Full text of "Introduction to the study of the Gospels with historical and explanatory notes .."

See other formats

Pee ow
Ne ww ent

ps Δ, μ“" ΩΝ " » —— ᾳ
2 ἊΨ —— 2 ling al var Ψ ~ μι soltieinade ee 4. =. nue a aud np
ES PE Ss API pe ~bapebae TOA peas pes amon = “+ ~~ ~~ τσ
Ὡρῶν» te phn 5... γα, οἰ pour A ae -΄συ > en wm nea ain a — —s nd ~ ~ ato na 4 NA Pr mene
anes 2 τ ~~ va - tS - Nf Fe ὁ “τ Ἀπ το 5 ΛΑ ἐς,

ag te rt hein sien ae ww ~~ » ~~ ' ~- ᾿ tare ¥ ΄ το τοῦσ ,
“7 4 a ~* ~ a — +> — - ,

ww ate 1s
-tete oe a "

προ πῆ
wie Re

+4 ΕΒ ἘῸΝ “ (ὦ
eee
PP a BD ee ww Gg wt = eee
Ne >
. συ, «τὸ

ern νυν,
Se me ποτ ττςΣ

git

δ 1

OF PRING
Ss Se:
JAN 27 1972

BSesss
4.58
ως.

PTH Ss
ΓΑ The

ΤΩΝ

er)
AK

a
4
AA
ut

ἡ

Ν ἵν! 7 iu
Δ } nt | iu ’
ἢ FP}
\
} ‘
1 ;
Ι
:
ἢ j
‘
+
ΠῚ
τὴ
'
᾿
pit
i Ἢ i
ἡ ἡ 1 }
" ΠΝ si j
] sit i j { ‘ ᾿, ᾿
Nicky ah 4}
‘ we . ᾿ ita Ay
y f ii a ἡ ᾿ ris
| Y ‘ ι ΤΥ "ἢ
Ι i 1 ἢ

i ie Ae NA}:
BER AOR iy St
UD A ae

INTRODUCTION

Ι TO THE

SPUDY OF THE GOSPELS

HISTORICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES

st
4,
ΒΗ toss WESTCOTT, D. Ὁ.
REGIUS PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY, AND LATE FELLOW OF TRINITY
COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE

NEW YORK
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY,
1902

Co my Mather.

Εὐλόγως ὁ διδάσκαλος ἡμῶν éreyev'

ΓΙΝΕΟΘΕ ΤΡΑΠΕΖΙΤΑΙ ΔΟΚΙΜΟΙ.

INTRODUCTION

ΠΕΡ AM REC AN BE DITION.

Mr. Westcott, the author of the volume which the American
publishers have here reprinted, was formerly a Fellow of ‘Trinity
College, Cambridge, and is now one of the Masters in Harrow
School. He enjoys a high reputation in his own country as a
scholar and a theologian, and is held to be a writer of acknowledged
authority on the subjects which he has brought within the circle
of his studies. His work on the Canon of the New Testament is
well known, on this side of the Atlantic as well as abroad, as a
performance of great learning and ability. Some of the more
elaborate articles in Dr. Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible are from
his pen. This Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, his latest
work, was published during the last year, and has been received
with marked favor in England. Competent judges in this country
who have examined the treatise agree in their estimate of its
value to the cause of sacred learning. It was found that different
persons were so much impressed with its merit and its adaptation
to meet a palpable want of the times, that they had been led,
without concert with each other, to adopt measures to reissue the
volume here, and thus render it more accessible to the American
public.

Perhaps I cannot better accomplish the object of these introdue-
tory words, than by alluding briefly to some of the characteristics
of the work which deserve attention. It must be an imperfect

ΥΙ INTRODUCTION.

sketch; for a careful study of the treatise itself is necessary to
give the reader any idea of its character that would be just to
the author.

In all ages of the church the Gospels, which describe the life and
record the teachings of the Saviour, have been regarded by believers
as the primary source of their faith and hopes, and by skeptics as
the ground on which they could most effectually assail the claims
of Christianity and of the sacred writings to a divine origin. The
peculiar character of the Gospel narratives, as separate and inde-
pendent histories, has enabled objectors to compare them with
each other, and to point out variations which they allege to be
contradictory, and hence subversive of the historical credibility of
the Evangelists. Porphyry in the third century had already taken
the position, in this respect, which Strauss and his followers occupy
at the present day. It must be confessed that the friends of the
truth have often set forth views of the Gospels as historical com-
positions, have prescribed to the writers of them an order of nar-
ration, and made them subject to assumed laws of inspiration, with
which it is not easy to reconcile the facts of the case; and oppo-
nents have thus been able to show that, according to such standards
of judgment, the Gospels do not answer to the character which is
claimed for them. No small degree of ignorance respecting what
the Evangelists have done and proposed to do, as ascertained from
the actual contents and structure of the histories, has been shown
on both sides of this controversy. The chief object of the present
work is to present to us the results of a critical and comprehensive
examination of the Gospels, for the purpose of settling the princi-
ples which distinguish them from other writings, the points of agree-
ment and disagreement which exist between them, the plan on
which they are composed, the peculiar traits of the several writers
as individuals, their diverse training, mental habits, differences of
style; and thus, by means of the apparent contrariety itself, estab-
lishing their character of essential unity, and of harmony both

with the truth and with one another. Such a vindication of these

INTRODUCTION. Vil

Scriptures is essential to their authority as truthful records, and
preliminary, therefore, to a proper use of them as a source of
religious instruction and discipline. Hence it will be seen with
what significant propriety this book, which is founded to such an
extent on a study of the Gospels, has been entitled an “ Introduc-
tion to the Study of the Gospels.”

But the accomplishment of this more immediate object requires
the author to introduce other related topics of great importance
in the study of the New Testament. The Saviour performed his
earthly work among the Jews; and the system of truth which his
teachings perfected passed through the Jewish mind to the rest
of the human family. It becomes, therefore, an interesting inquiry
what was the process of intellectual and moral education which
adapted this remarkable people to be the instructors of mankind ;
and, in order to comprehend fully the scheme of revelation, we
must view the inspired writers in their connection with the manifold
national influences which wrought out the Jewish type of faith and
character, as it appeared at length in its completed form in the first
promulgators of Christianity. The chapter on the Preparation for
the Gospel is designed to supply this information. It enables us to
see how God from the first had been arranging all the antecedents
of the chosen race, to fit them to be the medium through which
his final and highest revelations of truth were to be made to Jews
and Gentiles. It is shown that the bondage in Egypt, the Assyrian
captivity, the Persian rule, the Maccabean dynasty, the contact
with Greeks and Romans, as well as the numerous changes which
took place in the inner life of the nation, all served to bring forward
“the fulness of the times,” and to discipline the people for the
advent of Christ. The development of this train of thought will
be found to be original and instructive. The section on the Jewish
Idea of the Messiah, as presented in the Bible and other writings,
is an admirable summary of the most reliable results of the re-
searches of scholars on this subject, so vitally connected with the

interpretation of the Scriptures. The account of the Apocryphat

VIII INTRODUCTION.

