character of Nicodemus will be found in Evans, Scripture Biography, Vol. ii.
p. 233 sq.; and an ingenious but not satisfactory defence of his timidity in
Niemeyer, Charakt. Vol. i. p. 113 sq.

Lect. III. THE EARLY JUDAA.N MINISTRY. 125
and it is this, that if we remember, as I said in my first
lecture,1 that in St. John's Gospel our Lord especially
appears before us as the reader of the human heart, we
shall be prepared to find, as apparently we do find, that He
often answers rather the thoughts than the words of the
speaker, and alludes to the hidden feeling rather than the
expressed sentiment.2 If we bear this in mind, I verily
believe that, by the help of God, we shall be enabled to
gain some clew to understanding the more difficult parts
of this most solemn and profound revelation.
With this interview the occurrences of this eventful
passover appear to have closed. Our Lord
. . , , -, ., , Our Lord leaves
perceiving, by that same knowledge of the Jerusalem and re-
human heart to which I have just alluded, ^uofjudaeL
that He could no longer trust Himself even ¦&*»'¦¦ «¦
° Ch. iu. 22.
with those who had heard His teaching and
beheld His miracles, now leaves Jerusalem, most probably
for the northeastern portion of Judaea,3 in the vicinity
of the Jordan, where we seem to have good grounds for
supposing that He was pleased to abide till nearly the end
/ 1 See p. 44, note 3.
2 Thus, for example, at the very outset, our Lord's first words can scarcely be
considered an answer to the words with which Nicodemus first addresses Him,
but may very suitably be conceived an answer to the question of his heart, which
seems rather to have related to the mode of gaining an entrance into the king
dom of God. Was the lowly but wonder-working Teacher whom he addressed
the veritable Way, the Truth, and the Light, or was there some other way still
compatible with the old and familiar tenets of Judaism? Chrysostom seems
rather to imply that our Lord regards Nicodemus as not yet to have passed even
into the outer porch of true knowledge (vrt oitSe rSov irpo&vptov ttjs trpotrnKov-
mjr yvtbo-etos eW/Jij), and that He does not so much address Nicodemus as state
generally a mystic truth, which he knew not of, but which might well arrest
and engage his thoughts. Comment, in Joann. xxiv. Vol. viii. p. 161 (ed. Bened.
2). The very different views that have been taken of these opening words will
be seen in the commentaries above referred to.
8 The Evangelist only says, %\&ev 6 'Iijtrous koX ol ua&rjTal avrov els rnv
'lovSaiav yt\v (ch. iii. 22) ; but from'the closely-connected mention of the adminis
tration of baptism, it does not seem unreasonable to suppose, with Chrysostom,
that our Lord retired to the Jordan (eVl rbv 'lopSdvnv iroWdicts n"px*To), and
perhaps sought again the place where He Himself had been baptized by John,
(see p. 108, note 2), and to which numbers might still be thronging. Lightfoot
suggests a place more exactly to the north of Jerusalem, and closer to the direct
route to Galilee. See Harmon. Qaat. Evang. Vol. i. p. 446 (Roterod. 1686).
11*

126 THE EARLY JUDAiN MINISTRY. Lect. IH.
of the year. There the sacred narrative tells us He bap
tized by the hands of His disciples,1 and so
wrought upon the hearts of the people that
He eventually gathered round Him believers and disciples,
which outnumbered those of John, many as
Ver1' there seems reason for supposing them now
many of the Bap- to have become. The Baptist was still free.
"' ' . . „ He was now at iEnon,3 near Salim, a place of
John tft. 23. ' r
waters in the northern portion of the valley
of the Jordan,4 and from which he might afterwards have
passed by the fords of Succoth into the territory of the
licentious Antipas. At this spot was deliv
ered his final testimony to the Redeemer, —
a testimony, perhaps, directed against a jealousy on the
part of His disciples,6 which might have .been recently

1 The reason why our Lord did not Himself baptize has formed a subject of
comment since the days of Tertullian. We can, however, scarcely adopt that
early writer's view that it was owing to the difficulty of our Lord baptizing in
His own name (de Baptism, cap. 11), but may plausibly adopt the opinion hinted
at by the poetical paraphrast Nonnus ( ob yap aval &dirTi(ev iv vfiari, p. 30, ed.
Passow), and well expressed by Augustine ("prasbebant discipuli ministerium
corporis, praebebat ille adjutorium majestatis," in Joann. Tract, xv. 4. 3), — that
baptism was a ministerial act, and thus more suitably performed by disciples
than by their Lord. Compare Acts x. 48, 1 Cor. i. 17.
2 We can, of course, form no exact estimate of the actual numbers of disciples
which John might have now gathered round him. As, however, the inspired
narrative distinctly specifies the multitudes that came to his baptism (Matt. iii. 5;
Mark i. 5; Luke iii. 7), and alludes to the different classes and callings of which
they were composed (Luke iii. 12), we may reasonably infer that the number of
his actual disciples and followers could by no means have been inconsiderable.
3 Some plausible but purely contextual arguments for fixing the site of Mnon .
in the wilderness of Judaea will be found in Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 249 sq.
Such arguments, however, cannot safely be urged against the direct statements
of early writers. See next note.
4 There seems good reason for identifying the Salim, near to which the
Evangelist tellB us John was baptizing, with some ruins at the northern base ol
Tell Ridghab, near to which is a beautiful spring, and a Wely (Saint's tomb),
called Sheikh Salim. See Van de Velde, Memoir, p. 345. Robinson appears to
doubt this (Palestine, Vol. iii. p. 333, ed. 2), but without sufficient reason. The
mere coincidence of name might perhaps be an unsafe argument, if the position
of the place did not accord with the position of Salim as fixed by Jerome in his
Onomasticon (Art. "^non "), where jEnou and Salim are both noticed as being
eight Roman miles from Scythopobs. See Van de Velde, Syria and Palestine,
Vol. ii. p 845 sq.
6 The words of the sacred text (John iii. 26) give us some grounds for supposing

Lect. HI. THE EARLY JUD^IAN MINISTRY. 127
called out by the Jew 1 with whom they had been contend
ing on the subject of purifying. That testi-
mony was in one respect mournfully pro-
phetic. He had now begun, even as he him
self said, to decrease ; his ministry was over ; the Bride
groom had come, and the friend of the bridegroom had
heard his voice, and the joy of that faithful
J ' John iii. 23.
friend was now completed and full. Thus
it was that apparently at the close of this year, or, accord
ing to a recent chronologer, two or three months later,2
the fearless rebuker of sin, though it be in kings' palaces,
is seized on by the irritated yet superstitious Antipas, and,

it possible that feelings of doubt or jealousy might have been shown by some of
St. John's disciples, — feelings which perhaps might have remained even to a
later period, and might have been one of the causes which led to the mission of
the two disciples recorded in Matt. xi. 2 sq., Luke vii. 18 sq. There is an expres
sion of something unlooked for, and perhaps not wholly approved of, in the ?Se
outos jSairri^et ko.1 irdvTes epxovTcu irpbs uvt6v. So Augustine ("moti sunt
discipuli Johannis; concurrebatur ad Christum, veniebatur ad Johannem"),
and still more distinctly Chrysost. in loc.
1 There seems no reasonable doubt that the true reading is 'lovSaiov, and not
'lovSaiuv (Bee). The evidence for the former, which includes eleven uncial
MSS. in addition to the Alexandrian and Vatican, will be found in the new
edition of Tischendorf s New Test. Vol. i. p. 564. What the exact subject of the
contention was we are not told, further than that it was itept Ka^apiaaov (ver.
25); it might well have arisen, as Augustine suggests, from the statement on the
part of the Jew [August, adopts the plural], — "majorem esse Christum, et ad
ejus baptismum debere concurri." — In Joann. Tract, xm. 3. 8.
2 The exact date of the captivity of the Baptist is a question of great difficulty,
and perhaps can never be settled. See Winer, B WB. Art. " Johannes der Tdu-
fer," Vol. i: p. 590. Wieseler, in a very elaborate discussion (Chron. Synops. p.
223—251), has endeavored to show that it took place about the feast of Purim in
the following year (March 19, a. u. c. 782), and that he was beheaded a few days
before the Passover (April 17) of the same year. The latter date seems made out
(see Citron. Synops. p. 292 sq.), but the former is open to many objections, two of
which may be specified : (a) the way in which our Lord speaks of the Baptist
(John v. 33) ; and (6) the brief space of time that is thus necessarily assigned to
his captivity, — a time apparently as unduly short as that assigned by Greswell
is unnecessarily long. See Dissert, x. (Append.) Vol. iii. p. 425. It seems then,
on the whole, safer to adopt the first view in the text, and to suppose that St.
John was put into prison shortly before our Lord's present departure into Gali
lee, and that the avaxtipnets into that country specified by the Synoptical
Evangelists (Matt. iv. 12; Mark i. 14; Luke iv. 14) coincides with that here speci
fied by St. John. For a brief consideration of the difficulties this view has been
supposed to involve, see Lect. iv. p. 148, note 3, and compare the remarks of
Tischendorf, Synops. Evang. p. xxv.

128 THE EARLY JTJD^AN MINISTRY. Lect. III.
after a short imprisonment in the dungeons of Machserus,1
falls a victim to the arts of the vengeful
Luke iii. 19, com- ._. .
pared with Mark HerOdiaS. This capture of the Baptist, if we adopt
the earlier date, might, perhaps, have soon become known
to our Lord, and might have suggested some thoughts of
danger to Himself and to His infant Church from which
now He might have deemed it meet to withdraw. Per
haps with this feeling, but certainly, as St. John specially
tells us, with the knowledge that the blessed results and
success of His ministry had reached the ears of the malev
olent Pharisees, our Lord suspends His first
ministry in Judasa, a ministry that had now
lasted eight months, and prepares to return by the shortest
route, through Samaria,2 to the safe retirement of the hills
of Galilee.
It was now late in December,3 four months, as the narra
tive indirectly reminds us, from the harvest,4 when the Lord
1 See Josephus, Antiq. xviii. 5. 2; and for a description of the place, ib. Bell.
Jud. vii. 6. 2. From this latter passage, and especially from the notice of the
fine palace built there, we may perhaps suppose it to have been the scene of the '
festival (Matt. xiv. 6; Mark vi. 21) which preceded the Baptist's murder. See,
however, Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 250 sq., who places the scene at Livias.
The site of Macheerus is supposed by Seetzen to be now occupied by a ruined
fortress on the north end of Jebel Attarus, which is said still to bear the name
of Mkauer. See Ritter, Erdkunde, Part xv. 1, p. 577.
2 Our Lord was now probably in the northeastern, or, aB the e 8 e i Se abrbv
k. r. A. (John iv. 4) may be thought to suggest, more northerly portions of
Judaea. Thither he might have gradually moved from the more immediate
neighborhood of the Jordan, towards which he seems first to have gone. See
above, p. 126. Our Lord on one occasion at least (Luke ix. 51 sq.) adopted the
route through Samaria, in preference to the route through Perasa. At a later
time the journey through Samaria was occasionally rendered unsafe by the open
hostility of the Samaritans (see Joseph. Antiq. xx. 6. 2), some traces of which
we find even in our Lord's time. Comp. Luke ix. 53 ; and see Lightfoot, Harm.
Part in. Vol. i. p. 460 (Roterod. 1686).
3 Stanley (Palestine, ch. v. p. 240, note, ed. 2) fixes it in January or February,
but in opposition to Kobinson, Harmony,-}}. 19 (Tract Society), who adopts an
earlier date. See above, p. 107, note 3.
4 See John iv. 35, obx fyuets Aiyere otl IVi TerpdpvnvSs itrrtv Ka\ o Srepiffubs
epX<sTtu, — a passage which, from the distinctness and precision of the language
(observe the Iri and compare it with ^Sij which follows), has been rightly pressed
by some of the best expositors as affording a note of time. See Meyer in loc, and
especially Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 214 sq. The arguments in favor of its

Lect. HI. . THE EARLY JUDAAN MINISTRY. 129
crossed the rich plain that skirts the southern and east
ern bases of Ebal and Gerizim, and, weary
' J Our Lord's jour-
with travel, rested on His way by a well, which ney through sama-
even now the modern pilgrim can confidently
identify.1 His disciples had gone forward up the beautiful
but narrow valley2 to the ancient neighboring city, to which,
as it would seem, Jewish prejudice had long since given
the name of Sychar,3 when the grace of God brings one
poor sinful woman, either from the city or the fields, to
draw water at Jacob's well. We well remember the mem
orable converse that followed : how the conviction of sin
began to work within, and how the amazed woman became
the Lord's first herald in Sychem, — the first-fruits of the
great harvest that but a few years afterwards was to be
gathered in by Philip the Deacon.4

being merely a proverbial expression (comp. Alford in loc.) are extremely weak,
and are well disposed of by Wieseler, loc. cit. A different and very improbable
note of time is deduced from the passage by Greswell, Dissert, ix. (Append.),
Vol. iii. p. 408.
1 For a good description of Jacob's well, see Robinson, Palestine, Vol. ii. p.
286 sq. Compare also Van de Velde, Syria and Palestine, Vol. i. p. 399, and
Thomson, The Land and the Book, Vol. ii. p. 206, where a sketch is given of this
profoundly interesting spot. For a possible identification of this well with
the "'BIO ys of the Talmudical writers, see Lightfoot, Cliorogr. Vol. ii. p. 686
sq. (Koterod. 1686), and compare Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 256, note.
2 For a description of this valley, see Van de Velde, Syria and Palestine, Vol.
i. p. 386 sq., and compare Stanley, Palestine, ch. v. p. 232.
3 The name of Sychar (not Sichar; see Tischendorf in loc.) does not appear
to have arisen from a mere curruption of the ancient name of Shechem (Olsh.,
al.), but from a studiedly contemptuous change with reference either to nj?.'>?»
" falsehood," i. e. idol-worship (compare Heb. ii. 18, and Reland, Dissert. Misc.
Vol. i. p. 241), or to "''P*', " drunkard " (comp. Isaiah xxviii. 1, and Lightfoot,
Chorogr. Vol. ii. p. 686, Roterod.), and in the time of St. John had become the
regular name of the place. Compare, however, Acts vii. 16, where Stephen,
perhaps designedly, recurs to the ancient name, and Wieseler, Cliron. Synops.
p. 256 sq. (note), where the name is connected, apparently less probably, with
M?0=^5^, "to hire," in reference to Gen. xxxiii. 19. It is now called Nabu-
lus, by a contraction from the name of Neapolis, afterwards given it by the
Romans ; but it seems probable that the ancient city was larger and extended
nearer to Jacob's well. See Robinson, Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 292 (ed. 2), where
there will be found a full and excellent description of the place and itB vicinity.
Compare also Thomson, The Land, and the Book, Vol. ii. p. 200 sq., where
a sketch will be found of the entrance into the city, Van de Velde, Syria and
Palestine, Vol. i. p. 386 sq., and a photographic view by Frith, Egypt and
Palestine, Part rv. 3.
4 See Acts viii. 5 sq., where the thankful reception of the Gospel on the part

130 THE EARLY JUD^AN MINISTRY. Lect. III.
The faith of these Samaritans and the effect produced
on them, even when contrasted with that
The faith, of the pr0(juce^ Vjy our Lord during His ministry
Samaritans. r J o ./
in Judasa, deserves more than a passing
notice. In Judaea our Lord had abode eight months ; in
Sychem He spends but two days. In Ju-
Johnii. 23. , tt , ¦ 1 • CJ •
daea He works many miracles; in Samaria
He works none.1 And yet we read that in Sychem many
believed even the vague tidings of the heart-
Ch.iv.SS. . , ° ?«.
stricken woman, and hastened forth to wel
come Him, whom in the fulness of a faith that overstepped
all narrow national prejudices they believed and acknowl
edged as the true Messiah, the Restorer, or perhaps rather
Converter, as He was termed in their own dialect,2 the

of the Samaritans is especially noticed; and compare Baumgarten in loc. 5 14,
Vol. i. p. 184 sq. (Clark). That the " city of Samaria," to which the Deacon
went down from Jerusalem, was the city of Sychem, doeB not appear certain
(Meyer, on Acts viii. 5), though it may reasonably be considered highly probable.
I See some good remarks of Chrysostom on the faith of these Samaritans,
when contrasted with that of the Jews. It seems, however, a little rhetorical to
say that the latter " were doing everything to expel Him from their country,"
while the former were entreating Him to stay. See Horn, in Joann. xxxv. Vol.
viii. p. 232. Throughout the Gospel-history the multitudes in Judaea or else
where appear almost always to have gladly received our Lord, except when
instigated to a contrary course by His true and bitter enemies, the ruling and
hierarchical party (the 'lovSouoi of St. John ; see Meyer, on John xi. 19) and
their various satellites. Comp. Matt. xvii. 20, Mark xv. 11.
2 Much has been written about the expectation of a MeSBiah on the part of the
Samaritans. It is not improbable that, as their own letters in modern times
assert (see Hengstenberg, Christol. Vol. i. p. 66, Clark), they derived it from such
passages in the Pentateuch as Gen. xlix. 10, Numb. xxiv. 17, Deut. xviii. 15;
and that, though really foreigners by descent (comp. Robinson, Palestine, Vol.
ii. p. 289), they still maintained this belief in common with their hated neigh
bors, the Jews. At any rate it seems certain that an expectation of a Restorer
or Converter, under the title of Bn'i* r: or -^7.*)n > was entertained among them
at an earlier period ©f their history (see Gesenius, Samar. Theol. p. 41 sq., and
the curious doctrinal hymns published by the same learned editor under the
title Carmina Samaritana, p. 75 sq.); and we learn from Robinson that even to
this day, under the name of el-Muhdy (the Guide), the Messiah is still looked
for by this singular people. See Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 278, and p. 297 sq., where
an account is given of the celebrated correspondence maintained at intervals
between the Samaritans and Joseph Scaliger, Marshall, and other scholars of
the West. Compare also Winer, BWB., Art. " Samaritaner," Vol. ii. p. 273.
The exact meaning of 2riPn is discussed by Gesenius in the Berlin Jahrb. fur
Wissensch. Krit. for 1830, p. 651 sq.

Galilee. Ver. 41S.

Lect. III. THE EARLY JUD.3SAN MINISTRY. 131
Saviour, as they indirectly avow, not of Samaria only, but
of all the scattered families of the children John iv. 42.
of men.
But faith astonishing even as that of Samaria might not
detain Him who came to the lost sheep of the
house of Israel. After a stay of two memo- „<,„ '0/our ZJdZ
rable days, which the people of Sychem would
gladly have had prolonged, the Lord returns
to a country that now vouchsafed to receive its prophet x
only because His miracles at Jerusalem had been such as
could not be denied. Signs and wonders
° Ver. 45.
were all that dull-hearted Galilee could ap
preciate. Signs and wonders they must see, or, as our
Lord mournfully says, "they would not be
lieve." We may observe, then, how consistent
is the narrative which represents our Lord as having chosen
the scene of His first miracle as His temporary resting-
place.2 He returns to Cana in Galilee, where,
as St. John significantly adds, "He made the ° ""'
water wine." There He yet again performs a
second miracle in bringing back to life the dying son of the

l The exact meaning of our Lord's comment record, John iv. 44, oJtos yap
'Ino-ovs k. t. A.., is not perfectly clear, owing to the apparent difficulty caused
by the argumentative ydp, and the doubtful application of irarplSi. That this
latter word does not refer to Judaa (Origen, and recently Wieseler, Chron.
Synops. p. 45), but to Galilee, seems almost certain from the mention of Tdki-
Aa(a both in the preceding and succeeding verses. The force of the yap is, how
ever, less easy to decide upon, but is perhaps to be sought for in the fact that our
Lord stayed so short a time with the Samaritans, and avoided rather than courted
popularity. It is true that he found it in Galilee (ver. 45), but that was because
He brought it, as it were, from another country. The G aliheans did not honor
the Lord as their own prophet, but as One whom they had seen work wonders
at Jerusalem. The explanatory force adopted by Liicke and others does not
harmonize with the simplicity of the context.
2 See John iv. 46, ^A&ei/ oZv [6 'lntrovs] trd\tv els tV Kara, — where the oSv
seems to imply that the visit of our Lord was in consequence of this disposition
on the part of the Galilasans. He sees the effect which miracles produced upon
the people, and is pleased so far to condescend to their infirmities as to sojourn
for a time at the scene of a miracle that must have made a great impression on
those who witnessed it, and the memory of which His presence among them
might savingly revive and reanimate. See Chrysostom in loc. Horn. xxv. Vol.
viii. p. 325.

rim. John v. 1 sq.

132 THE EARLY JUD.33AN MINISTRY. Lect. m.
Capernaite nobleman,1 — a miracle which wrought its
blessed effects on the father and his whole
household, and may thus perchance have had
some influence in leading our Lord, three months after
wards, when rejected by the wretched mad
men of Nazareth, to make Capern'aum His
earthly home.2
Our present portion of the Evangelical history contains
but one more event, — the journey of our
iur^"toLje^aieZ Lord to Jerusalem, and his miraculous cure
jtf«. feast of pu- of the infirm man at the pool of Bethesda.
Here, I need scarcely remind you, we at once
find ourselves encountered by a question, on
the answer to which our whole system of Gospel-harmony
mainly depends, and on which we find, both in ancient3
and modern times, the most marked diversity of opinions.
The question is, what festival does St. John refer to at the
beginning of the fifth chapter of his Gospel, when he tells

l From the instances from Josephus of the use of the term SScxrikucos, that
have been collected by Krebs ( Obs. in Nov. Test. p. 144), we may perhaps reason
ably conclude that the person here specified was not a relative (Chrys. i.), but in
the service of Herod Antipas ("in famulitio et ministerio regis." Krebs, I. c), —
in what capacity, however, cannot be determined. The opinion that this miracle
was identical with that of the healing of the centurion's servant (Matt. viii. 5
sq., Luke vii. 1 sq.) is mentioned both by Origen (in Joann. Tom. xin. 60) and
Chrysostom (in Joann. Horn. xxxv. 2), but very properly rejected by them.
Nothing really is identical in the two miracles, except the locality of the sufferer,
and the fact that our Saviour did not see him. See especially Theophylact and
Euthymius in loc.
2 For some good comments on the details of this miracle, — one of the charac
teristics of which is the performance of the cure by our Lord not only without
His seeing (as in the case of the centurion's servant), but when at a distance of
some miles from the sufferer, — see the commentaries of Origen, Chrysostom,
Cyril Alex., Theophylact, and Euthymius; and for a general view of the whole,
Hall, Contempt, in. 2, and Trench, Miracles, p. 117 sq. Compare also Lange,
Leben Jesu, n. 4. 10, Part n. p. 552 sq.
3 The differences of opinion as to the festival mentioned in John v. 1, are not
confined to modern writers. Irenseus says that it was at the Passover [Hcer. n.
39), but as we cannot ascertain what reading (eoprn or r\ ioprn, see next note)
was adopted by this ancient writer, his opinion must be received with some
reserve. Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, and after them Theophylact and
Euthymius, with more plausibility, suppose it to have been the feast of Pente
cost. See, however, p. 133, note 2.

Lect. HI. THE EARLY JTJDAAN MINISTRY. 133
us that " there was a feast of the Jews, and Jesus went up
to Jerusalem"? The various answers I will Ver. 1.
not now pause to discuss, but will say briefly,
that, after a prolonged consideration of this difficult sub
ject, I venture to think that as the language of St. John,
according to the correct text,1 and when duly considered,
does seem distinctly unfavorable to this festival being con
sidered as either the Passover or one of the three greater
festivals,2 we may, not without many plausible arguments,
adopt the view of the best recent harmonists and commen
tators, and regard it as the Feast of Purim,3 — the coni-
l The true reading appears certainly to be kopr^\ (Bee), without the article. It
has, in addition to secondary authorities, the support of three out of the four
leading uncial MSS. (the Alex. Vatic., and that of Beza), is specially commented
on in the Chronicon Paschale (p. 405 sq., ed. Dindorf.), and is adopted by Lach-
mann, Tischendorf, and the best recent editors.
2 The principal arguments are as follow, and seem of some weight: (a) the
omission of the article, which, though sometimes observed when a verb sub-
stant. precedes (Middleton, Greek Art.; comp. Neander, Life of Christ, p. 234,
note, Bohn), or when a strictly defining or possessive genitive follows (see exx.
in Winer, Gramm. § 19. 2. 6), cannot possibly be urged in the case of a merely
inverted sentence like the present, and where the gen. has no such special and
defining force. See Winer, Gramm. I. c p. 232, note. [The answer to this in
Robinson, Harmony, p. 199 (Tract. Soc), has no force, as the cases adduced are
not out of St. John, wholly different, and easily to be accounted for.] To this
we may add (b) the absence of the name of the festival, whereas St. John seems
always to specify it. Compare ch. ii. 13, vii. 2, and even (in the case of the
iyicalvia) x. 22. Again (c) it seems now generally agreed upon that it was not
the Pentecost; that if it be a Passover, our Lord would then have been as long a
time as eighteen months absent from Jerusalem (see Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p.
217); and that if it be the Feast of Tabernacles, we then, according to Ebrard
(Krit. der Ev. Gesch. § 37, p. 157), must adopt the highly improbable view that it was
not the aKovoTtnyta that followed the Passover mentioned ch. ii. 13, but that
followed a second Passover, which St. John, usually so accurate on this point
see ch. vi. 4), has not specified. Lastly, (d) if the note of time alluded to, p. 128,
note 4, be accepted, the difficulties alluded to in (c) will be greatly complicated
and enhanced.
s The arguments in favor of this particular festival, though sufficiently strong
to have gained the assent of a decided majority of the best recent expositors,
are still of a dependent and negative character. They are as follows : (a) if the
note of time derived from John iv. 35 be correct, then the festival here men
tioned clearly fallB between the end of one year and the Passover of the one
following (ch. vi. 4), and consequently can be no other than the Feast of Purim,
which was celebrated on the fourteenth and fifteenth of the month Adar (Esth.
ix. 21) ; (6) if, as seems shown in the above note, strong critical as well as exeget-
ical objections can be urged against any and all of the other festivals that have
been proposed, then a remaining festival which is only open to objections of a
12

134 THE EARLY JTJD-ffiAN MINISTRY. Lect. III.
memorative feast of Esther's pleading and Haman's over
throw. This festival, it would appear by backward
computation, must have taken place in this present year
of our Lord's life (a.^ tj. c. 782), on the nineteenth of
March,1 and, as we may reasonably infer from the narrative,
a Sabbath-day, — a day on which, according to the ancient,
though not according to the modern calendar of the Jews,
this festival could apparently have been celebrated,2 and,
singularly enough, the only instance in which a Sabbath
could fall upon any one of the festivals of the year in
question.3
weaker and more general character (see below, note 2) deserves serious con
sideration; (c) if this date be fixed upon, the chronology of the period between
it and the following Passover not only admits of an easy adjustment, but also, as
will be seen in the course of the narrative, involves some striking coincidences
and' harmonies which reflect great additional plausibility upon the supposition.
For additional notices and arguments, see Anger, de Tempt, in Act. Apost. I. p.
24 sq., Wieseler, Chron. Synops. pp. 205 — 222, Lange, Leben Jesu, Book H. Part
I. p. 9; and for perhaps the strongest statement of the counter-arguments,
Hengstenberg, Christology, Vol. iii. p. 244 sq. (Clark).
1 For the principles on which this computation rests, see Wieseler, Chron.
Synops. p. 206 sq., compared with p. 219. Compare also the useful table in
Tischendorf, Synops. Evang. p. Li. ; and for general tables for facilitating such
calculations, see Browne, Ordo Sacl. § 452 — 455, p. 499 sq.
2 This seems to be made out by Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 219 sq., but it is so
strongly questioned by Hengstenberg (Christology, Vol. iii. p. 248), who refers
for proofs to Reland, Antiq. Sacr. iv. 9, and the special treatise of Shickard,
on this festival, reprinted in the Critici Sacri, Vol. ii. p. 1183 (ed. Amstelod.
1698 — 1732), — that a few comments must be made on the subject. Much seems
to turn on the question whether the fourteenth of Adar, or, as Hengstenberg
urges, the day on which the roll of Esther was read, — a day, as will be seen
from the Mishna, made variable for convenience, — was the true day of the fes
tival. With the opening sections of the Tract " Megillah " before us, we shall
probably (with Wieseler) decide for the former, especially when we compare
with the preceding sections the close of sect. 3, where it is said, in answer to the
general question, " when the Megillah may be read before its proper time," that
an exception is to be made for places where it is customary for [the country
people] to assemble on Mondays and Thursdays, but that " where that does not
take place it may only be read on its proper day" (sVs rimK V"11? Vs
n:»T3). Mishna, p. 182 (De Sola and Raphall's Transl.). The question is here
noticed as of some interest, but it may be observed that though it is probable
from the 6acred narrative that the Sabbath on which the miracle was performed
coincided with the festival, it is not expressly said so ; and that even if the Feast
of Purim could not fall on a Sabbath, the main question would remain wholly
unaffected by it. See Meyer, on John v. 1, p. 143.
3 See Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 219, and compare the table in Tischendorf,
Synops. Ev.p.u. It may be observed that the year now in question was a leap-

Lect. III. THE EARLY JUD2EAN MINISTRY. 135
It has, I know, been urged that our Lord would never
have gone up to a festival of mere earthly
rejoicing and revelry.1 In answer to this, „£££?"»
without pausing to compare this merely neg
ative statement with the positive arguments which have
been advanced on the contrary side, let us simply reply,
that at this festival, in which the hard lot of the poor and
needy received a passing alleviation, the divine presence
of Him who came to preach the Gospel to the poor might
not seem either strange or inappropriate.2 In addition to
this let us not forget that, in the year now under consider
ation, the Passover would take place only a month after
wards, and that our Lord might well have thought it meet
to fix His abode at Jerusalem and to commence His
preaching before the hurried influx of the multitudes that
came up to the solemnities of the great yearly festival.3
But let us now return to our narrative, and with sadness
observe how the malice and wickedness of man was per-
year, and had a second month of Adar; hence the difference between this cal
endar and that in Browne, Ordo Soscl. § 594, p. 647, where this fact is not observed.
For exact information on the difficult subject of the Jewish calendar, see Ideler,
Handbuch. der Chronol. Vol. i. p, 477 sq., the special work of Ben-David, Gesch.
des Jud. Kalend. (Berl. 1817). Compare also the Excursus of Wieseler, Chron.
Synops. p. 437 sq., and Browne, Ordo Steel. § 403 sq.
1 This objection is urged, though not with much cogency, by Trench, Miracles,
p. 245. For a full account of the ceremonies at this festival, see the work of
Shickard, de Festo Purim (Tubing. 1634), above alluded to, p. 134, note 2), and
compare Winer, B WB. Art. " Purim," Vol. ii. p. 589. The objection that has
been founded on St. John's omission of the special name of this festival, con
trasted with his usual habit in similar cases (ch. vii. 2, x. 22), is fairly met by
Anger, who remarks that while the names of other festivals (e. g. ovoji/oir^yia
and iyxalvia) partially explained themselves, that of the Feast of Purim, under
its Grecized title (rav tppovpod or tbovpal, or ttjs 'M.apSoxaiKris rjaipas), was
probably felt by the Evangelist as likely to prove unintelligible to the general
readers for whom the Gospel was designed. — De Tempt, in Act. Apost. p. 27 sq.
2 See Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 222 ; vigorously, though not very convinc
ingly, opposed by Hengstenberg, who seems to take a somewhat extreme view
of the revelry and license which prevailed at the festival. See Christology, Vol.
iii. p. 247.
8 A partial illustration of this is supplied by John xi. 65, where it is expressly
said that " many went out of the country up to Jerusalem before the Passover,
to purify themselves." The Iva ayvlaaatv of course does not apply in the pres
ent case ; but the general fact that there was such a habit of going up before the
festival is not without significance.

136 THE EARLY JUD^AN MINISTRY. Lect. HI.
mitted to counteract those counsels of mercy, and to
shorten that mission of love.
On this Sabbath-day, by the waters of that healing pool,1
which ancient tradition as well as recent in-
The miracle at
the pool of Be- vestigation seems to have correctly identified
with the large but now ruined reservoir in
the vicinity of St. Stephen's gate,2 the Lord performs a
miracle on one poor sufferer, who had long lingered in
that House of Mercy,3 unpitied and friendless. That
miracle was accompanied with a sign of great signifi-
1 It may be considered somewhat doubtful whether ver. 4 is really an integral
portion of the sacred text, or a later addition. It is omitted by Tischendorf
with the Vatican MS., the first hand of the Codex Ephremi, the Codex Bezaj,
and a few ancient versions, — the valuable Curetonian Syriac (but see Roberts,
On Lang, of St. Matt. Gospel, p. 122) being of the number. This is undoubtedly
authority of some weight ; but as prejudice or reluctance to accept the fact speci
fied might have something to do with the removal of the verse, we shall perhaps
be justified in following the judgment of Lachmann, and, with one first class and
nearly all the second class uncial MSS., in retaining the verse. It must not be
disguised, however, that these authorities differ greatly with one another in the
separate words, — a further argument of some importance. Compare Meyer,
Komment. p. 141 sq. (ed. 2). The attempts, in which, strangely enough, a note of
Hammond is to be included, to explain away the miraculous portion of the state
ment, are very unsatisfactory. If the verse is a part of the sacred text, then
undoubtedly the ultimate agency, however outwardly exhibited, whether by
gaseous exhalations or intermittent currents, was angelical. See Wordsworth
in loc. and comp. Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 2. 2, Part I. p. 50, and some curious com
ments and quotations in Sepp, Leben Christi, iv. 5, Vol. ii. p. 315 sq.
2 This, it must be conceded, is a debated point, as there are arguments of some
weight in favor of this reservoir being regarded as a portion of the ancient fosse
which protected the temple and the fort of Antonia. See Robinson, Palestine,
Vol. i. p. 293 sq. (ed. 2). The traditional site, however, and its identification with
the pool of Bethesda mentioned in the ancient Jerusalem Itinerary (p. 589),
seems fairly maintained by Williams, Holy City, n. 5, Vol. ii. p. 483, though
doubted by Winer, BWB. Vol. i. p. 170. Under any circumstances the suggestion
of .Robinson (apparently favored by Trench, Miracles, p. 247), that Bethesda is
perhaps to be identified with the Fountain of the Virgin, is pronounced by an
unbiased traveller, who has seen that deeply excavated fountain (see vignette in
Williams, Vol. ii. p. xi.), as plainly incompatible with what we must infer from
the details of the sacred narrative as to the nature of the locality where the
miracle was performed. For a good view of the traditional site, see Eobertson
and Beato, Views of Jerusalem, No. 12.
8 This appears to be the correct meaning: the true etymology not being fi^
BIBS, "the house of effusion or washing" (Bochart, Reland, al., followed by
Williams, Holy City,Yo\. ii. p. 487), but KlOrt iva, — an etymology strongly
confirmed by the Peshito-Syriac, which here resolves the Grecized form back
again into its original elements (beth chesdo). See Wolf, Cures Philolog. (m loc.)
Vol. ii. p. 835.

Lect. HI. THE EARLY JUD^AN MINISTRY. 137
cance. Not only does our Lord restore the helpless
paralytic,1 but commands him to rise up and
r J > r John v. 8.
bear his bed, and thus practically evince not
only his own completed recovery, but the true lordship of
the Sop of Man over Sabbatical restrictions and ceremo
nial rest.2 He that a year before had shown that He was
Lord of the temple, now shows that He is
r ' Ch. ii. 19.
Lord also of the Sabbath. But this was what
Pharisaical hypocrisy could not brook. This act, merciful
and miraculous as it was, involved a violation of what
Scribe and Pharisee affected to hold most dear; and it
could not and must not be tolerated. The Jews, or — as
that term nearly always implies in St. John — the adhe
rents of the Sanhedrin,8 who had been informed by the
man who it was that had healed him,4 and some of whom

l For an explanation of the various details of the miracle, the student must be
referred to the standard commentaries, especially those of Chrysostom, Cyril of
Alexandria, Theophylact, and Euthymius ; and, among more modern writers,
those of Maldonatus, Liicke, Meyer, and Alford. See also the fragmentary
homily of Cyril of Jerusalem ( Works, p. 336, ed. Bened.), Hall, Contemplations,
rv. 11, and Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 243.
2 It would certainly seem, as Lightfoot suggests (Hor. Hebr. in loc. Vol. ii. p.
622), that our Lord desired by this command to show His power over the Sab
bath, and to exhibit openly His condemnation of the ceremonial restrictions
with which it was then encumbered. For some striking instances of these, see
especially the Mishna, Tract, " Sabbath," p. 37 sq. (De Sola and Raphall), where
the case of an act of charity (relieving a mendicant) forms the subject of dis
cussion. We may infer what must have been the amount of glosses with which
the law respecting the Sabbath was now encumbered, when in the above formal
collection of the precepts of the oral law, committed to writing little more than
one hundred and fifty years afterwards, we find that " a tailor must not go out
with his needle near dusk [on the Sabbath eve], lest he forget and carry it out
with him [during the Sabbath]. Mishna, Tract, " Sabbath," I. 3, p. 38 (De Sola
and Raphall).
8 See above, p. 115, note 3. The only and indeed obvious exception to this is
when the term 'lovdatot is used with a national reference (John ii. 6, 13, iii. 1, iv.
9, al.); in all other cases the term in St. John's Gospel seems to mark the hostile
and hierarchical party that especially opposed our blessed Lord's teaching and
ministry. 4 There does not seem sufficient reason for supposing that the man made the
communication from gratitude, or from a desire to commend our Lord to the
rulers (comp. Chrys., Cyril Alex.); still less was it from any evil motive (comp.
Lange, p. 769). It probably arose simply from a desire to justify his performance
of the command (ver. 9), by specifying the authority under which he had acted.
Comp. Meyer in loc, and Luthardt, Joh. Evang. Part ii. pp. 6, 7.
12*

138 THE EARLY JVOMAN MINISTRY. Lect. m.
had perhaps witnessed the miracle, at once begin to ex
hibit a vengeful J hatred, which only deepens
in its implacability when in that sublime dis
course at the close of the chapter on which we are meditat
ing, the fifth chapter of St. John, the Lord declares not
only His unity in working, but His unity
in dignity and honor with the Eternal
*"•*¦ Father.2
This is the turning point in the Gospel history. Up to
this time the preaching of our Lord at Jeru-
Distinctive char- A
aeteristics of this salem and in Judaea has met with a certain
degree of toleration, and in many cases even
of acceptance :3 but after this all becomes changed. Hence
forth the city of David is no meet or safe abode for the
Son of David ; the earthly house of His heavenly Father
is no longer a secure hall of audience for the preaching of
the Eternal Son. Henceforth the Judsean, or, more strictly
speaking, the Jerusalem ministry narrows itself into two
efforts, the one made seven, the other nine months after-

1 This perhaps is the strongest term that we are fairly justified in using, as the
words ko! i0irovv avrbv knoKTeivat (ver. 16) are omitted by three out of the
four leading uncial MSS. See Tischendorf in loc. Vol. i. p. 677.
2 A very careful investigation into the connection and evolution of thought in
this divine discourse — the main subject of which is the Person, Mission, and
Offices of the eternal Son of the eternal Father, and the testimony by which
they are confirmed — will be found in Luthardt, Johann. Evang. Part ii. p. 10
sq. See also Stier, Words of our Lord, Vol. v. p. 83 sq. (Clark), and Lange,
Leben Jesu, II.-5. 1, Part n. pp. 770—775. The whole is ably expanded and
enlarged upon by Augustine, in Joannem, Tract, xviii. — xxiii. Vol. iii. p. 1355
sq. 3 See John ii. 23, iv. 1. In estimating the degree of reception that our Lord's
teaching met with, we must carefully distinguish between the general mass of
the people, whether in Judasa or Galilee, which commonly " heard him gladly "
(Mark xii. 37), and the Pharisaical and hierarchical party, which both disbelieved
themselves, and, commonly acting from Jerusalem as a centre (see esp. Matt. xv.
1, Mark iii. 22, vii. 1), readily organized cooperation in other quarters. Compare
Luke v. 17. Their present state of feeling deserves particular notice, as prepar
ing us for their future machinations, and as leading us to expect no such pro
longed duration of our Lord's ministry as the supposition that this feast was
a Passover would force us to assume. The fearful resolve to kill our Lord,
though perhaps not officially expressed, had nevertheless now been distinctly
formed, and was being acted upon. See John v. 18, and comp. Lange, Leben
Jesu, ii. 6. 1, Part ii. p. 769 sq.

Lect. HI. THE EARLY JUDAA.N MINISTRY. 139
wards,1 and both marked by a similar vindictive animosity,
on the part of the hostile Jewish section, to
that which now first comes into such melan- 8a^" M"•s8, *•
choly prominence. Abruptly, as it would
seem, perhaps only a day or two after this eventful Sab
bath,2 the Lord leaves Jerusalem, to return to His old home
in Galilee ; there, alas, to meet with a yet sadder rejec
tion, and to withdraw from hands more sav
age and murderous than those even of the T , !"'**'
& Luke iv. 28.
Pharisees of Jerusalem.
With this return to Galilee, — which is implied in the
interval between the fifth and sixth chapters A The termination
of St. John, and which has been supposed, oftheeariyjudazan
_ T , , , iai ministry.
though I cannot think correctly, by a recent Matt iv ]2.
sacred chronologer,4 as identical with the toKI*
° Luke iv. 14.
departure or return to Galilee specified by
all the three Synoptical Evangelists, — this portion of our
history comes to its conclusion.
1 The first of these was at our Lord's visit to Jerusalem, during the Feast of
Tabernacles, towards the middle of October in the present year, A. V. o. 782
(John vii. 1 sq., comp. Luke ix. 51 sq.); the second at His appearance in Jerusa
lem at the Feast of the Dedication, in the December of the same year (John x.
22 sq.).
2 When our Lord left Jerusalem is not mentioned, or even implied, but after
the impious efforts directed against His life we may reasonably conclude that it
was immediately, — the very day, perhaps, after the present Sabbath, and thus
with fully sufficient time to reach Galilee and Nazareth before the Sabbath
which succeeded. Comp. Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 222, 260 sq.
8 See above, p. 127, note 2, and the beginning of the next Lecture, where this
question is noticed more at length.
4 See Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 161 sq., compared with p. 223. This oppor
tunity may properly be taken of especially recommending to the attention of
every thoughtful student, who may be acquainted with the language in which it
is written, this able treatise on the succession of the events in the Gospel-history.
The more recent Synopsis Evangetica of Tischendorf is based nearly entirely
upon the researches and deductions of this keen-sighted writer, and the present
work owes a very large part of what may be thought plausible or probable in its
chronological arrangement to the same intelligent guide. It is just to state that
nothing has been accepted without independent and very deliberate investiga
tion, and that many modifications, and, as it would seem, rectifications have
been introduced. The clew, however, even where it has been judged to lead off
in a different direction, has in most cases, I again most gratefully acknowledge,
either been indicated or supplied by this excellent work. A translation of it
would be a very welcome aid to the general reader.

140 THE EARLY JUDiBAN MINISTRY. Lect. m,
Thus, then, what has been roughly termed the Judsean
ministry — a ministry extending continuously from the
March to the December of the preceding year (a. u. c. 781),
and resumed only to be abruptly broken off in the March
of the present year (a. tj. c. 782) — may be considered as
now practically ended.1 This is immediately succeeded
by the ministry in Galilee, and in the neighboring districts
to the north and east, — a ministry, be it again observed,
to which the principal portion of the Synoptical Gospels,
especially of the first and second,2 is nearly exclusively
confined. If we only steadily bear in mind that the Syn
optical Gospels mainly relate to us the events of the min
istry in Galilee, the rough starting-point of which is the
Baptist's captivity,3 we shall, I venture to feel confident,
find but little difficulty in appreciating the true relations
to one another of the four Gospels, and in mastering the
general outline of the succeeding portions of the Evan
gelical narrative.
And now let me close this lecture with the earnest
1 The short period of two months which intervenes between the Feast of
TabernacleB and the Feast of the Dedication was probably spent in Judzea (see
Lecture vi.), and thus might properly be considered a portion of the Judasan
ministry. The general reader, however, will find it more convenient to regard
the main Judsean ministry as now past, the Galilzean ministry as about to follow,
and to be succeeded by a period of broken and interrupted ministrations, of
removals and journeys, which terminate with the last Passover. See above,
Lect. II. p. 51.
2 It seems necessary to make this limitation, as the Gospel of St. Luke from
the close of the ninth to the middle of the nineteenth chapter — a very consid
erable portion of that Gospel — is occupied with notices of that portion of our
Lord's ministry which intervened between the Feast of Tabernacles (October,
a. u. c. 782) and the triumphal entry into Jerusalem just preceding the last Pass
over (April, A. u. c. 783).
3 See above, p. 127, note 2. The ancient tradition on which this very reason
able opinion mainly rests is cited below, p. 146, note 1. The reason why the
Synoptical Evangelists leave unnoticed the early ministry in Judasa cannot, per
haps, be readily assigned. As, however, it seems certain that nearly every system
of chronology must, in a greater or less degree, concede the fact, we may, with
all humility and reverence, perhaps hazard the opinion that these Evangelists
were specially directed and guided mainly to confine their narrative to the
period of the ministry in Galilee, — a period so marked, not only by the found
ing of the Church, but by the exhibition of many and mighty miracles, and the
communication of varied and manifold forms of heavenly teaching. Compare
Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 261.

Lbct.HI. THE EARLY JUILEAN MINISTRY. 141
prayer that these hasty and fleeting sketches x may have in
some degree served to bring this portion of Co„cteH„
the history of our Redeemer before our minds »>«*> andexhorta-
n r- i tions.
with increased measures of freshness and
coherence. Hard it has been, very hard, to adjust the
many questions of contested history ; harder still to know
where to enlarge or where to be brief only in unfolding the
connection of events which are still regarded by the wise
and meditative as in uncertain dependence, or in more
than precarious sequence. Yet I trust all has not been in
vain ; I trust that in you, my younger brethren, more espe
cially,2 I have awakened some desire to search the Scrip
tures, and to muse on the events of your Redeemer's life
with a fresher and more vital interest. Remember, I be
seech you, that though chronologies may seem perplexing
and events intermingled, yet still that every earnest effort
to bring before your hearts the living picture of your
Redeemer's life will be blessed by His Spirit.3 Be not
discouraged by the difficulty of the task; though here,

1 This is the term which is most appropriate to these Lectures, and which
would have appeared on the very title-page if it had not been deemed unsuitable
to place a term so purely belonging to mere human things in connection with
the most holy name of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
2 Some experience as a public examiner in the New Testament, both in this
University and elsewhere, has served to teach me that few points connected
with the exposition of the four Gospels are less known or less attended to, by
the youug, than the study of the probable order of events, and the relations
and degrees of interdependence existing between the records of the four inspired
writers. 3 It is well and truly observed by Bishop Taylor, in his noble introduction to
his greatest work, The Life of Christ, that every true and sincere effort to set
before our souls the life of our Master both ought to and, with God's blessing,
must needs end in imitation. " He that considers," says the Chrysostom of our
Church, in reference to one particular aspect of our Lord's life, " with what
effusions of love JeBus prayed, — what fervors and assiduity, what innocency of
wish, what modesty of posture, what subordination to His Father, and con
formity to the Divine pleasure, were in all His devotions, — is taught and excited
to holy and religious prayer. The rare sweetness of His deportment in all
temptations and violences of His passion, His charity to His enemies, His sharp
reprehension of the Scribes and Pharisees, His ingenuity toward all men, are
living and effectual sermons to teach us patience and humility and zeal, and
candid simplicity and justice in all our actions." — Life of Christ, Prelim. Exhort.
§ 15, Vol. i. p. 25 (Lond. ""

142 THE EARLY JDDiEAN MINISTRY. Lect. HI.
perchance, we may wander; there miss the right clew;
yet, if with a true and living faith we seek to bring home
. to our hearts the great features of the Evangelical history,
¦ — to journey with our Master over the lonely mountains
of Galilee; to sit with Him beside the busy waters of the
lake of Gennesareth ; to follow His footsteps into remote
and half-pagan lands,1 or to hang on His lips in the courts
of His Father's house, — we shall not seek in vain. The
history of the Gospels will be more and more to us a liv
ing history; one Divine Image ever waxing clearer and
brighter, — shedding its light on lonely hours, coming up
before us in solitary walks, ever fresher, ever dearer, —
until at length all things will seem so close, Stj near, so true,
that our faith in Jesus and Him crucified will be such
as no_sophistry can weaken, no doubtfulness becloud.2
For that vivid interest in the history of Jesus let us all
pray to our heavenly Father; and in the name of Him on
whom we have been meditating, let us eon-
LukexviuB. . TT.
elude with the prayer of His chosen ones,
" Lord, increase our faith."
1 This striking and commonly too much overlooked portion of our Lord's
ministry will be found noticed especially in Lect. v.
2 For an expansion of these passing comments on the unspeakable blessedness
of this form of meditative union with our adorable Saviour, the student may
profitably be referred to one of the most eloquent devotional treatises ever
written in our language, — the Christ Mystical of Bp. Hall ( Works, Vol. vii. p.
225. Talboys, 1837).

LECTURE IV.
THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE.

HOW AJTEB THAT JOHN WAS PUT IN PBISOH, JESUS CAME INTO GALILEE,
PREACHING THE GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM Or GOD. — St. Mark 1. 14.

In resuming my course of Lectures upon those events
in the life of our Lord and Master which- are
recorded to us in the Gospels, it will be per- e^ptim"'ftu
haps well for me, both in consideration of the
time that has elapsed since my last Lecture,1 and with the
remembrance that some may now be present who did not
hear the former portion of this course,2 so far to recapitu
late as to remind you briefly of our present position in the
Gospel-history, and of the events which appear to have just
preceded our present starting-point.
It may perhaps be remembered that our last meditations
were devoted to what we agreed to term our
Lord's early Judsean ministry,3 — a ministry J^f^£S%
which commenced with the cleansing of the th* Judaa" •»**-
Temple at our Lord's first Passover (March
a. tj. c. 781),4 and extended continuously to the December
1 The first three Lectures of this course were delivered in the month of April,
the present and the two following not till the succeeding October. The brief
recapitulation in the text could thus hardly be dispensed with, when so long an
interval had elapsed between the two portions of the course. In the form in
which the Lectures now appear it is not so necessary ; as, however, it has seemed
probable that, in a subject like the present, a brief recapitulation might be of
benefit even to the general reader, the Lecture has been left in the same state in
which it was delivered.
2 This refers to the new-comers in the October term. See the remarks in
Lecture i. p. 20.
3 See Lecture n. p. 61, and compare p. 140, note 1.
4 If the tables constructed by Wieseler ( Chron. Synops. p. 482 sq. ; reprinted
in Tischendorf, Synops. Evang. p. li.) on the basis of astronominal data sup-

144 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
of that year when our Lord returned to Galilee through
Samaria, and performed the second and, as it would seem,
isolated miracle of healing the son of the nobleman of
Capernaum.1 It may be further remembered that after a
brief stay in Galilee, — of which we have no further record
than the passing comment of St. Luke, that "He taught
ai iv 15 in their synagogues, being glorified of all,"2
<m. w. it. and the similarly brief notices of St. Matthew
CT-i15' and St. Mark, that the burden of that teach
ing was repentance, — our Lord went up to Jerusalem, at the
time of a festival, which it was judged highly probable was
that of Purim, with the apparent intention of staying over
plied by Wurm (Astron. Beitrage) are to be relied on as exact, the first day of
this Passover, i. e. according to popular usage, the fourteenth of Nisan took
place on the twenty-ninth of March. One day earlier (March 28) is the date
specified by Browne ( Ordo Smcl. § 64), but the Tables from which it appears to
have been derived (§ 448) are admitted to involve sufficient error to account for
the difference. See the examples on p. 497.
1 See above, Lect. III. p 131.
2 This text appears to illustrate, if not confirm, the opinion previously advanced
(see above, p. 127, note 2), that the return of our Lord specified by the three
Synoptical Evangelists (Matt. iv. 12, Mark i. 14, Luke iv. 14) does not coincide
with the interval between the fifth and sixth chapters of St. John, but with the
return specified by that Evangelist in the fourth chapter. The words of St.
Luke just seem to give that passing notice of the two-month residence in Galilee,
which preceded the Feast of Purim, that we might naturally expect. The chief
feature which probably marked that period, preaching and teaching in the
synagogues, is briefly specified, while in the words So£a£6uevos tmb rrdvToiv it is
just possible that there may be an oblique allusion to the miracle which we
know from St. John (ch. iv. 44) was performed during that interval. The force
of the main objection, that the Synoptical narrative does not thus, as it would
seem to profess to do, commence immediately after that return of our Lord to
Galilee, but really two months later, is thus so far weakened, that when we
further observe, — (a) that of two returns to Galilee, St. John pauses carefully
lo specify one, and leaves the other almost unnoticed (comp. ch. vi. 1), and
again, (b) that in ch. v. 35 our Lord seems to speak of John's ministry as some
thing now quite belonging to the past, it appears difficult to resist the convic
tion that the distinctly-mentioned avax^pntrts into Galilee of the Synoptical
writers, immediately after John's captivity, is identical with the carefully speci
fied journey recorded in the fourth chapter of St. John. See Tischendorf,
Synopsis Evangetica, p. xxv., and for the arguments (not very strong) in favor
of the identity of the above return with that implied in John vi. 1, Wieseler,
Chron. Synops. p. 161 6q. The attempt of Lange (Leben Jesu, Part Ii.) and
others to interpolate a considerable portion of the events of the present earlier
Galilean ministry between the return through Samaria and the Feast of Purim
has been well considered, and been found to involve chronological difficulties
wholly insurmountable.

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 145
the Passover,1 but that, owing to the malignity of the more
hostile section of the Jews, He appears to have left the
city almost immediately, and again to have returned -to
Galilee. Here our present section begins, and with it what may
be termed the Lord's Galilsean or extra-Judsean ministry, —
a ministry which in itself lasted about six months, but
which, combined with the journeys and interrupted minis
tries which succeeded, occupied as nearly as possible a
single year,2 — the " acceptable year " of that
ancient prophecy which our Lord Himself ^2eiv \[
proclaimed in the synagogue at Nazareth as
now receiving its fulfilment, — the year to which a most

l See above, p. 135, note 3.
2 The ministry of our Lord would thus seem to have lasted about two years
and three months, i. e. from His baptism at the close of 27 A. t>. (780 a. u. 0.) or
beginning of 28 a. i>. to the last Passover in 30 a . i>. , The opinions on this sub
ject have been apparently as much divided in ancient as in modern times.
Several early writers, among whom may be specified Clement of Alexandria
(Strom, i. 21, § 145), Origen (de Princip. iv. 5, in Levit. Horn, ix., in Luc. Horn.
xxxii., but see below), Archelaus of Mesopotamia (Routh, Meliq. Sacr. Vol.
iv. p. 218), and, according to apparently fair inferences, Julius Africanus (Gres
well, Dissert, xiii. Vol. i. p. 46), suppose our Lord's ministry to have lasted
little more than one year. Others again, of equal or even greater antiquity, such
as Melito of Sardis (Routh, Reliq. Sacr. Vol. i. p. 115), Irenseus (ffcer.n.39, but
see below), and, according to correct inferences, Tertullian (see Kaye, Eccl. Hist.
ch. n. p. 159, and compare Browne, Ordo Seed. § 86. 3), and, later in life, Origen
( Cels. n. 12, ooSfc rpia ern), have fixed the duration as three years, or, as IrenEeus
(1. c.) implies, even more. A calm consideration of these and other passages
from early writers will show that they cannot be strongly pressed on either side.
Several of them involve references to prophecy, which in some cases evidently
swayed the opinion of the writer (comp. Euseb. Dem. Evang. viii. 400 b); some
(as the passage of Irenseus) are called out by the counter-opinion of heretics,
while others again are mere obiter dicta, that cannot fairly be urged as giving
a really deliberate opinion. After a review of the whole evidence, the most
reasonable opinion, and one which tends in a great degree to harmonize these
citations, is this, — that the general feeling of antiquity was that our Lord's
entire ministry lasted for a period, speaking roughly, of about three years, but
that the more active part, i. e. that with which the synoptical narrative practically
commences, lasted one. If this be correct, the statement at the beginning of
the note has to a certain extent the united support of all antiquity, and suf
ficiently nearly accords with the three years of the significant parable (Luke
xiii. 6 sq.), which has, perhaps rightly, been pressed into this controversy. See
Wieseler, Citron. Synops. p. 202; and for further general information, Greswell,
J)issert. xiii. Vol. i. 438 sq., Browne, Ordo Sozcl. $ 85 sq., and the acute comments
of Anger, de Temp, in Act. Apost. p. 23 sq.
13

146 THE MINISTRY IK EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
trustworthy tradition preserved by Eusebius confines the
narrative of the three Synoptical Gospels.1
Before we enter upon the details of the inspired history,
let me pause to make two preliminary obser-
TwopreKminary vati0ns, the first in reference to the space of
observations. ' *r -l
time which it is convenient to consider in the
present Lecture ; the second in reference to the variations
of order in the events as related in this portion of the
Synoptical Gospels.
With regard to the first point, we may observe that we
have now before us the events of a year and
The exact period i *
of time embraced ;» a few days,2 distributed, however, very une
qually in the Gospel-narrative. Of the events
of the first portion, which, as will be seen, are included in
a period of little more than three weeks, we have an ample
and almost continuous history ; of the events of the whole
remaining period (excluding the final week of our Lord's
ministry), more isolated and detached notices, and a some
what altered mode of narration. This being the case, I
"venture to think that we shall both distribute our incidents
more equably, and, what is more important, keep distinct

l The valuable tradition above alluded to is as follows: "When the three first
written Gospels had now been delivered into the hands of all, and of John too
as well, they say that he approved of them and bore witness to their truth, and
that thus all that the history lacked was an account of the things done by Christ
at first and at the beginning of His preaching. And the account is certainly
true. For it is easily seen that the other three Evangelists have only written an
account of what was done by our Saviour in the space of one year after the
imprisonment of John the Baptist, and that they have intimated the same at the
beginning of their history." — Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. m. 24. Compare Wieseler,
Chron. Synops. p. 163.
2 The fir6t event is the rejection of our Lord on His appearance in the syna
gogue at Nazareth (Luke iv. 16). This we know was on a Sabbath-day, the exact
date of which — if Wieseler's Tables (see above, p. 143, note 4) are fully to be
relied on, and if the Feast of Purim fell, aB it appears to have done, on the Sab
bath when our Lord healed the man at the pool of Bethesda (see Lect. in. p. 134)
— would be March 26. The Passover of the succeeding year, we learn from the
same authority, commenced on April 6. We have then exactly a year and eleven
days. The calculation by which the week-day answering to any given date is
arrived at will be greatly facilitated by Tables iv. and v. in Browne's Ordo Sascl.
p. 502 6q. In the present case it will be found by independent computation that,
as above asserted, March 26 coincided with a Saturday.

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 147
from one another portions of the Gospels which appear
to be dissimilar in their general characteristics,1 if on the
present occasion we confine ourselves solely to the events
of the three weeks above alluded to, and reserve for the
remaining Lectures the events of the longer portion. The
dividing epoch, let it be observed, is that of the feeding
of the five thousand, — an epoch by no means arbitrarily
chosen, but, as a brief chronological notice
in St. John's Gospel warrants our asserting,
an epoch closely coincident with that Passover of the
present year,2 which the savage and impious designs of
the Jewish party at Jerusalem appear to have prevented
our Lord from celebrating in the Holy City.3 Estimating,
then, roughly by festivals, our present period extends from
the Feast of Purim (March 19, a. u. c. 782) to the Pass
over-eve (April 14), at which point our present medita
tions will conveniently come to their close.
With regard to the second point, — the order of the
events in these three weeks, let me briefly * The variations of
observe that the period we are now engaged order u the three
in presents the utmost difficulty to the har
monist,4 arising from this simple fact, that though all the

1 This statement will be substantiated by the succeeding comments upon the
variations of order in the first three Evangelists (p. 148), and by the introductory
remarks at the commencement of Lecture iv. The main points to be observed
are, that up to the feeding of the five thousand the order of events in St. Mat
thew appears intentionally modified, after that period, mainly regular and sys
tematic ; and that up to the same point St. Luke is full and explicit, while to the
six months between that period and the journey to Jerusalem at the Feast of
Tabernacles he only devotes about thirty verses.
2 This useful conciliatory date is commented upon by Wieseler, Chron. Synops.
p. 273. To set aside the words to irdffxa as a gloss (Mann, True Year of our
Lord's Birth, p. 161 ; comp. Browne, Ordo Steel. , 89) is arbitrary, and not justi
fied by any external evidence.
3 See above, p. 138, note 3.
4 These discrepancies perhaps can never be wholly cleared up, especially in
those cases where there are partial notes of place which augment the already
existing difficulties in regard of time. To take an example : in the case of the
healing of the leper recorded in the three Synoptical Gospels, independent of
all the difficulties arising from the difference in time, the scene of the miracle as
defined by St. Matthew, Kara^dvTt Se avr$ curb rov b'pavs (ch. viii. 1), does not
seem to accord with the iv utb} rav ir6\eav of St. Luke (ch. v. 12). We can, of

148 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
first three Evangelists record more or less the same facts,
St. Matthew relates them in an order so signally and pal
pably different from that adopted by St. Mark and St.
Luke, that all efforts to combine the two must be pro
nounced simply hopeless} Either for those three weeks
we must accept the order of St. Matthew and adapt that
of St. Mark and St. Luke to it, or we must adopt the con
verse course. The third alternative, that of constructing
a harmony of our own out of all three, — an alternative
that has only too often been adopted by the ingenious and
the speculative, — is in a high degree precarious, and, as
far as I am able to judge, has not led to any other than
debatable and unsatisfactory results.
Without here entering into details, which delivered
orally would prove both wearisome and perplexing,2 1 will

course, imagine several ways in which the two accounts could he harmonized,
but we must be satisfied with merely putting them forward as tentative and
conjectural. At first sight it might be thought judicious, in a case like the pres
ent, to consider the special notice of St. Matthew as contrasted with the more
general notices of St. Mark and St. Luke as definitely fixing both the time and
place {comp. Alford on Matt. viii. 2), hut a remembrance of the principle of
grouping, which appears almost evidently to have been followed in this portion
of the record of the first Evangelist (comp. Lecture i. p. 35), warns us at once
that all such eclectic modes of harmonizing can never be relied on, and that
even with St. Matthew's accessory definitions the order of the events he relates
must to the last remain a matter of uncertainty.
l Let the student either make for himself, with the proper notes of time and
place, three lists of the events in their order, as related by the first three Evan
gelists, or refer to those drawn up by others, as, for instance, by Wieseler ( Chron.
Synops. pp. 280, 297), Browne (Ordo Seed. § 586), or any of the better harmoniz-
ers of this portion of the inspired narrative, and he will feel the truth of this
remauk. For example, if 1 .... 26 represent in order the events of this period
as collected from St. Mark and St. Luke, the order in St. Matthew will be found
as follows : 1, 2, 3, 5, 12, 6, 13, 4, 19. 20, 7, 8, 21, 23, 15, 9, 10, 18, 17, 22, 25, 26. Such
a result speaks for itself.
2 To conduct such an inquiry properly, we must endeavor (a) to form a correct
idea of the general object of the Gospel in question, and to observe how far this
admits of its being made the basis of a regular and continuous Gospel-history;
(b) to collect all the passages which in any degree indicate the principles, anec
dotal or historical, on which the Evangelist appears to have drawn up his narra
tive ; (c) to note carefully the nature and amount of the irregularities which can
be detected, either from a comparison of different portions of the same Gospel
with one another, or with parallel accounts in the other Gospels; (d) to classify
the notes of time and place, and to observe where they are precise and definitive,
and where merely vague and indefinite; lastly, (c) to investigate the nature of

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 149
simply say, that after long and careful consideration, and
with a full sense of the great responsibility
of making distinct assertions on such diffi- ZHTsulL
cult questions before an audience like the fflmved •» these
* Lectures.
present, I have come to the determination
of following the order of events as given by St. Mark
and St. Luke, rather than that given by St. Matthew,
and that for these general but weighty reasons. First,
that in cases of clear discrepancy in the order
. n -, First reason.
of narration between two of the sacred
writers, we seem bound to follow the one who himself
tells us,1 if words mean anything, that it has been his care
to draw up his history with general reference to the order
of events. Secondly, that the order of St. Second reason.
Luke in the first part of our present por
tion is strikingly confirmed by the order of events in St.
Mark, from which it only differs in two or three instances,2

the formulas which link together the successive paragraphs, and to distinguish
between those which mark immediate connection and those which indicate
mere general sequence. The first of these heads is partially illustrated in Lect.
I p. 34; the rest are best left to independent observation. If assistance be
needed in reference to (b), see Davidson, Introd. to N. T. Vol. i. p. 66, or Cred
ner, Einleitung, § 37, p. 63 sq. ; in ref. to (e), Greswell, Dissert, hi. Vol. i. p. 195
eq. ; in ref. to (d), the table in Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 297 sq. ; and in ref. to
(e), Ebrard, Kritik der Ev. Gesch. § 23, pp. 88—94.
1 The exact meaning of some of the expressions in this introduction, especially
art' apxns, irapnKo\ovdnit6Ti, ivoibev, and most of all KO&e£rjs, has been abun
dantly discussed. The most correct view seems to be as follows: that apxn
refers to the beginning of the rrpaytidrav previously alluded to, scil. rav havud-
twv Kal Ttov TrpaypAroiV, Euthymius im loc. ; that Trapn^o\ov^nKoTi, in accord
ance both with its use and derivation, marks research as evinced in tracing
along, and, as it were, mentally accompanying the events in question; that
avta^ev refers to a commencement from the very beginning, — from the birth of
the Baptist; and, lastly, that Ka&el-ns, Uke &pe|i)s, can only imply an adherence
to the natural order of the events related, — e|ijs as exao-ra iyevero, Thucyd.
II. 1, V. 26. See Meyer, in loc, and compare Greswell, Dissert. I. Vol. i. p. 9.
In a word, in this preface we are assured by the inspired writer that we are to
expect in what follows fidelity, accuracy, research, and order; and we find them.
Compare Lange, Leben Jesu, I. 6. 3. Introd. p. 220.
2 These are, the calling of the four Apostles (Luke v. 1—11, compared with
Mark i. 16—20), the arrival of the mother and brethren of our Lord (Luke viii.
19—21, compared with Mark iii. 31—35), and apparently the calumnies of the
Pharisees (Mark iii. 20 sq., compared with Luke xi. 17 sq.), and the parable of
the Grain of Mustard (Luke xiii. 18 sq., compared with Mark iv. 30 sq.), though
13*

150 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IT.
which have been satisfactorily accounted for and adjusted.
Thirdly, that the chronology of St. Luke in
Third reason. . . . „ , ,-, 1 1 • . i
this portion of the Gospel history can be
shown to harmonize with that supplied indirectly by St.
John in a very striking manner.1 Fourthly, that the
seeming want of order in St. Matthew
Fourth reason. -. - , ,
can be very readily accounted tor by observ
ing that, in this portion of his Gospel, the Evangelist
appears to have wittingly adopted a peculiar arrangement,
viz., a separation into different groups of the discourses of
our Lord and the historical events with which they stood
in connection, and that such an arrangement almost neces
sarily precludes strict chronological adjustments. However
perplexing we may deem such a phenomenon in a Gospel
that in other parts appears mainly to follow a regular and
chronological order, — however we may be tempted to
speculate on the causes which led to it,2 this much appears

both these might well have been repeated on two different occasions. For a
good adjustment of the two main differences, see Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p.
284 sq., and in respect of the first of them, compare also Augustine, de Consens.
Ev. II. 17, and Spanheim, Dub. Evang. lxii. 2, p. 341 sq.
1 For a careful investigation, into the confirmatory elucidations of the order of
this portion of St. Luke's Gospel, as supplied by that of St. John, see Wieseler,
Chron. Synops. hi. 2 A, p. 271 sq.
2 Though it is ever both unwise and unbecoming to speculate too freely about
the origin and composition of an inspired document, the opinion may perhaps
be hazarded that this peculiarity in St. Matthew's Gospel may be due to the
incorporation by the Evangelist of an earlier (Hebrew) narrative in this later and
more complete (Greek) Gospel. If such a conjecture be received, we can not
only explain the present peculiarity, but can also account for, on the one hand,
the positive statements of antiquity that the first Evangelist composed his Gospel
originally in Hebrew (Papias ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. in. 39, Irenaeus, Host. hi. 1.
al.), and, on the other, the universal reception of the Greek Gospel as the verita
ble and undoubted work of the Evangelist. See Wieseler, Synops. p. 304. The
portion to which we are alluding may thus have been a part of the \6yia which
Papias says were drawn up by St. Matthew, and the meaning of the doubtful
word \6yia may be so far correctly modified as to point to a predominance in
that treatise of the to imb XptCTOv Aepc&eVra over the $) Trpax&ivra which
appears also included in the term. See above, Lect. i. p. 28, note 3. That St
Matthew originally wrote in Hebrew can scarcely be doubted, if we are to place
any reliance on external testimony, and that the present Greek Gospel came
from his hand, and not from that of an editor or compiler, seems almost equally
clear, from internal and external testimony combined ; how then can we adjust
the two apparent facts without assumiug an earlier and a later treatise? And if

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 151
certain, that such an arrangement does exist and can be
easily verified, if we examine the peculiar structure of the
portion of the Gospel which begins with the fifth and
closes with the thirteenth chapter. We see, for example,
that on the one hand we have three large portions contain
ing discourses, viz. the Sermon on the Mount, the appar
ently grouped and collected instructions which our Lord
addressed to the Twelve previous to their mission, and the
collection of the parables in the thirteenth chapter ; 1 and,
on the other hand, that we have a large collection of mira
cles related in the eighth and ninth chapters, which com
prise, with scarcely any exception, the scattered events of
the period preceding the sending out of the Twelve;
after which the narrative proceeds in strict chronological
order. When we add to this the concluding observation,
that, singularly enough, we find in several instances careful
notices of place exactly where the order of time seems
most disarranged,2 it seems almost impossible to resist the
conviction that the first Evangelist was by no means unac
quainted with the correct order of events, but that he
designedly departed from it, and directed his first attention
to his Master's preaching during this momentous period,
and then grouped together the nearly contemporary events
and miracles,3 with such notices of place as should guard
against any possibility of misconception.
so, is it strange that the first should have been incorporated in the second, and
thus so effectually superseded as to have soon passed out of notice? The preten
sions of the Curetonian Syriac (as put forward by its laborious editor) to repre
sent more nearly the words of St. Matthew than any other extant document
would in some degree affect the present question, if it had not apparently been
demonstrated that such pretensions are untenable. See, thus far, the recent
investigation of Roberts, Original Lang, of St. Matthew's Gospel, ch. iv. 3, p.
122 sq., and compare Donaldson, New Crat. § 15, p. 23, note (ed. 3).
1 For a brief notice of these, see Lect. I. p. 36, note 1, and for a specification of
the miracles in the eighth and ninth chapters, ib., note 2.
2 Compare for example ch. viii. 5, eiVeA&oVn 8e alrroj els Kairepvaoia ; ver.
14 i?&u)V fls r-hv olniav Herpov ; ver. 18, ets to ttipav ; ver. 28, i7&6vrt els rb
vipav els rnv x^pav rav Tepyetrnviiv ; ch. ix.l,%\2rev els ir]v 'Slav it6\iv;
ch. xii. 9, n^l&ev els rnv avvayoiynv avribv ; xiii. 1, i^e\bi>v dttb T7Jy olxlas
ixaAnro irapa tV &d\a.o-trav. See also Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 307.
3 The want of regularity in St. Matthew's Gospel, arising from this made of

152 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
Relying on these sound and apparently convincing rea
sons for following the order of St. Mark and St. Luke rather
than that of St. Matthew, let us now again take up the
thread of the inspired narrative.
After a hasty departure from Jerusalem our Lord returns
to his old home at Nazareth, where some, if
Appearance of not an 0f the kindred of the Lord appear to
our Lord in the syn- x
aaogue at Nana- have been still residing,1 and on the Sabbath-
iMke iv. i6. day which immediately succeeded His return
entered into the synagogue, as had now be
come His custom, to read and to teach. What a vivid
picture has the inspired Evangelist St. Luke been moved.
to present to us of that memorable morning. Prayer and
the reading of the law were now over a and the reading of
the prophets was to begin, and the reading of the season
was from the old Evangelist Isaiah. The Re-
Ver.lB. , , . , ,
deemer stands up to read, and, with the sanc
tion of the now not improbably expectant ruler of that

construction, is acknowledged by nearly all impartial inquirers of recent times.
See Greswell, Dissert, in. p. 194—238 ; Browne, Ordo Sad. § 690, whose theory of
a Redactor, however, is neither satisfactory nor plausible. Attention was
formerly called to it by Lightfoot (Harmony, Vol. i. p. 503, Roterod. 1686), and
also by Whiston (Harmony cf Gospels, p. 100 sq., Lond. 1702), but accounted for
by the latter in a way (misarrangement by a translator of fragmentary scraps)
which Browne (p. 644, note) properly designates as palpably absurd. He was
answered by Jones, Vindic of St. Matt. Lond. 1719.
1 It has been supposed that the Virgin and her family had retired to Cana (see
above, p. 107, note 1), but apparently not on sufficient grounds. That the
aSe\tpal of the L8rd were now living at Nazareth seems certain from Matt. xiii.
66, Mark vi. 3, and that the Virgin and the brethren were there also is not
improbable. The way, however, in which the residence of the aSeA^oi is speci
fied seems rather to imply the contrary, and may lead us to conjecture that the
Virgin and her other kindred were now at Capernaum, a place which they
might have selected for their abode a year before (John ii. 12) : consider Matt.
xii. 46 sq., Mark iii. 31 sq., Luke viii. 19 sq., and John vii. 3. The commonly
assumed identity of this visit to Nazareth with that mentioned Matt. xiii. 64 sq.,
Mark vi. 1 sq., is convincingly disproved by Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 284.
2 The service of the synagogue commenced with praise and prayer; then a
portion of the law was read aloud, and after this a portion from the prophets.
See Jost, Gesch. des Judenth. n. 1. 6, Vol. i. p. 173 sq., the special treatise of
Vitringa (de Synag.), the more modern work of Zunz (Gottesdienst. Vortrdge
der Juden. p. 329, sq.), and for useful references illustrative of the whole passage,
compare Lightfoot, Hor. Hear. Vol. ii. p. 608 sq. (Roterod. 1686).

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 153
house of prayer,1 the roll is delivered to Him by the at
tendant. He unfolds it, and reads that striking passage
which His own divine wisdom and foreknowledge had
moved Him to select,2 — that passage which
both in its specifications of time and circum- , Ver- ™\ xe
1 above, p. 145.
stances was now being so exactly fulfilled.
Such words might well have aroused the attention "of
those that heard it, nor can we wonder that
xn) i • t ii-,^ ., ^e impious se-
our .Lord s explanations3 were looked for with quel.
interest, and at first received with a kind of Ver-m-
amazed approval. But what a fearful sequel !
When grave yet gracious words of warning 4 were directed
against those feelings of distrust and unbelief into which

1 It would appear that our Lord by rising indicated that, as a member of the
synagogue of Nazareth, He desired on the present occasion to undertake the
office of Maphtir, or reader of the lesson from the prophets. Comp. Vitringa,
de Synag. in. 1. 7, Part n. p. 696 sq. Though not called upon by the ruler of the
synagogue (comp. Mishna, Tract u Megillah," iv. 4), assent is at once given, as
both the ruler and the congregation appear to have heard of the comparatively
recent miracle at Capernaum (Luke iv. 23; compare Wieseler, Chron. Synops.
p. 271), and, as the context shows (ver. 20), were full of expectation. See Light
foot, in loc. Vol. ii. p. 608.
2 It seems probable that the reading of the season was from Isaiah (Lightfoot),
and that our Lord received accordingly that portion of Scripture from the
attendant keeper of the sacred books (comp. Vitringa, Synagog. in. 2. 2, p. 899),
but that, with the privilege which the oral law conceded in the case of the lesson
from the prophets (Mishna, "Megillah," iv. 4), He either passed over from the
section of the day to the beginning of the sixty-first chapter, or else, as " Lord of
the Sabbath," specially selected that portion. See Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. Vol. ii.
p. 509, and comp. Meyer in loc. The supposition that on our Lord's opening the
roll this passage providentially met His eye (comp. De Wette), is not improbable,
but apparently less in accordance with the avcarril-as, which, as Lightfoot
remarks, seems somewhat more than the mere " explicuit or aperuit librum "
(I. c p. 510).
s After having read such a portion of the passage as by custom was deemed
sufficient ("si fuerit Sabbato interpres, legunt in Propheta versiculos tres aut
quinque aut septem, et non sunt soliciti de versiculis viginti uno," Massecheth
Soph. cap. 12), our Lord took upon Himself the office of interpreter, and, accord
ing to custom-, sat down to perform it. Comp. Zunz, Gottesd. Vortrdge derJuden.
p. 337, and Sepp, Leben Christi, n. 10, Part II. p. 122.
4 The objections that have been urged against the general character of this
address are most idle and irreverent. Our Lord, who knew the human heart,
saw here unbelief, and the ordinary Galilaan estimate of His divine mission
(John iv. 45), in their worst forms, and accordingly adopts the language of merci
ful warning and reproof. On the whole incident, see some useful comments in
Lange, Leben Jesu. n. 4. 9, Part u. p. 541 sq.

154 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. TV.
even now these dull-hearted men of Nazareth were fast
falling back again, we remember with horror what followed,
— how these wretched men dared to do what even the
gainsayers at Jerusalem a week before had only begun to
think of doing, how they thrust Him forth not only from
their synagogue and their town, but led Him
to a neighboring declivity, which modern
travellers have not doubtfully identified,^ to cast Him
down headlong, and how by an exercise of His divine
power 2 He escaped their impious and venge
ful hands.
Henceforth that quiet home in the bosom of the green
hills of Galilee was no longer to be the Lord's
ab^aTca^r- earthly resting place. His divine'steps were
"""""' now turned to more busy scenes, and, in
Isaiah tx.lsq. .
accordance with the voice of ancient proph
ecy, to the people that sat in the darkness the Light came ;
and in Capernaum, at but little distance 3 from that fair
and populous plain of " Gennesar," which a nearly contem
porary visitor has so eloquently described,4 the rejected
1 The exact place to which these wretched and infatuated people endeavored to
lead our Lord was certainly not the traditional Mount of Precipitation overlook
ing the vale of Esdraelon and two miles distant, but apparently one of the preci
pices of the western hill which flanks the town, — perhaps that by the present
Maronite church. See Robinson, Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 335 (ed. 2); and compare
Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 363 (ed. 2), Thomson, The Zand and the Book,
Vol. ii. p. 135. In the photograph of Frith (Syria and Palestine, Part n.) this
portion of the western hill is not included. See Roberts, Holy Land, Vol. ii.
Plate 29.
2 There does not seem sufficient reason for assuming, with Robinson and others,
that in this there was no exercise of that miraculous power which most of the
ancient writers (Ambrose, Euthymius, al.) recognize in our Lord's thus passing
through the infuriated throng. So also, and rightly, Alford in loc. In all these
things He manifested alike the exercise of His divine wisdom and His divine
power ; of the former in defining the time in which He vouchsafed to suffer, and of
the latter in preventing that time being hurried by the impiety and violence of men.
As Cyril of Alexandria well says, " it depended on Him to suffer, or not to
suffer; for He is the Lord of times as well as of things." — Comment, on St. Luke,
Part I. p. 64, where, however, it is just to observe that there is no distinct refer
ence to an exercise of miraculous power, but rather of overawing majesty. So
also Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 4. 9, Part ii. p. 648.
3 As to the supposed position of Capernaum, see Lect. m. p. 121, note 1.
4 See Josephus, Bell. Jud. in. 10. 8, — according to Robinson (Palestine, Vol. ii.

Ch. v. 1.

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 155
One of Nazareth found a more thankful and believing
home. More thankful, and more believing ;
for, not perhaps without a fresh recollection of specua canto the
the miracle performed on one who had lain
sick among them a few weeks before, the peo- John '"• 46>
pie, we are told by St. Luke, "pressed upon
Him to hear the word of God ; " and we may
well conceive that it was not without the deep conscious
ness and foreknowledge of the active ministry that was
now to be vouchsafed amid the populous towns of Gennes
areth,1 that He called the four disciples, who had already
been with Him for above a year, to leave on this occasion
for ever their earthly occupations, and to become the "fishers
of men." And we know how readily that call
was obeyed ; we know how St. Peter and
his brother, and the two sons of Thunder, wrought upon
by that miracle that showed how the crea
tures that the hand of the Lord had made ^e"«-
Ver. 9.
could gather together at His will, — that mir
acle that brought the impressible Peter on his knees,2 and
p. 402) an overdrawn picture. Thomson, with more judgment, draws a distinc
tion between what the land then was and what it has become now. Comp. The
Land and the Book, Vol. i. p. 836.
1 A very good description of what was probably the state of this populous
district in the time of our Lord is given by Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 371
sq. (ed. 2). The remark that "it was to the Roman Palestine almost what the
manufacturing districts are to England," is apparently borne out by the indirect
allusions in the inspired narrative to the populous nature of the district, and by
what we can infer from the ruins which are still found scattered about on the
western shores of the lake. Compare Robinson, Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 403. The
traces of buildings which appear to have been used in the operations of trade,
and may be the remains of ancient potteries, tanneries, etc., have been observed
by Dr. Thomson at Tabiga, which he terms "the grand manufacturing suburb of
Capernaum." — The Land and the Book, Vol. i. p. 547.
2 The effect which the miracle produced on St. Peter is well commented upon
by Olshausen (in loc. Vol. i. p. 299, Clark), and by Ewald, Gesch. Christus', p.
252. The contrast between his own conscious unholiness and the holy majesty
and power of Him who had just wrought the mighty miracle made the fervid
disciple both on the one hand offer his spontaneous adoration, and on the other
to beseech his pure, sinless Lord to depart from one who felt and knew in his
own bosom what sin was. On the whole miracle, 6ee Olshausen, Commentary,
Vol. i. p. 292 sq. (Clark); Trench, Miracles, p. 126; and compare Lange, Leben
Jesu, ii. 4. 11, Part II. p. 662 sq.