Gospels is necessarily brief; but furnishes ample means for answer-
ing the important questions which arise out of the known existence
of such Gospels, for which some in early times claimed a high place
as a source of traditionary and supplementary knowledge respect-
ing the Saviour’s history. Though the author’s plan does not
require a formal exegesis of extended portions of the text, the
reader will meet here with the exposition of many single passages,
and with forms of translation which show the hand of a master in
philology. The distribution of the miracles and parables of our
Lord into different classes according to the moral ends or the
aspects of religious truth which they were designed to confirm or
illustrate, evinces a rare power of analysis, and will be useful to
the preacher for homiletic purposes.

It is an important feature of the work, that, though it is intended
specially to refute the form of skepticism represented, for example,
by Strauss in Germany, and by Theodore Parker in this country,
it is not directly polemic in its character, but treats of facts and
discusses principles which render the argument appropriate to
all times and places. The author seeks to accomplish his object
by a negative process rather than a positive, by instruction and not
by controversy. He is not so anxious to overwhelm the error, as
to remove the ignorance and correct the misstatements out of which
the error has arisen.

A work so distinguished by its ample learning, its thorough criti-
cism, its calm and philosophical spirit, its vigorous and_ polished
style, must challenge the respect of every class of readers, whatever
may -be their claims as scholars or their particular belief on the
subjects here brought under review. At the same time, it 15 grat-
ifying to see the evidence everywhere apparent of the author’s
convictions as a devout Christian, and a firm believer in the author-
ity and inspiration of the Sacred Word. A tone of hearty con-
fidence in the Scriptures, as true and the source of truth, pervades
the work. Though the discussions are necessarily critical in their

character, and afford but little room for the direct exhibition of

INTRODUCTION. IX

personal feeling, they show at every step the unobtrusive influence
of an earnest faith, and a desire, as the predominant aim, to con-
vince the understanding for the sake of the conscience and the
heart.

The writer’s experience as a teacher of biblical exegesis has
Jed him to think, that there is no portion of the New Testament
on which it is so difficult to give to the instruction imparted a
character of unity and completeness, as the Gospels. The subject
has, no doubt, its intrinsic difficulties, which no labor can wholly
overcome. The time usually devoted to this part of the course
of study is and must be disproportionate to the amount of work to
be performed. It is possible to read and compare the different
narratives only in some of the more important sections. Very
few are able, in such a rapid survey of the ground, to lay up in
their minds a connected view of the events of the Saviour’s life.
The impression of his character as unfolded in his works is liable
to be indistinct and confused. _Numberless questions respecting
the plan of the Evangelists and the mode of reconciling them with
each other have been thrust on the student, of which he has ob-
tained no adequate solution. The use of the “Harmony,” so
called, may have thrown light upon many passages; but it will not
be strange if it has disclosed almost as many perplexities as it has
served to clear up. Every teacher must feel that a chief obstacle
in the way of greater success here has been the want of suitable
manuals or text-books of instruction, to be placed in the hands of
students as an accompaniment of the ordinary lectures and oral
teaching. We are confident that this work of Mr. Westcott will
do much to supply this deficiency. It will not be amiss to say, that
we welcome as another important aid of this nature the recently
published “Lectures on the Life of Christ,” by Professor Ellicott.

Such additions to our means of critical study invest the writings

1 HisTorRIcCAL LECTURES ON THE LIFE OF OUR LorD Jesus CuristT. With
Notes, Critical, Historical, and Explanatory. By C.J. Ellicott, B. Ὁ. Boston:
Gouldand Lincoln. 1861.

x INTRODUCTION.

of the Evangelists with new interest, and place the student of the
Bible in a new condition for the useful and the more nearly ex-
haustive study of these first sources of Christian truth.’

The work has been reprinted in strict conformity with the Eng-
lish edition, except a few changes in the mode of designating the
divisions, which consistency of plan and distinctness seemed to
require. Pains have been taken to secure accuracy in the nu-
merous proper names, titles of books, extracts from foreign lan-
guages, and similar details, so important in a learned treatise of
this character. Mr. Westcott, who has been consulted in reference
to the republication here, has forwarded some additions and cor-
rections, which have been inserted in accordance with his wishes;
and in this respect it may be claimed that this edition has some
superiority to the original English edition.

It is a matter of gratitude that such a book has been written. It
is hoped that it will receive the attention from theological teachers,
theological students, clergymen, and thoughtful readers of every
class, to which its claims entitle it. The writer believes that many
will join their prayers with his that God would be pleased to bless
this endeavor to “convince gainsayers,” and to lead believers to a
larger measure of the “full assurance of faith and understanding”

in the word and work of the Divine Redeemer.

1 The object here is not criticism, and this general commendation will not be
understood to imply an assent to all the views and principles which the emi-
nent writers referred to entertain.

NEWTON CENTRE, APRIL, 1861.

PREFACE.

Ix the present work I have endeavored to define and fill
up the outline which I sketched in “THe ELEMENTS OF THE
GospPeEL Harmony,” published in 1851. The kindness with
which that Essay was received encouraged me to work on
with patience within the limits which I had marked out, in
the hope that I might justify in some degree the friendly
welcome of my critics. The experience of nine years has
made me feel how much there was to remodel and correct
and explain in the first rough draught, so that 1 have
retained scarcely a paragraph in the form in which it was
originally written.

The title of the book will explain the chief aim which I
have had in view. It is intended to be an Introduction to
the Study of the Gospels. I have therefore confined myself
in many cases to the mere indication of lines of thought and
inquiry, from the conviction that truth is felt to be more
precious in proportion as it is opened to us by our own work.

From this cause a combination of references to passages of

1 A few sentences have been dropped here from the Prefaces in the English

edition, inasmuch as they relate chiefly to local or personal explanations.

XII PREFACE.