156 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
filled all with amazement, — obeyed the heavenly voice,
and left father .and earthly callings, nets and vessels, for
sook all, and followed Him.1
This prompt adhesion of men so well known in Caper
naum as two at least of the four must have
rSdalZ°Lasyt, been,2 this ready giving up of everything to
gogue at caper- f0\\ow Jesus of Nazareth, could not have been
without its effect on the people of Caper
naum and its neighborhood. The report, too, of the mira
cle, though, perhaps, as yet not fully understood or appre
ciated, had probably soon passed from mouth to mouth
among the fishers and boatmen on the lake, and might
well have added to the prevailing expectation and excite
ment. We may readily imagine, then, the eagerness and
gladness with which on the following Sab-
Jfarifc t. 21. bath the Redeemer's preaching was listened
to in the synagogue, and we know the mighty effect that
was produced by it, enhanced as it was by the subsequent
healing of the demoniac within its walls.3 How start
ling must have been that scene when the spirits of dark
ness, driven by the wild antagonisms of their
Lvkeiv.U. ' ... ,
fears and malignities, broke out amid that
mingled concourse into cries alike of reprobation and of

l There seems no reason for doubting that the call of the four disciples men
tioned by St. Matthew (ch. iv. 18 sq.) and St. Mark (ch. i. 16 sq.) was contempo
raneous with the above call mentioned by St. Luke. The only difficulty is, that
St. Luke makes it subsequent to the healing of the demoniac and of St. Peter's
mother-in-law, while St. Mark places it before. The order of the latter is con
firmed by St. Matthew, and distinctly to be preferred, especially as the change
of order in St. Luke can be partly accounted for by the desire of the Evangel
ist to place in immediate contrast the reception in the synagogue at Cana with
the rejection a week before at Nazareth. See Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 285 6q.
2 From the notice of the hired servants (Mark i. 20), the two vessels employed
(Luke v. 7), and the subsequent mention of St. John's acquaintance with one in
so high a position as the high-priest (John xviii. 15), it has been reasonably
inferred that Zebedee, if not a wealthy man (Jerome, in Matt. iv. 12, opp. to
Chrys. in Joann. Horn. n. 1), was at any rate of some position in Capernaum.
8 See especially Mark i. 27 ( Tisch.), in which this amazement both at the teach
ing and the miracle is expressed in the strongest terms; — Tf itrrtv tovto ; 5i-
Saxb Ktuvii kot' i£ovtriav nal rots Trviipuurtv rolf cuca&dpTois iirndao-si, Kal
\nraKoiovfftv ouT<y.

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 157
confession,1 " Let us alone, — I know thee who thou art ;
the Holy One of God." What amazement
was there then when those frightful voices Ma'*t-U-
° Luke IV. 34.
were silenced, and the wretched sufferer,
whose frail body had been the tenement of those hellish oc
cupants, though rent and convulsed by the final paroxysm,
yet a moment afterwards stood both freed
J Mark i. 26.
and unharmed before them.2 There were as zukew. as.
yet none among those simple-hearted men to
object to healings on the Sabbath. There were as yet
none to make the blasphemous assertion that such power,
after all, was only due to some league with the prince of
those spirits that had been commanded with
such authority, and had obeyed with such ",'"!'„
J ' J Mark til. 82.
terror. These men of Capernaum had no
such doubts ; they saw and believed, yea, and, as two Evan
gelists record, soon spread the fame of the great Healer
not only through all the neighboring villages and towns,
but in all the regions round about Galilee.
But the wonders of this first Sabbath at Mark\ k-. see
Capernaum, this day of which the events M'rZkuedprfor-
are so specially and so minutely told us by m""oe °f ™r<"cfe'
r J J J en the same day.
two Evangelists, had not yet come to their
close. Immediately after that amazing scene in the syna-

1 In the circumstances connected with this and other miracles performed on
demoniacs, three things are worthy of notice : (1) the lost consciousness of per
sonality on the part of the sufferer, the man becoming, as it were, identified with,
and at times the mouthpiece of, the devil within him (Mark v. 7, Luke viii. 28) ;
(2) the terror-stricken recognition on the part of the devils of Jesus as the Son
of God and their future Judge (Matt. viii. 29, Mark iii. 11, v. 7, Luke viii. 28),
enhanced in the present narrative by the awful ea\ (Luke iv. 34) of the recoiling
demon; (3) the prohibition from speaking on the part of our Lord (Mark i. 34, iii.
12, Luke iv. 41), possibly that the multitude might not believe in their Redeemer
on the testimony of devils. Compare Cyril Alex, on Luke iv. 41, Part I. p. 71
(Transl.). Hence, perhaps, the omission of the prohibition in the case of the
demoniacs of Gadara or Gergesa, when only those were present whose faith
was already firm and convictions true and settled.
2 For further comments on this miracle, see Trench, Miracles, p. 230, and for
some thoughtful observations on the case of demoniacal possessions generally,
Olshausen, Commentary, p. 305. Compare also Deyling, 06s. Sacr. XXVIII. Part
II. p. 373 sq. 14

Matt. i. 29.
Ver. 29.

158 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
gogue, probably about mid-day,1 our Lord, with His four
freshly-called disciples round Him, enters
into the common dwelling of two of the
number, and graciously vouchsafes to that
small home-circle, on the person of the mother-in-law of
St. Peter, another merciful display of those healing powers,
of which a whole synagogue had but lately been witness.
There, perhaps in the low and crowded suburb,2 the
mother-in-law of the Apostle Peter was laid, and sick, as
the physician-Evangelist characteristically notices, of a
great fever.3 But the Healer was now nigh at hand. Anx
iously they tell Him of her state ; anxiously they beseech
His help ; and with power and majesty that help is be
stowed. With His voice the Lord rebukes4
Luke iv. 39.
Matt. viii. ss. the evil influence of the disease, with His hand
He touches the sufferer, — and she, who a mo
ment before lay subdued and powerless, now rises, supported

l It would seem, from a passage in Josephus, that on the Sabbath-day the usual
hour for the meal of which our Lord appears afterwards to have partaken in
the house of the two brothers was mid-day : eKrn tlipa ko&' fy Tots o-d$fZaffiv
hpiffTOTtoteltj^at vopttaov iarlv nalv. De Vita Sua, cap. 54. The service in the
synagogue, the forms and hours of which appear to have been studiously con
formed to those in the temple-worship (Vitringa, de Synag. p. 42, Jost, Gesch.
des Judenth. Vol. i. p. 170), would in all probability have commenced about
nine o'clock, and ended some time before mid-day.
2 The conjecture of Dr. Thomson above alluded to (p. 155, note 1), that Tabiga
is the site of what was the manufacturing suburb of Capernaum, derives some
support from the above incident, there being marshy land in the vicinity which
might account for the "great fever" under which St. Peter's mother-in-law
was suffering. See 27ie Land and the Book, Vol. i. p. 647. There may be also a
slight hint at the season of the year, as we learn from modern travellers that in
the East fevers prevail in spring and autumn, dysentery in the summer. Comp.
Winer, BWB. Art. "Krankheiten," Vol. i. p. 673.
3 This passage has been often referred to as illustrating not only the accuracy,
but the profession of St. Luke. We learn from the Greek medical writers that
there was a recognized distinction between " great " and " small " fevers. See
Galen, de Different Febr. I. cited by Wetstein in loc.
4 The exact expression in the original should not be overlooked, iireriurio'ev
Tip irvpfTtp (Luke iv. 39), according to which the disease, like the boisterous
wind and stirred-up sea in the miracle on the lake (Matt. viii. 27, Mark iv. sq.,
Luke viii. 24), is treated as a hostile potency. Deductions as to the presence of
spiritual agencies iu similar cases must be made with caution ; but the expression
is remarkable, and has. not been left unnoticed by the early expositors. See
especially Cyril Alex, in loc. Part i. p. 69 (Transl.).

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 159
by the Divine hand, and, as all the three Synoptical Evan
gelists especially notice, ministers unto them,1 and with
wonted strength and health prepares for our Lord and His
followers the Sabbath mid-day meal. And yet the record
of that eventful day is not concluded. A few hours later,
at sun-set,2 the whole city, with all its sick,
gathers at the door of the house, and ancient -»*"*«¦ 83.
° ' Isai. mt. 4.
prophecy again finds its fulfilment in that
exercise of Divine power that raised the sick and healed
demoniacs, and yet chained in silence the driven-forth
spirits,3 who, with the recognition of terror, both knew
Him and would have proclaimed Him as
man's Redeemer and their own Judge.
What an insight does the account of this day, so marked
by deeds of love and mercy, give us into
the nature of our Lord's ministry in Galilee ! ™<= "¦»""•« of
... our Lord's minis-
What holy activities, what ceaseless acts of uriai labors, as tn-
, rt , . -, ... r. dicated by this one
mercies ! Such a picture does it give us ot day.
their actual nature and amount,that we may
well conceive that the single day, with all its quickly suc
ceeding events, has been thus minutely portrayed to show
us what our Redeemer's ministerial life really was,4 and to
1 " Not only doth He cure her from her disease," says Theophylact, " but also
Infuses in her full strength and power, enabling her to minister." — In Luc. iv.
39, p. 334 (Paris, 1631). Compare also Chrysost. in loc. For some very good
remarks on the manner in which this miracle was performed, see Cyril Alex, in
loc. Part I. p. 70 sq. (Transl.). Compare also Trench, Miracles, p. 234.
2 This note of time, supplied both by St. Mark (i. 32) and St. Luke (iv. 40),
6erves to mark that the Sabbath was over, after which the sick and suffering
could legally be brought to our Lord. See Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. Vol. i. p. 306
(Roterod. 1686). So rightly Theophylact (in Marc. i. 32), and the Scholiast in
Cramer, Caten. Vol. i. p. 278.
8 The comment of Cyril Alex, (referred to above, p. 157, note 1) seems correct
and pertinent : " He would not permit the unclean demons to confess Him, for
it was not fitting for them to usurp the glory of the Apostolic office, nor with
impure tongue to talk of the mystery of Christ." — Part I. p. 71 (Transl.). See
also Theophyl. in Due iv. 41 (first interpretation), who subjoins the good practical
remark, — ovx apatos dlvos iv ariaart auaproi\av.
4 The incidents of this first Sabbath at Capernaum are well noticed by Ewald
( Gesch. CliTistus', p. 254 sq.), as showing what the nature of our Lord's holy
labors really was. Comp. Lange, Leben Jesu, II. 4. 11, p. 659 sq. The occurrence
of so many events on a single day makes the short duration of the present min
istry in Galilee less improbable.

160 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
justify, if need be, the noble hyperbole of the beloved
Apostle, that if the things which Jesus did should be writ
ten every one, "the world itself could not
John xxi. 25. . , . , 1 iii, • „
contain the books that should be written.
What a day too had this been for Capernaum ! What
manifestations of Divine power had been vouchsafed to
them in their synagogue ! what mercies had
Marki.33. J ° ° .
been showered down upon them m their
streets! Could they, and did they, remain insensible to
such displays of omnipotence ? It would have been indeed
impossible ; and it is not with surprise that we find that
in the dawn1 of the following morning the multitudes,
conducted as it would seem by Peter and
jwtefe^ tlle newly-called disciples, tracked out the
great Healer to the lonely place whither
He had withdrawn to commune with His Father, broke in
upon His very prayers, and strove to prevent His leaving
those whom He had now so preeminently
blessed. But it might not be. That request
could not be granted in the exclusive manner in which it
had been urged. Though the faith of these men of Ca
pernaum was subsequently rewarded by our Lord's vouch
safing soon to return again, and by His gracious choice of.
Capernaum as His principal place of abode, yet now, as
He alike tells both them and His disciples.
Mark i. 38. He must fulfil His heavenly mission by
preaching to others as well as unto them. The blessings
of the Gospel were to be extended to the other towns and
villages by those peopled shores,2 and thither, with His
l We learn from St. Mark that our Lord retired before day broke to some
lonely spot, apparently at no great distance from Capernaum (comp. Stanley,
Sinai and Palestine, ch. x. p. 374), and was there praying. See ch. i. 32. From
the tenses used and the special note of time, iVcuxa A'tu' (Lachm., Tisch.), it
would seem that He had been there some little time before He was discovered by
St. Peter and those with him, who appear to have thus eagerly followed out
Lord (KareSla^av avrbv) at the instigation of the multitude. See Luke iv. 42,
and compare Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 4. 11, Part II. p. 561.
2 The expression used by St. Mark (ch. i. 38) is ras ixouivas Ka>p.0T6\eis (St.
Luke adopts the more general term, rats heptus %6\eaw), which seems to mark

Leot. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 161
small company of followers, the Lord departed, " healing,"
as St. Matthew tells us, " all manner of sick
ness, and all manner of disease, among the t Lukeiv'2S'
people." How long this circuit lasted we are not specially in
formed, but as one incident only, the healing
of the earnest and adoring leper,1 appears . Prohahle **™-
° * ' ¦* -* tion of this circuit.
to belong to this journey, we may perhaps,
not without some probability, believe that the present
circuit lasted but a few days, and that the return to Caper
naum took place on the day before the Sab- Mark ii. 1 .
bath of that week, — a Sabbath of which we
have some special notices.2
the sort of "village-towns" (compare Strabo, Geogr. xn. pp. 637, 657) with
which the whole adjacent plain of Gennesareth was closely studded. Compare
Stanley, Sinai and Palest, ch. x. p. 370.
1 It seems right to speak guardedly, as St. Matthew (ch. viii. 1) here appears
to add a note of time, tcaTafSdvrt Se avrqi airb rov upous (Rec, Tisch.). As,
however, there is nothing very definitely connective in the Kal tSov Xarphs 7rpo-
ae\&wi/ k. r. A.., as St. Mark and St. Luke both agree in their position of the
miracle, and as the place it occupies in St. Matthew's Gospel can he reasona
bly accounted for (see Lightfoot, Harmony, Vol. i. p. 512), we seem justified in
adhering to the order of St. Mark and St. Luke. Compare Wieseler, Chron.
Synops. p. 306 sq. On the miracle itself, one of the most remarkable character
istics of which was, that, as the three Evangelists all specify (Matt. viii. 13, Mark
i. 41, Luke v. 13), our Lord touched the sufferer {BeiKvbs tin 7} ayla avrov o~apj;
aytaa-fiov /ieTe5£5ov, Theoph. in Matt. I.e.), see Trench, Miracles, p. 210; and
for some good notices on the nature of the disease, Yon Ammon, Leben Jesu,
Vol. i. p. Ill, and the frightful account in Thomson, Land and Boole, Vol. ii.
p. 516. The subject is treated very fully and completely in Winer, BWB. Art.
" Aussatz," Vol. i. p. 114 sq.
2 As the circuit was probably confined to the "village-towns" on the western
shores of the lake and in the vicinity of Capernaum {see above, p. 160, note 2), we
have an additional reason for thinking that it did not last more than four or five
days, and that thus our Lord might easily and naturally be found at Capernaum
on the following Sabbath, which, as we shall see below, has a definite and dis
tinctive date. No objection against this chronological arrangement can be
founded on the fact that our Lord " preached in their synagogues" (Mark i. 39,
Luke iv. 44), as it appears certain, setting aside extraordinary days {of which
there would seem to have been one in this very week, — the New Moon of Nisan),
there were services on the Mondays and Thursdays (compare Mishna, Tract
"Megillah," i. 2), in which the law was read and probably expounded, and to
which the Talmudists (on " Baba, Bathra," 4) assigned as great an antiquity as
the days of Ezra. See Lightfoot, Harmony, Vol. i. p. 476 (Roterod. 1686). Vit
ringa, de Synag. I. 2. 2, p. 287, and compare Jost, Gesch. des Judenth. Vol. i. p.
168 sq. Some valuable observations on the^ubject of our Lord and His Apostles
preaching in synagogues will be found in Vitringa, de Synag. m. 1. 7, p. 696 sq.
14*

162 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
Meanwhile Capernaum had not forgotten its Healer and
Redeemer, though evil men from other parts
^™*S of Galilee, and, as it is significantly added,
ing of the faithful f j^gga arJd Jerusalem, had now come in
paralytic. '
among them,1 — men, as it would seem,
Luke v. IT. o > _
specially sent to collect charges against our
Lord, and to mature the savage counsels which, we have
already seen,2 had been taken by the party of the Sanhe
drin. No sooner was it noised abroad that He had
returned, than we find the whole city flocking to the
house, so that, as St. Mark with one of his graphic notices
tells us, " there was no room to receive them,
no not so much as about the door." But
there were some without who would not be sent away.
One sinful 3 but heart-touched paralytic there was, whose
body and soul alike needed healing, and whose faith was
such that, when entry in the usual way was found to be

1 We owe the important notice of the precise quarter from which these evil
men came solely to St. Luke. From the other two Synoptical Evangelists we
only learn that the objectors were Scribes (Matt. ix. 3, Mark ii. 6), and that they
appear to have come there with a sinister intent. The allusion, however, to
Judasa and Jerusalem (especially when compared with Mark iii. 22, ypafifiareis
ol attb 'lepotroKvpiuv KaraPavTes), throws a light upon the whole, and gives
some plausibility to the supposition that the " Scribes and Pharisees " we here
meet with for the first time in Galilee were emissaries from the hostile party at
Jerusalem. These men, promptly uniting themselves with others that they
found to be like-minded in Galilee, form a settled plan of collecting charges
against our Lord, and the sequel shows with what feelings and in what spirit
they were acting. For a while they wear the mask ; they reason (Luke v. 21),
they murmur (ver. 30), they insidiously watch (ch. vi. 7). Soon, however, all
disguise is thrown aside ; a deed of mercy on the Sabbath, in spite of their tacit
protest, hurries them on to their ruthless decision. That decision is at Caper
naum what it had already been at Jerusalem (John v. 18), — death. See Matt.
xii. 14, Mark iii. 6.
2 See above, Lect. iii. p. 138.
3 We may infer this from the declaration of our Lord recorded by all the
three Synoptical Evangelists, — atpioivTal trov al auaprlai, Matt. ix. 2, Mark ii.
5; comp. Luke v. 20. The disease of the man, as Neander observes, may have
been due to sinful excesses; and the consciousness, if not of this connection, yet
of the guilt within him, was such that spirit and body reacted on each other, and
an assurance of forgiveness was first needed, before the sensible pledge of it
extended to him by his cure could be fully and properly appreciated. See Life
of Christ, p. 272 (Bohn), and compare Olshausen, Commentary, Vol. 1. p. 300 sq.
(Clark).

Lect. TV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 163
impracticable, he prevailed on friends to bear him up the
outside staircase, and let him down, through the roof into
the upper chamber, where, as it would seem from the nar
rative, our Lord was preaching to the mingled multitude
both around Him and in the courtyard below.1 And we
remember well how that faith prevailed, and
how the soul was healed first and then the ^^
palsied body, and how the last act was made
use of, as it were, to justify the first in the eyes of those
Scribes and Pharisees who had stolen in among the simple-
hearted men of Capernaum, and were finding blasphemy
in the exercise of the Divine power and prerogatives of
the Son of God. But this time at least those intruders
were silenced, for when the sufferer obeyed His Lord's
command, and showed the completeness of his restored
powers 3 by bearing his bed and walking through that now
yielding throng, not only amazement, but, as
St. Matthew and St. Luke both notice, fear !'«='>¦;
found its way into their hearts, and made the
lips confess " that they had seen strange things that day."
But another opportunity soon offered itself to these

1 The course adopted was as follows : As the bearers could not enter the house,
on account of the press (Mark ii. 4), they ascend by the outside staircase that led
from the street to the roof (Winer, B WB. Art. " Dach," Vol. i. p. 242), proceed
ing thereon till they come to the spot over which they judged our Lord to be.
They then remove the tiles, or thin stone slabs, which are sometimes used even
at this day (see Thomson, cited below), and make an opening (Mark ii. 4, Luke
v. 19; comp. Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 15. 12), through which, perhaps assisted by
those below, they let the man down into the inreptpov, or large and commonly
low chamber beneath, in which, or perhaps rather under the verandah of which,
the Lord then was. See Thomson, The Land and the Book, Vol. ii. p. 7 sq.,
Meyer, Komment. uber Mark. p. 24 sq., and compare the good article in Kitto,
Bibl. Cyclop. Vol. i. p. 874 sq., especially p. 877.
2 "He saith to the paralytic, Rise, and take up thy bed, to add a greater con
firmation to the miracle, as not being in appearance only; and, at the same time,
to show that He not only healed him, but infused power into him." — Theophyl.
on Mark ii. 11. The command on the former occasion that it was given (John
v. 8) probably also involved a reference to Christ's lordship over the Sabbath.
Comp. Lect. in. p. 137. For further comments on this miracle, see Olshausen,
Commentary, Vol. i. p. 326 sq., Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 4. 14, Part n. p. 666 sq.,
Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 199 sq. ; and for some curious allegorical appli
cations, Theophylact, loc cit. p. 199 (Paris, 1631).

164 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
captious and malignant emissaries. Every prejudice was
to be rudely shocked, when, as it would
The caii of st. seem, 0n the very same dav, our Lord called
Matthew, and the 'f " . .. - ,
feast at his house. from his very toll-booth, by the side ot tne
Matt. ix. o. laj a puDiioan Matthew,1 — a publican, to
Mark ii. 14. ' L
be one of His followers and disciples. Here
was an infraction of all that Pharisaical prejudice held to
be most clear and recognized, an infraction, too, against
which they were soon able to inveigh openly, when, at the
feast which the grateful publican made in honor of His
Lord, and to which, perhaps by way of farewell, many of
his old associates were summoned,2 the great Teacher
openly sat down to meat "with publicans and sinners."
This was an opportunity that could not be neglected.
The disciples are taxed with their own and their Master's

1 There seems no reason for calling in question the opinion of most of the
more ancient writers (see Const. Apost. vm. 22, and Coteler, in loc. ; contrast,
however, Heracleon, ap. Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 11), that Levi (Mark ii. 14, Luke
v. 27) and Matthew (Matt. ix. 9) are names of one and the same person. In
favor of this identity, we have (1) the perfect agreement, both as to place and all
attendant circumstances, of the narrative of the calling of Matthew (Matt. ix.
10) with that of the calling of Levi (Mark ii. 15, Luke v. 29); (2) the absence on
the lists of the Apostles of any trace of the name Levi (the attempted identifica
tion with Lebbaeus is in the highest degree improbable), while the name of Mat
thew occurs in all, and is1 specified by the first Evangelist (ch. x. 3) as of that
earthly calling which is here definitely ascribed by the second Evangelist to
Levi. It is far from improbable that, after and in memory of his call, the grate
ful publican changed his name to one more appropriate and significant. He
was now no longer n*)P but ~^frH, not Levi but Theodore, one who might well
deem both himself and all his future life a veritable " gift of God." See Winer,
BWB. s. v. "Name," Vol. ii. p. 135.
2 This supposition, which is due to Neander (Life of Christ, p. 230, Bohn), is
not without some probability; at the same time the specially inserted dative
avTtp (Luke v. 29) seems clearly to imply that St. Matthew's first object in giving
the entertainment was to do honor to our Lord, and thereby to commemorate
his own now highl3r-favored lot. Compare Hall, Contempt, iv. 4. The attempt
to show that the feast mentioned by St Matthew is not that mentioned by St.
Mark and St. Luke (Greswell, Dissert, xxv. Vol. ii. p. 397) is by no means suc
cessful; still less the attempt of Meyer (Komment. rib. Matt. p. 195) to establish a
discrepancy between the first and the other two Synoptical Evangelists as to the
locality of the feast. That iv rr, oUlo. (Matt. ix. 10) refers to the bouse of St.
Matthew (iv rij olxlq. -rrj ixelvov, Chrys.) is not only grammatically possible,
but in a high degree natural and probable ; the general expression is studiedly
used by the Apostle as keeping in the background the fact of his own grateful
hospitality. See Blunt, Veracity of Evangelists, }, 6, p. SO sq.

Leot. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 165
laxity, to which the Lord vouchsafes an answer, turning
against these gainsayers the very term in which their pre
judice had expressed itself. The Redeemer, He tells them,
had "• not come to call the righteous, but sin-
ners to repentance." If the publicans were jlfo"-fa-ls-
sinners, then to them must He vouchsafe His presence,
then with them was it meet that He should be found. It
was in vain that they shifted their ground, and brought
forward the stern practices of John's disciples, some of
whom it is noticed were present, and some of
whom seem to have been speakers. They Marka.is.
r a Matt.ix.li.
were not worldly, they fasted ; the prophet
of Nazareth feasted. Yea, but the very garments worn
by those around, and the very wine they were drinking,
suggested a simile that conveyed the true answer, —
the New and the Old could not be brought together;1
the spirit of the new dispensation was incompatible with
the dead formalities of a dispensation that now, with all
that marked it, was gone and passed away for ever.
The day that followed was apparently a Sabbath,2 the
second-first Sabbath as it is especially defined
"LC1T1 if cii, • . Further charges :
by ot. .Luke, — the nrst Sabbath, as it is now the plucking of the
most plausibly explained, of a year that, stood cars° corn'
second in a sabbatical cycle,3 — when again the same bit-
1 Some good comments on this text, of which'the above is a summary, will be
found in Cyril Alex. Comment, on St. Luke, Part n. p. 89 (Oxf. 1859).
2 This assertion rests, not on the iv ixelvtp rtji ncup'2 (ch. xii. 1) of St. Mat
thew, which is only a general note of time, but on the apparent close connection
in point of time between the diflereut charges of the Pharisees and their adher
ents. The Passover was nigh at hand, and time was pressing.
3 There are four explanations of this difficult word that deserve consideration :
(a) that of Theophylact (in loc), that it was a Sabbath that immediately suc
ceeded a festival, which, from falling on the trapaaKevn, was observed as a regu
lar Sabbath ; (6) that of Scaliger (de Emend. Temp. p. 557), that it was the Sabbath
that succeeded the second day of the Passover; (c) that of Hitzig (Ost. u. Pfingst.
p. 19), that it was the fifteenth of, Nisan, the fourteenth being, it is asserted,
always coincident with a Sabbath; (d) that of Wieseler (Chron. Synops. p. 231
sq.), as stated in the text. Of these (a) is open to the decisive objection that
such concurrences must have been frequent, and that if such was the custom,
and such the designation, we must have found some trace of it elsewhere ; (c)
involves an assumption not historically demonstrable (see Wieseler, Chron.

166 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lbct. TV.
ter spirit of Pharisaical malice finds opportunity for dis.
playing itself.. Yesterday the social privacy of the publi
can's feast, to-day the peace and rest of the year's first
Sabbath,1 is broken in upon by the malignity of that same
gathered company of Pharisees whom Judaea and Jeru
salem, and alas too Galilee, had sent forth to
££££:«.«. forejudge and to condemn. With the full
uukna rFeah," sanction of the Mosaic law the disciples were
ch, 2J. A
plucking the ears of ripening corn, and rub
bing them in their hands. The act was permissible, but
the day was holy,2 and J,he charge, partly in the way of
rebuke to the disciples, partly in the way of complaint to
our Lord, who was tacitly sanctioning their act, is promptly
made with every assumption of offended piety, — " Why
do ye do that which it is not lawful to do on
the Sabbath?" Why indeed! The reason
was obvious; the justification immediate. Did not the
history of the man after God's own heart justify such an
Synops. p. 353 sq.), and, equally with (&), labors under the formidable objection
that as the event here specified is thus at, and not, as every reasonable system of
chronology appears to suggest, before a Passover, the Passover at the feeding of
the five thousand (John vi. 4) must be referred to a succeeding year, and an
interval of more than a year assumed to exist between the fifth and sixth chap
ters of St. John. We adopt, then, (d), as open to no serious objections, as involv
ing no chronological difficulties, and as apparently having some slight historical
basis to rest upon, viz. that at this period years appear to have been reckoned by
their place in a Sabbatical cycle. Comp. Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 10. 6. The word is
omitted in the important MSS. "B and L, and a few ancient versions (see Tischen
dorf in loc), but seems certainly genuine, there being an obvious reason for its
omission, and none for its insertion.
l The exact date of this Sabbath, according to our present calendar, if we can
rely on the tables of Wurm and Wieseler, would seem to be April 9, — a date
when the corn would be forward enough in many localities to be rubbed in the
hands. See Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 225 sq., and compare Lect. in. p. 107,
note 3.
2 The act was regarded as a kind of petty harvesting, and as such was regarded
by the ceremonial Pharisee as forbidden, if not by the written, yet by the oral
law: "Metens sabbato vel tantillum reus est. Et vellere spicas est species mes-
sionis." Maimonides, Tit. " Shabbath," ch. ix. cited by Lightfoot (Hor. Hebr. in
Matt. xii. 2, Vol. ii. p. 320), who further reminds us that, according to the tradi
tional law, the punishment for the offence was capital, the action being one of
those t; per quas reus fit homo lapidationis atque excisionis." — Maimon. ib. ch.
vii. It is not probable that at this period such a penalty would ever have been
pressed ; still it is not unreasonable to suppose that the legally grave nature of the

The healing of a
man with a with-

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 167
act ? Did not the unblamed acts of the great type of Him
who stood before them supply the substance,
as did ancient prophecy the exact terms of * &»»•»«¦ «•
, , Hos. vi. 6.
the answer that was vouchsafed, " I will have
mercy, and not sacrifice"? Mercy, and not sacrifice,—
words uttered already the day before, but
now accompanied with a striking declaration, """¦¦'¦ '-¦
which some of those standing by might have remembered
had been practically illustrated three weeks before in Je
rusalem by a deed of mercy and power,1 even " ttyit the
Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath,"
and of all its alleged restrictions.
And now hostility deepens. On the next, or apparently
next day but one,2 which, in the case of the
year we are considering (a. u. c. 782), com
putation would seem to fix as the seventh ^J^ °" "
day of the first month, and which we may infer
from a passage in Ezekiel was specially regarded as a holy
day,3 we almost detect traces of a regular stratagem. A
man in the synagogue afflicted with a with
ered right hand, placed perchance in a promi
nent position, forms the subject of a question which these
wretched spies not only entertain in their
hearts, but even presume openly to propound MJt ^ 'lg
to our Lord, — "was it lawful to heal on
the Sabbath-day?" The answer was prompt and practi-

supposed offence may have tended to call forth from our Lord that full and
explicit vindication of His disciples which the Evangelists have recorded.
1 See Lect. m. p. 137.
2 See below, p. 182, note 1, from which it would seem that there is an error of
a day in the tables of Wurm and Wieseler.
3 After speaking of the first month, and the sacrifices to be observed therein,
the prophet adds (ch. xlv. 20): "And so thou shalt do the seventh day of the
month for every one that erreth, and for him that is simple : so shall ye reconcile
the house." From these words, when coupled with the similar notice of the
solemn first day of Nisan in the verses that precede, and the notice of the still
more solemn fourteenth day in the verses that follow, it has been apparently
rightly inferred that the seventh of Nisan was regarded as holy, and might
appropriately be designated by St. Luke (ch. vi. 6) as 'irepov odBfiaTov. Comp.
Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 237.

Luke vi. 8.
Mark iii. 6.

168 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
cal: first the command to the sufferer to rise from his
place and stand forth in the midst; then the all-em
bracing gaze 1 of grief and anger, and, lastly,
after a few reproving words, the immediate
performance of the miracle.2 But such an
answer malice and infidelity could neither receive nor en
dure. The flame of savage vengeance at once breaks out.
"They were filled with madness" are the remarkable
words of St. Luke ; they go forth from the
Ch. vl. 11. ' J °
Matt. xii. m. synagogue, they hold a hasty council, yea,
they join with their very political opponents,
the followers of Herod Antipas,8 as St. Mark has been
moved to record, and now deliberately lay plans to slay
the great Healer. The cup, in their eyes, is
full. Two days since blasphemy, as they
deemed it, had been spoken ; this, however, they might
have borne with ; but publicans have been received, the
1 Not only St. Mark, but St. Luke notices this act of our Lord's, both using the
same expressive word, TrepiBKerjidfievos. On the use of this term by St. Mark,
comp. p. 39, note 1.
2 The present miracle forms one of the seven which are particularly noticed as
having been performed on the Sabbath (see John v. 9, Mark i. 21, Mark i. 29,
John ix. 14, Luke xiii. 14, Luke xiv. 1, and comp. Crit. Sacr. Thesaur. Nov. Vol.
ii. p. 196), and is specially the one before the performance of which the Lord
vouchsafes to vindicate the lawfulness (Matt. xii. 12) of such acts of mercy, by
an appeal to recognized principles of justice and mercy which even the Pharisees
could not reject or deny. For some comments on the miracle, the nature of
which was the immediate restoration of the nutritive powers of nature to a part
where they had perhaps by degrees but now permanently ceased to act (Winer,
B WB. Art. " Krankheiten," Vol. i. p. 674), compare Hook, Serm. on the Mira
cles, Vol. i. p. 135 sq., and especially see Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 312 sq.
3 There seems to be no reason to dissent from the conjecturally expressed
opinion of Origen ( Comm. in Matt. Tom. xvii. 26) that the Herodians were a
political sect who, as their name implies, were partisans of Herod Antipas (ol ra
'HpdiSov tjtpovovvres, Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 15. 10), and, by consequence, of the
Roman government, so far as it tended to maintain his influence. Compare
Ewald, Gesch. Christus' (Vol. v.), p. 43 sq. Thus they were really, as Meyer
(Komment. ub. Matt. xxii. 16) defines them, royalists as opposed to maintainers
of theocratic principles; still, being members of a political and not a religious
sect, they might easily be found in coalitions with one of the latter sects for tem
porary objects which might affect, or be thought to affect, the interests of both.
Comp. Matt. xxii. 16, Mark xii. 13, where they again appear in temporary union
with the Pharisees. For further comments, see Winer, BWB. s. v. Vol. i. p. 486,
Herzog, Beal-Encycl. o. v. Vol. vii. p. 14, and compare Lightfoot, Harm. Evang.
6 16, Vol. i. p. 470.

Leot. TV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 169
rest of a weekly Sabbath infringed upon, and now, worst of
all, a legal Sabbath has been profaned by — beneficence;
that profanity must be washed out by blood. As but a short
time before in Jerusalem, so now in Galilee the fearful
determination is distinctly formed of compassing the death
of One whose life-giving words their own ears had heard,
and whose deeds of mercy their own eyes had been per
mitted to behold.
This is a very important turning-point in the Gospel-
history, and it prepares us for the event
which followed, perhaps only a day or two twe™°ic°A?0.£,
afterwards,1 — and which now the deepening XL*™" °" ,he
animosities against the sacred person of our
Redeemer rendered in a high degree natural and appropri
ate, — a retirement into the lonely hills on the western
side of the lake, and the choice of twelve pillars for the
not yet consolidated, yet already endangered Church.
There, on that horned hill of Hattin, which a late tradi
tion does not in this case appear to have erroneously
selected,2 was the scene of the formal compacting and
framing together of the spiritual temple of God ; there
too was heard that heavenly summary of the life and prac
tice of Christianity which age after age has regarded as
the most sacred heritage that God has vouchsafed unto
His Church.3

1 The only note of time is iv reus 7}fJ.epat$ rat/rais (Luke vi. 12), which, though
far too general to be quoted in support of the above supposition, does not in any
way seem opposed to it. There appears much in favor of a close connection in
point of time between the formal choice of the Apostles and these murderous
determinations of the hierarchical party and their adherents. Compare Ewald,
Gesch. CJiristus'' (Vol. v.) p. 270 sq.
2 See Robinson, Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 370 sq. (ed. 2), who admits that, though
this appears to be only a late tradition of the Latin Church, "there is nothing
in the form or circumstances of the hill itself to contradict the supposition." So
far, indeed, it may be added, is this from being the case, that Dr. Stanley finds
the conformation of the hill so strikingly in accordance with what we read in
the Gospel narrative, " as almost to force the inference that in this instance the
eye of those who selected the spot was for once rightly guided." — Sinai and
Palestine, p. 364 (ed. 2). Thomson ( The Land and the Book, Vol. ii. p. 118) speaks
far more slightingly than is usual with that agreeable and observant writer.
3 Of the many expository works on this divine discourse the following may bo
15

170 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
I must here be tempted into no digressions, for there
are several events yet before us for considera-
Probableform of .... T . . -
the sermon on the tion ; still, at such an important point in
our history, it does seem almost wrong to
suppress the humble statement of an opinion on a most
serious and yet most contested question in reference to this
divine discourse. Let me say, then, with that brevity that
our limits demand, — First, that there seem greatly pre
ponderant reasons for believing the sermon recorded by St.
Luke to be substantially the same with that recited by St.
Matthew;1 Secondly, that the divine unity which per
vades the whole totally precludes our believing that St.
Matthew is here presenting us only with a general collec
tion of discourses, uttered at different times, and leads us
distinctly to maintain the more natural and reasonable
opinion, that this holy and blessed Sermon was uttered as
it is here delivered to us2; Thirdly, that of the modes

selected as appearing, perhaps more particularly, to deserve the attention of the
student: the exposition of Chrysostom in his Commentary on St. Matthew;
Augustine, de Sermone Domini, Vol. iii. p. 1229 sq. (Mign6), and with it Trench,
Serm. on the Mount {ed. 2); Pott, de Indole Orat. Mont. (Helmst. 1788), whose
general conclusion, however, as to the nature of the Sermon, does not appear
plausible; the exegetical comments of Stier (Disc, of our Lord,Yol.i. p. 90,
Clark) and Maldonatus (Comment, p. 95); the special work of Tholuck, Berg-
predigt (translated in Edinb. Cabinet Libr.)\ and, lastly, the more directly
practical comments and discourses of Bp. Blackall (Lond. 1717) and James Blair"
(Lond. 1740, with a commendatory preface by Waterland); to which may be
added the comments in Taylor, Life of Christ, ii. 12, Vol. i. p. 190 (Lond. 1836),
and in Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 4. 12, Part ij. p. 566 sq.
J The main arguments are, — that the beginning and end of the Sermon are
nearly identical in both Gospels; that the precepts, as recited by St. Luke, are
in the same general order as those in St. Matthew, and that they are often
expressed in nearly the same words ; and, lastly, that each Evangelist specifies
the same miracle, viz. the healing of the centurion's servant, as having taken
place shortly after the Sermon, on our Lord's entry into Capernaum. Compare
Matt. viii. 5, Luke vii. 2 sq., and see Tholuck, Sermon on the Mount, Vol. i. p. 5
sq. (Clark).
2 This opinion, improbable as it is now commonly felt to be, was adopted by
as good an interpreter as Calvin (Harm. Evang. Vol. i. p. 135, ed. Tholuck), and
has been lately advanced in a slightly changed form by Neander, who attributes
to the Greek editor (?) of St. Matthew the insertion of those expressions of our
Lord which are found in other collocations in St. Luke's Gospel. See Life of
CJirist, p. 241 (Bohn). There is nothing, however, unnatural in the supposition
that our blessed Lord vouchsafed to use the same precepts on more occasions than

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 171
of reconciliation proposed between the two forms of this
Sermon vouchsafed to us by the Holy Ghost, two deserve
consideration, — (a) that which represents St. Luke's as a
condensed recital of what St. Matthew has related more
at length, and (b) that which attributes the condensation
to our Lord Himself, who on the summit of the hill deliv
ered the longer, but, as it has been doubtfully termed, eso
teric sermon to His Apostles, and perhaps disciples, and on
the level piece of ground, a little distance below, delivered
the shortened and more popular form to the mixed multi
tude.1 But let us now pass onward. On the Lord's return to
Capernaum, which it does not seem un
reasonable to suppose took place on the J£**£££
evening of the same day, the elders of the amL, "J"'"" 0/ ",e
c J ' widows son.
synagogue of Capernaum meet our Lord
with a petition from one who shared in the faith, though
he was not of the lineage, of Abraham. This petition, and
the way in which it was made, deserve a passing notice.
We see, on the one hand, the different feelings with which
as yet the leading party at Capernaum were animated, when
contrasted with the emissaries from Jerusalem ; and on the
other we recognize the profound humility of the God-fear-
one. Compare Matt. v. 18 and Luke xii. 68, Matt. vi. 19—21 and Luke xii. 33,
Matt. vi. 24 and Luke xvi. 13, Matt. vii. 13 and Luke xiii. 24, Matt. vii. 22 and
Luke xiii. 25—27.
I Of these two opinions, the second, though noticed with some approval by
Augustine (de Consensu Evang . II. 19), and convenient for reconciling the slight
differences as to locality and audience which appear in the records of the two
Evangelists (see Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 4. 12, Part u. p. 568 sq.), has so much the
appearance of having been formed simply, to reconcile these differences, and
involves so much that is unlikely, and indeed unnatural, that we can hardly
hesitate to adopt the first; so too, as it would seem, Augustine, loc. cit. ad fin.
Comp. Trench, Expos, of Serm. on Mount, p. 160 (ed. 2). A fair comparison of
the two inspired records seems to confirm this judgment, and satisfactorily to
show that St. Luke's record is here a compendium, or rather selection, of the
leading precepts which appear in that of St. Matthew. No extract, it may be
observed, is made from ch. vi. (Matt.), as the duties there specified (almsgiving,
prayer, fasting, etc.) are mainly considered in reference to their due performance
in the sight of God, while St. Luke appears to have been moved to specify those
which relate more directly to our neighbor. For further notices and comments,
see Tholuck, Serm. on Mount, Vol. i. p. 1 sq. (Clark).

172 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
ing soldier who, it would seem from St. Luke's account,
twice preferred his petition by the mouths
of others, before he presumed himself to
speak in behalf of his suffering servant. Then followed,
probably from his own lips, words of faith that moved the
wonder of our Lord Himself, and forthwith came the
reward of that faith, — the healing of apparently the first
Gentile sufferer.1 But the morrow was to see yet greater
things ; for, as St. Luke tells us, on the fol
lowing day, during the course of a short ex
cursion into the vale of Esdraelon, the Lord of life comes
into first conflict with the powers of death. At the brow
of that steep ascent, up which the modern traveller to the
hamlet of Nain has still to pass,2 the Saviour, begirt with
a numerous company of His disciples and a large attendant
multitude, beholds a sad and pity-moving
sight. The only son of a widow was being
borne out to his last resting-place, followed by the poor,
weeping mother, and a large and, as it would seem, sym
pathizing crowd. But there was one now
nigh at hand who no sooner beheld than He
pitied, and with whom to pity was to bless.
The words of power were uttered, the dead at once rose up
to life and speech, and was given to the
ver.vs. widow's arras, while the amazed multitude
glorified God, and welcomed as a mighty
prophet Him who had done before their eyes what their
memories might have connected with the greatest of the

1 For comments on this miracle, one of the characteristics of which is, that,
as in the case of the nobleman's son, our Lord vouchsafed the cure without see
ing or visiting the sufferer, see Bp. Hall, Contempl. n. 6, Trench, Miracles, p.
222, and compare Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 4. 13, Part ii. p. 645 sq.
2 See Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, ch. ix. 352 (ed. 2). The Dutch traveller
Van de Velde remarks that the rock on the west side of Nain is full of sepulchral
caves, and infers from this that our Lord approached Nain on the western side.
Syria and Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 382. A sketch of the wretched-looking but
finely situated hamlet that still bears the name of Nain or Nein (Robinson,
Palest. Vol. ii. p. 361) will be found in Thomson, The Land and the Book, Vol.
li. p. 159.

Ver. 12.
Ver.VS.

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 173
prophets of the past.1 It is here perhaps, or at one of the
v towns in the neighborhood, that we are to fix the memo
rable and affecting scene at the house of
Simon the Pharisee, when the poor sinful
woman pressed unbidden among the guests to anoint, not
the head, like the pure Mary of Bethany, but
the feet of the Virgin's Son, and whose
passionate repentance and special and preeminent faith
were blessed with acceptance and pardon.2
It is about the same time, too, and, as TheBaptistsmes-
appears by no means improbable, but a very «*<><> ofinwin/.
few days before the tragical end of their Master's life,3 that
the two disciples of John the Baptist come to our Lord
with the formal question which the, so to say, dying man
commissioned them to ask, — whether the great Healer,
the fame of whose deeds had penetrated into
the dungeons of Machaerus, were truly He " ' ..'
° ' J Luke vii. 19.
that was to come, or whether another were
yet to be expected. The exact purpose of this mission
1 For some further comments on this miracle, see Cyril Alex, on St. Luke,
Serm. xxxvi. Part I, p. 132 sq, (Transl.), Bp. Hall, Contempt. II. 1, and Trench,
Notes on the Miracles, p. 239. Compare also Augustine, Serm. xcviii. Vol. v.
p. 591 sq. fed- Migne), and Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 4. 16, Part II. p. 740 sq.
2 With regard to this anointing of our Lord, we may briefly remark, (a) that it
certainly is not identical with that which is specified hy the other three Evangel
ists (Matt. xxvi. 6 sq,, Mark xiv. 3 sq., John xii. 1 sq.). Everything is different,
"-the time, the place, the chief actor, and the circumstances. See Meyer, on
Matt. xxvi. 6, p. 483, and Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 4, 16, Part n. p. 736. We may
further remark (6) that there seems no just ground for identifying the repentant
sinner here mentioned with Mary Magdalene, who, though a victim to Satanic
influence, and that too in a fearful and aggravated form (Luke viii. 2), is not
necessarily to be considered guilty of sins of impurity. Nay, more, the very
description of the affliction of Mary Magdalene seems in itself sufficient to dis
tinguish her frpm ope whom no hint of the Evangelist leads us to suppose was
then or formerly had been a demoniac. The contrary opinion has been firmly
maintained by Sepp (Leben Christi, ill. 23, Vol. ii. p. 285), but on the authority
Qf Rabbinical traditions, which are curious rather than convincing. On .the
incident generally, see Greg, MHom. in Evang. xxxiii., Augustine,&rm. xcix.,
and especially Bp. Hall, Contempt, iv. 17.
8 The most probable period to which the murder of the Baptist is to be
assigned would seem to be the week preceding the Passover of the second year
pf our Lord's ministry, April 10—17, A. rj. o. 782. For the arguments on which
this rests, consult Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 292 sq., and see below, p. 383,
note S, 15*

Pharisees. Luke viii. 2.

174 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
will perhaps remain to the end of time a subject of contro
versy,1 but it has ever been fairly, and, as it would seem,
convincingly urged, that He whose eyes, scarce sixteen
months before, had beheld the descending Spirit, whose
ears had heard the voice of paternal love and benediction,
and who now again had but recently been told of acts of
omnipotent power, could himself have never really doubted
the truth of his own declaration,2 that this was indeed
"the Lamb of God that taketh away the
John i. 20. - 11), '
sin of the world.
Almost immediately after the marvellous scene at Nam,
our Lord, accompanied not only by His twelve
tresteXlrgZoTthe Apostles, but, as it is specially recorded, by
pious and grateful women, chief among
whom stands the miraculously healed Mary
of Magdala, passed onward from city to city and village to
village, preaching the kingdom of God. That circuit could
not have lasted much above a day or two after the miracle
at Nain,3 and, as the words of the second Evangelist seem
1 The three different states of feeling (doubt, impatience, desire to convince his
disciples) which have been attributed to the Baptist, as having given rise to this
mission, are noticed and commented on by Ebrard, Kritik der Evang. Gesch.
5 73, p. 367 sq. For a full discussion of the subject, however, see the calm and
learned comments of Jackson, on the Creed, Vol. vi. p. 310 sq. Comp. also, but
with caution, Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 4. 17, Part n. p. 745 sq.
2 The utmost that can be said is, that the Baptist required the comfort of accu
mulated conviction (see Jackson, Creed, Vol. vi. p. 314); that he entertained
distrust, or wavered in faith in these last days of his life, seems wholly incred
ible. To convince his disciples (Cyril Alex, in loc) fully and completely before
his death, was the primary object of the mission; to derive some incidental com
forts from the answer he foresaw they would return with, may possibly have
been the secondary object.
3 It has been already observed (p. 160, note 2), that the villages, and even towns,
were so numerous in some parts of Galilee, that the words of the Evangelist
(SttiSevev Kara tt6\iv ko\ Ktipiriv Knpvtro-tov, Luke viii. 1) need hot be pressed as
necessarily implying a lengthened circuit. It may be indeed doubted whether
these notices of circuits, which it is confessedly very difficult to reconcile with
other notes of time, may not be general descriptions of our Lord's ministry at
the time rather than special notices of special journeys. That the circuit had a
homeward direction and terminated at Capernaum, we gather from Matt. xiii. 1,
which, in specifying the place (itapa t^v frdKao-ffav), marks the day as the same
with that on which the visit of our Lord's mother and brethren took place, and
so connects us with Mark iii. 19 sq., which seems to refer to the return from tha
circuit (Luke viii. 1 sq.) which we are now considering.

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 175
to imply, terminated at Capernaum, which, as we already
know, had now become our Lord's temporary home. On
their return two parties anxiously awaited them ; on the
one hand the multitude, which, St. Mark tells
us, gathered so hastily round the yet unrested
company, that either the disciples, or, as seems more prob
able from the sequel, the mother and brethren
of our Lord, deemed themselves called upon ''"" '"' ' 1 "'
to interpose,1 and to plead against what they could not but
deem an almost inconsiderate enthusiasm. On
,, , , ...... Mark iii. 21.
the other hand, we still find there the hostile
party of Scribes and Pharisees from Jerusalem, whom we
have already noticed, and whoyet lingered, though the Pass
over was so nigh, in hopes that they might find further and
more definite grounds of accusation. An opportunity, if
not for preferring a charge, yet for attempting to check the
growing belief of the amazed multitude, and
for enlisting the worst feelings against the
very acts of mercy which our Lord vouchsafed to perform,
soon presented itself at the miraculous cure of a blind and
dumb demoniac, which appears to belong to this portion
of the sacred narrative.2 Then was it that the embittered
hatred of these prejudiced and hardened men showed
1 A little difficulty has been felt (a) in the exact reference of the words ol irap'
avrov (Mark iii. 21), and (b) in the fact that St. Luke places the visit of our
Lord's mother and brethren after the delivery of the parables rather than before
them. With regard to the first point, ol irap1 avrov seems clearly to imply, not
the Apostles, but our Lord's relatives ("propinqui ejus," — Syr.), who are noticed
here as going forth (probably from some temporary abode at Capernaum ; see p.
152, note 1), and a few verses later (Mark iii. 31) as having now arrived at the
house where our Lord then was. With regard to (&), it seems enough to say that
St. Luke clearly agrees with St. Matthew in placing the event in question on the
same day, but from having here omitted the discourse which preceded the arrival
(Mark iii. 22 eq.), he mentions it a little out of its true chronological order, to
prevent its being referred to some one of the towns on the circuit, and to con
nect it with. the right place and time, — Capernaum, and the day of the return.
2 There seems reason for placing the narrative of the healing of the demoniac,
recorded in Matt. xii. 22 sq., between Mark iii. 21 and Mark iii. 22, as the sub
stance of the words which follow in both Gospels are so clearly alike, and as the
narrative of the miracle in St. Matthew follows that of other miracles which
certainly appear to belong to a period shortly preceding the one now under
consideration.

176 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
itself in the frightful blasphemy — repeated, it would
seem, more than once1— -that attributed the wonder-work
ing power of the eternal Son of God to the
Matt.xa.u. ener„y 0f gatan • anal then too was it that
Markiii. 23. °J ' ., .„ „
our Lord called them to Him, and mercifully
revealed to them the appalling nature of their sin, which
was now fast approaching the fearful climax of sin against
the Holy Ghost, — that sin for which there was no forgive
ness 2 " neither in this world, neither in that
Matt. xii. 32. _ .
The teaching by which is to come." The afternoon or early
paraoies. evening of that day was spent by the shores
of the lake. The eager multitude, augmented by others
who had come in from the neighboring
towns, had now become so large, that, as it
would seem, for the sake of more conveniently addressing
them, our Lord was pleased to go on board one of the
fishing vessels, and thence, with the multitude before
Him, and with His divine eyes perchance resting on some
one of those patches of varied and undulating corn-field
which modern travellers have noticed as in some cases on
the very margin of the lake,3 — with the earthly and the
heavenly harvest-field thus alike before Him, — He deliv-
1 Compare Luke xi. 17 sq., where we meet with, in what seems clearly a later
portion of the history, the same impious declaration on the part of the Pharisees
which St. Mark (ch. iii. 22 sq.) and apparently St. Matthew (ch. xii. 24) refer to
the present place. That such statements should have been made more than once,
when suggested by similar miracles, is every way natural and probable. Comp.
Matt. ix. 34 and xii. 22 sq., and see Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 287 sq.
2 On this highest and most frightful enhancement of sin in the individual, of
which the essential characteristic appears to be an outward expression (see
Waterland) of an inward hatred of that which is recognized and felt to be
divine, and the irremissihle nature of which depends, not on the refusal of grace,
but on the now lost ability of fulfilling the conditions required for forgiveness,
see the able remarks of MUller, Doctrine of Sin, Book v. Vol. ii. p. 475 (Clark),
and the good sermon of Waterland, Serm. xxviii. Vol. v. p. 707. For further
comments on this profound subject, see Augustine, Serm. lxxi. Vol. v. p. 445 sq.
(ed. Migne), the special work on the subject by Schaff (Halle, 1841), and the arti
cle by Tholuck, in the Studien u. Kritiken for 1826, compared with the earlier
articles in the same periodical by Grashoff (1833) and Gurlitt (1834).
3 See the interesting and illustrative remarks of Stanley, Sinai and Palestine,
ch. xiii. p. 4£1 sq. ; and, in reference to the parable, compare the elucidations,
from local observation, of Thomson, The Land and the Book^ \q\. \. p. 116 sq.

Luke viii. 23.
Markiv. 87.

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 177
ered to that listening concourse the wondrous series of
parables beginning with that appropriately chosen subject,
specified alike by all the three Synoptical Evangelists, —
the Sower and the seed.1
And now, as St. Mark specifies, the evening had come,
and after that long and exhausting day the
Holy One needed retirement and repose, and across an/To™
nowhere could it be more readily obtained <m""!fa*e-
than in the solitudes of the eastern shore.
The multitudes still linger; but the Apostles bear away
their wearied Master, " as He was," says the graphic St.
Mark, in the vessel from which He had been
preaching. As they sail the Lord slumbers ;
when from one of the deep clefts of the surrounding hills 2
a storm of wind bursts upon the lake, and
the stirred-up waters beat in upon the boat.
Terror-stricken, the disciples awake their
sleeping Master, and He, who only a few Matt. xii.22.
* ^ ' •* Mark iv. 39.
hours before had driven forth devils, now
quells by His word the lesser potencies of wind and storm.3
When they reached the opposite side, which might have

l On the connection of the parables, of which this forms the first, see Lect. i.
p. 35, note 3.
2 "To understand," says Dr. Thomson, who himself witnessed on the very
spot a storm of similar violence, and that lasted as long as three days, " the causes
of these sudden and violent tempets, we must remember that the lake lies low
[hence KareBn XoAaip, Luke viii. 23], — six hundred feet lower than the ocean;
that the vast and naked plateaus of Jaulan rise to a great height, spreading back
ward to the wilds of the Hauran, and upward to snowy Hermon ; that the water?
courses have cut out profound ravines and wild gorges, converging to the head
of this lake, and that these act like gigantic funnels to draw down the winds
from the mountains." — The Land and the Book, Vol. iii. pp. 32, 33. See also
Ritter, Erdkunde, Part XT. 1, p. 308 sq., where the peculiar nature of these
storm-winds is briefly noticed.
8 For further comments on this miracle, one of the more striking features of
which is the Saviour's rebuke to the warring elements, the very words of which,
as addressed to the storm-tost waters (k oX elire iri ^oXdtsan, 'Xtojira, iretbinaiao,
Markiv. 39), have been specially recorded by the second Evangelist, — see the
expository remarks of Chrysostom, in Matt. Horn, xxviii., the typical and
practical application of Augustine, Serm. lxiii. (ed. Migne), Trench, Notes on
the Miracles, p. 143, sq., and compare Hook, Serm. on the Miracles, Vol. j. p.
207 sq.

178 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
been late that evening, or more probably studiously de
layed till the dawn of the following day, our
The oergesene Lord had no sooner gone out of the vessel
demoniacs. than He was met by the hapless Gergesene1
demoniac or demoniacs,2 whose home was in the tombs,
that can still be traced in more than one of
Mark v.3. . , , ,
the ravines that open out upon the lake
on its eastern side.3 There, and in the solitudes of the
desert mountains behind, dwelt the wretched and, as it
would seem, sinful man, who by his Lord's own
Luke viii. 39. . .
divine command was hereafter to be Christ s
first preacher in his own household, and who
Mark v. 20. told abroad the blessings he had received
through the surrounding land of Decapolis. How he

1 Whether the true reading in Matt. viii. 28 be Tepyeanvuv, Ta&apnvSbv, or
TepaCQviJbv, is a question which cannot easily be answered. On the whole, how
ever, if we assign due weight not only to the evidence of manuscripts but also
to recent geographical discovery, we shall, perhaps, be led to adopt the first
reading in St. Matthew and the second in St. Mark and St. Luke. The grounds
on which this decision rests are as follows : (1) The amount of external evidence
in favor of Tepyetrnviiv in Matt. viii. 28 (see Tischendorf in loc.) is much too
great to be due solely to the correction of Origen ; (2) Origen plainly tells us that
there was a place in his time so named, and that the exact site of the miracle
was pointed out to that day ; (3) ruins have been recently discovered by Dr.
Thomson in Wady Semak, still bearing the name of Kerza or Gerza, which are
pronounced to fulfil every requirement of the narrative. See, especially, Tlie
Land and the Book, Vol. ii.- p. 33 sq., and compare Van de Velde, Memoir to
Map, p. 311. The probable reading in St. Mark and St. Luke (Tafiapnvuv) may
be accounted for by supposing that they were content with indicating generally
the scene of the miracle, while St. Matthew, whose knowledge of the shores of
the lake whereon he was collector of dues would naturally be precise, specifies
the exact spot.
2 Of the current explanations of the seeming difficulty that St. Matthew
names two and St. Mark and St. Luke one demoniac, that of Chrysostom (in
loc.) and Augustine (de Consensu Evang. ii. 24) seems most satisfactory, viz. that
one of the demoniacs took so entirely the prominent part as to cause two of the
narrators to omit all mention of his companion. We have no reason for
inferring from St. Matthew that the second of the sufferers did more than join
in the opening cry of deprecation. See Matt. viii. 29.
3 See Thomson, The Land and (lie Book, Vol. ii. p. 35. Tombs have also been
observed in Wady Fik on the side of the road leading up from the lake (Stan
ley, Palestine, ch. x. p. 376), the position of which has perhaps led to that
ravine being usually selected as the scene of the miracle ; if, however, the above
identification of Tepyeaa and Gerza be accepted, the scene of the miracle must
be transferred to the more northern Wady Semak.

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 179
was healed, the astonishing and most convincing way in
which every line of the narrative sets before us the awful
kind of double or rather manifold personality,
the kneeling man of the one moment and the '"
, ¦ ¦, . „ Ver. 0.
snouting demoniac of the next, the startling
yet all-wise permission given to the devils,1 and the over
powered instinct of self-preservation in the possessed
swine, — all this our present limits preclude me from
pausing fully to delineate ; but this one comment I will
venture to make, that with this miracle before us, with
expressions so unqualified, and terms so distinct, a denial
of the reality of demoniacal possession on the part of
any one who believes the Gospel narrative to be true and
inspired, may justly be regarded as simply and plainly
inconceivable.3 On the Lord's return to the western side, The raising of
, . , A , . . t,,« Jairus' daughter.
wnicn took place immediately in consequence
of the request of the terror-stricken inhab
itants of the neighboring city, He found the multitude

l On this much debated subject we may briefly observe, (a) that the permission
to enter into the herd of swine may have been deemed necessary by our Lord
(7roAA& ivrevSev oIkovouuv, Chrys.) to convince the sufferer of his cure (Chrys.
I.); (6) that it may also stand in connection with 6ome unknown laws of demo
niacal possession generally, and more particularly with that which the demons
dreaded, deprecated, and perhaps foresaw, — a return to the abyss (Luke Viii.
31). It may be that to defer that return they ask to be suffered to enter into
fresh objects in that district to which they mysteriously clung (Mark v. 10), and
it may be too that the very permitted entry, hy destroying the instinct of self-
preservation in the swine, brought about, even in a more ruinous way, the issue
they so much dreaded. That this was (c) further designed to punish the people
for keeping swine is not perfectly clear, as the inhabitants of those parts were
mainly Gentile. Compare Joseph. Antiq. xvii. 11. 4. The supposition that the
swine were driven down the precipice by the demoniacs (Kuinoel, followed by
Milman, Hist, of Christianity, Vol. i. p. 238) is not only in the highest degree
improbable, but wholly at variance with the express statements of the inspired
writers. 2 For some good remarks on this subject, see Olshausen, Commentary, Vol. i.
p. 305 sq. (Clark), Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 151 sq., Alford on Matt. viii.
32, and compare Kitto, Journal of Sacr. Lit. No. vii. p. 1 sq., No. xiv. p. 394 sq.
In addition to these, on the miracle generally, see Chrysostom ore Matt. Horn.
xxvii., the good comments of Maldonatus on Matt. I. c, Bp-Hall, Contempt.
in. 5, and compare Jones of Nayland, Works, Vol. v. p. 72 sq., and Bp. Wilber-
force. Serm. p. 107.

180 THE MINISTRY LN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
eagerly waiting to receive Him, and among them one anx
ious and heart-stricken man, Jairus, whose
Luke ma. 40. daughter lay dying, and who besought our
Lord with all the passion of a father's love to save his
child. But the crowd hung round the Lord,
Fir"42- and the case of the suffering woman, who
Ver.4Ssq. . ° .
touched her Saviours garments with the
touch of faith,1 added to the delay, and the daughter of
the ruler of the synagogue had breathed her last before
the Lord could reach the father's house;2 so
Sf„"<fk they tell Him that all was over. But now
was the glory of God to be revealed. Yet
again a second time — as once on the bier, so now on the
bed — did the Lord loose the bands of death ; with how
ever this very striking and peculiar difference, that what
a few days before was done in the sight of
all Nain, was here done in strict privacy, with
three chosen Apostles and the father and mother alone
present, and with the special and urgent
command to those present not to raise the
veil of the solemn scene they had been permitted to
witness.3

l On this miracle, the characteristics of which are the great faith of the sufferer,
and the indirect though not unconscious performance of the cure, see Hall,
Contempt, iv. 7, Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 189 sq., Hook, Serm. on the
Miracles, Vol. i. p. 242 sq. ; and compare Lange, Leben Jesu, TV. 4. 14, Part n.
p. 681.
2 The slight difference between the narrative of St. Matthew, in which the
father speaks of his daughter as now dead (ch. ix. 18), and that of St. Mark,
where he speaks of her as being at the last gasp (ch. v. 23), has been accounted
for most reasonably by Augustine (de Conoens. Evang. II. 2), Theophylact (1st
alternative), and others, by the supposition that Jairus spoke from what his
fears suggested, and that he regarded the death of his daughter as by that time
having actually taken place. Comp. Greswell, Dissert, m. Vol. i. p. 217.
3 This command, which Meyer (ore Mark v. 43) most rashly considers a mere
unauthorized addition of later tradition, is perfectly in harmony with the pri
vate manner in which the miracle was performed. The reason why it was given
can, however, only be conjectured. It can scarcely have been on account of the
Jews (Sta rhv tp&6vov rdxa toiv 'lovSaltov, Theophy). on Luke viii. 56), but may
very probably have been suggested by a desire to avoid undue publicity, and
perhaps also by merciful considerations of what the Lord knew to be best for
the maiden and her relatives. Compare Olshausen, Commentary on Gospels,

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 181
Soon after this, perhaps on the same day, our Lord,
accompanied by His disciples, leaves Caper-
, Ttie second visit
naum, and on the Sabbath which immediately to the s,niagogue at
followed again appeared in the synagogue at
His own town of Nazareth.1 The feeling there is now
in some degree better than it was three
° Luke iv. 16 sa.
weeks before. The fame that spread all
through Galilee had produced some effect even at Naza
reth, and had disposed them to give ear a second time to
Him whose wisdom and even miraculous , Mark vi. 2.
powers they were forced to recognize and
to confess. But the inward heart of the men of Nazareth
was unchanged as ever. Though there was now no longer
that open indignation and murderous rage
that was so frightfully manifested at the
former visit, there was a similar vexed spirit of amaze
ment and incredulity, and a similar and even more scorn
fully worded appeal to family connections of low estate,
and to kindred that had long lived humbly among them :
" Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and the brother
of James and Joses and Judas and Simon?"
-r • , rf. i • Mark vi. 3.
It is now, however, offence rather than posi
tive rejection, — yet offence that sprang from a deep heart
of unbelief, which stayed the Saviour's heal-
' Matt. xiii. IS.
ing hands, and made Him, who knew full
well what it was to meet with rejection and want of faith,
to marvel at the exceeding measures of Naz-
° Mark. vL 6.
arene unbelief. On the eve of that day, or
more probably early on the morrow, our Lord appears to
Vol. i. p. 276 (Clark). On the miracle itself see the good comments of Chrysost.
in Matt. Horn, xxxi., Bp. Hall, Contempt, iv. 8, Lardner's vindication, Works,
Vol. xi. p. 1 sq., Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 179, and Lange, Leben Jesu,
n. 4. 14, Part II. p. 683 sq.
1 That this visit to Nazareth is not identical with that recorded by St. Luke
(ch. iv. 16) is rightly maintained by Meyer, on Matt. xiii. 54. The only argument
for the identity is our Lord's use of the same proverb on both occasions ; but is
there anything strange in such a repetition, especially when the conduct of the
people of Nazareth on each occasion rendered such a proverb most mournfully
pertinent? See Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 284 sq.
16

182 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
have commenced a short circuit of Galilee, but,' as we
must conclude from our general notes of
forth of the Twelve time,1 in the direction of Capernaum ; and at
this same time also it would certainly appear
that He sent forth the twelve Apostles (who we know
accompanied Him to Nazareth), by two and
two, probably in different directions, and
perhaps with an order, after having made a brief trial
of the powers with which they had been
Mark vi. 12. . n . . , . .. , -~
intrusted, to join their Master at Caper
naum. Thither they must have returned, it would seem,
not more than two days afterwards.2 Such a statement
may at first seem startling. It may be urged that so short
an absence on the part of the Apostles is hardly compat
ible with the instructions given to them by our Lord, as
recorded by the first Evangelist, wherein
Matt. x.Ssg. * *,
distant and continued journeyings would
seem rather to be contemplated than the limited circuit
which our present chronology suggests.3 The objection is
1 The Sabbath on which our Lord preached at Nazareth would certainly seem
to be the Sabbath which succeeded the odBBarov SevrepoTtponov (Luke vi. 1),
and consequently, according to our explanation of the latter term, the second
Sabbath of Nisan. Now if we turn to our tables (Wieseler, Cliron. Synops. p.
484), we find that our present Sabbath answers to Nisan 13, and therefore must
conclude that both our Lord and His Apostles returned to Capernaum from
their respective missionary journeys on the following day, there being good
reason for fixing the feeding of the five thousand on the Passover-eve, Nisan
14. See below, and compare John vi. 4. Such a result can hardly be conceived
natural. The difficulty, however, may be in some degree removed by taking
into consideration the fact that the first day of the Jewish month was fixed by
observation, and that the day of the Julian calendar with which it agrees can
hardly be determined with perfect certainty. In the case of Nisan 1 in the pres
ent year, the correct time of new moon was about seven o'clock in the evening
of April 2; the new moon would then probably be observed on the evening of
April 4 (see Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 446). But the Jewish day begins after six
o'clock; Nisan 1 would then begin on April 4, but really coincide with April 5,
and not with April 4, as Wieseler and Wurm suppose. The date of our present
Sabbath would then be Nisan 12, and not Nisan 11, and we should have two
whole days for the absence of the Apostles, a time not improbably short. See
below. Such niceties and difficulties may well teach us caution, and may justly
make us very diffident as to our ability to assign each event in this portion of the
sacred narrative to the true day on which it occurred.
2 See the preceding note.
3 Another objection may perhaps be founded on the declaration of St. Mark

Lect. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 183
certainly not without force, and is useful in warning us not
to be too confident either on the construction of our chro
nological tables, or in the correctness of our collocation of
individual events. Still, when we consider, — First, that
it is far from improbable that St. Matthew has incorpoi-ated
in this address to the Apostles instructions given to them
by our Lord at other periods of His ministry;1 Secondly,
that the address, whether in its longer or its shorter form,
may reasonably be supposed to extend far
.'-,," . -, t. Comp. Matt. x. 23.
beyond the present time, and to refer to
periods of missionary labor as yet still distant ; Thirdly,
that it does not seem probable that our Lord would have
long dispensed with the attendance of those to whom His
blessed presence was so vital and so essential,2 — when we
consider all these points, it will perhaps seem less improb
able that this first missionary journey was but short, and
that the Apostles returned to Capernaum as early as the
evening of the second day. The return was nearly, it
would seem, contemporaneous with the arrival of the
tidings of the Baptist's murder ; 3 and it was, perhaps, partly
that our Lord " went round about the villages, teaching " (ch. vi. 6 ; comp. Matt.
ix. 35). This is also of some weight, but as we find no special note of time serv
ing to define it as subsequent to the visit to Nazareth, and prior to the sending
forth of the Twelve, we may perhaps justly and correctly regard it either (a) as
serving only to mark that our Lord's ministry was continuous, that He did not
remain at Nazareth, but was extending His blessings to other places ; or, still
more simply, (&) as merely specifying the work in which our Lord was then
engaged, and as preparing the reader for a transition to other subjects (ver.
7—29). See above, p. 174, note 3.
1 When we remember that St. Matthew does not notice the sending forth of
the Seventy, and, further, when we compare the instructions delivered to them,
as recorded by St. Luke (ch. x. ii), with those which are here recorded by St.
Matthew, as delivered to the Twelve (ch. x. 2 sq.), it seems hard to resist the con
viction that as the first Evangelist was moved in the preceding chapters to group
miracles together, so in the present case he is presenting in a collected form all
our Lord's instructions on the subject of missionary duties and labors generally.
See a comparison of the parallel passages in Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 303.
2 It is right to remember that the formal appointment of the Twelve can
scarcely be placed further back than a week or ten days from the present time.
Some of the number, we know, had been already long enough with our Lord as
disciples for us to conceive that they might have been enabled to teach and
preach for some time without being sustained by His presence, but this can
hardly be felt in reference to all the Apostles.
3 It seems probable that the death of the Baptist took place somewhere about

184 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV,
on this account, and partly for the sake of communing in
stillness with His chosen ones after their first
la. missionary efforts, that our Lord thought it
Mark vi si meet to avoid the many comers and goers
which a time so close to the Passover would
Ver.Zl. . . -, ,
be sure to set in motion, and to seek rest
and privacy by retiring with His Apostles to the solitudes
of the further side of the lake.
But rest and privacy were not to be obtained. A very
short time, especially when we remember the
th^fi/ruZal probable vicinity of the city of Bethsaida-
Julias,1 and the numbers that might now have
been moving about the country, would have served to have
brought the five thousand round our Lord ; and there, on
the green table-lands on the northeastern corner of the
lake, or amid the " green grass " of the rich
Mark vi. 39. . ' ° °
plain near the mouth of the Jordan/ must
we place the memorable scene of the miraculous feeding of
that vast multitude. Memorable indeed, — •
Matt. xiv. 21. memorable for the display of the creative
power of the eternal Son that was then made before more

a week before the time now under consideration. See Wieseler, Chron. Synops.
p. 292 sq. Much, however, turns on the meaning assigned to the term yevetrta
(Matt. xiv. 6, Mark vi. 21). If it refers to the festival in honor of the birthday of
Herod Antipas (Meyer), no precise date for the murder of the Baptist can be
obtained from this portion of the narrative ; if, however, as seems not unlikely,
it refers to the festival in honor of the commencement of Herod's reign, then an
approximately close date can easily be arrived at, as Herod the Great, whom
Herod Antipas succeeded in the government of Galilee (Joseph. Antiq. xvii. 8.
1), is known to have died a few days before the Passover, a. u. o. 750. See Lect.
n. p. 81, note 1.
1 This appears to have been a place of some size and importance. It was trans
formed by Philip from a mere village into a populous and handsome town (see
Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 2. 1), of which some traces are thought to have been found
on some rising ground on the east side of the Jordan and not far from the head
of the lake. See Robinson, Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 413, Thomson, The Land and
the Book, Vol. ii. p. 9, and compare Winer, BWB. Vol. ii. p. 174.
2 See Stanley, Palestine, ch. x. p. 377, and especially Thomson, The Land and
the Book, Vol. ii. p. 29, where it is stated that the exact site of the miracle may
almost confidently be identified. For a confutation of the rashly advanced
opinion that St. Luke places the scene of the miracle on the western shore (De
Wette, comp. Winer, B WB. Vol. i. p. 176), see Meyer on Luke ix. 10.

LECT. IV. THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. 18.5
than five thousand witnesses; memorable too for the
strange coincidence that on the very eve that the Paschal
lambs were being offered up in the temple-courts of Jeru
salem, the eternal Lamb of God was feeding His people in
the wilderness with the bread which His own divine hands
had multiplied!1
And now I must draw these words and this portion of
our Master's life at once to a close, yet not
without the prayer that this effort to set ma^a^ina re"
forth the narrative of a most solemn and
eventful period — the period of the Lord's founding His
Church — may be blessed by His Spirit. To be confident
of the accuracy of details, either of time or place, where
not only the connection of individual events, but the ar
rangement of the whole period, is a matter of the utmost
doubt and difficulty, would indeed argue a rash and self-
satisfied spirit ; yet this I will presume to say, that if certain
chronological data and reasonings be approximately cor
rect, — and after manifold testings correct in the main I
do verily believe them to be, — then the general picture
can hardly be much otherwise than as it has been here
sketched out. Be this however as it may, I count all as
nought if only I have succeeded in the great object which
these Lectures are intended to promote, if only, by pre
senting some sketches of the continued life of the Saviour,
I may have been enabled to bring that Saviour nearer to
one heart in this church. On that holy life, on all its
divine harmonies, on all its holy mysteries, may we be
moved more and more to dwell. By meditating on the
inspired records may we daily acquire increasing measures
of that fulness of conviction, to have which in its most
1 On this miracle, which, as has been often observed, is the only one found in
all the four Gospels, and which, when compared with the miracle of turning the
water into wine (John ii. 1 sq.), shows our Lord's creative powers in reference to
quantity, as the latter does his transforming powers as to quality, see Origen, in
Matt. xi. 1, Vol. iii. p. 476 sq. (ed Bened.), Augustine, in Joann. Tract, xxiv.
Vol. iii. p. 1592 sq. (ed. Migne), Bp. Hall, Contempl. IV. 5, Trench, Notes on the
Miracles, p. 261, and a good sermon by Mill, Univ. Serm. xvi. p. 301.
16*

186 THE MINISTRY IN EASTERN GALILEE. Lect. IV.
complete proportions is to enjoy the greatest earthly
blessing which the Lord has reserved for those that love
Him. This is indeed to dwell with _the Lord on earth ;x
this is indeed to feel His spiritual presence around us and
about us, and yet to feel, with no ascetic severity, but in
sober truth, that we have here no abiding city, but that
there, where He is, is our true and everlasting home;
there, by the shores of that crystal sea, our
heavenly Gennesareth ; there that new Jeru-
Xev. xxi. 23. J
Heb. to. 10. salem, whose light is the light of the Lamb,
— the "city which has foundations, whose
builder and maker is God."

l " Do not then," says the wise and eloquent Bp. Hall, " conceive of this union
as some imaginary thing that hath no existence hut in the brain, or as if it were
merely an accidental or metaphorical union by way of figurative resemblance;
but know that this is a real and substantial union, whereby the believer is indis
solubly united to the glorious person of the Son of God. Know that this union
is not more mystical than certain, that in natural unions there may be more evi
dence but cannot be more truth. Neither is there so firm and close a union
betwixt the soul and body as there is betwixt Christ and the believing soul ; for
asmuch as that may be severed by death, but this cannot." — Christ Mystical,
ch. n. See above, Lect. in. p. 142, note 2.

LECTURE V.
THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE.
AHD HE SAID TTNTO THEM, I MUST PREACH THE KINGDOM OP GOD TO OTHER
CITIES ALSO: EOK THEREFORE AM I SEHT. — St. Luke iv. 43.
I have chosen these words, brethren, which really belong
to a slightly earlier period1 than that which we are now
about to consider, as nevertheless a very suitable text for
that part of our Master's history which will occupy our
attention this afternoon.
In the portion of the inspired narrative now before us,
we have the brief yet deeply interesting:
J r ^ ° General features
notices of more widely extended journeys of this part of our
-i , i • • -m- r. -i i Lord's history.
and more prolonged circuits. We find the
clear traces of missionary travel to the west and to the
east and to the north, and we read the holy record of deeds
of mercy performed in remote regions, both of Galilee and
the lands across the Jordan,2 which the Lord had not, as it

1 The exact time when these words were uttered by our Lord was the morn
ing following the first Sabbath at Capernaum, when the amazed but grateful
multitudes were pressing Him not to leave the place He had so greatly blessed.
See Lect. iv. p. 160.
2 It has not been easy to select a single term which should correctly describe
the principal scene of the ministerial labors of our Lord which come before us
in this Lecture. The known geographical divisions of Upper and Lower Gali
lee (Joseph. Bell. Jud. in. 3. 1) would naturally have suggested the adoption of
the former term in reference to the present, and the latter in reference to the
preceding portion of the sacred narrative, if it were not apparently an estab
lished fact that Capernaum belonged, not, as it might be thought, to Lower
(Kitto, Bibl. Cycl. Art. " Galilee," Vol. i. p. 727), but to Upper Galilee. Comp.
Euseb. Onomast.Art. " Capharnaum," and Smith, Diet. of Bible, Art. "Galilee,"
Vol. i p. 646. The title above has thus been chosen, though it is confessedly not
exact, as failing to include the districts across the Jordan, which, as will be seen
from the narrative, were the scenes of some part of the ministry that we are
now considering.

188 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V.
would appear, yet blessed with his divine presence. Hitherto
the plain 'of Gennesareth and the nearer portions of Galilee,
" the land of Zabulon and the land of Neph-
thalim," had been almost exclusively blest
with the glory of the great Light; now Phosnice and
Decapolis were to behold its rays. Hitherto the lake of
the east, " the way of the sea beyond Jor
dan," had been the chief theatre of the Re
deemer's teaching and miracles; now even the coasts of
Tyre and Sidon, and the great sea of the west, were to
hear the tidings of salvation, yea, and to bear their witness
to victories over the powers of that kingdom of darkness
which had so long been seated on those heathen and idol
atrous shores.
Such is the general character of the very remarkable
portion of the sacred narrative on which we
special contrasts now about to dwell. Remarkable is it
and characteristics. for the glimpses it vouchsafes to us of the"
unwearied activities of our Lord's ministerial life ; remark
able for the notices it supplies to us of the extended
spheres to which those holy energies were directed;1 re
markable too for the contrasted relations in which it stands
to that portion of the Gospel history which claimed so
much of our attention last Sunday. To these contrasts
and characteristics let us devote a few preliminary thoughts.
First, however, let us specify the limits of the section to
which we are about to confine our attention.
Chronological
limits of the present These seem, almost at once, to suggest them-
portion. selves to the meditative reader, and serve to
separate the evangelical narrative into simple and natural

1 The peculiar character of these distant missionary journeys of our Lord, and
the considerable portion of time which they appear to have occupied, have been
too much overlooked by modern writers of the Life of our Lord. Compare, for
example, Hase, Leben Jesu, § 85, and even to some extent Lange, Leben Jesu, n.
6. 10, Part n. p. 864, neither of whom seems properly to recognize the important
place which these journeys really occupy in our Lord's ministry. See below, p.
189. Ewald, on the contrary, has correctly devoted a separate section to this
portion of the Gospel history. See Gesch. Christus\ p. 331 sq.

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 189
divisions. Our section, it will be remembered, commences
with the events which immediately succeeded the feeding
of the five thousand on the Passover eve,1 and naturally
and appropriately concludes with the return of our Lord
to Capernaum a very short time previous to His journey
to Jerusalem at the feast of Tabernacles, towards the mid
dle of October. We have thus as nearly as possible a
period of six months ;2 a period bounded by two great
festivals, and, as I have already said, marked off from the
preceding portion of our Lord's history by some striking
contrasts and characteristics. Oh these let us briefly pause
to make a few observations which the nature of the subject
appears to demand.
One of the most striking features of the present section
is the glimpse it affords us of the progressive
01 l v Progressive na~
nature, if I may venture to use such an ex- ««« of our Lord's
pression, of our Lord's ministerial labors, and
the prophetic indications, as it were, which it supplies of
the future universal diffusion of the Gospel. At first we
have seen that our blessed Master was mercifully pleased
to confine His teaching and His deeds of love and mercy
mainly to that province which could now alone be reck
oned as the land of the old theocracy. In Judaea He was
pleased to dwell continuously more than eight
c . John iv. 1.
months ; 3 in Judaea He gathered round Him
disciples more numerous than those of John, and from Ju-

1 See above, Lect. iv. p. 185. The opinion there advanced, of the exact coin
cidence of the day on which the multitudes were fed with that on which the
paschal-lamb was slain, derives some slight support from the subject of our
Lord's discourse (the bread of life, John vi. 22 sq.) at Capernaum on the follow
ing day, which, it does not appear at all unlikely, was suggested by the festal
season. See below, p. 197.
2 If we are correct in our general chronology, the present year would be 782
A. jj. c, and in this year the Passover would begin April 17 or 18 (see above, p.
182, note 1), and the feast of Tabernacles October 19. See the tables in Wieseler,
Cliron. Synops. p. 483.
3 This ministry began with the Passover of the year 781 A. u. o. (March 29),
and concluded with our Lord's departure to Galilee through Samaria, which, as
we have seen above, may be fixed approximately as late in December. See
Lect. in. p. 128, note 3.

190 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V.
dsea He departed only when the malignity of Scribe and
Pharisee rendered that favored land no longer a safe rest
ing-place for its Redeemer and its God.
Then, and not till then, followed the minis
try in the eastern and, as it would seem, more Judaized1
portion of Galilee. In due and mysterious order suc
ceeded those missionary labors in frontier lands where the
Gentile element was mainly, if not in some cases exclu
sively, prevalent. This gradual enlargement of the field of
holy labor does indeed seem both striking and suggestive ;
this we may perhaps venture to regard as a result from
our present system of harmonizing the Gospel narrative,
which reflects on that system no small degree of plausibility.
But there are contrasts too between the narrative of this
present portion of our Lord's history and
thlZnTZ^cTd- that which has preceded, which seem to il-
ZiToZlT °f 'he lustrate the foregoing remarks, and are in
themselves both interesting and instructive.
Though the portion of time vouchsafed to the ministry in
Capernaum and its vicinity was so short, yet with what
minute accuracy is it detailed to us by the three Synoptical
Evangelists ! How numerous the miracles, how varied and
impressive the teaching ! Three continuous weeks only,2
* 1 This last epithet may perhaps be questioned, but is apparently borne out by
the essentially Jewish chaiacter of the district which the sacred narrative seems
to reveal. The population of the great city of the district, Tiberias, though
mixed (Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 2. 3), appears to have included a considerable and'
probably preponderant number of Jews, as we find it mentioned as in revolt
against the Romans (Joseph. Vit. 9), while the other large city of Galilee, Sep-
phoris, did not swerve from its allegiance. Capernaum too, if we agree to
identify it with Tell Hum (p. 121, note 1), must have had a large population of
Jews at a time not very distant from the Christian era, otherwise we can hardly
account for the extensive ruins, apparently of a synagogue of unusual magnifi
cence, 'which have been observed at that place by modern travellers. See Rob
inson, Palestine, Vol. in. p. 346 (ed. 2), Thomson, The Land and the Book, Vol.
i. p. 540. As to the supposed early date of the building, compare the remarks of
Robinson, Palest. Vol. iii. p. 74.
2 Assuming our general dates to be right, our Lord's first appearance in the
synagogue at Nazareth would be on a Sabbath corresponding with the twenty-
first day of the intercalated month Beadar, or, according to the Julian Calendar,
March 26 or 27. The Passover, as we have already seen, commenced on April
17 or 18. We have thus for the portion of our Lord's ministry on which we

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 191
yet in that short time one signal instance of the Lord's
controlling power over the elements,1 two records of tri
umphs over the power of death, three notable accounts of
a stern sovereignty exercised over the spirits of perdition,2
the formal founding of the Church, and the promulgation
of all its deepest teaching. But in our present section, when
we follow our Lord's steps into half-heathen lands, though
the time spent was so much greater, how few the recorded
miracles, how isolated and detached the notices of them !
Nay, more, our very inspired authorities
J ' • J _ r Teaching and
seem to change their relations, and yet sug- preaching rattier
, , , . than miracles char-
gest by the very change that local teaching acteristio of this
and preaching,3 rather than display of mi
raculous power, was the chief characteristic of these six
have commented in the preceding Lecture only a period of about twenty-two
days. It may be urged that this is far shorter than we could have inferred from
the narrative; but it may he answered, that if the feast mentioned by St.
John (ch. v. 1) be Purim, and if we consider, as we seem fairly justified in doing,
the feeding of the five thousand coincident with the Passover-eve of the same
year (see p. 147, note 2), then our Lord's ministry in Eastern Galilee cannot
readily be shown to have lasted longer than has been here supposed. It is by
no means disguised that there are in this, as in every other system of chronology
that has yet been proposed, many difficulties, and much that may make us very
doubtful of our power of fixing the exact epochs of many events (see above, p.
182, note 1) ; still, if the extreme chronological limits appear rightly fixed, we
seem bound to accept the fair results of such an arrangement, if not as certainly
true, yet at least as consistent with what has been judged to be so, and thus far
as claiming our assent. For some remarks tending in some measure to dilute
the force of a priori arguments founded on the apparent shortness of the time,
see Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 288.
1 We might have almost said two, as the miracle of walking on the water
(Matt. xiv. 22, Mark vi. 48, John vi. 19), though placed in the portion on which
we are now commenting, obviously belongs to the ministry in Eastern Galilee.
2 These are, (1) the striking instance in the synagogue at Capernaum (Mark i.
23 sq., Luke iv. 33 sq.), which so greatly amazed those who witnessed it; (2) the
instance of healing the blind and deaf demoniac (Matt. xii. 22), which provoked
the impious declarations of the Jerusalem scribes and Pharisees ; and (3) the
Gergesene demoniacs (Matt. viii. 28 sq., Mark v. i. sq., Luke viii. 26 sq.).
3 The statement of Chrysostom (in Matt. Horn. lii. Vol. vii. p. 596, ed. Bened.
2), that our Lord did not journey to the borders of Tyre and Sidon for the pur
pose of preaching there (ovSe as icqpl/£a>v &7ri}A&ey), seems doubtful. From St.
Mark, as Chrysostom urges, we learn that our Lord sought privacy " and would
have no man know" (ch. vii. 24), but this, from the immediate context, and, as
it were, contrasted miracle, would seem to indicate a desire for partial rather
than absolute concealment; a temporary laying aside of His merciful displays
of divine power, rather than a suspension of His ministry.

192 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V.
months of the Lord's ministerial life. I ground this opin
ion on the easily verified fact that the professed histo
rian of his Master's life, he who made it his duty to set in
¦order the narrative which eye-witnesses had delivered,
and who records to us events rather than
discourses,1 has assigned to this six months'
period only some thirty or more verses,2 while to the brief
but eventful period that preceded he has devoted at least
seven times as much of his inspired record. Our principal
authority, as we might almost expect, is St. Matthew ; yet
not exclusively, as abbut one hundred and fifty verses of
St. Mark's Gospel relate to the same period.3 The events
however recorded by both Evangelists taken together are
eo very few, that again the inference would seem reason
able, that if two of those who were eye-witnesses — for in
St. Mark we have the testimony of St. Peter — have
related so little, our Lord's miracles during this time could
scarcely have been numerous. Miracles, as we know, were
performed, but it was probably less by their influence than
by the calm but persuasive influence of teaching and
preaching that the Lord was pleased to touch and test the
rude yet apparently receptive hearts of the dwellers in the
remote uplands of Galilee, or in the borders of Hellenic
Decapolis.4 1 On the nature and characteristics of this Gospel, see Lect. I. p. 41 sq.
2 The only portion of St. Luke's Gospel which appears to relate to this period
"if our Lord's ministry, if we except a very few verses which may perhaps belong
to discourses during this period (ch. xv. 3 — 7, xvii. 1, 3), begins ch. ix. 18, and
concludes with the fiftieth verse of the same chapter. Comp. Wieseler, Chron.
Synops. p. 314.
3 The portion of St. Mark's Gospel that refers to this period of our Lord's
¦toinistry begins ch. vi. 45, and seems to conclude with the last verse of ch. ix.
the next chapter describes our Lord as journeying into Judaea by way of Persea,
and, consequently, is describing the last journey to Jerusalem. See Lect. vi.
4 The district, or, more strictly speaking, confederation bearing this name,
Seems to have been made up of cities and villages round them (Joseph. Vit. j
65), of which the population was nearly entirely Gentile; two of the cities. Hip
pos and Gadara, are distinctly termed by Josephus (Antiq. xn. 11. 4) 'Y.WnviSes
it6\eis. The geographical limits of Decapolis can scarcely be defined; we
seem, however, justified in considering that nearly all the cities included in the
confederation were across the Jordan, and on the eastern side of the lake of
Gennesareth. Compare Eusebius, Onomast. s. v. "Decapolis," and see Winer,
BWB. Art. " Decapolis," Vol. i. p. 263.

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 193
This is exactly what we might have presumed to expect
from the circumstances of the case, and from
,,,... Such a difference
what has been incidentally revealed to us of probavu from the
, ... . ,.,, r. n nature of the case.
the conditions on which the performance of
the Lord's miracles in a great measure depended. From
the comment which both St. Matthew and
St. Mark have made upon the repressing " . m"_
influence of the unbelief of the people of
Nazareth, we seem justified in asserting that our Redeem
er's miracles were in a great degree contingent upon the
faith of those to whom the message of the Gospel was
offered.1 How persuasively true then does that narrative
appear which on the one hand represents the appeal tc
miracles most frequent and continuous in Eastern Galilee,
where the receptivity was great and the contravening
influences mainly due to alien emissaries,* — and, on the
other, leaves us to infer, by its few and isolated notices,
that amid the darkness and necessarily imperfect belief of
the frontier lands that appeal was comparatively limited
and exceptional.
But it is now time for us to resume the thread of the
inspired history. On that Passover-eve with
\ The return across
which our narrative commences, our Lord, theutce. our Lord
c , . n -, , „ -, . walks on the waters.
alter having ted the five thousand, remains
Himself behind on the eastern shore to dis
miss the yet lingering multitudes, but directs ." '""•"•
Job ' %ark „;. 45,
the disciples to cross over the lake to Beth-
saida. From some supposed discordant notices in the

1 The following comment of Origen is clear and pertinent : " From these words
(Matt. xiii. 58) we are taught that miracles were performed among the believing,
since ' to every one that hath it shall be given and shall be made to abound,'
but among unbelievers miracles not only were not, but, as St. Mark has recorded,
even could not be performed. For attend to that ' He could not perform any
miracle there;' he did not say 'He would not,' but 'He could not,' implying
that there is an accessory cooperation with the miraculous pdwer supplied by
the faith of Him towards whom the miracle is being performed, but that there is
a positive hinderance caused by unbelief." — In Matt. x. 18, Vol. iii. p. 466 (ed.
Bened.). See also Euthym. Matt. xiii. 68.
2 See above, Lect. iv. p. 162, note 1. 17

194 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V.
accounts given of the circumstances which followed, it has
been urged that this Bethsaida was the town of that
name, known also by the name of Julias, not far from the
head of the lake,1 and with this supposition it may be con
ceded that there are some statements in the sacred narra-
. tive that at first sight seem to be fairly accordant : as, how
ever, the supposed discordances and difficulties are really
only imaginary, there seems no sufficient reason for depart
ing from the ordinarily received opinion that this was the
village on the western side. Nay, more, the scarcely
doubtful direction of the gale from the south-west,2 which
would bring, as we are afterwards told, ves-
Johnvi. 23. ?' . , ,
sels from liberias to the north-eastern coast,
but would greatly delay a passage in the contrary direc
tion, seems to make against such a supposition, and to lead
us decidedly to believe that Bethsaida on the western coast
was the point which the Apostles were trying to reach,
1 This view, which is perhaps originally due to Lightfoot (Chron. Temp, j 47,
Vol. ii. p. 30, Roterod. 1686),'is very elaborately maintained by Wieseler (Chron.
Synops. p. 274, note), and has also found a recent advocate in Dr. Thomson (The
Land and the Book, Vol. ii. p. 30 sq.), who conceives that there was really
only one Bethsaida, viz. the town at the northeastern corner of the lake. In
opposition to Lightfoot and Wieseler, we may Justly urge, first, the distinct
words of St. Matthew, describing the position of the vessel on its return, to Be
irhotov iiSri aeaov r9\s Srdkdaer\s fy (ch. xiv. 24; comp. Mark vi. 47); and,
secondly, the words of St. Mark, irpodyeiv els to trepav trphs firfco-diSdv
(ch. vi. 45), which, when coupled with the above notice of the position of the
vessel, it does seem impossible to explain otherwise than as specifying a direct
course across the lake. Compare also John vi. 17. With regard to Dr. Thom
son's opinion, it may be observed that all modern writers seem rightly to acqui
esce in the opinion of Reland that there was a place of that name on the west
ern coast, very near Capernaum. Robinson fixes its site as at the modern
et-Tabighah (Palestine, Vol. in. p. 359, ed. 2), but there seems good reason for
agreeing with Ritter in placing it at Khan Minyeh, and in fully admitting the
statement of Seetzen, that this last-mentioned place was also known by the local
name of BM-Szaida. See Erdkunde, Part xv. p. 333 6q. That there should be
two places called Bethsaida (" House of Fish") on or near a lake so well known,
not only for the peculiar varieties (Joseph. Bell. Jud. in. 10. 8), but the great
abundance of its fish, as that of Gennesareth, cannot justly be considered at all
improbable. 2 See Blunt, Veracity of Evangelists, No. xx. p. 82, who appears rightly to
connect with the mention of the gale the incidental notice of the passage of
boats from Tiberias to the N. E. corner of the lake. For a description of these
sudden and often lasting gales, see Thomson, Land and the Book, Yol. ii. p. 82,
and comp. p. 177, note 2.

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 195
and trying to reach in vain. Though they had started in
the evening,1 they had not crossed the lake by the time of
the fourth watch ; still were they toiling
against the stirred-up waters and tempestu- M"ark^^
ous wind, when to their bewilderment they
see the Lord walking on those storm-tossed waves, and, as it
were, leading the way2 to the haven they had so long been
striving to reach. We well remember the incident of the
striking but, alas, soon failing faith of St.
Peter, the ceasing of the wind, and the <"'¦<"*»• »«•
7 O > John vi. a.
speedy arrival of the vessel at the land
whither they were going; and we have, perhaps, not forgot
ten that this miracle produced a greater impression on the
Apostles than any they had yet witnessed.3 The miracle
of the multiplied loaves they could not fully appreciate.

i Some little difficulty has been round in the specifications of time in the nar
rative, owing to the inclusive nature of the term oxj/la. The following remarks
will perhaps adjust the seeming discrepancies. From St. Matthew (ch. xiv. 15)
we learn that it was o<fila before the men sat down. This we may reasonably
suppose roughly specifies some time in the first evening (3 p.m.— 6 p.m.), which
again the Sopa woW^ of St. Mark (ch. vi. 35) would seem more nearly to define
as rather towards the close than the commencement of that dipia. At the begin
ning of the second evening, probably soon after six o'clock, the disciples embark
(John vi. 16), and ere this oifiia, which extended from sunset to darkness, had
quite concluded, the disciples had reached the middle of the lake (Mark vi. 47 ;
comp. Matt. xiv. 24), and were now experiencing the full force of a gale, which,
probably commencing soon after sunset (compare Thomson, Land and the Book,
Vol. ii. p. 32), was now becoming hourly more wild. For some hours they con
tend against it, but without making more than a few stadia (comp. John vi. 19 ;
the lake was about forty stadia broad ; Joseph. Bell. Jud. m. 10. 7), when, in
the fourth watch (Matt. xiv. 25), they beheld our Lord walking on the waters,
and approaching the vessel. On the first and second evenings see Gesenius, Lex.
e. v -"?.?, p- dclii. (Bagster), Jahn, Archceol. Bibl. § 101.
2 See Mark vi. 48, Kal fj&sAei' iraoeAAeiy avrovs ; and compare Lange, Leben
Jesu, II. 5. 3, Part n. p. 788.
S On this miracle, which is one of the seven selected by St. John (comp. Ewald,
Gesch. Christus', p. 359, note), and which, as the Greek commentators rightly
observe (see Chryeost. and Euthymius in Matt. xiv. 33), evinces even more dis
tinctly than the stilling of the tempest our Lord's power over the laws that
govern the material world, — see some novel, though too allegorically applied
comments in Origen, in Matt. vi. 5, Vol. iii. p. 484 sq. (ed. Bened.), and in Augus
tine, Serm. lxxv. lxxvi. Vol. v. p. 474 sq. More general comments will be
.found in Hall, Contempt, it. 6, Trench, Miracles, p. 274 sq. ; and notices of diffi
culties in this and the accompanying narrative, in Ebrard, Kritik der Evang.
Geschichte, § 76, p. 391.

John vi. 15.
Ver. 14.

196 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V.
Though, as we well know, it had produced a profound
effect upon those for whose sake it had been
performed, and had caused them to confess
that this was "of a truth that prophet that
should come into the world," and though we cannot doubt
that in such a confession the Apostles had also silently
shared, yet we are plainly told by the sec
ond Evangelist that their hearts were too
hard and too dull to understand fully the mighty miracle
at which they themselves had been permitted to minister.
Here, however, was something that produced on them a
far deeper impression ; here was something that appealed
to those hardy boatmen as nought else could have ap
pealed, and made them, both with their lips and by their
outward and unforbidden posture of worship,
avow, for the first time collectively, that their
Master was what one of them had long since separately
declared Him to be, not only "the king of
Johni.iv. J.srael>» but «« the gorj 0f God » 1
Return to caper- ipjjg morning brings back to the western
naum; our Lord's ° °
discourse •» the side many2 of those who had been miracu-
synagogue. ¦ ,
lously fed the evening before, and to them,
in the synagogue at Capernaum (for it was the fifteenth
of Nisan and a day of solemn service8), the Lord utters
1 On the full signification of the title " Son of God," as applied to our Lord
inthe New Testament, see the valuable remarks of Wilson, Ulustr. of the New
Test. ch. II. p. 10 sq. In the present case it is impossible to doubt that it was
aught else than a full and complete recognition, not merely of our Saviour's
Messiahship (Meyer), which would here be wholly out of place, but of His
divine nature and prerogatives.
2 Unnecessary difficulties have been made about the transit of the multitude.
Without unduly pressing d ear-nnttis (Stier), as specially implying those who
remained, in contrast with those that went away, it still seems obvious from the
tenor of the narrative that those who followed our Lord were only the more
earnest and deeply impressed portion of the multitude. Boats they would find
in abundance, as the traffic on the lake was great, and the gale would have
driven boats in a direction from Tiberias, and obliged them to seek shelter on
the northeastern shore. See above, p. 194, note 2, and compare Sepp, Leben
Christi, v. 7, Vol. iii. 16.
3 See Lev. xxiii. 7, Deut. xxviii. 18, from both of which passages we learn
that there was to be a holy convocation on the day, and no servile work done
thereon.

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 197
that sublime discourse recorded by St. John, so strik
ingly in accordance not only with the past miracle but
with the present Passover-season, wherein He declares
Himself to be the Bread of Life. The whole discourse is
worthy of our attention,1 as serving to confirm, perhaps
in a somewhat striking way, some of the views which we
were led to adopt last Sunday in regard to the spiritual
state of the people of Capernaum and its neighborhood.
It seemed almost clear, you may remember, that the hos
tility and unbelief which the Lord met with at Capernaum
were in a great degree to be traced to malignant emissa
ries from Jerusalem, subsequently joined by
some Galilaean Pharisees.2 We may reasona- „£<*e..Y- 17i """*•
J Mark m. 22.
bly conceive that these evil men had now
left Galilee to celebrate the Passover, and we may in con
sequence be led to expect far fewer exhibitions of hatred
and hostility when our Lord vouchsafes to preach in the
synagogue from which they were temporarily absent.
And -this is exactly what we do find recorded by the
fourth Evangelist. We detect traces of doubt and sus
pended belief in some of the assembled
, -i -i *. ¦ J~ohn ¦"¦ 30-
hearers, nay, we are told of murmunngs
from the more hostile section then present,3
when our Lord declares that He Himself J9"' '
Ver. 52.
was " the bread which came down from
heaven;" we observe, too, strivings among themselves as

1 For good and copious comments on this discourse, the subject of which is
the mysterious relation of our Lord to His people as the Bread of Life, and as
the spiritual sustenance of believers, see Chrysostom, in Joann. Horn. xliv.
— xlvii., Cyril Alex, in Joann. Vol. iv. pp. 295 — 372 (ed. Aubert), Augustine, in
Joann. Tractat. xxv. xxvi., and among modern writers in Luthardt, das Johann.
Evang. Part II. pp. 49—64, and Stier, Disc of our Lord, Vol. v. pp. 149—205
(Clark). 2 See above, p. 162, note 1.
3 It deserves notice that the speakers are now not, as above, some of the mul
titude who had followed our Lord, and whose questions had received the solemn
answers recorded in the earlier portion of the discourse, but are specially noticed
as '\ovScCiot ; i. e., according to what seems St. John's regular use of the term,
adherents of the party that was specially hostile to our Lord. See above, p. 137,
note 3. 17*

198 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lec* V.
to the true meaning of His weighty words;1 but we are
shocked by none of those outbursts of maddened hatred
which on an earlier occasion marked the
Lukevi.ii; comp. presence of the intruders from Jerusalem.
It is clear, however, that evil seed had been
sown and was springing up ; it is plain that our Lord's
words caused offence, and that not merely to the general
multitude, but, alas, to some unspiritual disciples, who,
St. John tells us shortly but sadly, " went
back, and walked with Him no more." But
the holy Twelve were true and firm: they who a few
hours before, on the dark waters of the solitary lake, had
confessed their Master's divinity, now again,
Matt. xv. 33. m tne face 0f a]i men declare by the mouth
John vi. 69. J
of St. Peter2 that they believed and were
sure that " He was Christ, the Son of the living God."
1 These strivings, though in a different and better 6pirit, have continued to this
very day. Without entering deeply into the contested question of the reference of
the words (col 6 dpros, K. t. \, (ver. 61), we may remark generally (1) that the allu
sion in ver. 50 is clearly to the Incarnation, which at the commencement of ver. 51
is more fully unfolded, and in the conclusion of that verse seems also further
(Kal o apios 5e, k.t.A.) followed out to its last most gracious purpose, — the
giving up of the human flesh thus assumed to atone for the sins of mankind :
aTro&vfitTKQ} tprjtrlv, irwep ravraiv, 'Iva irdvras Qoioitov^tTu SC iptavTov, Cyril
Alex, in loc. Vol. iv. p. 353. This supposition, thus derived from the context, is
strongly confirmed by the word o~dp£, which, especially in its present connec
tion, seems intended still more definitely to point to our Lord's atoning death.
Compare Eph. ii. 15, Col. i. 22, 1 Pet. iii. 18. To which we may add (2) that the
idea pervading the whole verse, — Christ the bread of the world, and the further
explanations which our Lord Himself vouchsafes (ver. 53), fully warrant a
reference, not directly and exclusively, but indirectly and inclusively, to the
Holy Communion of our Lord's body and blood. For an account of the vari
ous conflicting views, see Liicke, Comment, titer Joh. Vol. ii. p. 152 sq. (ed. 3),
Meyer, ib. p. 209 (ed. 3); but to ascertain the exact opinion of the patristic
writers there referred to, the student will be wise to consult the original writers.
2 This confession of St. Peter, which, as Chrysostom rightly remarks, was said
in behalf of all (ov yap elirev " iyvtotta," a.\\' " 4yvdtKariev "), is certainly not
to be regarded as identical with that recorded in Matt. xvi. 16 : contrast Wiese
ler, Chron. Synops. p. 277. Time, place, and circumstances seem so clearly dif
ferent that we can hardly fail to admit, what is in itself highly natural, that the
fervid apostle twice made a similar confession. Such seems distinctly the
opinion of Chrysostom (in loc), who alludes to the other confession as ahAaxov.
The exact words of the confession are not perfectly certain. We have followed
above the Received Text, but as there seems some probability of alteration from
Matt. xvi. 16 (see Meyer and Alford in loc) it may be fairly questioned whether
the reading of BC1DL, 6 0710s toS ®eov, is not to be preferred.

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 199
Of the miraculous events that immediately followed
we can only speak in general terms. Both
St. Matthew and St. Mark here expressly J^Z^Z
mention numerous healings which were tum of the Jewish
° emissaries,
performed in the plain of Gennesareth.
Both speak of the great confluence of the sick and
the suffering; both specify the mightiness .
of the power with which they were healed. Markm. 55.
To the performance of these deeds of mercy Matt. xiv. as.
, « ., , Mark vi. 56.
a short time — a few days perhaps — may
reasonably be assigned;1 but it was a short time only.
Those healing hands were, alas, soon to be stayed. Old
enemies were by this time on their way back again to
bring charges and to condemn ; the human agents of the
kingdom of darkness were again arraying themselves
against the Lord of the kingdom of light.
St. Matthew and St. Mark both relate the '""' '
Ch. wti. 1.
arrival of Scribes and Pharisees from Jeru
salem,2 — beyond all doubt those whose machinations we
noticed in our last lecture, and who now, with the true
spirit of the sect to which they belonged, had formally
observed their Passover at Jerusalem, and had hastened
back, as it were from the presence of the God of justice
1 In the narrative of St. Matthew there is nothing to guide us. The remark,
however, of St. Mark, oirov ttv eiffeiropeveTO els Kd\u.as t) els ir6\ets fj els biypovs
(ch. vi. 56), seems to indicate a continued ministry in the neighborhood of Caper
naum, of at least a few days' duration. Wieseler (Chron. Synops. p. 311, note)
seems to refer not only all these events, but also the reply of our Lord to the
Pharisees on the subject of eating with unwashen hands (Matt. xv. 1 sq., Mark
vii. 1 sq.), to the same day as that on which the discourse on the Bread of Life
was delivered, i. e. on Nisan 15. This, however, is by no means probable. The
Pharisees and Scribes, who are specified both by the first and second Evangelists
as having come from Jerusalem, would hardly have left the city till the festival
of the Passover was fully concluded. Origen (in Matt. Tom. xi. 8) comments
on the Tore (Matt. xv. 1) as marking a general coincidence in point of time
with the healings in Gennesareth, but gives no precise opinion as to the exact
time when the emissaries reappeared.
2 Chrysostom (in Matt. xv. 1) has noticed the special mention of the place
whence they had come, remarking that the Scribes and Pharisees from the
capital were both actuated by a worse spirit and held more in repute than those
from other parts of Juda;a. Horn, W. Vol, vii. p. 585 (ed. Bened. 2). See
Euthymius, in loc Vol. i. p. 605,

200 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V.
and truth, to take counsel against innocent blood. Ground
of accusation is soon found out. These base men had
perhaps insidiously crept into the social meetings of the
disciples, and marked with malignant eyes the freedom of
early evangelical life, and the charge is soon made : "Why
walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the
elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands ?"
MatkHit Stern and crushing indeed is the answer
which is returned, startling the application
Mark vii. 6. . .
of prophecy, plain the principle, declared
openly and plainly to the throng of bystanders,1 that de
filement is not from without, but from within.
Complete indeed was the vindication, but
dangerous in its very completeness. The Pharisees, as
we learn incidentally, were now still more
deeply offended; their malevolence was as
suming hourly a more implacable form, and, not improba
bly, hourly becoming more and more contagious. Doubts,
suspicion, and perhaps aversion,2 were now not improbably
fast springing up in the minds even of fliose
who once would fain have prevented the
Lord from ever leaving their highly-favored land. Nor
was this all. Other evil influences were at work, not only
among the people, but among their rulers; for we may
1 Both St. Matthew and St. Mark notice the fact that our Lord called the
mixed multitude round Him (Matt. xvi. 10, Kal rrpoarKaKeadu.evos top i%\ov.
Comp. Mark vii. 14) and declared more especially to them (Tpeirei rbv Koyov
irpbs ibv 6x^.ov ws t\%iokoyt!>Tepov, Euthym.)the principle, which the Pharisees
would have been slow to admit, that defilement was from within, and not from
without. It would 6eem, however, that this was uttered in the hearing of the
Pharisees, and that, as Euthymius rightly suggests, this was the \6yos (Matt.
xv. 12) at which, both from its sentiment and the publicity given to it, the Phar
isees were so much offended. Comp. Meyer, in loc. p. 306 (ed. 4).
2 This seems in some measure to transpire in St. John's account of our Lord's
recent preaching at Capernaum, especially in those expressions of thorough
Nazarene unbelief (Luke iv. 22, Mark vi. 3) which followed our Lord's declara
tion that He was the " Bread which came down from heaven " (John vi. 41 sq.).
Though it is right to remember that these expressions came from a hostile sec
tion (see above, p. 197, note 3), yet the very presence of such a section in a syna
gogue where a very short time before the only feeling was amazement (Mark i.
22, Luke iv. 32), seems to show that some change of feeling was beginning decid
edly to show itself.

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 201
remember that it was but a short time before that the
evil and superstitious Herod Antipas1 had
i i ¦ /-. o Lukeix.i.
evinced a strong desire to see One of whom
he had heard tidings that filled him with uneasiness and
perplexity. And such a desire on the part
of the murderer of the Baptist, we may well
infer, could bode nothing but ill against One whom his
fears had made him believe was his victim come back
again from the grave.2 All the Lord's secret or avowed
enemies thus seemed unconsciously working together;
danger was on every side, and eastern Galilee was proba
bly fast becoming as unsafe an abode for the Redeemer
and His Apostles as Judaea had been a few months before.
However this may be, the blessing of the Lord's pres
ence was now to be vouchsafed to other
¦, -, T , -. . Journey to Tyre
lands. In the remote west and in the con- and sidon, ana the
/.ortrriiiTn it miracle performed
fines" or lyre the Lord was now pleased there.
to seek, if not for a security that was denied
at Capernaum, yet for a seclusion that might
have been needed for a yet further instruction of the

1 What little we know of the character of this Tetrarch is chiefly derived from
what is recorded of him in the Gospels, especially in that of St. Luke. Josephus
notices chiefly his love of ease and expense (Antiq. xviii. 7. 1 sq.), but in the
sacred writers, beside the mention of his adultery and murder of the Baptist,
we also find allusions that prove him to have been a thoroughly bad man. Com
pare Luke iii. 19, and Nolde, Historia Idum. p. 251 sq.
2 In the account given by the three Synoptical Evangelists (Matt. xiv. 1 sq.,
Mark vi. 14 sq., Luke ix. 7 sq.) we have the workings of a bad conscience plainly
set before us. Observe the emphatic iytb (Luke ix. 9), and the desire expressed
to see our Lord so as to satisfy himself that the general opinion (Luke ix. 7), in
which he himself seems to have shared (Matt. xiv. 2, Mark vi. 16; comp. Chrys.
in Matt. 1. c), was not true after all. There seems no reason for ascribing to the
Tetrarch a belief in any form of transmigration of souls (comp. Grotius in loc);
his words were merely the natural accents of guilty fear.
3 This seems the correct inference from the words of St. Mark (ra [ie&6pia
Tvpov, ch. vii. 24) coupled with the incidental comment of St. Matthew (airh
Tav bploiv ttcelvwv i£er\&ovo~a, ch. xv. 22). At present, it would seem, our Lord
had not actually crossed into the territory of Tyre, but was in the district
closely contiguous to it. Origen (in Matt. Tom. xi. 16) rightly connects this
journey with the offence given to the Pharisees by our Lord's declaration to the
multitudes on the subject of inward and outward pollution (Matt. xv. 11, Mark
vii. 15). Compare also Greswell, Dissert, xxiii. Vol. ii. p. 354. That it was al30
for quiet and repose (Euthym.) is to be inferred from Mark vii. 24.

202 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V.
Apostles in the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.
But, as St. Mark records, " He could not be
hid." There was faith even in those dark
ened and heathen lands, and a faith that in one instance
at least was proved and was blessed. No sooner was it
known that the Lord was there than one poor woman at
once crossed the frontier, which as yet the
Redeemer had not passed, and with those
strange words on heathen lips, " Have mercy on me, Lord,
thou Son of David," called upon the Lord
with importunate energy to heal her demo
niac daughter. The whole tenor of the narrative of both
the Evangelists who relate the incidents seems clearly to
show that this passionate call and these wildly-uttered
words at first met with no response.1 Our Lord was silent.
When, however, that suppliant drew nigh, when she fell
at her Redeemer's feet, and uttered those pity-moving
words of truest faith, " Lord, help me," then
was it that the all-merciful One beheld and
vouchsafed to accept a faith that was permitted to extend
the very sphere of His own mission. The Canaanite was
heard; the descendant of ancient idolaters2 was practi
cally accounted as one of the lost sheep of the house of
Israel ; the devil was cast out, and the child was healed.3

1 See Matthew xv. 23. That this silence on the part of our Lord was designed
to prove the faith of the woman is the opinion of the ancient commentators (see
Chrys. in Matt. Horn. lii. 2), and seems certainly borne out by the trying
answer of our Lord (Matt. xv. 26, Mark vii. 27) which was vouchsafed to her
second entreaty. To suppose that our Lord was here condescending to the
prejudices of the apostles (Milman, Hist, of Christianity, Vol. i. p. 253) is not
probable or satisfactory ; still less so is the supposition that He was simply over
come by her faithful importunity (De Wette, Meyer) ; as Chrysostom properly
says, Ei fiij Sovvtu e/ieWev, oiib" ttv ptera ravra eSwicev. Vol. vii. p. 598 (ed.
Bened. 2).
2 The term Xavavaia, used by St. Matthew (ch. xv. 22), seems fully to justify
this statement. She is termed 'EWijvls (i. e. a heathen, not of Jewish descent),
^vpotpotviKttrtra (Lachm.) or 5i5pa ^oivlKitrtra ( Tisch.) rep yevet by St. Mark (ch.
vii. 26), a definition perfectly accordant with that of St. Matthew, as these Syro-
Phoenicians probably derived their origin from the remains of old Canaanite
nations which had withdrawn on the conquest of Palestine to the extreme
northern coasts. Comp. Winer, BWB. Art. " Canaaniter," Vol. i. p. 210.
s On this miracle, the characteristics of which are that it was performed on

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 203
How long our Lord abode in these regions we know not ;
but as this touching miracle is the only inci
dent recorded by the Evangelists, and as the ^£2 2T£
privacy which our Lord sought for was now ST"8*"™ ""**
still less likely to be maintained, we may,
perhaps, not unreasonably conclude that after a short stay,
yet probably long enough for His enemies to have returned
back to Jerusalem, our Lord again turned His steps back
ward, passing through the midst of the semi-pagan Decap
olis,1 and ultimately approaching the sea of Galilee, as it
would seem, from the further side of the
Jordan. Equally, or nearly equally, ignorant S1?°m'' Mark "*•
are we of the extent of this northernjourney;
if, however, we adopt a reading which now finds a place in
most critical editions,2 we are certainly led to extend this
journey beyond the Tyrian frontier, and further to draw
the interesting inference, that our Lord, moved probably
by the great faith of the Syro-Phoenician woman, actually
passed into the heathen territory, visited ancient and idol
atrous Sidon,3 and from the neighborhood of that city
one of heathen descent, at a distance from the sufferer (comp. p. 132, note 2),
and in consequence of the great faith of the petitioner ("vox humilis sed celsa
fides," Sedulius), see Chrysost. in Matt. Horn, lii., Augustine, Serm. lxxvii.
Vol. v. p. 483 (ed. Migne), Bp. Hall, Contempt, rv. 1, Trench, Miracles, p. 339
etj., and Lange, Leben Jesu, II. 5. 10, Fart II. p. 865 sq. The allegorical reference
according to which the woman represents the Gentile Church, and her daughter
t^jv irpal-LV KvptevopLevnv vvb Satpiivtav, is briefly but perspicuously noticed by
Euthymius in Matt. xv. 28.
1 See above, p. 192, note 4, where the character of this confederation is briefly
noticed. 2 The reading in question is %\&ev Sia ~S,tSwvos (Mark vii. 31), which is found
in the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Beza;, in the valuable MS. marked L, in A
(Codex Sangallensis), and in several ancient versions of considerable critical
value, e. g. the Old Latin, Vulgate, Coptic, and Ethiopic. It has been adopted
by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Fritzsche, Meyer, Alford, and Tregelles, and appears
certainly to deserve the preference which these critics and commentators have
thus unanimously given to it. See Meyer, Komment. ub. Mark. p. 80 (ed. 3).
3 It is not safe to enlarge upon a point which rests only on a probable reading;
but if we accept this reading, it must be acknowledged as a fact of the greatest
significance in reference to the subsequent diffusion of the Gospel, that the city
of Baal and of Astarte was visited by the Redeemer of mankind. See above, p.
201. This question is worthy of further consideration.

204 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V.
commenced His south-easterly circuit towards Decapolis
and the further shore of the sea of Gennesareth.
On that shore He was not now to be a strange and
unwelcome visitor. There, in that region of
xetwm to Decap- Decapolis, lips by which devils once had
olis; healing of a ,-i, n i • J j.1,
deafanddumbman. spoken had already proclaimed tne power
si. °n'"'' and majesty of Him that had now vouchsafed
Serfiifk to journey through that darkened land; and
there too those lips had not spoken in vain.
No sooner had the Lord appeared among them, than, as
St. Mark relates to us, His healing powers are
ch.va.v2. besought for a deaf and all but dumb man
who is brought to Him, and brought only to be healed.1
It is worthy of a moment's notice that both this and a
miracle performed shortly afterwards on a
blind man at Bethsaida-Julias were accom
panied with a withdrawal of the sufferer from the throng
of bystanders, special outward signs, and, in the case of
the latter miracle, a more gradual process of restoration.
All these differences it is undoubtedly right to connect
with something peculiar in the individual cases of those on
whom the miracle was performed;2 yet still it does not
seem improper to take into consideration the general fact
that these were miracles performed in lands which the
Lord had" before traversed, — lands where the nature of
His healing powers might have been wholly misunderstood,
and to which, for the spiritual benefit of the sufferers, it was
judged meet that their earnest and deliberate attention3
1 On this miracle, the characteristics of which are alluded to in the text, see
the comments of Maldonatus and Olshausen, Hook, Serm. on the Miracles, Vol.
ii. p. 49 sq., Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 348 sq., and Hare (Jul.), Serm.
xiv. Vol. i. p. 245.
2 See Olshausen on the Gospels, Vol. ii. p. 206 (Clark), who comments at some
length on the peculiarities in the performance of this miracle, and in that of the
healing of the blind man at Bethsaida. Some good comments will also be
found in Maldonatus, Comment, in Marc. vii. 33. The withdrawal from the
crowd is ascribed by the scholiast in Cramer's Catena (Vol. i. p. 338) to a desire
on the part of our Lord to avoid display (Iva ufy S6£ri 4iriSeiKTtKus iniTeKeiv
tos &eo<rr)^ias) ; hut this, in the present case, seems very doubtful.
3 So in effect Maldonatus : " Quia ergo qui surdi sunt, videntur re aliquft obtu-

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY LN NORTHERN GALILEE. 205
should be especially directed. Both these miracles, we may
also observe, were accompanied with a command to preserve
silence,1 but in the case of the present miracle
it was signally disobeyed. So widely, indeed,
was the fame of it spread abroad that great multitudes, as
we are told by St. Matthew, brought their
sick unto the Lord ; and He, who as He Him- ™' *°\ m'
' ' Ver.24.
self had but recently declared, was not come
"save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel," nevertheless
sought His Father's glory even amidst half-Gentile Decap
olis ; so that it is not, perhaps, without deep meaning that
the first Evangelist tells us that "they glorified
a J ° Ch. xv. 81.
the God of Israel."2 And they were yet to The feeding of me
glorify Him more, and to be the witnesses of "* <"um '
the creative as well as of the healing powers of His beloved
Son. Those eager-hearted men had now so swelled in num
bers that four thousand, without counting
, , ., , , - , , Matt. xv. 38.
women and children, were gathered round the
Lord and His Apostles, and He who had so pitied and re
lieved their afflictions now pitied and relieved their wants.
They had come from far; they were faint
, ., ,.,, Mark viii. 3.
and weary, and were to be miraculously
refreshed. Seven loaves feed the four thousand, just as, a
few weeks before, and perhaps not far from the same spot,3

ratas habere aures, mittit digitum in aures surdi, quasi clausas et obturatas tere-
braturus, aut impedimentum, quod in illis erat, ablaturus digito. Et quia qui
muti sunt, videntur ligatam nimia siccitate habere linguam ( ?), palatoque adhx-
rentem, ideoque loqui non posse . . . mittit salivam in os muti, quasi ejus linguam
humectaturus." —Vol. i. p. 762 (Mogunt. 1611).
1 See above, p. 180, note 3.
2 This did not escape the notice of Origen (in Matt. Tom. xi. 18), who remarks
as follows : " Tea, they glorify Him, being persuaded that the Father of Him
who healed the man above-mentioned is one and the same God with the God of
Israel; for God is not the God of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles." — Vol.
iii. p. 508 (ed. Bened.). Theophylact (in Matt. xv. 29) places the scene in Galilee,
but, as the parallel passage in St. Mark (ch. vii. 31 sq.) seems clearly to prove,
not correctly. Comp. Robinson, Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 397, note 2.
3 The locality is not very clearly defined. That it was an uninhabited place
appears from Matt. xv. 33, and that it was on the high ground east of the lake
may be inferred from ver. 31. As the spot to which our Lord crosses over is
situated about the middle of the western coast, we may perhaps consider the
18

206 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V.
five loaves had fed a greater number ; " they did all eat,"
says the first Evangelist, "and were filled,
and they took up of the broken meat that
was left seven baskets full."
We may here pause, yet for a moment only, to make our
decided protest against that shallow criticism
Not identical with
the feeding of the which would persuade us that this distinctive
Jive thousand. . , . , .,, , , ,
miracle is merely an ill-remembered repro
duction of the feeding of the five thousand a few weeks
before.1 Few opinions can be met more easily; few of
the many misstatements that have been made in reference
to the miracles of our Redeemer can be disposed of more
readily and more satisfactorily. Let it be observed only
that everything that might seem most clearly to specify
and to characterize is different in the two miracles. The
number of loaves in the latter miracle is greater; the
number offish greater; the remnants collected less; the
people fewer; the time they had tarried longer; their
behavior in the sequel noticeably different. The more
excitable inhabitants of the coast-villages of the north
and the west,2 we are distinctly told, would
Johnvi.lS. J ' .
have borne away our Lord and made Him a
king, if He had not withdrawn into the mountains ; the
men of Decapolis and the eastern shores permit the Lord
high ground in the neighborhood of the ravine nearly opposite to Magdala,
which is now called Wady Semak, as not very improbably the site of the present
miracle. 1 See, for example, De Wette, on Matt. xv. 29, and Neander, Life of Christ,
p. 287, note (Bohn). The remarks in the text seem sufliciently to demonstrate
that such a view is wholly untenable. See more in Olshausen, Comment. Vol. ii.
p. 209 sq. (Clark), Ebrard, Kritik der Evang. Gesch. § 86, p. 433; and compare
Origen, in Matt. xi. 19, Vol. iii. p. 509 (ed. Bened.), Alford, Commentary, Vol.
i. p. 157 (ed. 4).
2 The recipients in the case of the former miracle appear to have come mainly
from the western side. Compare Mark vi. 33. They followed our Lord, we are
told, on foot (Matt. xiv. 13), and would consequently have passed round the
northern extremity of the lake, receiving probably, as they went, additions from
Bethsaida-Julias and the places in its vicinity. Chrysostom (in Matt. Horn.
Lin. 2) seems to imply that the effect produced by this miracle was as great as
that produced by the former miracle ; this may have been so, but it certainly
cannot be inferred from the words of the sacred narrative.

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 207
to leave them without any recorded excitement or demon
stration. Let all these things be fairly and temperately
considered, and there will, I firmly believe, be found but
few indeed who will feel doubt or difficulty as to the sep
arate and distinct nature of this second manifestation of
the Lord's creative beneficence.1 Immediately
after this miracle our Lord leaves a land which ^TZfZZt
seems to have displayed somewhat striking
faith, and on which His divine visit could hardly have
failed to have exercised a permanent spiritual influence,
for the familiar shores on the opposite side of the lake.
He crosses over to Magdala,2 or perhaps to some village
close to the high ground in its vicinity, which seems alluded
to in the designation Dalmanutha,3 as specified by the
1 On the miracle itself, which Origen (in Matt. Tom. xi. 19), though on some
what insufficient reasons, considers as even greater than that of the feeding of
the five thousand, 6ee Origen, I. c, Hilary, in Matt. Can. xv. p. 542 (Paris, 1631),
Augustine, Serm. lxxxi. Append, (but apparently rightly regarded by Trench
as genuine), Vol. v. p. 1902 (ed. Migne), Hook, Serm. on the Miracles, Vol. ii.
p. 66, Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 355. The idea of Hilary (loc. cit.) that
the former miracle has reference mainly to the Jews, the present miracle to the
Gentiles, is perhaps not wholly fanciful; the multitude in the present case we
may reasonably conceive to have been collected nearly entirely from Decapolis,
and so mainly Gentile ; the multitude in the former case, as we have observed,
was apparently from Capernaum and its vicinity, and probably mainly Jewish.
Compare p. 190, note 1.
2 This place is now unanimously regarded by recent travellers as situated, not
on the eastern side of the lake (Lightfoot, Decas Chorographica Marco prosmissa,
cap. v. 1), but on the western side, and at the miserable collection of huts now
known by the name of " el-Medjel." See Robinson, Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 397
(ed. 2), Thomson, Land and the Book, Vol. ii. p. 108, where there is a sketch of
this forlorn village, and Van de Velde, Memoir, p. 334. It is proper to observe
that some MSS. and versions of importance (BD; Vulg., Old Lat., al.) read
WlayaSdv, and that this reading has been adopted by some recent editors. Of
this latter place nothing seems to be known; the identification with Megiddo
(Ewald, Drei Erst. Evv. p. 268, Gesch. Christus', p. 333) does not seem very
probable. 3 The exact locality of Dalmanutha is difficult to trace. It must clearly have
been near to Magdala, as St. Mark (ch. viii. 10) specifies it as the place into the
neighborhood of which our Lord arrived in the transit across the lake which
we are now considering. If we accept the not improbable derivation of -11,
"was pointed" (Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 312), we may fix the locality as
close to or among the cliffs (see Thomson's sketch) which rise at a short distance
from Magdala. Porter indentifies Dalmanutha with " Ain el-Barideh" (Smith,
Diet, of Bible, Vol. i. p. 381), situated at the mouth of a narrow glen a mile south
of Magdala, but this appears only to rest on the fact that ruins are found
there.

208 THE MINISTRY LN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V.
second Evangelist. But there His abode was short. The
evil wrought by the emissaries from Jerusa-
Ch. viii. 10. , , f, „
lem was now only too mournfully apparent.
No sooner was the Lord arrived than Pharisees, now for
tjie first time leagued with Sadducees, as once before they
had combined with Herodians, come to Him
•with the sceptical demand of a sign from
Matt. xvi. 1. r °
heaven. Amid such faithless and probably
malevolent hearts the Lord vouchsafes not to tarry, but, as
it would seem immediately, enters the vessel in which He
had come,1 and with warning words to them, and a special
caution to His disciples against the leaven of
Matt. XV. 2 sq. _ _ l °
ch.xvi.6-, their teaching, crosses over to Bethsaida-Ju-
lias, and there performs the progressively
developed miracle of healing the blind man to which we
have recently alluded.2
From thence we trace the Lord's steps northward to the
towns and villages in the neighborhood of
ward to ccesarea the remote city of Caesarea Philippi,3 near
which it is just possible that He might have
passed in His circuit from Sidon a very few weeks before.

1 The words of St. Mark are here so very distinct (ird\iv ip.Bas oiri)A&«',
ch. viii. 12) that the supposition of Fritzsche, that our Lord crossed over alone
to the place where he was questioned by the Pharisees, and that he was after
wards joined by His disciples (Matt. xvi. 6), must be pronounced wholly unten
able. The disciples are mentioned specially and by themselves (Matt. xvi. 5)
simply because they alone form the subject of the 4ire?ui&ovTO, and because this
act indirectly gave rise to the warning instructions which follow.
2 On this miracle, the chief characteristic of which is the very gradual and
progressive nature of the cure, see the comments of Olshausen above alluded to
(Comment. Vol. ii. p. 206, Clark), Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 359, Hook,
Serm: on the Miracles, Vol. ii. p. 20. The Bethsaida here mentioned is clearly
not the village on the western side (comp. Theophylact in loc), but Bethsaida-
Julias, by which the Lord would naturally have passed in his northward journey
to Cassarea Philippi.
s This picturesquely placed city, formerly called Panium (Joseph. Antiq. xv.
10. 3) or Paneas, from a cavern sacred to Pan in its vicinity (see Winer, B WB.
Vol. i. p. 207, Stanley, Palest, p. 394), received its subsequent name from the
Tetrarch Philip, by whom it was enlarged and beautified (Joseph. Antiq. xviii.
2. 1, Bell. Jud. II. 9. 1). For a description of its site see Robinson, Palestine,
Vol. iii. p. 408 sq. (ed. 2), and compare Thomson, Land and the Book, Vol. i.
p. 344 sq., where there is a sketch of the singular cavern above alluded to.

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 209
Of the exact purpose of this journey, or of the special
events connected with it, we have no certain knowledge,
though we may reasonably infer, from the incidental men
tion of a formal address to the multitude as
well as to the disciples, that public teaching
and preaching rather than seclusion was the object of this
extended circuit. However this may be, with those regions
we connect three circumstances of considerable moment :
First, the remarkable profession of faith in Christ as the
Son of the living God uttered by St. Peter as the ready
spokesman of the rest of the Apostles, accompanied by the
remarkable charge on the part of the Lord that they should
tell it to no man ; x Secondly, and as it would seem almost
immediately afterwards, the Lord's first formal prediction
of His own sufferings and death, — a prediction which
jarred strangely on the ears of men who now seem to have
begun to realize more fully the divine nature and Messiah-
ship of their beloved Master ; 2 Thirdly, the Transfigura
tion, which a precise note of time supplied by two Evan
gelists fixes as six days from some epoch not
t . , Matt.xvii.1.
defined, but which the more general comment Marntx. 2.
of St. Luke seems to imply was that of the
above-mentioned confession, and of the discourses associ
ated with it.s

1 The true reason for this strict command (SieffTefAaTo, Matt. xvi. 20), at
which Origen (in Matt. Tom. xii. 15) appears to have felt some difficulty, would
seem to be one which almost naturally suggests itself; viz. that our Lord's time
was not yet come, and that expectations were not to be roused among those who
would have sought to realize them in tumults and popular excitement. As Cyril
of Alexandria well says, " He commanded them to guard the mystery by a sea
sonable silence, until the whole plan of the dispensation should arrive at a suita
ble conclusion." — Comment, on St. Luke, Part 1. p. 220.
2 On this prediction see a good sermon by Horsley, Serm. xix. Vol. ii. p. 121
(Dundee, 1810).
3 The six days are regarded by Lightfoot (Chron. Temp, liii.) as dating from
the words last spoken by our Lord. This view differs but little from that adopted
in the text, as the confession of St. Peter seems to stand in close connection with
the Lord's announcement of His own sufferings (see Luke ix. 21, 22), and this
last announcement to have suggested what follows. A more inclusive reference,
however, as well to the important confession as to what followed, appears, on
the whole, more simple and more probable. The i<rel of St. Luke (ch. ix. 28)
18*

210 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V
On the mysteries connected with this third event, — the
glorified aspect of Him whose very garments
The locality and ° A „ , .
significance of the shone bright as the snows ot the mountain
on which He was standing; the personal
presence of Moses and Elias ; the divine voice, not only
of paternal love, but of exhortation and com-
Mat.lcrti. 5j mand, " Hear ye Him," and the injunction
w"~*f; of the Saviour to seal all in silence till the
Son of Man be risen from the dead, — on all
this our present limits will not permit me to enlarge. Let
me only remark, first, as to locality, that there seems every
reason for fixing the scene of the Transfiguration, not on
the more southern Tabor, but on one of the lofty spurs of
the snow-capped Hermon;1 secondly, as to its meaning
and significance, that we may, not without reason, regard
the whole as in mysterious connection both with St. Peter's
profession of faith and with that saddening prediction
which followed it, and which, it has been specially revealed,
formed the subject of the mystic converse between the
Lord and his two attendant saints. That the
Transfiguration appears generally to have
had, what may be termed, a theological aspect, and was
designed to show that the Law and the Prophets had now
become a part of the Gospel, cannot reasonably be doubted;
but that it was also designed to confirm the Apostles who
witnessed it in their faith, and to supply them with spirit
ual strength against those hours of suffering and trial
shows that there is no necessity to attempt a formal reconciliation (see Chrysost.
in loc.) of his note of time with that supplied by St. Matthew and St. Mark.
1 So rightly Lightfoot (Hor. Hebr. in Marc. ix. 2), Reland (Palcest. p. 334 sq.),
and apparently the majority of the best recent commentators. The objections of
Lightfoot to the traditional site, founded on the high improbability of so sudden
a change of place, are nearly conclusive; and when we add to this that the sum
mit of Tabor was then occupied hy a fortified town (see Robinson, Palestine,
Vol. ii. p. 359), we seem certainly warranted in rejecting a tradition though as
old as the sixth century. The incidental simile, &>s xl^"> of the graphic St.
Mark (ch. ix. 3) might well have been supplied to him by one to whom the snow
capped mountain suggested it; the reading, however, though fairly probable
(see Meyer, Komm. Mb. Mark. p. 97), is not certain, o>s xl&v not being found in
two of the four leading manuscripts.

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 211
which our Lord had recently predicted, seems pressed upon
lis by the position it occupies in the sacred narrative.1
And the practical faith of the Apostles was verily still
weak, for, on the very day that followed, their ne heating of a
want of spiritual strength to heal a deaf and *™»««»>°»-
dumb demoniac afforded an opportunity, only
too readily seized, to some Scribes who were present, of
making it fully known to the gathering multitudes. They
were in the very act, St. Mark tells us, of questioning with
the disciples, when the Lord, with His face
perchance still reflecting the glories of the
past night,2 comes among the disputing and amazed throng.
After a general rebuke for the want of faith shown by all
around,3 the Lord commands the hapless lad to be brought
1 This view seems certainly to have been considered probable by Chrysostom,
who states as a fifth reason why Moses and Elias appeared in attendance on the
Lord, that it was "to comfort Peter and those who regarded with fear the
(Lord's) suffering, and to raise up their thoughts," — in Matt. Horn. Li. 2, Vol.
vii. p. 638 (ed. Bened. 2). Comp. Cyril Alex, on St. Luke, Serm. li Part II. p.
227 (Transl.). The last-mentioned writer, it is proper to be observed, also clearly
states the reason alluded to in the text for the appearance of Moses and Elias
(ib. p. 228), and so, as we might imagine, does Origen, who briefly but perti
nently says, " Moses the Law and Elias the Prophets are become one, and united
with Jesus the Gospel," — in Matt. Tom. xn. 43, Vol. iii. p. 565 (ed. Bened.).
On the subject generally, besides the writers above referred to, see August. Serm.
Lxxvm. Vol. v. p. 490 (ed. Migne), Hall, Contempt, iv. 12, Hacket, vil. Serm. p.
441 sq. (Lond. 1675), Frank, Serm. xlvii. Vol. ii. p. 318 (A.-C.L.), Lange, Leben
Jesu, n. 512, Part II. p. 902, and Olshausen, Commentary, Vol. ii. p. 228 sq.
(Clark). The opinion that this holy mystery was a sleeping or waking vision
(comp. Milman, Hist, of Christianity, Vol. i. p. 258), though as old as the days of
Tertullian (contr. Marc iv. 22), is at once to be rejected, as plainly at variance
with the clear, distinct, objective statements of the three inspired narrators.
2 This, as Euthymius (second altern.) suggests, may perhaps be inferred from,
and be the natural explanation of, the strong word QebduB-no-av (ko! yap ei«i>s
itpeKtceoSal rtva x&P1" ^K T^s tieTauoptptbtreas), with which St. Mark (ch. ix.
15), whose account of this miracle is peculiarly full and graphic (see Da Costa,
The Eour Witnesses, p. 78 sq.), describes the feelings of the multitude when they
beheld our Lord. Comp. also Bengel, in loc
3 The avrois (Mark ix. 19, Lachm., Tisch.) may refer only to the disciples
(Meyer), but our Lord's use of the strong term " perverted," as well as " faith
less" (a) yevea Sttiotos Kal Siearpap.p.evn) , specified both by St. Matthew and
St. Luke, would seem to show that the address is to both parties, if indeed not
principally to the disputing Scribes. Perverted feelings were far more at work
in the av^Toais of the Scribes than in the exhibition of the imperfect faith of
the disciples that probably tended to provoke it. See Lightfoot, Hot. Hebr. in
Matt. xvii. 17.

212 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V.
to him. The recital of what followed, from the pen of St.
Mark, is here in the highest degree graphic and sublime.
The whole scene seems at once to come up before us: the
paroxysm of demoniacal violence brought on by proximity
Markic. 20. to the Redeemer;1 the foaming and wallow-
ver. 23 sq. ing sufferer ; the retarded cure till the faith
ver.25. 0f jne father is made fully apparent; the
crowding multitude ; and then the word of power ; the last
struggle of the departing demon; the prostra-
ar ix. . q£ ^e |a(j after the fierceness of the reac-
Ver. 27. tion, and the upraising hand of the great
Healer, — all tend to make up one of those striking pic
tures which so noticeably diversify the inspired narrative
of the second Evangelist, and which could have only come
originally from one who heard and saw and believed.2
Our Lord's steps appear now to have been again turned
southward, through Galilee towards Caper-
Heturn to and j. i_ • i i Ai *. jj3 j.
prohabiy temporary naum, at which place the next recorded event
section at Caper- {& ^ miraculcms pavrnent of the tribute-
money. If, as seems most natural both from
the peculiar use of the term (ra SiSpaxp-a.), and still more

1 This seems implied in the words Kal IShv (sc. o Satuovt£6uevos ; see Meyer,
in loc] avr6v, to Trvevaa ev&vs iairdpa^v avr6v (Mark ix. 20). Something
similar may be observed in the case of the demoniac in the synagogue at Caper
naum (Luke iv. 34: comp. Lect. iv. p. 156) and that of the Gergesene demoniacs
(Mark v. 6 sq., Luke viii. 28). Lange (Leben Jesu, ii. 5. 13, Part n. p. 921) con
siders the paroxysm as an evidence that the power of our Lord was already
working upon the lad, but the view adopted in the text seems more simple and
natural. For further comments on this miracle, see Origen. in Matt. xiii. 3 Eq.,
Vol. iii. p. 574 (ed. Bened.), Cyril Alex. Comment, on St. Luke, Serm. lii. Part I.
p. 231 sq. (Transl.), Bp. Hall, Contempt, iv. 19, Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p.
362 sq., and the careful exposition of the whole narrative in Olshausen, Commen
tary on tile Gospels, Vol. ii. p. 238 sq. (Clark).
2 It is scarcely necessary to remark that reference is here made to the early
and universally received tradition that St. Mark's Gospel was written under the
guidance of St. Peter, and embodies the substance, if not in some cases the very
words, of that Apostle's teaching. The principal testim&nies of antiquity on
which this assertion rests have been already referred to (Lect. i. p. 29, note 4), to
which we may add Tertullian contr. Marc iv. 5. See further, if necessary,
Guericke, Einleitung in das N. T. § 39, 2, p. 254, (ed. 2), and the introductory
comments of Meyer (Komment. p. 3), who seems fairly to admit the truth of the
ancient tradition.

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 213
from the context, we retain the old opinion that it was the
half-shekel for the temple-service,1 we must attribute the
present tardy demand of a tax levied some months before
either to the Lord's frequent absences from Capernaum, or
to some habit of delayed collection which may very likely
have prevailed in places remote from Jerusalem, but which,
from deficient knowledge of local customs, we are unable
formally to substantiate.2 The present stay at Capernaum
was probably short, and, as far as we can infer from the
Lord's desire, expressed on His homeward
journey, to remain unobserved, one of com- ar 1X| '
parative seclusion. He had now to prepare the minds of
His chosen ones for the heavy trials through which they
must soon pass, when their Master was delivered up into
the hands of men, and when their longings for a trium
phant Messiah were to be changed into the avowal of a
crucified Saviour. On their late return through Galilee,

1 This 6um was to be paid every year for the service of the sanctuary (Exod.
xxx. 13 ; compare 2 Kings xii. 4, 2 Chron. xxiv. 6, 9) by every male who had
attained the age of twenty years (see Winer, BWB. Art. " Abgaben," Vol. i.
p. 4), and, as we learn from the Mishna (".Shekalim," 1, 3), was levied in the
month Adar. We seem therefore obliged to have recourse to some supposition
like that advanced in the text. Compare Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in loc Vol. ii.
p. 341 sq. (Roterod. 1686), and see Greswell, Dissert, xxiii. Vol. ii. p. 377, who
gives some reason for thinking that the tax might have been regularly paid
about the feast of Tabernacles. The opinion of most of the ancient expositors
that the reference is here to a tribute which each male had to pay to the Boman
government ("tributum Csesareum," Sedulius) is noticed, not disapprovingly,
by Lightfoot, and has been zealously defended by Wieseler (Chron. Synops.
p. 264 sq.), but to such a view the words of our Lord (Matt. xvii. 25, 26) seem
distinctly opposed. What our Lord implies by His question to St. Peter, and
His comment on the Apostle's answer, seems clearly this : — as Son of Him to
whom the temple was dedicated, and indeed as Himself the Lord thereof, He
had fullest claim to be exempted from the tribute, but still He would not avail
Himself of His undoubted prerogatives. See Hammond, in loc, whose discus
sion of this passage is both clear and convincing.
2 On the remarkable miracle by which the half-shekel was paid, the design of
which, we may humbly conceive, was still further to illustrate and substantiate
what was implied in the address to the Apostle ("in medio actu submissionis
emicat majestas," — Bengel), see the extremely good comments of Trench,
Notes on the Miracles, p. 372. The older expositors cannot here be referred to
with advantage, as they nearly all adopt the apparently erroneous opinion above
alluded to, that it was a tribute which was paid to the Boman government, and
adapt their comments accordingly.

214 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V.
when their hearts were dwelling most on their Lord's
powers, their elation was checked by a re-
Lukeix.®. newal 0f the sad prediction which they first
Mark ix. S3. r _ •>
heard near Casarea Philippi; and now
again, in the quiet of home, the same holy anxiety may
be traced to check that pride of spirit which seems to
have been sensibly manifesting itself in the apostolic com
pany. Such manifestations were apparently of a mixed
character, and were probably due to very different influen
ces. On the one hand, we may connect them with a more
real conviction of their Lord's divine nature and Messiah-
ship; on the other hand, we cannot fail to observe that
they involved much that was merely carnal and worldly.
This pride of spirit showed itself, as we are especially
informed, in unbecoming contentions among themselves
about future preeminence, and led them over-
hastily to forbid some yet undeclared disciple,1
who was casting out devils in their Master's name, from
continuing to do what they might have remembered they
themselves could not do a week or two before, when an
Markix.se. agonized father called to them for help, and
ver.ss. when Scribes stood by and scoffed. Humil-
Matt. xviii. 6. "
ver.w. ity, forbearance, avoidance of all grounds of
Matt, xxik sq!; offence, love towards their Master's little
ones, gentleness, and forgiveness, the lost
sheep, and the debtor of the ten thousand talents, were the

1 It would seem clear from our Lord's words that the man was no deceiver or
exorcist, but one who, as Cyril of Alexandria observes, though " not numbered
among the holy Apostles, was yet crowned with apostolic powers." — Comment.
on St. Luke, Serm. LV. Part i. p. 249 (Transl.), where there are some other good
comments on this very suggestive incident. The connection of thought between
the notice of this occurrence on the part of St. John and the words of our Lord
which preceded is, perhaps, more clearly to be traced in St. Mark (ch. ix. 37, 38)
than in St. Luke (ch. ix. 49). Our Lord's declaration, ts av ev rav totoirav
iraiS'iwv Scotch 4 ir I r a ovipiarl uov 4p.4 8 4 x 6 T a h seems to bring to the
remembrance of St. John a recent case which appeared at variance with His
Master's words, viz. that of one who used the Lord's name and yet did not
evince his reception of Him hy becoming an avowed disciple. The remembrance,
coupled perhaps, as Theophylact suggests, with the feeling that their treatment
of that case had not been right, gives rise to the mention of it to our Lord.

Lect. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 215
wise and loving lessons which the Lord now specially
vouchsafed to them in this brief period of tranquillity and
seclusion. And here this portion of our meditations comes to a
natural and suitable close.1 Yet ere we part let us spend
a few moments in recapitulation and retrospect.
We have considered this afternoon what I think we
cannot but deem a most interesting part of
our Redeemer's ministry, and yet one which J^ZZ,and
does not perhaps always so distinctly present
itself to the general reader as other and more sharply de
fined portions of the Gospel-history. We have perhaps
been led to admit the appearance of a gradual enlargement
of the sphere of our Master's personal ministries ; we have
journeyed with Him in half-heathen lands ; we have seen
saving mercies extended to those who were not of the
stock of Abraham ; we have seen that divine presence not
withheld from the dwellers in Decapolis ; nay, more, we
* have seemed to see2 that priceless blessing vouchsafed
to strictly pagan regions, the land of Baal and of Ashto-
reth ; yea, we have beheld, as it were, the Lord's prophetic
1 After this period, as will be seen in the following Lecture, the nature of our
Lord's -ministerial labors and the character of His missionary journeys appear
to assume a completely different aspect. The whole wears the character of being
what St. Luke very fitly terms it, — al rjpieptu Trjs ava\Ti\fieas (ch. ix. 51). Though
Jerusalem is the point towards which the journeys tend, and Judaea the land to
which a portion of the ministry is confined, yet the whole period is so marked
by interruptions and removals, that we can hardly consider it as standing in
ministerial connection with any former period. See above, Lect. in. p. 140,
note 1.
2 Here, as it has already been observed, it is our duty to speak with caution.
That our Lord approached that portion of Palestine which is termed the " con
fines of Tyre " (io ue&opta Tvpov, Mark vii. 24, — if with Tischendorf we adopt
the shorter reading), or, with more latitude, the "parts of Tyre and Sidon"
(Tcb u4pv Tvpov /cal StS&vos, Matt. xv. 21), is indisputable, but that He was
• pleased actually to cross the frontier rests really upon a probable though con
tested reading. See above, p. 203, note 2. Modern writers appear often to have
felt a difficulty in the supposition that our Lord went beyond the Jewish border
(comp. Meyer, Ub. Matt. xv. 21), but this feeling does not seem to have prevailed
equally among the earlier writers, some of whom, as Chrysostom, in Matt. Horn.
LII. 1, not only speak of our Lord's having departed eis SSbv 4&vtiv, but
endeavor to account for His having acted contrary to a command which Ho
Himself gave to His Apostles. Compare Matt. x. 5.

216 THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. Lect. V.
performance of His own subsequent command, that the
message of mercy should be published not
Matt.xxviii.i9. ^^ .q juda3a an(j Jerusalem, but even to
the uttermost bounds of the wide heathen world. All
this we have seen and dwelt upon, — and I trust not dwelt
upon wholly in vain. To some, perchance, the grouping
of events which I have ventured to advocate may seem to
wear the aspect of partial novelty ; to others again I may
have seemed to press unduly characteristics to which they
may feel disposed to assign a different or a modified ap
plication. Be this, however, as it may ; whether such a
survey of this portion of our Lord's life be regarded as
plausible or improbable; whether such an endeavor to
trace the connection of events during a period where
connection is doubtful be deemed hopeful or precarious,
matters but little, provided only it may have so far arrested
the student's attention as to lead him to examine for him
self, patiently and thoughtfully, the harmonies in the nar
rative of His Master's life.1 Tea, I will joyfully count all
as nought, if only I have been enabled by the help of God
to stir up in others a desire to look more closely into the
connection of the inspired record, and have helped to
strengthen the belief that the earnest student may un-

1 It is much to be feared that the tendency of our more modern study of the
Gospels ib to regard every attempt to harmonize the sacred narrative with
indifference, if not sometimes even with suspicion. We may concede that recent
harmonistic efforts, viewed generally, though made with the most loyal feelings
towards the inspired Word, have in many cases been such as cannot stand the
test of criticism. Nay, we may go further, and say that the modern tendency to
study each Gospel by itself, rather than in connection with the rest, is undoubt
edly just and right, so long as the object proposed is a more complete realization
of the view of our Lord's life as presented by each of the sacred writers, and so
long as it is considered preparatory to further combinations. All this we may
willingly concede, and yet we may with justice most strongly urge the extreme
importance, not only in a mere critical, but even in a devotional point of view,
of obtaining as complete and connected a view of our Lord's life and ministry
as can possibly be obtained from our existing inspired records. And this, let it
be remembered, can only be done by that patient and thoughtful comparison of
Scripture with Scripture which now finds such little favor with so many theo
logians of our present day. The general principle on which such comparisons
ought to be made we have already endeavored to indicate. See Lect. i. p. 31 sq ,

LECT. V. THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 217
ceasingly derive from it fresh subjects for meditation, and
that the seeker may verily hope to find.
May God move us all to dwell upon such things with an
ever fresh and ever renewing interest. May His eternal
Spirit guide us into all truth ; and may He, on whose
blessed words and deeds we have mused this afternoon,
lovingly draw us, heart and soul and spirit, to Himself.
O may we really feel that to commune with Him here
on earth is the most blessed privilege that the Lord has
reserved for those that love Him; yea, that it is a very
antepast of the joys of those realms where He now is, —
a very foretaste of that blessed and final union, when,
whether summoned forth from the holy calm of Paradise,
or borne aloft from earth by upbearing clouds,1 the servants
of Jesus shall enter into their Redeemer's presence, and
dwell with Him, forever and forever.
1 See 1 Thess. iv. 17, apTrayno'6rie&a 4v yetpe\ais, — on which we here pause
only to make the passing comment, that the sublime picture the inspired words
present is commonly missed by the general reader, and perhaps obscured by the
collocation of words and insertion of the article in our authorized version.
The Greek text appears to imply that the clouds are, as it were, the triumphal
chariots in which the holy living, and, as it would seem also, the holy dead, will
be borne aloft to meet their coming Lord. See Commentary on 1 Thess. p. 66.
19

LECTURE VI.
THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM.
AND JESUS SAID UNTO HIM, POXES HAVE HOLES, AND BIRDS OP THE AUS
HAVE NESTS; BUT THE SON OP MAN HATH NOT WHERE TO LAY HIS
head. — St. Luke ix. 58.
These mournful and affecting words, which were uttered
nearly at the commencement of the period
teToTtL Cp^nt 'which we are now about to consider, form,
portion of the in- j think, a very suitable text for our present
spired narrative. "
meditations.
The scene now strikingly changes. Last Sunday we
had before us the deeply interesting record of missionary
journeys into heathen and half-heathen lands. We seemed
to follow our Lord's steps to the very gates of idolatrous
Sidon,1 we beheld His miracles in half-Gentile Decapolis,
we traced His deeds of mercy in the remote uplands of
Galilee, and we again heard His loving words and touch
ing parables in the short seclusion2 in His earthly home at
Capernaum. But now that earthly home is to receive Him
no more. Six months of anxious wanderings in Judasa
and the lands on the further side of Jordan, interrupted
only by brief sojourns in remote frontier-towns, now claim
1 See, however, the observations on this point, p. 215, note 2.
2 How long our Lord remained at Capernaum after His return from the dis
trict of Csesarea Philippi and the northern parts of Galilee is in no way specified.
As, however, St. Luke passes at once from his notice of the contention among
the Apostles (which we know took place before they had actually come to Caper
naum ; see Mark ix. 33) to the journey of our Lord to Jerusalem, we are perhaps
correct in supposing that the stay was short. It is not improbable that the
approaching celebration of the feast of Tabernacles led to the return from th«
north, and induced our Lord to come back to Capernaum, not only as being
His temporary home, but as being a convenient starting-point for the journey to
Jerusalem. See above, Lect. m. p. 121, and note 2.

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 219
our attention ; — six months of ceaseless activities and un
resting labor, of mighty deeds and momentous teaching,
yet six months, if not of actual flight, yet of ever-recurring
avoidance of implacable and murderous designs1 that were
now fast approaching their appalling and impious climax.
What I have just said serves indirectly to define the
limits of our present section. These, how
ever, for the sake of clearness, I will specify presJuTcZn.
more exactly, as commencing with the Lord's
journey in October to the feast of Tabernacles, and con
cluding with His arrival at Bethany six days before the
Passover. This period, I need scarcely remind you, presents to the
harmonist and chronologer difficulties so un- Harmonistic and
usually great,2 that it has been frequently chronological dm-
considered a matter of simple impossibility
to adjust in their probable order the events which belong
to this portion of the narrative. It has been urged that
1 It would seem probable that a resolution to kill our Redeemer had been
secretly formed among the leading members of the hierarchical party at Jerusa
lem, perhaps some months before the present time. If we are correct in the
view we have taken in Lect. iv., that the machinations against our Lord in Gali
lee were due to emissaries from Jerusalem, it does not seem wholly improbable
that the vengeful feelings of the Pharisaical party, which first definitely showed
themselves at the feast of Purim (see above, p. 121), had been from time to time
fostered by these emissaries, and were now issuing in designs so far matured as
to have become the subject of frequent comment, and of almost general noto
riety. See especially John vii. 25. It is at the beginning of the present period
that we meet with the first open and formal attempt on the part of the authori
ties to lay their sacrilegious hands on the person of our Lord. See John vii. 32,
where it will be observed that the imperfectly organized attempt noticed two or
three verses before (iChrovv, ver. 30) is recommenced under official sanction.
Compare Meyer, Komment. tib. Joh. p. 236 (ed. 3), and Greswell, Dissert, xxx.
Vol. ii. p. 489.
2 The precise nature of these difficulties are explained below, p. 221. Some
considerations on the nature of that portion of St. Luke's Gospel with which
these difficulties are chiefly connected will be found in Greswell, Dissert, xxxi.
Vol. ii. p. 517 sq., but the results at which the learned writer arrives, viz. that Luke
ix. 51— xviii. 14 refers to our Lord's last journey to Jerusalem, and that to doubt
it "is the perfection of scepticism and incredulity " (p. 540), are such as may be
most justly called into question. Some useful observations on this portion of
the Gospel narrative will be found in Robinson, Harmony of Gospels, p. 92
(Tract Society). Comp. also the remarks of Dr. Thomson in Smith's Dictionary
of the Bible, Vol. i. p. 1061.

220 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
the Evangelist, to whom we owe the recital of so many of
the circumstances and discourses which belong to this
period, has here failed in his deliberately an
nounced design of relating in order1 the
events of his Master's life, and has here blended in one in
coherent narrative the distinctive features and elements
of the last three journeys of our Redeemer to Judaea and
Jerusalem.2 We may, indeed, be thankful to feel and know
that such opinions, which in fact carry with them their
own condemnation, are now beginning to belong to the
past. We may with good reason rejoice that of late years
a far more reverent as well as critical spirit has been at
work among the chronologers and expositors of the sacred
histories. We may gladly observe that order and connec
tion have been found where there was once deemed to be
only confusion and incoherence, — that the inspired narra
tives are regarded no longer as discrepant but as self-ex
planatory,— and that honest investigation is showing more
and more clearly that what one inspired writer has left
unrecorded another has often supplied, with an incidental
preciseness of adjustment which is all the more convinc
ing from being seen and felt to be undesigned. All this it
1 Some comments on the apparent meaning of this and other expressions
used by St. Luke in the introduction to his Gospel will be found above, Lect. IV.
p. 149, note 1.
2 See, for instance, the very sweeping and objectionable remarks of De Wette,
who speaks of the necessity of recognizing in this portion of the Evangelist's
record "eine unchronologische und unhistorische Zusammenstellung" (Erkl.
des Luk. p. 76), and conceives that it resulted from St. Luke's having had a cer
tain amount of matter before him relating to our Lord's ministry which he did
not know how otherwise to dispose of. The opinion of Schleiermacher, and after
him of Olshausen, Neander, and others, that we have in this portion of St.
Luke's Gospel the accounts of two journeys, the one terminating at the Feast of
Dedication, the second at the Passover, is at first sight more reasonable. It will
be found, however, to involve assumptions, viz. (a) that the two narratives of
the two journeys were blended by some one ignorant of the exact circum
stances, and in this state inserted by St. Luke in his Gospel (Schleierm.), or (5)
that St. Luke re-wrote the accounts, and himself helped to blend them (compare
Olshausen, Commentary, Vol. ii. p. 282 sq.), which must be pronounced by every
sober interpreter to be as untenable in principle as they will be found on exam
ination to be unsupported by facts.

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 221
is^cheering to feel and know;1 yet still I must not, and
ought «ot, to disguise from you that the difficulties in our
present portion of the Gospel-history — difficulties, how
ever, which I firmly believe have been of late correctly
cleared up — are still such as must sensibly strike the gen
eral reader, and must claim from me a few, yet only a few,
explanatory and introductory comments.
The facts are these. Above three hundred verses of St.
Luke's Gospel, or from the end of the ninth
to nearly the middle of the eighteenth chap- ,£%££?"
ter, clearly belong to the period that we are
now about to consider,2 but stand, so to speak, isolated and
alone. The two other Synoptical Gospels scarcely supply
more than two or three parallel notices, but after the mid
dle of the eighteenth chapter again become distinct and
explicit, and again present the most exact coincidences
with the narrative of the third Evangelist,3 — coincidences

1 We may observe, hy way of example, the working of these sounder princi
ples in the manner in which the peculiar portion of St. Luke's Gospel to which
we have been alluding is discussed in the best recent commentaries. See, for
' instance, Meyer, Komment. ub. Irak. p. 326 sq. (ed. 3), and, in our own country,
Alford, on Luke ix. 51, both of whom, though too scrupulously declining every
attempt to reconcile the narrative with that of St. John, clearly recognize
(Meyer in a less degree) its unity and historical importance. The assertion, how
ever, of the latter writer, that St. Luke "has completely, by his connecting
words in many places, disclaimed" any chronological arrangement in this por
tion of his Gospel, seems certainly much too strong. The utmost that can be
said is, that the absence of notes of time precludes our determining the precise
epoch at which the events specified took place, and the intervals of time between
them, but that we have no reason whatever to doubt that in nearly all cases the
right sequence is preserved. In other words, though we have no chronology in
this portion of the third Evangelist's Gospel, we have no reason to doubt that
we have order. On this distinction see Ebrard, Kritik der Evang. Gesch. § 11, p.
46, and compare Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 327 sq.
2 A few sections may perhaps belong to an earlier portion of the narrative,
«. g. Luke xi. 17 sq. compared with Mark iii. 20 sq., Luke xiii. 18 sq. with Mark
iv. 30 sq., if indeed it be not more probable that the substance of both the above
sections was repeated on two different occasions. Compare Wieseler, Chron.
Synops. p. 288.
3 The first point of resumed connection between St. Luke and the first and sec
ond Evangelists is apparently to be found in Luke xvii. 11 compared with Matt.
xix. 1, 2, and Mark x. 1, — St. Luke alluding to the journey (from Ephraim ; Bee
John xi. 64) through Samaria and Galilee, and St. Matthew and St. Mark the
continuation of it through Penea to Judaea and Jerusalem. The more distinct
19*

222 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
as striking as the former absence of them and the former
comparative silence. But this is not all : these, three
hundred verses of St. Luke's Gospel have somewhat
remarkable characteristics. They are very rich in their
recital of our Lord's discourses, especially of those which
were suggested by passing occurrences, but they contain
but few of those notices of time and place1 which we so
naturally associate with the narrative of the historian
Evangelist. Now what would be the opinion of any calm, reasonable,
and reverent man upon the phenomenon thus presented to
him ? Why clearly this. In the first place, he would at
once conclude that here was but another of the almost
countless instances which the holy Gospels present to us
of the mercy and wisdom of Almighty God, whose Eter
nal Spirit moved one Evangelist to relate what the others
had left unrecorded.2 In the second place, he would here

point of union, however, is the narrative of the young children being hrought
to our Lord, which begins ch. xviii. 15, and stands in strict parallelism with
Matthew xix. 13 sq. and Mark x. 13 sq. After this, for the few remaining sec
tions, the narrative of the Synoptical Evangelists proceeds harmoniously onward
to the close of the portion now before us. Comp. the table in Wieseler, Cliron.
Synops. p. 331.
1 This remark will be best verified by an inspection of the chapters in question.
We may, however, pause to specify the following very undefined notices of
chronological connection: uera 5e ravra, ch. x. 1; nal ISov, ch. x. 25; eyevero
Se, ch. x. 38; Kid eysvero, ch. xi. 1; simply Kal, ch. xi. 14, xiii. 22; 4v Se t£
\dhT\trat, ch. xi. 37; 4v oTs, ch. xii. 1; elirev S4, ch. xii. 22; and comp. xiii. 6,
xvi. 1, xvii. 1, xviii. 1; Kal 4y4vero, ch. xiv. 1; Kal eltrepxo^vov avrov ets rtva
ku/j.7jv, ch. xvii. 12. The only really definite expressions in reference to time are
apparently confined to ch. xiii. 1, 31, and even these are of little use to us, owing
to the events with which they stand in connection themselves being undefined
as to time. With regard to place, for examples of a similarly undefined charac
ter, compare ch. x. 38, xi. 1, xiii. 10, 22, xiv. 1, xvii. 12. It may be admitted that
we can find instances of a similar absence of definite notices of time and place
in other portions of St. Luke's Gospel, but in none so regularly and continu
ously as in the portion now before us. See the table in Ebrard, Kritik der Ev.
Gesch. i 32, p. 131 sq.
2 The supplementary relations in which the earlier-written Gospels appear to
stand to the later-written are noticed at some length by Greswell, Dissert. I.
Vol. i. p. 15. The popular objection, that we have no intimations in the sacred
records themselves by which we can infer where one is to be regarded defective
and others supplementary to it, is considered and reasonably answered in the
Appendix, Dissert. I. Vol. iii. p. 321 sq.

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 223
recognize, on the one hand, an indirect verification of that
careful research which was openly professed by the third
Evangelist ; l and, on the other, a direct proof of that faith
fulness that made him adopt less special notices of the strict
connection of events when the sources of information, oral
or written, to which he had been moved to refer, had not
fully or distinctly supplied them.
Now suppose such a reasonable thinker had observed, as
he could scarcely fail to have observed, that
the fourth Evangelist, true to the supplemen- this'p^t^Tof st.
tary character, which we seem to have very jj^S^**
sufficient grounds for ascribing to several por
tions of his Gospel,2 had supplied three distinct chronolog
ical notices of three journeys taken toward if not all actually
to Jerusalem during this period we are about to consider,8
would he not at once turn back to St. Luke to discover
some trace, however slight, of journeys so clearly defined
by another Evangelist ? And would he turn back there in
vain ? Would he find no break in the narrative, no indica
tions of journeys to Jerusalem beside that with which this
portion of his Gospel commences ? Most assuredly not.

1 This seems a fair representation of what the Evangelist designed to imply by
TTapnKoXovfrnKuTi ava^ev tratriv aKpiBas (ch. i. 3). See the comments on this
passage in Lect. iv. p. 149, note 1. The view of the ancient Syriac translator,
according to which vduTt is masculine, and TrapnKoKov^. implies proximity and
personal attendance (see also von Gumpach in Kitto, Journal of Sacred Lit. for
1849, No. vm. p. 301), deserves attention from its antiquity, but is apparently
rightly rejected by all the best modern expositors.
2 See above, Lect. I. p. 30, note 3, and compare the illustrations supplied by
Greswell, Dissert, xxi.— xxiii. Vol. ii. p. 196 sq., Dissert, xxx. Vol. ii. p. 482 sq.
Comp. also Ebrard, Kritik der Ev. Gesch. j 37, p. 150 sq.
8 The objection that if we include our Lord's visit to Jerusalem at the feast ol
Dedication we might seem to have four journeys to Jerusalem (see the synopsis
of Lampe), is readily removed by observing that the way in which St. John men
tions the festival and our Lord's appearance at it (John x. 22), combined with
the fact that there is no previous mention of any departure from Judasa (con
trast John x. 40), leads us certainly to suppose that during the interval between
the feast of Tabernacles and that of the Dedication our Lord confined His min.
istry to Judffia. See p. 256. If this be so, the visit to the latter festival is not to be
regarded as due to a separate or second journey, but only as a sequel of the first.
Comp. Bengel's more correct synopsis, Gnomon, Vol. i. p. 851, and see Wieseler,
Chron. Synops. p. 318, note 1.