Scripture often stands for the argument which it suggests, and _
claims are made upon the reader’s attention which would be
unreasonable if he were not regarded as a fellow-student with
the writer. For the same reason I have carefully avoided the
multiplication of references, confining myself to the acknowl-
edgment of personal debts or to the indication of sources of
further information.

| My chief object has been to show that there is a true mean
between the idea of a formal harmonization of the Gospels
and the abandonment of their absolute truth. It was cer-
tainly an error of the earlier Harmonists that they endeavored
to fit together the mere facts of the Gospels by mechanical
ingenuity ; but it is surely no less an error, in modern critics,
that they hold the perfect truthfulness of Scripture as a
matter of secondary moment. The more carefully we study
the details of the Bible, the more fully shall we realize their
importance ; and daily experience can furnish parallels to
the most intricate conjectures of commentators, who were
wrong only so far as they attempted to determine the exact
solution of a difficulty, when they should have been contented
to wait in patience for a fuller knowledge.

Again: it must have occurred to every student of the Gos-
pels that it cannot be sufficient to consider them separately.
We must notice their mutual relations and constructive force.
We must collect all their teaching into a great spiritual whole,
and not rest satisfied with forming out of them an accurate,
or even a plausible history. The general schemes which I
have attempted to give of the miracles and parables will
probably be so far satisfactory as to direct some attention to
the wonderful harmonies which yet lie beneath the simplicity

. of Scripture.

PREFACE. XITI

Once again: it seems to be a general opinion that the Bible

and the Church — Scripture and Tradition — are antithetical
in some other way than as uniting to form the foundation of
Christianity. I trust that the history of Inspiration which
I have appended to this Essay may serve, in some measure,
to remove an error which endangers the very existence of
all Christian Communions.

The quotations which occur from time to time, I need
hardly say, are derived from the original sources; and I
trust that I have carefully acknowledged my obligations to
others. In the history of Inspiration I could have wished
to have found more trustworthy guides. Rosenmiiller and
Sonntag are partial and inexact, and Hagenbach is neces-
sarily meagre. Every one, however, who has paid any atten-
tion to Patristic literature, will heartily acknowledge the deep
debt of gratitude which he owes to the Benedictines of St.
Maur.

In a subject which involves so vast a literature much must
have been overlooked; but I have made it a point at least to
study the researches of the great writers, and consciously to
neglect none. My obligations to the leaders of the extreme
German schools are very considerable, though I can rarely
accept any of their conclusions. But criticism even without
reverence may lay open mysteries for devout study.

On one question alone I have endeavored to preserve a
complete independence. With one exception I have carefully
abstained from reading anything which has been written on
the subject of Inspiration since my first Essay was published.
It seemed to me that it might be a more useful task to offer
the simple result of personal thought and conviction than to
attempt within narrow limits to discuss a subject which is

LY. PREPACE,.

really infinite. At times independence is not dearly pur-
chased by isolation; and one who speaks directly from his
own heart on the highest truths, may suggest, even by the
most imperfect utterance, something fresh or serviceable.
Above all things, in this and other points of controversy, we
cannot remind ourselves too often that arguments are strong
only as they are true, and that truth is itself the fullest con-
futation of error.

How impossible it is to avoid errors in travelling over so
wide a field, those will best know who have labored in it;
and those who detect most easily the errors, from which I
cannot hope to be free, will, I believe, be most ready to par-
don them. but besides the fear of errors in detail, there is
another consideration which must be deeply felt by every one
who writes on Holy Scripture. The infinite greatness of the
subject imparts an influence for good or for evil to all that
bears upon it. The “winged word” leaves its trace, though
the first effect may be, in the old Hebrew image, transient as
the shadow of a flying bird. Yet I would humbly pray that
by His blessing, who is perfect Wisdom and perfect Light,
what has been written with candor and reverence may con-
tribute, however little, to further the cause of Truth and
Haith, the twin messengers of earth and heaven. In His
HAND ARE BOTH WE AND OUR WORDS.

BF. W:

Harrow, Lent, 1860.

CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION.

The connection of Philosophy and Religion in regard to the progressive
development and the essential need of revelation; and the special
objections brought against it, :

The general effects of the course of Modern Philosophy on the popular
views of Christianity, and Holy Scripture specially, as regards,

I. Its InsprraTion. 11, Its ComPLrETENEsS. III. Its INTERPRETATION,

I. INSPIRATION.

The contrast of the Calvinistic and Modern views — General objec-
tions to both— The possibility of a mean,

1. THE GENERAL IDEA OF INSPIRATION.

Compared with Revelation — Believed in universally — In-

volves no special difficulties incapable of analysis,

2. THE FORM OF INSPIRATION.

Pagan — Biblical — Various, yet always twofold,

The personality of the teacher preserved — This is an essen-
tial part of the conception, the expression, the record,

Thus the inspiration of Scripture is plenary, and yet progres-

sive,

8. THE RELATION OF INSPIRED WRITINGS TO CHRISTIAN LIFE,

PAGE

27—29

31—33

34—36

36—38

39, 40

42, 43

XVI CONDE N's.

PAGE
4. THE PROOFS OF THE INSPIRATION OF WRITINGS,
(a) External.
i. Supernatural commission of Apostles.
ii. Analogy of Apostolic use of Old Testament.
iii. Testimony of the Church, ᾿ Ξ Ξ : - . 48, 44
(δ) Internal.
. How far a proof is possible, ; : : - 2 . 44, 45
6. g., Gospels.
i. Negative Character — Fragmentary: Unchronolog-
ical: Simple, . : : :- : : 1 4 . 46, 47
ii. Subject, 5 : : 5 Ξ A 3 : : 48
iii. Social teaching — Miracles: Parables: Prophecies, . 49—53
IL COMPLETENESS.
DIFFICULTIES — Analogous to those in Individual: Society: Na-
ture — Their solution to be found in the idea of Providence —
History and Criticism suggest the idea of completeness, or at
least a tendency towardsit, . : 5 : 5 5 . 53—59
11. INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE TWOFOLD:
1. LITERAL.
Strictly grammatical: importance of this in New Testament
— Objections met, . : - : - - : - . 59—63
2. SPIRITUAL.
Flows from literal: sanctioned by universal testimony.
The spiritual sense the primary sense, a : : : 65
Interpretation realized in the visible Church, Sena NS 65
THE PROVINCE OF CRITICISM, . ; . 5 « 65, 66

GENERAL PLAN, . : ἃ ᾿ : ‘ : : . - 66, 67

CONTENTS.