224 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. Vt
Instead of all seeming, as it might once have seemed, the
confused recital of the circumstances of but one journey,
he would now be led to identify the journey of the ninth
chapter of St. Luke with the journey to the feast of Tab
ernacles specified by St. John;1 he would again have his
attention arrested by the break a little past the middle of
the thirteenth chapter, and would see how
strikingly it agreed with St. John's notice of
the second journey toward Jerusalem, that reached no fur
ther than Bethany;2 and, lastly, he could not fail to pause
at the special notice of a third journey towards the begin-
ver.n. nmg OI" tne seventeenth chapter, and would
ch. xxt. 1. naturally connect it, not only with the express
ra- * *¦ statements of St. Matthew and St. Mark, but
with the previous retirement to Ephraim so distinctly spe
cified by St. John. s Such would be the result of a fair and
e
l The main argument for the identity of the journey specified John vii. 10 with
that mentioned Luke ix. 51 rests on the two facts, (a) that the journey specified
by the third Evangelist was through Samaria (Luke ix. 52), and (6) that the
inhabitants of that country at once inferred that our Lord's destination was
Jerusalem (ver. 53). The first of these facts is in complete harmony with the
avoidance of observation specified in John vii. 10; the second is in equally com
plete harmony with St. John's statement of the object of that journey (ave&n
els r^v kopr4\v, ib. ver. 10). It was the knowledge on the part of the Samari
tans that the feast of Tabernacles was now going on that made them so readily
notice and recognize the direction to which the Lord's face was now turned.
See below, p. 249. The main objection against the identity lies in St. Luke's
rough note of time, iv t£ o-vfx-KX^povo-^ai ras ¦fyuepas *rijs avaXtyetos (ch. ix.
51), which, itis urged, the use of the peculiar term avakTiipts clearly shows can
only belong to a last journey (see Meyer, in loc, and compare Greswell, Dissert.
xxxi. Vol. ii. p. 522). Why, however, may not the very general term, at Tjfxepat
tt}s aua\^ecos 6 Kaiphs 6 atpopitr&els (J.*XPl TVS acaA.^if-'ews, Euthym.) suitably
apply to the period between the conclusion of the regular ministry of our Lord
nnd the last Passover, — a period which was ushered in by special prophecies of
such an avd\rj\pis (Mark ix. 30), and which throughout wears the character of
being a season of preparation for that final issue? Compare p. 215, note 1. The
interpretation of the words proposed by Wieseler {Chron. Synops. p. 324. Com
pare Lange, Leben Jesu, it. 5. 12, Part n. p. 1054), — "the days of His having
found acceptance with men," is contrary to the New Testament use of the verb
(Mark xvi. 19, Acts i. 2, xi. 22, 1 Tim. iii. 16), and completely untenable.
2 For further considerations in favor of the connection of Luke xiii. 22 with
St. John's notice of our Lord's withdrawal wepov rod 'IopSdVou (ch. x. 40), and
the same Apostle's notice of the journey to Bethany (ch. xi. 1), see below, p. 262
sq., and compare Wieseler, Cliron. Synops. p. 321.
s With John xi. 54 we seem rightly to connect Luke xvii. 11, Srijp^eTo 5(4

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 225
reasonable investigation into the narrative of St. Luke, — .,
and such too is the result arrived at in part by the learned
Lightfoot,1 and more distinctly by a recent investigator,
whose elaborate treatise on the chronology of the Gospel
history may justly be classed among the most successful
efforts in that department of theology that have appeared
in our own times.2
If we rest satisfied with this result, and I verily believe
it will commend itself to us each step we
. Results cf the
advance forward in the history, we have above considem-
before us, to speak broadly and generally,
the record of the circumstances connected with three jour
neys to or toward Jerusalem, the first being at the feast of
Tabernacles, the second three months or more afterwards,
the last a short time before the ensuing Passover.8
u4<rov ^auapel as Kal TaXiKatas, where the confirmatory hint supplied by
the notice of the direction of the journey should not be overlooked. See below,
p. 269, note 5.
1 The following appears to be the arrangement of this able harmonist as indi
cated in his Chronica Temporum (Vol. ii. p. 36 sq. Roterod. 1686) : (1) he connects
(sect. 57) Luke ix. 51 aud John vii. 10; (2) he places (sect. 60) Luke x. 17 — xiii. 23
before John ix. 1— x. 42; (3) he refers Luke xvii. 11 to our Lord's last journey to
Jerusalem, connecting it, however, with John x. 42 rather than with John xi.
55. See sect. 62. The main differences between this and the view adopted in
the text are the identification of Luke xiii. 22 with the visit to Jerusalem at the
feast of Dedication (see above, p. 223, note 3), and the reference to John ix. 1 —
x. 21 to the visit at the feast of Dedication rather than, as seems more natural,
to that at the feast of Tabernacles. Contrast Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 329.
2 It is scarcely necessary to observe that reference is here made to the Clirono-
logische Synopse der Vier Evamgelien of Karl Wieseler, — a treatise of which the
importance has been already commented on. See p. 139, note- 4. It is to be
regretted that in a few important passages Wieseler has been tempted to pro
pound novel interpretations (see above, -p. 224, note 1), which have been almost
universally pronounced to be untenable. This has led hasty readers to rate this
able work much below its real merits. Compare Kitto, Journal of Sacr. Lit. for
1850, No. xi. p. 75.
3 The date of the commencement of the second and third journeys and their
duration can only be fixed roughly and approximately. The data for forming a
calculation are as follow. The feast of the Dedication took place on the twenty-
fifth of Kislev (Dec. 20), and lasted eight days (Joseph. Antiq. m. 7. 7 ; compare
Jahn, Archmol. , 359) ; at this, as we know from St. John, our Lord was present.
Very soon afterwards our Lord retires to the Perasan Bethany (John x. 40), and
there abides long enough for many to believe on Him (John x. 42). At the end
of this stay the second journey towards Jerusalem (Luke xiii. 22; compare John
xi. 7) is commenced, which for the time terminates at Bethany, but which.

226 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
Let us now proceed to a brief but orderly recital of the
recorded events.
The last circumstance on which we dwelt was the return
of our Lord to Capernaum after His long
Brief stay at Ca- ... t TT.
pemaum.- worldly missionary journeys, and His impressive
ZZSt^LT teaching to His Apostles during that brief
period of apparent tranquillity and seclusion.1
That time of holy rest seems soon to have come to an end.
The feast of Tabernacles was nigh at hand, and the Lord's
brethren,2 who now come prominently before us, and who,
in spite of their practical unbelief,3 appear to have dis
tinctly shared in similar feelings of pride and expectancy
to those which we seem to have already traced in the
Apostles, now urge Him to display His wonder-working
powers amid circumstances of greater pub-
Johnvii.3. f. . ° x
licity, — to challenge and to command adhe
sion, and that not in remote Galilee, but in the busy
owing to the machinations of the Jews (John xi. 47), is very shortly afterwards
directed to Ephraim (John xi. 54). From this place the third journey is com
menced, which appears to have extended through Samaria, Galilee, and Peraea,
and to have been temporarily arrested at Bethany, near Jerusalem, six days
before the Passover, or, in the year in question (A. u. o. 783), somewhere about
April 1. If we now reckon backward, and assign at least a fortnight to this
journey, a month or five weeks to the stay at Ephraim, and a week or more to
the second journey, — which, though much shorter than the third, seems at first
to have been leisurely performed (comp. Luke xiii. 22, and see below, p. 262,
note 2), — we shall then leave about a month or five weeks for the stay in the
neighborhood of the Persean Bethany. The second journey, according to this
view, would have commenced about the beginning of February, and the third
about the middle of March.
1 See Lect. v. p. 213, and comp. p. 218, note 2.
2 For a brief consideration of the probable meaning of this much contested
appellation, see above, p. 100, note 2, and for examples of the various senses of
the word d5e\tj> bs, according to Hebrew usage, Bee Greswell, Dissert, xvii. Vol.
ii. p. 117.
3 That the words oiSe iirlarevov (John xiii. 5), though probably implying a
disbelief in our Lord's Godhead (a>s els ®e6v, Euthym.), did not imply a disbe
lief in His mighty works, and perhaps not even in His claims to be regarded a
divinely accredited teacher, seems clear from the context. See ver. 3, and com
pare Lect. in. p. 101, note. Chrysostom (in loc) rightly remarks that the address,
though marked by bitterness, still clearly came from friends (SoKet ii a£lutrts
Srj&ev tpl\wv 4lvai ; contrast Euthym. in loc). We may pause, however, before
we agree with that able expositor in his further remark that James the brother
of the Lord was one of the speakers. Compare Greswell, Dissert, xvii. Vol. ii.
p 116.

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 227
thoroughfares of Jerusalem,1 and among the thronging
worshippers in its temple courts. The apparent contra
diction that has here been found between our Lord's words
and His subsequent acts vanishes at once when we pause
to observe that here, as so often in the narrative of the
fourth Evangelist, He is revealed to us as the reader of the
heart, and as answering its thoughts and imaginations,
rather than the words by which those feelings were dis
guised.2 It is to the spirit and meaning of this worldly
and self-seeking request, rather than to the mere outward
terms in which it was couched, that the Lord answers His
brethren, even as He had once before answered a mother's
tacit importunity, that " His time is not yet
r . J John vii. 6.
come, and that He goeth not up to the
feast. He does indeed not go up to the feast in the sense
in which those carnal-minded men presumed to counsel
Him. He joins now no festal companies ; He takes now
no prominent part in festal solemnities;3 if He be found in
1 The exact meaning of the address of our Lord's brethren, especially of the
confirmatory clause (ouBels yap 4v Kpinrrtp ti nottt zeal fqret awrbs 4v iro^rj-
trltf elvai, John vii. 4), is not at first sight perfectly clear. What the brethren
appear to say is this : " Go to Judsea, that Thy disciples, whether dwelling there
or come there to the festival, may behold the works which Thou art doing here
in comparative secrecy ; it is needful that Thou seek this publicity if true to Thy
character, for no man doeth his works in secret, and seeks personally (avr6s) to
be before the world, as Thou, who claimest to be the Messiah, must necessarily
desire to be. Hidden though wondrous works and personal acceptance by the
world at large are things not compatible." The whole is the speech of shrewd
and worldly-minded, but not treacherous or designing men. Compare Liicke in
loc. Vol. ii. p. 189 (ed. 3).
2 See above, Lect. I. p. 44, note 3, and compare p. 125, note 2. The supposition
of Meyer, that our Lord here states His intention and afterwards alters it, is
neither borne out by the context nor rendered admissible by any parallel case
(Matt. xv. 26 is certainly not in point) in the whole sacred narrative. The mis
erable eflbrt of Porphyry to fix on our Lord the charge of fraudulent represen
tations and deliberate inconstancy is noticed and refuted by Jerome, contr.
Pelag. ii. 6.
3 That this is the true meaning of the words was apparently felt by the earlier
expositors (ob yap avaBaivei trvveoprdtrtov vov^er-fitrtov Se uaWov, Cyril Alex.
in loc. p. 404 n), and has been distinctly asserted by many of the sounder modern
writers. So rightly Luthardt (" nicht an diesem Feste wird er so wie sie meinen
hinauf-und einziebn in Jerusalem" — Das Johann Evang. Part II. p. 77), Stier
(Disc, of our Lord, Vol. v. p. 242, Clark), and somewhat similarly, Liicke in loc.
The explanation of De Wette and Alford, that the true reading ovk avo.8o.ivw is

228 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
Jerusalem and in the courts of His Father's house, it is
not as the wonder-worker or Messianic king, but as the
persecuted Redeemer, who will yet again brave the malice
of Scribe and Pharisee that He may still fulfil his mission
to those lost sheep of the house of Israel whom the festival
may gather together.
Thus it was, that, perhaps, scarcely before the very day
on which the festival actually commenced,1
journey to jem- our Lor(j an<3 as the sequel seems to show,
salcm through Sa- t x •
maria. His Apostles, directed their steps to Jerusa-
amp. Luke ix. \em, but, as it were, in secret. Their way, as
we might have expected, and as the appar
ently coincident notice of St. Luke distinctly substantiates,
lay through Samaria.2 But Samaria now
' receives not this Saviour as it had received
John iv. 40. Him nine months before. Then the Lord's
face was turned towards Galilee, now it is turned towards
practically equivalent to the oUttco avafiaivca of the received" text, is perhaps
defensible on the ground that the succeeding oij-jro) may be thought to reflect a
kind of temporal limitation on the foregoing negative, but seems neither so sim
ple nor so natural as that which has been adopted in the text.
l That our Lord did not arrive at Jerusalem till the middle of the feast is cer
tainly not positively to be deduced from John vii. 14, which may only imply that
up to that day, though in Jerusalem, He remained in concealment (Meyer).
Still the use of the term hvefin, especially viewed in connection with its use a
few verses before, seems to involve the idea of a preceding journey, and may
possibly have been chosen as serving to imply that on His arrival our Lord pro
ceeded at once to the Temple,— that it was, in fact, the true goal of the present
journey. Cyril of Alexandria calls attention to the word &WjSi| (o&x a7r\as
€lar)?\&€v, oAAa avefin, <pwo-iv, els to Up6v, in loc. p. 409 e), but apparently
refers it to the solemn and formal nature of the entry.
2 Even if we hesitate to regard the journey mentioned by St. Luke (ch. ix. 51)
as identical with that here specified by St. John, which, indeed, as we have
shown above, we seem to have no sufficient reason for doing, we can scarcely
doubt that the journey was through Samaria. By this route our Lord would be
able to make his journey more completely &s iv Kpvirr^ (John vii. 10), and
would also apparently be able to reach Jerusalem more quickly than if He had
taken the usual and longer route through Persea. See above, Lecture in. p. 121,
note 2. The assertion of Meyer (in loc), that ct>s iv tcpy-imp simply implies that
our Lord joined no festal caravan, but affords no indication of the way He was
pleased to take, may justly be questioned. If our Lord was accompanied by
His Apostles, which, from St. John's Gospel alone, seems certainly more proba
ble than the contrary, could a company of thirteen have travelled &s iv Kpvwrtp
by any but a little-frequented route?

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 229
Jerusalem; then His journey was made more leisurely,
now it is in haste ; then there was no apparent reason why
the route through Samaria had been chosen rather than
any other ; now it is self-evident. The peculiar season of
the year at once reminds the jealous Samaritan whither
those hurried steps were being directed, and tells him
plainly enough what must be the true reason which now
has brought that hastening company through their com
monly avoided land. So when messengers
„ , . Lukcix.52.
are sent forward to expedite the journey,
and make preparations for the coming Master, He whom
the city of Sychar had once welcomed is now
rejected by the churlish village that lay in Ver.s3.
His way. The Sons of Thunder1 would have had fire
called down from heaven, but their intemperate zeal is
rebuked by their Lord, yea, and practically rebuked by a
striking proof that even now Samaria was not utterly
faithless. One at least, there seems to have been,2 who

l The incident mentioned in this passage deserves particular attention as tend
ing to correct a very popular and prevailing error in reference to the character
of one of the actors. Does the present passage, especially when combined with
Luke ix. 49 and Mark x. 38, and further illustrated by the most natural and
obvious interpretation of the term "Son of Thunder " (Mark iii. 17; see Meyer
in loc p. 39, at all justify our regarding St. John as the apostolic type of that
almost feminine softness and meditative tranquillity (see Olshausen, Comment, on
the Gospels, Vol. iii. p. 304) which is so popularly ascribed to him? Is it not
much more correct to say that the notices of the beloved Apostle recorded in
the Gospels, when estimated in connection with the name given to him by his
Master, present to us the scarcely doubtful traces of an ardent love, zeal, and
confidence (Mark x. 38), which, like the thunder to which the character was
compared, was sometimes shown forth in outspokenness and outburst? This
characteristic ardor, tbis glowing while loving zeal, is not obscurely evinced in
the outspokenness and honest denunciation of falsehood and heresy that marks
the first, and, even more clearly, the short remaining epistles of this inspired
writer. Compare 2 John 10, 3 John 10. The misconception of the character of
the Apostle is apparently of early date, and perhaps stands in some degree of
connection with his own simple yet affecting notice of the love and confidence
vouchsafed towards him by our Redeemer during the Last Supper (John xiv.
25). Let us not forget, however, that he, who in memory of this was lovingly
called o tVio-T^&ios by the early Church, was called by his own Master the " Son
of Thunder." The patristic explanation of this latter title will be found in Sui
cer, Thesaur. o. v. Bpovr^j, Vol. i. p. 712 sq., but is not sufficiently distinctive.
2 It seems proper here to speak with caution, as the present case, and that of
the man who, when called by our Lord, requested leave first to go and bury his
20

230 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VL
was ready to cast in his lot with that travel-worn company,
and to him it was answered in the words of
Luke ix.57. . , ., . , ,
our text, and with a striking and pathetic
appropriateness, that though the creatures that His own
divine hands had made had their allotted places of shelter
and rest, "the Son of Man had not where to lay His head."
The Lord soon reaches Jerusalem, where it would seem
He was partially expected, and about the
Our Lord's arri- * lmi
vai and preaching middle of the feast enters the Temple, and
teaches in its now crowded courts. And that
John vii. U. • • mi , n
teaching was not m vain. Though some of
the mere dwellers in Jerusalem1 paused only to speculate
on the policy of their spiritual rulers in permitting One
whom they were seeking to kill now to speak
Johnvii.25. J ° r
with such openness and freedom, the effect
on the collected multitude was clearly different. Many,
we are told, believed in our Lord : many saw
Ver. a. J
in His miracles an evidence of a Messiahship
which it seemed now no longer possible either to doubt
or to deny. The sequel, however, we might
Jr" easily have foreseen. An effort is at once
Ver. 82. J
made by the party of the Sanhedrin to lay
hands on our Lord, but is frustrated, perhaps partly by the

father, are placed by St. Matthew in a totally different connection. See ch. xviii.
19 — 21. To account for this is difficult, though we can have no difficulty in believ
ing that it could be readily accounted for if we knew all the circumstances. It is
not, for example, unreasonable to suppose that the incident of the self-offering
follower might have happened twice, and that St. Matthew, in accordance with
his habit of connecting together what was similar (see Lect. i. p. 35 sq.), might
have associated with the first occurrence of that incident an incident which, in
point of time, really belonged to the second.
1 It is worthy of notice that St. John here places before us the views and com
ments of a party that clearly must be regarded as different from the general
oxApj (ver. 20) on the one hand, and the more hostile 'lovSouot (ver. 15) on the
other. We have here the remarks of some of the residents in the city. They
evidently are perfectly acquainted with the general designs of the party of the
Sanhedrin, and are full of natural wonder that they should have permitted this
free speaking on the part of One whom they had resolved, and whom it was
obviously their interest, to silence. The incidental notice of the sort of half-
knowledge these 'Ipoffohvpurai had acquired is in the highest degree natural and
characteristic. See Stier, Disc of our Lord, Vol. v. p. 267.

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 231
multitude, and certainly also in great measure by the
convictions of the very men that were sent to take Him.1
The savage spirit of the Sanhedrin is now, however,
distinctly shown, and now is it that for the first time
publicly, though darkly, the Lord speaks of that depart
ure, — of that " being sought for and not
° ° Ver. St.
found," on which He had already spoken
twice before to His disciples with such saddening explicit-
ness. Tet He will not leave those heart-touched multi
tudes that were now hanging on His words. Yet again, on
the last day of the festival, the Lord preaches
publicly, with a most solemn and appropriate
reference to the living waters of the Spirit which should
flow forth when He was glorified.2 Again a desire is
manifested by the party of the Sanhedrin to
lay hands on Him;- again, as it would seem,
a meeting of the Sanhedrin is held, and again their pro-
l This transpires afterwards. See John vii. 45. It would seem that when
these VTrnperat were sent forth with orders to seize our Lord, it was left to their
discretion to watch for a good opportunity and a reasonable pretext. At the
next session of the Sanhedrin they make a report of what they had done, or
rather left undone, and are exposed accordingly to the scornful inquiries and
practical censure of the council (ver. 47). Further proceedings, it would seem,
are at present, if not arrested, yet impeded by the question of Nicodemus (ver.
51). 2 There seems no sufficient reason for rejecting the generally received opinion,
that allusion is here made to the custom of bringing water from the well of
Siloam and pouring it on the altar, which appears to have been observed on
every day of this festival, — the eighth (according to R. Judah in "Succah,"
IV. 9) also included. See especially Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in loc Vol. ii. p. 632
(Roterod. 1686), and the good article in Winer, BWB. " Laubhuttenfest," Vol.
ii. p. 8. Whether this "great day" of the festival is to be regarded as the
seventh or as the eighth is a matter of some doubt. If it be true, as urged by
Winer, that the opinion of Rabbi Judah above cited is only that of an indi
vidual, and that the prevailing practice was to offer libations only on seven days
(" Succah," iv. 1), and if it be further supposed that our Lord's words were
called forth by the actual performance of the rite, then " the great day " must
be the seventh day. As, however, it appears from the written law that the eighth
day was regarded as a Sabbath (Lev. xxiii. 36; comp. Joseph. Antiq. m. 10. 4),
and as peculiar solemnities are specified in the oral law as celebrated on that day
(see Lightfoot, loc cit.), it seems more correct to regard the eighth as "the great
day ; " and if it be conceded that there was no libation on that day, to suppose
our Lord's words were called forth, not by the act itself, but by a remembrance
of the custom observed on the preceding days. See Meyer in loc p. 239 (ed. 3)
and the elaborate comments of Lttcke, Vol. ii. p. 223 sq. (ed. 3).

232 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
posals are encountered by a just opposition ; not, however,
on this occasion by the tacit and merely passive opposition
of their reluctant satellites, but by the open pleading of
one of its most important members, the timid yet faithful
Mcodemus,1 — the only one among the rulers
of the Jews who was found to urge the
observance of that law of Moses which its hypocritical
guardians were now seeking to pervert or to violate.
To this same period, if we conceive the narrative in
question to be written by St. John, must be
The woman taken assigned the memorable and most certainly
in adultery tproba- . .. • -i i
bu place of them- inspired history of the woman taken in aaul-
tMentinthe Gospel ^ . ^ &g j venture tQ entertain, SOme-
what decidedly, the opinion that it was not
written by that Evangelist,2 and that it does not in any
way blend naturally with the present portion of the Re
deemer's history, I will not here pause on it, but will only
notice in passing the great plausibility and historical fitness
with which three or four of the cursive manuscripts insert
it at the end of the twenty-first chapter of St. Luke.3

1 Compare Lect. in. p. 124, note 3, ad fin.
2 The limits and general character of these notes wholly preclude our attempt
ing to enter upon a formal discussion of this difficult question. It may be briefly
observed, however, that the opinion expressed in the text rests on the following
considerations: (1) the absence of the passage from — (a) three out of the four first'
class MSS. and the valuable MS. marked L; (b) several ancient versions, among
which are some early Latin versions of great importance, and apparently the
Peshito-Syriacf (c) several early and important patristic writers, Origen, Tertul-
lian, Cyprian, and Chrysostom being of the number : (2) The striking number of
variations of reading among the documents that retain the passage, there being not
less than eighty variations of reading in one hundred and eighty-three words : (S)
The almost equally striking difference of style, both in the connecting particles
and other words, from that of St. John, and the apparent similarity in style to
that of St. Luke. From these reasons, external and internal, we seem justi
fied in removing the passage from the place it now occupies in the received text,
though there appears every reason for believing it a portion of the Gospel his
tory. It cannot be too strongly impressed on the general reader that no reason
able critic throws doubt on the incident, but only on its present place in the
sacred narrative. For critical details see the new (7th) edition of Tischendorf s
Greek Test. Vol. i. p. 602, and Meyer, Komment. ilb. Joh. p. 247 (ed. 3).
3 These manuscripts are numbered 13, 69, 124, 346 ; one of these (69) being the
well-known Codex Leicestrensis, and the other three MSS. of the Alexandrian
family. It cannot apparently be asserted that the passage exactly fits on after

LECT. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 233
But the Lord still lingers at Jerusalem in spite of the
vengeful storm that was fast gathering round
Him. To the first Sabbath after the festival Jf££Z?Z
we must apparently1 assign the discourse on Je™ha^_ 12_20,
His own and His Father's testimony, and the
striking declarations of His mission from Him that was
true, and of His union with the eternal
' Ver. 25 sq.
Father, — declarations which we know so
wrought upon our Lord's very opponents that many of
them,2 as St. John tells us, believed on Him as He thus
spake unto them, though, alas, as the sequel
seems to show, that belief was soon exchanged " S3'
for captious questioning, and at last even for
the frightful violences of blinded religious zeal. To this
same Sabbath we must certainly assign the
performance of the deeply interesting miracle
of giving sight to the beggar 3 who had grown up to man-
Luke xxi. 38, but it certainly does seem rightly attached to that chapter gen
erally, and properly to find a place among the incidents there related. See more
in Lect. vn,
1 It may be doubted whether we are to assign the discourses recorded by St.
John .in ch. viii. to the last day of the feast of Tabernacles (John vii. 37), or to
the Sabbath on which the blind man was healed (John x. 14). The latter appears
to be the more probable connection. The beginning of ch. ix. seems closely
linked with the concluding verse of chap. viii. — a chapter which really com
mences with ver. 12, and contains the record ofaseriesof apparently continuous
discourses. Compare Origen, in Joann. xix. 2, Vol. iv. p. 292 (ed. Bened.).
Between this chapter and the close of ch. vii. there seems a break, which in the
received text is filled up with the narrative of the woman taken in adultery.
On the connection of this portion, see Wieseler, Cliron. Synops. p. 329, and com
pare the remarks of Meyer, Komment. ub.Joh. p. 289 sq. (ed. 3), — who, however,
does not seem correct in separating John viii. 21 sq. from what precedes, and in
assigning the discourse to a following day.
2 It is worthy of notice that the Evangelist seems desirous that it should be
clearly observed that the iroKKol who believed (John viii. 30) belonged to the
hostile party, the 'lovStuoi (see p. 115, note 3), as he specially adds that the address
beginning ch. viii. 31 was directed irpbs rovs 7rono*Teu/coTas avrtp 'lovSalovs.
On the whole discourse and the melancholy fluctuations in the minds of these
sadly imperfect believers, see the exceedingly good comments of Stier, Disc of
Our Lord, Vol. iv. p. 349 sq. (Clark).
3 See John ix. 8, where the true reading seems undoubtedly, not SVt t v tp A o s
5" (Bee), but SVt w p o a a I rn s ¦tiv, which has the support of the four principal
MSS., the Syriac, Latin, Coptic, and other* ancient versions, and is rightly
adopted by most recent editors. On the miracle itself, the characteristics of
20*

234 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
hood in blindness, and who believed in, yea, and wor
shipped as the Son of God, Him by whose
joimix.i st. merciful hands he received his sight.1 With
the sublime discourse on the Good Shep-
ch. x. 1 sq. hera — the Good Shepherd that even now,
Comp. ch. viii. 59. with stones every moment ready to be cast
upon Him, was giving His very life for His sheep, — the
memorable occurrences on this eventful Sabbath2 and
during our Lord's present stay in Jerusalem appear to
have come to their close. At no preceding festival had
our Lord made a deeper impression on the minds of those
whom He had vouchsafed to address. At no former visit
was such an effect produced on the feelings, not only of the
more friendly multitudes, but even of open
amTctSi. 15. or concealed foes, and that, too, as far as we
contrast John a. can jnfer from the inspired narrative, not so
much by mighty works, as by powerful and
persuasive teaching. All seem alike to have felt, and in
some degree alike to have yielded to, the influence of the
gracious words that proceeded from the Redeemer's mouth.
which are, our Lord's being pleased to impart His healing powers by an outward
medium (ver. 5), a deferred (comp. Mark viii. 23) or rather suspended cure, and
its divinely ordered dependence on the sufferer's performance of a prescribed
act (2 Kings v. 10), — see the comments of Cyril Alex, and Chrysostom, in loc,
August, in Joann. Tractat. xliv., Bp. Hall, Contempt, iv. 8, and Trench, Notes
on the Miracles, p. 288.
1 Some modern expositors endeavor to dilute the nature of the blind man's
belief in our Lord as the " Son of God." Why, however, are we to say that this
title must have had a theocratic (Meyer) rather than a Christian meaning to the
mind of the recent sufferer, when it is so possible, and even so probable, from his
conduct before the Pharisees, that He who had given light to his bodily eye had
vouchsafed a special illuminating influence (see Euthym. in loc) to the inner eye
of the mind? What else are we to understand from Iris prompt act of accepted
adoration than a recognition of the divine nature of Him before whom he was
standing? As Augustine well 6ays, "Agnoscit eum non filium hominis tantum,
quod ante crediderat, sed jam filium Dei qui carnem susceperat." — In Joann.
Tractat. xuv. 15, Vol. iii. p. 1718 (ed. Migne). On the meaning ascribed to the
title " Son of God," compare Lect. m. p. 119, note 2, Lect. v. p. 196, note 1.
2 Some expositors place an interval of one or more days after John ix. 34, and
before John x. 1 (see Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. v. pp. 445, 448), and so extend
the events over a greater space of time. This may be so; but the above assump
tion, that all took place on the Sabbath mentioned ch. ix. 14, seems on tha,whola
rather more in accordance with the general tenor of the text.

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 235
The impression was general ; the testimony all but unani
mous. The mixed multitude, the dwellers at Jerusalem,
the officials of the Temple, and to some
r ' Ch. vii. 25.
extent even the hostile Jewish party, bore ve,-.4s.
witness to the more than mortal power of
the teaching of Jesus of Nazareth.
Whither our Lord now went is not specified, and must
remain only a matter of conjecture. It may
. it, ,,., n Departure from
be remarked, however, that the silence of Jerusalem and mis-
c. t , , ', . -,. . , sion cf the Seventy.
bt. J onn, who commonly indicates whenever
our Lord's ministry was transferred from Judasa, seems to
give us very good grounds for supposing that our Lord, as
once before, after His first passover, so now again, remained
still within the frontier of Judaea, and again partially
resumed a ministry there which had been suspended in
the December of the preceding year. If this be so, it is
to this country, and apparently also to this period,1 that
we must refer the sending forth of the seventy disciples, —
those seventy whose very number hinted at
the future destination of the Gospel for the
wide world and the seventy nations into which the Jews
divided it,2 even as the mission of the twelve Apostles not
obscurely hinted at the first offer of the Gospel to the now
merged twelve tribes of God's own peculiar people.
The exact period of the mission of the Seventy has been much debated by
harmonists of this portion of Scripture. Wieseler fixes it as during the journey
through Samaria, and finds a special appropriateness in the choice of that coun
try. See Clironol. Synops. p. 326, note. As, however, the journey through
Samaria was apparently in haste, and as the whole of Luke x. seems to refer to
events which succeeded that journey (comp. De Wette, in loc), the place here
assigned to the mission is perhaps more probable.
2 See Eisenmenger, Entd. Judenthum, Vol. ii. p. 736 sq., and especially the
interesting Rabbinical citations in Lightfoot (Hor. Hebr. in Joann. vii 37), which
we may further use as indirectly confirming our present chronological arrange
ment. If the custom alluded to in those passages, of offering sacrifices at the
feast of Tabernacles for the seventy nations of the heathen world, was as old as
the time of our Saviour, — and this there seems no reason to doubt, — it does not
seem wholly fanciful to connect this mission of seventy men, whose destiuation,
though not defined, does not at any rate appear to have had any specified limits
assigned to it (contrast Matt. x. 5), with a period shortly succeeding a festival
where the needs of the heathen world were not forgotten even by the Jews.

236 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
During this same period — this interval between the
feast of Tabernacles and the feast of the
i'ifS Dedication — we may also, with considerable
by st. Luke. probability, place the visit of our Lord to
Martha and Mary at Bethany, when Martha
was so cumbered with much serving; and to this same
interval may we assign that instructive series of discourses1
which extend from the middle of the tenth to the middle
of the thirteenth chapter of St. Luke, the few incidents
connecting which seem admirably to agree with the ar
rangement that would refer them to Judasa and to this par
ticular period of our Lord's ministry.2 Though devoid of
all notices of place 3 which might enable us to give some
circumstantial touches to the few interspersed incidents, or
sketch them out in a connected narrative, they still serve
to show us very clearly, on the one hand, that the effect
produced by our Lord's present ministry in Judaea was very
great, that His hearers were now unusually numerous, and
showed as earnest a desire to hear the words of life as was

1 This interesting portion of St. Luke's Gospel opens with the parable of the
good Samaritan (ch. x. 25 sq.) and closes with the miracle performed on the
woman bowed by a spirit of infirmity (ch. xiii. 10—17). The two striking para
bles of the rich fool (ch. x. 16 sq.) and the barren fig-tree (ch. xiii. 6 sq.) belong
to this period, and present the characteristics of so many of the parables recorded
by St. Luke, viz. that of springing from or being suggested by some preceding
event. See Da Costa, The Four Witnesses, p. 211 sq.
2 The healing of the two blind men (Matt. ix. 27 sq.) is inserted by Tischendorf
(Synops. Evang. p. xxxix.) in the present portion of the narrative, on the
ground that, according to St. Matthew, it stands in close counection with the
cure of a deaf and dumb demoniac (ver. 32 sq.), which again, according to Luke
xi. 14 sq., must belong to the present period of the history. On the whole, how
ever, it seems better to conceive that the incident of curing a deaf and dumb
demoniac, and the blasphemy it evoked (Matt. ix. 34, Luke xi. 15), happened
twice, than to detach Matt. ix. 27 sq. so far from the period to which it certainly
seems to belong. The blasphemous comment might well have been first made
by the Pharisees (Matt. ix. 34), and then afterwards have been imitated and reit
erated by others. Compare Luke xi. 15, where observe that the speakers are not
defined. 3 Compare ch. x. 38, where even the well-known Bethany [Greswell's argu
ments (Dissertation xxxii.) against this identification seem wholly invalid]
is no more nearly defined than as a Kibpn} rts. Compare also ch. xi. 1, 4v
r$ elval 4v r6irtp Ttvt, xiii. 10, 4v p.ia tuv trvvayarywv, and see above, p. 206,
note 2.

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 237
ever shown even in Galilee ; and, on the other hand, that
the enmity of the Pharisees and hierarchical
party was deepening in its implacability, — comp. ch. ™k '
and that more especially as our Lord did not ?¦ xi- S?„S3-
r J See ver. 89 sq.
now repress His solemn and open denun
ciations of the hypocrisy and bloodthirsty spirit of these
miserable and blinded men. The last incident of the
period in question, the cure, on a Sabbath day, of a woman
weakened and bowed down by demoniacal influence,1
brings both parties very clearly before us, the
adversaries and their shamed silence, and the ° T"'
7 Ver. 17.
people, that, as the Evangelist tells us, "re
joiced for all the glorious things" that were done by their
great Healer.
At the end of this two-month ministry in Judaea, and,
as computation seems to warrant our saying, '
about the 20th of December,2 St. John dis- to Jerusalem at the
...,'.«.,. Tt . . feast of Dedication.
tinctly specifies that our Lord was present m
Jerusalem at the annual festival which commemorated the
purification and re-dedication of the Temple under Judas
Maccabeus.3 Though threatened by every form of danger,

1 This miracle, it may be observed, also took place in a synagogue (Luke xiii.
10), and in this respect was the counterpart in Judasa of the similar healings on
the Sabbath in the synagogue at Capernaum (Mark i. 21 sq., Luke iv. 31 sq. ; and
again, Matt. xii. 9 sq., Mark iii. 1 sq., Luke vi. 6 sq.). On the first occasion we
find no expression of complaint or indignation; on the second occasion, evil
thoughts are at work, but no demonstration is made ; here, however, the ruler
of the synagogue himself interposes and addresses the multitude in terms spe
cially intended to reflect censure on our Lord (ver. 14). On the miracle itself,
the peculiar nature of which was the removal of a contraction of the body, pro
duced by demoniacal influence (ver. 16), that had continued as long as eighteen
year6, see Augustine, Serm. ox. Vol. v. p. 638 sq. (ed Migne), Hook, Serm. on the
Miracles, Vol. ii. p. 102, and Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 324.
2 The feast of Dedication regularly commenced on the twenty-fifth of Chislev.
This date in the year we are now considering (A.rj. o. 782) will coincide, accord
ing to the tables of Wurm and Wieseler, with Tuesday, December 20. See
Chron. Synops. p. 484, or Tischendorf, Synops. Evang. p. mi.
8 This festival, more fully specified in the Books of Maccabees as o 4yKatvttxabs
rov frvtrtao'T'nplov (1 Mace. iv. 56, 59), 6 Ka&apio-ptbs rov vaov (2 Mace. x. 5), and
further distinguished by the name tpura, in consequence, according to Josephus
(Antiq. xii. 7. 7), of unlooked-for deliverance, was instituted by Judas Macca
beus after his victories over the generals of Antiochus Epiphanes, and designed

238 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
the Good Shepherd yet went once again, as His own divine
words seem partially to suggest, to tend His sheep, — the
sheep which he'ard His voice and had been given to Him
by that eternal Father with whom He now solemnly and
explicitly declared Himself to be one. He
John x. 30. , . n , , c • ,
who but a few months before, in the remote
uplands of Galilee, had commanded His disciples not to
divulge His Messiahship, now in Solomon's
Matt. xvi. 20. ° L .
porch1 and in the face of bitter foes pro
claims His divinity; He who even now vouchsafed not
fully to answer the question of the excited people whether
He were the Christ or no, nevertheless avows
John X. 24, 25. _. -
before all men that He .is the Son of God/*
That title which to the misbelieving Jew would have
been but the symbol of earthly and carnal hope or the
watchword of sedition, He merges in the higher designa

te commemorate the purification of the temple after its pollution by that frantic
and cruel man (1 Mace. i. 20, Joseph. Antiq. xii. 5. 4). It lasted eight days, and
appears to have been a time of great festivity and rejoicing. See Otho, Lex.
Bobbin, p. 238 sq., and Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Joann. x. 22, where quotations
are given from the Mishna which seem to show that the practice of illuminating
the city during the festival, and perhaps also the title tpSrra, was derived from a
legendary account of a miraculous multiplication of pure oil for lighting the
sacred lamps, which occurred at the first celebration of the festival. See, how
ever, Winer, BWB. Art. " Kirchweihfest," Vol. i. p. 659.
1 The comment xelad}V l\v (ch. x. 22), which St. 'John prefixes to his notice of
the exact locality in which our Lord then was, seems designed to remind the
reader why He was pleased to select this covered place (" ut captaret calorem,"
Lightfoot) rather than the open courts in which, it would seem, He more usually
taught the multitudes. Compare Winer, BWB., Art. "Tempel," Vol. ii. p. 586.
The porch, or cloister in question, we learn from Josephus (Antiq. xx. 9. 7), was
on the east side of the temple, — hence also known by the name of the trroa,
avaroKucfi, — and appears to have been a veritable portion of the ancient temple
of Solomon, which either wholly or in part escaped when the rest of the build
ing was burnt by Nebuchadnezzar, 2 Kings xxv. 9 (Joseph. Antiq. x. 8. 5). It
formed one, and that apparently the most splendid, of the noble cloisters which
surrounded the temple enclosure. See Lightfoot, Descr. Templi, cap. 8, Vol. i.
p. 565 (Roterod. 1686).
2 On this title, which here, as in other places, has been explained away by
many recent writers, see the following note, and compare above, p. 119, note 2,
and p. 196, note 1. Some good pomments on this particular passage will be
found in Wilson, Ulustr. of the N. T. ch. ii. p. 37 sq., and a defence of the true
meaning of the title in opposition to Dorner, in Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. v.
p. 196 sq.

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 23P
tion that betokened His eternity and Godhead.1 We can
perhaps scarcely wonder at what followed. If, nine months
before, at the feast of Purim, the same bitter and preju
diced men had sought to kill our Lord for
claiming to be the Son of God ; if again, at the
recent feast of Tabernacles, the declaration of an existence
before Abraham had made them snatch up
TT. . , , - _ Ch. viii. 59.
stones, to cast at Him, it could scarcely be
otherwise now, when the eternal Son was claiming a one
ness of essence with the eternal Father.
o in , , , Ch.x. so.
[savage hands soon take up the stones that
lay around those ancient cloisters;2 wild voices charge
the Holy One with blasphemy. With blas-
, • , . , n r, . Psalm Ixxxii. 6.
phemy ! when the very language of Scripture
proved that Shiloh was only laying claim to prerogatives
and titles that were verily His own. Blas-
¦ Johnx. 36.
phemy! when the very works to which our
Lord appealed were living proofs that He was in the
Father, and the Father in Him. But the
hearts of those wretched men were hardened,
and their ears could not hear. Fain would they have used
the stones they were now holding in their hands ;3 fain

1 The popular assumption that the term " Son of God " was regarded by the
Jews in the time of our Lord as one of the appropriate titles of the Messiah, is
carefully investigated by Wilson in the work referred to above (chap. iv. p. 56
sq.), and the conclusion arrived at is stated as follows: "With no direct testi
mony whatever on one side, and with the testimony of Origen (contr. Cels. I. p.
38, ed. Spencer), supported by a strong body of probable evidence deduced from
the New Testament, on the other, it seems necessary to conclude that custom had
not appropriated this title to the Messiah of the Jews near the time of Jesus
Christ." — Ulustr. of N. T. p. 74.
2 The idle question, how stones would be found in such a locality, may be most
easily disposed of by observing, not only that general repairs and restoration in
and about the temple were going on to a considerable extent until after the time
of our Lord (Joseph. Antiq. xx. 9. 7 ; compare Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. Vol. ii. p.
638), but that these very cloisters had not improbably suffered greatly in the fire
during the revolt against Sabinus (Antiq. xvii. 10. 2), and might not even yet
have been completely restored. At any rate, a proposal was made to rebuild
them in the time of Agrippa (Antiq. x. 9. 7). For an account of stones being
freely used in an uproar in the temple-courts, see Antiq. xvii. 9. 3.
3 We seem justified in pressing the present tense (Sta •Kolov ovtwv %pyov ue
\idid£eTe; John x. 32) ; the Jews had taken up stones, and were standing

240 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
would they have seized on their Redeemer, and carried
out, even where they were, their lawless and impious
designs, when that Holy One at once left both the temple
and the city, and withdrew to those secluded
districts across the Jordan where the Baptist
had commenced his ministry.1 There the Lord found both
faith and reception, and there, as it would
1 ''''¦'"' seem, He vouchsafed to abide until the com-
Luke xiii. 32. '
mencement of His second and subsequent
journey to Bethany and to the neighborhood of Jerusalem.
But even in those secluded districts hypocrisy and
malice soon found an opportunity for cooper-
The Lord's mes. ation. After our Lord had now, as it would
sage to Herod, and '
preparation to seem commenced His iourney towards Jeru-
leave Percea. ' . .
salem, and as His steps were leading Him
perhaps through one of the Pereean villages or towns in
the neighborhood of His former abode,2 Pharisees come

ready to carry out their blinded impiety. Compare Winer, Gram. § 40. 2, p. 237
(ed. 6). Stier (Disc, of our Lord, Vol. v. p. 494, Clark) contrasts the 4BdaTaaav
\foovs in the present case with the fjpav Kl&ovs in ch. viii. 59, urging that the
former word marks a more deliberate rolling up of larger stones, the latter a
more hasty and impetuous snatching up of any stones that chanced to lie in
their way. The explanation of %pav may possibly be correct; but the 4BdffTa~
aav seems rather to imply, what the context seems to confirm, both the act of
taking up the stones, and also that of holding them in their hands, so as to be
ready for use.
1 For a rough estimate both of the time (four or five weeks) which our Lord
may be supposed to have now spent in Perffia, and of the date of the commence
ment of the second journey, see above, p. 225, note 3. The place, we may
observe, is particularly specified, as " where John at first baptized " (John x.
40), i. e., Bethabara, or (according to the correct reading) Bethany, which would
seem to have been situated not very far from the ford over the Jordan in the
neighborhood of Jericho. See above, Lect. ill. p. 108, note 2. Here, and in the
adjoining districts of Feraea, our Lord remained till the second journey toward
Jerusalem, which at first might have assumed the character of a partial mission
ary circuit, with the Holy City as its ultimate goal (see the following note), and
which at first might have been leisurely, but which afterwards, as the sequel
shows, was speedy.
2 It would seem, as has been suggested in the preceding note, that our Lord's
present journey was not at first direct. St. Luke's very words StSdaKtov Kal
iropeiav trotoiaevos sis '\epovtraXiyi. (ch. xiii. 22) appear almost studiously both
to mark a more deliberate progress and to point to Jerusalem, not as the imme
diate destination, but as the place toward which the journey was tending. See
Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 321.

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 241
with plausible words to expedite His departure, and to
rid themselves of One whose successful preaching and
teaching they had probably already observed with anxiety
and hatred. They affect to give Him friendly warning;
they urge Him to depart, because Herod was seeking to
kill Him. Because Herod was seeking to
, .., tt. .-. , , , . .. -, . y-. LukexUi.Sl.
kill Him ! O double-sided stratagem ! O
cunning cooperation of evil men ! 'T was Herod who was
wishing Him to depart; 'twas Pharisees who were wishing
to kill Him. That weak, wicked, and selfish Tetrarch1 was
probably anxious to get out of his territory One whose
fame was daily spreading, and whom he knew not whether
to honor or to persecute. He was embarrassed, but soon
both sought and found useful tools in the Pharisees,2 who
were only too ready to urge our Lord to leave a land
where His life was comparatively safe, for one where, as
they well knew, it was now in extremest jeopardy. But
the divine Reader of the heart, as His message to Herod
seems to prove, and His mournful address to Jerusalem,3

1 See Lect. v. p. 210, note 1.
2 The above explanation is the only one which appears to satisfy the context
and the plain meaning of the terms used. Our Lord sees through the stratagem,
and sends a message to Herod, which, in the peculiar term used (rrj aAwtteKt
ravrn, Luke xiii. 32), implies that the Tetrarch's craftiness had not escaped
notice; and, in the distinct specifications of time (o-liaepov Kal aipiov KcU ttj
Tplrn), seems to imply not mere general and undefined periods, but literal and
actual days (see Meyer and Alford, in loc), two of which would be spent in the
territory of the evil man to whom the message was sent, and devoted to miracu
lous works of mercy. That our Lord really designed the message not for Herod
but for the Pharisees (Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. iv. p. 61, Clark; comp. also
Cyril Alex, in loc and the Scholiast in Cramer, Caten. Vol. ii. p. 110) seems
highly improbable, and contrary to the plain tenor of very simple and very
explicit words.
3 The position which this address to Jerusalem occupies in St. Luke's Gospel
(ch. xiii. 34), as compared with that in St. Matthew's Gospel (see ch. xxiii. 37
sq.), and the interpretation which is to be given to the words, are points which
have been much discussed. With regard to the first, the natural coherence with
what precedes wholly precludes our believing that St. Luke has misplaced the
words. Nearly as much may be urged for the position of the words in St. Mat
thew. It appears, then, not unreasonable to suppose that the words were
uttered on two different occasions, a supposition further supported by some
slight diversities of language in the two places. See Alford on Luke xiii. 34-
With regard to the second point, while it seems difficult to believe that the words
21

242 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VL
which immediately follows, serves indirectly to confirm,
saw in an instant through that combination of cunning
and malevolence. Works of mercy were yet to be done,
miraculous cures were to be vouchsafed to-day and to-mor
row, even in the borders of that wily ruler's province ; on
the third was to begin the journey that, though recom
menced from Ephraim, was the last made
actually to Jerusalem, — that journey that
closed with Golgotha and its perfected sacrifice.1
Whether the difficult words which have just been para
phrased apply definitely to the period of the
PrdbobXe events
during the tost two history now before us, whether they are
merely proverbial, or whether they involve
a special note of time, cannot confidently be decided.
The latter, as we have already implied, seems the more
natural view, and is most in accordance with the precise
nature of the inspired language; but more than this
cannot be positively asserted. One thing seems perfectly
clear, that in the succeeding portion of St. Luke's Gospel
there is .nothing which is opposed to such a view, and that
in St. John's Gospel, as we shall hereafter see,2 there is
something in its favor. That our Lord preached and per
formed miracles3 during the brief remainder of His stay in
have no reference to the time when the very terms here specified were actually
used (see Mark xi. 9), it seems equally difficult to believe that their meaning was
then exhausted. We may thus, perhaps with some reason, believe, with modern
chronologers (comp. Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 322), that the words had a first
and perhaps immediate reference to the triumphal entry, and, with the ancient
writers (Theophylact, al.), that they had a further reference to the Lord's second
advent. i The meaning and reference of reKetovpiat (Luke xiii. 32) is perhaps slightly
doubtful. That it is a present passive (Syr., Vulg.), not a pres. middle (Meyer),
and that the meaning is " consummor " (Syr., Vulg.), seems clearly to follow
from the regular usage of the verb in the N. Test. (comp. esp. Phil. iii. 12); and
that the reference is to an action soon and certainly (Winer, Gr. r 40. 2) to be
commenced, and also to be continued, seems a just inference from the tense.
Combining these observations, we may perhaps rightly refer it, as above, to our
Lord's perfected sacrifice ("the passion upon the cross for the salvation of the
world," Cyr. Alex.), which was consummated in Golgotha, but the onward
course to which was commenced when our Lord left the borders of Peraea.
2 See below, pp. 267, 268.
3 The prominent declaration in our Lord's message to Herod is that there will

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 243
Persea can scarcely be doubted. That He healed a man
afflicted with dropsy1 at the house of a leader of the
Pharisees, where He was invited, as it would r , . ,
' 3 Luke xiv. 1.
seem, only to be watched, and uttered there ver. is.
7 J ' Luke xv. 1.
the appropriate parable of the Great Supper,
— that publicans2 and sinners crowded round Him, — and
that when scribes and Pharisees murmured thereat, He
uttered the parables of the Lost Sheep, the
Lost Coin, the Prodigal Son, and subse- va-.f'
quently, to His disciples, though in the hear- 5^'. 14.

Ver.l.Ver. 19.

ing of the Pharisees, the parables of the
Unjust Steward, and of Lazarus3 and the
Rich Man, — seems almost certain from the place which
still be a continuance of miraculous works of mercy " to-day and to-morrow."
Of these St. Luke only mentions the healing of a man afflicted with dropsy; but
as we may observe that in this portion of bis Gospel he was clearly moved rather
to record the teaching of our Lord than to specify His mighty works, we cannot
fairly press the omission of other miracles that might have taken place on these
concluding days.
X On this miracle, which forms one of the seven performed on the Sabbath
(see above, p. 168, note 2), compare some comments by Anselm, Horn. x. p. 180
(Paris, 1675), a few remarks by Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. iv. p. 67 (Clark),
and Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 329. The miracle was performed at the
house of an apxvov tuv Qaptaalaiv (Luke xiv. 1), — a general title, as it would
seem, implying some leadership or preeminence in the sect. See Meyer in loc.
2 The peculiar reference which St. Luke here makes to "all the publicans"
(irdvTes ol Te\avat, Luke xv. 1) appears to deserve attention as something
more than a merely general or " popularly hyperbolical " (Meyer) form of ex
pression. If our Lord was now near one of the fords of the Jordan, and not
far from Jericho, he would be on the borders of a district in which, owing to its
great productiveness (Robinson, Palestine, Vol. i. p. 559), these tax collectors
would probably have been very numerous. Comp. Luke xix. 2, and see Lange,
Leben Jesu, n. 6. 1, Part II. p. 1159.
8 From the general connection of Luke xvi. 1 (s\eyev Se /col trpbs robs uadn-
rds) with ch. xv., and the apparent connection of subject between ch. xvi. 19 —
31 with ver. 9 — 13 (see Meyer in loc p. 421, ed. 3), we may perhaps infer that this
parable was uttered on the same day that so many of the publicans came to hear
our Lord's teaching (ch. xv. 1), and probably at the close of the last day in
Peraea, or at the beginning of the next, when our Lord might have been in the
district of Jericho. See above, p. 240, note 1. If this be so, and we agree to
combine with this portion of St. Luke's Gospel the narrative in John xi. 1 sq.
(see below), this parable would have been uttered only a day or two after our
Lord had received the message about Lazarus. May not, then, the name of the
sufferer in the parable have been suggested by the name of Lazarus of Bethany,
on whom our Lord's thoughts might now have been dwelling, and in whose his
tory there may have been possibly some circumstances of resemblance te that of

244 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
these discourses occupy in the present portion of St. Luke's
narrative. That all this might have been done in the two
days, the " to-day and to-morrow " which our Lord twice
so distinctly specifies, and that on the third
Ch. xiii. 32, 33. J r '
He might have crossed the Jordan and com
menced a journey, which, though, as we have already
observed, not the last to Judaea,1 was notwithstanding the
last estimated with reference to the final goal, Jerusalem,
— is a supposition which seems to coincide fully with the
language and notices of St. Luke.2
And with this too the narrative of St. John does indeed
appear very strikingly to harmonize. The
fi^aZTnlicTTn next event recorded by that Evangelist, after
St'ciohx'n> *^e notlce °f tne withdrawal to and preach
ing in Persea, is the message sent by the af
flicted sisters of Lazarus, accompanied by the special
note of time that the Lord abode two days where He then
was. Now, as two days more would easily bring our Lord
from Persea to Bethany,3 and as we also know that Lazarus
the Lazarus of the parable? The opinions of early writers were divided in
reference to this parable, some (Irenaeus, Tertullian, Chrysostom, al.) conceiving
it to be an actual history, some of equal antiquity (Clem. Alex., Theophilus,
Asterius, al.) more plausibly regarding it a parable. See especially the citations
in Suicer, Thesaur. s. v. A-dfapos, Vol. ii. p. 206 sq.
1 The journey from Ephraim, which apparently lay through Samaria, Galilee,
and Persea, was the last to Judtea, but, in reference to Jerusalem, may be con
sidered a part of the second. On these journeys see above, p. 223 sq., and comp.
p. 225, note 3.
2 Compare the notice of this second journey, tropetav irotoiuevos eis 'lepovffa
\-h]u (Luke xiii. 22), with the notice of what seems the third journey, 4v t$> iropei'/-
ecr&cti airbv els 'UpovaaAripi, (col avrbs Si^p^ero Sia aeoov ^aaapelas Kal Ta\t-
\alas (Luke xvii. 11), — between which passages there is just the connection we
might expect, on the hypothesis that the first refers to a journey which did not
reach Jerusalem, and that the second refers to its continuation or recommence
ment. 3 According to the Jerusalem Itinerary, the distance from Jerusalem to Jericho
was eighteen miles, and from Jericho to the Jordan five more, in all twenty-
three miles. The same distances are specified by Josephus (Bell. Jud. ry. 8. 3) as
one hundred and fifty and sixty stades respectively, or in all two hundred and
ten stades. See Greswell, Dissert, xxxvm. Vol. iii. p. 60. Whichever calcu
lation be adopted, our Lord clearly could have reached Bethany from the
Jordan in as little as one day, and with ease in two, even if he had been some
little distance on the other side of the river. On the rate of a day's journey, see
Gre6well, Dissert, xxvi. (Append.) Vol. iv. p. 525 sq.

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 245
was summoned from the tomb after he had lain there four
days, how very plausible is the supposition
that the Lord was in Persea when He re
ceived the message from the sisters of Lazarus,1 and that
the two days during which " He abode in the place where
He was " were the two last days in Peraaa, Ver. 6.
the "to-day and to-morrow" of which He
spake when the Pharisees came with the hypocritical warn
ing about the designs of Herod. This seern-
. . . , „ , „ . ,. -, LukexiiuSl.
ing coincidence of the notes of time supplied
by the fourth Evangelist with those hinted at by St. Luke,
combined with the further very curious fact, already alluded
to, that the not very common name of Laza-
- " See p. 243, note 3.
rus^ appears in a parable delivered by our
Lord just at a time when it may be thought to have been
suggested by the message which St. John tells us was
sent to our Lord about the actual Lazarus of Bethany, —
all this does indeed seem to support our view of the
chronology of the present period, and to reflect some prob
ability on our explanation of the ambiguous "to-day and
to-morrow " of the third Evangelist.3
But let us pass onward.
On the mighty but familiar miracle of the inffhe" raMnTof
raising of Lazarus I will not pause, save to Lazarvs-
remark that the effect it produced was immense. It gath-

l The message only announced tbat Lazarus was sick, but the supposition is
not improbable that by the time the messenger reached our Lord Lazarus had
died. It may be observed that two days afterwards, when our Lord speaks of
the death of Lazarus, he uses the aorist aire^avev (John xi. 14), which seems to
refer the death to some period, undefined indeed, but now past. See Fritz, de
Aoristi Vi, p. 17, and compare notes on 1 Thess. ii. 16. On the adjustments of
time mentioned in the narrative of St. John, see Meyer on John xi. 17, p. 331
(ed. 3).
2 Lazarus appears to be a shortened form of the more familiar Eleazar. See
especially the learned investigation of Bynauis, de Morte Christi, m. 8, Vol. i.
p. 180 sq., and compare Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Joann. xi. 1.
8 We may perhaps recognize a further point of contact between the rp rplrn
re\etovuat of St. Luke (ch. xiii. 32) and the remarks of the Apostles (John xi.
8, 16) on our Lord's proposal to go into Judasa : they regard that journey, as it
truly proved to be, a journey of which to Tere\eiwo~&ai was the issue.
21*

246 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
ered in believers even from the ranks of opponents; it
afterwards brought multitudes from Jerusa-
johnxi.ts. iem t0 see the risen man, and swelled the
Ch. xii. 9. triumph of the Lord's entry ; 1 and, alas ! it
also now stirred up enemies to delay no longer, and made
a high-priest pervert the mysterious gift of
John xi. «. prophecy 2 by using it to hurry on the mem
bers of his council to plot against innocent
blood. So avowed were now the savage counsels, that
our Lord at once withdrew to the town of
Ephraim, on the borders of Samaria,3 and
there, after an abode of perhaps a very few weeks,4 com
menced the last, and, as we may perhaps venture to term
it, the farewell journey described by all the
Maricx.i. ' three Synoptical Evangelists, and specially
OTU' ' noticed by St. Luke as being directed
" through the midst of /Samaria and Galilee." 6 The strik-

1 See John xii. 17, 18. On this mighty miracle, in which our Lord not only
appears, as previously, the conqueror of death, but even of corruption (John
xi. 39), see the commentaries of Origen [the part preceding ver. 39 is lost], Chrys
ostom, Cyril Alex., and Augustine (in Joann. Tractat. xlix.), Bp. Hall, Con-
tempi, iv. 23, 24, the very good comments in Stier, Disc, of Our Lord, Vol. vi.
p. 1 sq. (Clark), the vindication of Lardner, Works, Vol. xi. p. 1, and Trench,
Notes on the Miracles, p. 389.
2 It has often been discussed whether this was conscious or unconscious
prophecy. The tenor of the context seems clearly to show that it can only be
regarded in the latter view. Caiaphas was only consciously stating what he
deemed politically advisable, but he was nevertheless, as the inspired Evangelist
distinctly tells us, at the time actually prophesying : Kara tov 'Introd ayuvi^d-
pievos ovSev ^yrrav Trpoetfyfrrevaei'. Origen, in Joann. Tom. xi. 12, where the
nature of this prophecy is considered at great length. Compare Thesaur. Nov.
(Orit. Sacr.) Vol. ii. p. 525.
8 There seems reason for believing that this place was identical with Ophrah,
and corresponds with the modern village of Taiyibeh, which, according to Rob
inson, occupies a commanding site on the top of a conical hill, whence a fine
view is to be obtained of the eastern mountains, the valley of the Jordan, and
the Dead Sea. — Palestine, Vol. i. pp. 444, 447. It is about 6h. 20m. (1 hour =
three Roman miles) distant from Jerusalem (see ib., Vol. ii. p. 668), a distance
very closely agreeing with that specified by Jerome (Onomast. s. v.), who makes
it twenty miles.
4 See above, p. 225, note 3.
5 The interpretation of Meyer (comp. Alford in loc, Lange, Leben Jesu, Part
il. p. 1065), according to which Sta p.4trov Sapiapelas Kal TaAiAaias (Luke xvii.
11) is te be understood as implying the frontier district lying between these two

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 247
ing harmony between this notice of direction and the
abode in the frontier town of Ephraim specified by St.
John, may well give us confidence in our foregoing ar
rangement, and add strength to our belief in the general
chronological accuracy of the latter as well as of the
former portions of the narrative of the third Evangelist.
The incidents in this last journey are not many. Possi
bly on the frontiers of Samaria we may fix
.¦i n ,t i t j* ,1 . i i Incidents in the
the scene of the healing of the ten lepers,1 tost journey to ju-
and of the gratitude of the single sufferer d "^ XVIL 16-
that belonged to the despised land. To the
period of the transit through Galilee we may perhaps
assign the notice of the solemn answer to the probably
treacherous inquiry of the Pharisees when
the kingdom of God should come, and to ""' '
° ' Ch. xviii. 1 sq.
the same period2 the parable of the "Unjust
Judge, — a parable that gains much of its force and solem
nity from the previous mention of a time of terrible trial
and perplexity.3 From Galilee we seem fully justified, by

provinces along which our Lord journeyed from west to east, is apparently
grammatically defensible (see Xen. Anab. I. 4. 4), but certainly not very natural
or probable. The plain and obvious meaning surely is that our Lord went, not
merely "per Samaritanos in Galilajam," Syr.-Pesh., but through the middle of
both countries. See Lightfoot, Cliron. Temp. § 62, and comp. Wieseler, Chron.
Synops. p. 322.
1 On this miracle, the characteristic of which is its deferred working till the
faith of the sufferers was shown by their obedience to the Lord's command, see
Bp. Hall, Contempt, iv. 10, Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 332, — who, how
ever, has adopted the not very probable interpretation referred to in the pre
ceding note ; and compare Hook, Serm. on the Miracles, Vol. ii. p. 140, and a
good practical sermon by Hare (A. W.), Sermons, Vol. ii. p. 457.
2 It is very doubtful whether these incidents are to be assigned to the portion
of the journey through Galilee, or to that through Peraa. The latter view is
adopted by Greswell, Dissert, xxxi. Yol. ii. p. 542 ; the former, however, seems
slightly the most probable. See Lightfoot, Chron. Temp, j 62, 63, Yol. ii. p. 40
(Roterod. 1686).
3 There seems no reason for supposing, with Olshausen and others, that some
intermediate remarks connecting this parable more closely with what precedes
are here omitted. On the contrary, as ver. 7 seems to prove, the connection is
close and immediate. When the Lord comes, He comes to avenge His own and
free them from their foes, and that full surely. If an unjust earthly judge
avenged her who called upon him, shall not a righteous heavenly Judge avenge
the elect of God? See Meyer in loc. p. 441 (ed. 3), and on the parable generally,

Ch. xix. 1.

248 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
the distinct notices both of St. Matthew and St. Mark, in
tracing our Lord's steps to the lands across
the Jordan. Whether this journey extended
Ch.x.1. " "
to the more northern parts of Persea, where
it will be remembered a few months before the four thou
sand were fed, and where the name of the God of Israel
was so magnified, we cannot determine. The
Matt. xv. 3l. expressions of St. Matthew would rather lead
Ch. xix. 1. r
us to the contrary opinion, and to the suppo
sition that our Lord passed directly onward to the portions
nearer Judaaa L in which He had preached a few weeks
before, add to which we shall apparently be right in confin
ing the few remaining incidents which we meet with in
this part of the inspired narrative.2 We observe there
just what we should have expected from our remembrance
of our Lord's former sojourn in that country. We trace
the same characteristics displayed by the two classes of
our Lord's hearers with which we are so familiar in earlier
parts of the Gospel history, — thankful and
Matt. xix. 2. ... . , « ,
even enthusiastic reception on the partot the
multitude, craft and malignity on the part of the Pharisees

compare Greswell, Exposition of the Parables, Vol. iv. p. 213 sq., Trench, Notes
on the Parables, p. 489.
1 There is some little difficulty in the words i)?&ev els to Spia ttjj 'lavSalas
irepav rov 'lopSdvov (Matt. xix. 1). Viewed simply, and with the remembrance
that an insertion of the article before v4pav is not positively necessary (see
Winer, Gr. § 20. 2), they would seem in accordance with the statement of
Ptolemy ( Geogr. v. 16. 9) that a certain portion of the province of Judasa
actually lay on the eastern side of the Jordan ; viewed, however, in connection
with Mark x. 1, they seem rather to mark the general direction of our Lord's
journey, and might be paraphrased, — " He came to the frontiers of Judaea
(ovk 4irl to aeca, a\K olovel rd &Kpa, Origen), His route lying on the other
side of the Jordan." Comp. Greswell, Dissert, xxxi. Vol. ii. p. 542.
2 In this arrangement nearly all harmonists are agreed; the only doubt, as has
been before observed (p. 247, note 2), is whether these are the only incidents
which belong to the journey through Persea. Greswell urges the apparent con
secutive character of the discourses, Luke xvii. 20— xviii. 14, but it may be said
that there is really no greater break between Luke xvii. 19 and Luke xvii. 20,
which Greswell disconnects, than between Luke xviii. 14 and Luke xviii. 15,
which he unites. It must remain, then, a matter of opinion, the few arguments
in favor of one arrangement being nearly of equal weight with those in fevor of
the other.

Mark x. 21.

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 249
and their various adherents. The latter feelings are soon
displayed in the insidious inquiry about the
lawfulness of divorce, a question studiously '' T*' sq'
chosen to place our Lord in antagonism
either with the school of Hillel or with the school of
Shammai, and thus to bring upon Him the hostility of
one or other of two influential parties, if not also in some
degree to involve Him with the adulterous Tetrarch in
whose territory He then was.1 In .these same districts,
and in touching contrast to all this craft,
, , «i -, , . Matt. xix. 13.
were the young children brought to our
Lord, and blessed with the outward signs and tokens of
His divine love.2 Here, too, was the home of that rich
young man whom Jesus looked on and loved,
and of whom the melancholy notice is left,
that worldly possessions kept him back from
the kingdom of God.3
And now every step was leading our Lord and His
Apostles nearer to Jerusalem, and every step calls forth in

l Compare De Wette on Matt. xix. 3, to whom the hint is due. The main
design, however, as St. Matthew's addition koto iratrav curlav (practically the
language of the school of Hillel) seems clearly to show, was to induce our Lord
to decide upon a question that was much in debate between two large parties,
tbe school of Hillel adopting the lax view, the school of Shammai the more
strict ; " Schola Shammaeana, non permisit repudia nisi in causa adulterii, Hille-
liana aliter. " — Lightfoot in loc. Vol. ii. p. 345. Comp. Jost, Gesch. des Judenth-
II. 3, 13, Vol. i. p. 257.
2 We are distinctly told by St. Matthew the two blessings which the bringers of
the children hope to receive for them at the hands of our Lord, — %va tos x^Pas
iTrtdrj avroTs Kal irpotrev^nTat (ch. xix. 13). The former act, the imposition of
hands, was probably regarded to some extent what it truly was, the outward
sign of the conveyance of inward gifts and blessings (r^v tppovprjTiK^jv eavrov
Sivapuv, Euthym. Comp. Origen in Matt. Tom. xv. 6); the latter was regarded,
and apparently not uncommonly sought for (see Buxtorf, Synag. cap. vii. p. 138,
Basil, 1661), as adding to the former the efficacies of holy and prevailing prayer.
Rightly did the early Church see in this an argument for infant baptism. Com
pare Augustine, Serm. cxv. 4, Vol. v. p. 657 (ed. Migne).
3 That this young man was not a hypocrite, but one whom wealth and world-
liness held in a thraldom that kept him from Christ, is justly maintained by
Chrysostom (in Matt. Horn, lxiii.), who bases his opinion on Mark x. 21. The
apocryphal version of the incident, said to come from the Evang. secundum
Hebratos, is given by Origen in Matt. ( Vet. Interpr.) Tom. xv. 14. See Hofmann,
Leben Jesu, § 71, p. 306.

250 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
the very outward demeanor of the Lord a manifestation
of a dauntless resolution which awes and
J^rfeZZtm" amazes ' that shrinking and now foreboding
company. The Lord now heads His band
Ch. x. 33. r J
of followers, as St. Mark graphically men
tions, and leads the onward way. To the general com
pany of disciples, augmented as it now well might have
been by many a worshipper that the festival was bringing
up to Jerusalem, the Lord is silent; but to the chosen
Twelve 2 He now again for the third time speaks of the
future that awaited Him. Yet they could not
Luke**' <& or *nev woul(i no* understand. Nay, they
seem, as on a former occasion, almost to have
put a counter-interpretation on the words; for, strange as
indeed it appears, this we learn was the hour
" 'jac'„ *?° that the sons of Zebedee and their mother
Mark x. S5sq. preferred their ambitious request, and in fancy
were enthroning themselves on the right hand and the left
hand of their triumphant Master.3
1 The second reason assigned by Euthymius (on Mark x. 32) seems certainly
the true one : " They were amazed, either at what He was saying, or because of
His own accord He was going onward to His passion " (SioWi nvrofi6\et irpbs t&
vdStos). 2 It is distinctly told us by St. Matthew (ch. xx. 17) that this mournful com
munication was made privately ((car' ISlav) to the Apostles. Comp. Mark x.
32, Luke xviii. 31. The two other occasions on which the same sad future had
been announced to them was in the neighborhood of Cassarea Philippi, imme
diately after St. Peter's confession (Matt. xvi. 21 sq., Mark viii. 30 sq., Luke ix.
21 sq.), and not very long afterwards during the subsequent return to Caper
naum (Matt. xvii. 22 sq., Mark ix. 30 sq., Luke ix. 43 sq.). The reason for the
private manner in which the communication was made is perhaps rightly given
by Euthymius, — to avoid giving grounds of offence to the attendant multitudes.
3 It is worthy of notice that the request is made by one from whom, according
to our common estimate of his character, we should not have expected it, — St.
John, the disciple whom Jesus loved. The attempt of Olshausen to explain
away the request as a petition hereafter to enjoy the same privilege of nearness
to our Lord (Comment, on Gospels, Vol. iii. p. 121, Clark) must certainly be
rejected ; such a desire was doubtless present, but the request itself was plainly
one for irpoeSpia (Chrys.), u genuine characteristic of the glowing hearts of the
Sons of Thunder. See above, p. 229, note 1. According to St. Matthew (eh. xx.
20), the request was preferred by their mother, Salome. The explanation is
obvious : the mother was the actual speaker, the two apostles were the instiga
tors ; alo-xwiuevoi irpoBdWovrat r'hv TiKovtrav, Chrysost. in Matt. Horn. lxv.
Vol. vii. p. 645 (ed. Bened. 2).

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 251
Jericho is soon reached ; and there, as it would seem, at
the entrance into the city, one, or, as St. Mat- Arrival at Jericho.
thew specifies, two blind men x hail the Lord
with the same title that a few days afterwards was heard
from a thousand voices on the slopes of Oli
vet. They call unto the Son of David, whom ° ' xa\ '
J ' Mark x. 47.
as yet they saw not ; they call, and they are
healed. Begirt by the now increasing and glorifying mul
titude, the Lord enters the city. But praises soon change
to general murmurings when the just and
faithful Zacchseus is called down from the emx'
sycamore-tree to entertain Him on whose divine form he
would have rejoiced only to have gazed afar off,2 but whom
now he was to be so blest as to welcome under the shadow
of his roof. Still the heart of the people was
moved. Wild hopes and expectations still
pervade all hearts ; and it is to allay them that the Lord
now utters, both to the disciples and the
multitude, the solemn parable of the Pounds,
¦ — that parable which, as St. Luke tells us, was specially

l It is difficult to account for this seeming discrepancy, as there is not only a
difference between St. Matthew and the second and third Evangelists as to num
ber, but between St. Luke and the first and second as to time. Perhaps, as
seemed likely in the similar case of the Gadarene demoniacs (see above, p. 178,
note 2), one of the blind men, Bartimaras, was better known (Augustine), and
thus his cure more particularly specified. See Mark x. 44 sq. If we add to this
the further supposition that the one who is mentioned at our Lord's entry into
Jericho as having learnt from the crowd who it was that was coming into the
city (Luke xviii. 37), was not healed then, but in company with another sufferer,
when our Lord was leaving the city (Maldonatus, Bengel), we have perhaps
the most probable solution of the difficulty that has yet been proposed. On this
point and the miracle generally see Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 428 sq., and
compare Origen, in Matt. Tom. xvi. 9, who adopts an allegorical mode of recon
ciliation, Augustine, de Consens. Evang. n. 65, Vol. iii. p. 1167, Serm. lxxxviii.
Vol. v. p. 539 (ed. Migne), and Lange, Leben' Jesu, n. 6. 1, Part n. p. 1158.
2 The language of St. Luke (4(irrei ISelv Tbv'lr)o-ovv rls 4aitv, ch. xix. 3)
would seem te imply that Zacchseus was anxious to behold the person and out
ward form of our Lord, and distinguish it from that of the bystanders. That
this was not from curiosity, but from a far deeper feeling, — perhaps presenti
ment, — seems clear from what followed: eiSei* avrbv rots 6tp&d\uots Trjs av-
&paijroVrjToj, irpoeTBe yap avrbv rots otp&d\pu>ts, r?js &eoVr;Tos, Euthymius, in
loc. On the title apxtTe\a)vr)s, compare p. 35. note 1.

252 THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. Lect. VI.
designed- to check the hope that God's kingdom was
speedily to be revealed.1
In the same noticeable attitude, as is again specially
mentioned, at the head of His followers, the
Luke xix. 11. ;Lor(j goon iourneys onward towards Jeru-
John xii.1. ° * -tot
salem, and reaches Bethany six days2 before
his last Passover.
And here our present section, and our extended though,
alas, hasty survey of the concluding year of our Lord's
ministry, comes to its close.
I will delay you with no practical comments, — for the
time is far spent, — but I will conclude with the deep and

1 Apparently two reasons are given by St. Luke why our Lord uttered this
parable, — " because He was nigh to Jerusalem," and " because the kingdom of
God should immediately appear" (ch. xix. 11). The two reasons, however,
really only amount to one, our Lord's journey to Jerusalem being connected in
the mind of the populace (as was fully shown two or three days later) with the
establishment there of His future kingdom: " They deemed," says Euthymius,
" that for this cause He was now going up that He might reign therein." On
the parable itself, which is obviously very similar to, .but not on that account to
be regarded as identical with, the parable of the talents (Matt. xxv. 14), see
Greswell, Exposition of the Parables, Vol. iv. p. 418 sq., Trench, Notes on the
Parables, p. 234 sq.
2 There is some little difficulty as to the date of our Lord's arrival at Bethany.
It is definitely fixed by St. John as irpb e£ ripteputv rov irdcrxa (oh. xii. 1), and
thus, according te the ordinary meaning of the words and the usual mode of
reckoning, would seem to be Nisan 8, the Passover being Nisan 14. Now, as it
seems certain that our Lord suffered on a Friday, and as it is scarcely less cer
tain that, according to St. John (ch. xiii. 1, xviii. 28, xix. 4), the Passover was
eaten on that same day, it will follow that Nisan 8, or the day of our Lord's
arrival at Bethany, will coincide with the preceding Saturday, or with the Jew
ish Sabbath. Of this difficulty various solutions have been proposed, the most
elaborate of which is that of Greswell (Dissert, xxxvm. Vol. iii. p. 51 sq.),
according to which our Lord came from Jericho to a place a few miles from
Bethany, assumed to be the house of Zacchseus, on Friday eve, and on Saturday
eve, after sunset, went onward to Bethany. This appears so complicated, that it
is better either (a) to admit that our Lord arrived on Nisan 8, but to leave the
circumstances and time of the arrival unexplained (Liicke, Meyer, Alford), or
(b) to conceive that St. John, writing generally, does not here include the days
from which and to which the six days are reckoned, and that thus our Lord
arrived at Bethany on Friday, Nisan 7. Comp. Tischendorf, Syn. Ev. p. xliii.
It is worthy of consideration, however, whether (c) our Lord might not have
arrived on Friday eve just after the Sabbath commenced, so that the day of His
arrival was really, according to Jewish reckoning, Nisan 8. Discussions of this
question will be found in the various commentaries. Compare also Bynsaus, d&
Mm-te Christi, 1. 3. 12, Yol. i. p. 188 sq., Schneckenburger, Beitrdge, p. 14.

Lect. VI. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARD JERUSALEM. 253
earnest prayer that I may have awakened in some hearts
a fresh desire to ponder over for themselves Conclusion.
the connections of the blessed history of their
own and the world's redemption. The close study of it
may require all our highest powers, and tax all our freshest
energies; but believe me, brethren, the consolations of that
study no tongue of men or angels can fully tell. While
we are so engaged we do indeed feel the deep meaning
of what an apostle has called the "comfort" of the word
of God. Thouarh at times we may seem as
° . ' Horn. xv. 4.
yet in doubtfulness or perplexity, yet soon,
very soon, all becomes clear and comforting. Lights break
around our path ; assurance becomes more sure ; hopes
burn brighter; love waxes warmer; sorrows become joys,
and joys the reflections of the unending felicities of the
kingdom of Christ. Around us and about us we feel the
deepening influence of the Eternal Son. All inward
things, yea, too, all outward things, appear to us verily
transfigured and changed. We cast our eyes abroad on
earth ; 't is the earth that He trod, and earth seems bright
and blessed. We raise our eyes to the heavens, and we
know that He is there ; we gaze, and faith
. ° Isa.xxxiii.17.
rolls back those everlasting doors ; yea, we
seem to see the vision of beauty, and in our spirit we
behold our God. 22

LBCTUEB VII.
THE LAST PASSOVER.
BEHOLD, WE GO UP TO JERUSALEM, AND ALL THINGS THAT AKE WRITTEN
BY THE PROPHETS CONCERNING THE SON OP MAN SHALL BE ACCOM
PLISHED. — St. Luke xviii. 31.
We have now entered upon a portion of the inspired
narrative which, no less in its general and
jMroductorycom- outward features than in the subjects on
which it treats, is strikingly different from
any other portion that we have yet attempted to consider.
Hitherto in only a very few, and those scattered parts of
the sacred history, has the united testimony of the four
Evangelists been vouchsafed to us in reference to the same
facts.1 Sometimes one of the inspired writers has been
our principal guide, sometimes another. What one has left
unnoticed another has often been moved to record; but
seldom have all related to us the same events, or even
dwelt in equal proportions upon the same general divisions

l In the large portion of the Gospel history which we have now considered,
apparently not more than three or four cases can be found in which the same
speech, subject, or event is specified by all the four sacred writers. The first
instance, perhaps, is the declaration of the Baptist as to the relation in which he
stood to our Lord. With Matt. iii. 11 sq., Mark i. 7 sq., Luke iii. 16 sq., compare
John i. 26, but observe that the words which are approximately the same in the
four narratives were uttered on more than one occasion, and to different hearers.
The second instance is the narrative of our Lord's baptism, which, as related by
the Baptist (John i. 32), may be compared with the notices of the Synoptical
writers (Matt. iii. 16 sq., Mark i. 10 sq., Luke iii. 21 sq.). The third is the account
of the feeding of the five thousand, where John vi. 1 sq. is clearly parallel with
Matt. xiv. 13 sq., Mark vi. 32 sq., Luke ix. 10 sq. St. Peter's profession of faith
in our Lord may perhaps be considered a fourth case ; but it must be remem
bered that the occasions were different : the first profession (John vi. 68) being
made at Capernaum, the second (Matt. xvi. 16, Mark viii. 29, Luke ix. 20) in the
neighborhood of Cssarea Philippi. See above, Lecture v. p. 198, note 2.