CHAP TE B 1:

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

The true idea of History —The coming of Christ the centre of human
history, and the record of the Gospel impressed with results of a
world-wide training, the outlines of which are

J. PARTLY PRESERVED IN THE OLD TESTAMENT, and

II. PARTLY TO BE SOUGHT IN THE POST-BIBLICAL HISTORY OF THE
JEWS, which is pregnant with important issues, ‘both from outward
vicissitudes and inward revolutions, during the (1) Persian and (2)
Grecian periods; and here especially the foundations of Christian

thought and writing were laid silently and slowly,

1. THE PERSIAN PERIOD; as to

‘(a) National hopes.
The loss of independence gave to the Jews a truer
spiritual union, and higher aspirations,
(Ὁ) Spiritual position.

As a consequence the prophetic work ceased, and the
Scriptures were collected — Meanwhile religion as-
sumed a more spiritual character, and the view of

the spiritual world was widened,

The hierarchical element prevailed from the growing
regard to the Law and the Synagogue-service, .

The dangers of the period —Its character impressed on the
literature and traditions of the time,

2. THE GRECIAN PERIOD.

The Dispersion, military and commercial, reconciled with

unity by the Syrian persecution, .

"ὦ

XVII

PAGE

74, 75

80—82

82—86

XVIII CONTENTS.

PAGE
The internal history of the Jews.
(a) In Palestine ; during
i. The Grecian supremacy.
Rise of speculation — Sadducees; Pharisees; Es-
senes, . 3 : : : : ; : . 86—90
The prevalent Legalism to be traced in EKcclesias-
ticus and the traditional sayings of the doctors, 91, 92
ii. The Hasmonzan supremacy.
, Impulse given to thought and writing (Baruch).
Revelation :
The Book of Henoch —IV. Esdras, : “ΣΟ:

Didactic narrative :
Tobit— Judith, . : ; : : : . 94, 95
History: I. Maccabees, . : - ἥ . ; 95

(b) In Egypt.
i. The LXX., 5 : - : ξ ‘ : 5 Shey

ii. The growth of Hellenism.
Aristobulus — Jewish Sibyl — Philo—The Thera-
peute —Wisdom, . : 3 : : c . 98--101

General characteristics of the period; positive and nega-

tive, - 5 : : - : are - - . 101—107

ΝΌΤΕ. — Synopsis of Early Jewish Literature, 5 : - Ἴ - 108, 109

CHAP TER. AT.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF THE MESSIAH.

In the patriarchal age—In the time of Moses; the Kingdom;
the Captivity — The general forms which it assumed, » 110--112

CONTENTS.

The Apocryphal books contain no mention of Messiah, but anticipate
a national restoration,

I. THE MESSIANIC DOCTRINE AS FURTHER DEVELOPED.

1. In THE APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE.
(a) The Sibylline writings (Egypt), : . . ‘
(δ) The Book of Henoch (Palestine),

(d) The Book of Jubilees (Palestine),

2. IN THE EXEGETIC LITERATURE.

(a) The LXX. (Egypt),

(6) The Targums (Palestine) — Onkelos; Jonathan — The
later Targums on the Pentateuch; Hagiographa—
The Psalms of Solomon,

II. THE MESSIANIC DOCTRINE AS DESCRIBED IN HIS-
TORIC RECORDS OF THE FIRST CENTURY.

1. THE NEW TESTAMENT,

2. CONTEMPORARY WRITERS.
(a) Philo,
(b) Josephus,

III. THE LATER MESSIANIC DOCTRINE OF THE JEWS.

1. THE ΜΙΒΗΝΑ,
2. THE GEMARA,
3. LATER JEWISH Books,

4. MysTicaL Books, : : ; °

XIX

PAGE

112—114

114—117
117—126
126—132

132—134

134

135—140

140—147

148, 149
150, 151

151, 152

152
158—155
155, 156

156—161

XX CONT EN TS.

PAGE
1V. THE DOCTRINE OF THE WORD.
1. In PALESTINE: the Targums, . Ρ - 4 2 ς = 10. ἸῸΣ
2. In Eaypr: Philo, : . : ( . - Ξ ὸ . 162—166
General result, . Ξ Ξ : : > Ξ - - : . 166—168

Norte I.— Messianic prophecies in the New Testament compared with
the corresponding interpretations of Jewish commentators, 168—171

Nore II.— The Christology of the Samaritans, . A : : . 111-118

CHA P THR we P::

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

The first Christian teachers entertained no design of handing down a
written record of the Gospel—Such a design would have been
wholly foreign to their national feeling, for the ‘‘ literature” of Pal-
estine was essentially traditionary, and the social position of the
Apostles offered no advantages for the work —On the other hand,
an oral Gospel was the natural result of their labors, : : . 1i4—177

I. THE ORAL GOSPEL.

1. PREACHING was itself a necessary preliminary to the historic
Gospel, and the means by which it was formed, . : . 11τ|---119

In this work all the Apostles joined; and it was regarded as
the characteristic of the Christian dispensation and of the

Apostolic mission, . ‘ : ᾿ Ῥ : : : : 179

Thus ‘“‘ the Gospel” was the substance, and not the record, of
the life of Christ—The Old Testament was the written
word, . 5 : i ‘ : ; : νόμον : : 181

CONTENTS. XXI

PAGE
This feeling survived even to the close of the Second Cen-

tury, ἧ- . Ἶ = . . : . - - : Ξ 181

2. THE ORAL GOSPEL OF THE APOSTLES WAS Historic. This
appears from

(a) The description given of the Apostolic work, 5 ᾿ 182
(Ὁ) The account of the Apostolic preaching, : : . 183, 184
(c) The contents of the Apostolic letters - : : . 185—191

II. THE WRITTEN GOSPELS.

1. DISTINCTLY CONNECTED WITH THE APOSTOLIC PREACHING.

(a) St. Mark, . 5 . . : . : : 5 . 191-198
(Ὁ) St. Matthew, Oe See ees & ΤῊ 7. Ὁ: ere it Ie
(c) St. Luke, Σ Ξ ° : A . = . . ᾿ 195

The evidence of St. Luke’s Preface, . ᾿ A . 196—198

2. THe INTERNAL CHARACTER OF THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS
FAVORS THE BELIEF THAT THEY AROSE FROM A COMMON
ORAL SOURCE.

(a) The nature of the problem which they present, ᾿ 198

i. Their concordances threefold.
a. In general plan. ὃ. In incident. ὁ. In Jan-
guage, re watt woe oo ON: See

ii. Their corresponding differences, ‘ Ξ . ° 205

(b) The solutions proposed,
i. Mutual dependence, . . . . 5 ° : 206

ii. Common sources.
a. Written. ὃ. Oral and written. c. Oral, . 207—212
In relation to the form and substance of the
Gospels: to their specific characters; to
their language, : . : ἐ ὶ . 212—215
2

Tradition not necessarily a source of myths, 215,

XXIT CONT ENTS.,

CHAPTER ITY.

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

PAGE
Times of calm belief unfavorable to the study of the Bible, . 217
The characteristics of the Gospels brought out by modern controversy, 217
I. THE INDIVIDUAL CHARACTER OF THE GOSPELS implied
in the idea of inspired history ; and even necessary in their first
form, from
1. THE NATURE OF THE SUBJECT. Divine: Human, 218—222
2. THE ELEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE APOSTOLIC TEACHING
St. James, St. Paul, St. Peter, 222—225
3. THE FORMS OF THOUGHT CURRENT IN THE APOSTOLIC AGE
Jew; Past— Roman; Present — Hellenist; Future — Alex-
andrine; Eternal relations —By which it was adapted
to the wants of later times, - - 3 “Ὁ 5 ἢ τ ἢ)
II. THE EVANGELISTS were fitted to preserve these original types
of Christian faith,
1. THouGH not Conspicuous IN HISTORY OR TRADITION, 229, 280
St. Matthew — St. Mark (St. Peter) — St. Luke (St. Paul) —
St. John, : ; : ‘ 230—243
The general result of the position of the Evangelists, . . 243

2. THE DISTINCTNESS OF THE GOSPELS ATTESTED BY

(a) The practice of separate sects.
Ebionites (St. Matthew) —[Docete] (St. Mark) —
Marcionites (St. Luke) — Valentinians (St. John,) 244—~—250

CeNTIENTS. XXIIT

PAGE

(δ) The judgment of the Church.

The Evangelic symbols. Augustine, . 3 ; . 250—252
The consequences of the view, : : μον; : . 252, 253
CAPT EBV.
THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.
The contrast between St. John and the Synoptists, 254
CHARACTERISTICS OF ST. JOHN.
I. THE GOSPEL IN ITSELF, : Ξ - : - : . 255
1. Irs SPECIAL HisTory, 255
(a) The life of St. John.
Later legends — His typical character, : : . 267, 258
(L) The authenticity of the Gospel, 258
Its late date— The testimony of the Apostolic Fa-
thers; of the Fathers of the second century; of
heretical writers — The skepticism of the Alogi, 259—263
2. Irs INTERNAL CHARACTER, 264
(a) Language.
i. Words.
ii. Composition.
Φ a, General characteristics: Directness; Circumstan-
tiality; Repetition; Individuality of narra-
tive; Personality of action, ‘ . 268—271

b. Combination of sentences: Particles; Key-

words; Parallelism, . : εν . 272-210

XXIV CONTENTS.

PAGE
(Ὁ) Plan.
An Epic. 7
The object of the Gospel.
Its great divisions:
i. The Manifestation of Christ.
ii. The issue of the Manifestation, . . : . 275—281

Wl. THE RELATION OF ST. JOHN TO THE SYNOPTISTS, . 284
1. Pornts oF DIFFERENCE, . : = ὦ Ξ 5 ae οὐ τῷ 285

(a) As to locality and teaching, . - : ° : . 286—291

(6) As to our Lord’s Person, - A 5 τ oe 4 5 291

2. POINTS OF COINCIDENCE, . ὃ : : : . - Ξ 291

(a) In fact, 5 : - - 4 : - - - . 292—294

(δ) In teaching, : ; ; - ; 5 : : - 294—296

The Relation of St. John’s Gospel to a new world; Christian doc-

trine; Human Thought, mere ἥν: 3 » . « 804—808

CHA PTE =v:

THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL OF THE SYNOPTIC
EVANGELISTS.

The differences of the Synoptists as to

ΤῊΝ Av ey et ees tes tan nae eg 810
Il. THe Baptism, AnD III. ΤΈΜΡΤΑΤΙΟΝ, meee. ihe . »« 814—818

LY, Gan TRANSTIGUEA TION) ((-0) "ut oe ee ee ee oe

CONTENTS. XXV

PAGE

V. THE Passion, . Β : ὃ Ἵ “ : - ; . 821—326

VI. THE RESURRECTION, ἢ ; : - 3 ‘ : . 827—333
Conclusions from these characteristic differences, . : . . . 899-935
Norte. — On the Day of the Crucifixion, . 5 Ξ 5 : : . 98530--ῶ42

CHAP Tt he VEE

THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT OF THE
SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS.

Few traces of a chronological arrangement in the Gospels, . 5 - 848—347

I. THE GOSPEL ΟΕ St. MATTHEW in its internal development, 347—360

II. THE GOSPEL oF ST. Mark, - : - 861—370
1Π. THE GOSPEL oF ST. LUKE, ‘ : : Ἶ - . . 370—383
General Summary, ΩΣ Ξ ἈΠ ΟΥΤΩΣ eae ele le. me, O88, GOD

CHAPTER VERE.

THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS.

Difficulties arise from errors as to the character, the purpose, the his-

torical authority of the Gospels, and from antecedent prejudices, . 386—3891
They are useful intellectually, morally, and in connection with the
whole scheme of Nature, ee NE hs eg se + SOG

XXVI CONS EN DS

APPENDICES.

APPENDIX A. ON THE QUOTATIONS IN THE GOSPELS,

APPENDIX B. ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION,

§ 1. The Sub-Apostolic Fathers, 4083—407. § 2. The Apologists,
407—411. § 3. The Church of Asia Minor, 412—416. § 4.
The Roman Church, 416—419. § 5. The North African
Church, 419—424. § 6. The Church of Alexandria, 424—440.
§ 7. The Clementines, 440—445.

APPENDIX C. ON THE APOCRYPHAL TRADITIONS OF THE LORD'S

WorRDS AND WORKS,

APPENDIX D. ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS,

The Gospel according to the Hebrews, 454—457 The Gospel of
the Ebionites, 457—460. The Gospel of the Clementines, 460—
462. The Gospel of Marcion, 462—466.