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 255
of the Gospel history. Not unfrequently indeed have we
enjoyed the privilege of the combined testimony of two
of the sacred writers, and not much less frequently even
of the first three;1 but at present anything like a con
tinuously concurrent testimony, even in the case of the
Synoptical Gospels, has rarely presented itself except for
very limited periods of the time over which their records
extend. We may verify this by a brief retrospect. We may
remember, for instance, how in the earliest
portions of the Gospel history the appointed *£££?£.
witness seemed to be, preeminently though *™ °f the narra-
not exclusively, St. Luke, and how again in
the brief narrative of the early ministry in Judsea almost
our only guide was found to be St. John.2 It may be
remembered, further, that of portions of our Lord's minis
try in eastern Galilee we often had the blessing of three
records, but that in reference to the order of the events we
appeared to have reasons for relying more on the narrative
of the second and third Evangelists than on that of the
more grouped records of St. Matthew.3 Of the ministry
1 The exact numerical proportions in which the discourses, subjects, or events
specified by three of the Evangelists stand with respect te those related only by
two can hardly be satisfactorily stated, owing to the differences of opinion about
some of these coincidences, and still more to the obvious fact that the relations
between the three Synoptical gospels are continually changing. As a general
statement, however, it may be said that the combined testimony of the first three
Evangelists preponderates inthe narrative of the ministry in eastern Galilee, but
that in the narrative of the north-Galilasan ministry the instances are not many
where we have the testimony of more than two, principally St. Matthew. See
above, Lect. v. p. 192. The whole question of these correspondences is one of great
importance, as affecting our opinion of the origin and relations of the first three
Gospels, but far too long to be comprised in the limits of a single note. The
attention of the student may, however, be called to the fact, that exact verbal
coincidences are much more frequent in the recital of words spoken than in
merely narrative portions ; and, again, that the ratio of coincidence in narrative
to that in recital is strikingly different in the first three Evangelists, the ratio in
St. Matthew being as 1 to a little more than 2, in St. Mark as 1 to 4, and in St.
Luke as 1 to 10. See especially the good discussion in Norton, Evidences of the
Genuineness of the Gospels, Vol. i. p. 239 (ed. 2), where the consideration of these
numerical relations appears to lead to satisfactory results.
2 See above the important quotation from Eusebius, Lect. iv. p. 146, note 1.
8 See above, Lect. iv. p. 149 sq., where a statement will be found of "the four

256 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
in northern Galilee, we have seen that but little has been
recorded by the historian-Evangelist St. Luke ; but again,
that of our Lord's concluding ministry in Judaea and
Perasa we should have known almost nothing if he had
not been specially moved to record that striking series
of connected events and discourses1 which occupied our
attention in the concluding part of the foregoing Lecture.
Thus varied would seem to be the general aspect of
those parts of the inspired narrative to which
£%ZZ££ we have hitherto confined our meditations.
Now, however, we meet with a striking and
yet not unlooked-for change. If all the three solemn pre
dictions of our Lord's sufferings were thought to be of
"such moment that they have been specially recorded ' by
all the three Synoptical Evangelists,2 surely it would not
be too much to expect that the mournful record of the
verification of those prophecies should be given, not by
two only, or by three, but by all. The history of the suf
ferings whereby mankind was redeemed must be told by
no fewer in number than the holy four.3 The fulfilment
principal reasons for adopting the order of St. Mark and St. Luke rather than
that of St. Matthew. Compare also Lect. i. p. 35 sq.
1 It has been already implied, but may be more distinctly stated, that the great
peculiarity of the large portion of St. Luke's Gospel, extending from the end of
the 9th to the middle of the 19th chapter, is the close connection that appears
to exist between the incidents mentioned, or alluded to, and the discourses which
followed. It would seem almost as if the former were only noticed as serving to
introduce and give force to the weighty words which followed. Compare Luke
xi. 37 sq., xii. 1 sq., xiii. 1 sq., 23 sq., xiv. 1 sq., xv. 1 sq., al. Some careful com
ments on this portion of St. Luke's Gospel, though not always such as can be
fully accepted, will be found in Greswell, Dissert, xxxi. Vol. ii. p. 517 sq.
2 The prediction uttered near Csesarea Philippi is specified in Matt. xvi. 21 sq.,
Mark viii. 30 sq., and Luke ix. 21 sq. ; the prediction near or on the way to
Capernaum, in Matt. xvii. 22 sq., Mark ix. 31 sq., Luke ix. 44; the prediction in
Persea on the way to Jericho, in Matt. xx. 17 sq., Mark x. 32 sq., Luke xviii.
31 sq.
3 It may be notioed as a matter of curiosity, that the Apocryphal Gospels,
which we have long lost sight of, now again come before us. With the excep
tion of an account of our Lord's appearance in the temple when twelve years
old (Evang. Inf. Arab. cap. 50 sq., Evang. Thom. cap. 19), a few scattered notices
of our Lord's baptism (see Hofmann, Leben Jesu, § 69, p. 299), and the narrative
of the rich young man (see above, p. 249, note 8), we meet with no attempts to
add anything to the Gospel history since the '"eriod of the infancy. Now, how-

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 257
of type and shadow, of the hopes of patriarchs, of the
expectations of prophets, yea, and of the dim longings of
a whole lost and sinful world, must be declared by the
whole Evangelistic company; the four streams that go
forth to water the earth1 must here meet in a common
channel; the four winds of the Spirit of Life2 must here
be united and one.
Por such a dispensation of wisdom and grace, ere we
presume to dwell upon it, let us offer up our adoring
thanks. Let us bless God for this fourfold heritage ; let us
praise the Eternal Spirit that thus moved the hearts and
guided the pens of these appointed witnesses, and then
with all lowliness and reverence address ourselves to the
momentous task of attempting so far to combine their holy
narratives as to bring before our minds, in all its fulness
and completeness, the record of the six concluding days
of the Lord's earthly ministry, — the six days in which a
world was re-created, and the last fearful efforts of the
rulers of its darkness met, quelled, and tri-
, -, r. Eph. vi. 12.
umphed over forevermore.
The last incident, it will be remembered, to which we
alluded in the preceding Lecture, was the
short stay of our Lord at Jericho, and the J££3*£
subsequent journey to Bethany. He had m«; „ . „
1 ° •* J Comp. John xi. 7.
now again passed along the wild and unsafe
road3 that leads from the plain of Jericho to the uplands of
ever, in the Evangelium Nicodemi we find the apocryphal narrative resumed,
and are furnished with accounts (not wholly undeserving of notice) of our Lord's
trial, and of the events which followed. See Tischendorf, Evang. Apocr. p. 203
sq., and compare Hofmann, Leben Jesu, § 78 sq.
1 Jerome, Prof, in Matt. cap. 4, Vol. vii. p. 18 (ed. Migne).
2 This second simile is a modification of one which occurs in a curious passage
in Irena?us, which, though not very convincing, may bear citation as incidentally
showing how completely at that early age the four, and only the four, Gos
pels were accepted throughout the Church. " Since there are four regions of the
world," says this ancient writer, " in which we live, and four cardinal winds,
and the Church has become spread over the whole earth, and the Gospel is the
pillar and support of the Church, and the breath of life, it is meet that it should
have four pillars breathing on all sides incorruption, and refreshing mankind."
Adv. Hcer. III. 11., p. 221 (ed. Grabe).
3 This road, though connecting two places of great importance, seems almost
22*

258 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
Judaaa, and was now, possibly late on the Friday evening,1
in the abode of that highly-favored household, which, as
the fourth Evangelist tells us, our Lord vouchsafed to
regard with feelings of affection and love.
johnxi.5. There, in the retirement of that mountain-
John xii. 9. hamlet of Bethany,2 — a retirement soon to
be broken in upon, — the Redeemer of the world may
with reason be supposed to have spent His last earthly
Sabbath. There, too, either in their own house, or, as seems
more probable, in the house of one who probably owed to
our Lord his return to the society of his fellow-men,3 did
that loving household " make a supper" for
their divine Guest. Joyfully and thankfully
did each one of that loving family instinctively do that
which might seem most to tend to the honor and glorifica
tion of Him whom one of them had declared to be, and
always to have been infested by robbers (Jerome on Jerem. iii. 2), and to have
been deemed notoriously dangerous to the traveller. See Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr.
in Luc. x. 30. It was the scene of the striking parable of the Good Samaritan,
and was now being traversed, apparently for the second time (the first being on
the occasion of the sickness and death of Lazarus), by Him whom several writers
of the early Church (Origen, Ambrose, Augustine, al.) regarded as shadowed
forth by the merciful stranger of His own parable. For an account of the road,
see Thomson, The Land and The Book, Vol. ii. p. 440 sq. ; and for a very power
ful sketch of a wild portion of it, with the plain of Jericho below, see Roberts,
Holy Land, Vol. ii. Plate 15.
1 See above, p. 252, note 2.
2 The village of Bethany (according to Lightfoot, ""l^rj rfq "house of dates")
lies on the eastern slope of Olivet, in a shallow and partially wooded valley, and
in a direction about E. S. E. from Jerusalem, and at a distance of about fifteen
furlongs (John xi. 18), or between half and three quarters of an hour in time. It
is now called " el-'Aziriyeh," from the tomb of Lazarus, which is still pretended
to be shown there, and is described by travellers as a poor and somewhat forlorn
hamlet of about twenty houses. See Robinson, Palestine, Vol. i. p. 432 (ed. 2),
Thomson, The Land and the Book, Vol. ii. p. 599, Stanley, Palestine, p. 188; and
for views of it, Roberts, Holy Land, Vol. ii. Plate 13, Robertson and Beato,
Views of Jerusalem, No. 30, and Frith, Egypt and Palestine, Part xxiv. 3.
sit has been conjectured, and perhaps rightly, that Simon "the leper," at
whose house the supper would seem to have been prepared (Matt. xxvi. 6, Mark
xiv. 3), had formerly suffered under this frightful disease, and had been healed
by our Lord. Compare Meyer on Matt. xxvi. 6. The connection in which he
stood to Lazarus and his sisters is wholly unknown to us ; according to Theophy
lact he was the father (comp. Ewald, Gesch. Christus', p. 357) ; according to some
modern writers, the husband of Martha (Greswell, Dissert. Vol. ii. p. 554), or, as
seems perhaps slightly more probable, a friend of the family.

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 259
whom they all knew to be, the Son of God1 that was to
come into the world. So Martha serves;
Lazarus, it is specially noticed, takes his place ch 2
at the table, the visible, living proof of the
omnipotence of his Lord ; Mary performs the tender office
of a mournfully foreseeing love, that thought
nought too pure or too costly for its God, —
that tender office which, though grudgingly rebuked by
Judas, and, alas ! others than Judas, who
' ' 7 Matt. xxvi. 8.
could not appreciate the depths of such a Markxw.4.
. t . ,., Matt. xxvi. 18.
devotion, nevertheless received a praise which
it has been declared shall evermore hold its place on the
pages of the Book of Life.2
But that Sabbath soon passed away. Ere night came
on, numbers, even of those who were sel
dom favorably disposed to our Lord, now3 en«n, l,,TjSust
came to see both Him and the living monu-
n tx* • r. , ¦ m, John xii. 9.
ment ot His merciful omnipotence. ine
morrow probably brought more of these half-
curious, half-awed, yet, as it would now seem in a great
1 On the title " Son of God " see above, Lect. v. p. 196, note 1, and also Lect.
vr. p. 239, note 1. It can scarcely be doubted that on the occasion referred to
(John xi. 27) Martha had a general if not a theologically precise belief in our
Lord's divinity. Now, that belief would naturally have become still clearer and
fuller, and probably evinced itself in all these acts of duteous and loving service.
2 For the arguments by which it would appear almost certain that the present
anointing is not identical with that in the house of Simon the Pharisee (Luke
vii. 36), see above, p. 173, note 2, and compare Ebrard, Kritik der Evang. Gesch.
S 96, p. 473. The incident is related by St. Matthew and St. Mark after the
triumphal entry, — not as having happened then, but as standing in suitable
connection with the mention of the betrayal of Judas, the workings of whose
evil heart, as we know from St. John, were fully displayed on the occasion of
this supper. See Wieseler, Synops. p. 391 sq.
3 It seems reasonable to suppose that at a time of such large popular gather
ings the strict observance of the Sabbath-day's journey might in some measure
have been relaxed. Even, however, without this assumption, we may suppose
these eager visitants to have arrived at Bethany soon after the Sabbath was
over, having performed the permitted part of the distance (five or 6ix stades)
before the Sabbath legally ended, and the rest afterwards. The news that our
Lord was there could easily have been spread by those who journeyed with Him
-from Jericho on the Friday, and who themselves went on direct to Jerusalem.
On the length of a Sabbath-day's journey, see Winer, BWB., Art. "Sabbath-
sweg," Vol. ii. p. 351, Greswell, Dissert, xxxviii. Vol. iii. p. 70.

tern (Sunday).ihn xii. 9.
Ver. U.

260 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
measure, believing visitants. The deep heart of the peo
ple was stirred, and the time was fully come when ancient
prophecy was to receive its fulfilment, and
Zech. ix.2. r r J
the daughter of Zion was to welcome her
King.1 Tea, and in kingly state shall He come. Begirt
not only by the smaller band of His own disciples, but
by the great and now hourly increasing multitude, our
Lord leaves the little wooded vale that had ministered
to Him its Sabbath-day of seclusion and repose, and
directs His way onward to Jerusalem. As yet, however,
in but humble guise, and as a pilgrim among pilgrims,
He traverses the rough mountain-track which the modern
traveller can even now somewhat hopefully identify;3
every step bringing Him nearer to the ridge of Olivet, and
to that hamlet or district of Bethphage, the exact site of
which it is so hard to fix, but which was separated perhaps
only by some narrow valley from the road along which the
procession was now wending its way.3 But the Son of
1 This prophecy, we are told distinctly by St. John (ch. xii. 16), was not under
stood by the disciples as now being fulfilled till after our Lord had been glorified.
The illumination of the Holy Ghost then enabled them both te call to mind the
words of this particular prophecy (observe the thrice-repeated Tavra) and to
recognize the occasion on which it was thus signally fulfilled. See Meyer on
John xii. 16.
2 See Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 189 sq., where this triumphal entry is
extremely well described and illustrated. In deference to the opinion and argu
ments of this observant traveller, who has himself seen and considered the
locality in reference to the very event we are now considering, it has been
assumed in the text that our Lord proceeded, not by the traditional route over
the summit of Olivet, but by the most southern of the three routes from Bethany
to Jerusalem. We must not, however, forget that the present appearance of
the city from Olivet and the appearance of the city in the time of our Lord,
when the eastern wall certainly ran much within the present line of wall
(see the plans by Ferguson in Smith, Diet, of Bible, Vol. i. pp. 1028, 1032), must
certainly have been different, and that the statements of the modern traveller
must always be subjected to this correction. Views of the city from Olivet are
very numerous. See, however, especially, Williams, Holy City, Vol. i. Frontis
piece, Roberts, Holy Land, Vol. i. Plate 4, 16, Frith, Egypt and Palestine, Part
xviii. 1, 2, and for a view of the roads down the side of Olivet, Williams, Vol.
i. p. 318, and compare Stanley, Palestine, p. 156.
3 The site of this village or district has not yet been satisfactorily determined.
See Robinson, Palestine, Vol. i. p. 433, but compare also Van de Velde, Memoir
to Map, p. 297. The most reasonable view seems to be that Bethphage (Sa.B fro,
" house of figs") was a village or hamlet not far from Bethany, but nearer to

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 261
David must not solemnly enter the city of David as a
scarcely distinguishable wayfarer amid a mixed and way
faring throng. Prophecy must have its full and exact ful
filment; the King must approach the city of the King with
some meek symbols of kingly majesty. With haste, it
would seem, two disciples are despatched to the village
over against them, to bring to Him " who
had need of it" the colt "whereon yet never zukexix.30.
man sat ; " with haste the zealous followers J?r- ff-
7 Ver. 39.
cast upon it their garments, and, all uncon
scious of the significant nature of their act, place thereon
their Master, the coming King. Strange it would have
been if feelings such as now were eagerly stirring in every
heart had not found vent in words. Strange indeed if,
with the Hill of Zion now breaking upon their view,1 the
long prophetic past had not seemed to mingle with the
present, and evoke those shouts of mysterious
1 -. ¦ , ¦ 1 r- , . . Ver. sr.
welcome and praise which, nrst beginning
with the disciples and those immediately round our Lord,2
soon were heard from every mouth of that glorifying mul
titude. And not from them alone. Numberless others
Jerusalem (hence the order in Mark xi. 1 ; compare Luke xix. 29), and situated
at no great distance from one of the roads connecting these two places. Com
pare Matt. xxi. 2, rfyv Kt^pcnv t)jv airevavrt vpttjov 5 Mark xi. 2, rty koj/mov t)jv
Karevavri vp.Sav ; Luke xix. 30, rfv Karevavri KOjfnjv, — in all which places Beth
phage appears to be referred to. ¦ The apparently less probable supposition that
it was a district rather than a village, has been advocated by Lightfoot, Cent.
Chorogr. in Matt. cap. 37, Vol. ii. p. 198 (Roterod. 1686). Comp. also Williams,
Holy City, Vol. ii. p. 442 sqi
1 See Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 190, where it is stated that, on reaching
the ridge of the southern slope of Olivet, by the road above alluded to, the trav
eller obtains a view of Mount Zion and that portion of Jerusalem which was
more especially connected with the memory of David, as the site of his palace.
The temple and the more northern parts would not be seen at present, being hid
from view by an intervening slope on the right.
2 This would seem to be the correct reconciliation of Luke xix. 37 with Matt.
xxi. 9 and Mark xi. 9. The disciples that were round our Lord first raise the
jubilant shouts, the multitudes both before and behind (Matt. I. c.) take them
up immediately afterwards. St. John specifies some of the acclamations, but
more particularly gives us the subject of the testimony which the multitude pub
licly bare to our Lord, viz., that He had raised Lazarus from the dead (ch. xii.
17), and thus incidentally supplies the reason why they so readily joined in these
shouts of triumph. Compare Ewald, Gesch. Cliristus', p. 384.

262 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. Vn.
there were fast streaming up Olivet, a palm-branch in every
hand, to greet the Raiser of Lazarus and the
Conqueror of Death. And now all join. One
common feeling of holy enthusiasm now pervades that
mighty multitude, and displays itself in befitting acts.
Garments are torn off and cast down J before
Matt. xxi.8. t^e jj0jv Qne. green boughs bestrew the
way ; Zion's King rides onward in meek maj
esty, a thousand voices' before and a thousand voices
behind rising up to heaven with hosannas and with
mingled words of magnifying acclamation, some of which
once had been sung to the Psalmist's harp,
Ps. cxmn. 26. an(j some heard even from angelic tongues.
Luke ii. 14. ° °
.... But the hour of triumph was the hour
of deepest and most touching compassion. If, as we have
ventured to believe, the suddenly opening view of Zion
may have caused the excited feelings of that thronging
multitude to pour themselves forth in words of exalted and
triumphant praise, full surely we know from the inspired
narrative that, on our Redeemer's nearer ap-
Luke xix. 41. , . . . , ,
proach to the city, as it rose up, perhaps sud
denly,2 in all its extent and magnificence before Him who
1 Most of the recent expositors of this passage have appropriately referred to
the curious incident, mentioned by Dr. Robinson (Palestine, Vol. i. p. 473, ed. 2),
of the people of Bethlehem casting their garments on the way before the horses
of the English consul of Damascus when supplicating his assistance and inter
cession. The same writer briefly illustrates, by modern usage, the act of the
disciples casting their cloaks (why does Dr. Thomson, in Smith's Diet, of Bible,
Vol. i. p. 1064, go out of his way to specify them as " ragged "?) upon the foal to
serve as a saddle. — Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 219. Such is the enduring nature of
pastern habits.
2 We learn from Dr. Stanley (Sinai and Palestine, p. 191) that at a particular
point of the southern road the traveller reaches a ledge of smooth rock from
which the whole city, rising up, as it were, " out of a deep abyss," is suddenly
beheld in all its extent. Compare the view in Williams, Holy City, Vol. i., Front
ispiece, which seems to illustrate this description. It seems too much to venture,
with Dr. Stanley, positively to identify this spot with that where the Saviour
paused and wepf, especially as it is by no means certain (see above, p. 260, note
2) that this was the route actually taken ; still we may perhaps permit ourselves
to believe that our Saviour's affecting address was synchronous with and per
haps suggested by the sudden opening out of some widely extended view of the
magnificent city. The view from the summit of Olivet is noticed by Dr. Robin-

Lect. VLT. THE LAST PASSOVER. 263
even now beheld the trenches cast about it, and Roman
legions mustering round its fated walls, tears Ver. 43.
fell from those divine eyes ; yea, the Saviour
of the world wept over the city wherein He had come to
suffer and to die. . . . The lengthening procession again
moves onward, slowly descending into the deep valley of
the Cedron, and slowly winding up the opposite slope, until
at length, by one of the eastern gates, it passes into one
of the now crowded1 thoroughfares of the Holy City.
Such was the Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem ; such
the most striking event, considered with ref-
t _ Reflections on the
erence to the nation, on which we have as striking credaauy
yet meditated. It was no less than a public
recognition of Jesus of Nazareth as the long looked-for
Messiah, the long and passionately expected theocratic
King. Though, as the sequel shows, only transitory and
evanescent, it was still a recognition, plain, distinct, and
historical, and exactly of such a nature as tends to increase
son, and described as " not particularly interesting,'.' and as embracing little
more than a " dull, mixed mass of roofs and domes." — Palestine, Vol. i. p. 236
(ed. 2).
l It is now hardly possible to form a just conception of the appearance which
Jerusalem and its vicinity must have presented at the season of the Passover.
All the open ground near the city, and perhaps the sides of the very hill down
which our Lord had recently passed, were now, probably, being covered with
the tents and temporarily erected structures of the gathering multitudes, who
even thus early would have most likely found every available abode in the city
completely full. We are not left without some data of the actual amount of the
gathered numbers, as we have a calculation of Josephus, based upon the num
ber of lambs sacrificed (256,500), according to which it would appear that even at
the very low estimate of ten persons to each lamb, the number of people assem
bled must have been little short of two millions seven hundred thousand, with
out taking into consideration those that were present but incapacitated by legal
impurities from being partakers in the sacrifice. See Bell. Jud. vi. 9. 3, and
compare Bell. Jud. n. 14. 3, where the number is with more probability set down
at about three millions. There would thus have been present not much short of
half of the probable population of Judsa and Galilee. See Greswell, Dissert.
xxiii. Append. Vol. iv. p. 494. These observations are not without importance,
considered theologically. They show that our Lord's rejection and death is not
merely to be laid to the malevolence of the party of the Sanhedrin, and to the
wild clamors of a city mob, but may justly be considered, though done in partial
ignorance (Acts iii. 17), the act of the nation. When Pilate made his proposal, it
was to the multitude (Mark xv. 9), and that multitude we know was unanimous
(John xviii. 40).

264 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
in the highest degree our convictions of the living truth
of the inspired narrative. Let us pause a moment only to
observe how marvellously it sets forth no less the sacred
dignity than the holy decorum of the accepted homage.
Let us only observe with wonder and reverence how not a
single prerogative of the Messiah was waived or foregone,
and how not even the most bitter opponent of the truth1
can dare, with any show of reason or justice, to assert that
the faintest appeal was here made to the prejudices or
passions of the multitude. Let us mark, on the one hand,
how, ere the multitude begin to greet their Lord with the
words of a Messianic psalm,2 He Himself vouchsafes them
a Messianic sign, and how, when the Pharisees urge our
Lord to silence the commencing acclama-
Luke xix. 39. .
tions, He refuses with an answer at once
decided and sublime. Let us mark again, on the other
hand, how the object of all that jubilant reverence shows
in the plainest way the spiritual nature of His triumph
and of His kingdom, when on His nearer approach He
pauses and weeps over the city to which He was advanc
ing with such kingly majesty. Was this the way to appeal
to the political passions of the multitude ? WaS this what
worldly prudence would have suggested as the most hope
ful mode of assuming the attributes of such a Messiah
1 The various objections in detail which modern scepticism has endeavored to
bring against the inspired narrative do not appear in any way to deserve our
attention, or require any further confutation than they have already received.
For notices of them, and short but sufficient answers, see Ebrard, Kritik der
Evang. Gesch. § 97, p. 476. The general objection, however, or rather false
representation, alluded to, and briefly discussed in the text, deserves a passing
notice and exposure. It was advanced, towards the close of the last century, by
the compiler of the notorious Wolfenbuttel Fragments, and has often been
repeated in later sceptical writings. When we read the inspired accounts, and
observe how they incidentally disclose everything that was moBt opposed to
political demonstration, it may seem doubtful whether the impiety of such a
theory is not even exceeded by its improbability and its total want of all histor
ical credibility.
2 The comment of Hilary is not without point : " Laudationis verba redemp-
tionis in eo exprimunt potestatem, nam Osanna Hebraico sermone significa-
tur redemptio [domus David]."— Comment, in Matt. Canon xxi. p. 567 (Paris
1631).

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 265
as was then looked for by popular enthusiasm?1 No, it
cannot be. Here at least let scepticism fairly own that
it is at fault — plainly, palpably at fault. If it affects to
value truth, let it own that here at least there is a sober
reality wholly irreconcilable with assumptions of mistaken
enthusiasm or political adventure, here a" life and a truth
with which the subtlest combinations of thought could
never have animated a mythical narrative.
But let us pass onward. No sooner had our Lord entered
the city than all was amazed inquiry and
commotion. The recognition, as far as we Z^HT"
can infer from the sacred narrative, would
seem to have been speedy and general;2 not indeed in
those exalted strains which had just been heard on Olivet,
yet still in a manner which probably served to show how
true was the bitter admission of the Pharisees one to an
other, that the whole " world had gone after
Him," and that all their efforts were at present
of no avail. Tet by no outward acts, if we adopt what
seems on the whole the most probable connection of the
sacred narrative,3 did our Lord as yet respond to those

1 It, perhaps, cannot be doubted that at the present time numbers trusted that
they beheld in our Lord the mighty Deliverer and Restorer whose advent was
so earnestly and so eagerly looked for. See Luke xxiv'. 21, and compare Acts
i. 6. Still it seems by no means improbable that with all this there was also such a
growing feeling that the expected kingdom was to be at least as much of a spir
itual as of a temporal nature (compare Luke xix. 11), that even the most enthu
siastic did not perhaps generally associate with the Lord's present triumphal
entry many well-defined expectations of purely political results and successes.
Comp. Ewald, Gesch. Christus', p. 381. The nature of their acclamations seems
confirmatory of this view.
2 We may observe the characteristic way in which the inquiry is made and the
answer returned. The people in the city at present share but little in the enthu
siasm of the entering multitudes ; their only question is, Tts 4ertv ovros (Matt.
xxi. 10). The answer is given by the fix*-01) mainly, as it would seem, though
probably not exclusively those who were now accompanying our Lord, and not
perhaps without a tinge of provincial and local pride : OZt6s 4trriv o irpotp-frrns
'lno-ovs [Bee 'Ino-ovs d irpoqyfiTns] & ditb NafcpeS ttjs Ta\t\alas. See Meyer
in loc. p. 389 (ed. 4).
8 It seems slightly doubtful whether, with Robinson, we are to place the
cleansing of the temple on the same day as our Lord's triumphal entry, or
whether, with Lightfoot, Wieseler. &\., we are to refer it to the following day.
23

266 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VIL
excited feelings. All we read is that He entered the
temple, and in one comprehending gaze1 be-
held all things, — all the mercenary desecra
tion to which the needs of the festal season had given
fresh impulse,2 and which on the morrow must solemnly
be purged away. When all was surveyed,
evening was now come, and with the small
company of the Twelve our Lord returned to the quiet of
the upland village which He had left with such a mighty
multitude but a few hours before.
Early on the following morning, as we learn from a
comparison of the narratives of St. Matthew
The curst™ of an(j gt> Mark, our Lord set forth from Beth-
the barren fig-tree '
(Monday). any, with the intention, we may humbly
ai. xxiAS. presume, of reaching the temple before any
great influx of worshippers could have been
found in its courts. The inspection of the preceding
day had shown only too clearly that the
sanctity of His Father's house must again
he vindicated, and that the unholy and usurious3 traffic

The former view is most in accordance with the connection of St. Matthew's
narrative, and is partially supported by the notice of the children crying in the
temple, which might seem but a continuation of what had happened on the way.
Still, the very, distinct note of time (t?j 4iravptov, eh. xi. 12) supplied by St.
Mark, coupled with his precise notice of the lateness of the hour when our Lord
finished His survey the preceding evening (ch. xi. 11), leads us here to adopt the
generally safe rule, in cases of disputed order, of giving the preference to the
narrative of that Evangelist who has been moved to supply a special rather than
a merely general note of the time when any event occurred. The hypothesis
that the cleansing of the temple commenced on the afternoon of the Sunday,
and was continued on the following day, is noticed, but rightly rejected, by
Greswell, Dissert, xxxix. Vol. iii. p. 99 sq.
1 On the use of this peculiar term by St. Mark, see Da Costa, Four Witnesses,
p. 122, and compare Lect. I. p. 39, note 1.
2 See Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Matt. xxi. 12, who mentions that the place
where this traffic was carried on was called m^rt (" Tabernas "), and was in the
spacious court of the Gentiles. Compare Descr. Tempi, cap. ix. Vol. i. p. 665.
3 See Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Matt. xxi. 12, where there are some valuable
Rabbinical citations illustrative of the KoWvfiurTal and their practices. The
following seems to show that the agio exacted in changing common money into
sacred, or the shekel into two half-shekels, was great: " Quanti valoris est istud
lucrum? Tunc temporis cum denarios persolverent pro Hemisiclo, Kolbon [vel,

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 267
which was now being carried on within its walls must
again1 be purged out of the hallowed precincts. On the
way, He, who was truly flesh of our flesh and bone of our
bone, felt the weakness of the nature He vouchsafed to
assume. He hungered, we are told by the Maa ^ lft
first two Evangelists, and turned to a way- Markxi.vL
side fig-tree to see if haply there was the *>"¦**»
fruit thereon of which the early show of leaves, though not
the season of the year,2 gave such ostentatious promise.

lucrosus reditns nummulario pensus] fuit dimidium Mea3, hoc est pars duodecima
denarii: et nunquam minus;,' — Talm. " Shekalim," cap. 3. For a description
of the sacred shekel, compare Friedlieb, Arch'dol, § 15, p. 37,
1 The purging of the temple, mentioned by St. John {ch. ii. 13 sq.), is rightly
regarded by Chrysostom, most of the older, and nearly all the best recent expos
itors, as different from the present. It took place at the Passover, a. tj. c. 781, or
two years before the present time. See above, Lect. hi. p, 122. The vindication
. of the sanctity and honor of His Father's house was thus one of our lord's ear
liest as well as one of His latest public acts. On the difficulties which some
interpreters have felt in the performance of this authoritative act by our Lord,
especially on the first occasion, see above, p. 122, note 3.
2 Much difficulty has been felt at the partially parenthetical clause, Mark xi. 13,
6 yap Katpbs ovk %v ffvKcov (Tisch.), or ov yap %v icaipbs o-titctov (Jiec). From
this, it has been urged, we are to conclude that our Lord could not have expected
to find figs on the tree, and consequently that the curse pronounced on it is less
easy to be accounted for. A close attention to the exact words of the original,
combined with the notices of modern travellers, seems completely to remove all
difficulty. St. Mark tells us distinctly that our Lord saw a fig-tree ixovaav
(pvKXa (ver. 13), *. e., affording the usual though in the present case extremely
early evidence that fruit was certainly to be looked for, the latter regularly pre
ceding the leaves. See Thomson, TJie Land and the Book, Vol. i. p. 538, from
whom we learn that in a sheltered spot figs of an early kind may occasionally be
found ripe as soon as the beginning of April. Compare also Winer, BWB. Art.
" Feigenbaum," Vol. i. p. 367, Greswell, ZHssert. xxxix. Vol. iii. p. 91. Our Lord
approaches the tree to see ei &pa, if, as was reasonable to expect under such cir
cumstances (Klotz, Devar. p. 178 sq.), fruit was to be found. He finds nothing
except leaves, — leaves, not fruit; whereas, if it had been later, and the regular
season, He would have found fruit and not leaves, and would not have been
attracted by tb.e unseasonable appearance of the tree. See Meyer, Komment. vfo.
Mark. p. 134, whose general explanation of the passage is reasonable and satis
factory- The ordinary supposition that these were leaves of the preceding year,
and that what our Lord expected was fruit of the same year (see Lightfoot, Hor.
Hebr. in Matt. xxi. 19), is by no means probable, as the connection between the
presence of leaves and absence of fruit is thus wholly lost, tha curse not
accounted for {the tree might have once had figs which others had now plucked
off), and, lastly, the force of the clause ov yap k. t. A. either explained away
("Non stricte et solum rationem reddit, cur ficus non invenerit; sed rationem
reddit totius actionis, cur scilicet in monte isto, ficubus abundanti, unam tantum

268 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. Vn.
Hapless ,tree ! emblem of a still more hapless nation. The
dews of heaven had fallen upon it, the sunlight had fos
tered it, the sheltering hill-side had protected it ; all sea
sonable influences had ministered to it, and, even as it had
been with the mercies of Jehovah to His chosen people,
all had been utterly in vain. Nay, worse than in vain ; the
issue was a barrenness that told not merely of frustrated
but of perverted influences ; gifts from the God of nature
received only to issue forth in unprofitable and deceptive
produce ; not in the fruit of His appointment, but in
pretentious and unseasonable leaves. Why, then, are we
to pause for reasons, or to seek about for any further expla
nation of what is at once so suggestive and so intelligible ?
Why marvel we that, like the watered earth, "that bringeth
not forth herbs meet for the use of man," but
Heb. vi. 7. beareth only thorns and briers, that emblem
atic tree was now "nigh unto cursing," and that its end
was to be burned?1
It was probably still early when our Lord reached the
temple. Its present desecration might pos-
The cleansing or".,,., , ,. ,
the temple and sibly not have been so great in every respect
p°JZm%tnZ7 as it had been two years before. Still it is
clear that nearly every evil practice had been
resumed. Buyers and sellers were there, usurious money
changers were there ; all was well-nigh as of old. Meet

viderit, cui folia talia," — Lightfoot) or completely lost. Explanations such as
those of Lange (Leben Jesu, Part n. p. 321), Sepp (Leben Christi, Vol. iii. p. 219),
and others, according to which Kaipbs is amplified to mean " favorable season,"
or " favorable locality," appear wholly untenable.
1 The above comments seem fully sufficient to meet the open or tacit objections
against this " destructive act, and that on a tree by the wayside, the common
property " (Milman, Hist, of Christianity, ch. vn. Vol. i. p. 309). Those who
advance such objections would do well to remember the sensible remarks of
Chrysostom: " Whenever any such act takes place, either in respect of places,
plants, or things without reason, be not over-precise in thy comments, and do
not say, ' How then with justice was the fig-tree made to wither away ?' ... for it
is the extreme of folly to make such remarks. Look rather at the miracle, and
admire and glorify Him who wrought it." — iii Matt. Horn, lxvii. Vol. vii. p.
746. On the miracle generally, see the good comments of Hall, Contempt, iv. 26,
and Trench, Notes o» the Miracles, p. 435.

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 269
then was it that by authoritative acts no less than in
inspired words it should be proclaimed in
the face of all men that God's house was not j^'tifiL
for thievish gains,1 but for worship ; not for
Jewish buying and selling, but for the prayers of all the
scattered children of God.2 Meet was it that, as at the
first Passover of our Lord's ministry, so at His last, the
majesty of the eternal Father should be thus openly glori
fied by the acts of His eternal Son. And not by these
only. Deeds of mercy followed deeds of necessity. The
blind came to Him and received their sight ;
1 Matt- xxL "¦
the lame walked, yea, even before the un
believing eyes of the very chief priests and scribes who, as
we learn from St. Mark, had heard of- the Ch. 33.18.
Lord s presence m the temple, and were now
seeking to find an opportunity of destroying Him8 whom
now, more than ever, they were regarding with mingled
hatred and apprehension. At present it was in vain. The
children round them glorifying the Son of
David, the attentive and awe-stricken mul- MarkxTv.vi.
titude hanging on the words and deeds of
Him whom they had welcomed yesterday with cries that
l See above, p. 266, note 3.
2 It is worthy of notice that the words irSiri toIs i&veaiv, which duly express
t he spirit of the prophecy referred to, are only found in St. Mark (ch. xi. 17).
The addition would not seem due to any greater care in St. Mark's mode of cita
tion (De Wette), but as suggested by the general character of bis Gospel and its
more general destination for Gentile readers.
3 It is perhaps scarcely safe to make definite historical deductions from finer
shades of grammatical distinction which may not have been fully recognized by
the writers,* still the student's attention may be called to Mark xi. 18, e^Toui/
\ol apxtepei* KcA ol ypaupiaTeis] irws airrbv airo\4owu>o'iv, where the tense
adopted, emoKetroiatv (Tisch., Lachm., with the four leading MSS.), or airoKe-
aovatv (Bee. with later MSS.), will modify the view taken of the conduct of the
members of the Sanhedrin. If we adopt the subjunctive, the meaning will sim
ply be " how they should kill Him," how they should carry out the design they
were now entertaining; if the future, — which, however, critically considered,
seems less probable, — the meaning will be, " how they shall kill Him," how they
shall accomplish a design already definitely formed and agreed upon, and now
considered only in reference to the " modus operandi." On this distinction, 6eo
Winer, Gr. J 41. a, p. 266 (ed. 6), and compare Stalbaum on Plato, Sympos. p.
225. 23*

270 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VLT.
their children were now reiterating, all clearly told the
party of the Sanhedrin that their hour — the hour of the
powers of darkness — had not yet come.
One effort they make; reproachfully they
ask Him if He hears, if He accepts these cries of hom
age, plainly implying what the Pharisees had
Matt.xxi.is. openly demanded on the Mount of Olives
Luke xix. 39. f J
the day before, that such demonstrations
should be silenced.1 But neither then nor now is it meet
that the jubilant accents, whether of loving or of innocent
lips, should be hushed and checked. Nay, prophecy must
have its fulfilment. With the pertinent words
Ps viii 2. of a Psalm, of which the deeper meaning and
application was now fully disclosed, our Lord leaves the
temple and city and returns again to Bethany.
On the morrow, and, as St. Mark tells us, early in the
Answers to the day, our Lord and His disciples take their
tkputationfromthe t0 Jerusalem. Much there awaited
Sanhedrin (Tues- J
day)- them. The clay preceding had been marked
ch. xi.20. Dy manifestations of divine power, as shown
forth in deeds and wondrous works ; the present day was
to be the witness of divine wisdom, as shown forth in
words and discourses. It was a day that our Lord fore-
1 The present feelings of these evil men are very distinctly put before us by the
comment of St. Mark, 4$oBovvto yap avriv, ch. xi. 18. Formerly it was the
hostility of a hypocrisy which saw its real principles of action exposed, and of
a party spirit which deemed its prerogatives interfered with or disregarded.
Now there is a positive apprehension, founded, probably, on the recent recep
tion of our Lord by the populace, that their own power will be soon wholly set
aside, and that the prophet of Nazareth will become the theocratic leader of the
nation. Even the heathen Pilate recognized the true motive of their actions;
fySei yap ori oto (p 3 6 v ov irapeSoiKav avrov. Matt, xxvii. 18. The present
behavior of the people, as Cyril of Alexandria has well observed, ought to have
led to a very different result: " And does not this, then, make the punishment of
the scribes and Pharisees, and all the rulers of the Jewish ranks, more heavy,
— that the whole people, consisting of unlearned persons, hung upon the sacred
doctrines, and drank in the saving word as the rain, and were ready to bring
forth also the fruits of faith, and place their neck under His commandments?
But they whose office it was to urge on their people to this very thing savagely
rebelled, and wickedly sought the opportunity for murder, and with unbridled
violence ran upon the rocks, not accepting the faith, and wickedly hindering
others also."— Commentary on St. Luke, Serm. cxxxii. Part n. p. 615 (Transl.).

Lect. Vn. THE LAST PASSOVER. 271
knew would be marked by rapidly changing incidents,1 by
every varied form of stratagem, by hypocritical question
ings and insidious inquiry ; it was to be a day of last and
most solemn warnings, of deepest and most momentous
prophecies. Early must it needs be that He go, late that
He return. Ere they reach Jerusalem the hapless emblem
of that city and its people meets the eyes of the disciples.
The fig-tree, as the graphic St. Mark tells us,
was withered from its very roots. The won- '^
dering question that was called forth by such an exhibition
of the power of their Master over the material world re
ceives its practical answer in the solemn reiteration of
words first uttered by way of gentle reproof
., , n -i . i Matt. xvii. 20.
some months before, and now again, by way
of instruction, declaring the omnipotence of perfect and
unwavering faith.2 They pass onward to the temple,
l To the present day (Tuesday) are assigned, by most of the leading harmonists,
all the events and discourses comprised in Matt. xxi. 20 — xxv. 46, Mark xi. 20 —
xiii. 37, Luke xx. 1— xxi. 38, and apparently (see below, p. 286) John xii. 20—36,
with the recapitulatory remarks and citations of the Evangelist, ver. 37—50. We
have thus, on this important day, the answer to the deputation from the San
hedrin, and the three parables which followed it; the answer to the Pharisees
and Herodians about the tribute-money, to the Sadducees about the woman
with seven husbands, and to the scribe about the greatest commandment; the
question put to the Pharisees about the Messiah, and the severely reproving dis
course in reference to them and the scribes ; the praise of the poor widow ; the
words uttered in the presence of the Greeks who sought to see our Lord, and
the last prophecies in reference to the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of
the world, with the accompanying parable of the Ten Virgins. See Wieseler,
Chron. Synops. p. 393 sq., and Greswell, Dissert, xl. Vol. iii. p. 109 sq., who,
however, conceives the day to be Wednesday, and also differs in fixing the inci
dent of the Greeks on the day of the triumphal entry. The view of Milman
(Hist, of Christianity, Vol. i. p. 311 note), that some of the discourses, e. g., the
answer to the Pharisees and Herodians, and what followed, belong to a day sub
sequent to that on which the answer was made to the deputation from the San
hedrin, has very little in its favor.
2 The addition of the verse in St. Mark (ch. xi. 25) on the duty and necessity
of showing a forgiving spirit, especially when offering up prayer to God (comp.
Matt. vi. 14), has been judged by Meyer and others as due to the Evangelist, and
as not forming a part of our Lord's present words. This seems a very uncalled-
for assumption. The preceding declaration of the prevailing nature of the prayer
of faith leads our Lord to add a warning, which a possible misunderstanding of
the miracle just performed might suggest as necessary, viz., that this efficacy of
prayer was not to be used against others, even though they might be thought
justly to deserve our animadversion. Compare Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. iii.

272 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
where already, early as it was, many were gathered
together to hear the teaching of life and
an/eomp^rT'LuW those glad tidings of the Gospel which now,
^'^ ™ as St. Luke incidentally informs us, formed
Ch. xx. 20. _
Lukexix.4s. the subject of our Lord's addresses to His
fcol It ie eager and wondering hearers. But, as since,
so then was the Gospel to some a savor of
death unto death. The Lord's preaching is broken in
upon, by a formal deputation from the Sanhedrin,1 with
two questions fair and specious in their general form, and
yet most mischievously calculated to call forth an answer
that might be twisted into a charge, — "By what authority
was He doing these things?"3 and "From
Matt, xxi.23. , ° . . „„ -r.
whom did He receive it ? But question
must be met by question. Ere the Messiah declares the
nature of His mission, He must be told in what aspects
the mission of His forerunner was regarded. Was that
without higher sanction, unaccredited, unauthorized, —
from men or from heaven ? Let the spiritual rulers of the
nation answer that question, and then in turn
vL 27 shall answer be made to them. The sequel
we well remember: the shrewdly-weighed
alternatives, the necessary admission, "They could not
p. 105, Lange, Leben Jesu, II. 6. 6, p. 1212. That our Lord should have uttered
the same words on another and earlier occasion, and should now be pleased to
repeat them, involves nothing that is either unlikely or even unusual. See Lect.
iv. p. 170, note 2.
1 This seems clearly implied by St. Mark's mention of the three component
parts of the supreme court, 4pxovTai rtpbs avrbv ol c\pxt4pets Kal ol ypau.pw.Teis
Kal ol Tpeo-Bi'nepot, ch. xi. 27. Compare Matt. xxi. 23, Luke xx. 1. For a good
account of tbeBe three sections of the Sanhedrin, the first of which was com
posed of priests (perhaps heads of the twenty-four classes, not deposed high-
priests), the second of expounders and transcribers of the law (see Lightfoot,
Hor. Hebr. in Matt. ii. 4), the third of the heads of the principal families of
Israel, see Friedlieb, Archdol. § 8, p. 15 sq.
2 In the question proposed by the deputation, 'Ev irofqt 4%ovaltt Tavra iroteTs
(Mark xi. 28), the touto appears to reler, not to the present or previous teaching
of our Lord (Bengel, comp. Chrysost.), but to the authoritative purging of the
temple the day before (Cyril. Alex., Euthym.), and apparently also to the mira
cles on the blind and the lame, of which some of the speakers had been wit
nesses. See Matt, xxi, 15. The probable design was to induce our Lord to lay
such claim to divine powers as might be turned into a charge against Him.

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 275
tell," the consequent refusal of our Lard to give them an
answer,1 and yet the mercy with which, by
means of two parables, their conduct, both in mer'
its individual and in its official aspects, is
placed clearly before them,2 with all its issues of shame
and condemnation.
The drift of the two parables, especially of the second,
they failed not clearly to perceive. They
, ., , x j l • •,, n Continued efforts
knew that our Lord was speaking with ref- m the part ^ the
erence to them, but they heed not, nay, they dePutatim-
renew their efforts aerainst Him with greater „ , '. '
o o Matt, xxvu 46.
implacability, and are only restrained from
open acts by their fear of the populace. With words of
last and merciful warning,3 as expressed in the parable of

l The question proposed by our Lord had close reference to Himself, as Him of
whom John had spoken, and that too to a similar deputation (John i. 19 sq.) to
the present. The Sanhedrin had heard two years ago, from the mouth of the
Baptist, an indirect answer to the very question they were now proposing; meet,
then, was it that they should first declare the estimation in which they held him
who had so spoken to them.
2 In- the fir6tof the two parables, the Two Sons sent into the Vineyard, the gen
eral course of conduct of the Pharisaical party is put in contrast with that of
the publicans and harlots (ver. 31), and thus more clearly shown in its true char
acter. By their general habits this latter class practically said ob t&4xta to the
divine command, but afterwards repented, at the preaching of John. The Phar
isaical party, on the contrary, at once said 4y&) Kupte with all affected readiness,
but, as their conduct to this very hour showed clearly enough, never even
attempted to fulfil the promise ; they were the second son of the parable, the
harlots and publicans (not the Gentiles, as Chrysost. and the principal patristia
expositors) the first. Compare Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 6. 6, Part n. p. 1215, Gres
well, Dissert. XL. Vol. iii. p. 113, and see De Wette and Meyer in loc. In the
second parable, the Husbandmen who slew the Heir, the conduct of the Phar
isaical party, as Stier (Disc, of owr Lord, Vol. iii. p. 107) rightly observes, is set
forth more in reference to its official characteristics, and to the position of the
rejecting party as representatives of the nation. At the same time, also, the
punishment that awaited them (4iriryaye Kal ras KaKdaets, Chrys.), which was
only hinted at in the first parable (Matt. xxi. 21), is now expressly declared.
See Matt. xxi. 41. On these parables generally, see Stier, I. c, Trench, Notes on
the Parables, p. 160 sq., 173 sq., and comp. Greswell, Parables, Yol. v. p. 1 sq.
3 There seems no just reason for thinking, with Olshausen and others, that
Matt. xxi. 45, 46 conclude the previous scene. The words only depict the gen
eral state of feeling of the adverse party, viz., that they both perceived the
application of the parable, and were only restrained from open violence by fear
of the multitude, and thus in fact prepare the reader for the further act of
mercy on the part of our Lord in addressing yet another r arable to these malig-

274 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
the Marriage of the King's Son, they depart for a season
to organize some plan how they may en-
ch.xxu.isq. gnare tne Holy One in His speech; how they
Matt. xxii. u. may force Him or beguile Him into admis-
BliXTK £11. lo. sions which may afford a colorable pretext for
giving Him up to the stern man1 that then bore the
sword in Jerusalem.
They choose fit instruments for such an attempt, — their
own disciples, associated with Herodians ;
about the duTof men at variance in many points,2 but united
poiw, tribute to jn one? an(j rea(jv enougQ now> ag tney na(J
Maa. xxii. is. been once before, to combine in any attempt
to compass the destruction of one who was
alike hateful to both. 'T was a well-arranged combination :
religious hypocrisy and political craft, hierarchical preju
dice and royalist sympathies ; each party scarcely tolerat
ing the other except for temporary and special purposes,
and yet both of them, for the time and the occasion, working
harmoniously together,3 and concurring in the proposal of
the most perplexing and dangerous question that could

nant enemies. Comp. Chrysost. in Matt. Horn. lxix. init., Lange, Leben Jesu,
n. 6. 6, Part n. p. 1217.
1 Such certainly seems to have been the general character of Pilate as procu
rator of Judsa. See Luke xiii. 1, and compare Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 3. 1 sq.,
Bell. Jud. u. 9. 2 sq. There are some proofs that this sternness was not always
pushed to an extreme (6ee Friedlieb, Archdol. § 34, p. 122, note), but it is still
equally clear that his general contluct towards the refractory province of which
he was procurator was by no means marked by leniency or forbearance. The
consideration of his conduct as a public officer forms the subject of a separate
treatise by J. C. S. Germar, Thorun. 1785. See Winer, BWB. Art. "Pilatus,"
Vol. ii. p. 262.
2 On the general characteristics of the political sect of the Herodians, see Lect.
iv. p. 168, note 3.
3 The temporary bond of union between the two parties was now probably a
common fear caused by the attitude which they conceived our Lord to have
recently assumed. The triumphal entry into Jerusalem, and the authoritative
acts in the temple, would have been easily represented by the Pharisees, though
happening in Judaja, as boding danger to the authority of Herod when the
Prophet should return back to his home in Galilee. To regard the Herodians as
" soldiers of Herod " (Chrysost.), and sent only as witnesses (ft ti Kara tov Kat-
aapos aTtoKp&elri, Euthym.), does not seem either natural or accordant with the
expressions of the sacred narrative, which seem rather to imply that both parties
joined in the question. See Mark xii. 14.

Lect. VTI. THE LAST PASSOVER. 275
then have been devised — the tributary relations of a
conquered to a conquering people. Let us pause for a
moment to consider the exact nature of the attempt, and
the true difficulties of the question proposed. ... A party
of men, with every appearance, as the third
Evangelist implies, of being right-minded
and thoroughly in earnest, come, as it would seem, with a
case of conscience,1 " Was it meet and right to give tribute
to Cassar, or no?" To such a question, even if proposed bjr
honest men, hard would it have been to have returned a
blameless answer at such a time and in such a place, — .
during the tumultuous passover season, and in the very
presence of the symbols of these conflicting claims ; when
round the speakers spread the temple courts and the
thronging worshippers of the God of Israel ; when yonder
stood the palace of the first Herod, and in front rose the
frowning tower of Antonia.2 Hard indeed would it have
been, in such a case, to have answered honest men without
causing offence; but plainly, as it would have seemed, im
possible, when those who put the question were avowed hyp
ocrites, of differing religious sympathies and of .discordant
political creeds. If the Lord answered as they might have
hoped and expected,3 standing as now He did in the very
l The question, it will be observed, was so worded as to show that it affected
to be considered as something more than one of mere political duty or expedi
ency. The inquiry was not whether it was advisable to give tribute to Csesar,
but whether it was lawful to do so (eJeoTic Sovvat, Matt. xxii. 17, Mark xii. 14,
Luke xx. 22); whether it was consistent with an acknowledgment of God as
their king. The seditious enterprise of Judas of Gamala (Acts v. 37) put thia
forward as one of the principles which it pretended to vindicate, jtivov rryea6v^
ko\ SeOTrornv rbv &ebv eivat, Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 1. 6. Compare Lightfoot;
Hor. Hebr. in Matt. xxii. 20, Sepp, Leben Christi, vi. 17, Vol. iii. p. 256.
2 This fortress was rebuilt by the first Herod towards the beginning of hj
reign (Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 4. 3), and was situated at the N. W. corner of thj
temple enclosure, with which it was connected by an underground gallerj
(Joseph. Antiq. xv. 11. 7). Its situation, and the full view it commanded of thr
outer courts, made it a convenient place for the Roman garrison, by which, whej
Judaea came under the jurisdiction of a procurator, it was regularly occupies
See Winer, BWB. Art. "Tempel," Vol. ii. p. 586; compare Friedlieb, Archdtbt.
i 28, p. 98 sq.
3 "They expected," says Chrysostom, "that they should catch Him whichever
way He might answer; they hoped, however, that He would answer against

276 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
centre of Judaism, and laying claim to represent all that
was most distinctive in its expectations — if He answered
Nay, their most eager wish was realized ; they could at
once, with a fair show of reason and justice, deliver Him
up to the Roman government as an advocate of sedition,
a Galilsean of avowed Galilaean sympathies, one whose
blood they knew Pilate would now as readily shed at the
very altar, as he had shed that of His coun-
Lukexiii.l. , _ , -~. - Tx
trymen but a short time before.1 Did He,
however, contrary to expectation, answer Tea, then He
stood forth to the multitude as the practical opponent of
the theocratic aspirations they so dearly cherished, and to
the Herodians as the Jewish subject of a Jewish prince,
who scrupled not to sanction the payment of tribute to
heathens and to strangers.
Such was the most artful and complex stratagem ever
laid against the Saviour;2 and yet, with what divine sim
plicity was it frustrated ! A word lays bare the true char-
the Herodians." — In Matt. Horn. lxx. Compare Euthym. in loc. This also, as
Cyril of Alexandria observes, seems clearly to transpire from the words of St.
Luke (Iva 4m\dBo3VTOt avrov \6yov, &o~Te irapaJSovvai avrbv T-rj apxy Kal Try
iiovaitf toE Tjyeuovos, ch. xx. 20), and probably suggested the insidious com
ment (ov B\4irets els irp6oojirov av&ptoTratv, Matt. xxii. 16, Mark xii. 14; comp.
Luke xx. 21) with which they accosted our Lord. "This, too, they say, inciting
Him not to entertain any reverence for Caasar, and not from any fear to with
hold an answer to the inquiry." — Euthymius on Matt. xxii. 16.
1 The exact time and circumstances under which the act here alluded to took
place is not known. The way in which it was told to our Lord (iraprjaav Se
Tives 4v avrip rip Kcupip a,Trayy4Wovres, Luke xiii. 1) would seem to imply that
¦it had happened recently, and the mention of the country to which the victims
belonged would also seem to render it likely that it was one of those movements
in which the Galilieans were so often implicated. Compare Joseph. Vit. 5 17,
and Antiq. xvii. 9. 3. That they were actual adherents of the party which
Judas of Gamala had formerly headed (Theophyl.) is possible, but not veiy
probable. See Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Luc. xiii. 1.
2 It is not without point that Cyril of Alexandria alludes to the way in which
they who strove to involve the innocent Saviour with the Roman government
themselves became involved with that nation in the most tragic way. After
quoting Psalm xxxv. 7, and showing its application in the present case, he adds:
"For so verily they did fall; for because they delivered Jesus unto Pilate, they
were themselves given over to destruction ; and the Roman host consumed them
with fire and sword, and burnt up all their land, and even the glorious temple
that was among them." — Commentary on Luke, Sermon cxxxv. Part II. p. 633
(Transl.).

Matt. xxii. 22.

Lect. VH. THE LAST PASSOVER. 277
acter of the affected case of conscience and of those who
proposed it;1 a single command that the Expomre and
tribute-money be brought, and a single in- /™<™"«>» of »">
•* ° ' ° stratagem.
quiry whose image it bore, — and the whole
, „ ... .. . Mark xii. 15.
web of cunning and hypocrisy is rent in a Mau.xxn.20.
moment: "All that by God's appointment
belongs unto CaBsar must be rendered unto Cassar, and all
that be God's unto God, and to Him alone."2 On receiv
ing such an answer, no marvel is it that we
read that the very inquirers tendered to Him
the reluctant homage of their wonder,3 that
they were silent and went their way.

1 It is very distinctly specified by all the three Synoptical Evangelists that our
Lord saw into the hearts and characters of those who came with the question.
Comp. Matt. xxii. 18, yvobs Se b 'Iritrovs t))V irovnplav ; Mark xii. 15, ei5<*>s avTuv
t}jv inr6itpLo-tv ; Luke xx. 23, Karavo^aas Se avrav T-hv iravovpylav. We are
told by St. Luke that they were 4yKc&4Tavs \nroKpivop.4vovs eavrobs SiKalovs
elvat (ch. xx. 20) ; this our Lord confirms and exposes by His address as recorded
by St. Matthew [the reading in St. Mark and St. Luke is doubtful], Tl pie iretpd-
^ere vno k piT al, ch. xxii. 18.
2 The exact force of this declaration has been somewhat differently estimated,
in consequence of the different meanings that have been assigned to tc\ rov
@eov. Most of them, however, e. g., " the temple tribute " (Milman, Hist, of
Christianity, Vol. i. p. 313), " the inner life " (Lange, Leben Jesu, Part II. 1220 ;
comp. Tertull. contr. Marc. iv. 38), etc., seem wholly inconsistent with the gen
eral form of the expression, and give a mere special and partial aspect to what
was designedly inclusive and comprehensive. If, with Chrysostom ,(in Matt.
Horn. lxx. Vol. vii. p. 776), we explain the expression as simply and generally,
Ta t<j> 0e<£ Trap1 r\p.tov 6<petK6ueva, the meaning of the whole appears perfectly
clear: " Give to Czesar what rightly belongs to him (ov ydp itrri tovto Sovvai,
aU' airoSovvat, Chrys.), as to one ordained of God (Rom. xiii. 1), and to God
all that be His — all that is due to Him as your King and your God." Thus, then,
far from separating what is political from what is religious, or accepting the ques
tion in the alternative form (Sovvai r} of, i.e., in point of fact, " Caasar or God"?)
in which it was proposed, our Lord graciously returns an answer which shows
that it was not a question for either yea or nay ; that obedience to Caesar aud
duty to God were not things to be put in competition with each other, but to be
united, — the latter supplying, where necessary, the true regulating and limiting
principle of the former (see Chrys. in loc), and the former, thus regulated and
defined, becoming a very part of the latter, — duty to Him by whom Caesar was
Caesar, and from whom are " the powers that be." For sound practical applica
tions of this text see Andrewes, Serm. vi. Vol. v. p. 127 (A.-C. Libr.), and a ser
mon by Mill, Univ. Serm. I. p. 1 sq.
8 Thi6, not improbably, would have been increased by the recognition of the
determination of their own schools (" Ubicunque numisma regis alicujus obtinet,
illic incolse regem istum pro domino agnoscunt." — Maimon. in " Gezelah," cap.
24

278 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VIL
But if a question as to civil duties and relations has
been thus answered and thus foiled, might
tu question not auestion as to religious differences prove
of the Sadducees u ° i
touching the Res- more successful ? Was there not some hope
urrection. in stirring a controversy that had long sepa
rated two important sects? Might not the Sadducee
succeed where the Pharisee and Herodian had failed?
The trial we know was made. On that same
day, as St. Matthew particularly specifies,
a party of the Sadducees,1 probably acting under the
instructions of the same supreme court, approach our
Lord with a hypothetical case of religious difficulty, the
woman that had seven husbands in this world — to whom
was she to belong in that world to come in which those
worldly and self-sufficient speakers so utterly disbe
lieved?2 The question was coarsely devised and coarsely
propounded ; but the attempt to drive our Lord into some
admissions that might comj>romise Him either with the
Pharisees or with the multitude was rendered thereby all
the more hopeful. To such a question our Lord vouchsafes
to return no answer ; but to the evil heart of unbelief
5), which the Lord was in part here actually propounding to them. See Light
foot, Hor. Hebr. in Matt. xxii. 20.
1 These Sadducees might have been, and perhaps actually were, a portion of the
Sanhedrin, the religious opinions of the sect being no bar to their election as
members of the supreme court. See Acts xxiii. 6, and comp. Friedlieb, Archdol.
5 8, p. 19. There seems no reason for supposing, with Lightfoot (in Matt. xxii.
23), that there was any connection in point of religious creed between the pres
ent party and the Herodians who had just gone away. Some of the Herodians
might possibly have been Sadducees; but to draw definitely such a conclusion
from Matt. xvi. 6, compared with Mark viii. 15, seems certainly precarious, espe
cially when we remember that Herod can hardly be conceived himself to have
had much in common with the peculiar tenets of the Sadducees. See Matt.
xiv. 2.
2 See Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Matt. xii. 32. The statement of the Sadducee
was, " Deficit nubes, atque abit; sic descendens in sepulchrum non redit." —
Tanehum, fol. 3. 1, cited by Lightfoot on Matt. xxii. 23. They appeared to have1
believed that the soul perished with the body ('SaSSvKaiois -rets ipvx&s 6 \6yos
o-vvatbavlCu rots trtlipiatri, Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 1. 4), and thus, as a matter of
course, denied the doctrine of the resurrection, and of future rewards and pun
ishments. Compare Joseph. Bell. Jud. n. 8. 14. On the origin and peculiarities
of this sect, sec Lightfoot, in Matt. iii. 7, Jost, Gesch. des Judenth. n. 2. 8, Vol.
i. p. 215, and a good article by Winer, BWB. Vol. ii. p. 352.

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 279
from which it came He speaks out clearly and plainly.
With all their affected wisdom and philosophic calm He
tells them they do err, and that they know
not either the Scriptures, which clearly teach Zl^k^'if'
the doctrine of the future state that they so
confidently denied, or the power of God, which shall make
man the equal of angels and the inheritor of incorruption.1
So clear was the vindication of God's truth, so weighty
the censure, so final the answer, that we can scarcely
wonder that the impressible multitudes were Matt. xxii. S3.
stricken with amazement, and that some even
of the number of our Lord's opponents could not forbear
declaring that He had " well spoken," that
,. _ „ - - Lukexx.39.
the discomfiture of the impugners of the
future state was complete and overwhelming.2
One at least of that number was so struck by the divine
1 Our Lord does not notice the mere question of the Sadducees, but the erro
neous belief that suggested it (ob irpbs to fiiiptaTa a.\\a irpbs t^v yvtbpvnv lard-
pitvos, Chrysost.); this He shows was due to their ignorance of two things: (1)
the Scriptures, (2) the power of God. Their ignorance of the latter is shown
first (Matt. xxii. 30, Mark xii. 25, Luke xx. 35, 36) by a declaration of the char
acteristics of the life after death, and the change of the natural body into a
spiritual body (1 Cor. xv. 44; comp. Phil. iii. 21); the ignorance of the former
by a declaration of the doctrine really contained in the Scriptures, and more
especially in one of the books (Exod. iii. 6) of that very portion (the Pentateuch)
that contained the passage on which they had based their question : 4iretS^}ir^p
iKeivot tSv Mtovaea wpoeBd\ovTo Koiitbv Kal avrbs curb ttjs Mtoo-a'iKTJs ypatprjs
tovtovs eVio-TO|ui£ei. Euthymius, in Matt. xxii. 31, closely following Chrysost.
in loc, Vol. vii. p. 778 (ed. Bened.).
2 It has been commonly alleged, both by ancient (Origen, contr. Cels. I. 49,
expressly; compare also Tertull. Praiser. Hcer. cap. 45) and modern writers,
that the Sadducees only acknowledged the authority of the Pentateuch, and
that, in consequence, our Lord specially appealed to that portion of Scripture.
This, however, is now, as it would seem, rightly called in question, there being
no confirmation of such an opinion in the notices of the sect supplied by Jose
phus (compare Antiq. xiii. 10. 6, xviii. 1. 4, Bell. Jud. n. 8), and a reasonable
probability that the Sadducees could not have had the share in the civil and
religious government of the nation, which it can be proved they had, if they
openly differed from the rest of their countrymen on a point of such funda
mental importance as the canon of Scripture. The correct statement appears
to be, that they rejected all tradition, and received only the written law ; and
that this special adherence to the latter, though merely in contradistinction to
the former, gave rise to the opinion that this was the only part of Scripture that
they accepted as canonical. See esp. Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 10. 6, and Winer,
BWB. Art. " Sadducaer," Vol. ii. p. 353.

280 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
wisdom of our Lord's last answer, that though, as it
would seem from the narrative of St. Mat-
The question of tnew ne came forward with the hope of
the lawyer about ' # L
the greatest com- retrieving the honor of the sect to which we
mandment. ch. xxii. 35. know that he belonged,1 the partisan seems
to have been merged in the interested in
quirer ; party spirit seems to have given way to a genuine
desire to learn from the wise Teacher His opinion on one,
perhaps, of the questions of the time,2 — the relative great
ness and precedence of the leading commandments of
the law. At the same time the question was one that
would not be disapproved of by the adherents of the party
to which the inquirer belonged, as involving probably more
than one answer which might seriously compromise our
Lord with some of the Rabbinical schools of the day.3 In

1 According to St. Matthew (ch. xxii. 35 sq.) the lawyer forms one of a party
of Pharisees who were collected together after the defeat of the Sadducees, and
comes forward with a trying and probably insidious question (iretpdfav ovt6v);
according to St. Mark (ch. xii. 28 sq.), he puts the question after observing how
well our Lord had answered. The slight apparent difference between these
accounts admits of this natural explanation, that the man was put forward by
his party for the purpose of ensnaring our Lord, and that he acquiesced, but
that he was also really inspired by a sincere desire to hear the opinion of one
whose wisdom he respected. St. Matthew exhibits him in the former light, and
in reference to his party ; St. Mark in the latter, and as an individual. Compare
Lange, Leben Jesu, li. 6. 6, Part n. p. 1232. The reconciliation adopted by
Euthymius (see Chrysostom), that the designs of the man at first were bad, but
were changed by our Lord's answer, seems scarcely so natural.
2 Somewhat similar questions are noticed by Schoettgen, in Matt. xxii. 36, and
by Wet6tein in his notes on ch. v. 19 and xxiii. 23. According to Lightfoot (in
Marc. xii. 28), the inquiry turned upon the importance of the ceremonial as
compared with the moral law ; this, however, seems less probable.
3 It is not easy to specify in what particular way the question was calculated
to ensnare our Lord ; though, from the nature of the controversies and casuistry
of the day, it is not difficult to imagine that there were known differences of
opinion on the subject, in which it might have been thought our Lord could not
escape becoming involved. It is worthy of notice that, on an earlier occasion,
when our Lord puts an inquiry to a lawyer who had a similar but stronger
design against Him (a.v4o-Tn 4 Kir eipd(ov avriv, Luke x. 25), "What is
written in the law? " (comp. Matt. xxii. 36, iroia 4vT0\ti pteydx-q 4v T-ip v6p. tp),
the answer was promptly given, in terms but little different to the present, and
was approved of by our Lord (Luke x. 28). The present question, then, might
have been intended to lead Him to give the prominence to some single com-
mand; the anBwer given, however, was one which our Lord had commended as
an answer to a more general question, and which involved the substance of no

Lect. VH. THE LAST PASSOVER. 281
the inquirer's concluding comment, his better feelings still
more clearly prevail ; a sort of consciousness of the idle
nature of all that casuistry and formality of which his
own question was the exponent breaks out in words, and
obtains for him, from the Redeemer's lips, the gracious
declaration,1 that " he was not far from the
kingdom of God.
And was this the last attempt to ensnare our Lord
which was made on this eventful day ? So m ,.
J The question rel-
indeed it would seem from the tenor of the "'*« >° 'he woman
. taken in adultery.
present portion of the inspired narrative.
But are we not in some degree justified in again2 ad
vancing the conjecture that the incident of the woman
taken in adultery belongs to the history of the present
day? Such a view, it may be remembered, has the
support of some slight amount of external evidence, in
addition to the very strong internal arguments on which
it principally rests.3 What, save the deeply-laid stratagem
of the tribute-money, could have seemed more hopeful
than the proposal of a case for decision which must appar
ently have involved our Lord either with the Roman

single command, but of all. The opinion of Chrysostom and others, that it was
to tempt our Lord to say something about his own Godhead, is apparently not
very probable.
1 We cannot say, with Milman, that the lawyer " did not hesitate openly to
espouse our Lord's doctrines," and that the Pharisees " were paralyzed by this
desertion " (Hist, of Christianity, Vol. i. p. 315), as there is nothing in the sacred
text to substantiate such an inference. The declaration that " he was not far
from the kingdom of God " gives hope that he was afterwards admitted into it ;
but, as Chrysostom correctly observes, SelKvvtriv 4ti 4ir4xovTa ?"a flT^ffn to
helirov. — In Matt. Horn. liii.
2 See above, Lect. VI. p. 232.
3 The external evidence is specified above, p. 232, note 2. The internal argu
ments are, on the negative side, (a) the striking dissimilarity of the language
from that of St. John, especially in the particles, (6) the forced nature of the
connection with the close of John vii. (see Luthardt, Johann. Evang. Part n. p.
39), and (c) the total want of union with what follows ; and on the positive side,
(d) the similarity in language to that of the Synoptical Gospels (compare Meyer
on John viii. 1—3), especially of St. Luke, and, lastly, (e) the striking similarity
between the attempt and those recorded as having been made on the day we are
now considering. Compare Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 6. 6, Part li. p. 1222, and the
introductory critical comments of Meyer, Kommentar, p. 247 sq. (ed. 3).
24*

282 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
governor or the Sanhedrin? Did He decide, as they seem
to have hoped, in favor of carrying out the Mosaic law,1
then He was at once committed to antagonism not only
with Roman customs, but with the exclusive power which
Rome seems to have reserved to herself in all capital
cases.2 Did He decide in favor of mercy to the sinner,
then He stood forth, both before the Sanhedrin and the
populace, as a daring innovator, that publicly sanctioned
the abrogation of a decree of the Mosaic law. But, as in
all the preceding cases, the same heavenly wisdom displays
itself in the answer that was vouchsafed. The law of
Moses was tacitly maintained, but its execution limited
to those who were free from all such sins of uncleanness3
1 Some little difficulty has been felt in the mention of " stoning" (ver. 4), as
the general punishment of death was decreed against those convicted of adul
tery (Lev. xx. 20, Deut. xxii. 22), the special punishment of stoning being appar
ently reserved for the case of unfaithfulness in one betrothed (Deut. xxii. 23, 24).
It is not improbable that the woman in the present case might have been one of
the latter class (Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Joann. v. 5), especially as the Rabbin
ical law seems to have specified that the adulteress was to be strangled (see
Lightfoot, in loc); still, as this last point does not appear certain (see Ewald,
Alterth. pp. 218, 232, and comp. Michael. Mos. Becht. , 262), and as " stoning " is
mentioned in the Law, and in close connection with adultery, it is perhaps more
probable that such was generally regarded as the prescribed mode of death, and
that this was a case of piotxela in the ordinary acceptation of the word.
2 This question has been much debated. The most reasonable view appears to
be, that though, in hurried cases like that of St. Stephen's martyrdom, the pun
ishment of death might have been tumultuously inflicted, still that the declara
tion of the party of the Sanhedrin, that " it was not lawful for them to put any
one to death " (John xviii. 31), was strictly true, and that the supreme court lost
the power of formally carrying out their sentence, even in religious cases, prob
ably about the time that Judam became attached to Syria, and placed under a
Roman procurator. See Friedlieb, Archdol. § 28, p. 96 sq., and Winer, BWB.
Art. " Synedr." Vol. ii. p. 553. The statements of the Talmudical writers, that
the loss of this power was really owing to the Sanhedrin ceasing to sit in the
room or hall called " Gazith " (see Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Joann. xviii. 81, and
compare Selden, de Synedr. n. 15), is now justly considered an evasion to cover
the true state of the case, viz., that they had been deprived of it by the Romans.
See Friedlieb, § 10, p. 22 sq.
3 The context and circumstances of the case seem to suggest that the term
avapidprnTos (an 07ra| \ey6p.. in the N. T.) is not here to be understood in refer
ence to sin generally (Luthardt, Johann. Evang. Part n. p. 96), but in reference
to the class of sins of which the case in question was an instance, i. e., sins of the
flesh. Compare lm)K6TI apidprave, ver. 11, and the limited meaning of apiapToi-
\6s, Luke vii. 37. It may be remarked that, according to the text of the Codex
Beza, the woman is actually described as 4irl a p. a p t i a yvvaiita el\rip.pi4rnr
|ver. S).

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 283
as those of the guilty woman who stood before them. No
wonder is it that we read that they went out one by one,
convicted by their consciences, and left the
t . , . -, . , , . John viii. 9.
sinner standing in the midst, in the solitary
presence of her sinless yet merciful Judge. If this be the
true position of the narrative, our blessed Lord would now
have been subjected to the most trying questions that the
subtlety of man could excogitate, — the first relative to
the authority of His public acts, the second of a political
nature, the third relating to doctrine, the fourth to specu
lative teaching, the last-mentioned to discipline.1
And now all those malicious attempts had been openly
and triumphantly frustrated; so triumph
antly, that all the three Synoptical Evan- iion respecting the
gelists tell us that no man henceforth had ^Mau.^dik.
the hardihood to propose any further ques- ^Zex^'m
tion. One final display of meek victory
alone was wanting, and that must be seen in the interro
gated now assuming the character of the interrogator, and
receiving only the answer of shamed silence. The last
question mentioned in the narratives of St. Matthew and
St. Mark had been proposed by a scribe, and to them and
to the Pharisees with whom he was united,2 and to whose
sect he probably belonged, does our Lord now turn with
the inquiry, how, when according to the teaching of the
1 The position in which this attempt stands with reference to the others cannot
of course be determined. The cursive manuscripts (see above, p. 232, note 3)
which place it after Luke xxi. 38 probably only intended to imply that the inci
dent was judged to belong to the portion of the Gospel which immediately pre
ceded, not that it formed the last of the attempts in historical order. Of mere
conjectures, the most probable seems that which places it after the question
about the tribute-money. Compare Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 6. 6, Part n. p. 1222.
2 According to St. Matthew the question was proposed to the Pharisees (ch.
xxii. 41); according to St. Luke, who omits the question about the chief com
mandment, to [not concerning, Grot., Alford on Matt. xxii. 41] the scribes (ch.
xx. 39); according to St. Mark, it was uttered in the hearing of the people (ch.
xii. 36, 37), and as a sort of answer (ver. 35) to the silence of the opponents. All
these accounts admit of the obvious explanation, that the question of our Lord
was proposed openly, and to those who had last questioned Him, viz., Pharisees
in regard to their sect, but several of whom were scribes and lawyers by preci
sion. Compare Luke xx. 39 with Mark xii. 23.

284 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
scribes Christ is the Son of David, David, while speaking
under the influence of the Spirit, nevertheless calls Him
Lord. How can He be both His Lord and
Psalm ex. 1. His Son ?l To that profound question, so
clearly pointing to the mystery of the divine and human
natures of Him who stood before them,2 no answer is even
attempted. By silence they acknowledge
Matt. xxii. 46. , . , „ , . ., , .
their defeat; and m silence they now receive
that warning though merciful chastisement of their meek
victor recorded to us by the first Evangelist, which forms
the subject of the whole of the 23d chapter of his Gospel.
There our Lord, with a just severity, lays bare the prac
tices of scribe and Pharisee, concluding with
ver.issq. an apostrophe to Jerusalem, which it would
seem had been uttered on an earlier occa
sion,8 but was now appropriately repeated, as declaring, in

1 It has been popularly urged by modern expositors that the psalm was not
written by David but to David (Ewald, Meyer, al.), and that our Lord conformed
His language to the generally received views of the time (De Wette). This latter
assumption, though a very favorite one in our popular theology, is always very
precarious, if no worse. In the present case it is even out of place, as there are
strong reasons for believing, from a fair critical consideration of the psalm in
question, that it was written by David, as is here expressly declared. Compare
Hengstenberg, Comment, om Psalms, Vol. iii. p. 316 sq. (Clark), Phillips, ib., Vol.
ii. p. 416, and on the Messianic character of the psalm and its reference to 2 Sam.
vii. 1 sq., 1 Chron. xvii. 1 sq., 6ee Ebrard, Kritik der Evang. Gesch. § 100, p. 490.
2 As Euthymius briefly but clearly expresses it, — " He is said to be his Son, as
having sprung from his root, according to His human generation ; but his Lord,
as being his God." — In Matt. xxii. 45, Vol. i. p. 869.
3 An address scarcely differing from the present except in the particle that
connects the last verse with what precedes \ydp, Matt, xxiii. 39; 8e', Luke xiii.
35) is specified by St. Luke as having been uttered by our Lord after receiving
the message about Herod's designs as communicated by the Pharisees. See
above, Lect. vi. p. 242. There does not seem any reason either for agreeing
with Meyer (on Luke xiii. 34), who asserts that the original and proper position
of the words is that assigned by St. Matthew, or with Wieseler ( Chron. Synops.
p. 322; compare Credner, Einleit. p. 67, 136), who regards the words in their
present position as interpolated from St. Luke. As we have elsewhere, and as
it would seem justly, urged the probability of a repetition of the same words on
different occasions, when called forth by something similar, so in the present
instance does it seem reasonable to suppose that the similarity of the subject
which in both cases precedes the words (the slaughter of the righteous in Jeru
salem), called forth in both the pathetic address to the bloodthirsty and now
forlorn city. Compare Lect. iv. p. 170, note 2, p. 181, note 1.

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 285
language of the deepest pathos, that desolation was nigh
at hand, that the hour of mercy had at length
passed away, and that justice, temporal and
eternal, must now be the portion of the city that had.
poured out the blood of Jehovah's prophets, and was
thirsting for the blood of His Son.1
The scene changes with a marvellous truthfulness and
appropriateness. After our Lord had uttered
His last words of solemn denunciation against tuploruMow. °
the scribe? and Pharisees, — the consumers SeS'.'tf!"
of widows' houses, the rapacious, the hypocrit
ical, and the bloodthirsty, — He turns His steps toward the
place where tree gifts and contributions for the various
ministrations of the temple were offered by the worship
pers, and site there marking the varied and variously
minded multitude that was now clustering round the
numerous chestp.2 There He beholds one of those hapless
ones of whom He had but so lately spoken as the victim
of the extortionate scribe, in her penury cast-
, . n»A-,, Mark xii. 42.
ing in her two mites, her all. And she
departed not unblest. That act caused the Redeemer of
1 The concluding words of ti^ pie iSere K. r. h. (Matt, xxiii. 39) had reference,
on the former occasion that they were uttered, primarily to the triumphal entry,
and secondarily to the second advent (see above, p. 241, note 2); in the present
the reference is exclusively to the latter. "Then," as Euthymius well remarks,
" will they say this — willingly, never, but unwillingly, at the time of His sec
ond advent, when He shall come with power and great glory, and when their
recognition shall be of no avail." — In Matt, xxiii. 39.
2 These, we learn from Lightfoot (Decas Chorogr. in Marc cap. 3, 5 4), were
thirteen in number, called by the Talmudical writers F!"nBll0 (from the trumpet
like shape of the openings into which the money was dropped, — "angusta;
supra lata; infra propter deceptores " — Gemara on Mishna, "Shekalim," u. 1),
and stood in the court of the women. See Reland, Antiq. 1. 8. 14, and comp
Winer, BWB. Art. "Tempel," Vol. ii. p. 583.
8 As Lightfoot pertinently says, " Hw paupercula duobus minutis aeternam
sibi famam coemit." — In Marc. xii. 42. The grounds of the divine commenda
tion are distinctly specified, — she gave all. She might have given one of the two
\eirTd [the Rabbinical citation in Schoettgen, in loc. and Sepp, Leben Chr. Vol.
iii. p. 311, does not seem to refer to contributions like the present], but she gives
both: "The woman offered two farthings; but she possessed nothing mom than
what she offered; she had nothing left; with empty hand, but a hand bountiful
of the little she possessed, she went away from the treasury." — Cyril Alex. Com
ment, on St. Duke, Sermon oxxxvm. Part li. p. 647.

286 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
the world to call up to Him His disciples, and to declare
to them that the poor desolate one had cast
Luke xxi. 2. in more than all; yea, and one at least of
rcr^T''43' the hearers did so bear witness that, by the
asfnofeT'' *°P' record of two Evangelists, the widow's gift,
like the piety of Mary of Bethany, shall be
known and remembered wheresoever the Gospel shall be
preached unto men.
While, as it would seem, our Lord was still teaching
within,1 a strange message is brought from
me request of the tne court without. Some Greek proselytes
Greek proselytes. ~. "*
of the gate, who had come up to Jerusalem
to worship the God of the- Jew and the Gentile at the
feast of the Passover, prefer, by the mouths
John xn. 20. of tne apostjes Andrew and Philip, a request
to see Him of whom every tongue in Jerusa
lem now was speaking, and towards whom perchance deep-
seated presentiment had mysteriously attracted these God
fearing Gentiles.2 Deeply moved by a request which He

1 The suggestion of Greswell (Dissert. XL. Vol. iii. p. 123, note), that our Lord
sat aud taught in the court of the women, in order "that the female Israelites
might have access to Him, as well as the male," is not without probability. It
must be remembered, however, that the court of the women (yvvatKoiviTis,
Joseph. Bell. Jud. vi. 9. 2) was so called, not because it was especially designed
for their use, but because it was the furthest court into which they were per
mitted to enter. See Lightfoot, Decas Chorogr. in Marc. cap. 3, § 5. The
incident that follows is also assigned by Greswell to the day of our Lord's
triumphal entry; the words kcu airer&tiiv 4KpbBn air' avTuv (ch. xii. 36) seem,
however, much more in favor of its present position. Compare Wieseler, Cliron.
Synops. p. 396.
2 The "EKAwves here mentioned by St. John are rightly considered by the
majority of modern expositors not to have been, on the one hand, purely hea
thens (Chrys., Euthym.), nor again, on the other, Hellenists (Ewald, Gesch. Chr.
p. 392), but, in accordance with the usual meaning of the word in the N. T.,
Greeks, whom, however, the clause a.vaBatv6vTwv k. t. A. (observe the pres.
part.) seems further to specify as habitual worshippers, and so, probably, as is
stated in the text, " proselytes of the gate," many of whom attended the great
feasts. See Acts viii. 27, Joseph. Bell. Jud. vi. 9. 3, and compare Lightfoot, Hor.
Hebr. in Joann. xii. 20. The reason why they peculiarly addressed themselves
to the Apostle Philip can only be a matter of conjecture. It has been supposed
that they may have come from Galilee (De Wette, Meyer), and from the neigh
borhood of Bethsaida, to which place it is here again (see John i. 45) specially
noticed that the apostle originally belonged. It is, however, perhaps, equally

Lect. VH. THE LAST PASSOVER. 287
felt to be yet another token of His own approaching glori
fication, and of the declaration of His name to the wide
heathen world of which these were the earliest fruits, our
Lord, as it would seem, accedes to the wish.1 In their
hearing and in that of the people around He reveals, by
means of a similitude appropriately taken
from the teaching of nature, that truth which
it was so hard for the Greek mind with its deifying love
of the living and the beautiful to conceive or to realize —
that unto man the pathway to true life lay through the
dreaded gates of death and decay. And if to man, so also,
by the mystery of redeeming love, in a certain measure, to
the Son of Man Himself, — a thought which so moved the
depths of the Saviour's soul,2 and called forth from His
probable that they were complete strangers, but attracted to Philip by his Gre-
cized name. The conduct of the apostle on the present occasion, and his appli
cation to Andrew ("cum sodali audet," — Beng.), has been rightly judged to
indicate a cautious, wise, and circumspect nature. Compare Luthardt, Johan.
Evang. Part I. p. 102.
1 This has been considered doubtful. It is, however, reasonable to suppose
that such a request, thus sanctioned by two apostles, would not be refused by
our Lord, especially as the character of the applicants (avaBatv6vroiv 'tvu itpoa-
Kvvi)tTovtriv 4v ttj eoprfj, ver. 20) seems to show that it did not result from mere
curiosity. The first portion of our Lord's reply (ver. 23) may have been ad
dressed only to the two apostles on the way to the outer court, the rest uttered
in the hearing of the Greeks and the multitude (ver. 29). On the whole incident,
see Lange, Leben Jesu, II. 6. 5, Part II. p. 1200 sq.
2 It is worthy of notice that, as in the more awful scene in Gethsemane (Matt.
xxvi. 38, Mark xiv. 34), the Evangelist has been specially moved to record that
the soul of the Saviour — that human i\ivxb of which the earlier Apollinarians
seem at first even to have denied the existence (Pearson, Creed, Vol. ii. p. 205,
ed. Burton) — was moved and troubled (ver. 27). On the scriptural meaning of
the term, and its prevailing reference to the feelings and affections, rather than
to the thoughts or imaginations, see Olshausen, Opuscula, p. 153 sq., and comp.
notes on 1 Tim. iii. 16, and Destiny of the Creature, Serm. v. p. 99. It is perhaps
scarcely necessary to add that the present troubled state of the Saviour's soul is
not for a moment to be referred to the mere apprehension of physical death
(compare Liicke in loc), still less of the wrath of the devil (Lightfoot, in Joann.
xii. 28), but to the profound consciousness of the close connection of death with
sin. In dying for us, the sinless Saviour vouchsafed to bow to a dispensation
which was the wages of sin (Rom.vi. 23); and it was the contemplation of such
a contact on the part of the all-Pure and all-Holy with everything that was most
alien to the divine nature, — sin, darkness, and death, — that called forth the
Saviour's present words (ver. 27), that heightened the agonies of Gethsemane,
and found its deepest utterance in that cry of unimaginable suffering (Matt.
xxvii. 46, Mark xv. 34) which was heard from Golgotha, when all that was con-

Ver. 27.

ecies. 1
Ver.