APPENDIX E. A CLASSIFICATION OF THE MIRACLES OF THE GOS-

PELS,

APPENDIX F. A CLASSIFICATION OF THE PARABLES OF THE GOS-

PELS,

ADDITIONAL NOTES, (AMERICAN EDITION), . 3 4

ΤΉΝ Briagt PR? ae

PAGE

399—402

402—445

445—453

454—466

466—469

469—471

478—476

fet khODUCTION

TO THE

STUDY OF THE GOSPELS.

᾿ INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.

INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND INTERPRETATION OF
SCRIPTURE.

Ἔοικεν 6 τὴν Ἶριν Θαύμαντος ἔκγονον φήσας οὐ κακῶς γενεαλογεῖν.
ς PLATO.

Every one who has paid any attention to the history
of the Church must have felt the want of a
clear and comprehensive view of the mutual ,; nepal aa
relations and influences of speculation and Mor παρ
religion, as they have been gradually un- Marie to cnuac
folded by reason and revelation. In The-
ology and Philosophy we insensibly leave the positions
of our Fathers, and rarely examine the origin and primary
import of the doctrines which we have inherited or ab-
jured. Words and formulas survive as silent witnesses or
accusers, but we do not interrogate or heed them. Still
it would be a noble and worthy task to determine the
meeting-points and common advances of faith and science,
and to discover how far each has been modified by the
other, either in combination or in conflict.
We might then follow the progress of man’s
material and spiritual life, from the begin-
ning to the end of the Bible, from the mysteries of the
Creation and the Fall to the dark foreshadowing of the
final consummation of the world in the last chapters of

the progressive de-
velopment,

28 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

the Apocalypse. We might be able to mark the rise and
growth of error, as well as its full and fatal development,
and to learn under what guise of truth it gained accept-
ance among men. We might see how far the expression
of the doctrine of the Church was re-shaped to meet the
requirements of successive ages, and how far the language
of its formularies was suggested by the opinions of the
times in which they were composed.

Nor is this all: we might find in philosophy not only
the handmaid, but also the herald of revelation. We

might trace in the writings of the heathen
the exential need, World the tendency of man’s spontaneous

impulses, and the limits of his innate pow-
ers. We might compare the natural view of our destiny
in Plato or Aristotle with its fulfilment in the Gospel.
We might be taught by them to value the privileges of a
divine law, and a definite covenant, when they tell us, in
the language of doubt and dependence, that there is some-
thing infinitely greater for which our mind still longs at
the moment of its noblest triumphs; that the wants which
modern skepticism would deny are-real and enduring;
that the doctrines which Natural Religion has assumed
are not the proper heritage of thought; that the crowning
mystery of the Incarnation is an idea as true to reason as
it is welcome to the heart.

Yet more, by such a view of the scheme of revelation
we should be able to fix the source of the special objec-
Pisa se o tions which are brought against it, and to
pects of divine Cetermine their proper relation to the whole.
ΠΝ Men are always inclined to exaggerate the
importance of a conflict in which they .are themselves
engaged, and to judge of everything as it affects their own
position. A general change in the religious character of
an age often: leads to the disregard of some element, or
the abandonment of some outwork, which is really essen-
tial to the perfection and integrity of revealed religion.)

1 Cf. an eloquent article by Quinet in the Revue des deux Mondes, 1888.

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 29

And if it be the first duty of an impartial student to esti-
mate the exact force of his personal bias, that he may
eliminate its influence before he determines a result, it is
no less important for those who would judge rightly of
the absolute value of current opinions to consider how
much they owe to the characteristics of the present age,
before they are assigned to their proper place as fresh
steps in the progressive development of human wisdom.
During the last two centuries, to speak generally, there
has been a steady advance from one extreme in philoso-
phy to the other, — from naturalism to tran- apoE sc
scendentalism, —- and the successive assaults — ofthe course of mo-
on Christianity have exhibited a correspond- “°°
ing change. Religion and metaphysics are now contem-
plated from within, and not from without: the world has
been absorbed in man. In spite of partial reiictions, the
idea of the society, whether in the State or in the Church,
has yielded to that of the individual; and whatever may
be thought of the true precedence and relation of the
two, it is evident that theology cannot have been unat-
fected by the new point of sight from which it is contem-
plated. Those who press the claims of the individual to
the utmost, find in Christianity itself a sys- hay pinta.
tem of necessary truth, independent of any φ' Ciristianity, ana
Gospel histories, and unsupported by any Betas
true redemption. They abandon the “letter” to secure the
“spirit,” and in exchange for the mysteries of our faith they
offer us a law without types, a theocracy without prophe-
cies, a Gospel without miracles, a cluster of definite wants
with no reality to supply them; for the mythic and critical
theories, as if in bitter irony, concede every craving which
the Gospel satisfies, and only account for the wide spread
of orthodox error by the intensity of man’s need. Chiris-
tian apologists have exhibited the influence of the same
change. They have been naturally led to connect the
teaching of revelation with the instincts of man, and to
show that even the mysteries of faith have some analogy
3%

30 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

with natural feeling or action. Meanwhile the power of
Christianity, as embodied in a permanent society, — the
depository and witness of the truth,—has grown less,
and so it is now a common thing to depreciate the out-
ward evidences of religion, which are not, however, essen-
tially the less important because they appear inconclusive
to some minds. Upon the widest view, history perhaps
offers the fullest and most philosophical proof of the claims
of Christianity; but however this may be, historical evi-
dence necessarily demands attention even where it cannot
convince; and as aforetime many who did not believe for
Jesus’ words, believed for His very works’ sake, so still the
external array of Christian evidences may kindle the true
inner faith, and in turn reflect its glory.

The doctrine of Holy Scripture is specially liable to the
et oh ee ten influence of this transition from an objective
Holy Scripture as to a subjective philosophy. The Written
affecting its : Ξ .

Word, by its manifold relations to the action
of Providence, and the growth of Christian society, no less
than by its combination of Divine and human elements,
offers points of contact with every system, and furnishes
infinite materials for speculation. A variety of questions
arise at the outset of all intelligent study of the Bible which
involve the solution of some of the most difficult prob-
lems of mental or critical science, and which consequently
receive answers in accordance with the existing forms of
thought. In what sense, it may be asked, is a writing of
By eee HN man God’s message? How can we be rea-
aE Cenrletestie’s sonably assured that the record is exact and

complete? In what way are the ordinary
rules of criticism affected by the subject matter to which
they are applied? It is evidently impossible to discuss
such questions at present in detail: probably they do not
admit of any abstract discussion; but it may be allowable
to suggest some general principles affecting the Inspira-
tion, the Completeness, and the Interpretation of Holy
Seripture which may serve to open an approach to the
study of it.

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE, 31

When the first act of the Reformation was closed, and
the great men had passed away whose pres-
ence seemed to supply the strength which %. te Mspiration

yf Scripture.

was found before in the recognition of the
one living Body of Christ, their followers invested the
Bible as a whole with all the attributes of
mechanical infallibility which the Romanists evans Caieiase
had claimed for the Church. Pressed by the “““
necessities of their position, the disciples of Calvin were
contented to maintain the direct and supernatural action
of a guiding power on the very words of the inspired
writer, without any regard to his personal or national posi-
tion. Every part of Scripture was held to be not only
pregnant with instruction, but with instruction of the same
kind, and in the same sense. Nor could it be otherwise,
while men considered the Divine agency of Inspiration as
acting externally, and not internally, as acting on man,
and not through man. The idea of a vital energy was
thus lost in that of a passive state, and growth was reduced
to existence; for what is highest in a purely spiritual
world becomes lowest in the complex and limited life of
man. The rude but sincere violence of fanaticism, and the
rapid advance of physical science, did much to shake this
arbitrary theory; and those who were captivated by the
first vigorous achievements of historical criticism and men-
tal analysis hastened to the other extreme. The Bible,
they said, is merely the book of the legends
of the Hebrews, which will yield to the skil- re δ οι
fal inquirer their residuum of truth, like those
of the Greeks and Romans. Inspiration is but another
name for that poetic faculty which embodies whatever is
of typical and permanent import in things Around, and
invests with a lasting form the transitory growths of time.

It is easy to state the fatal objections sil ae
which a candid reader of Scripture must feel tions 1 me otjec-
to both these views; and ina general sense mit
it is not less easy to show how the partial forms of truth,

32 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

in virtue of which they gained acceptance, may be harmo-
niously combined. The purely organic theory of Inspira-
tion rests on no Scriptural authority, and, if we except a
few ambiguous metaphors, is supported by no historical
testimony. It is at variance with the whole form and
fashion of the Bible, and is destructive of all that is holiest
in man and highest in religion, which seeks the coérdinate
elevation of all our faculties, and not the destruction of
any one of them. If we look exclusively at the objective
side of inspiration, the prophet becomes a mere soulless
machine, mechanically answering the force which moves
it, the pen and not the penman of the Holy Spirit. He
ceases to be a man while he is affected by the frenzy
(μανία) of the heathen seers,’ and in a momentary influence
gives up his whole spiritual growth. But, on
the other hand, if we regard inspiration only
subjectively, we lose all sense of a fresh and
living connection of the prophet with God.
indeed a man, but he is nothing more. He appears only
to develop naturally a germ of truth which lies within
him, and to draw no new supplies of grace and wisdom
from without. There is no reiinion of the divine and
human in his soul on which a Church may rest its faith.
He may deduce, interpret, combine truth, but in the ab-
sence of a creative power he is deficient in that which an
instinct of our being declares to be the essential attribute

subjective theories
of Inspiration.

He remains

1 Cf. Plat. Phedr. 248 p. It will be
seen from his position in the scale that

of ‘‘eestasy ’ in Scriptural records, cf.
Del Zyl.

the prophet is regarded as one in
whom all human powers are neutral-
ized. Tim. 71 τ᾿, οὐδεὶς ἔννους ἐφάπ-
τεται μαντικῆς ἐνϑΊιέου καὶ ἀληϑοῦς,
ἀλλ᾽ ἢ κα ὕπνον... ἢ διὰ νόσον ἢ
διά τινα ἐνδουσιασμὸν παραλλάξας.
This idea of an “" Ecstasy ” was applied
to the Prophets by the Alexandrian
Jews, and adopted by the Montanists,
but rejected by the Catholic Church.
Cf. App. A,§2. As to the occurrence

Plato’s idea of a possible inspiration
is interesting; cf. Phaed. 85 Ὁ; Phedr.
244 A; 256 B; and in reference to ora-
cles [Ion], 584 ©; ‘lim. 71 p. In the
passage which I have taken as a motto
(Theeet. 155 Ὁ), he has expressed admi-
rably the true relation of wonder to
wisdom, faith to philosophy. The anal-
ogy is more striking when we call to
mind the office of Iris—&pw, εἴρω,
*Ipis, the messenger.

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 99

of the highest teacher... Such a theory removes all that is
divine in our faith, and destroys the title-deeds of the
Church’s inheritance. It is opposed to the universal tenor
of Scripture and tradition, and leaves our wants unsatisfied
and our doubts unanswered by God. If it be true, man is
after all alone in the world, abandoned to the blind issues
of fate or reason or circumstance. His teachers are merely
his fellow-men, and their words claim his hearing only so far
as they find a response in a heart already influenced by
personal and social life. And who then shall answer him
that their promises are more than echoes of his own crav-
ings; and that the ready acceptance which their doctrine
has found is anything but a natural rege a of the wants
and wishes of men ?

Happily, however, we are not confined to the two ex-
treme theories: the elements of truth on

The possibility
which they are respectively based are oppo- ον gaining a true
site indeed, but not contrary. If we com. ™“"“™entem
bine the outward and the inward — God and man — the
moving power and the living instrument — we have a
great and noble doctrine, to which our inmost nature bears
its witness. We have a Bible competent to calm our
doubts, and able to speak to our weakness. It then be-
comes, not an utterance in strange tongues, but in the
words of wisdom and knowledge. It is authoritative, for
it is the voice of God; it is intelligible, for it is in the
language of men.

The possibility of such a combination seems to follow
directly from a consideration of the nature

3 : in respect to the

and form of Inspiration; and the same reflec- teacher and the
tions which establish a necessary connection πο
between inspired thoughts and inspired words, point out
the natural transition from the notion of an inspired

cr a /
1 Ποιητής. Cf. Plat. Conv. 205 ο. ἀπὸ δὲ πάσης τῆς ποιήσεως Ev μόριον
7) a ~ at.’ f
ἢ ἐκ Tov μὴ ὄντος εἰς τὸ ὃν ἰόντι ἀφορισϑὲν.. .. τῷ TOV ὕλου ὀνόματι
ὁτῳοῦν αἰτία πᾶσά ἐστι ποίησις... . προσαγορεύεται.

34 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

teacher to that of an inspired book, and justify the appli-
cation of the epithet at once to the impulse and the result,
an ambiguity which at first sight creates only confusion
and embarrassment.