288 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
divine lips such words of self-devotion and prayer, that
now again, in the court of the Gentiles, as
,.,,. once by the banks of the Jordan and on the
Luke ix. 35. Mount of the Transfiguration, the answer
of Paternal love was vouchsafed, for the sake
of those who stood around, in audible accents of accept
ance and promise.1
And now the day was far spent, and our Lord prepares
to leave His Father's house, and for a short
aJVES" ^pace to conceal Himself both from His ene-
andthe last proph- mjeg an(j from tne thronging multitudes that
ver. 36. huner on His words and beheld His miracles,
Ver.37. O
and yet did not and could not fully believe.
While leaving the temple, a few words from one of the
disciples, suggested, perhaps, by a remem-
Markxin.1. brance of an expression2 in our Lord's recent
ver. 2. apostrophe to Jerusalem, call forth from Him
jMexicTi. ' a declaration of the terrible future that
awaited all the grandeur and magnificence of
the sumptuous structure from which He was now taking
templated was approaching its appalling realization. See Luthardt, das Johann.
Evang. Part n. p. 252, and comp. Pearson, On the Creed, Vol. i. p. 234 (Burton),
Jackson, Comment, on the Creed, vm. 14, Vol. vii. p. 502 sq.
1 All the best commentators now admit, what indeed there never ought to have
been any doubt of, the real and objective nature of the voice from heaven. It
may be observed that those who heard appear to be divisible into three classes :
(1) the more dull-hearted, who heard the sound, recognized from whence it came,
but mistook it for thunder ; (2) the more susceptible hearers, who perceived it to
be a voice, and imagined it to be angelical, but were unable to distinguish what
was uttered ; (3) the smaller circle, of which the apostle who relates the occur
rence was one, who both heard the voice, knew whence it came, and were ena
bled to understand the words that were spoken. See the note of Meyer, in loc.
p. 361 (ed. 3), and the brief but good comment of Chrysostom, in Joann. Horn.
ixvu. Vol. viii. p. 461 (ed. Bened. 2), who has noticed the first and second
classes of hearers.
2 The opinion of Chrysostom, Theophylact, and others, that the disciples were
led to call our Lord's attention to the solidity of structure (Mark xiii. 1) and
general magnificence (Luke xxi. 5) of the temple from a remembrance of His
recent declaration, ISov atpieTcu. vpiiv 6 oIkos bpiuv epnpios (Matt, xxiii. 38), seems
highly probable. A declaration of speedy and all but present desolation (atple-
toi), when all around was so grand and so stable, appeared to them wholly
inexplicable. On the nature of the buildings, see Joseph. Antiq. xv. 11. 5, Bell.
Jud. v. 6. 6, and comp. Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Matt. xxiv. 1.

Lect. VH. THE LAST PASSOVER. 289
His final departure. Such boding words called for yet
fuller explanation. On their homeward journey, as the
Lord was sitting on the Mount of Olives, to
,,. , i'iti i Matt. xxiv. 3.
contemplate perchance yet again the doomed
city and temple of which the desolation had
even now begun, four of His apostles,1 Peter, and James,
and John, and Andrew, come to Him with
, . . . , , . ~ . Mark xixi. 8.
the solemn inquiry when this mournful
prophecy was to be fulfilled, and when* the end of this
earthly state of things, which they could not but connect
with the end of the theocracy,2 was to be looked for by the
children of men. In a manner strikingly and
° * Matt. xxiv. 3.
appropriately similar to that in which the Markxm.4.
-, , -r -i . Luke xxi. 7.
question was proposed does our Lord return
His answer. In a prophecy, in which at first the fate of
the Holy City and the end of the world are Matt. xxv. 1 sq.
mysteriously blended,3 but which gradually, a. xxv. u, seep.
, t. ., , , , & ii 252, note 1, ad fin.
by means of the solemn parables of the
Ten Virgins and the Talents, and the revelation that
1 According to St. Matthew, the question was proposed by the fiafrqral gener
ally, — a statement which, when coupled with the further remark of both Evan
gelists, that it was proposed privately (Matt. xxiv. 3, Mark xiii. 3), admits of
the easy and obvious explanation, that none except the chosen twelve were
present when the question was proposed, and that the four apostles mentioned
by St. Mark acted as spokesmen for the rest. A good description of the scene
and its accessories will be found in Milman, Hist, of Cliristianity, Vol. i. p.
317 sq.
2 It has been correctly observed (compare Lange, Leben Jesu, Part II. p. 1257,
note) that the two^questions proposed to our Lord ought not to be separated too
sharply, or regarded as definitely referring to separate and distinct periods, but
only as referring generally to the period when the destruction recently foretold
by our Lord was actually to take place ; with this event they instinctively con
nect the advent of the Messiah (compare Matt. xxiv. 3 with Mark xiii. 4 and
Luke xxi. 7), and of this they not unnaturally ask for the prevenient sign. The
connection of these two events in the mind of the apostles was not improbably
due to a share in the "sententia apud gentem receptissimii de rpiaw "^nn,
Doloribus Messice [compare Hos. xiii. 13], id est, de calamitatibus, quas expecta-
runt futuras ad adventum Messise." — Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Marc xiii. 9.
Compare also Schoettgen, loc cit. Vol. ii. p. 550.
8 The limits and general character of these notes preclude any regular discus
sion of this solemn and difficult prophecy. It may be remarked, however, (a)
that it appears exegetically correct, with the* majority of modern expositors, to
recognize a change of subject at Matt. xxiv. 29 (not, with Chrys., at ver. 23), so
that what has preceded is to be referred mainly, but not exclusively, to th*
25 '

290 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
follows, unfolds itself into a distinct declaration of the
circumstances of the Last Judgment, the Saviour of the
world vouchsafes an explicit answer to the questions of
His amazed hearers ; yea, too, and on the slopes of that
very mountain where mysterious prophecy1 seems to indi
cate that He who then spake as our Redeemer will here
after appear as our King and our Judge.
The day that followed was spent in that holy retirement
into which, as it would seem from St. John,
th^°sMrZan% oxxv Lord now solemnly withdrew, and ap-
?wetnZ!d%)Ma3 Pears onlJ to have been marked by two
events, first the formal and deliberate consul-
ex. xii.SS. 7
tation of the Sanhedrin how they might best
carry out their designs, and secondly their compact with
the traitor Judas, who perhaps might have
Matt.xxm.3. aVailed himself of this very retirement of
Lune xxii. 3. "
our Lord for seeking out the chief priests,
and for bringing the designs of his now satanically
possessed heart to their awful and impious completion.
On the next day, and, as we may perhaps with some
reason be led to think, so near its close2 as to be really on
destruction of Jerusalem ; what follows, mainly but not exclusively (see below)
to our Lord's second advent and the final judgment; (b) that the difficult word
ev&eois (bptov yap ox&bv airavra ylverai, Chrys.) is to be explained by the
apparent fact that towards the close of the former part of the prophecy the
description of the events connected with the fall of Jerusalem becomes identical
with, and gradually (ver. 27, 28) passes into, that of the end of the world; (c)
that the appended parable (ver. 32 sq.) refers to both events, the ndvra ravra
(ver. 34) belonging exclusively to the events preceding the fall of Jerusalem, and
standing in clear contrast to the rjpiepa 4 k elvi) (ver. 36) which obviously refers
exclusively to the end of the world. For more special explanations the student
may be referred to the excellent comments of Chrysostom, in Matt. Horn.
lxxv.— lxxvii., Stier, Disc, of Our Lord, Vol. iii. p. 244 sq. (Clark), Lange,
Leben Jesu, II. 6. 7, Part n. p. 1253, and, with reservations, to the special trea
tises of Dorner (de Orat. Chr. Eschatblog. Stuttg. 1844), E. J. Meyer (Komment.
zu Matt. xxiv. xxv., Frankf. 1857), and the commentary of Meyer (H. W.), p.
433 sq. (ed. 4).
1 On the prophetic declaration of the appearance of the Lord on Olivet (Zech.
xiv. 4), and its supposed reference to the circumstances of His second advent,
and to the locality of His seat of judgment, see Jackson, On the Creed, Vol. x.
p. 196.
2 See Greswell, Dissert, xli. Vol. iii. p. 170 sq., where it is shown, on the
authority of Maimonides and Apollinarius of Laodicea that the proper begin-

Lect. VTI. THE LAST PASSOVER. 291
the commencement (according to Jewish reckoning) of the
fourteenth of Nisan, the day on which the
paschal lamb was to be killed and preparation Cf the Last supper
made for the celebration of the Passover, we <-Tlmn'la^-
are told by the three Synoptical Evangelists f^^z
that our Lord answers the inquiry of His
disciples, where He would have preparation made for eating
the Passover, by sending Peter and John to
r. i i. . « . ., Luke xxii. B.
the house of a believing follower1 with a
special message, and with orders there to make ready.
Thither, it would seem, our Lord shortly afterwards fol
lowed them with the rest of the disciples, and partook of
a supper, which the distinct expressions of the first three
Evangelists2 leave us no ground for doubting was a pas
chal supper, but which the equally distinct expressions of
the fourth Evangelist,3 combined with the peculiar nature
ning of any feast-day was reckoned from the night [eve] which preceded it.
The fourteenth of Nisan, though not, strictly considered, a portion of the festival
(comp. Joseph. Antiq. ill. 10. 5), was popularly regarded as such, and, from the
putting away of leaven, which took place immediately it commenced, and the
cessation from servile labor (comp. Mishna, " Pesach," iv. 5), was usually spoken
of as the " first day of unleavened bread " (Matt. xxvi. 17, Mark xiv. 12. See
Joseph. Antiq. n. 15. 1, who speaks of the festival as lasting eight days, and
compare Lightfoot, in Marc. xiv. 12, Friedlieb, Archdol. § 17, p. 42).
1 This supposition seems justified by the peculiar use of the words specified by
all the three Synoptical Evangelists, 3 SiSdcKaAos \4yei (Matt. xxvi. 18,
Mark xiv. 14, Luke xxii. 11), and still more by the peculiar and confidential
terms of the message. Compare Kahnis, Lehre vom Abendm. p. 5. When we
farther remember that the bearers of the message were our Lord's most chosen
apostles, we shall feel less difficulty in admitting the apparently inevitable con
clusion (see below) that the supper was prepared within what we have seen were
popularly considered the limits of the festival, but actually one day before the
usual time.
2 These are especially (bayeiv to irdffxa (Matt. xxvi. 17, Mark xiv. 12, Luke
xxii. 7) and eTotpid^etv to irdo'xa. (Matt. xxvi. 19, Mark xiv. 16, Luke xxii. 13),
both of which all sound principles of interpretation wholly preclude our refer
ring, either here or John xviii. 28 (opp. to Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 381 sq.),
to the paschal supper. Comp. Gesenius, Thesaur. Vol. ii. p. 1115.
3 These are (a) Xva tpdyuatv rb irdo'xa (ch. xviii. 28), alluded to in the above
note, and referred to the day following that which we are now considering; (6)
the special note of time (ch. xiii. 1) in reference to a supper which it seems
nearly impossible (opp. to Lightfoot, in Matt. xxvi. 6) to regard as different
from that referred to by the Synoptical Evangelists ; (c) the definition of time,
irapaffKevii rov irdo'xa (ch. xix. 14), which it seems equally impossible (opp. to
Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 336), in the language of the N . T., to understand

292 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
of our Lord's message to the householder, give us every
reason for believing was celebrated twenty-
a .xxvi. . hours earlier than the time when it was
John xmn. 28. celebrated by the chief priests and Pharisees,
and apparently the whole body of the nation.1 While
otherwise than as " the preparation," or day preceding the Passover. See Meyer
in loc. p. 478 (ed. 3), and Kitto, Journal of Sacr. Lit. for 1850, xi. p. 75 sq. ; (d)
the statement that the Sabbath in the Passover week was " a high day " (ch. xix.
31), which admits of no easy or natural explanation except that of a coincidence
of the important Nisan 15 with the weekly Sabbath. The statements are so
clear, that to attempt, with Wieseler (Chron. Synops.), Robinson (Biblioth.
Sacr. for Aug. 1845), and others, to explain them away, must be regarded as arbi
trary and hopeless.
1 From what is here said, and the above notes, it will be seen that we adopt
the view of the Greek Fathers, and indeed of the primitive Church generally
see the quotations in Greswell, Dissert, xli. Vol. iii. p. 168 sq., and add Clem.
Alex, on St. Luke, Sermon cxli. Part n. p. 660, Transl.), that, even as Tal-
mudical tradition (Babyl. " Sanbedr." VI. 2) also asserts, our Lord suffered on
Nisan 14, and that He ate the paschal supper on the eve with which that day
commenced. In favor of this opinion we may briefly urge, on the positive side,
(a) the statements of St. John above alluded to; (&) the peculiar nature of the
message sent to the olKoSeo"ir6Tns, which seemB to refer to something special and
unusual. See above, p. 291, note 1; (c) the words tovto to irdo'xa (Luke
xxii. 15), and the desire expressed by our Lord (ib.), both of which well coincide
with the assumption of a peculiar celebration ; (d) several apparent hints in the
Synoptical Gospels that the day on which our Lord suffered was not marked by
the Sabbatical rest which belonged to Nisan 15. Comp. xxvii. 59 sq., Mark xv.
21 (?), 42, 46, Luke xxiii. 26 (?), 54, 46; (e) the anti-typical relation of our Lord
to the paschal lamb (1 Cor. v. 7), in accordance with which the death of our
Redeemer on the very day and hour when the paschal lamb was sacrificed must
be reverently regarded as a coincidence of high probability. See Euthym. in
Matt. xxvi. 20. On the negative side, we may observe (/) that the main objec
tion, founded on the necessity of the lamb being killed in the temple (Lightfoot,
in Matt. xxvi. 19, Friedlieb, ArchUol. § 18, p. 47), is somewhat shaken by the lan
guage of Philo, adduced by Greswell 1. c, p. 146, and still more so by the proba
bility that the time specified for killing the lamb, viz., " between the two even
ings" (Exod. xii. 6, Lev. xxiii. 3, Numb. ix. 3), might have been understood to
mean between the eves of Nisan 14 and Nisan 15 (see Lee, Serm. on Sabb. p. 22),
and that more especially at a time when the worshippers had become so numer
ous that above two hundred and fifty-six thousand lambs (see above, p. 263,
note 1) would have had to be sacrificed in about two hours, if the ordinary
interpretation of the D^aiSn "pa had been rigorously observed. Again, (g)
the silence of St. John as to the paschal nature of the supper is in no way more
singular than his silence as to its Eucharistic character. Both were well-known
features which it did not fall in with his divinely ordered plan here to specify.
All that it was necessary to add so as to obviate all misapprehension he does
add, viz., that the supper was before the Passover; ch. xiii. 1. Lastly, (h) if we
accept the highly probable statement that our Lord suffered A. D. 30, and the
nearly certain statement that the day of the week was Friday (see Wieseler,
Chron. Syn. p. 334 sq.), then, beyond all reasonable doubt, He suffered on Nisan

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 293
they are taking their places at the table the same unbe
coming contention for priority, which we have already
noticed on previous occasions, again shows
in 11 i r. i i Seepage260.
itself, called forth, perhaps, in the present
case, by a desire to occupy the places nearest One
towards whom every hour was now deepening their love
and devotion. But such demonstrations were unmeet
for the disciples of Jesus Christ ; such contentions, though
not without some excuse, must still be lovingly repressed.
And in no way could this be more tenderly done than by
the performance of every part of an office —
,«. ,. ,y.7., , ¦ John xiii. 4, &.
that of washing the feet of those about to sit
down to meat — which Usually fell to the lot of a servant,1
but was now solemnly completed in the case of each one
of them, yea, the traitor not excepted, by Him whom they
called, and rightly called, their Master and
their Lord. And now the supper had com
menced,2 and round the Saviour were gathered, for the last
14, and ate the Passov«r on the first lusurs of that day the eve before, — calcuia-,
tion clearly showing that in that year the new moon of Nisan was on Wednes
day, March 22, at 8h. 8m. in the evening, and that, consequently, if we allow the
tisual two days for the phase (see Greswell, Dissert. Vol. i. p. 320), Nisan 1 com
menced (according to Jewish reckoning) on Friday evening March 24, but really
coincided as to daylight with Saturday, March 25, or Nisan 14 with Friday
April 7- Compare Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 446, whose own tables (indepen
dently proved to be accurate) may thus be used against him. See also above, p.
282, note 1. More might he urged, but the above considerations may perhaps
lead us to pause before we reject a mode of reconciliation so ancient, so free
from all forcings of language, and apparently so reasonable and trustworthy.
For notices of the many different treatises on this difficult subject, see Winer,
BWB. Art, " Paspha," Vol, ii, p, 202, and Meyer, Komment. ub. Jolt, xviii. 28, p.
J63 sq, (ed- 3),
1 See Friedlieb, Aroh'dol. , 20, p. 64, and Meyer in loc p. 375 (ed. 3). It may be
pbserved that there is some little difficulty in arranging the circumstances of the
Last Supper in their exact order, as the narrative of St. Luke is not in strict
harmony with that of St, Matthew and St, Mark. Of the various possible ar
rangements, the connection adopted in the text, which is closely in accordance
with that qf tha best recent harmonists, seems, on the whole, the most satisfac
tory, gee ~Y? ieseler, Chron. Synops, p, 398 sq., Robinson, Harmony, p. 153 (Tract.
Soc), and comp, Greswell, Dissert, Slii. Vol. iii. p, 179 sq.
2 There seems some reason for aocepting, with Tischendorf, the reading of
BXX, Cant., Orig. (4), Seiirvov yivou4vov (John xiii. 2), according to which the
time would seem to be indicated when our Lord and His apostles were just in
(he act pf sitting down, Comp. Meyer, in loo. Even, however, if we retain the
25*

Ver. 1.
Ver. 21.

294 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VIL
time, those whom He loved so well, and loved even unto
the end. And yet the hand of the betrayer
was on the table, — a thought, we are told,
that so moved the very inward spirit of the
Lord that He solemnly announced it, and brought it home
by a general indication1 to that small and saddened com
pany that sat around Him, and that now
Matt. xxvi. 22. , ., TT. , _ , • i i
asked Him, each one of them in the deep
trouble of his heart, whether it were possible that it
could be he. After a more special and pri-
ver.S"' vate indication had been vouchsafed, and
MarkxHf'if' *ne self-convicted son of perdition had gone
forth into the night, followed in due and sol
emn order the institution of the Eucharist,3 and with it
those mysterious words that seem to imply that that most

received text, yevoaevov, the meaning cannot be " supper being ended " (Autb.
Ver. ; compare Friedlieb, Archdol. p. 64) ; for compare ver. 4, 12, 26, but, " when
supper had begun, had now taken place." Comp. Liicke, Commentar uber Joh.
Vol. ii. p. 548 (ed. 3).
1 It seems incorrect and uncritical to confuse the general indication specified
in the Synoptical Gospels, & 4piBd^as pier' 4ptov t}jv X€'Pa (Matt. xxvi. 23) or
6 4riBairT6/.tevos k. t. K. (Mark xiv. 20), with the more particular one John xiii.
26. The first merely indicates what is in fact stated by St. John in ver. 18, that
the betrayer was one of those who were now eating with our Lord ; the second
is a special indication more particularly vouchsafed to St. John, though perhaps
in some degree felt to be significant by the rest of the Apostles. See Stier,
Disc of Our Lord, Vol. vii. p. 49 (Clark). The change of tense in St. Mark
6 4p.Battr6ii.evos (" the dipper with me," etc.) has been alluded to by Meyer (in
loc.) as indicating that Judas sat in close proximity to our Lord. This does not
seem improbable (comp. John xiii. 26), and may be thought to favor the idea
that St. John was on one side of our Lord, and the traitor on the other. If,
however, we accept the reading of Lachmann and Tischendorf in ver. 24, vevet
olv Siliwj/ rieVpos Ka! \e7e1 avTop Elite ris 4 a t i v, the usually re
ceived opinion that St. Peter was on the other side of our Lord will then seem
most natural.
2 This would seem not to have taken place till the traitor went out. The
strongly affirmative ab ehtas of St. Matthew (ch. xxvi. 25; compare Schoettg.
in loc.) appears to agree so well with the second and distinct indication of the
traitor in John xiii. 26, after which we know that he went out, that we can
hardly imagine that Judas was present at what followed. Again, John I. v.
seems to imply that the supper was going on, whereas it is certain that the cup was
blessed listo to Senrvriaai, Luke xxii. 20, 1 Cor. xi. 25. If this view be correct,
we must suppose that the departure of the traitor took place after Matt. xxvi.
25, and that ver. 26 4o-diovTwv Se abrcov refers to a resumption of the supper
after the interruption caused by his leaving the apartment.

Lect.VH. THE LAST PASSOVER. 295
holy sacrament was to have relation not only to the past,
but to the future ; that it was not only to be commemo
rative of the sad but blessed hour that then was passing,
but prophetic of that hour of holy joy when all should
again be gathered together, and the Lord should drink
with his chosen ones the new paschal wine in the king
dom of God.1 After a few melancholy words on the dis
persion and failing faith of all of those who were then
around, yea, and even more particularly of him who said
in the warmth of his own glowing heart that he would lay
down his life for his Master, and follow Him
to prison and to death, our Lord appears ^^"'i^sL
to have uttered the longer and reassuring
address which forms the fourteenth chapter of the Gospel
of St. John, and which ceased only to be
resumed again, perchance, while all were
standing in attitude to depart,3 in the sublime chapters

l The meaning of this mysterious declaration can only be humbly surmised.
It would appear, however, from the peculiar distinctness of the expressions
(tovtov rov yevvfifxaTos tt)s afiireAov, Matt. xxvi. 29), that there is a reference
to some future participation in elements which a glorified creation may sup
ply (comp. Rev. xxii. 2), perchance at that mystic marriage supper of the Lamb
(Rev. xix. 9), when the Lord and those that love Him shall be visibly united in
the kingdom of God, nevermore to part. The reference to our Lord's compan
ionship with His disciples after the resurrection (Theophyl., Euthym.) can never
be accepted as an adequate explanation of this most mysterious yet most exalt
ing promise. See especially Stier, Disc, of Our Lord, Vol. vii. p. 166 sq., and
compare Krummacher, The Suffering Saviour, ch. v. p. 44 (Clark).
'2 It scarcely seems probable that John xjr. 1 sq. was uttered in a different and
safer place (comp. Chrysost. in loc.) than that in which the preceding discourse
had been delivered, still less that it was uttered on the way to Gethsemane. The
view adopted by Luthardt {das Johann. Evang. Part. n. p. 321), Stier {Disc, of
Our Lord, Vol. vi. p. 266), and other recent expositors, viz., that our Lord uttered
the discourses in the fifteenth and two following chapters in the paschal apart
ment, on the point of departure, and with the disciples standing round Him,
seems much more natural. The reference to the vine (ver. 1} has led to several
arbitrary assumptions, e. g., that it was suggested by the vineyards through
which they are to be supposed to have been passing (Lange, Leben Jesu, Part
ii. p. 1347), or by The vine on the door of the holy place (Joseph. Antiq. xv. 11.
3), to which it has been thought allusion may have been made (Lampe, in Joe).
If we are to presume that this heavenly discourse waB suggested by anything
outward, "the fruit of the vine," of which all had so solemnly partaken, would
seem to he the more natural object that gave rise to the comparison. See Gro
tius in h?e.t and Stier, Disc, of Our Lord7 Vol. vi. p. 269 (Clark).

296 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
which follow. With the high-priestly prayer in the
seventeenth chapter, in which, as it were, in rapt and holy
retrospect the Lord contemplates and dedicates to His
heavenly Father His completed work,1 the solemn scene
comes to its exalted close.
Still followed by the yet undispersed eleven, our Lord
now leaves that upper room which had been
GefslmZTThur's- the witness of such adorable mysteries, and, ^
day nighty passing out of the city and down the deep
John xviii. 1. r ° J . L
gorge on its eastern side, crosses over the
Kedron to a garden at the foot of the Mount of Olives,
where, as we learn from St. John, He was
uL^'.%°"np' often wont to resort, and to which the pro
duce of the adjacent hill gave the name of
Gethsemane.2 Arrived at this spot, the Lord leaves the
greater part of His saddened Apostles in the
Comp. Matt. dxvi. °
«¦ outskirts of the garden, while with His three
Ver. 36. . '
more especially chosen attendants, Peter and
the two sons of Zebedee, He Himself advances farther into
the solitude and gloom.3 And now was solemnly disclosed
1 Though it is right to be cautious in pressing grammatical distinctions, it
still 6eems probable that the significant aorists in John xvii. 4 sq., 4S6£atra,
4reKelaitra, 4tpav4ptatra k. t. A., point to a contemplation, on the part of the
Saviour, of His work on earth as now completed and concluded. He now
stands as it were at the goal, and in holy retrospect commends both His work
and those loved ones who had been permitted to witness it to the Eternal rather
in a prayer which has been rightly regarded by all deeper expositors *as the
most affecting and most sublime outpouring of love and devotion that stands
recorded on the pages of the Book of Life. See Luthardt, das Johann. Evang.
Part II. p. 354, and the admirable exposition of Stier, Disc of Our Lord, Vol.
vi. p. 421 sq.
2 The most probable derivation appears to be SJK'O t1i(" oil-press"). See
Winer, BWB. Vol. i. p. 424, and comp. Bynasus, de Morte Christi, n. 2. 6, Fart
II. p. 73. For an account of the place with which Gethsemane has been identi
fied by modern travellers, see Robinson, Palestine, Vol. i. p. 234 sq. (ed. 2.),
Smith, Diet, of Bible, Vol. i. p. 684; but compare Thomson, Land and the Book,
Vol. ii. p. 483. For a representation, see Robertson and Beato, Views of Jerusa
lem, No. 20.
s The conjecture of Dean Alford that our Lord retired with the three Apos
tles into a portion of the garden from which tbe moonlight might have been
intercepted by the rocks and buildings on the opposite side of the gorge, does
not seem improbable, or at variance with the supposed site, Comp. Robinson,
Palestine, Vol. i. p. 235.

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 297
a mystery of unimaginable sufferings and woe. Removed
from the three Apostles, but only at such a
• • i ... Matt. xxvi. 39.
distance that their eyes might still behold
and their poor human hearts strive to sympathize1 with
the now consciously deepening agony of
their beloved Master, the Eternal Son kneels, Luke xxii. «.
bows, and falls forward on the earth. Twice Markxtv. ss.
did the prayer pass those suffering lips, that if it were pos
sible, — if it were compatible with His Father's glory and
the world's salvation, — this cup, this cup of a present
anguish, in which, in an awful and indivisible unity, all the
future was included, might pass from Him;2 and twice,
with words of meekest resignation, did He
yield Himself to the heavenly will of Him ya.'£[m' '
with whom He Himself was one. Twice
did He return to the three chosen ones whom He had
bidden to watch with Him in this awful hour of utter-

l While, with the older expositors, we may reasonably believe that our Lord
was pleased to take the three Apostles with Him that they might be eye-wit
nesses to His church of His mysterious agony (&tTTe 4vSel£air&ui avro7s ra ttjs
Kvirns, Euthym. in Matt. xxvi. 37), we may perhaps al60, with the best modern
expositors, presume to infer from the special exhortation ypnyopelre pier'
4fiov (Matt. xxvi. 39) that the Redeemer of the world vouchsafed to desire the
human sympathy of these His chosen followers. See Stier, Disc, of Our Lord,
Vol. vii. p. 225, where the practical aspects of this opinion are fittingly alluded
to,tand compare Krummacher, The Suffering Christ, § 12, p. 96 (Clark), Ewald,
Gesch. Christus', p. 414.
2 To regard this most holy prayer as merely expressive of that shrinking from
death and suffering (Meyer, al.) which belongs to the nature our Lord was
pleased to assume, is as unfitting, on the one band, as it is precarious, on the
other, to refer the anguish and amazement that preceded it either to the visible
appearance (uin formil scilicet aliqua dira et horrenda," Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in
loc) of the Prince of Darkness, or to a sense of the punitive withdrawal of
the Paternal presence (Krummacher, p. 97, in language unwarrantably strong)
from Him who, though now feeling the full pressure of the burden of a world's
sin, not only could say, but did say, " Abba, Father." See Stier, Disc, of Our
Lord, Vol. vii. p. 237. Heavy indeed was the burden of sin, for it bowed the
Saviour to the earth (Mark xiv. 35); fearful the assaults of the powers of evil,
for their hour was at hand (Luke xxii. 53); but it was to the vivid clearness of
the Saviour's knowledge of the awful affinity between death, sin, and the powers
of darkness (see p. 287, note 2) that we may humbly presume to refer the truest
bitterness of the cup of Gethsemane. See Beck, Lehrwissenschaft, p. 514 (cited
by Stier), and compare Pearson, Creed, Vol. i. p. 234 (ed. Burt.), Jackson, Creed,
viii. 12. 4. Vol. vii. p. 472 sq.

298 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
most conflict, and twice did He find Himself bereft even
of human sympathy — unwatched with, unheeded, alone.
Yet a third time, if we here1 incorporate the narrative
of the third Evangelist, even while the min
istry of the sustaining angel and the thick-
falling drops of bloody sweat2 alike bore witness to an
agony fast transcending the powers of our common hu
manity, — yet a third time was that prayer offered to the
Eternal Father, and again was it answered by the meek
resignation of the Eternal Son. For the last time the
Lord returns to His slumbering Apostles, and
Mark xiv. «. q witQ wor(js tnat sadly remind them that
Matt. xxvi. 45. t .
the holy privilege of watching with their
suffering Master is finally lost and forfeited,3 He forewarns
them that the hour is come and the traitor nigh at hand.

1 It is perhaps doubtful whether we are to consider the appearance of the sus
taining angel recorded by St. Luke as after the first or after the second prayer.
However this may be, it seems right closely to connect the angelical ministra
tion and the agony recorded in the next verse. The infused physical strength
(4VKTXV01V ahriv, ver. 43; compare Matt. iv. 11) was exhibited in the more ago
nized fervency of the prayer ( 4KTevearepov irpoo-niixeTo, ver. 44), but in a man
ner that showed that the exhaustion of the human and bodily powers of the
Redeemer had now reached its uttermost limit. The omission of this verse (ver.
43) and of that which follows in some manuscripts [AB ; 13. 69, 124], and the
marks of suspicion attached to them in others (see Tisch. in loc), are apparently
only due to the mistaken opinion that the nature of the contents of the verses
was not consistent with the doctrine of our Lord's divinity.
2 It has been considered doubtful whether the comparison of the sweat to fall
ing drops of blood was only designed to specify the thickness and greatness of
the drops (Theophyl., Euthym., Bynseus), or whether it also implies that the
sweat was tinged with actual blood, forced forth from the pores of that sacred
body (comp. Pearson, Creed, Vol. i. p. 233, ed. Burt) in the agony of the struggle.
The latter opinion seems most probable, and most coincident with the language
of the inspired writer. If the use of aicel shows that what fell were not drops
of blood, but of sweat, the special addition of oVjuotos seems certainly to indi
cate the peculiar nature of the sweat, viz., as an ISpths cuaaToeiS^s (Diod. Sic.
Hist. xvii. 90), and to direct attention to that with which it was tinged and com
mingled. See Meyer on Luke xxii. 44, and for notices of partial analogies,
Jackson, Creed, Vol. vii. p. 483, Bynseus de Morte Christi, Part ii. p. 133.
3 The exact meaning of the words KaSevSere to \oiirbv Kal o.vairaveo-&e
(Matt. xxvi. 45) has been somewhat differently estimated. To find in them a
sort of mournful irony (Meyer, in loc), is, to use the mildest term, psychologi
cally unnatural, and to take them in an interrogative sense (Greswell, Dissert.
xlii. Vol. iii. p. 194), in a high degree improbable. We must, then, either supply
an el Svvaxr&e, with Euthymius, or, as seems much more natural, regard the

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 299
Nigh indeed he was ; for even now as the Lord was
speaking an armed heathen1 and Jewish
band, with torches and lanterns, led by the „„«."*"
lost Apostle, arrives before the entrance of Mark xiv. 43.
the garden. While they pause, perchance, zSeTxli 47
and stand consulting how they may best
provide against every possibility of escape, He whom they
were seeking, with all the holy calm of pre- John xviii. 4.
science, comes forth from the enclosure, and
stands face to face with the apostate and his company.
And now follows a scene of rapidly succeeding incidents,
— the traitor's kiss,2 the Lord's question to the soldiers, and
avowal of Himself as Him whom they were
. John xviii. 5.
seeking ; the involuntary homage of the ter
ror-stricken band ;s the tender solicitude of the Lord for

words as spoken with a kind of permissive force (Winer, Gram. } 43, p. 278),
and in tones in which merciful reproach was blended with calm resignation:
SetKvvs, oti obSev rrjs avruv Seirat Btrn&elas, Kal on Set irdvrojs avrbv irapaSo-
&5jj'ai.— Chrs. in loc. Horn, lxxxiii. With this the eyelpea&e, dyauev (ver.
46) that follows seems in no way inconsistent. The former words were rather in
the accents of a pensive contemplation, the latter in the tones of exhortation
and command. Comp. Mark xiv. 41, where the Inserted &ire'x« seems exactly
to mark the change in tone and expression.
1 From the term o-ireTpa used by St. John (ch. xviii. S), and the separate men
tion of birnperai 4k toiv hpxtep4a>v kcu Qapioaiosv, we must certainly conclude
that a portion of the Roman cohort (comp. Valcken. Scliol. Vol. i. p. 458), with
which the fortress of Antonia was usually garrisoned, was now placed at the
service of the chief-priestly party, probably for the sake of at once quelling any
opposition that might be offered, and thus of avoiding all chance of uproar at a
time when public tranquillity was always liable to be disturbed. See Friedlieb,
Archdol. f 21, p. 67. The notice of the "torches and lanterns" (John xviii. 3)
that were brought, though it was now the time of full moon, shows the deliber
ate nature of the plan, and the determination to preclude every possibility of
escape. Comp. Luthardt, das Johann. Evang. Part II. p. 378.
2 It may be observed that both St. Matthew (ch. xxvi. 49) and St. Mark (ch.
xiv. 45) specially use the compound form, KaTetpi\i]trev. To assert that this "is
only another word for etpl\ntrev" (Alford) seems very precarious, especially
when the nature of the case would render a studied manner of salutation highly
probable. Meyer appropriately cites Xenoph. Mem. ii. 6. 33, ojs Tabs Kahobs
tpi\tf]travr6s piov, robs 5* aya&obs KaratpiK'tiffavTOS.
3 The statement of Stier, that there was here " no specific miracle apart from
the standing miracle of our Lord's personality itself"' (Disc, of our Lord, Vol.
vii. p. 271), may very justly be called in question. It seems much more correct
to suppose, with the older expositors, that the mighty words eya) elut (compare
Mark vi. 50) were permitted to exercise their full miraculous force, in order that

300 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
His Apostles, and their reciprocated readiness to defend
Him, scantily armed as they were, even to
L^ke*xxu.ss. the death; the rash sword-stroke of Peter,
ver. 49. an(j tne healing touch of the divine hand;
Luke xxii. 51. n i • j?
the Lord's words of meek protest to the chief
priests 1 and multitude ; the flight of the terrified Apostles ;
the, binding and leading away of the now
forsaken Redeemer, — all of which we must
here not fail thus briefly to enumerate, but on the details
of which our present limits will not permit us to enlarge,
especially as there is still so much before us that requires
our more close and concentrated attention.
It was now deep in the night when that mixed Jewish
and Gentile multitude returned to the city
The preliminary .
examination before with Him whom the party of the Sanhedrin
had so long and so eagerly desired to seize.
Directed probably by those who sent them forth, or by
some of the chief priests and elders who we know were
anions; the multitude, the soldiers and Jewish
See below, note 1. ^ #
johnxmu.12. officers2 that were with them lead our Lord
away to the well-known and influential
Annas,3 who, if not as president of the Sanhedrin, yet
alike to friends and foes the voluntary nature of the Lord's surrender of Him
self might be fully declared. See Chrysostom, in loc, and compare the curious
remarks of Origen, in Matt. § 100, Vol. iii. p. 906 (ed. Bened.).
1 It seems clear, from the inclusive terms of Luke xxii. 53, that not only some
of the temple officers, but that some even of the members of the Sanhedrin had
either come with or recently joined (Euthym.) the crowd, and were now taking
a prominent part in the proceedings. To call this a " Verirrung der Tradition "
(Meyer, wo. Dak. p. 486) is as arbitrary as it is presumptuous. Such a fact is
neither unlikely in itself nor incompatible with the statements of the other
Evangelists. 2 The very distinct enumeration of those that took part in the present acts
(John xviii. 12) may perliaps hint at the impression produced by the preceding
events, which now led all to help (Luthardt), but is more probably only intended
to mark that Gentiles and Jews alike took part in the heinous act, y trtreTpa Kal
o xl^aPXos forming a natural designation of the one part, ol inrnperai tuv
'lovSaiuiv of the other.
3 This successful man was appointed high-priest by Quirinus, A. D. 12, and after
holding the office for several years was deposed by Valerius Gratus, the procu
rator of Judaea who preceded Pilate. Comp. Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 2. 1 sq. He
appears, however, to have possessed vast influence, as he not only obtained the

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 301
certainly as the father-in-law of the acting high-priest, was
the fittest person * with whom to leave our Lord till the
Sanhedrin could be formally assembled. The locality of
the examination that followed is confessedly most difficult
to decide upon, as the first and fourth Evangelists seem
here to specify two different places, though
...... . 1...1 • i t Matt. xxvi. 57.
indeed it requires but the simple and reason- Johnxviii 13
able supposition that Annas and Caiaphas
occupied a common official residence, to unite their testi
mony, and to remove many of the difficulties with which
this portion of the sacred narrative is specially marked.2
Be this as it may, we can scarcely doubt, from the clear
statements in St. John's Gospel, that a pre-
,. ¦ ... « . ., . -i Ch. xviii. 13— 24.
liminary examination of an inquisitorial na-
ture, in which the Lord was questioned,
perhaps conversationally, about His followers and His
teaching, and which the brutal conduct of
„ , - , Ver. 22.
one of the attendants present seems to show
was private and informal, took place in the palace of
Annas. Here, too, it would seem, we must also place the
high-priesthood for bis son Eleazar, and his son-in-law Caiaphas, but subse
quently for four other sons, under the last of whom James, the brother of our
Lord, was put to death. Comp. Joseph. Antiq. xx. 9. 1. It is thus highly prob
able that besides having the title of apxtepebs merely as one who had filled the
office, he to a great degree retained the powers he had formerly exercised, and
came to be regarded practically as a kind of de jure high-priest. The opinion
of Lightfoot that he was Sagan, is not consistent with the position of his name
before Caiaphas, Luke iii. 2 (see Vitringa, 06s. Sacr. vi. p. 529), and much less
probable than the supposition of Selden (revived and ably put forward by
Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 186 sq.) that he was the Nasi or President of the
Sanhedrin, an office not always held by the high-priest. Compare Friedlieb,
Archdol. § 7, p. 12. The latter view would well account for the preliminary
examination, but is not fully made out, and hardly in accordance with John
xviii. 13. See below.
1 The words -f\v yap irev&epos k. t. A. (John xviii. 13) seem certainly to point
to the degree of relationship as the cause of the sending. They are thus, to say
the least, not inconsistent with the supposition that Caiaphas was wholly in the
bands of his powerful father-in-law. Compare (thus far) Sepp, Leben Christi,
vi. 48, Vol. iii. p. 463 sq.
2 So Euthymius, in Matt. xxvi. 58, — a very reasonable conjecture, which has
been accepted by several of the best modern expositors. See Stier, Disc of our
Lord, Vol. vii. p. 306 (Clark).
26

XXVI.

302 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
three denials of St. Peter,1 the last of which, by the sort of
note of time afforded by the mention of the
Mark xiv. 72. .. - ^ , -, ,
second cock-crowing, must have occurred not
very long before the first dawning of day,2 and not improb
ably at the very time that the Saviour was being led away,
bound, to Caiaphas, across the court where
John xviii. 24. , . . . n.
the Apostle was then standing.
And now day was beginning to draw nigh ; yet, as it
would seem, before its earliest rays the whole
*£*£"££ body of the Sanhedrin had assembled, as
d™~ it was a case that required secrecy and
comp. Matt. (Jespatch, at the house of the high-priest
Caiaphas, whither the Lord had recently
been brought.3 The Holy One is now placed before his

l The difficult question of the harmony of the various accounts cannot here
be fully entered into. If we allow ourselves to conceive that in the narrative of
St. John the first and second denials are transposed, and that the first took place
at going out, rather than coming in, there would seem to result this very natura]
account, — that the first denial took place at the fire (Matt. xxvi. 69, Mark xiv.
66 sq., Luke xxii. 56, John xviii. 25), and was caused by the fixed recognition
(Luke xxii. 56) of the maid who admitted St. Peter ; that the second took place
at or near the door leading out of the court, to which fear might have driven
the Apostle (Matt. xxvi. 71, Mark xiv. 68 sq., Luke xxii. 58, John xviii. 17); and
that the third took place in the court, about an hour afterwards (Luke xxii. 59),
before several witnesses, who urged the peculiar nature of the Apostle's harsh
GalilEean pronunciation (see Friedlieb, Archdol. § 25, Sepp, Leben Chr. Vol. iii.
p. 478 sq.), and near enough to our Lord for Him to turn and gaze upon His now
heart-touched and repentant follower. Minor discordances, as to the number
and identity of the recognizers, still remain ; but these, when properly considered,
will only be found such as serve the more clearly to show not only the indepen
dence of the inspired witnesses, but the living truth of the occurrence. For
further details see a good note of Alford on Matt. xxvi. 69, Robinson, Harmony,
p. 166 note (Tract Society), and compare Lichtenstein, Lebensgesch. Jes. p. 427 sq.
2 From a consideration of passages in ancient writers (esp. Ammian. Marcel-
linus, Hist. xxii. 14) Friedlieb shows that the second cock-crowing must be as
signed to the beginning of the fourth watch, and consequently to a time some
where between the hours of three and four in the morning. See Archdol. § 24,
p. 79, Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 406, and compare Greswell, Dissert, xiii. Vol.
iii. p. 211 sq.
3 From the above narration it will be seen that the contested air4o-Tet\ev ( Jobn
xviii. 24) is taken in its simple aoristic sense, and as defining the end of the pre
liminary examination before Annas, of which the fourth Evangelist, true to the
supplemental nature of his Gospel (see p. 30, note 3), alone gives an account.
The usual pluperfect translation (" miserat") is open, in a case like the present.
to serious objection in a mere grammatical point of view (consider the examples

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 303
prejudiced and embittered judges, and proceedings at
once commenced. These were probably not gravely
irregular. Though neither the time nor perhaps the place
of meeting were strictly legal in the case of a capital trial
like the present, there still does not seem any reason, for
supposing that the council departed widely from the out
ward rules of their court.1 With vengeance in their hearts,
yet, as it would seem, with all show of legal formality, they
forthwith proceed to receive and investigate the many
suborned witnesses that were now in readi
ness to bear their testimony. But conviction
is not easy. The wretched men, as we may remember, so
gainsayed each other that something further
seemed required before the bloody sentence vZ.sT'^'
which so many present had now ready on
J r J Matt. xxvi. 63.
their lips could with any decency be pro-
nounced. Meanwhile the Lord was silent.
The witnesses were left to confute or contradict each
other;2 even the two that affected to repeat words actu-

in Winer, Gr. § 40, p. 246), especially as the verb has a pluperfect in regular use ;
even, however, if these be waived, the exegetical arguments against it seem
plainly irresistible. See Stier, Disc, of Our Lord, Vol. vii. p. 307 (Clark).
1 As the council had now, it would seem (Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Matt. xxvi.
3), ceased to occupy its formal hall of meeting on the south side of the temple,
called Gazith (rvTan fiSloV conclave caesi lapidis), and had moved elsewhere
(see Friedlieb, Archdol. § 5, p. 10; and correct accordingly Milman, Hist, of
Christianity, chap. vii. Vol. i. p. 336, note, and p. 344), meetings in the city and
in the house of the high-priest may have become less out of order. The time,
however, was not in accordance with the principle, " judicia capitalia transi-
gunt interdiu, et finiunt interdiu " ( Gem. Babyl. " Sanhedr." iv. 1), as the com
ment of St. Luke &s 4yevero ijaepa (ch. xxii. 66) would appear to refer to the
concluding part of the trial, of the whole of which he only gives a summary.
Compare Meyer, in loc. p. 448. The preceding part of the trial would thus seem
to have been in the night. In other respects it is probable that the prescribed
forms were complied with. The Sanhedrists were doubtless resolved to condemn
our Lord to death at all hazards ; it still however seems clear, from the sacred
narrative (Matt. xxvi. 60, 61),' that they observed the general principles of the
laws relating to evidence. See Wilson, Ulustr. of the New Test. ch. v. p. 77, and
for a description of the regular'mode of conducting a trial compare Friedlieb,
Archdol. § 26, and the rabbinical quotations in Sepp, Leben Christi, vi. 48 sq.,
Vol. iii. p. 464 sq.
2 The difference of our blessed Lord's deportment before His different judges
is worthy of notice. Before Annas, where the examination was mainly conver-

304 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VH.
ally spoken, and even in this could not agree, were dis
missed without one question being put to
Mark xiv.Bs. them by the meek Sufferer, who, even as
Isaiah liii. 7. J
ancient prophecy had foretold, still preserved
His solemn and impressive silence. Foiled and perplexed,
the high-priest himself becomes interrogator.
Mark xiv. SO. or ^ _ ,.,,?,
Matt. xxvi. ss. With a formal adjuration, which had the
omp. ev. v. . eg-ect 0£ pUtting the accused under the obli
gation of an oath, he puts a question x which, if answered
in the affirmative, would probably at once ensure the Lord's
condemnation as a false Messiah,2 and as one against whom
the law relating to the false prophet might
xviu. *>!' """" ' be plausibly brought to bear. And the an
swer was given. He that spake avowed Him-
Markxiv. 62. & r
self to be both the Christ and the Son of
God ; yea, the Son of God in no modified or theocratic
sense,3 but whom their own eyes should behold sitting on

sational, He vouchsafes to answer, though, as Stier remarks, with dignified repul.
sion. Before the injustice of the Sanhedrin and the mockery of Herod He is
profoundly silent. Before Pilate, when apart from the chief priests and elders
(contrast Matt, xxvii. 12 — 14), He vouchsafes to answer with gracious forbear.
ance, and to bear testimony unto the truth. See Stier, Disc of our Lord, Vol.
vii. p. 311 (Clark).
1 The question, it has been not improbably supposed, was partially suggested
by the previous testimony about our Lord's destroying the temple, there being
an ancient rabbinical tradition that when the Messiah came He was to construct
a much more glorious temple than the one then existing. See especially Sepp,
Leben Christi, vi. 48, Vol. iii. p. 468 sq.
2 When the high-priest asked our Lord whether He were " the Christ, the Son
of God" (Matt. xxvi. 63), or "the Christ, the Son of the Blessed "(Mark xiv.
61), he was probably using with design a title of the Messiah, which, though not
appropriated by custom to the Messiah (see p. 239, note 1), was not wliolly un
precedented, and in the present case was particularly well calculated to lead to
some answer which might justify condemnation. If our Lord had answered
that He was truly the Messiah, it is possible the intention might have been to
put further questions as to His relation with the Father, and so lead Him to
declare before the Sanhedrin what they perhaps knew He had declared before
the people (John x. 30). It is, however, not improbable that the formal avowal
of Messiahship would have been deemed enough to justify condemnation accord
ing to the law alluded to in the text. See the following note. A 6ligbtly different
explanation is given by Wilson, Illust. of New Test. ch. iv. p. 64.
3 Whatever may have been the design of the high-priest in putting the ques
tion to our Lord in the peculiar terms in which we find it specified both by St.
Matthew and St. Mark, — whether it was merely a formal though unusual title,

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 305
the right hand of Him with whom equality was now both
implied and understood, and riding on the
r ' ° Matt. xxvi. 64.
clouds of heaven. With those words all Mark xiv. 02.
-, n m. ,., • . Matt. xxvi. 65.
was uproar and confusion, ihe high-priest,
possibly with no pretended horror,1 rent his clothes ; the
excited council put the question in the new form which it
had now assumed. Was it even so? Did the seeming
mortal that stood before them declare that He was the
Son of God? Yea, verily, He did.2 Then
•' Lukexxii.70.
His blood be on His head. Worse, a thou
sand times worse, than false prophet or false Messiah, —
a blasphemer, and that before the high-priesj;
and great council of the nation, — let Him S-fcS'ef
die the death.
After our Lord was removed from the chamber, or per
haps even in the presence of the Sanhedrin,
A .. The brutal mock-
began a fearful scene of brutal ferocity, in em of the attena-
which, possibly not for the first time in that
dreadful night,8 the menial wretches that held the Lord

or one chosen for sinister purposes, — the fact remains the same, that our Lord
gave marked prominence to the second portion of the title, using a known syn
onym and well-remembered passage (Dan. vii. 13) to make the meaning in which
He used it still more explicit, and that it was for claiming this that He was con
demned. See John xix. 7, and the very clear statements of Wilson, Ulustr. of
the N. T. p. 5 sq.
1 There seems no good reason for supposing this was either a " stage trick "
(Krummacher), or the result of a concerted plan. The declaration of our Lord
following the formally assenting 2u extras (Matt. xxvi. 64), introduced as it is by
the forcible ir\T\v (" besides my assertion, you shall have the testimony of your
own eyes;" compare Klotz, Devar. Vol. ii. p. 725), seems to have filled the
wretched Caiaphas with mingled rage and horror. He gives full prominence to
the last, that he may better satiate the first. On the ceremony of rending gar
ments, which we learn was to be performed standing (compare Matt. xxvi. 65),
and so that the rent was to be from the neck straight downwards (" fit stando ;
a collo anterius non posterius" — Maimon. ap. Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. p. 2146), see
Friedlieb, Archdol. § 26, p. 92, Sepp. Leben Christi, vi. 48, Vol. iii. p. 473, note.
2 In the words bue?s \eyere, Sti 4yd elut (Luke xxii. 70) the on is rightly
taken by the best expositors as argumentative (" because I am "), the sentence
here being, to use the language of grammarians, not objective, but causal. Com
pare Donalds. Gr. Gram. & 584, 615.
3 It is extremely doubtful whether Luke xxii. 63 — 65 is to be conceived as
placed a little out of its exact order, or as referring to insults and mockery in
the court of Annas. The exact similarity of the incidents with those specified
26*

306 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
now all took their satanic part, and in which the terms
used showed that the recent declaration of
Luke xxii. 63. ., /»*-*••
our Lord was used as a pretext for indigni
ties and shameless violence that verily belonged to the
hour of the powers of darkness. Meanwhile
Ver. 53.
Malt.xxvii.i. the confused court was again reassembled,
Mark xv. i. an(j^ a^.er gome consultation how their sen
tence could most hopefully be carried into effect,1 they
again bind our Lord, aud lead Him to Pon-
Matt. xxvii. 2. , , . ~. . ,
tius Pilate, who was now in his official res
idence in Herod's palace,2 and had, as usual, come to Jeru
salem to preserve order during the great yearly festival.
We may here pause for a moment to observe that, from
the connection in this portion of St. Mat-
j^ruu"fJmla" thew's narrative, it would certainly seem
reasonable to suppose that it was this last
act on the part of the Sanhedrin that served suddenly to
open the eyes of the traitor Judas to the real issues of his
appalling sin. Covetousness had lured him on ; Satan
had blinded him ; and he could not and would not look
forward to all that must inevitably follow. But now the

Matt. xxvi. 67 sq., Mark xiv. 65, make the first supposition perhaps slightly the
most probable.
1 The meeting of the council alluded to Matt, xxvii. 1, Mark xv. 1 (compare
Luke xxiii. 1, John xviii. 28), and defined by the second Evangelist as 4nl to
irpul (" about morning; " Winer, Gr. § 49, p. 363)j was clearly not a new meet
ing, but, as the language both of St. Matthew and St. Mark seems clearly to
imply, a continued session of the former meeting, and that, too, in its full
numbers (Kal '6\ov to avveSptov, Mark xv. 1). The question now before the
meeting was, how best to consummate the judicial murder to which they had
recently agreed.
2 Here appears to have been the regular residence of the procurators when in
Jerusalem. See Joseph. Bell. Jud. II. 14. 8, $\<2pos Se Tore 4v toIs Bao-i\elois
av\l(eTat (compared with Bell. Jud. n. 15. 5), and see Winer, BWB. Art.
"Richthaus," Vol. ii. p. 329. This has been recently denied by Ewald (Gesch.
Christus', p. 12), who states that the temporary residence of the procurators was
in an older palace, nearer to the fort of Antonia, but apparently on insufficient
grounds. For a description of Herod's palace, and notices of the size and
Bplendor of its apartments, see Joseph. Bell. Jud. v. 4. 4, Antiq. xv. 9. 3, and
compare Sepp, Leben Chr, VI. 63, Vol. iii. p. 496 sq., Ewald, Gesch. des Volk. Isr.
Vol. iv. p. 493.

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 307
lost man sees all. The priests,1 at whose feet he casts
the blood-money, jibe him in language al
most fiendish; his soul is filled with bitter- natt.xxvu.4.
ness, darkness, despair, and death. The son Acts i.25.
of perdition 2 goes to his own place.
But let us return to the further circumstances of our
Lord's trial. The Redeemer now stood
before the gates of him who bore the sword appearance before
in Jerusalem, awaiting the message which ^'fXnxva, &
the Sanhedrists, men who shrank from leaven
though they shrank not from blood, had sent into the
palace of the procurator, demanding, as it would seem,
that our Lord should at once be put to death as a danger
ous malefactor. With ready political tact the Roman
1 The use of the definite terms 4v t§ va$ (Matt, xxvii. 5) would certainly seem
to imply that the wretched traitor forced his way into the inner portion of the
temple, where the priests would now have been preparing for the approaching
festival (compare Sepp, Leben Chr. vi. 78, Vol. iii. p. 609), and there flung down
the price of blood. With regard to his end, it is plainly impossible to interpret
the explicit term airfiy£aro (Matt, xxvii. 5) in any other way than as specifying
a self-inflicted death by hanging. Compare the exx. in Greswell, Dissert, xlii.
Vol. iii. p. 220, note. The notice in Acts i. 18 in no way opposes this, but only
states a frightful sequel which was observed to have taken place by those,
probably, who found the body. The explanation of Lightfoot (Hor. Hebr. in
Matt. 1. c), according to which a7T^*y|aTO is to be translated " strangulaius est,
a Diabolo scilicet," is obviously untenable. We may say truly, with Chrysos
tom, that it was the mediate work of Satan (avaipel ireitras eavrbv arroKeaat),
but must refer the immediate perpetration of the deed to Judas himself. For
further accounts, all exaggerated or legendary, see the notices in Hofmann,
Leben Jesu, p. 333.
2 This title, given to the wretched man by our Lord Himself, in His solemn
high-priestly prayer (John xvii. 12; compare vi. 70), coupled with His previous
declaration, Ka\bv ?jv avTtp el ovk 4yevv4i&ri S biv&pttmos 4Ke1vos (Matt. xxvi.
24 ; compare hereon Krummacher, The Suffering Saviour, p. 69), will always be
regarded by sound thinkers as a practical protest against all the anti-Christian
attempts of later historical criticism (see the reff. in Meyer, Komment. ub. Matt.
p. 487) to palliate the traitor's inexpiable crime, and to make it appear that he
only wished to force our Lord to declare His true nature, and betrayed Him as
the best means of ensuring it. Whether such motives did or did not mingle
with the traitor's besetting sin of covetousness (comp. Ewald, Gesch. Chr. p. 398
sq.), we pause not to inquire; we only see in his fearful end the most dread
instance of the regular development and enhancement of sin in the individual
(see MUller, Doctr. of Sin, Book V. Vol. ii. p. 461, Clark) that is contained in the
history of man, and with awe we behold in him the only one who received his
sentence in person before the last day. See Stier, Disc, of our Lord,'Yo\. vii,
p. 66 sq., and a practical sermon by Pusey, Paroch. Serm. xii. Vol. ii. p. 197.

'308 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
comes forth at their summons, but, with a Roman's in
stinctive respect for the recognized forms of justice,
demands the nature of the charge brought
Ver. 29. .
against the man on whom his eyes now fell,
and whose aspect proclaimed His innocence. The accusers
at first answer evasively ; but soon, as it
„er' ' would seem from the narrative of St. Luke,
Ch. xxiii. 2. '
find an answer that they calculated could not
fail in appealing to a procurator of Judaea. With satanically
prompted cunning they carefully suppress the real grounds
on which they had condemned the Saviour, and heap up
charges of a purely political nature ; 1 chief among which
were specified, in all their familiar sequence to the procu
rator's ear, seditious agitation, attempted prohibition of
the payment of the tribute-money, and assumption of the
mixed civil and religious title of King of the Jews.2 It
seems, however, clear that from the very first the sharp-
sighted Roman perceived that it was no case for his tribu
nal, that it was wholly a matter of religious differences and
religious hate, and that the meek prisoner who stood
before him was at least innocent of the political crimes
that had been laid to His charge with such an unwonted
and suspicious zeal.3 The prescribed forms must, however,
be gone through ; the accused must be examined, and be
dealt with according to the facts which the examination
1 This fact has been alluded to by Wilson, Ulustr. of the New Test. p. 5, and
has been urged by Blunt, Veracity cf Gospels, § 13, p. 50 sq. (Lond. 1831.) It did
not escape the notice of Cyril Alex., who has some good comments upon the
changed character of the charges. Comment, on St. Luke, Part II. p. 709.
2 There are no sufficient grounds for rejecting, with Meyer (nb. Joh. p. 470,
ed. 3), the U6ual and very reasonable supposition that St. Luke's mention of the
charges preferred by the Sanhedrin (ch. xxiii. 2) is to be connected with Pilate's
question as recorded by St. John (ch. xviii. 29). It would seem that, at first, the
Sanhedrists hoped to urge the procurator to accept the decision of their own
court without further inquiry, but, finding this promptly and even tauntingly
(John xviii. 38) rejected, they then are driven to prefer specific charges. Comp.
Lange, Leben Jesu, ii. 7. 7, Part n. p. 1504 sq. On the nature of these charges
see Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. vii. p. 346 (Clark).
3 The remark of Pfenninger (cited by Stier) is just and pertinent, that "Pilate
knew too much about Jewish expectations to suppose that the Sanhedrin would
hate and persecute one who would free them from Roman authority."

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 309
may elicit. That examination, which (we may observe
in passing) was conducted by the procurator
. , -, ,-.., , . John xviii. 33.
in person,1 served to deepen Pilate s impres
sions, and to convince him that the exalted sufferer, whose
mien and words seem alike to have awed and attracted
him, was guiltless of everything save an enthusiasm which
the practical Roman might deem hopeless and visionary,2
but which it was in no way meet to punish with the sword
of civil justice. And the yet righteous judge acts on his
convictions. He goes forth to the Jews and declares the
Lord's innocence, and only so far listens to
... /. . , , ., . John xviii. 38.
the clamors of the accusers as to use their Luke xxiii. 5.
mention of the name of Galilee as a pretext
for sending our Lord to the Tetrarch of that country,3
who was now in Jerusalem as a so-called wor- Ver. 7.
shipper at the paschal festival. This course
the dexterous procurator failed not to perceive had two
great advantages : it enabled him, in the first place, to rid
himself of all further responsibility, and in the next it
gave him an opportunity of exercising the true Roman
state-craft of propitiating by a trifling act of political
courtesy a native ruler with whom he had been previously

» 1 Pilate, being only a procurator, though a procurator cum potestate, had no
quaestor to conduct the examinations, and thus, as the Gospels most accurately
record, performs that office himself. Compare Friedlieb, Archdol. § 31, p. 105.
2 On the character of Pihjte see below, p. 315, note 3. His memorable ques
tion, " What is truth? " (John xviii. 38) which occurred in the present part of the
examination, must apparently neither be regarded, with the older writers, as the
expression of a desire to know what truth really was (Chrys., al.), nor, again,
with some recent expositors, as the cheerless query of the wearied and baffled
searcher (Olshausen, al.), but simply as the half-pitying question of the practical
man of the world, who felt that truth was a phantom, a word that had no polit
ical import, and regarded the attempt to connect it with a kingdom and matters
of real life as a delusion of harmless though pitiable enthusiasm. See Meyer, in
loc. p. 472, Stier, Disc of our Lord, Vol. vii. p. 376 sq. (Clark), and compare
Luthardt, Johan. Evang. Part ii. p. 400.
3 Pilate here availed himself of a practice occasionally adopted in criminal
cases, viz., that of sending away (Luke xiii. 7, aveireuipev remisit) the accused
from the forum apprehensionis to his forum originis. Compare the partly sim
ilar case in reference to St. Paul (Acts xxv. 9 sq.), and the conduct of Vespasian
towards the prisoners who were subjects of Agrippa. — Josephus, Bell. Jud. in.
10. 10. See Friedlieb, Archdol. § 32, p. 107.

310 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VIL
at enmity,1 and with whose authority he had probably
often come in collision.
The sinful man2 before whom our Lord now was brought,
had, we are told by St. Luke, long desired to
ou?LraTJmrot see Him, and is now rejoiced to have the
ch.xxiu.3. wonder-worker before him.3 He puts many
questions, all probably superstitious or pro
fane, but is met only by a calm and holy silence. Super
stitious curiosity soon changes to scorn. "With a frightful
and shameless profanity, the wretched man, after mocking
and setting at nought Him whom a moment
xiAexxfu.il. Defore) if any response had been vouchsafed
to his curiosity, he would with equal levity
have honored as a prophet, now sends the
Lord back to Pilate, clad in a shining 4 kingly robe, as if to
l The cause of the enmity is not known, but is probably to be referred to some
acts on the part of the procurator which were considered by Herod undue as
sumptions of authority. It is possible that the recent slaughter of the Galilseans
mentioned Luke xiii. 1, if it did not give rise to, may still have added to the ill-
feeling. The discreditable attempts to throw doubt upon the whole incident, as
being mentioned only by one Evangelist, require no other answer than the nar
rative itself, which exhibits every clearest mark of truth and originality. Comp.
Meyer, Komment. ub Luk. p. 493 (ed. 3), Krummacher, The Suffering Christ, ch.
xxxi. p. 268.
2 On the character of this Tetrarch, which seems to have been a compound of
cunning, levity, and licentiousness, see above, p. 201, note 1.
3 The key to the present conduct of this profane man is apparently supplied*
us by the observant comment (comp. p. 43, n. 1) of the thoughtful Evangelist,
«at %ATn.£4v ti aijfxeiov ifieiv inr' avrov yev6fievov, Lube xxiii. 8. As long as
there seemed any chalice of this desire being gratifiad, Herod treated our Lord
with forbearance ; when it became evident that he was neither to see nor hear
anything wonderful, he gave rein to his wretched levity, and avenged his disap
pointment by mockery. On the incident generally, see Lange, Leben Jesu,
ii. 7. 7, Fart in. p. 1512 sq.
4 It has been thought that by the use of the terms itr&rjra Aaprrpav (Luke
xxiu. 11) the Evangelist intended to denote a white robe, and that the point of
the profane mockery was, that our Lord was to be deemed a " candidatus." See
Friedlieb, Archdol. § 32, ^p. 109, Lange, Leben Jesu, Part in. p. 1515. This seems
very doubtful; the word AapTrphs does not necessarily involve the idea of white
ness (the primary idea is "visibility" [kdto]; see Donaldson, Crat. § 452), nor
would the dress of a " candidate" imply the contempt which Herod designed to
express for the pretensions of this King so well as the " gorgeous robe" (Auth.
Ver.) of caricatured royalty. The remark, too, of Lightfoot seems fully in
point, " de veste alba cum aliis intellexerim, nisi quod videam hunc Evangelis-
tam, cum de veste alba, habet sermonem, albam earn vocare in terminis; " cap-
ix. 29, Acts i. 10. Hor. Hebr. in Luc. xxiii. 7.

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 311
intimate that for such pretenders to the throne of David
neither the Tetrarch of Galilee nor the Procurator of
Judssa need reserve any heavier punishment than their
ridicule and contempt.
We may well conceive that Pilate was much perplexed
at seeing our Lord again before his own tri-
¦i l T j.t_ j. i Second appear-
bunal. in the present appearance, however, ancebefore euate .¦
of the Saviour, the procurator plainly saw a ^rfJe"toM",!0'
practical exhibition of Herod's sentiments,
and at once resolved to set free one who he was now more
than ever convinced was a harmless enthusiast, wholly and
entirely innocent of the crimes that had been laid to His
charge. So, too, he tells the assembled chief
t , i t-* i n t-> . Luke xxiii. IS.
priests and people. But, alas for Koman jus
tice ! he seeks to secure their assent by a promise of inflict
ing punishment, lighter indeed by very far
than had been demanded,2 yet still by his
own previous declarations undeserved and unjust. But
this, though a most unrighteous concession, was far from
satisfying the bitter and bloodthirsty men to whom it was
made. Something perchance in their countenances and
gestures3 drove the now anxious judge to an appeal to the
people, who, he might have heard and even
i -i <. i i •! Markxv.t.
observed, were for the most part on the side
of the Prophet of Nazareth, and whose clamorous reque&ts
1 We may observe that St. Luke specially notices that on the return of our
Lord from Herod, Pilate assembled not only the chief priests and rulers, but the
people also (ch. xxiii. 13); he probably had already resolved to make an appeal
to them, if his present proposal (ver. 16) were not accepted. See above, p. 263,
note 1.
2 The punishment implied in the term vatSevtras (Luke xxiii. 16) is left unde
fined. It was, however, probably no severer than scourging. Comp. Hammond,
in loc Here was Pilate's first concession, and first betrayal of a desire, if pos
sible, to meet the wishes of the accusers. This was not lost on men so subtle
and so malignant as the Sanhedrists.
3 There is a slight difficulty in the fact, that, according to St. Luke (xxiii. 18;
ver. 17 is of doubtful authority), the request in reference to Barabbas comes first
from the people, and in St. Matthew (ch. xxvii. 17) that the proposal is made by
Pilate. All, however, seems made clear by the narrative of St. Mark (ch. xv.
8), who represents the people as making the request in general terms, and Pilate
as availing himself of it in the present emergency of this particular case.

312 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
now reminded him of a custom, not improbably instituted
by himself or his predecessors,1 which offered a ready mode
of subterfuge, — he will offer to release to them one of two,
the seditious and blood-stained robber Barab-
bas,2 or Jesus who was called, and whom but
lately so many of those present had triumphantly hailed
as the Christ. The choice cannot be doubtful. Meanwhile
he will ascend his tribunal formally to accept and formally
to ratify the judgment of the popular voice. Unhappy
man ! No sooner has he taken his seat 3 than
MatLxxvii. 19. _ , . . . . . r. «
a fresh appeal comes to him in the form ot
a message from his mysteriously warned wife,4 bidding

l The origin of the custom here alluded to is wholly unknown. If Luke xxiii.
17 were an unquestioned reading, it might seem as if it were some ancient (Jew
ish) custom (compare John xxviii. 39) to which the procurator was practically
obliged (avdyKnv elxev) to adhere. As, however, the verse has some appearance
of being a gloss, and as the other Evangelists seem to refer the custom to the
rryea&v (Matt, xxvii. 15), or to Pilate personally (Mark xv. 6, 8 ; comp. John
xviii. 39), we may perhaps best consider it as due to the shrewd Roman policy
of one of the early procurators, by which a not unusual pagan custom (see
Winer, BWB. Vol. ii. p. 202, ed. 3) was adopted as a contribution to the general
festivities and solemnities of the Passover. Compare Friedlieb, Archdol. § 33,
and, for general information on the subject, Bynjeus, de Morte Chr. in. 3, Vol.
iii. p. 57 sq., and the copious reff. in Hofmann, Leben Jesu, § 83, p. 360.
2 Nothing more is known of this insurgent than is specified in the Gospels.
From them we learn that his seditious movements took place in Jerusalem (Luke
xxiii. 19), that he had comrades in his undertaking (Mark xv. 7), and had also
acquired some notoriety (Matt, xxvii. 16). The reading which makes the name
to have been Jesus Barabbas is adopted by Ewald, Meyer and others, but has
very far from sufficient external support, and is now rightly rejected by Tischen
dorf in his last edition. See Vol. i. p. 154.
3 Compare Matt, xxvii. 19, Ko&npievov Se avrov 4irl tov B^ipuvros. This firjpuz
was a portable tribunal which was placed where the magistrate might direct,
and from which judgment was formally and finally delivered. In the present
case, as we learn from St. John (ch. xix. 13), it was erected on a (tessellated)
pavement, the position of which is unknown, but which was called in Greek
AiS-iSoTparroc and in Hebrew (probably from the slight ridge pi] on which it
may have been laid) Gabbatha, and perhaps formed the front of the procura
tor's residence. See Friedlieb, Archdol. § 31, p. 105, Winer, BWB. Art. "Lithos-
troton," Vol. ii. p. 29.
4 According to tradition, her name was Procla, or Claudia Procula, and her
sympathies Jewish. See Evang. Nicod. cap. 2, and the good comments of Hof
mann, Leben Jesu, § 79, p. 340 sq. The dream, which is specified by the Evangel
ist as of a disturbing or harrowing nature (iroWa eiro&ov, Matt, xxvii. 19), may
well be supposed, with some of the early expositors, to have been divinely sent,
though this need not preclude the further supposition that the woman had pre-

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 313
him not to condemn the Just One who stands before him.
But the agents of the priestly party are doing their work.
Many a fiendish whisper is running through
the crowd that the Nazarene was a blas
phemer, yea, a blasphemer in the face of the elderhood of
Israel, one who had claimed the incommunicable attributes
of Jehovah, and who Jehovah's word had said must expi
ate His profanity by His blood. It was
i . . ,.1 i , , Lev. xxiv. 16.
enough ; the worst passions of the rabble
multitude were now stirred up ; * the question is no sooner
formally proposed than the answer is returned with a fear
ful unanimity — " Not this man, but Barab-
bas." The astounded procurator for a mo- °"™^
1 Luke xxiii. 22.
ment tries to reason with them, but now it is
all in vain. The rabble and their satanic instigators press
their advantage ; wild voices are heard on
. , .... , Ver. 23.
every side ; tumult is imminent ; the un
happy and unrighteous judge gives way, and, by an act
which was probably as fully understood 2 as it was con
temptuously disregarded, strives to transfer the guilt of
innocent blood to the infuriate throng around him. Fear
fully and frantically they accept it, but their
end is now gained: Barabbas is set free;'
the holy Jesus is given up to their will.
viously heard of our Lord, and was now more than ever impressed with a feeling
of His holiness and innocence. Most expositors here rightly call attention to
the fact that former laws by which Roman magistrates might have been pro
hibited from taking their wives with them were not now observed. See esp.
Tacit. Annal. in. 33,_34, and compare Sepp, Leben Chr. vi. 56, Vol. iii. p. 507.
1 The strong word avevettrav (Mark xv. 11) seems to show the determined way
in which the priestly party were now endeavoring to turn the current of popu
lar feeling against our Lord. It was in consequence of this that we have that
tutored unanimity of clamor which is specially noticed by three of the Evangel
ists. Comp. Matt, xxvii. 22, Luke xxiii. 18, John xviii. 40.
2 It has been doubted whether Pilate, in washing his hands (according to the
apocryphal Evang. Nicodemi, cap. 8, " before the sun "), was following a heathen
or a Jewish custom. The latter view, which is that adopted by the sensible com
mentator Euthymius, seems, on the whole, most probable. See Deut. xxi. 6, and
comp. Thilo, Cod. Apocr. p. 573 sq., Hofraann, Leben Jesu, $ 83, p. 361.
3 It has been thought by some modern writers (Sepp, Leben Chr. Vol. iii. p.
502, Wratislaw, Serm. and Dissert, p. 8) that this has an antitypical reference to
27

314 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
Now followed the scourging, preliminary to crucifixion,
the crown of thorns,1 the scarlet robe,2 and
£7:r?ZutdZ- all the horrible mockery of the brutal sol-
farlr(^: diery, the Gentile -counterpart of the appall-
Matt. xxvu. 2s,sg. j scenes of fiendish derision in which
Mark xiv. 65. °
Jews had taken part scarcely two hours
before. The heart of the hapless Pilate was perhaps in
some degree touched ; and, judging from what even a
Roman could feel for one of the stubborn nation over
which he ruled, he strove to make one last appeal to the
wild Jewish multitude without,8 by showing to them, with
the garb of mockery flung around that lacerated and bleed
ing form, the man — the man of their own
race and nation, whom they had given up to
such sufferings and such shame. But even this last appeal
was utterly in vain. Nay, worse than in vain.
comp. Lev. xxiv. That pity-moving sight only calls from the
priestly party fresh outbursts of ferocity;
the charge is only the more vehemently repeated : " By
the ceremony of the scapegoat. This seems in itself in a high degree doubtful,
and that more especially as the ancient interpreters all rightly consider the two
goats as both typifying Christ, the one in His death, the other in His resurrec
tion. See Barnab. Epist. cap. 7, Ephrem. Syr. in Lev. xvi. 20, Vol. i. p. 244 sq.
(Roma?, 1737).
1 The question of the exact species of the thorn it is not here necessary to
discuss; the rhamnus nabeca (Hasselquist) and the lycium spinosum (Sieber)
have both been specified by competent observers as not unfitted for the purpose ;
but of these the latter seems the more probable. See Friedl., Archdol. § 34, p. 119,
Hofmann, Leben Jesu, § 84, p. 373. As mockery seems to have been the primary
object (t<£ OTetpdvtp riov aKav&u)v Ka&v Bpi£ov, Chrys.), the choice of the
plant was not suggested by the sharpness of its thorns; the soldiers took what
first came to hand, utterly careless whether it was likely to inflict pain or no.
2 The robe appears to have been the nsual cloak of scarlet cloth worn both by
the common soldiers and those in command. In the latter case it was longer
and of better wool. See Friedlieb, Archdol. $ 34, p. 118, and comp. Winer, BWB.
Art. "Kleider," Vol. i. p. 664.
3 Though Pilate appears to have sanctioned, or, to say the very least, failed to
interfere with the mockery and indeed brutalities (John xix. 3) of the soldiers,
he is still rightly considered by the older expositors to have here made an effort
to arouse some feelings of pity in the priests and people. See Lange, Leben Jesu,
n. 7. 7, Part n. p. 1525. The ISe b avSrpttnros (ver. 5) was thus said in a tone of
commiseration, and certainly without any of the bitterness which seems plainly
to mark the XSe 6 BaaiXebs vp.iv of ver. 14. Compare Luthardt, das Johann.
Evang. Part ii. p. 413.

John xix. 7,

Lect. Vn. THE LAST PASSOVER. 315
our law ought He to die," because "He made Himself
the Son of God." The Son of God ! That title' spake
with strange significance to one pagan heart
in that vast concourse. The awed * and now Ver. 9.
unnerved procurator again returns into his
palace to question the Holy Sufferer, and comes forth
again, yet once more to make a last effort to save one
whose mysterious2 words had now strangely moved his
very inmost soul. VWfaat a moment for that hapless pagan!
One expression of an honest and bold determination to
take a responsibility on himself from which no Roman
magistrate ought ever to have shrunk, one righteous
resolve to follow the dictates of his conscience, and the
name of Pilate would never have held its melancholy
place in the Christian's creed as that of the irresolute and
unjust judge, who, against his own most solemn convic
tions, gave up to a death of agony and shame one whom
he knew to be innocent, and even dimly felt to be divine.3
1 The fear which Pilate now felt, even more than before (uaWov 4tpoB4i&n,
John xix. 8), when he heard that our Lord had represented Himself as vtos ®eov,
would naturally arise from his conceiving such a title to imply a divine descent
or parentage, which the analogy of the heroes and demigods of ancient story
might predispose him to believe possible in the present case. Comp. Luthardt,
Johann. Evang. Part n. p. 405. The message from his wife might have already
Aroused some apprehensions; these the present declaration greatly augments.
The unjust judge begins to fear he may be braving the wrath of some unknown
Aeity, and now anxiously puts the question ir6frev el av (ver. 9), " Was His
lescent indeed such as the mysterious title might be understood to imply? " To
iiis the ava&ev (ver. 11) forms, and probably was felt by Pilate to form, a kind
)f indirect answer. See Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. vii. p. 391 sq. (Clark),
v^here the last question is well explained. Compare Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 7. 7,
Part m. p. 1527.
2 The difficult words Sta tovto S vapabiSois ue aot k. t. \. (John xix. 11),
•which the Evangelist notices as having still more caused (4k tovtov 40)Tet)
Pilate to renew his efforts, appear to refer to Caiaphas as the official representa
tive of those who formally gave over our Lord to the Roman governor (Matt.
xxvii. 2, Mark xv. 1), and to imply that his guilt was greater, because, when he
¦had no power granted him from above against our Lord, he gave the Lord up to
one who bad, and whose power was plenary. In a word, Pilate, the instrument
in God's hands, the bearer of the sword, is guilty because he acts against his
convictions, but he who gave up the Lord to this bearer of the sword is more
guilty, because he knew what he was doing, and was acting against clearer
knowledge and fuller light.
s The character of Pilate, though often discussed, has not always been correctly

316 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
But that word was never spoken. Cries now smote upon
Pilate's ears, at which every previous impression was for
gotten. Instinctive sense of justice, convictions, preposses
sions, apprehensions, were all swallowed up in an instant,
when he heard himself denounced before the multitude,
before the Sanhedrin, and before his own soldiers as " no
friend to Caesar " 1 if he let go one who by His assumptions
had practically spoken against that dreaded name. "No
friend to Csesar ! " Allfeady in imagination
the wretched man saw himself in the pres
ence of his gloomy and suspicious master, informed against,
condemned, degraded, banished.2 It was enough ; Pilate
must not come to this dishonor ; the Galilsean must die ;
it remains only to pronounce the sentence. The Roman

estimated. The fair statement seems to be that he was a thorough and complete
type of the later Roman man of the world. Stern, but not relentless (see Fried
lieb, Archdol. 5 34, p. 122), shrewd and world-worn, prompt and practical,
haughtily just, and yet, as the early writers correctly perceived, self-seeking and
cowardly (dvavSpos <rtp6Spa, Chrys. ; comp. Const. Apost. v. 14), able to perceive
what was right, but without moral strength to follow it out, — the sixth procu
rator of Judaea stands forth a sad and terrible instance of a man whom the fear
of endangered self-interest drove not only to act against the deliberate convic
tions of his heart and his conscience, but further to commit an act of the utmost
cruelty and injustice, even after those convictions had been deepened by warn
ings and strengthened by presentiment. Compare Niemeyer, Charakt. Vol. i.
p. 121 sq., Luthardt, Johann. Evang. Part I. p. 128 sq., Winer, BWB. Art.
"Pilatus," Vol. ii. p. 262, and for references to various treatises on this subject,
Hase, Leben Jesu, § 117, p. 198.
1 See John xix. 12, obK el tpl\os tov Kalffapos. This appellation was probably
not here used in its formal and semi-official sense, u amicus Csesaris " (Sepp.
Leben Chr. ti. 60, Vol. iii. p. 519), but in its more simple meaning of " friendly
and true to the interests of Csesar." The concluding words iras 6 BaaiAea
k. -i . \. must also have had their full effect on the procurator, who probably
knew full well how truly in those times " majestatis crimen omnium accusatio-
num complementum erat." — Tacit. Annal. in. 38.
2 All that the unhappy man was now probably dreading in imagination
finally came upon him. On the complaint of some Samaritans, Vitellius, the
President of Syria, sent his friend Marcellus to administer the affairs of JudsEa,
and ordered Pilate to go to Rome to answer the charges preferred against him.
See Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 4. 2. This deposition appear to have taken place in
the lifetime of Tiberius (see Winer, BWB. Art. " Pilatus," Vol. ii. p. 261), and
about Easter, a. d. 36. The sequel is said to have been disgrace and misfortunes
(Euseb.), and, not long afterwards, death by his own hand. See Euseb. Hist.
Eccl. n. 7. For a good account of his political life, see Ewald, Gesch. Christus',
p. 30 sq.

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 317
again ascends the tribunal, now determined, yet with words
of jibing bitterness towards his tempters,
which show the still enduring struggle in his
unhappy soul ; but again the ominous rejoinder " We have
no king but Cassar," and the struggle is
ended. The sentence is pronounced, and
the Saviour is led forth to Golgotha.1
On that concluding scene our words must be guarded
and few. The last sufferings of the Eternal
Son are no meet subject for lengthened ,D^fE Cbtoifix-
description, however solemn and reverential
be the language in which it is attempted to be conveyed.
Let us then presume only with all brevity to illustrate the
outward connection of events which the inspired writers
have been moved to record. The chief priests and scribes
now at length have Him for whose blood they were thirst
ing formally delivered over into their mur
derous hands. With the aid of the Roman **»*<*• w-
Matt. xxvu. 31.
soldiery,2 who had now removed from Him
the garb of mockery, they lead the Saviour without the
gate to a spot of slightly rising ground, known by a name
which the shape of the rounded summit may perhaps have
1 Into the difficult questions relating to the site of this place we cannot here
enter further than to remark (a) that the name (Chald. fcSriwVa) is perliaps
more plausibly understood as referring to the general form of the place (Cyril of
Jerus., al,)— possibly a low, rounded, bare bill (Ewald, Gesch. Clvr. p. 434) — than
to the skulls of the criminals executed there (Jerome, al); (b) that it appears to
have been in the vicinity of some thoroughfare (Matt, xxvii. 39), and lastly, (c),
—if it be not presumptuous to express an opinion on a question of such extreme
difficulty, — that the arguments in favor of its proximity (at any rate) to the
present traditional site appear to preponderate. See, on the one hand, the able
arguments of Williams, Holy City, Vol. ii. p. 13 sq., and, on the other, Robinson,
Palestine, Vol. i. p. 407 sq., to which add an article by Ferguson in Smith, Diet.
of Bible, Vol. i. p. 1017 sq. The nearness of the assumed site to that of Herod's
palace is a fact of some importance.
2 In John xix. 17 sq. the grammatical subject would seem to be the same as
the avTols of the preceding verse, i. e., the apxtepels ver. 15. The soldiers seem
first specially mentioned ver. 23, but, from the distinctly specified ore 4trTavpto-
o~av (ib.) and the statements of the other Evangelists, were obviously throughout
the instruments by which the sentence was carried out. The party of the San
hedrin are however still clearly put forward as the leading actors : they cruci
fied our Lord (John xix. 18, Acts v. 30); Roman hands drove in the nails.
27*

318 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII
suggested — Golgotha, or the place of a skull. Ere, how
ever, they arrive there, two touching incidents are specified
by the Evangelists — the unrestrained lamentation and
weeping of the women1 that formed part of the vast attend
ant multitude, and the substitution of Simon of Cyrene 2
as bearer of the cross in the place of the now exhausted
Redeemer. The low hill is soon reached ; the cross is fixed ;
the stupefying drink is offered and refused ; ruthless hands
strip away the garments;3 the holy and lace-
Matt. xxvii. 34. ^^ ^^ ^ ^^ ^^ . ^ handg ^
nailed to the transverse beam ; the feet are
separately nailed4 to the lower part of the upright beam ;
the bitterly worded accusation is fixed up above the sacred
1 This incident is only specified by St. Luke (ch. xxiii. 27 sq.), who, as we have
already had occasion to remark, mentions the ministrations of women more
frequently than any of the other Evangelists. See Lect. I. p. 43, note 2.
2 He is said, both by St. Mark (ch. xv. 21) and St. Luke (ch. xxiu. 26), to have
now been 4pxbp.evos airb aypov, — a comment which may perhaps imply that he
had been laboring there, and was now returning (" onustus ligno," Lightfoot,
Hor. Hebr. in Marc. I. c), some time before the hour when (if the day was the
irapao-Kev}} too irdo'xa) servile work would commonly cease. Comp. Friedlieb,
Archdol. § 17, p. 41. If this be the meaning of the words, they may be urged as
supplying a subsidiary proof that the day was Nisan 14, and not Nisan 15. See
p. 291, note 2, where this and a few similar passages are briefly specified.
3 See Matt, xxvii. 35, Mark xv. 24, Luke xxiii. 34, John xix. 23. None of
these passages are opposed to the ancient belief that a linen cloth was bound
round the sacred loins, as the apocryphal Evang. Nicodemi (cap. 10) cursorily,
and so perhaps with a greater probability of truth, mentions in its narrative of
the crucifixion. What we know of the prevailing custom haB been thought to
imply the contrary (see Lipsius, de Cruce, n. 7); still, as this is by no means
certain, the undoubted antiquity of the apocryphal writing to which we have
referred may justly be allowed to have some weight. See Hofmann, Leben
Jesu, j 84, p. 373, and compare Hug, Frieb. Zeitschr.tai. p. 161 sq. (cited by
Winer). 4 This is a very debated point. The arguments, however, in favor of the
opinion advanced in the text, viz., that not three (Nonnus, p. 176, ed. Passow)
hut four nails were used, seem perhaps distinctly to preponderate. See Friedlieb,
Archdol. i 41, p. 144 sq., Hofmann, Leben Jesu, p. 375. The attempt to show that
it is doubtful even whether the feet were nailed at all (comp. Winer, de Pedum
Affixione, Lips. 1845, and BWB. Vol. i. p. 678), must be pronounced plainly futile,
and is well disposed of by Meyer, Komment. iib. Matt, xxvii. 35, p. 533 sq. For
a full account of the form of the cross, which, in the present case, owing to the
tIt\os fixed thereon (John xix. 19), was probably that of the crux immissa (-)-),
not of the crux commissa (T), see esp. Friedlieb, Archdol. § 36, p. 130; and for
the assertion that the holy body was raised, and then nailed, ib. } 41, pp. 142,
141.

LEOT.Vn. THE LAST PASSOVER. 319
head; the soldiers divide up and cast lots for the gar
ments, and then, as St. Matthew has paused
to specify, sit watching, the stolid, impassive ch-xxm,-se-
spectators of their fearful and now completed work.
It was now, as we learn from St. Mark, about the third
hour,1 and to the interval between this and
mid-day must we assign the mockeries of the t^ZdlftZ'sZa
passers-by, the brutalities of the soldiery, and Ao»r-
the display of inhuman malignity on the part Matt, xxvii. w.
of the members of the Sanhedrin, who now Mau.'mia.ii.
were striving, chief priests and elders of Is
rael as they were, by every fiendish taunt and jibe to add
to the agonies of the crucified Lord, when
even, as it would seem, -the rude multitude J^w-Lukexxm.
stood around in wistful and perhaps commis
erating silence. To the same period also must we refer
the narrative of the mercy extended to the
penitent malefactor, and St. John's affecting _°™^
notice of our Lord's tender care for the for
lorn Virgin mother, who, with her sister 2 and the faith-

l This, again, is a doubtful point, owing to the distinct statement of St. John,
who specifies it as %>pa &>s euro (ch. xix. 14). As the supposition that the fourth
Evangelist here was reckoning from midnight (comp. Wieseler, Chron. Synops.
p. 410 sq., Greswell, Dissert, xlii. Vol. iii. p. 229) does not seem satisfactorily
made out, and the old assumption of an erratum (r7 for f ; compare Alford, in
loc) extremely precarious, we must either leave the difference as we find it, or,
what is not unreasonable, suppose that the hour of crucifixion was somewhere
between the two broad divisions, the third and sixth hours, and that the one
Evangelist specified the hither, the other the farther terminus.
2 It has recently been considered doubtful whether three or four women are
here specified; i. e., whether the sister of the blessed Virgin is to be regarded as
identical with the wife of Clopas, or whether we have in fact two pairs, Mary
and her sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. The latter opinion
has been maintained by Wieseler (Stud. u. Krit. for 1840, p. 648 sq.) and adopted
by Lange (Leben Jesu, Part n. p. 1558), Ewald (Gesch. Chr. p. 438), Meyer (in
loc), and others, but on grounds that seem wholly insufficient to overcome (a)
the improbability that the sister of the Virgin should have been thus vaguely
mentioned in a passage which appears studiedly explicit and distinct, and (b) the
improbability arising from the general style of St. John that Kal should have
been omitted (the Syr.-Pesh. inserts it), and the women thus enumerated in pairs.
Contrast John ii. 12, where we might have almost expected such a separation,
and en. xxi. 2. Wieseler conceives the unnamed aSeKtpij to have been Salome,
and Meyer finds in the passage a trace of the Apostle'B peculiarity not directly

320 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
ful Mary of Magdala, was remaining up to thiB fearful
hour nigh to the Redeemer's cross, but who now, it would
seem, yielded to what she might have either inferred or
perceived was the desire of her Lord, and was led away by
the beloved Apostle.1
But could all these scenes of agony and woe thus fear
fully succeed each other, and nature remain
fro^'the'st^Z impassive and unmoved? The sixth hour
theninthhour. now had come. Was there to be no outward
mlrk^'si. sign, no visible token that earth and heaven
were sympathizing in the agonies of Him hy
whose hands they had been made and fashioned ? No, ver
ily, it could not be. If one Evangelist, as we have already
observed, tells us that on the night of the
Lect. II. p. 70. . ' 6
Matt, xxtni. 45. Lord's birth a heavenly brightness and glory
Mark xv. w. shone forth amid the gloom, three inspired
Luke xxni. 44. o ? I
witnesses now tell us that a pall of darkness
was spread over the whole land2 from the sixth to the
to name himself or his kindred; but as ch. i. 42 (where Meyer asserts that James
was then called though not mentioned) proves utterly nothing, and ch. xxi. 2
proves the contrary, we seem to have full reason for adhering to the usual ac
ceptation of the passage, and for believing that the sister of the Virgin was the
wife of Clopas. See Luthardt, das Johann, Evang. Part II. p. 419, Ebrard,
Kritik der Evang. Gesch. § 108, p. 555.
1 This seems a reasonable inference from John xix. 27, the air 4Kelvns &pas
appearing to mark that the apostle at once and on the spot manifested his lov
ing obedience by leading away the Virgin mother to his own home. After this
(piera tovto, ver. 28), and during the three-hour interval of darkness, the apos
tle would have returned, and thus have been the witness of what he has re
corded, ver. 28 sq. In confirmation of this view, it may be noticed that among
the women specified as beholding afar off (Matt, xxvii. 56, Mark xv, 40) the Vir
gin is not mentioned. Compare Greswell, Dissert, xlii. Vol. iii. p. 249, Stier,
Disc, of our Lord,Vo\. vii. p. 479 (Clark).
2 This darkness, as now seems properly admitted by all the best expositors,
was neither due to any species of eclipse, nor to the deepened gloom which in
some cases precedes an earthquake (comp. Milman, Hist, of Chr. Vol. i. 363), but
was strictly supernatural, — the appointed testimony of sympathizing nature.
"Yea, creation itself," as it has been well said, "bewailed its Lord, for the sun
was darkened, and the rooks were rent." — Cyril Alex. Comment, on St. Luke,
Serm. oliii. Part II. p. 722, where reference is made to Amos (ch. viii. 9, not v. 8)
as having foretold it. Compare Bauer, de Mirao. obscurati solis, Wittenb. 1741.
External heathen testimony appears not to have been wanting (see Tertullian,
Apologet. cap. 21), though, as recent chronologers have properly shown, the
constantly-cited notice of the freednjRP Phlegon (apud Syncell, Chronogr. Vol,

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 321
ninth hour. But while they thus specially notice the
interval, it may be observed that they maintain the most
solemn reserve as to the incidents by which it was marked.
Though full and explicit as to the circumstances of the
agony in the garden, they are here profoundly silent.
The mysteries of those hours of darkness, when with the
sufferings of the agonized body mingled the sufferings of
the sacred soul, the struggles with sinking nature, the accu
mulating pressure of the burden of a world's sin, the mo
mently more and more embittered foretastings of that
which was its wages and its penalty, the clinging despera
tion of the last assaults of Satan and his mustered hosts,1
the withdrawal and darkening of the Paternal presence, —
mysteries such as these, so deep and so dread, it was not
meet that even the tongues of Apostles should be moved
to speak of, or the pens of Evangelists to record. Nay,
the very outward eye of man might now gaze no further.
All man might know was by the hearing of the ear. One
loud cry revealed all, and more than all, that it is possible
for our nature to conceive, — one loud cry of unfathom
able woe and uttermost desolation, z and yet, even as its
very accents imply, of achieved and consummated victory.
i. p. 614, ed. Bonn) has no reference to the present miracle, but to an ordinary
•eclipse the year before. See Ideler, Handb. der Chronol. Vol. ii. p. 427, Wieseler,
Cliron. Synops. p. 388.
1 It is worthy of consideration whether the important and difficult passage,
Col. ii. 15, may not have some reference to this awful period. If, as now seemo
grammatically certain, aireKSvtrduevos is to be taken in its usual and proper
middle sense, may not the " stripping off from Himself of powers and principal
ities " have stood in some connection as to time with the hours when the dying
but victorious Lord, even out of the darkness, called unto His God, and, by His
holy surrender of Himself into the hands of His Eternal Father, quelled satanic
assaults, which, though not recorded, aDd scarcely hinted at (compare, however,
Luke xxii. 53, and observe Luke iv. 13), we may still presume to think would then
have been made with fearfully renewed energies. See Com. oh Col. I. c. p. 161.
2 On the words of our Lord here referred to — which are indeed far from
being "perhaps a phrase in common use in extreme distress," as Milman coldly
terms them (Hist, of Chr. Vol. i. p. 364), and which the two inspired witnesses
who record them have retained even in the very form and accents in which they
were uttered — see esp. the thoughtful comments of Stier, Disc of our Lord,
Vol. vii. p. 483 sq., Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 7. 9, Part in. p. 1573, and compare
Thesaur. Theol. (Grit. Sacr.) Vol. ii. 247 sq.

322 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
Even from the lowest depths of a tortured, tempted, sin-
burdened, and now forsaken . humanity — even from the
remotest bound, as it were, of a nature thus traversed to
"*s extremest limits,1 and thus feelingly realized in all the
Heasures of its infirmity for man's salvation, the Saviour
cried unto God as Sis God ; the Son called
Matt, xxvii. 47. . TT. ... , • ... . r.
, , unto Him with whom, even in this hour of
Mark xv. 34. '
dereliction and abandonment, He felt and
knew that He was eternally one ; yea, and, as the language
of inspiration has declared, He "was heard in that He
feared." With the utterance of that loud
cry, as we perhaps presume to infer from the
incidents that followed,2 the clouds of darkness rolled away
and the light broke forth. If this be so, the first mo
ments of that returning light were profaned by a mockery
and a malignity on which it is fearful to dwell. We shud
der as we read that the words of that harrowing exclama
tion — words first spoken by the prophetic
Psalmist, and the outward meaning of which
no Jew could possibly have misunderstood — were studi
ously perverted by a satanic malice,3 and that the most holy

1 Compare Cyril. Alex. : " He who excels all created things, and shares the
Father's throne, humbled Himself unto emptying, and took the form of a slave,
and endured the limits of human nature, that he might fulfil the promise made
of God to the forefathers of the Jews." — Commentary on St. Duke, Serm. cliii.
Part II. p. 722.
2 It seems most consistent with the deep mysteries of these hours to conceive
that the darkness had not passed away when the Lord uttered the opening
words of Psalm xxii. 1, but that immediately afterwards light returned. See
Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. vii. p. 483 (Clark). With the returning light
mockery would not unnaturally break forth anew. However this may be, we
must certainly maintain that these words of Psalm xxii. were not, as asserted
by Milman (Hist, of Christianity, Vol. i. p. 364), our Lord's "last words," it
being perfectly clear from St. Matthew that, after the 'EW, 'EAxo/, k. t. A..,
our Lord uttered at least another cry (irdktv Kpd£as, ch. xxvii. 50). The re
ceived opinion seems undoubtedly the right one; according to which the sixth
word from the cross was TeTe\etrTat (John xix. 30), the last words Tldrep, els
ras x*?Pas aov irapaTi&epiai to irvevpid piov [compare itapeSuKev to itvevp.a,
John xix. 30], as recorded by St. Luke (ch. xxiii. 46). Compare, if necessary,
Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. viii p. 28 (Clark), Meyer, ii&. Luk. p. 498 (ed. 3).
3 There is no reason for thinking, with Euthymius (in Matt, xxvii. 47), that
those who said 'Hktuv tputve? (Matt. 1. c) were Roman soldiers (rijv 'EjSpotSo

Lect. VH. THE LAST PASSOVER. I 323
name of the eternal Father was used by the Jewish repro
bates that stood around as that wherewith they now dared
to make a mock at the Eternal Son. But the
end had now come. One solitary act of in- Matt' xxvii' 47"
, Mark xv. 36.
stinctive compassion 1 was yet to be performed ;
the sponge of vinegar was pressed to the parching lips;
the dying Lord received it, and, with a loud cry of con
sciously completed victory for man, and of most loving
resignation unto God,2 bowed meekly His divine head and
gave up the ghost.
Jesus was dead. Can we marvel, then, The portents that
when we read that the most awful moment %£?"' Lard'3
in the history of the world was marked bv Ma"' iKE""' n-
^ J Mark xv. 28.
mighty and significant portents ? — that the Matt.xxva.57.
veil that symbolically separated sinful man
from his offended God was now rent in twain,3 that the

tpoiviiv ayvoovvres), who only caught the sound of the words uttered. There
was here neither misunderstanding nor imperfect hearing, but only a mockery,
which had now become verily demoniacal.
1 This would seem to be the correct statement, as we learn from Mark xv. 36,
that the poor wretch joined in the mockery of the rest, and yet must apparently
infer from Matt, xxvii. 49 that his present act was regarded as one of mercy
which his companions sought to restrain. It may be true, as has been suggested
by some expositors, that the man was really touched by the Saviour's suffering,
now perhaps made more apparent by the Stipcb of John xix. 28, and that under
the cover of mockery he still persisted in performing this last act of compassion.
At any rate, the Spapiti>v (Matt, xxvii. 48, Mark xv. 36) and atpere (Mark xv. 36,
not improbably "let me alone") seem very fairly to accord with such a suppo
sition. 2 The remark of Draseke (cited by Stier) is, perhaps, not wholly fanciful, that
the It is finished was more especially directed to men, as the farewell greeting to
earth, and that the Fatlier, into thine hands was, as it were, "His entrance-
greeting to heaven." — Disc of our Lord, Vol. viii. p. 28 (Clark).
3 That the veil of the temple here specified was that which separated, not the
holy place from the rest of the temple (Hug), but the holy place from the holy
of holies, seems most clearly shown not so much by the mere term used (Kara-
ireTaapia not KdKvpipta; Friedlieb, Archdol. § 47, p. 172), as by the authentic
elucidations supplied by the inspired author of the Epistle to the Hebrews.
See ch. ix. 7 sq., x. 20. The remark of Lightfoot (Hor. Hebr. in Matt, xxvii. 51)
that, according to custom, the high-priest entered on one side of the inner veil,
may perhaps illustrate the full meaning of the sign ; the veil now, as we are dis
tinctly told by St. Luke, was rent in the midst (<?<rx£<r&5) p.4cov, ch. xxiii. ib), a
statement made still more explicit by the 4ax'takrn curb &vu>Sev eus Kdru els Sbo
of St. Matthew (ch. xxvii. 51) and St. Mark (ch. xv. 38).

324 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
earth quaked, that the rocks were rent and the graves
opened, and that by the vivifying power of the Lord's
death they that slumbered therein arose, and after their
Saviour's resurrection were seen by many witnesses ? 1
Such things were known, patent, and recognized; they
were seen by Jews and by Gentiles ; by the centurion on
Golgotha, and by the priest in the temple ;
M^tdu.47. Dv tne multitudes that now beat their breasts
Luke xxiii. 4s. jn amazed and unavailing sorrow, and by the
women and kinsmen that stood gazing afar
off; they were believed in and they stand recorded ; yea,
and in spite of all the negative criticism that the unbelief
of later days has dared to bring against them,2 they remain,
and will remain even unto the end of time, as the solemn
1 Nothing can be more unwarrantable than to speak of this statement of the
inspired Evangelist as the mythical conversion into actual history of the sign of
the rent graves (Meyer, ub. Matt, xxvii. 52), nor less in harmony with sound
principles of interpretation than to term these resurrections (TJyepSna'av, ver. 52)
visionary appearances of the spirits (contrast iroWa trtatiaTa, ver. 52) of deceased
brethren confined to the minds of our Lord's followers (Milman, Hist, of Chr.
Vol. i. p. 365), when the words of St. Matthew are so particularly definite and
explicit. Compare ver. 52, 53. We are plainly told that at the Lord's death the
bodies of slumbering saints arose (tptav^i avrovs fjyetpe, Chrys.; but?); and we
are as plainly told, with the addition of a special and appropriate note of time,
that after our Lord's resurrection they entered into the Holy City and were
seen there by many. Into particulars it is unwise and precarious to enter ; if,
however, further comments be needed, the student may be referred to the special
dissertation of Calmet. See Journal of Sacr. Lit. for 1848, p. 112, and comp.
Lardner, Works, Vol. x. p. 340.
2 Some critical writers have ventured to consider Matthew xxvii. 52 an inter
polation. See Norton, Introd. to the Gospels, Vol. i. p. 216, and compare Gers-
dorf, Beitrdge, p. 149. Such a statement is wholly unsupported by external
evidence, and is rejected even by those who regard this portion of the narrative
as mythical. See Meyer, Komment. jib. Matt. p. 542 (ed. 4). Reference has been
freely made by this last-mentioned writer and others to the Evang. Nicodem.
cap. 17 sq. as containing the further development of the incident. This state
ment, probably designed to be mischievous, is not wholly correct. The notices
of the event in question are really very slight, and in language closely resembling
that of St. Matthew (see Evang. Nicod. cap. 11) ; in fact, the only use made of
the incident by the apocryphal writer is to introduce the narrative of Carinus
and Leucius, which refers nearly exclusively to the Lord's descent into Hades
and appearance in the under world. If the Evang. Nicod. tends to prove any
thing, it is this: that the ancient writer of that document regarded Matt, xxvii.
52 as an authentic statement, and as one which no current traditions enabled
him to embellish, but which was adopted as a convenient starting-point for his
legendary narrative.

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 325
testimony of nature to the truth of the mighty mystery of
redeeming Love.
And now the day was beginning to wane, and within
Jerusalem all was preparation for paschal
.... ,. , . n ,. , The removal from
solemnities which henceforth were to lose the cross and bm-iai
their deepest and truest significance. Eager (>f'heLords'>0!1v-
bands of householders1 were now. streaming into the
temple, each one to slay his victim, and to make ready
for the feast. It was a Passover of great
solemnity. The morrow was a high day, a
double Sabbath, a day which was alike the solemn fifteenth
of Nisan and the weekly festival.2 Not unnatural, then,
was it that petition should be made to Pilate for the
prompt removal from the cross of the bodies of those who
had been crucified in the forenoon, that the approaching
day might not be legally profaned. The petition is
granted; the legs of the two malefactors
.. , i • -i , 4 1 John xix. 32.
are broken to hasten their death, but no
bone is broken of that sacred body which now hung life
less between them. A spear is thrust into Ver. 34.
the holy side, perchance in the neighborhood
of the heart, to make sure that life is extinct, and forthwith
a twofold sign was vouchsafed, whether natural or supernat-

1 See especially Friedlieb, Archdol. § 18, p. 47 sq., where this and other cere
monies connected with the Passover are very fully illustrated.
2 The efforts of those writers who regard this Saturday as Nisan 16 cannot be
considered successful in proving it to have been a " high day " (John xix. 31).
The principal fact adduced in favor of such an opinion is that on this day the
first-fruits were presented in the temple. See Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 385,
Robinson, Harmony, p. 150 (Tract Society). If, on the contrary, the day be re
garded as Nisan 15, then all becomes intelligible and self-explanatory, the
solemn character of Nisan 15 being so well known and so distinctly defined.
See Exod. xii. 16, Lev. xxiii. 7.
3 The breaking of the legs has been thought to include a coup de grace (see
Friedlieb, Archdol. § 48, and compare Hng, Fried. Zeitschr. in. p. 67 sq.), as the
crwrifragium would not seem sufficient in itself to extinguish life. As, how
ever, such an expansion of the term has not been made out (Amm. Marcell.
Hist. xiv. 9 is certainly not sufficient to prove it), and as the present passage
seems to show that it had reference to the death of the sufferer (comp. John xix.
33), we must conclude that it was found by experience to bring death, possibly
Blowly, but thus not unconformably with the fearful nature of the punishment.
28

John xix. 41.
Matt, xxvii. 60.

326 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
ural we know not,1 but which the fourth Evangelist was
specially moved to record, and in which we may, with all
the best interpreters of the ancient church, not perhaps
unfitly recognize the sacramental symbol both of the
communion of our Master's body and blood, and of the
baptismal laver of regenerating grace. The sacred body
was taken from the cross, and was still in the custody of
the soldiers, when a secret disciple, the wealthy Joseph of
Arimathea, who, as a member of the supreme court, would
know that the bodies were to be removed, now came to
Golgotha,2 and, after finding that the procurator's permis
sion was carried out, emboldened himself so
far as to beg personally for the Lord's body
from that unrighteous judge. The request is freely
granted,3 and the holy body is borne by the
pious Joseph to a garden nigh at hand,
which was probably his own property, and
in which was a tomb that he had hewn out of the rock,

1 The emphatic language of St. John (ch. xix. 34) seems to favor the opinion
that it was a supernatural sign. The use made of this incident by Dr. Stroud
(Physical Death of Christ, Lond. 1849) and others to prove that our Lord died of
a ruptured vessel of the heart is ingenious, but seems precarious. Without in
any way availing ourselves of the ancient statement that our Lord's death was
hastened supernaturally (see Greswell, Dissert, xlii. Vol. iii. p. 251), we may
perhaps reasonably ascribe it to the exhausting pains of body (see Richter quoted
by Friedlieb, Archdol. § 44), which, though in ordinary cases not sufficient to
bring such speedy death, did so in the present, when there had been not only
great physical suffering previously, but agonies of mind which human thought
cannot conceive, and which clearly appear (compare Matt, xxvii. 46) to have
endured unto the very end.
2 See Matt, xxvii. 57, where the i)r\&ev would seem naturally to have reference.
to the scene of the incidents last mentioned, *. e., to the place of crucifixion.
While the soldiers were waiting for the sequel of the crurifragium (John xix.
32), Joseph would easily have had time to go to the praetorium and prefer his
request to Pilate. The touch supplied by the ToXp^aas of the graphic St. Mark
(ch. xv. 43) should not be left unnoticed.
3 It is not improbable that the term e'8et>p^a"aTo was designedly used by St.
Mark (ch. xv. 45), as implying that Pilate gave np the holy body without de
manding money for it. See Wetstein, in loc Had not Joseph been moved to
perform this pious office, it would seem that the Lord's body would have been
removed to one of two common sepulchres reserved for those who had suffered
capital punishments, — "unum occisis gladio et strangulatis, alteram lapidatis
[qui etiam suspendebantur] et combustis." " Sanhedr." vi. 5, cited by Light
foot, in Malt, xxvii. 68. Comp. Sepp, Leben Christi, vi. 76, Vol. iii. p. 602.

Lect. VII. THE LAST PASSOVER. 327
wherein man had never yet been laid. Aided by one who
at first came secretly to the Lord under cover
of night, but now feared not to bring his Lvkexxii,-e3'
princely offering x of myrrh and aloes openly and in the
light of day, the faithful disciple solemnly
r. .. r. , . Johnxix.3&.
performs every rite of honoring sepulture.
Yea, the hands of two members of that very council that
had condemned the Lord to death, but one at least of
whom had no part in their crime, are those
that now tenderly place the Redeemer's body
in the new rock-hewn tomb. And now all is done, and
the Sabbath well-nigh begun. The King's Son is laid in
His sleeping-chamber ; the faithful Mary Magdalene and
the mother of Joses,2who in their deep grief had remained
sitting beside the tomb, now return to the
city to buy spices and ointments, and make <>"• «""»'¦«¦
" . Luke xxiu. 56.
preparations for doing more completely what
had now necessarily been done in haste ; the great stone
is rolled against" the opening of the tomb ; 3 the two pious

1 This, we learn from St. John, was of the weight of one hundred pounds (ch.
xix. 39), and did indeed display what Chrysostom rightly calls the p.eya\oipv-
X'av t)]V 4v tois xfrhr""" (in Matt. Horn, lxxxviii.) of the faithful and true-
hearted ruler. The myrrh and aloes were probably mixed, and in the form of a
coarse powder freely sprinkled between the 6&£via with which the body was
swathed. See John xix. 40. For further details see Friedlieb, Archdol. § 50, p.
171 6q., and Winer, BWB. Art. "Leicben," Vol. ii. p. 15.
2 The reading is somewhat doubtful (Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischend., r\ 'Ia>-
ffiJTos — apparently rightly), though the person designated is not, 'lucriJTos
being only the Greek form of the more familiar 'loiarj. Wieseler (Chron. Synops.
p. 426, note) adopts the reading of the Alexandrian MS., V 'laio-fitp, and considers
the Mary here mentioned to have been the daughter of the honorable man who
bore that name ; this, however, has been rightly judged by recent critics to be
open to objections, which, combined with the small amount of external evidence
on which the reading rests, are decisive against it. See Meyer, ub. Mark, p. 180
(ed. 3). With regard to the two women, it would seem from Matt, xxvii. 61
(Kahiipievai airevavTi tov rdtpov), compared with Mark xv. 47, Luke xxiii.
55, that at present they took but little part, but sat by, stupefied with grief, while
the two rulers (John xix. 40, 4\aBov, iSr\aav) performed the principal rites of
sepulture. 3 The tombs were then probably, as now, either (a) with steps and a descent in
a perpendicular direction, or (6) in the face of the rock, and with -an entry in a
sloping or horizontal direction. The tomb of our Lord would seem to have been
of the latter description ; tombs of the former kind are perhaps alluded to Luke

328 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
rulers turn their steps to Jerusalem, and all rest on the
Sabbath-day, "according to the command-
Luke xxiii. 5&. ment.
With the first Evangelist's notice of the request pre
ferred by the members of the Sanhedrin that the sepulchre
should be guarded, and with a brief mention
att.xxvn. . o£ t^e procurator)S Curtly expressed permis
sion, the sealing of the stone, and the setting
of the watch,1 this lengthened portion of the inspired
narrative now comes to its close.
And here our Lecture shall at once conclude. Practical
reflections on events so numerous, and of
such momentous interest, would far exceed
the limits that must be prescribed to this work,2 and would
necessarily involve recapitulations which, in a narrative so
simple and continuous as that here given by the Evangel
ists, might reasonably be judged to a certain degree unne
cessary and undesirable. Into such varied reflections, then,
it may not now be wholly suitable to enter. Yet let us at
least bear one truth which this portion of our subject has
presented to us, practically, vitally, and savingly, in mind,
— even the everlasting truth, that our sins have been
atoned for, that they have been borne by our Lord on His
xi. 44. The stone which was rolled against the opening and in this case appears to
have completely filled it up (comp. John xx. 1, 4k tov pivnueiov, and see Meyer,
in loc.) was technically termed Golal (VVp; see Sepp, Leben Chr. VI. 77, Vol.
iii. p. 608), and was usually of considerable size (Mark xvi. 4). See Pearson,
Creed, Art. iv. Vol. ii. p. 187 sq. (ed. Burton), »nd on the subject generally, the
special work of Nicolai in Ugolini, Thesaur. Vol. xxxiii., and Winer, BWB.
Art. " Graber," Vol. i. p. 443 sq.
I See Matt, xxvii. 65, where the verb fyere would seem more naturally imper
ative than indicative, as in the latter case the reference could only be to such a
KovaTaiSla as the chief priests had at their disposal, i.e., temple guards, whereas
the actual watchers were Roman soldiers. See Matt, xxviii. 14. In the former
case permission is given in the form of a brusquely expressed command, means
being supplied for it to be carried out.
2 It may again be noticed (see above, p. 51, note 1) that both this and the follow
ing Lecture were not preached, the number required, owing to recent changes,
being only six. The omission of practical comments or hortatory application
will thus seem perhaps not only natural but desirable, as such addresses, if
merely of a general character, and not made to a special audience, can rarely
be satisfactory.

LEOT. Vn. THE LAST PASSOVER. 329
cross, and that by His stripes we have been healed. God
grant that this belief of our fathers and our
forefathers, and of the holiest and the wisest * **•«.«.
of every age in the Church of Christ, may not at length
become modified and diluted. Let; words of controversy
here appear not. Let no terms of party strife appear at
the close of a narrative of a love boundless as the universe,
and of a sacrifice of which the sweet-smell
ing savor has pervaded every realm of be- ^s-"-2-
ing, — let none such meet the eye of the reader of these
concluding lines. Yet let the prayer be offered with all
lowliness and humility that these weak words may have
been permitted to strengthen belief in the Atonement, to
convince the fair and candid reader of the written Word
that here there is something more than the perfection of
a self-denial, something more than a great moral spectacle
at which we may gaze in a perplexed wonder, but of which
the benefits to us are but indirect, the realities but exem
plary. O, no, no! That blood, which, as it were, we have be
held falling drop by drop on Golgotha, fell not thus fruit
lessly to the earth. Those curtains of darkness shrouded
something more than the manifestation of a moral sublim
ity. That cry of agony and desolation told of something
more than a sense of merely personal suffering, or the
closing exhaustions of a distressed humanity. The very
outward circumstances of the harrowing history raise
their voices against such a bleak and cheerless theosophy.
The very details of the varied scenes of agony and woe
plead meekly, yet persuasively, against such an estimate of
the sufferings of an Incarnate God. O, may deeper med
itation on these things bring conviction ! May those who
yet believe in the perfections of their humanity, and doubt
the efficacies of their Redeemer's blood, unlearn that joy
less creed. May the speculators here cease to speculate ;
may the casuist learn to adore. Yea, to us all may fuller
measures of faith and of saving assurance yet be minis-
28*

330 THE LAST PASSOVER. Lect. VII.
tered, that with heart and mind and soul and spirit we
may verily and indeed believe that " Christ was once
offered to bear the sins of many," and that,
i John* a 2. even as *^e Del°ve(l Apostle has said, "He
is the propitiation for our sins, and not for
ours only, but for the sins of the whole world."

LECTURE VIII.
THE FORTY DATS.
90 TO MT BRETHREN, AND SAT TJHTO THEM, 1 ASCEHD UHTO MY FATHER,
AHD TOUR FATHER; AHD TO MT GOD, AHD TOUR GOD. — St. John. XX. 17.
The portion of the inspired narrative at which we have
now arrived is the shortest, but by no means
the least important of the divisions into JtZZ**"™*
which it has appeared convenient to separate
the Gospel history. In some respects, indeed, it maybe
rightly termed the most important, as containing the ac
count of that which was in fact the foundation of all apos
tolical preaching, and which, when alluding to the subject
generally, St. Paul has not scrupled to speak
of as that which alone gives a reality to our 1 Cor' ""' "'
faith here and to our hope of what shall be hereafter.1
The resurrection of Jesus Christ, of Him whom Joseph
and Nicodemus laid in the new rock-hewn tomb, is no less
the solemn guarantee to us of the truth of that 'in which
we have believed, than it is ¦ also the holy pledge to us of
our own future victory over death and corruption.
On the history of such an adorable manifes- Doctrinal ques-
tation of the divine power and majesty of ¦ ^"J^™^ t™
Him who saved us, and who has thus given *&*»¦»•
an infallible proof that He had as much the power2 to take
1 The nature of the apostle's argument, and the reciprocal inferences, viz.,
" that Christ's resurrection from the dead is the necessary cause of our resurrec
tion," and "that our future resurrection necessarily infers Christ's resurrection
from the dead," so that " the denial or doubt of our resurrection infers a doubt
or denial of His resurrection," are well discussed by the learned Jackson, in
his valuable Commentaries on the Creed, xi. 16. 1, Vol. ji. p. 807 sq. (Oxford,
1844). 2 The catholic doctrine on the agency by which Christ was raised from the

332 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
His life again as He had the mercy to lay it down — on
such a history, meet indeed will it be for us
to dwell with thoughtfulness, precision, and
care. Meet indeed will it be to strive to bring into one
every ray of divine truth, as vouchsafed to us in this por
tion of the Evangelical history, to miss no hint, to over
look no inference whereby our faith in our risen and as
cended Lord may become more real and more vital, and
our conviction of our own resurrection more assured and
more complete.1
And not of our own resurrection only, but even of what
lies beyond. Yea, hints there are of partial answers not
only to the question "How are the dead raised?" but even
to that further and more special question, "With what
body do they come ? " which so perplexed the doubters of
Corinth, and remains even to this day such a subject of
controversy and debate. Into such questions the general
character of my present undertaking will wholly preclude
me from entering, either formally or at length ; nay, in a
professed recital of events it will scarcely be convenient to
call away the attention of the reader from a simple con
sideration of facts to their probable use as bases for
speculative meditation; still it will not be unsuitable or
dead is nowhere better or more clearly stated than by Bp. Pearson, who, while
stating the general truth "that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost raised Christ
from the dead," shows also that the special truth " that the Lord raised Him
self" is distinct and irrefragable, as resting on our Lord's own words (John ii.
22), and the way in which those words were understood by the apostles : " If,
upon t^ie resurrection of Christ, the apostles believed those words of Christ,
' Destroy this tefhple, and I will raise it up again,' then did they believe that
Christ raised Himself; for in those words there is a person mentioned which
raised Christ, and no other person mentioned but Himself." — Exposition of the
Creed, Art. v. Vol. i. p. 308 (ed. Burton).
1 It has been well said by Dr. Thomas Jackson, that " every man is bound to
believe that all true believers of Christ's resurrection from the dead shall be
undoubted partakers of that endless and immortal glory into which Christ hath
been raised. But no man is bound to believe his own resurrection, in particular,
into Buch glory any further, or upon more certain terms, than he can (upon just
and deliberate examination) find that himself doth steadfastly believe this fun
damental article of Christ's resurrection from the dead." — Commentaries on the
Creed, xi. 16. 11, Vol. x. p. 326 sq., where there is also a short but excellent prac
tical application of the doctrine.

Lect. VIII. THE FORTY DAYS. 333
inappropriate to bestow such a careful consideration on
those parts of the subject which need it on their own
account, as will also incidentally prove suggestive of fruit
ful thoughts in reference to our future state, our hopes and
our expectations. The remembrance that our risen Lord
was the veritable first-fruits of them that slept, that as He
rose we shall rise, will always press upon us the thought
that the nature of His resurrection-body1 must involve
something, at any rate, remotely analogous to the nature
of the future bodies of His glorified servants, and must
insensibly lead us to dwell with thoughtful care upon all
the circumstances and details relating to those appearances
which we are now about to recount. Let us, then, address
ourselves to this important portion of the inspired history
with all earnestness and sobriety. Never was there a time
when meditation on the history of the risen yet not ascen-

1 This difficult subject will not be formally discussed in the text, but in every
case comments will be made upon the nature of those appearances which seem
to require more special consideration. From these, and, above all, from a sound
exegetical discussion of the passages in question, the student will perhaps be
enabled to arrive at some opinion upon a very important subject. Meanwhile,
without anticipating what will be best considered separately and in detail, it may
be well to notice that there have been, roughly speaking, three opinions on the
subject : (a) that our Lord's body was the same natural body of flesh and blood
that had been crucified and laid in the tomb; (6) that it was wholly changed at
the resurrection, and became simply an ethereal body, something between
matter and spirit {coffirepel 4v fie&opltp Ttvl ttjs iraxbTnTos Tijs irpb too irdSovs
ffujpiaTos Kal rov yvpivfyv towvtov trt&puiTOS (palijetr^at ij/vxvv — Origen, contr.
Cels. n. 62) ; (c) thatit was the same as before, but endued with new powers, prop
erties, and attributes. Of these views (a) is open to very serious objections, aris
ing from the many passages which seem clearly to imply either (1) that there was
a change in the outward appearance of our Lord's body, or (2) that its appear
ances and disappearances involved something supernatural. Again, (b) seems
plainly irreconcilable with our Lord's own declaration (Luke xxiv. 39), and
with the fact that His holy body was touched, handled, and proved experiment
ally to be real. Between these two extremes (c) seems soberly to meditate, and
is the opinion maintained by Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hilary, Augustine (but not
exclusively), and other sound writers of the early church. As will be seen from
what follows, it appears best to reconcile all apparent differences in the accounts
of the Lord's appearances, and, to say the very least, deserves the student's
most thoughtful consideration. For a very complete article on this subject, see
the Bibliotheca Sacra for 1845, Vol. ii. p. 292. The writer (Dr. Robinson) advo
cates (a), but supplies much interesting matter and many useful quotations in
reference to the other opinions.

334 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
ded Lord were more likely to be useful than now; never
was there an age when it was more necessary to set forth
events that not only imply but practically prove the resur
rection of the body,1 and that not only suggest but confirm
that teaching of the Church in reference to the future state
which it is the obvious tendency of the speculations of our
own times to explain away, to modify, or to deny.2
Ere, however, we proceed to the regular and orderly
recital of the events of this portion of the
Characteristics of , « ,
the present portion evangelical history, let us pause for a moment
to make a few brief comments on the general
character of the different records of the inspired narrators.
With regard to the number of those holy records, the
same remarks that were made at the begin-
Number of the -
accounts. ning of the last Lecture may here be repeated,
seepages. ag equally applicable to the portion of the
sacred history now before us. Events of such a moment
ous nature as those which followed our Lord's death and
burial were not to be told by one, but by all. If all relate
how the holy body of the Lord was laid in the tomb, surely
all shall relate how on the third morning the tomb was
found empty, and how angelical witnesses3 declared that
the Lord had risen. If all relate how holy women were
spectators of their Redeemer's suffering, shall not all relate

1 Some of the more popular quasi scientific objections to the received doctrine
of the resurrection of the body are noticed, discussed, and fairly answered, in
an article by Prof. Goodwin in the Bibliotheca Sacra for 1852, Vol. ix. p. 1 sq.
For earlier objections, see Jackson, Creed, xi. 15, Vol. x. p. 283 sq.
2 Information is so often sought for in vain on the subject of the general
teaching of the best writers of the early Church on the Doctrine of the Last
Things (Eschatology, as it is now called), that we may pause to refer the student
to a learned volume now nearly forgotten, Burnet, de Statu Mortuorum et Be-
surgentium, London, 1728.
3 The first point, the fact that the tomb was empty, and the body not there, is
very distinctly put forward by all the four Evangelists. Compare Matt, xxviii.
6, Mark xvi. 6, Luke xxiv. 3, John xx. 2, 6, 7. The second point, the angelical
testimony, is, strictly considered, only specified by the first three Evangelists:
St. John relates the appearance of two angels, and their address to Mary Mag
dalene (ch. xx. 13), but the testimony which they deliver to the women (Matt.
xxviii. 6, Mark xvi. 6, Luke xxiv. 6) is, in the case of Mary Magdalene, prac
tically delivered by the Lord Himself.

Lect. VIII. THE FORTY DAYS. 335
how some at least of this ministering company1 were first
to hear the glad tidings of His victory over the grave, and
to proclaim it to His doubting Apostles? If all, as we
have seen in the last Lecture, have so minutely described
the various scenes of the Passion, can we wonder that all
were moved to record some of the more striking scenes of
the great forty days that followed, and that afforded to the
disciples the visible proofs of the Lord's resurrection?2 It
could not indeed be otherwise. These things must be told
by all, though, as in other portions of the Gospel history,
all have not been moved to specify exactly the same inci
dents. Nay, when we come to consider the pre- Thar pecunari-
cise nature and character of the four holy tUsandd^^^
records we meet with some striking and instructive differ
ences.3 The first two Evangelists devote no more than
l The women mentioned as having visited the sepulchre are not the same even
in the case of the first three Evangelists. This, however, can cause no real diffi
culty, as the fact that St. Matthew only mentions Mary Magdalene and " the
other Mary" (the wife of Clopas or Alphasus, and sister of the Virgin; see above,
p. 319, n. 2) in no way implies that others were not with them. From St. Mark
(cb. xvi. 1) we learn that Salome was also present; and from St. Luke (ch. xxiv.
1 compared with ch, xxiii. 49 and 55) we should naturally draw the same infer
ence; when, however, the Evangelist pauses a little later to specify by name,
Salome is not mentioned but Joanna (ch. xxiv. 10), the al Konral trvv avtais
including Salome, and, as it would appear, others not named by any of the
Evangelists. The attempt of Greswell (Dissert, xliii. Vol. iii. p. 264 sq.) to
prove that there were two parties of women, the one the party of Salome, and
the other the party of Joanna, is very artificial, and really does but little to
remove the difficulties which seem to have given rise to the hypothesis.
2 So rightly Augustine: "Ergo ad eorum [discipulorum] confirmationem dig-
natus est post resurrectionem vivere cum illis quadraginta diebus integris, ab
ipso die passionis sua; usque in hodiernum diem [fest. Ascensionis], intrans et
exiens, manducans et bibens, sicut dicit Scriptura [Act. i. 3, 4], confirmans hoc
redditum esse oculis eorum post resurrectionem, quod ahlatum erat per crucem."
Serm. ccxxiv. Vol. v. p. 1212 (ed. Migne). The reasons suggested by the same
author (p. 1211, 1216) why the interval was exactly forty days, are ingenious, but
scarcely satisfactory.
8 These differences, when studiously collected and paraded out (see De Wette,
Erkl. des Evang. Matt. p. 306, ed. 3), at first seem very startling and irreconcil
able. They cease, however, at once to appear so when we only pause to observe
the brevity of the sacred writers, and remember that an additional knowledge
of perhaps no more than two or three particulars would enable us at once to
reconcile all that seems discordant. See a good article by Eobinson in the Bib-
liotheca Sacra for 1845, Vol. ii. p. 162. At the end (p. 189) will be found a useful

336 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
twenty verses each to the history of this period, and are
but brief in their notices of the appearances of the risen-
Lord, though explicit as to the circumstances under which
the first witnesses of the resurrection were enabled to
give their testimony. The third and fourth Evangelists,
on the other hand, have each given a record nearly three
times as long, and have each related with great exactness
the circumstances of selected instances of the Redeemer's
manifestation of Himself, wherein He more especially
vouchsafed to show that He had raised again the same
body that had been laid in Joseph's sepulchre ; that it was
indeed He Himself, their very own adorable
exxtv- ¦ Master and Lord. And yet both in this and
other differences we can hardly fail to be struck by the
divine harmony that pervades the whole, and must again
be led to recognize in this portion of the history, with all
its seeming discrepancies, what we have so often already
observed in earlier portions, how strikingly the Evangel
ical accounts illustrate by their differences, and how the
very omissions in one or two of the sacred records will
sometimes be found to place even in a clearer light, and to
reflect a fuller and truer significance on what others have
been moved to record. If, for example, two Evangelists
would thus appear to dwell simply upon the fact of the
Resurrection, the other two, we observe, were specially
guided to set forth the proofs of its true nature, its reality,
and its certainty.1 If, again, we might be induced to
think from the words of the first and second Evangelists
that Galilee was to be more especially the land blessed by
the appearances of the risen Saviour, the two others direct
selected list of treatises both on the subject of the Resurrection and on the prin
cipal events connected therewith.
I It can hardly escape the notice of the observant reader that while the first
and second Evangelists dwell mainly on the fact that the Lord was risen from
the dead, the third and fourth Evangelists dwell most upon the reality of the
body that was raised (Luke xxiv. 30, 39, 41 sq.; comp. Acts i. 3) and its identity
with that which was crucified. Compare John xx. 20, 27. The, so to speak,
crucial test of eating is alone referred to by these Evangelists —being definitely
specified, Luke xxiv. 43, and perhaps implied, John xxi. 12 sq.

Lect. VIII. THE FORTY DAYS. 337
our thoughts more to Judaea, and yet one of these joins the
testimony of an eye-witness to that of the first two by his
explicit and most undoubtedly genuine x account of the
Lord's appearance at the most favored scene
of His Galilsean ministry.2 If, lastly, two Luke xxii 51.
only of the four witnesses have been moved
to record the Ascension, the other two have taught us by
their very silence, in the first place, to view that last event
of the Gospel history in its true light, as so entirely the
necessary and natural sequel of what preceded, that Apos
tles could leave it unrecorded ; and, in the second place,
thus to realize more deeply the true mystery of the Resur
rection, to see and to feel how it included and involved all

1 On this point it is not necessary to dwell at length. There is not a vestige of
external evidence to lead us to think that the early Church entertained the
slightest doubt of John xxi. being written by the Apostle St. John. Internal
evidence has nothing else whatever to rest upon than the two seeming conclu
sions, ch. xx. 30 sq., and ch. xxi. 24 sq. ; it being now admitted by the best recent
critics of the Apostle's language (see esp. Meyer, Komment. p. 610) that ch. xxi.
came from his hand. On such evidence, or rather absence of evidence, we shall,
probably, be slow to believe, with Wieseler (comp. Chron. Synops. p. 418, and his
special dissertation on the subject), that John xxi. was written by John the
Presbyter. 2 Few points have been dwelt upon more studiously by sceptical and semi-
sceptical writers than the assumed fact that St. Matthew and St. Mark (ch. xvi.
9 — 20 being presupposed to be not genuine) regard Galilee as the scene of the
Lord's appearances (Matt, xxviii. 7, 10, 16 sq. ; Mark xvi. 7), while St. Luke and
St. John (ch. xxi. is commonly assumed by such writers to be not genuine) place
them in Juthe.a. Compare Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 421 sq. Now, iu the first
place, such a statement rests upon two assumptions, the first of which is open to
some doubt (see above, p. 40, note 1), and the second of which is inconsistent
with evidence (see the preceding note) ; and in the second place, even if we con
cede these two assumptions, what more can be fairly said than this, — that St.
Matthew relates two appearances only, one confessedly in Galilee (ch. xxviii.
16), but one most certainly in Judaea (ch. xxviii. 9, 10) ; that St. Mark's Gospel is
according to assumption imperfect, and cannot be pleaded for either side ; that
St. Luke and St. John (ch. xx.) have recorded special appearances of a highly
important nature in reference to the object which they seem mainly to have had
in view (see p. 336, note 1), and that these, from the nature of the case, would be
very soon after the Resurrection, and by consequence in Judaja? Even then
with the two concessions above alluded to our opponents cannot be regarded as
having dome much to impair the harmony of the Evangelical records, or to
establish the favorite theory of different "traditions" of the Resurrection.
Compare Meyer, Komment. ub. Matt. p. 553, where this untenable hypothesis is
put forward and defended. 29

338 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII-
that followed, and how it truly was that one great victory
over sin and death that made every minor conquest over
earthly relations a matter of certain and inevitable se
quence.1 If, on the one hand, St. Luke has told us how
the Lord "was carried up into heaven," and
Lukexxiv.a. g(._ Mark2 has followed Him with the eye of
faith even up to the moment of His session at the right
hand of God, no less, on the other, is our text
xart xvi. ia. a mogt sjgDjficant testimony, from the beloved
Apostle, that, when the Lord arose, that ascension had vir
tually commenced, that He rose to ascend, and that in the
early dawning of that Easter morn the Lord's return to
the throne of Omnipotence was already begun3 — "I as
cend to my Father and your Father, and to
my God and your God."
We might extend these observations, but enough, per
haps, has been said to indicate the general
Resumption of the character of this portion of the inspired nar-
narrative. L _ , .
rative, and the general nature of the difficul
ties we may expect to meet with. We must now turn to

1 It may be remarked how comparatively little the ascension of our Lord is
dwelt upon by the early writers, compared with their references to tbe resurrec
tion, and it may also be observed that the special festival, though undoubtedly
of great antiquity (see Augustine, Epist. ad Januar. liv. Vol. ii. p. 200, ed.
Migne), and certainly regarded in the fourth century as one of the great festi
vals ( Const. Apost. vm. 33), is still not alluded to by any of the earliest writers,
Justin Martyr, Irenaaus, Clement of Alexandria, and Cyprian, and is not in
cluded in the list of festivals enumerated by Origen (contr. Cels. vm. 21, 22).
See Riddle, Christian Antiq. p. 678. The preaching of the apostles was preemi
nently the resurrection of Christ (Acts ii. 31, iv. 33 al.), as that which inclnded in
it everything besides ; it was from this that the early Church derived all its full
est grounds of assurance. Comp. Clem. Bom. Epist. ad Cor. cap. 42.
2 For a brief discussion of the arguments in favor of the genuineness of the
concluding verses of St. Mark's Gospel, see above, Lect. I. p. 40, note.
3 Though the use of the present avaBalvoi John xx. 17) may be regarded as
ethical, i. e., as indicating what was soon and certainly to take place tsee Winer,
Gram. § 40. 2, p. 237, ed. 6), it seems here more simple to regard it as temporal, —
as indicating a process which had in fact already begun. The extreme view of
this text, as indicating that an ascension of our Lord took place on the same
day that He rose (Kinkel, in Stud. u. Krit. for 1841, translated in Bibliotheca
Sacra, Vol. i. p. 152 sq.), is, it is needless to say, plainly to be rejected, as incon
sistent with Acts i. 3, and numerous other passages in all the four Gospels.

Lect. Vin. THE FORTY DAYS. 339
its subject-matter, and ta a consideration of the few but
notable events which mark this concluding part of our
Redeemer's history.
One of the last events in the preceding portion of our
narrative is that which connects us with the
present, and unites the Friday eve with the «."»> "the "JpZ-
Easter morn. This we observe especially in
the Gospel of the historian Evangelist, who, without any
break or marked transition, relates to us how the minister
ing women of Galilee* now come to perform the pious
work for which they had made preparations on the Friday
evening. They had bought spices and oint
ments ere the Sabbath had commenced, and " ,xxm'
Mark xvi. 1.
again, as it would seem, after its legal conclu
sion on the Saturday evening. Every preparation was thus
fully made, and it remained only that with the earliest light
of the coming day they should bear their offering to the
sepulchre, and tenderly anoint that sacred body1 which
they had seen laid in haste, though with all reverence and
honor, in the new rock-hewn tomb. It was still dark when
they set out, and their hearts were as sad and as gloomy
as the shadows of the night that were still lingering around
them.2 But the mere needs of the present were what now

1 The object is more definitely stated by St. Mark than by St. Matthew. The
first Evangelist says generally that it was &eti>frrj<rcu rbv Tdtpov (ch. xxviii. 1) ;
the second specifies more exactly that it was iva aKelifimviv avrdv (ah. xvi. 1).
It will be remembered that when our Lord was interred, spices were only strewn
between the folds of the swathing bands (John xix. 40; compare p. 327, note 1);
the object of the women was now to spread over the sacred body the customary
liquid perfumes. See Greswell, Dissert, xliii. Vol. iii. p. 260.
2 Some little difficulty has arisen from the apparently different definitions of
the time of the visit to the sepulchre, as specified in the four Evangelists, the
two extremes being, that of St. John, own-fas trt oians (ch. xx. 1), and the
second of St. Mark, avare'iKavTos tov rp\iov (ch. xvi. 2). Were these the only
notes of time, we might have been led to suppose that the first referred to the
time of starting, the second of arriving at the sepulchre. As, however, St.
Mark has another note of time Xiav irpat (ver. 2), and as this is supported by the
tjj 4mtpoio-Kovo-ri [sc. fipepa] els uiav aa&fidToiv of St. Matthew (ch. xxviii. 1)
and the tpStpov BaSreus of St. Luke (ch. xxiv. 1), the most natural conclusion is
that the avaTelS. tov ijKlov is not to be referred to the actual phenomenon (Meyer,
al.) but to be regarded only as a general definition of time. See Robinson,

340 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. Vni.
mainly occupied their thoughts : Who was to roll away
for them the great stone they had seen but
two nights before so closely fitted in its ap
pointed place ? x Where were the strong and zealous
hands that were to open that door that would lead them
to their Lord ? While thus musing, and as yet, as it would
seem, at some distance from the sepulchre, lo ! the ground
around them quakes under their feet;2 the
Matt, xxvitt. 2. ^ '
ver. 2. angel of the Lord descends from heaven ; the
Ver 4 heathen watchers at the tomb fall prostrate
with fear as the glory of that celestial appearance smites
upon their eyes ; the great stone is rolled away from the
already empty sepulchre ; 3 men now may perceive what
angels know, that the Loed is kisen. Meanwhile the
women, who probably were still too distant to see dis
tinctly, perhaps pause, bewildered and irresolute, doubtful
Biblioth. Sacra, Vol. ii. p. 168, where examples are given from the Septuagint
which dilute the objection arising from the use of the aorist.
1 This, as has already been suggested (p. 327, note 3), is perhaps to be inferred
from the ripptevop 4k tov pLvnpieiov of John xx. 1, the preposition seeming to
imply that the stone was not only rolled against the door, but fitted into the
cavity. 2 It is very difficult to decide whether the women actually beheld the miracu
lous circumstances mentioned Matt, xxviii. 1 sq., or not. The definite expres
sion, Kal ISov (ver. 2), the address of the angel (ver. 5), and the contrasting vueis
(ver. 5; compare Chrys. in loc), seem most distinctly in favor of the affirmative,
while the silence of the other Evangelists, and even St. Matthew's very indirect
notice of the impression produced on the women by the wondrous sight, strongly
suggest the negative. In this difficulty the mediating view of the text, that
they beheld it partially and at a distance, has been adopted as in some degree
reconciling the two impressions produced by a consideration of this portion of
the narrative. The terrified guards would also probably have been unable to
have wholly suppressed some account of an event (Matt, xxviii. 13) which so
greatly terrified them, and thus, partly from them and partly from the women,
the occurrence would have become gradually but completely known.
3 The exact moment when the Lord issued from the tomb is left wholly unde
fined. The prevailing view of the early writers is that it preceded the events
specified by the Evangelist (p.eTa\ t)\v avdtTTatstv 3\khev ayyeXos, Chrysost. in
Matt, xxviii. 1), and that the appearance of the angel and removal of the stone
were to announce what had already taken place and to demonstrate its reality.
Comp. Hacket, Serm. v. on Besurr. p. 592 sq. (Lond. 1675). All we can know of
the circumstances of the holy mystery is to be gathered from John xx 6 sq. ;
from which we may perhaps presume to say that it took place with all the
adjuncts of holy order, deliberation, and peace. Comp. Robinson, Bibl. Sacra,
Vol. ii. p. 166.

Lect. VIII. THE FORTY DAYS. 341
whether to go onward or to return. But all is now again
the wonted calm of early dawn ; the earth has ceased to
tremble; the strange flashing light has faded away; they
will yet pursue their way; they will enter the quiet gar
den ; they will strive to find entrance into the tomb ; they
will do that for which they are come. As they draw nearer,
they see to their joy that the stone is rolled away, resting
perhaps on one side of the rocky portal;1 they take heart
and press onward; yea, they enter, as St. Luke
tells us, into the tomb itself, and by the see
ing of the eye are assured that the holy body they them
selves had beheld securely laid there is now there no
longer. The tomb is empty ; they have searched and have
not found, and now stand sadly gazing on each other in
utter bewilderment and perplexity. But one
there was among them more rapid in the in
ferences of her fears, and more prompt in action. Ere, as
it would seem, the rest had entered the sepulchre and com
menced their search, Mary Magdalene was already on her
way to Jerusalem.2 She who owed to Him
that died on Golgotha a freedom from a state
worse than death, and who loved even as she had been

l Some little difficulty has been felt in the clause ^v yap ueyas <rtp6Spa (Mark
xvi. 4), as it might seem rather to give a reason why the women meditated how
the stone should be removed, than why they perceive that what they mused on
had happened. If, however, we make the assumption in the text, or some simi
lar one, as to the position of the stone, all seems clear; while the women are yet
at a little distance they perceive that the stone is not in its place, it being of large
size, and its changed position readily seen. This harmonizes with the supposition
that Mary Magdalene went away first, and at once. Compare John xx. 1, 2,
BKeiret k. t. \. Tpe'xei oSv k. t. \., where the oiv must not be left unnoticed.
2 The common supposition is that Mary ran first to the sepulchre, without
waiting for the rest; to this, however, there are objections arising from the fact
that St. Matthew specifies that there was at least another with her when she
went (ch. xxviii. 1), and that St. Luke implies that she acted in some degfte of
concert with the other women. Compare Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 430, and
see below, p. 342, note 2. The primary difficulty that St. John names no other
woman than Mary, must be cut, if not solved, by the reasonable assertion that
St. John was moved to notice her case particularly, and by the fair principle of
Le Clerc, which so often claims our recognition in this part of the inspired nar
rative,— " qui plura narrat, pauciora complectitur; qui pauciora memorat, plura
non negat."— Harmon, p. 525, Can. xii. fin. (cited by Robinson).
29*

342 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. Vin.
blessed, no sooner beholds the stone removed from the
doorway of her Lord's resting-place than she sees, or seems
to see, all. She whose whole present thought was only
how she might do honor to her Master's body, how best
strew the spices around the holy body, how most tenderly
spread the ointment on the sacred temples of the sleeping
head, now at a glance perceives that others have been
before her; she sees it, and at once fears the worst, — her
Lord's sepulchre violated, His holy body borne away to
some dishonored grave,1 or exposed to shame and indigni
ties which it was fearful even to think of. Help and coun
sel must at once be sought, and that of a more effectual
kind than weak women could provide. Perhaps, with a
few hasty words to those around,2 she runs
with all speed to the Lord's most chosen fol
lowers, Peter and John, and in artless language, which
incidentally shows that she had not been the sole visitant
of the tomb,3 at once tells them the mournful tidings, —
" They have taken away the Lord out of the
sepulchre, and we know not where they have
laid Him." The two Apostles promptly attend to the

1 See above, p. 326, note 3.
2 This supposition, though not positively required by any of the succeeding
incidents, is still hazarded, as serving to indicate bow it might have happened
that the women did not meet St. Peter as he was coming up to the sepulchre.
Knowing that one of their party had gone to him, the women possibly went off
in different directions to the abodes of the other Apostles. Though they were
all assembled together in the evening (Luke xxiv. 36, John xx. 19), it does not
follow that they were now all occupying a common abode. Comp. Griesbach,
Opusc. Acad. Vol. ii. p. 243. If further conjectures are worth making, it does
seem wholly improbable that St. Peter might have been now in the abode that
contained St. John and the Virgin (John xix. 27). The psychological truth in
Mary's running for help to men is noticed by Luthardt, Johann. Evang. Part ii.
p. 435. It is, however, quite as useful in illustrating the reason why Mary did
not remain with those unable to help, as why (on Luthardt's hypothesis) she did
not run back to them.
3 This deduction from the plural oiSapiev (John xx. 3) is objected to by Meyer
(in loc), who urges the o(5o (ver. 13) as fully counterbalancing the plural in the
present case. This does not seem satisfactory. The first statement was made
under different feelings to the second ; now she had but lately left others, and
speaks under the natural consciousness of the fact; afterwards she feels left
alone in her sorrow, and speaks accordingly. See below, p. 346, note 2.

Lect. Vni. THE FORTY DAYS. 343
message and hasten to the sepulchre, followed, as it would
seem, by her who brought the tidings, and
who, it appears from the context, must have ror'S-
arrived there not long afterwards.
Ere, however, the two Apostles had reached the tomb,
other messengers, filled indeed with an awe
and amazement that sealed their lips to every 0f the a^k'toThl
one they met,1 but filled also with a deep JS£ at ** "*-
feeling of holy joy that quickened their steps Matt.xxviu.i.
to the city, were now seeking out the rest of
the eleven. Shortly after Mary Magdalene had left the
other ministering women, and while, as it would seem, they
were standing bewildered in the tomb, two
or, as some of these perturbed beholders a.
might have specified,2 one of the heavenly *¦<»* mt- 5-,
, . . comp. Matt, xxviii.
host, announce to them that the Lord is risen, s.
and bid them with all speed convey the tid- Matt. xxviii. 7.
ings to the Apostles, and tell them that the ver.i. Mark xvi.
risen Shepherd groeth before His flock3 to 7p„ „ . „
*¦ *=> Matt. xxvi. 82.
Galilee, even as He had solemnly promised ch.xxnu. 8.
„ , /.xt. ¦ Mark xvi. 10.
three days before on the eve of His passion.
The message, we know, was speedily delivered ; the weep-
1 It seems unreasonable in Meyer (on Mark xvi. 8) and others to press the
ovSevl ovSev eiirov of the second Evangelist, as implying that the women did
not obey the angel's command, and that it was only afterwards that they men
tioned it. Surely it is reasonable on psychological grounds (to borrow a favor
ite mode of argument in modern writers) to think that the women would not,
individually, much less collectively, disobey a command of such a kind, and
uttered by such a speaker. Fear sealed their lips to chance-met passers to and
fro, but joy (Matt, xxviii. 8) opened them freely enough to the Apostles.
2 The question of the number of the angels present at the sepulchre possibly
admits of some sort of explanation similar to those already adopted in not
unlike cases (p. 178, note 2 ; p. 251, note 1), and founded on the assumption that
one was the chief speaker, and that to him attention was particularly directed.
It is, however, perhaps more probable that in the present case the difference is
to be referred to the special excitement of the time, and the perturbed state of
the observers (Luke xxiv. 5). Compare Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. viii. p. 53
(Clark). 3 The term irpodyet (Matt xxviii. 7, Mark xvi. 7) is rightly explained by Stier
and others as indicating, not a mere precedence in reference to the time of
going, but as marking the attitude of the risen Lord to His now partly scattered
flock. Observe the connection in Matt. xxvi. 31 sq., and Mark xiv. 27 sq.

John xx. 5.

344 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
ing and desolate Apostles1 were sought out and told the
cheering tidings, but their sorrow clouded their faith ; the
words of the excited messengers- seemed foolishness unto
them, and they believed them not. Sad-
Luke xxiv. 11. _ - _ , ..
dened, perhaps, and grieved that they could
not persuade those to whom they were sent, yet strong
in a faith that was soon to receive its exceeding great
reward, the women appear to have turned backward again 2
toward the one spot in the world on which their thoughts
now were fixed — their Master's tomb.
Let us, however, turn back for a moment to Mary
Magdalene and the two Apostles. They
The two Apostles were now. a]l tnree at tne tQmh. St. John
at the tomb. had reached it first, but with the feelings
of a holy awe had not presumed to enter his Master's
tomb, though he had seen enough to feel
half convinced that Mary's tidings were
ver.e. true. St. Peter follows, and with charac
teristic promptness enters the tomb, and
steadily surveys3 its state, and the position of the grave-
1 The graphic comment on the state of the Apostles when Mary Magdalene
brought her message dwfjyyetXev toIs p.er avrov yevop.4vots, it evto-ovo- iv
Kal KXalovtr iv (Mark xvi. 10), seems justly to outweigh all the petty excep
tions that have been taken by Meyer and others to some expressions in this verse
\4Kelvn, used without emphasis ; iropev^eitra, toIs pier' avTov yevopievots, instead
of tois ua*tojTa?j avTov) which are urged as foreign to St. Mark's style. If the
hypothesis already advanced (p. 40, note 1) be accepted, viz., that St. Mark
added this portion at a later period, we only here meet exactly with what we
might have expected, identity in leading characteristics, change in details of
language. 2 It seems reasonable to suppose that the women would return to the sepulchre.
They left it in great precipitation (h'tpvyov, Mark xvi. 8), and would naturally go
back again, if not for the lower purpose of fetching what they might have left
there, yet for the higher one of gaining some further knowledge of a mystery
which even Apostles refused to believe. Compare, thus far, Wieseler, Chron.
Synops. p. 425 sq.
3 The verb &eo>pe?v, though frequently used by St. John (above twenty times),
seems in the present case (Sieape? to o&oV(a Kelueva, k. t. X. ch. xx. 6), as indeed
commonly elsewhere, to mark the steady contemplation ("ipsius animi inten-
tionem denotat qui quis intuetur quidquam." Tittm.) with which anything is
regarded by an interested observer; aitavra KaTtiitTevtrev aKptBws, Chrys. See
the good comments on this word in Tittmann, Synon. Nov. Test. p. 120 sq. The
remark of Stier is perhaps not wholly fanciful, that the visibility of angels, is

Lect. VIII. THE FORTY DAYS. 345
clothes. What his exact feelings then were we know not,
though we know those of his brother Apostle who now
entered into the tomb. He too saw the position of the
grave-clothes, the swathing-bands by themselves in one
part of the tomb, the folded napkin in the
other, every sign of order and none of con
fusion,1 and he who had perhaps before believed that the
tomb was empty, now believes, what a true knowledge of
the Scriptures might have taught him at first, that the
Lord is risen.2 Consoled, and elevated in thought and
hope, the two Apostles turn backward to their own home.8
Meanwhile Mary Magdalene had now returned to the
tomb, though, as we must conclude from the context, with-

dependent upon the existing wakefulness or susceptibility of the beholding eye,
and that thus the investigating Apostles did not see them, while to the rapt and
longing Mary they became apparent. See Disc of our Lord, Vol. viii. p. 68, and
comp. the somewhat similar but over-confidently expressed " canon " of Liicke,
Comment, ub. Jdh. Vol. ii. p. 781 (ed. 3).
1 The position of the grave-clothes is specially noticed as showing clearly that
there had been no violation of the tomb: "inde patebat, ilium qui statum sepul-
chri mutaverat, quicuuque tandem fuerit, nihil festinanter egisse . . . sed studio
et cum certo consilio lintea corpori detraxisse, et concinno ordine in diversis
locis reposuisse." — Lampe, in loc, cited by Luthardt, p. 436. On the further
deductions from this passage (on ovk fy airevSdvTuv ovSe &opvBovpi4vuv to
¦Kpay/ia, Chrys.) see above, p. 340, note 3.
2 The exact meaning of 4irlaTevaev (John xx. 8) is somewhat doubtful. Are
we to understand by it merely that the Apostle believed in Mary's report (" quod
dixerat mulier, eum de monumento esse sublatum," August, in Joann. Tractat.
cxix.), or, in accordance with the usual and deeper meaning of the word, that
he believed in the religious truth, viz., of the resurrection (Trj avaardtret, 4irltr-
Teuoaj/, Chrys.)? Certainly, as it would seem, the latter. The ground of the
belief was the position of the grave-clothes, which was inconsistent with the
supposition of a removal of the body by enemies; airb ttjs twv o&ovla>v cvXXo-
yris 4vvovai tV avdoTaaiv, Cyril. Alex, in Joann. Vol. iv. p. 1078 (ed. Aubert).
The supposed difficulty in the yap of the succeeding member seems removed by
the gloss adopted above in the text. St. John saw and believed (eTSev Kal 4ir'io-
revtrev) : but had he known the Scripture he would not have, required the evi
dence by which he had become convinced. Compare Robinson, Biblioth. Sacr.
Vol. ii. p. 174.
3 The expression amjX&ov irpbs avrobs (John xx. 10) seems rightly paraphrased
by Euthymius, airrjX&ov, — irpbs t^v eavrav KaTayoryhv. So, similarly, Luke
xxiv. 12. The two disciples returned to the places, or perhaps rather place (see
above, p. 342, note 2), where they were abiding, to meditate upon the amazing
miracle (compare Luke xxiv. 12); very soon afterwards, as we must infer from
Luke xxiv. 24, they communicated it to the rest of the Apostles and the other
brethren.

346 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
out having again met the two Apostles, who would other
wise have cheered her with the hopes they
The Lord's ap- - , ,
pearance to Mary themselves were feeling, and imparted to
Magdalene. - « ., . • ..
her some share of their own convictions.
But she was now standing weeping by the
tomb, unconsoled and inconsolable; her Lord
was borne away, and she knew not where he was laid : was
not that cause sufficient for those bitter tears ? Tet she
will gaze at least into that quiet resting-place that once
had contained her Lord and Saviour ; she will gaze in,
though she fears to enter. The fourth Evan-
Ch. xx. 12. , ¦ ,
gehst has told us what she saw, — two angels
as in attitude of still watching over Him who had but so
lately lain there.1 They ask her why she
John xx. VS. mi, i
weeps. She has but one answer, the same
artless words she uttered to the two Apostles, varied only
by a slight change of person, that seems to
tell of an utter grief and perplexity with
which she feels herself now left to struggle unsustained
and alone.2 Yea, she turns away, as it would
seem, even from angelic sympathy. But she
turns to see, perhaps, now standing in some position in
which immediate recognition was less easy,3 One whom

l There seems something more than arbitrary fancy (Meyer) in the idea alluded
to in the text. The attitude of the angels, thus specially mentioned by the
Apostle, was so explained by some of the best early commentators (a"np.alvovres
&s ovk ttv ^8(K7jo*e tis to aytov 0-iap.a, Cyril Alex, in loc), and has been rightly
so understood by some of the better modern interpreters. See Luthardt, das
Johann. Evang. Part II. p. 438, Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. viii. p. 58 (Clark).
2 As has been already observed (p. 342, note 3), the present o?Sa (John xx. 13)
of the solitary mourner is not to be regarded as simply synonymous with o"Sap.ev
(ver. 2). Here, as the context shows, the woman is standing alone by the tomb ;
the Apostles have gone away ; she feels herself unsupported in her grief, and she
thus naturally expresses it. Comp. ver. 15, where the first person is similarly
continued. s It is not, at first sight, easy. to understand why Mary did not at once recognize
our Lord, as we have no reason for thinking from the context that her eyes were
specially holden (contrast Luke xxiv. 16), and every reason for rejecting the idea
of some interpreters that the Lord's recent sufferings had left His features unrec
ognizable. The natural explanation would seem to be this, — that she was so
absorbed in her sorrow, and so utterly without hope or expectancy of such a

Luke viii. 1, 2.

Lect. Vm. THE FORTY DAYS. 347
she knew not, nay, whose very voice either she did not or
could not recognize? until her slumbering con
sciousness is awakened by hearing her own
name uttered, and that, as we may presume to think, in
accents that in a moment revealed all.1 Amazement, hope,
belief, conviction, all in their fullest measures, burst, as it
were, upon her soul. With the one word
L John XX. 16.
Rabboni, and, as the context leads ns to
think, with some gesture of overwhelming and bewildered
joy, she turns round as if to satisfy herself, not only by the
eye and ear, but by the touch of the clasping hand, that it
was indeed He Himself,2 no mere heaven-sent form, but
her Teacher and Deliverer, whose feet she had been per
mitted to follow over the hills of Galilee,
whose power had rescued her, and whose
redeeming blood she had seen falling on the very ground
nigh to which she then was standing. Tea, her out
stretched hand shall assure her that it is her Lord. But it

blessing, that she speaks to, and perhaps even generally looks at the supposed
stranger without recognizing Hire. Compare the illustrative anecdote in Sher
lock's able tract, The Trial of Witnesses, Vol. v. p. 195 (ed. Hughes). It may be
also further remarked, that if any knowledge of the exact locality had been
vouchsafed to us, further explanation would probably be found in the 4tnpdcxT\
els Ta Maw, ver. 14. Into the question of clothing (comp. Stier, Disc Vol.
viii. p. 63, note) it is idle and indeed presumptuous to enter. Whatsoever garb
onr Lord's wisdom thought fit, that did His power assume.
1 It 6eems natural to think that besides the mere utterance of her name there
was something also in the intonation that so vividly recalled the holy privileges
of past intercourse and past teaching, that Mary not only at once recognizes her
Lord, but, by the very title with which she addresses Him, shows how fully she
reverts to previous relations, and as yet to nothing higher. Contrast John xx.
28, and compare Luthardt, das Johann. Evang. Part II. p. 439. The single word
" Rabboni," if properly weighed, will be found to throw considerable light on
the next verse. Compare Hacket, Serm. viii. on Besurr. p. 619.
2 The supposition of Lamy, and, more recently, of Meyer, that Mary Magda
lene sought to convince herself of the reality of the divine Form that stood be
fore her, is apparently reasonable and natural, but when pushed further as the
sole explanation of the yap of the following clause ("you need not convince
yourself by touch, I am not yet a glorified spirit; » comp. Kinkel in Biblioth.
Sacra, Vol. i. p. 168), seems utterly lacking and unsatisfactory. A desire to sat
isfy herself was probably in the mind of the speaker, but there were other feel-
ings half disclosed in the Eabboni, to which the Lord's words were more espe
cially intended to refer. Compare Andrewes, Serm. xv. Vol. iii. p. 30 (A.-C. L.).

348 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VHI.
must not be ; relations now are solemnly changed. That
holy body is the resurrection body of the ascending Lord ;
the eager touch of a mere earthly love is now more than
ever unbecoming and unmeet. With mysterious words
full of holy dignity and majesty, yet at the same -time of
most tenderly implied consolation,1 the Lord bids her
refrain. The time indeed will come when, under higher
relations, love, eager and demonstrative as that now shown
to the risen, may hereafter unforbiddenly direct itself to
the ascended Lord. But that time is not now. Still love
devoted and true as that displayed by Mary of Magdala
shall not be left unblessed.2 To her is vouchsafed the
privilege of being the first mortal preacher of the risen
Lord. From her lips is it that even Apos-
John xx. 17. ties are to learn not only that the resurrec
tion is past, but that the ascension is begun, and that He

I In the very difficult words M^ piov airTow k. t. X. (John xx. 17) two things
seem clearly implied: (1) a solemn declaration of changed relations of inter
course with the risen Lord, expressed in the prohibitory pvt\ piov cXtttov; (2) a
consolatory assurance that what is prohibited now shall (in another form) be
vouchsafed hereafter. The Greek expositors are thus perfectly right when they
recognize in the words the holy dignity of the risen Lord (avdyei avTijs t^v
Sidvotav, Hare alSeaipitiTepov a&Tip irpotr4xeiv, Chrys.), which, to use the words
of Stier, " withdraws sublimely from a too human touch ; " but they fail, for
the most part, in the second member, and either miss or neglect the full force of
the yap. This must certainly be preserved, as involving a consolatory reason for
the present prohibition (Photius), and as giving the necessary divine fulness to
these first words of the risen Saviour. The whole meaning, then, may be briefly
expressed inthe following paraphrase : — "Touch me not (with this touch of the
past), for I have not yet entered into those relations in which I may truly be
touched, though it will be with the equally loving but necessarily more reverent
and spiritual touch of the future." For further details, see especially the excel
lent and exhaustive sermon of Andrewes, Serm. xv. Vol. iii. p. 23 sq. (A.-C. L.),
Meyer, Komment. iib. Joh. p. 499 sq., Lucke, ib. Vol. ii. p. 783 sq., Stier, Disc of
our Lord, Vol. viii. p. 67 sq. ; and compare Robinson in Biblioth. Sacr. Vol.
viii. p. 175.
2 It seems right to recognize in the avaBalvoi (ver. 17) a reference to the ava-
BeBvKa of the preceding member, and in the Se that sort of latent opposition
(Klotz, Devar. Vol. ii. p. 362) which seems to imply that the member it intro
duces involves contrasts to what precedes; — "I have not yet ascended; but
delay not, go thy way and deliver the message, that my resurrection has really
practically commenced." See above, p. 338, note 3, and compare Andrewes,
Serm. Vol. iii. 46.

Lbct. Vin. THE FORTY DAYS. 349
who "is not ashamed to call them1 brethren" is now as
cending to His Father and to their Father,
and to His God and their God. a*-<tlL
What exact effect was produced on the minds of the
Apostles by a message thus clear and cir
cumstantial, we cannot fullv tell. From the Probable effect
m J produced on the
second Evangelist it would certainly seem ^vastus by Mary's
, J tidings.
clear that no credence was given to Mary's
declaration that the Lord was alive again, and that her
own eyes had seen Him. This, at any rate,
they did not and could not believe. They "r *"'
had but lately, as it would seem, heard strange tidings
from the women, and they might possibly have come to
the belief that a part at least of these tidings was true.2
But the Lord Himself no eye had seen ;3 nay, the very
removal of the body, which might have been admitted

l Most commentators have rightly called attention to our Lord's present use
of the term " brethren" (John xx. 17) in reference to the Apostles, though they
differ in their estimate of the exact sentiment it seems intended to convey. The
most natural view 6eems that of Euthymius, that it was indirectly to assure the
disciples that the Lord was still truly man, and still stood, in this respect, on the
same relations with them as before: "He named them brethren, as being him
self a man, and their kinsman according to man's nature." — In Joann. xx. 17,
Vol. iii. p. 635.
2 The exact amount of information of what had taken place which the Apostles
had up to this time received, and their present state of feeling, can only be gener
ally surmised. All we know certainly is that they had received the first tidings
of the women and regarded them as " idle tales " (Luke xxiv. 11). It is indeed
possible that, previous to the arrival of Mary Magdalene, some of them might
have learnt from St. Peter and St. John, or from those to whom those Apostles
might have mentioned it, " that the body was not in the sepulchre " (comp. Luke
xxiv. 23); the probable shortness of time, however, between the departure of
the two Apostles and the second departure of Mary, and the improbability of
the supposition that the disciples were already all assembled together (see above,
p. 342, note 2), render it natural to think that not much more could be generally
known that had been communicated by the first women.
3 Even if we adopt the supposition alluded to in the -preceding note, and con
ceive the results of the visit of St. Peter and St. John to have been now known
to the rest of the Apostles, it still seems clear that any account of an actual visi
ble appearance of our Lord would have been regarded little less incredible than
before. The two travellers to Emmaus, though probably starting at a time (see
below) when more would have been known, speak of the confirmation which
the report of the women had received, but add the melancholy conviction of the
disciples generally, avrbv Se obK eXSov, Luke xxiv. 24.
30

350 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
and believed in, served perhaps only to confirm the vague
feeling that now all trace was forever lost ; that the angels
of which the women had spoken had borne away the holy
body to some sepulchre unknown as that of
Moses; and that the dream of any earthly
union was more than ever impossible and unimaginable.
The vision of angels they perhaps had now
comp. Luke xxm. Degun partially to believe in,1 but that their
Lord had been seen by the excited woman
that now stood before them, that He had spoken with her,
and made her the bearer of a message, was a dream and
a hallucination too wild to deserve even a moment's
attention. But they were soon to receive yet further and fuller
testimony. Hitherto those that had come
eSanre""? X to tbem could speak* only from the seeing
other ministmng 0f tne eve . others were now to come who
women. J
could plead the evidence of another sense,
and could tell not only of what their eyes had seen but
their " hands handled." Very shortly, perhaps, after Mary
Magdalene had left the Apostles,2 the other ministering
women, who had brought the first tidings to
Matt, xxviii. 9. . .
the Apostles, are permitted to meet their
Lord face to face, yea, and to clasp the holy feet before

1 After the intelligence brought by Mary Magdalene, the Apostles might have
been led to believe that the tomb really was empty, and, further, that marvellous
things had been seen (comp. Luke xxiv. 23); but more than this, it seems certain,
was not believed hy any except by St. John. On the slowness of the Apostles
to believe, see Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. viii. p. 96. The reasons why
women were the first bearers of the tidings of the resurrection are alluded to
by Augustine, Serm. xlv. Vol. v. p. 266, Serm. coxxxn. ib. p. 1108 (ed. Migne).
2 It would seem probable that the women returned with the account of having
seen the Lord not long after Mary Magdalene had left the Apostles. We have,
however, no data for fixing even roughly the probable time, the very fact of
such a return being in itself in some degree debatable. See below, p. 351, note
3 It may indeed be urged that, if the disciples had received thus early this
double testimony, the travellers to Emmaus would have alluded to such an
appearance (comp. Luke xxiv. 22) ; but to this it may be replied, that, through
out, the tidings brought by the women seem to have been viewed with distrust ;
the speakers rather appeal to what the apostles had seen and verified, and to
them the Lord had certainly not yet appeared.

Lect. VIII. THE FORTY DAYS. 351
which they had at once fallen in trembling and believing
adoration. They saw, they believed, they touched, and they
worshipped.1 More we know not ; where they were, or
nnder what circumstances they thus beheld the Lord, must
remain only a matter of the merest conjecture.2 If we
adopt the received text we may seem to have some
grounds for thinking that this appearance was vouchsafed
to the women soon after leaving the sepulchre ; but as the
text which favors such an opinion has been justly regarded
extremely doubtful,3 and as such a supposition scarcely
admits of any reasonable reconciliation with the distinct
statement of the second Evangelist that Mary
,, . . , r. i . . Markxvi. 9.
Magdalene was the first mortal to whom the
risen Lord vouchsafed to show Himself, we shall perhaps
1 The conduct of the women, when our Lord thus vouchsafed to appear to
them, is noticeable and instructive. It is specially recorded by St. Matthew
(ch. xxviii. 9) that they " held Him by the feet," and " worshipped Him " (irpo-
Q-eKbtrqtrav abrSv). They at once recognize Him, with holy awe (ver. 9), not
merely as their Teacher (contrast John xx. 16), but as their risen Lord, and
instinctively pay Him an adoration which, as Bengel has rightly observed, was
but rarely evinced towards our Lord by His immediate followers previous to His
passion: "Jesum ante passionem alii potius alieniores adorarunt quam disci-
pnli." — In Matt, xxviii. 9. The exact feeling which led to their embracing the
Lord's feet has been differently estimated ; the act may have been from a desire
to convince themselves that it was He (Chrysost. in loc), or from joy at again
beholding Him they had thought lost to them (De Wette), but from the context
(compare ver. 10) seems more naturally to have been from a reverential love (4k
nd&ov Kal Tiu.ijs, Euthym.), that evinced itself in supplicating adoration. Com
pare Bp. Hacket, Serm. viii. on Besurr. p. 618 (Lond. 1675).
2 We have nothing from which to infer where or when our Lord appeared to
the women. If we adopt what seems the true reading in ver. 9 (see the following
note), there seems nothing unreasonable in the conjecture that, after the delivery
of the first tidings to the Apostles, they directed their steps back again to the
sepulchre (see above, p. 344, note 2), and that it was on their way there that the
Lord vouchsafed to appear to them.
3 If we adopt the received text in Matt, xxviii. 9, ws Si 4iropeiovro dirayyeiXat
rots p.a^r7}Tats avrov, we have no alternative but to suppose that the appearance
of our Lord took place when the women were first on their way to the apostles.
As, however, the above words are rejected by Lachmann, Tischendorf, and Tre-
gelles, on what seems sufficient evidence (see Tischend. in loc. Vol. i. p. 164), and
have strongly the appearance of an explanatory gloss, we are in no way neces
sitated by the context to refer the incident to the first journey. No valid objec
tion to this can be urged from the iropevop.4vwv Se avrav of ver. 11 ; the apostle,
having related all connected with the women, reverts to the terrified guard
(ver. 4), and to the further circumstances conected with them; to this fresh para
graph he suitably prefixes a note of time.

352 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
be right in conceiving that the appearance was subse
quent to the first communication which the women made
to the Apostles, and most undoubtedly subsequent to the
appearance to Mary Magdalene.1 It might thus seem
designed not only to add confirmation to the statements
which had been made by Mary, but again to convey a
special and singular command relative to the Lord's ap
pearance in Galilee2 which had first been alluded to by the
angels, and appears to have' been directed,
and indeed understood to have been directed,
to all the company of believers then abiding in Jeru
salem. But the apostles were to receive yet a third and more
convincing testimony that their Lord had
ofo^rlfrTlo'au) rlSeD> and had ^en SeeU' Je&> aild SP°ten
two diseipies jour- -^ith, bv those who had known Him in the
neying to Emmaus. 'J
flesh. Meet indeed was it that the holy
eleven should now learn to believe. Were they to be the
last to welcome back their risen Saviour? Were their
hearts to be duller even than that of the Lord's worst and
most cruel enemies ? Already we know that these things

1 Independently of the very distinct statement of Mark xvi. 9, 4tpdvn irpa-
t ov Mapla. tj? MaySaXijvrj (opp. to Robinson, Bibl. Sacra, Vol. ii. p. 178), it
seems impossible, on sound principles of interpretation, to maintain, with Wiese
ler ( Chron. Syn. p. 426) and others, that the appearance recorded in John xx. 14
sq. is identical with that to the other women ; every circumstance is not only
different, but contrasted. See Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. viii. p. 91 (Clark),
and comp. Andrewes, Serm. iv. Vol. ii. p. 238 (A.-C. L.), Hacket, Serm. viii. on
Besurr. p. 616 (Lond. 1675), both of whom rightly consider the appearance to
Mary distinct from that to the women.
2 The repetition, from our Lord's own lips, of the direction which had so
recently been given by the angels (Matt, xxviii. 7, Mark xvi. 7), that the disci
ples were to depart into Galilee, accompanied with the reiterated promise that
there they should see Him (Matt, xxviii. 10), seems clearly to invest the appear
ance specified by St. Matthew (ver. 16 sq.) as having taken place in that country
with great importance and significance. The very distinct and consoling kclkci
pie bi\iovTat (ver. 10), when coupled with the remembrance that it is simply cer
tain that on the present day (John xx. 19) our Lord appeared to the eleven and
those with them in Jerusalem, seems certainly to predispose us to believe that
the appearance in Galilee was to the Church at large, and thus was identical
with the appearance specified 1 Cor. xv. 6. See, however, the further remarkB,
p. 368, note 1.

Lect. VIH. THE FORTY DAYS. 353
had reached the ears of the Sanhedrin, and that the
tidings brought by the terrified soldiers had
caused them deliberately to fabricate a lie for
these bribed watchers to repeat,1 lest the fact of the super
natural disappearance of the body should be publicly
known, and the multitude should believe what their very
lie showed they themselves were in a great measure forced
to admit. Were Romans to testify, and Jews to accept,
and Christians still to doubt ? Friends, it seemed, required
fuller confirmation than enemies, and fuller confirmation
was it mercifully appointed that they were yet to receive.
Ere the day closed two of the Lord's followers, but neither,
as it would seem, of the number of the eleven,2 were
to be the bearers of the third testimony to
the still perplexed and doubting Apostles. a"np- Mark xh:-
On the particulars of that interesting jour
ney to Emmaus3 it will not be necessary to dwell, as

1 The studious way in which this lie was propagated is alluded to by Justin
Martyr (Trypho, cap. 108, compare capp. 17, 117), who taxes the Jewish rulers
with having sent out " chosen men over the whole world " for this special pur
pose. Compare also TertuUian, adv. Marc. in. 23. The missionary efforts of
the Jews against the Christians are mentioned by Eusebius (in Jes. xviii. 1) in a
valuable passage cited both by Thirlby and Otto in their notes on Just. M.
Trypho, cap. 17. Compare Tertull. ad Nat. 1. 14, adv. Judceos. cap. 13. Some
good comments on the incident of the bribery of the guards, and on the fact that
it is especially related by St. Matthew, will be found in Sherlock, Trial of Wit
nesses, Vol. v. p. 182, and in Sequel of Trial, ib. p. 274.
2 Who the two disciples were has been much debated. The popular view that
Cleopas was identical with Clopas or Alphams (comp. p. 101, note), and the further
not unnatural supposition that his companion was James his son, are open to
this etymological objection, that KXeuiras appears not to be identical with KXta-
iras, but to be a shortened form of KAeoVaTpos, like 'Avrliras (Rev. ii. 13) and
similar forms. See Winer, Gr. § 16, 4. 1, p. 93. If this be so, the slight proba
bility that the second of the two was James is proportionately weakened, and
the appeal to 1 Cor. xv. 7 less plausible. We are thus thrown wholly upon con
jecture. This, in its most ancient form, appears to regard the unnamed disciple
as Simon (Origen, Comment, in Joann. ±. 7, Vol. iv. p. 8, ed. Bened.), and both
as of the number of the seventy disciples ; " And you must know that these two
belonged to the number of the seventy, and that Cleopas's companion was
Simon, — not Peter, nor he of Cana, but another of the seventy." — Cyril. Alex.
Comment, on St. Luke, Part n. p. 726 (Transl.).
3 The site of Emmaus is somewhat doubtful. In ancient times it appears to
have been identified with Nicopolis on the border of the plain of Philistia, but
erroneously, as the distance of this latter place from Jerusalem (about twenty-
30*

354 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
all is so clear and simple, and so completely free from those
difficulties of adjustment with which we have hitherto
had to contend. We may, however, pause to remark, that
the time when the incident took place is generally defined
by St. Luke as having formed part of the
'" " ' same day on which our Lord rose from the
ver. 29; comp. grave. As we know that it was not yet
evening when the two disciples turned back
ward to Jerusalem, and as we are also specially informed
by the Evangelist of the distance1 of Emmaus from the
city, we may perhaps reasonably suppose
that they started some little time before mid
day, and so, very probably, might have heard of the later
announcements made to the Apostles by Mary Magda
lene and the other ministering women. " Him they saw
not" seems, however, to be the pathetic bur-
Ver. 24. den of their discourse and their commun
ings,2 and forms, as it were, the sad summary of that want
two Boman miles) cannot possibly be reconciled with the distance specified by
the Evangelist. See next note. In later times it has been identified with the
village of EI-Kubeibeh, about two and a half hours N. W. of Jerusalem (Van
de Velde, Memoir to Map, p. 309), but for this there appears no reasonable
grounds of any kind. Either, then, with Porter (Smith, Diet. s. v., Vol. i. 548),
we must consider the site yet to be identified, or we must accept the tradition of
the Greek church, which places it at Kuriet el-'Enab (Abu Gush). In defence of
this latter opinion, see some good remarks of Williams, Journal of Philology,
Vol. iv. p. 262 sq.
1 A few manuscripts (D KIN; 5 cursive MSS.) and a few versions read e«a-
Tbv e^KOvra for e%i)Kovra in Luke xxiv. 13, making the distance of Emmaus
one hundred and sixty instead of sixty stadia from Jerusalem. This reading
has been supported by Robinson (Palestine, Vol. iii. p. 150, ed. 2) as tending to
favor his identification of Emmaus with 'Amwas (the ancient Nicopolis), but is
rightly rejected by all modern editors. The statement of Josephus (Bell. Jud.
vii. 6. 6) that there was a place of this name sixty stadia (so all the best MSS.)
from Jerusalem, and the other arguments urged by Reland against the identifi
cation with Nicopolis, have justly been considered satisfactory and final. See
Palcestina, p. 426 sq.
2 It is doubtful how much information the two travellers to. Emmaus had
received in reference to our Lord's resurrection. It might possibly be concluded
from Luke xxiv. 23, 24, that they had not heard of the tidings brought by
Mary Magdalene and the women relative to the Lord's appearances, but this,
owing to the time at which they appear to have started, is not likely. They
probably speak tn reference to the confirmatory reports of the Ttves Ttov trbv
flpiiv (ver. 24), and to what they themselves believed. See above, p. 350, note 2.

Lect. Vm. THE FORTY DAYS. 355
of faith which the Lord was pleased so mercifully and so
effectually to rebuke by the deliberate statement and ex
position1 of all the passages of the prophetic
Scriptures that related to Himself, and had
foretold His approaching glorification.
One other remark we may make on the apparently sin
gular fact that the two disciples were not able
_ Inability of the
to recognize our L/ord till the very moment of dismpies to mog-
¦ His departure; that they not only beheld
Him, and heard His words, but felt their hearts kindle as
they listened to His teaching, and yet never
surmised even who it was that spake with
them. Singular indeed such a fact does seem if we are to
reason merely from what we know or think we may know
of that which constitutes personal identity,2 but in no
wise singular if we will dismiss our philosophy and our
speculations, and accept only what is told us by one and
confirmed by another Evangelist. Plainly
are we told by St. Luke that the eyes of the
two disciples were holden, that by divine interposition8
1 There is some little difficulty in the explanation of the words Kal apfyipievos
oiro Mwvtreas k. t. X. Luke xxiv. 27. The simplest interpretation is either to
regard the Kal apl-dpievos as belonging to both parts (" beginning with Moses,
and with each of the prophets as he came to them," Meyer, Alford), or, still
more simply, to consider the second airb as a continuation and echo of the first,
which necessarily turns the substantive it precedes into the genitive, and involves
a slight laxity in the mode of expression, the meaning really being, " He began
with Moses, and went through all the prophets." See Winer, Gram. § 67. 2, p.
557 (ed. 6).
2 Into such considerations it seems here wholly undesirable to enter, as in
ordinary cases they involve much that is debatable, and, in the present, much
that is presumptuous. All that we are concerned to know and believe may be
very simply stated. On the one hand, we have before us in this portion of the
Gospel history the certain fact that our Lord's body was the same body as that
which was laid in the tomb (Luke xxiv. 39, John xx. 20), and, on the other, the
certain fact that His form sometimes appeared to be so far different from it
(Mark xvi. 12) as not to be recognized. The reconciliation of these two state
ments may be diflioult, owing to our ignorance of the exact nature of the Lord's
resurrection body, but the facts no less remain.
8 The meaning of the words ol otpSiaXpiol c&t&v eKparovvro (Luke xxiv. 16) is
simply, as expressed by the authorized version, " their eyes were holden " (" tene-
bantur," Vulg. ; " detenU erant," Syr:), — their eyes were prevented from exert
ing their full power of recognition. Compare Kypke, Ob). Sacr. Vol. i. p. 338.

356 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
they were prevented from recognizing their Lord till He
was pleased to reveal Himself. Plainly, too, is this con
firmed by St. Mark, who, in declaring that our Lord
appeared to these disciples in a "different
i; form," intimates with all clearness that our
Lord was pleased to exercise one of the powers which had
in part belonged to His former body,1 and perhaps wholly
and naturally belonged to His resurrection body, whereby
the characterizing expression of His most holy form could
be weakened or withdrawn until the power of recognition
on the part of the natural beholder was completely lost.2
What the third Evangelist expresses in one form of words,
the second Evangelist expresses in another, both however
asserting the same simple truth, that the Lord was pleased
to exercise a power, whether belonging to Him in respect
of His divine nature, or of His most sinless, pure, and now
glorified3 humanity, we know not, nor need we pause to

The agency by which this was effected is not specified, but obviously was
divine. The seeming discrepancy between this passage and Mark xvi. 12, is thus
excellently discussed by Augustine : " Cum legitur ' tenebantur oculi eorum ne
agnoscerent eum' (Luc. xxiv. 16), impedimentum quoddam agnoscendi videtur
in lumjnibus factum esse cernentium ; cum vero aperte dicitur, ' Apparuit eis in
alia efngie ' (Marc. xvi. 12), utique in ipso corpore cujus alia erat effigies, aliquid
factum fuisse, quo impedimento tenerentur, id est moram agnoscendi paterentur
oculi eorum." — Epist. cxlix. 31, Vol. ii. p. 643(ed. Migne).
1 Independently of any special exercise of our Lord's divine power, it would
seem, from the fact of the Transfiguration, that His pure and perfect humanity
admitted of revelations of concealed glory which involved positive changes of
appearance (Luke ix. 29), and yet in no way interfered with the reality of His
earthly body. See Augustine, Epist. cxlix. 31, Vol. ii. p. 643 (ed. Migne), and
Muller, Christian Doctr. of Sin, Vol. ii. p. 329 (Clark).
2 A few comments on this subject will be found in Stier, Disc of our Lord,
Vol. viii. p. 101 sq. (Clark). Compare also Ebrard, Kritik tier Evang. Gesch.
i in. p. 588. The explanation indirectly suggested by Sherlock, Trial of the
Witnesses, Vol. v. p. 195 (ed. Hughes), that the want of recognition on the part
of the two disciples was owing partly to the persuasion they were under that
their Lord was dead, and partly to their position, —walking side by side, — is
neither in itself plausible, nor reconcilable with the clear statement of Mark
xvi. 12.
3 The term " now glorified " is here only used in a general and popular sense,
and not to be understood as denying that there was any further glorification of
the body after the resurrection. Upon such subjects it is not either very safe or
very desirable to speculate too freely; it may, however, be added, that the opin
ion of some of the sounder expositors of recent times— that during the myste-

Lect. VHI. THE FORTY DAYS. 357
inquire, but by which, whensoever it seemed good to our
Lord's divine wisdom, the holy body suddenly ceased to
be seen, or appeared without those lineaments that were
necessary for recognition.
But let us return to the narrative. It was late evening
before the two disciples returned to Jerusalem
and appeared before the Apostles, who now, thet^ZZL"
with other members of the infant Church,1 19Comp' Joh" "*¦
were assembled together, and on whom some Luke xxiv. as.
0 Luke xxiv. 34.
recent appearance of our Lord to St. Peter
had made apparently so great an impression,2 that they at
once greet the new comers with the joyful tidings, that

rious period of the forty days the glorification of the Lord's holy body was pro
gressive — is, if not distinctly confirmed by the sacred narrative (consider,
however, ava$aiva>, John xx. 17), still by no means inconsistent with it, and
deserves, perhaps, some slight consideration. See Stier, Disc of our Lord, Vol.
viii. p. 89, Muller, Doctr. of Sin, Vol.ii. p. 328 (Clark), and comp. below, p. 366,
note 1.
1 The language of St. Luke, eipov ri&poiapievovs tovs evSeKa Kal robs abv
ovtoIs, ch. xxiv. 33, leads us to conclude that others beside the apostles were pres
ent at the appearance of our Lord which we are now considering. Whether,how-
ever, all, or whether only the ten Apostles received the first-fruits of the Holy
Spirit (John xx. 22), cannot positively be decided, as St. John only uses the gen
eral term pu&T)Tai. Analogy might seem to suggest that, as others beside the Apos
tles (consider Acts ii. 1, 4) appear to have received the miraculous gift of the Spirit
on the day of Pentecost, so it might have been now ; the power of binding and
loosing, however, which seems to have been specially conveyed in this gift of
the Spirit (see Chrysost. in loc), more naturally directs our thoughts solely to
the Apostles, and leads us to think that they were on this occasion the only
recipients; the atrapxh of the Spirit is received by the airapxh of the Church.
So Andrewes, who, in his sermon on this text, defines " the parties to whom" as
the Apostles. — Serm. ix. Vol. iii. p. 263 (A.-C. L.).
2 Of the appearance of our Lord to St. Pe.ter, incidentally mentioned by St.
Luke, and further confirmed by 1 Cor. xv. 5, we know nothing. It certainly
occurred after the return from the sepulchre (Luke xxiv. 12, John xx. 10), but
whether before the appearance to the two disciples on their way to Emmaus
(Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 8. 3, Part Hi. p. 1691), or after it, as conjectured by Cyril
Alex. ( Comment, on St. Duke, Part n. p. 728, note), cannot be determined. The
effect, however, produced by it was clearly very great. The words of the disci
ples now show plainly their conviction of the truth of the Lord's resurrection
(iiy4p&n 6 Kvptos SVtojs, ver- 34), and the very construction adopted by the
Evangelist implies how eager they were in expressing it: evpov i$poto-u.4vovs
tovs evSeKa Kal Tobs abv avrols Xeyovras k. t. X. ver. 34. They gave but little
credence to the accounts of the women, but in the report of one of their own
number, and that one St. Peter, they very naturally put the fullest confidence.
See above, p. 350, note 2.

Luke xxiv. 34.

358 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
"the Lord had risen indeed, and appeared unto Simon."
And now they too in their turn have a tes
timony to render to the assembled disciples
more full and explicit than any that had yet been delivered
that eventful day. They have seen the Lord, they have
journeyed with Him, they have conversed with Him, they
have been instructed by Him, they have sat down with
Him to an evening meal,1 they have received bread from
His sacred hands, and, at the very moment when recog
nition was permitted, they have seen Him vanish from
•their longing eyes. To such a testimony we marvel not to
find it recorded that full belief even now was not extended.
Events so circumstantial and so minutely specified seemed
perhaps less to confirm than to bewilder. They might at
length have been led to admit the already thrice-repeated
statement that the Lord had been seen, that His sacred form
had passed before the eyes of Peter, that it had even been
seen by Mary Magdalene, and, even further, that it had been
touched, or thought to have been touched, by the other
women ; — this they might at length have been disposed
either wholly or in part to believe, but the
Luke xxiv. 37. . . -i . • l • -i
ver 38 present narrative seemed to involve ideas
of a bodily form and substance which their
subsequent fears and our Lord's gentle reproof showed

1 It does not appear from the inspired narrative that our Lord actually shared
with them their evening meal. The words Kal 4yevero 4v rep KaTaKXi&i)vai
K. i. X. (ver. 30) seem rather to imply that the Lord vouchsafed to sit down with
the two disciples, and took the position, gladly offered, of master of the house,
but that after He had pronounced the customary blessing (Mishna, " Berachoth,"
vi. 6 ; the citation in Lightfoot, reproduced by most expositors, " Tres viri qui
simul comedunt tenentur ad gratias indicendum " [cap. vii. 1] appears to refer to
grace after meat), and had broken the bread and given it to the two disciples,
He permitted Himself to be recognized, and then vanished from their eyes.
The act by which the Lord was pleased to awaken their powers of recognition
was "the breaking of the bread" (4v Trj KXdtrei tov dprov, ver. 35; on this
force of 4v, see notes on 1 Thess. iv. 18); but how, whether by allowing them to
see the wosnds on His sacred hands, or (more probably) by some solemn and
well-remembered gesture, we can only conjecture. The opinion of many of the
early writers, that this was a celebration of the Eucharist, seems inconsistent
with the specification of time (4v ti£ KaraxX.) and the general circumstances of
the present supper.

Lect. VIII. THE FORTY DAYS. 359
they regarded as inconceivable and incredible.1 We have
no need, then, to explain away the accurate statement of
the second Evangelist that they believed not
the strange recital of the wayfarers to Em- ch' "* R
maus.2 But, lo! a yet fuller testimony was now to be
vouchsafed. Even while they were considering and dis
cussing these things, and now perhaps putting questions in
every form to the two latest witnesses, the Lord Himself
appears among them, and with words of holy and benedic
tory greeting shows unto them both His
hands and His side. At first, as we learn John KE-20-
from St. Luke's narrative, they were above measure per
turbed and terrified ; they well knew that the doors were
closed, and yet they plainly beheld their Lord standing
before them;3 they knew not what to think ; they conceive
1 In spite of the joyful avowal of their belief that the Lord had risen, the
disciples, as the inspired narrative plainly specifies, are greatly terrified (Luke
xxiv. 37) when the Lord actually appears. This was not in itself wholly unnat
ural, but seems to have been increased by the belief that they were beholding a
spirit (4S6kovv irvevpia&ewpe'iv), a persuasion against which our Lord's subse
quent words are specially directed. This in some measure prepares us for the
statement in Mark xvi. 13. See the following note.
2 Tfcerp is confessedly, at first sight, some difficulty in reconciling the joyful
greeting of the Apostles and their spontaneous announcement of the appear
ance to Simon (Luke xxiv. 34) with the incredulity with which St. Mark (ch.
xvi. 13) tells us they received the account of the two disciples from Emmaus. It
is possible that the ovSe iKeivois 4irltrTevaav (ver. 13) may refer, not to the Apos
tles, but to 6ome of the others (tois XoiiroTs) to whom they related it (see August.
de Consens. Evang. in. 25), but it seems more reasonable to suppose, as in the
text, that the want of belief is to be accounted for by the strangely circumstan
tial nature of the narrative of the two disciples, the contrasts it presented to
two of the other appearances, and perhaps also to the third, and also further,
its seeming incompatibility with what they might have conceived to be their
Master's present state. He whose feet suppliant and adoring women deemed
they clasped, seemed widely different from the humble wayfarer to Emmaus.
3 The special notice rav Svpav KeKXettrpi4vo3V (John xx. 19), repeated ver. 26,
and in the latter case without any repetition of the reason, seems to point to the
mode of the Lord's entry (&&poov earn pietros, Chrysost.) as involving some
thing marvellous and supernatural. How this took place we are wholly unable
to explain, but the conjecture may be hazarded that it was not so much spe
cially miraculous, as due to the very nature and properties of the body of the
risen Lord. Compare p. 356 sq. The attempts to show that this might have
been merely a natural entry (Robinson, Bibl. Sacr, Vol. ii. p. 182, comp. Sher
lock, Trial of Witn. Vol. v. p. 196) do not seem successful. The etrr-n els to
pi4o-ov of St. John appears correlative to the HtpavTos 4yevero of St. Luke (ch.
xxiv. 31); if the latter be supernatural, so certainly would seem the former.

Luke xxiv. 3
John xx. 10.

360 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
it must be His bodiless spirit that they are now beholding,
and the flesh quailed. Though partially reassured by the
sight of the wounds, and by the condescend
ing love which permitted them to touch the
Lukexxiu.ss. nolv D0(jy that stood before them, they even
Luke xxiv. 41. J J
then could not fully believe. But that lack
ing belief now no longer arose from a dull or faithless
heart, but from a bewildering joy : l it was to be excused,
yea, it was so far to be borne with that a special sign,
which on another occasion had probably been
used in a similar way to bring final conviction,
was yet to be vouchsafed to the overjoyed but amazed be
holders. The fish and the honey-comb were
Luke xxiv. 42. taken by Him who, as Augustine has well
said, had "the power though not the need of eating;"2
they were taken in the presence of all; the
Lord was pleased to eat thereof; and then, as
we may infer from the context, the Apostles and assembled
followers believed with all the fulness of a fervent, lasting,
and enduring faith. Then at length the first-fruits of the
effusion of the Holy Spirit were conveyed by
an outward sign and medium, and the myste
rious power of binding and loosing was conferred upon the
inspired and anew accredited Apostles.3

1 See Luke xxiv. 41, airttrrovvTatv avrav airb Trjs xapas. With this the
4xdpnaav ISovres rbv Kvptov of St. John (ch. xx. 20) seems exactly to harmo
nize. Joy is the pervading feeling, so great and so overwhelming, that they can
hardly believe the evidence of their very eyes and ears. Both Chrysostom and
Cyril of Alexandria here refer to John xvi. 22 as now notably fulfilled.
2 This appears to have been a favorite comment of Augustine, and is as reason
able as it is pertinently expressed : " Fecit cum discipulis quadraginta dies, intrans
et exiens, manducans et bibens, non egestate sed potestate ; manducans et bibens,
non esuriendo nee sitiendo, sed docendo et monstrando." Serm. ccxclviii. 2,
Vol. v. p. 1360. See also Serm. cxvi. 3, Vol. v. p. 659, in Joann. Tractat. lxiv.
1, Vol. iii. p. 1806, an interesting passage in the Civit. Dei, xiii. 22, Vol. vii. p.
895, and some sound remarks in Cyril Alex. Commentary on St. Luke, Part n.
p. 730 (Transl.).
3 The mysterious power now given to the Apostles was an essential adjunct to
their office as the ambassadors of Christ, and, more especially, as the rulers of
His Church ; " potestas ista .... primitus ApostoHs ut ecclesise magistris et rec-
toribus demandata est." Parrow, de Potest. Clav. Vol. viii. 113. It had refer-

Lect. Vm. THE FORTY DAYS. . 361
But one there yet was of the number of the holy eleven
who had not beheld with his own eyes, and
who could not and would not believe even ^^j7'™1-
, u as; our Lord's ap-
the overwhelming testimony of the assembled p'"™"011 to th°
... o ¦» eleven Apostles.
believers. Seven days was he to remain in
his unbelief. While his brother Apostles were now the
probably conscious recipients of the eternal Spirit,1 the
unconvinced Thomas was yet seeking for outward and
material evidences, without which he had
avowed that he could not believe. And even •/otoin;-25-
these were vouchsafed to the now isolated Apostle. We
read in the inspired narrative of the fourth
Evangelist, how on the day which the Lord's Ver'K'
renewed appearance thereon had now begun to stamp
with a special sanctity,2 our Lord appears in the same

ence, as Meyer rightly observes, not merely to the general power of receiving
into the Church or the contrary, but to their disciplinary power over individual
members of it, both in respect of the retaining and the absolving of sins. On
the subject generally, see Andrewes, Serm. Vol. v. p. 82 ( A.-C. Libr.) Barrow,
de Potest. Clav. Vol. viii. p. 84 sq. (Oxf. 1830), Bingham, Works, Vol. viii. p. 357
sq. (Lond. 1844), and comp. Marshall, Penit. Disc. I. 2, p. 10 sq. (A.-C. L.), Thorn-
dike, Princ of Chr. Truth, I. 9, Vol. ii. p. 157 (A.-C. L.).
1 It seems right and reasonable to suppose that the Apostles now felt them
selves endued with that gift of the Holy Ghost which they had received from
their Lord, though as yet they could have had no power of exercising it. That
this was a real dirapx'h of the Holy Ghost is rightly maintained by all the best
expositors ; the gift was not general like that at the Pentecost, but special and
peculiar (4irfryayev'eClv av atbiJTe k. t. X. SetKvvs irolov eJSos 4vepyelas SiStatrtv,
Chrysost.), yet no less veritably a gift of the Spirit. Luthardt (Johann. Evang.
Part n. p. 449) presses the absence of the article, and urges that it was only a
spirit of the new life as coming from the risen but not ascended Lord : for such
a distinction, however, there is no sound grammatical foundation (see notes on
Gal. v. 5), and apparently no evidence deducible from the language of the N. T.
2 It does not seem wholly improbable that we have here the very commence
ment, as it were, of the celebration of the Lord's day, and the earliest indication
of that observance of the first day of the week which the Lord's resurrection
had naturally evoked, and to which His present appearance gave additional
sanction and validity. See Cyril Alex, in Joann'. xx. 26, Vol. iv. p. 1104, and
compare Huls. Essay for 1843, p. 74. The fair statement of the whole contested
subject would seem to be as follows, — that the dedication of one day of the week
to the special service of God is binding on us by His primeval law, but that the
special selection of the first day rests on Apostolical, and, as the present case
6eems to suggest, indirectly Divine appointment. Compare also Abp. Bramhall,
Lord's Day, Vol. v. p. 32 sq. (A.-C. L.). 31

362 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
supernatural manner j1 we mark with adoring wonder how
the personal test which the doubting Apostle had required
was now vouchsafed to him, and it is with
thankful joy that we hear that outburst of
inspired conviction that now recognized in the risen Jesus,
yea, in Him whose very wounds the privileged Apostle
was permitted to touch, not so much the humanity as the
divinity;2 — "and Thomas answered and said
unto Him, My Lord, and my God."
Some time afterwards, how long we know not, followed
the Lord's manifestation of Himself by the
our Lord's ap- ja]je 0f Tiberias, of which we have so full
pearancebythelake '
of Tiberias. and explicit account from the hand of the
ch.xxi.isq. beloved Apostle. The promise of the* great
Matt.xxvi.32. Shepherd that He would go before His flock
Mark xlv. 28. r °
into Galilee, and would there appear unto
them, was now first most solemnly fulfilled. Seven Apos
tles3 are the first witnesses, and under circum
stances which the distinct and emphatic lan
guage of the inspired narrator leads us to believe produced
1 That our*Lord's appearance was supernatural again rests on the special
notice of the fact of the closed doors. See above, p. 359, note 3. The peculiar
terms (here epxerai Kal earn, ver. 26, comp. ver. 19) which seem designedly used
by the Evangelists in describing our Lord's appearances are noticed by Stier,
Disc, of our Lord, Vol. viii. p. 90 (Clark).
2 The declaration of St. Thomas has often and with justice been urged hy
writers upon our Lord's divinity, but the exact circumstances under which it
was made, and which add so much to its force, have not always been sufficiently
considered. Let it then be observed that it is at the very time when our Lord is
being graciously pleased to convince His donhting follower of the reality of His
sacred body, in fact of His perfect humanity, that the Apostle so preeminently
recognizes his Lord's divinity. With his hands on the sacred wounds, with evi
dence the most distinct that He whom he was permitted to touch was man, the
convinced disciple, in terms the most explicit, declares Him to be God. Some
sound comments on this text will be found in Cyril Alex, in Joann. xx. 28, Vol.
iv. p. 1108 (ed. Aubert.), and for a collection of analogous passages, Waterland,
Serm. vi. on our Lord's Divinity (Moyer's Lect.) Vol. ii. p. 129.
3 It is not perfectly certain that the two not mentioned by name (fiAXoi 4k
tuv pio&nTuv avrov Svo, ver. 2) were Apostles, as the word ptafrnTal has some
times in St. John a more inclusive 6ense. As, however, in verse 1 it seems used
to specify the Apostles (with verse 1 compare John xx. 26, to which the irdXtv
naturally refers the reader), the assumption that it is used in a similar sense in
ver. 2 appears perfectly reasonable. See Lucke, in loc. Vol. ii. p. 806 (ed. 3).

Lect. VIII. THE FORTY DAYS. 363
an impression almost more deep and enduring than any they
had yet received.1 Upon the details, where all is told
with such divine simplicity, and where there are no diffi
culties either in the language or in the sequence of the
narrative, it will not perhaps he necessary to dwell. We
may pause, however, to notice that again the disciples did
not recognize the Lord, though they were
near enough to the beach to hear his voice.2 Va'' 4'
On this occasion, however, there seems no reason to sup
pose that the Lord's form was specially changed, or that it
was not His divine pleasure that He should at first be rec
ognized. It was now, it must be remembered, early dawn ;
the wearied men probably saw the figure
somewhat indistinctly, and with the unobserv-
ing eye of those who expect nothing and indeed perceive
nothing different to the usual homely incidents of their
daily life,3 they answer the friendly call of the stranger ;

1 It is not wholly improbable that the emphatic declaration of the Apostle at
the close of the narrative, in reference to the truth of his testimony (John xxi.
24), may have been occasioned by the feeling that this manifestation of our Lord
was perhaps the most important that had yet been vouchsafed. It was indeed a
manifestation (4tpav4pcoffev 4k tovtov SijXov, oVe ovx efaparo el fify cvyKaTeBn,
Chrys.) alike convincing and consolatory. On the one hand, in the various acts
He was pleased to perform (ver. 13), it most clearly set forth the reality of the
Lord's risen body ; and, on the other, it assured the Apostles of the continuance
of those same miraculous powers which would have ever occupied so prominent
a place in their retrospect of their Master's earthly ministry. On the importance
of this revelation, see Augustine, in Joann. Tractat. cxxii., where it is suggested
that the concluding verses of the preceding chapter might have been added, —
"secuturaa narrationis quasi procemium,quod ei quodammodo faceret eminentio-
rem locum." — Vol. iii. p. 1959 (ed. Migne).
2 The distance at which the boat was from the shore (abput one hundred
yards, ver. 8) would certainly be sufficient to prevent them immediately recog
nizing one whom, at that particular place and time, they were in no way
expecting to see, unless, indeed, we are to suppose that there was something in
the Lord's form and general appearance strikingly different from that of other
men. This, however, we have already seen, does not appear to have been the
case. Comp. Lect. in. p. 92, note 1.
3 It seems natural to think that the friendly voice, " calling, after the manner
of the East, children" (Stanley, Palest, p. 374), and inquiring if they had any
•npoatpdyiov, was conceived by the disciples to be that of one who wished to buy
of them — lis pieXXoiv rt wveloSai trap' out&v, Chrysost. in loc. Comp. Cyril
Alex, in Joann. Vol. iv. p. 1113. To this Dean Trench objects, supposing it to be
merely the inquiry of that natural interest, "not unmixed with curiosity,"

Per. 5.
Ver. e.

364 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
and supposing Him to be one who would fain buy of them,
they tell Him in the simplest way they have nothing.
Even when told to cast in their net in- a par
ticular place,* they still appear to have been
in no way surprised by the order. It might
be the suggestion of one experienced, or who had some
reasons for his suggestion that they did not know, and did
not pause to consider. They obey, perhaps, with the feeling
of men who in their ill success were ready to
take any suggestion, by whomsoever offered.
The wonderful and miraculous draught,1 however, at once
arouses their attention. The sudden contrast with their
weary and profitless night's fishing, the great number of
¦ large fish, and the care requisite to bring them
to the land, all bring back to their minds the
never-forgotten miracle of the early part of the past year,
when three at least of those now on the lake had received
the divine call to become fishers of men, and had forsook,
as they then perhaps thought, forever that
Luke'V'n calling to which they had now returned.
Everything brings back the past ; and he on
whom the past had perhaps made the most permanent
impression 2 is the first to recognize the blessedness of the
which all feel in the uncertainty of the fisherman's toil ( Notes on Miracles, p.
456). It should be remembered, however, that we are only considering how the
Apostles understood the speech, and this, probably, is all that Chrysostom meant
to imply.
1 On this miracle, the peculiarities of which are the similarity it preserves to
the former miracle on the lake, and the apparently symbolical character of some
of its incidents, see the interesting, but perhaps too minutely allegorizing com
ments of Augustine, in Joann. Tractat. cxxn. Vol. iii. p. 1962 sq., Stier, Disc, of
our Lord, Vol. viii. p. 212 sq., Trench, Notes on the Miracles, p. 453 sq.
2 We may justify this casual remark not only by what followed, but by »
reference to the fact that, though St. John had probably received his call a year
previously to the former miracle (John i. 37 sq.), and had accompanied our Lord
as one of His special followers, the miraculous draught of fishes constituted the
epoch when he deliberately and formally left his father, his home, and all the
employments of his former life (compare Matt. iv. 20, Mark i. 20, Luke v. 11) to
become a fisher of men. St. Peter, we know, was much moved at the time by
the miracle and its results (Luke v. 9), but the impression produced on the mind
of the younger Apostle, from the circumstances with which the miracle stood in
connection, would probably have been more lasting.

Lect. Vni. THE FORTY DAYS. 365
present. The Apostle whom the Lord loved is the first to
recognize ; and yet, as we might have expected, another is
the first to greet.1 He who on that very lake, and under
circumstances strikingly similar,, had besought his holy
Master to depart from one so sin-stained, now
casts himself into the water, and is the first i"*60-8-
, , . -, . . „ John xxi. 7.
to kneel at the divine feet.
One other point only requires a passing comment — the
reverential awe felt by the disciples, and its
connection with the circumstances of the Beverentm awe
of the ApoBUes.
morning meal. These circumstances, we
know, were strange and perplexing. The fire of coals
provided by the ministry of unseen agencies,2
the fish lying thereon, the bread — whence •/ofaKa-9-
° Ver. v.
eame they ? Enough there was in this mys
terious provision which the Lord had just been pleased to
make for the wants of His wearied disciples to account
for the awed silence which, we are told, thev Ver. 12.
preserved with regard to the exact state of
His holy personality.3 Enough there was in this alone,
without our being obliged to suppose that there was any

I The differences of nature and character, in the case of the two Apostles,
Which the incident discloses are thus clearly stated by Chrysostom, in loc:
" When they recognized the Lord," says this able commentator, " again do the
disciples display the peculiarities of their individual characters. The one, for
instance, was more ardent, but the other more elevated ; the one more eager, but
the other endued with finer perception. On which account John was the first to
recognize the Lord, but Peter to come to Him." — In Joann. Horn, lxxxvii,
Vol. viii. p. 594 (ed. Bened. 2).
2 It is idle to speculate on the agencies which caused the fire of coals and the
fish thereon to be found on the beach. The most reasonable and reverent sup
position is that it was miraculous (Chrysost., Theoph., al.); but as nothing is
lidded from which any inference can be drawn, we must be content to leave the
statement as we find it. The attempt of Lange (Leben Jesu, II. 8. 6, Part in. p.
J713) to account for it in a natural way is certainly not satisfactory.
^Observe especially the comment of the Apostle, ovSels 4r6Xua tuv ptafr"Ta)v
i^erdaat avTov, 2i> t(j eT, John xxi. 12. Here, again, the explanation of
Chrysostom seems perfectly satisfactory : "Seeing his form somewhat different
to what it was before, and with much about it that caused astonishment, they
were above measure amazed, and felt a ^lesire to make some inquiry about it ;
but their apprehension, and their knowledge that it was not another, but Him
self, restrained the inquiry."—/™ Joann. Vol. viii. p. 694 eq.
3J*

366 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
special alteration in the Lord's appearance. A change
doubtless there was, as the early interpreters have rightly
surmised,1 but it was a change probably rather felt than
seen ; a change that might have deepened their reverential
awe, but in no way interfered with the warm feelings of
holy love which two at least appear to have specially
evinced both in their words and their ac-
Comp. ver. 19,20. .
tions. The very last glimpse we are per
mitted to behold of this third blessed interview with the
disciples, so rich in symbol and so deep in meaning — this
continuance, as it were, after the weary night had passed
away, of the Last Supper,2 is an incident that brings back
the past, and mingles it, as it were, with the blessed and
glorious present. Again St. Peter and St. John appear
before us in their wonted relations of warmest and most
clinging love to their holy Master. We see the Lord
gradually and perhaps mysteriously withdrawing;3 we see
1 See the above note. The exact words of Chrysostom are tV ptoptfrhv aXXoto-
Tepav bpwvres, by which we may conclude he intended to imply a partial
change, something easy to recognize, but not easy to specify. Comp. Luthardt,
Johann. Evang. Part ii. p 468. If we admit the suggestion that has already
been thrown out (p. 356, note 3), we may perhaps allow ourselves to imagine that
the developing glorification of the Lord was now beginning to make a more dis
tinct impression on the beholders.
2 Compare Stier, Disc, of our Lord, Vol. viii. p. 226, where, as in all sounder
and deeper expositions of this portion of Scripture, the mystical and typicai
charaoter of the early morning meal, as well as of the preceding miracle, is
properly recognized. The details of many of these interpretations, and the
desirableness of the attempts to allegorize every particular, e. g., the number of
fish (Jerome, Cyril Alex., Theoph., al.), may most fairly be called in question;
but the general reference of the miracle to the future labors of the Apostles, its
analogy to the previous miracle, and, perhaps, the retrospective reference of
this morning meal to the Lord's Supper, can hardly be denied by any thoughtful
expositor. See Luthardt, Johann. Evang. Part II. p. 466 sq., Trench, Notes on
the Miracles, p. 459 sq., and a good note of Alford, in loc. Vol. i. p. 861 (ed. 4).
3 It seems probable that, as our Lord uttered the words " Follow me " (ver.
19), He commenced withdrawing from the Apostles. Peter, not fully under
standing the meaning of the command, obeys in a literal sense. While advanc
ing, he turns and looks round, and sees the beloved Apostle following also,
upon which he puts the inquiry, outos Se rl (i. e., probably effTat), " what shall
his lot be?" (ver. 21). It may be observed that the true meaning of aKoXoibet
pan, when viewed in connection with what precedes, would seem to he u follow
me, even unto that martyr's death for my name which I have but just now
foretold." Compare Augustine, in Joann. Tractat. cxxiv. 1, Vol. iii. p. 1970
(ed. MigniS).

Lect. VIII. THE FORTY DAYS. 367
the elder Apostle perhaps obeying literally the figurative
command of his Lord, and behind him the
true-hearted son of Zebedee, both following
the steps of their receding Saviour ; we hear the solemn
and mysterious words in answer to the un
befitting question,1 and the holy, exalted, and
most impressive scene fades away from our wondering eyes.
But this interview, full as it was of blessedness and con
solation, was not to be the last. The Lord
had promised, even on the morning of His tJt^TZ 1
resurrection, that He would meet His Church MllTm m aa,ilee-
Matt, xxviii. 10.
in that land in whioh it had formerly been
established and consolidated. And there, as it would
seem, all now were assembled,2 hourly expecting the com
plete fulfilment of a promise, of which the last-mentioned
interview had been a commencement and first-fruits, fr'or
did they tarry long. Probably within a few days after
the appearance by the lake, and on a moun
tain which He had appointed, perchance that
of the Beatitudes,3 the Lord manifests Himself not only to

l The exact meaning of the words used in reference to St. John Las been
much discussed. *The most simple and satisfactory explanation would seem to
be that alluded to by Theophylact, according to which the coming of the Lord
is to be understood of that form of His advent which in His last prophecy He
was pleased to connect with His final advent, viz., the fall of Jerusalem. Com
pare Matt. xiv. 28. The hypothetical mode of explanation (Cyril Alex., al.), and
that which refers p.eveiv to a natural death, seem much less satisfactory.
2 It seems reasonable to suppose that the great promise uttered by the angels
after the resurrection (Matt, xxviii. 7, Mark xvi. 7), and specially confirmed by
our Lord (John xx. 10), was understood to apply to the whole Church, and had
induced the greater part of the brethren who were then in Jerusalem to take
their way to Galilee and there await its fulfilment. Some of the Apostles, wc
have seen, had not only returned to Galilee but even resumed their former call.
ing (John xxi. 2).
3 The exact scene of the solemn meeting is not further specified than as being
"the mountain which Jesus appointed," and in Galilee (Matt, xxviii. 16). The
only two conjectures worthy of consideration are (a) that it was Tabor, which
from its situation might seem not unsuitable for a place of general meeting (see
Lange, Leben Jesu, n. 8. 7, Part in. p. 1730), and (6) that it was the mountain on
which the Sermon had been delivered, which, from its proximity to the lake of
Tiberias (see p. 169, note 2) and to the populous plain of Gennesareth, might
seem, topographically considered, even more suitable than Tabor, and from its
connection with the founding of the Church much more probable, considered

368 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VKI.
the eleven, but, as the terms of his promise seem fairly
to imply, to the five hundred brethren ! al-
Matt. xxvm. ie. iuaed to by St. Paul. The interview was of
1 Cor. xv. 6. J
the deepest solemnity, and tends to set forth
the majesty of the risen Lord in a manner far more distinct
than had even yet been witnessed. While a
few doubt the evidence of their senses,2 and
cannot apparently believe that they are beholding their
Lord, the chosen eleven no sooner see than
Matt, xxviii. 17. ., . . T ,
they adore. That adoration the Lord now
not only accepts, but confirms by the mighty declaration
that "all power now was given to Him in heaven and in
earth." Yea, He gives it a yet deeper meaning and fuller
significance by now issuing His great evangelical com
mission, and by enhancing it with that promise of bound
less consolation — that with those that execute that com
mission He will be present unto the end, even unto the
theologically. The supposition of Hofmann (Leben Jesu, § 89, p. 397) that the
term " Galilee" here used by St. Matthew really refers, not to the country but to
the northern summit of Olivet, which appears to have been so named (though
not by any early writers), is by no means natural or probable.
1 Nearly all the best recent expositors concur in supposing, that the appear
ance of our Lord mentioned by St- Matthew (ch. xxviii. 16) is identical with that
alluded to by St. Paul (1 Cor. xv. 6) as having been vouchsafed to above five hun
dred brethren at once. Comp. Wieseler, Chron. Synops. p. 434, Eobinson, Bibl.
Sacra, Vol. ii. p. 185. It is true that St. Matthew only specifies the eleven as
having gone to the appointed mountain, but the solemn character of the twice-
repeated promise (see p. 352, note 2) on the morning of the resurrection, com
bined with the fact that our Lord had appeared twice previously to the collected
Apostles, renders it highly probable that the term was here not intended to be
understood as exclusive.
2 The statement that " some doubted," though strongly urged by Meyer and
others (comp. Winer, Gr. § 17. 2, p. 96) as referring to the Apostles, is far more
reasonably referred to others who were with them. Though it cannot perhaps
positively be asserted that St. Matthew must have used ol p.ev — ol Se if he had
meant to indicate that some few of the Apostles doubted, yet it seems natural to
suppose that Bome very explicit form of expression (e. g,, Tives e| abruv) would
certainly have been selected to mark a fact in itself so unlikely (even if we con
fine ourselves to St. Matthew's Gospel) as the doubting of some of the eleven
while the rest were sufficiently persuaded to worship. If we admit that the
events specified by St. John, ch. xx. 19—29, preceded, then the supposition that
the doubters were Apostles seems plainly preposterous. See Stier, Disc, of our
Lord, Vol. viii. p. 280 (Clark), The assumption of MUller and others that the
doubting only lasted till the Lord came nearer (irpoo-fK&oiv, yer. 18) is precarious.
as no hint of this is contained in the words,

Lect. VIH. THE FORTY DAYS. 369
hour when His mediatorial kingdom shall be merged in
the eternity of His everlasting reign.1
One further and last interview is yet to be vouchsafed,
and of that a holier mountain even than that
of the Beatitudes is to be the scene and the Tks x°r<fs As~
cension.
witness. Warned, it may be, by the Lord
Himself, or attracted thither by the near approach of the
Pentecost,2 the Apostles and those with them return to
Jerusalem, their hearts full of mighty presentiments and
exalted hopes. Tet again they see their Mas
ter in the neighborhood of the Holy City ; yet ^"im-Lukcxxiv.
again they hear from those divine lips fuller
and more precise instructions ; 3 they are taught to gaze
l Our own hopes of the future, as Bp. Pearson has well observed, confirm our
belief in our Redeemer's eternal reign: "He hath promised to make us kings
and priests, which honor we expect in heaven, believing we shall reign with
Him forever, and therefore forever must believe Him King. ' The kingdoms of
this world are become the kingdoms of the [our] Lord, and of His Christ, and
He shall reign for ever and ever' (Rev. xi. 15), not only to the modificated
eternity of His mediatorship, so long as there shall be need of regal power to
subdue the enemies of God's elect; but also to the complete eternity of the dura
tion of His humanity, which for the future is coeternal to His divinity." — Expos.
of Creed, Art. vi. Vol. ii. p. 334 sq. (ed. Burton).
2 Some difficulties that have been felt in the change of place in reference to
the earlier and later appearances of our Lord will be modified if we remember
that the period we are considering was bounded by two festivals, which would
of themselves involve journeyings to and from Judaea. At first the disciples are
found at Jerusalem, whither they had gone with their Lord to the feast of the
Passover. A few days after the conclusion of the feast they leave the city, and,
in obedience to their Lord's command, go to Galilee. After the solemn appear
ance vouchsafed to them in that country, on the appointed mountain, probably
towards the close of the forty days, they naturally go up to Jerusalem to cele
brate the Pentecost. In the neighborhood of that city they see our Lord for the
last time (Luke xxiv. 44 sq.), but whether unexpectedly or otherwise we cannot
at all determine.
3 It seems not only perfectly reasonable to suppose that Luke xxiv. 44 sq. is to
be regarded as on the same day with Luke xxiv. 50—53, but right to deem it
actually proved by the opening verses of Acts, ch. i. The command to remain
in Jerusalem must, according to Acts i. 4, 5, be placed a few days before the
Pentecost: when we meet them with the same command in Luke xxiv. 49, are
we to believe that the same writer is so inconsistent with himself as to imply
that it was spoken six weeks before that festival? See Wieseler, Chron. Synops-
p. 423 sq. The insinuation of Meyer (iib. Due. p. 511; see also p. 514), that St.
Luke followed one traditionary account of the ascension in his Gospel and
another in the Acts, is a truly hopeless way of avoiding the force of a very just
and very reasonable inference.

370 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
backward down the great vistas of the prophetic Scrip
tures, to understand and to believe. Again,
Fir'4*' too, they hear transcendent promises, prom-
1 """ ises of gifts and blessings now exceeding
Acts i. 5, ¦ ¦ ¦ - ¦ o tj *-"
nigh, but even yet they partially misunder
stand, and vaguely question.1 Such inquiries, however, are
solemnly silenced ; they are to be the Lord's
witnesses; they are not to expect an earthly-
kingdom, but to prepare others for a heavenly kingdom.
They marvel and they follow.2 . . . They now
stand on the mountain down which the tri
umphal entry had swept into the earthly Jerusalem, and
from which the triumphal entry into the heavenly Jeru
salem, and the celestial realms beyond,3 shall be beheld
by the same chosen witnesses. They follow their Lord
even to the borders of the district of Bethany,4 and then,
even while His uplifted hands are confirming with a bless-

1 For some comments on the nature of the expectations of the Jews in refer
ence to the Messiah's reign, see Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Act. i. 6. The supposi
tion, however, of this able expositor, that the question of the Apostles involved
a kind of deprecation of the present establishment of such a kingdom (" an jam,
Domine regnum iis restitues, qui te sic tractarunt? ") is neither probable nor in
accordance with the context.
2 The term 4^yayev (Luke xxiv. 60) refers to the scene of the commencement
of this interview, from which our Lord conducted His disciples towards Beth
any. This may have been either in the neighborhood of the city, or more proba
bly in the city ; perhaps in the same room, with its closed doors, where the Lord
had already appeared twice before (John xx. 19, 26).
3 Comp. Heb. iv. 14, SteXr]Xv&6Ta tovs obpavobs, where there seems no reason
to consider the plural as without its proper force, especially when compared
with Eph. iv. 10, b avaBas birepdvto irdvTav tu>v obpdvoivT " Whatsoever
heaven there is higher than all the rest which are called heavens, whatsoever
sanctuary is holier than all which are called holies, whatsoever place is of great
est dignity in all those courts above, into that place did He ascend, where, in
the splendor of His deity, He was before He took upon Him our humanity." —
Pearson, Expos, of Creed, Art. vi. Vol. ii. p. 320 (ed- Burton).
4 There seems no sufficient reason for calling in question the ancient tradition
that our Lord ascended from the Mount of Olives. The usual arguments,
founded on the eois els BySravlav of Luke xxiv. 60 (Robinson, Palest. Vol. i. pp.
416) are not by any means conclusive, as it seems fairly probable that the words
are not to be limited to the actual village, but generally referred to the brow or
side of the hill, where the road strikes downward to Bethany. Comp. Acts i. 12,
and see Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Luc. xxiv. 60, Meyer, ub. Apostelgesch. i. 12,
Williams, Holy City, Vol. ii. p. 440 sq.

Lect. VIII. THE FORTY DAYS. 371
ing the words of the last promise, they behold Him part
ing from them, rising from Olivet higher and
yet higher, still rising and still blessing, until •r«*««a*-n-
the cloud1 receives Him from their sight,
and angelic voices address to them those words of mingled
warning, consolation, and prophecy, " Why stand ye gaz
ing up into heaven ? This same Jesus which is taken up
from you into heaven, shall so come in like
manner as ye have seen Him go into heaven."
° Rev. xxii. 20.
Even so, come, Lord Jesus; come quickly.
Amen. And now let us bring these meditations to their close,
yet not without the expression of an earnest
. Conclusion.
hope that they may have in some degree
tended to remove a few of the doubts and difficulties, which
even the sober and the thoughtful have sometimes felt with
regard to the connection of this portion of the Evangelical
history.2 Above all things, may it have been granted to
l The cloud in which our Redeemer ascended was not only, as Stier suggests,
typical of that cloud in which He will visibly return (4v vetp4xn, Luke xxi. 27),
but also directs the thought to the mystery of the assumption of the faithful
servants of Christ who at His second coming will be caught up "in clouds"
(4v vetp4xats, 1 Thess. iv. 17) to meet their Lord in the air. Compare Lect. IV.
p. 217, note 1. It may be remarked further that if the words avetpepero els Tbv
ovpavbv (Luke xxiv. 51) be received as genuine, of which, supported as they are
by external authority, there can be no reasonable doubt ( Tisch: rejects them on
most insufficient grounds), we have the gradual ascent upwards (&vetp4peTO,
imperf.) vividly put before us: the Lord is parted from His disciples, and is
beheld being borne upwards, till the cloud at length intercepts Him from the
view of the watchers beneath.
2 If the views advanced in the preceding pages be accepted, it would seem
that in the Gospels we have in all notices of nine appearances of our Lord after
His resurrection ; (1) to Mary Magdalene ; (2) to the other miniBtering women ; (3)
to the two disciples journeying to Emmaus; (4) to St. Peter; (5) to the ten Apos
tles; (6) to the eleven Apostles; (7) to seven ApoBtles by the sea of Tiberias; (8)
to the eleven Apostles, and probably many others, on the appointed mountain ;
(9) to the Apostles in or near Jerusalem, immediately previous to the ascension.
Besides these, we learn from St. Paul (10) that an appearance of our Lord was
vouchsafed to-James (1 Cor. xv. 7). This, if we conceive the passage to be writ
ten with reference to chronological order, would seem to have been shortly
after the appearance to the five hundred brethren. The agreement of this
enumeration of St. Paul with the record of the appearances to men, as recorded
in the Gospels, is very striking, and has been rightly put forward by Wieseler,
Chron. Synops. p. 419 sq. Comp. Ebrard, Kritik der Ev. Gesch. § 113, p. 699.

372 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIIL
these humble words that they may have brought home to
those who have dwelt on them the living reality of the mys
teries of these Forty Days, the plain and objective truth of
the Lord's appearances on earth after His resurrection, and
the actual, visible, and bodily nature of His ascension.1
On such truths rest the surest consolations of the present ;
on such the holiest hopes of the future.2 O, may God's
Spirit, in these latter days of scepticism and incredulity,
move the hearts of His ministers and His people to hold
more truly and tenaciously that living truth, which alone
rests for its basis on the literal truth of the resurrection
and ascension of our Lord, — that truth which an Apos-

1 On this subject it is painful to feel how much half-belief prevails at the
present day, even among those expositors of Scripture who have in other
respects 6ome claim on our attention. See, for instance, the remarks of Meyer,
iib Due. p. 514 sq. (ed. 3). The fact itself is not questioned, nay, even the exalta
tion of the Lord's glorified body is admitted ; but the distinct statements of one
Evangelist, and the implied statements of a second (Mark xvi. 19), that this
exaltation took place visibly, and before the eyes of appointed witnesses, is flatly
denied. Why so, we ask, when so much is, as it ought to be, accepted as true?
For an answer we are referred to the silence of the two Apostolical Evangelists.
See Meyer, loc cit. p. 515 sq. But even if we concede such a silence, which,
indeed, we need not concede (what meaning, for instance, could St. John have
assigned to our Lord's words, ch. vi. 62, if he had not seen how they were ful
filled?), — conceding it, however, for the sake of our argument, what are we to
say of a mode of criticism which, in a history where three out of the four
writers of it are almost avowedly selective, is prepared to reject a miracle when
ever two out of four alone relate it? If it be replied that this is no common
miracle, but, like the resurrection, forms an epoch in our Lord's life of the high
est importance, the rejoinder seems as final as it is true, that the sacred writers
viewed the ascension as a necessary part and sequel of the resurrection, and
that it is only the unsound theology of later times that has sought to separate
them. See above, p. 337, and for further comments, see Olshausen, Commentary,
Vol. iv. p. 353 sq., Lange, Leben Jesu, II. 8. 10, Part III. p. 1760 sq., Ebrard, Krit.
der Ev. Gesch. § 113. 4, p. 699 sq.
2 Well and wisely has Bp. Pearson dwelt upon that truth to which the ancient
writers have invariably given such prominence when treating upon the ascen
sion, viz., that the bodily ascension of our Lord into heaven is the strongest
corroboration of our own hope of ascending thither. See Expos, of Creed, Art.
vi. Vol. i. p. 321 (ed. Burton). That " where the Head is gone there the mem
bers may hope to follow," is the inference which all sound expositors have
drawn, alike from the nature of our union with our Lord, and from the eternal
truth that He has vouchsafed in His own person to take our glorified humanity
to His Father's throne. Compare Augustine, Serm. ccxxin. 3, Vol..v. p. 1210
(ed. Migne), and a sound sermon by Beveridge, Serm. lxxvi. Vol. iii. p. 432 sq.
(A-C. L.).

Lect. VIII. THE FORTY DAYS. 373
tie has declared to us, — even that our Master has raised
us with Himself and made us in spirit ascend
with Himself to His Father's kingdom, and '"''"'"
sit there the partakers of His glory and His blessedness.*
Where the Head is, even there has He solemnly assured us
the true members now are in spirit. We are already
seated there in Him, — that is the support and consolation
of the present ; we shall hereafter be made to sit there by
Him, not in spirit only, but in our glorified human nature,
— that is the hope and joy of the future.2
Present and future are alike bound up in our belief of
our Master's resurrection and ascension ; and dreary indeed
must this present be, and gloomy and clouded that future,
if our belief in our risen and our ascended Lord be uncer
tain, partial, or precarious. We may think, perchance, that
we are free to speculate, to poise historical credibilities, to
boast the liberty of a suspended assent to what seems all
too objective and material for the falsely spiritualizing ten
dencies of the age in which we live.3 We may think so

l No words can be more distinct than those which the Apostle uses in the
passage above referred to, — Kal ffvviyyetpev KoX o'vveKd&io'ev 4v rois 4irovpaviois
(Eph. ii. 6). Though the passage, considered in one sense, may refer to what is
yet future, yet in another and a spiritual sense, it is eternally true that the faith
ful believer in Jesus Christ has even now been raised with His Lord, and in
spirit made to sit with Him and in Him in the realms of His blessedness and
glory; Tijs KetpaXrjs KoAe^oueirns Kal rb oSpia o-vyKdfrnrar Stb 4irfiy ay ev 4v
XpiffT^ *Iijo~ov. Chrysost. in loc. See also Commentary on Eph. p. 38 (ed. 2).
2 " Even now we sit there in Him, and shall sit there with Him in the end. So
he promiseth, in express terms, that ' we shall sit with Him in His throne '
(Rev. iii. 21), as He doth in His Father's. And so, not in the throne will he be
above us, but only that He in the midst, and we on His right hand." — An
drewes, Serm. vii. Vol. i. p. 115 (A.-C. L.).
3 It is, alas! not only the heretics of the past (see Augustine, de Hair. cap. 59,
Vol. viii. p. 41, Theodoret, Hatret. Fab. 1. 19) who have felt and expressed diffi
culties on the subject of our Lord's body being taken up into heaven. Modern
writers who on other points have shown themselves sound and thoughtful
expositors of Scripture, have here n«t scrupled to use language sadly analogous
to the language of the past, and have sought for imaginary places where they
might assume that the "final residuum of the corporeity" of the Lord was
deposited on His ascent to the Father. See the references in Stier, Disc of our
Lord Vol. viii. p. 442 (Clark), and on the subject generally, Augustine, Epist.
cov. Vol. ii. p. 942 sq., to which add the wise caution, de Fide et Symb. cap. 6,
Vol. vi. p. 188 (ed. Migne).
32

374 THE FORTY DAYS. Lect. VIII.
now ; but when the end draws near, when sorrows break
us, when age weakens, when darkness begins to close
around us, where will all such license of thought be, and
what will it avail us ? How shall dust and ashes hope to
ascend into' the heaven of heavens, if it cannot feel with
all the fulness of conviction that One who was bone of
our bone and flesh of our flesh has entered those realms
before us, and has taken up our very nature, glorified and
beautified, to the right hand of the everlasting Father ? 1
May, then, the belief in the resurrection and in all its
attendant mysteries become in the heart of every one
whose eye may fall on these concluding words of an ear
nest, though, God knoweth, poor and weak effort to set
forth His truth, ever truer and ever fresher. May it call
up our thoughts and affections to His throne,
ever teaching us to ascend heavenward in
soul and spirit now, to learn the path, and to know the
way, that so we may ascend in body, soul, and spirit here
after ; yea, and not ascend only, but abide there with Him
forevermore, redeemed, justified, sanctified, glorified, the
. bidden and welcome guests at the marriage-
supper of the Lamb, the admitted inheritors
of the kingdom prepared for us from the
foundation of the world. .
i To none of the great truths relating to the two natures of our Lord is it
more necessary to adhere firmly in the present age than to this. A hearty belief
in the literal and local ascent of our Lord's humanity into the heavens is in
itself a belief in the whole mystery of the union of the Godhead and Manhood.
If, as has been truly said, in His death our Lord has assured us of His human
ity, and in His resurrection has demonstrated His divinity (Pearson, Creed, Vol.
i. p. 313, ed. Burton), most 6urely in His ascension has He displayed both. There
we see, as it were, in one what in other places our imperfect nature rarely ena
bles us to contemplate otherwise than under separate relations. In that last
scene we realize all, — the human, the divine, and the most complete manifesta
tion of their union. It is more as a man that we see Him leading His disciples
out of Jerusalem, and walking, for the last time, up the slopes of Olivet; it is
more as God that, with the eye of faith, we behold Him taking His seat on His
Father's throne; it is, however, as the God-man in its truest aspects that we
gaze on Him ascending, flesh of our flesh, and yet God blessed forever,— man
in the form that rises, God in the power that bears Him to His Father's throne :
"corpus levatum eBt in cesium illo levante qui ascendit." — August, de Agon.
Chr. 25, Vol. vi. p. 304.

Lect. Vin. THE FORTY DAYS. 375
0 holy Jesus,1 who for our sakes didst suffer incompara
ble anguish and pains, commensurate to thy love and our
miseries, which were infinite, that thou mightest purchase
for us blessings upon earth and an inheritance in heaven,
dispose us by love, thankfulness, humility; and obedience,
to receive all the benefit of thy passion, granting unto
us and thy whole Church remission of all our sins, in
tegrity of mind, health of body, competent maintenance,
peace in our days, a temperate air, fruitfulness of the earth,
unity and integrity of faith, extirpation of heresies, recon
cilement of schisms, and destruction of all wicked counsels
intended against us. Multiply thy blessings upon us, holy
Jesus : increase in us true religion, sincere and actual devo
tion in our prayers, patience in troubles, and whatsoever
is necessary to our soul's health, or conducing to thy glory.
Amen. 1 This beautiful and catholic prayer is taken from Bp. Jeremy Taylor's Life of
Christ, in. 15, Vol. i. p. 340 (Lond. 1836).

INDEX.-

Adultery, woman taken in, 232 ; nar
rative not written by St. John, 232,
n.; probable place in the Gospel
history, 281 ; nature of the strata
gem, 282; punishment of, 282 n.
Agony in the Garden, 297; nature
of the deprecatory prayer, 297 n. ;
ministry of the angel, 298 n.
Alph_«us, identical with Clopas, 101 n.
Angels, 57; number of, at the sepul
chre, 343 n.; significant attitude,
346 n.
Anna, the prophetess, 76.
Annas, short history of, 300 n. ; our
Lord's examination before, 300.
Antonia, tower of, 275 n.
Apocryphal Infancies, 99.
Apostles, sending forth of, 182 ; dura
tion of their circuit, 182 n. ; slowness
of to believe in resurrection, 349.
Appearances, our Lord's to Mary
Magdalene, 346; to the other minis
tering women, 350; to the two disci
ples, 352; to the ten Apostles, 357;
to St. Peter, 357 n.; to the eleven
Apostles, 361 ; to disciples on the lake
of Gennesareth, 362; to the five hun
dred brethren, 367; last, previous to
ascension, 369.
Ascension, festival of, 338 n. ; descrip
tion of, 370-71; probable place of,
370 n. ; literal and local, 372 n. ; half-
belief in the doctrine of, 372 n. ; great
importance of a right belief in, ib.
Atonement, its connection with our
Lord's divinity, 21 n. ; hortatory com
ments on, 329.
Baptism, our Lord's, 110; probable
date of, 106 n. ; probable locality of,
108 n. 32*

Bar abb A3, 311 n. ; origin of custom
which led to his escape, 312. *
Beeroth, 94.
Bethany, date of our Lord's last ar
rival at, 252 n. ; supper at, 257 ; posi
tion of, 258 n. ; roads from to Jerusa
lem, 260 n.
Bethesda, pool of, 136 ». ; etymology
of, 136 n.
Bethabara, 108 m., 240 n.
Bethlehem, 70 n.
Bethphage, probable site of, 260 n.
Bethsaid a-Julias, 184 n. ; two places
of that name, 194 n.
Betrayal of our Lord, 299; circum
stances which immediately followed,
300.
Binding and loosing, power of, 357 n.,
360 m.
Brethren of our Lord, 100 n. ; im
portunity' of and imperfect faith, 227.
Cjesarea Philippi, 208 n. ; events
which took place in its vicinity, 209.
Caiaphas, prophecy of, 246 n. ; ex
amination of our Lord, 304.
Cana, 117 n. ; miracle at, 117.
Canticles in Luke i., 64; inspiration
and characteristics of, 64.
Capernaum, site of, 121 n. ; nobleman
of, 132.
Circuits, our Lord's, round Galilee,
161 n. ; length of, 174 n.
Civilization, theories of, 22 n.
Christ, early development of, 90 ; ad
vance of in wisdom, 91 n. ; supposed
outward appearance of, 92; visit of
to temple when twelve years old, 93;
youth of, 97; reserve hereon of the
Evangelists, 100 ; spiritual and mental
development of, 102 ; a reader of the

378

INDEX.

heart, 125 n. ; reception of his teach
ing, 143 m.; date of his return to
Galilee, 144 n. ; duration of ministry,
145 n. ; visit to Jerusalem at Feast of
Tabernacles, 226 ; deportment of be
fore his judges, 303 n. ; nature of last
agonies, 321 ; last words on the cross,
322 n. ; nature of death, 326 n. ; burial
of, 327; recognition of not always
permitted after the resurrection, 346
n. ; how this is to be explained, 355;
appearance of after resurrection
somewhat changed, 355 n. ; bodily
nature of his ascension, 371; his
eternal reign, 369 n.
Cleopas, 353 n.
Clopas, wife of, 319 n.
Clothes, casting down of, 262 m. ;
rending of, 305 m.
Cook-crowing, 302 n.
Coincidences, verbal, in the four Gos
pels, 255 n.
Corn, rubbing ears of, 166 n.
Cross, form of, 318 n.
Dalmanutha, site of, 207 n.
Darkness, supernatural, at the cruci
fixion, 320 «.
Decapolis, confederation of, 192 n.
Dedication, feast of, 237 n.
Demoniacs, healing of, how charac
terized, 156 n. ; boy, healing of, 211;
Gergesene, 178.
Disciples, first that joined our Lord,
117 n.; the two journeying to Em
maus, 353 n.
Discourses of our Lord, their order
doubtful, 24 m.; delivered in the syn
agogue at Capernaum, 197 n. ; our
Lord's last, 295 n.
Doctors, Jewish, names of those alive
when our Lord was twelve years old,

Eastern world , expectations of, 55 n.
Emmaus, position of, 353 n. ; distance
of from Jerusalem, 354 n.
Ephraim, site of, 246 m.
Essene teaching, 103.
Eucharist, institution of, 294 ; proba
bly not partaken of by Judas, 294 n.
Eusebius, on the relations of the four
Gospels, 146,

Fig-tree, cursing of, 267; objections
urged against, 268 n.
Fish, constellation of, 79 n.
Five thousand, feeding of, 184.
Flight into Egypt, date of, and du
ration of stay, 85 n.
Four thousand, feeding of, 205; site
of the miracle, 205 n.
Gabbatha, 312 n.
Galilee, divisions of, 187 n. ; Christ's
appearances in, 337 n.; the mountain
in, where probably situated, 367 n.
Genealogies, comments on, 99 n.
Gennesareth, lake of, storms on,
177 m.
Gennesareth, plain of, 155 m.
Gergesa, probable site of, 178 m.
Gethsemane, 296 n.
Golgotha, site of, 317 n. ; meaning of
the term, ib.
Gospel history, mode of studying,
23 n.
Gospels, inspiration of, 27 n. ; har
monies of, 31 m. ; correct principles
of a harmony of, 34; apocryphal,
256 m. ; characteristics of contrasted
and compared, 46 m. ; discrepancies
of unduly exaggerated, 50 m.
Grave-clothes, position of, in the
sepulchre, 345 n.
Greeks, petition of, to see our Lord,
286 m.
Guards, bribery of, 353.
Harmonists, errors of, 32.
Harvest, usual time of, 107 n.
Herod the Great, death of, 81 m.;
barbarities of, 83 n.
Herod Antipas, character of, 201 n. ;
dismissal of our Lord to, 310; wicked
levity of, 310 n. ; mockery of our
Lord, ib.
Herodians, 168 m., 274 n.
Hillel, school of, 249 m.
Holy Ghost, blasphemy against, 176
m. ; gift of to the Apostles, 357 ».,
361m.
Innocents, murder of, 83; silence
hereon of Josephus, 83.
'IovSaioi, meaning of the term in St.
John, 115 n. , 137 n.

INDEX.

379

Jacob's well, 129 m.
Jalrus' daughter, healing of, 180.
Jerusalem, our Lord's address to,
241 ». ; view of from Olivet, 262 n. ;
appearance of at Passover, 263 n. ;
probable numbers assembled at, ib. ;
our Lord's apostrophe to, 241 m.,
284.
Jericho, our Lord's visit to, 251 ; road
from to Jerusalem, 257 m.
John the Baptist, 104; date of com
mencement of his ministry, 104 n. ;
its effects, 105; deputation of San
hedrin to, 115; number of his disci
ples, 126 m. ; date of captivity of, 127
n. ; message of inquiry to our Lord,
173; death of, when, 183 n.
John, St., Gospel of, 30 ; character of,
229 m., 250 m.; difference of from that
of St. Peter, 364 m. ; visit of to the
sepulchre, 344; external characteris
tics of, 30 it,.; individuality of, 51;
genuineness of chap, xxi., 338 n.
Joseph op Arimathea, 326.
Journeys, last three of our Lord to
Jerusalem, 224 ; their probable dates
and durations, 225 m.
Juda, city of, 61.
Judas, death of, 307 n. ; sin of, 307 m.
Lazarus, sickness of, and death, 245 ;
raising of, 246 n. ; effect produced by
the miracle, 245.
Legs, breaking of, 325 m.
Levi, same as Matthew, 164 n. ; feast
in his house, ib.
Lipe op Christ, history of, a history
of redemption, 26.
Loins, cloth bound round, at the cru
cifixion, 318 m.
Luke, St., Gospel of, its external char
acteristics, 29 n. ; individuality of,
41; universality of, 42 m. ; peculiarity
of the portion ch. xi. 51— xviii. 14,
219 m., 222 m.
Luthardt, Essay on St. John's Gos
pel, 44 m.
Mach^rub, site of, 128 m.
Magdala, site of, 207 m.
Magi, adoration of, 77; country of, 77;
ground of their expectations, 78 m. ;
nature of their expectations, 80 n.

Mark, St., identical with John Mark,
38 n. ; Gospel of, its external charac
teristics, 29 ; written under the guid
ance of St. Peter, 29 m., 212 m. ; in
dividuality of, 37 ; graphic character
of, 38; genuineness of concluding
verses, 40 m., 344 n.
Makriage-feasts, customs at, 118 n.
Mary Magdalene, visit of to the
sepulchre, 341 m. ; appearance of our
Lord to, 346-7.
Matthew, St., Gospel of, its external
characteristics, 28; individuality of,
65; originally written in Hebrew,
150 m. ; genuineness of first two chap
ters of, 65 n. ; order of incidents not
exact, 148 n., 151 m. ; how this is to be
accounted for, 160.
Messages, divine, to Joseph and Mary,
65.
Miraculous conception, dignity of,
52; mystery of, ib. ; narrative of, 56;
not noticed by St. John, 52.
Ministry, our Lord's, duration of,
145 m.
Mount, sermon on the, 169 ; scene of,
169 m.
Nain, site of, 172 n.
Nativity, circumstances of, 69; exact
locality of, 69 n. ; date of, 70 m.
Nazareth, description of, 103 m. ; ill
repute of, 57 n. ; our Lord's first
preaching at, 152; second visit to,
181.
Nicodemus, history of, 124 m. ; dis
course of our Lord with, 124; bold
ness and piety of at our Lord's burial,
327.
Parables, of sons sent into vineyard,
273 m. ; of wicked husbandmen, ib. ;
collection of, by St. Matthew, 35 m.
Paralytic, healing of, 162.
Pilate, official character of, 274 m. ;
general character of, 315 m. ; our
Lord's first appearance before, 307;
second ditto, 311 ; enmity with Herod,
310 m.; awe felt by towards our
Lord, 315 m. ; fate of, 316 m.
Pinnacle of the temple, 115.
Presentation in temple, 73.
Precepts, reception of, 170.

380

INDEX.

Precipitation, Mount of, 170 n.
Portents, at our Lord's death, 323.
Procurators, residence of, at Jeru
salem, 306 n.
Prophecies, our Lord's last, 289 n.
Protevangelium Jacobi, narrative
of Nativity, 69 n.
Puberty, age of, 93 n.
Publicans, 35 m.
Purim, feast of, our Lord's visit to
Jerusalem at, 133; observances at,
134 m.
Purification, time of, 73 m.
Peter, St., confession of, 198 m. ; three
denials of our Lord, 302 m. ; visit of
to sepulchre, 344; character of as
compared with that of St. John, 364 m.
Resurrection, Christ's, a pledge of
ours, 332 n. ; objections to doctrine
of, 334 m. ; number of the accounts
of, 334 n. ; differences in the incidents
related, 335; exact time of, 340 m.
Resurrection -body, nature of our
Lord's, 333 n. ; glorification of, per
haps progressive, 356 n., 366 n.
Roads, from Judaga to Galilee, 121 n.
Roofs, nature of, 163 «.
Sabbath, observance of, 137; second-
first, 165 m. ; miracles performed on,
168 n., 237 n.
Sabbath-day's journey, 259 m.
Sadducees, errors of, 278 m. ; accepted
other parts of Scripture beside Pen
tateuch, 279 n.
Saints, resurrection of, at our Lord's
deatb, 324 n.
Salim, site of, 126 m.
Samaria, our Lord's first journey
_ through, 129; secondjourneythrough,
228.
Samaritan woman, our Lord's dis
course with, 129.
Samaritans, faith of, 130; expectation
of a Messiah, 130 n.
Sanhedrin, meeting of, called by
Herod, 81 m. ; first public manifesta
tion of their designs, 231 ; component
parts of, 272 n. ; lost the power of
life and death, 282 n. ; place of meet
ing, 303 n. ; our Lord's examination
before, 302.

Scape-goat, supposed reference to,
314 m.
Scribes, from Jerusalem, 162 ».
Scripture, inspiration of, 21 m.
Sects, Jewish, some characteristics of,
72 n.
Seventy disciples, mission of, 235 ».
Shammai, school of, 249 m.-
Shekel, half, annual payment of,
213 k.
Shepherds, announcement to, 71.
Sidon, probably visited by our Lord,
203, 215 n.
Siloam, well of, 231 m.
Simeon, 74 m. ; prophetic address of,
75 m.
Simon the leper, 258 m.
Simon of Cyrene, 318 n.
Solomon's Porch, 238 m.
Son of God, 119 m. ; meaning of the
title, 198 n., 234 m., 238 »., 259 m., 304 n.
Sosiosch, 82 m.
Soul, meaning of the term, 114 m.
Spirit, meaning of the term, 114 n.
Star of the East, 78; date of ap
pearance, 79 n.
Stone,- great, rolled against the door
of the sepulchre, 328 n., 340 m.
Storm, stilling of, 195 m.
Sufferings, our Lord's predictions of
his own, 256 n.
Supper, last, celebration of, 291; a
paschal supper, but not on Nisan 14,
292 m. ; order of incidents, 293 m.
Sweat, bloody, nature of, 298 m.
Swine, destruction of, 179 n.
Sychar, 129 m.
Synagogue, service of, 153 n., 158 n
SYROPHC3NICIAN WOMAN, 202 m.
Tabiga, a suburb of Capernaum, 158
n., 158 m.
Taxing, under Quirinus, 66; Roman in
origin, Jewish in form, 68.
Temple, first cleansing of, 122 ; second
cleansing of, 266; veil of, 323 n.
Temptation, scene of, 110 n. ; no
vision, 111 ; an assault from without,
112; addressed to the three parts of
our nature, 113.
Thomas, St., disbelief of, 361; testi
mony of to our Lord's divinity, 362 n,
Thorns, crown of, 314 n.

INDEX.

381

Tombs, nature of, 327 m.
Transfiguration, 210 ; probable
scene of, 210 n.
Treasury, 285.
Triumphal entry, 259.
Tyre, our Lord's journey towards, 201.
Virgin Mary, probable authority for
early portions of St. Luke's Gospel,
66 m. ; legendary history of, 57 m. ;
relationship to Elizabeth, 60 m. ; char
acter of, 60 ; journey of to Elizabeth,
61; later residence of, 175 n.

Washing of hands, Pilate's, 313 m.
Wieseler (K.), value of his chrono
logical labors, 139 m., 225 m.
Women, court of, 286 n. ; the minister
ing, 335 m. ; visit of to the sepulchre,
339.
World, state of at pur Lord's birth,
54 ».
Zacchjsus, 251; desire of to see our
Lord, 251 m.
Zebedee, position of at Capernaum,
166 m.

382

INDEX.

PASSAGES OP SCRIPTURE
EXPLAINED OR ILLUSTRATED.

Micah v. 2, .

82 m.

Luke

XV. 1, .

. 243 n.

Matt. ii. 2,

. 79 m.

xxii. 70,

305 n.

ii. 9, .

82 m.

xxiv. 44,

. 305 m.

ii. 13, .

. 85 n.

John

i. 29, .

116 m.

ii. 23, .

86 m.

i. 33, .

. 109 m.

xiii. 58, .

. 193 m.

ii.2, . .
118 m.
xix. 1,
. 248 m.
ii.3,4, . .
. 120.
xxii. 21,
. 277 m.
ii. 15, .
122.
xxvi. 29, .
. 295 m.
ii. 21, .
. 123 n.
xxvi. 45,
. 298 m.
iii. 3, .
124 m.
xxviii. 7, .
. 343 n.
iv. 2,
. 126 m.
xxviii. 9,
. 351 n.
iv. 4, .
. 131 n.
xxviii. 17, .
. 351m.
v.l, . .
. 133.
Mark i. 34,
. 159 m.
v.4, . .
136 n.
vi. 3, .
97 n.
vi. 50, .
. 198 m.
vii. 24, .
. 191 m.
vii. 4, .
227 m.
xi. 13,
. 267 m.
x. 32, .
. 239 m.
xi. 18, .
. 269 m.
xii. 27,
. 287m.
ib., . .
. 270 n.
xii. 29, .
. 288 m.
xi. 25, .
. 271 n.
xiii. 5,
226 m.
xvi. 4,
. 341 m.
xvii. 4 sq., .
. 296 m.
xvi. 7, .
. 343 n.
xviii. 3,
268 n.
Luke i. 37, .
59.
xviii. 24,
. 302 m.
i. 2, . .
. 149 n.
xviii. 38, .
309 m.
i.3, . .
. 223 n.
xix. 11, .
. 315 m.
ii. 8,
. 70 n.
xix. 12,
316 m.
ii. 35, .
75 m.
xix. 14, .
. 319 m.
ii. 43, .
. 94 n.
xx. 8,
345 m.
ii. 44, .
95 m.
xx. 17, .
. 338 m.
ii. 48, .
. 96 n.
xx. 17,
348 n.
ii. 49, .
97 n.
xxi. 19, . •.
. 366 n.
iii. 1,
. 106 m.
xxi. 22,
367 n.
iii. 23,
. 106 n.
Eph.
ii. 6,
. 373 m.
iv. 39, .
. 158 n.
Col.
ii. 15. .
. 321 m.
ix. 51, .
. 224 m.
1 Thess. iv. 17,
. 217 m.
xiii. 32, .
. 241.
Heb.
iv. 14, .
370 m.
%\l fltu-.
1

Siffi
Wwmmm

iSSaVWaSK

:.-f.':- '¦'.',¦ t.:,' !•.':>

-I'1

M

MV