Inspiration may be regarded in one aspect as the correl-
ative of Revelation. Both operations imply
a supernatural extension of the field of man’s
spiritual vision, but in different ways. By
Inspiration we conceive that his natural powers are quick-
ened, so that he contemplates with a divine
intuition the truth as it exists still among
the ruins of the moral and physical worlds.
By Revelation we see, as it were, the dark veil removed
from the face of things, so that the true springs and issues
of life stand disclosed in their eternal nature.
This idea of Revelation which regards power
and truth and beauty as veiled, and yet
essentially existing beneath the suffering and sin and dis-
order which are spread over the world within us and with-
out, — over man and nature, — seems to be peculiarly
Christian. Probably nothing but the belief in the Incar-
nation could give reality and distinctness to the conception
of a “restitution of all things;” and St. Paul describes the
possibility of a clear vision and transforming reflection of
the divine glory as the especial privilege of believers.
The change wrought in philosophy by the vital recogni-
tion of this idea penetrates to the very foundations of
knowledge and hope. The “recollection” of Plato be-
comes intuition, and we can now by faith reverse the
words of Plotinus, who thanked God that “he was not
tied to an immortal body.” !

1. The idea of
Inspiration.

The contrast be-
tween Inspiration
and Revelation.

The idea of Rev-
elation peculiarly
Christian.

1 The usage of the word ἀποκάλυψις
and ἀποκαλύπτειν in the New Testa-
ment is full of interest, as illustrating
the Apostolic view of the objects of
Revelation. The passages in which the
words occur are the following:

᾿Αποκάλυψις. i. The substantive oc-

curs only once in the Gospels, when
Simeon describes our Lord as “a light
to dispel the darkness under which the
heathen were veiled * (Luke ii. 32, φῶς
eis amon. ἐδνῶν). Elsewhere Chris-
tianity itself, the very centre of all rev-
elation, is described by St. Paul as “8

INTERPRETATION

But while the idea of Revelation in its

OF SCRIPTURE.

fullest sense

appears to be essentially Christian, every

religion presupposes the reality of Inspira-
tion, of a direct, intelligible communication
of the Divine will to chosen messengers. The

The belief in In-
spiration universal ;
and the difficulties
which it involves
common to all spir-
ἐμαὶ phenomena,

belief in such a gift is in fact instinctive,
and equally at least with the belief in a Supreme Being

revelation of a mystery ” (Rom. xvi. 25,
amok. μυστ.)ὴ; and so especially the
great fact that the Gentiles should share
equally with God’s ancient people in
the New Covenant was made known
“by revelation” (Eph. iii. 8, κατὰ
amok.). ‘Through revelation of Jesus
Christ”? St. Paul received the Gospel
which he preached (Gal. i 12, δ ἀποκ.
I. X ). The visions of St. John were
“a revelation of Jesus Christ” (Apoc.
j. 1). And even in details of action it
was ‘‘ by revelation” that St. Paul went
up the second time to Jerusalem (Gal.
ii. 2, κατ᾽ ἀποκ.).

ii. Revelation also serves to express
that insight into divine truth which
God gives to his servants, and which
all Christians are encouraged and
bound to seek (Eph. i. 17, δῴη ὑμῖν
πνεῦμα σοφίας Kal ἀποκαλύψεως ἐν
ἐπιγνώσει αὐτοῦ). Hence “- Revela-
tions’’— peculiar manifestations of this
general gift—are disclosed in the
Christian assemblies (1 Cor. xiv. 6, 26);
and St. Paul dwells particularly on the
number of them which were granted
to him (2 Cor. xii. 1, 7).

iii. But as the eye of the Christian is
naturally turned to the coming con-
summation of the ages, ‘‘ the revelation
of Jesus Christ’ in an especial sense is
that second coming of the Lord, when
all shall know Him (1 Pet. i. 7, 18,
&zox. I. X. 2 Thess.i.7. 1 Cor. i- 7,
ἡ @rox. τοῦ Kup.). In this we look
forward to ‘the revelation of His
g:ory’’ when the robe of sorrow shall
at last be thrown aside (1 Pet. iv. 13);
and God’s righteous judgment of the
world made known (Rom. ii. 5, ἀποκ.
δι catoxpicias τοῦ Θεοῦ); and then the

sons of God shall be revealed in their
full majesty, and creation shall rejoice
in the sight (Rom. viii. 19, ἀποκ. τῶν
υἱῶν τοῦ Θεοῦ.).

᾿Αποκαλύπτειν. i. The verb occurs
more frequently than the substantive,
but exactly in the same varieties of con-
nection. By Revelation the prophets
in old time gained an understanding
of the glad tidings which they pro-
claimed (1 Vet. i. 12, οἷς ἀπεκαλ.
k.T. A.) By Revelation ‘‘ the faith”
was made known (Gal. 111. 23), and its
fulness declared ‘in the spirit to the
holy apostles and prophets” (Eph. iii.
5), in whom God was pleased to reveal
His Son (Gal. i. 16, ἄποκ. ἐν éuol).

ii. Then, again, by Revelation the per-
sonal knowledge of the truth is gained
(Matt. xi. 25,27. Luke x. 21, 22. Matt.
xvi. 17); by Revelation God supplies
what is yet defective in us (Phil. iii. 15),
by special teaching (1 Cor. xiv. 30), or
in general hope (1 Cor. ii. 10).

iii. And while a continuous Revela
tion of God’s righteousness and wrath
is still ever being made (Rom. i. 17, 18,
ἀποκαλύπτεται), the Christian looks to
that final manifestation of His infinite
holiness, when the power of evil shall
be at last ‘“‘ revealed’ (2 Thess. ii. 3, 6,
8) in due time, and also ‘‘the Son of
Man” (Luke xvii. 30). before whom he
shall perish. Then shall be fulfilled the
purpose of Christ’s coming, when thie
thoughts of many hearts are unveiled
(Luke ii. 35), as they were partially un-
veiled during His earthly work: then
everything secret shall be revealed
(Matt. x. 26. Luke xii. 2); for “the
day is revealed” in fire to try men’s
works (1 Cor. iii. 18); then shall Ilis

6 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

possesses the testimony of universal acceptance. Even
intellectually the idea of Inspiration offers no extraordi-
nary difticulties. To enlarge or inform any faculty 1s
evidently a secondary operation of the same power by
which it was first given and quickened. The intercourse
between the Creator and the creature must, 1n common
with all spiritual manifestations, remain a mystery; but
that it does take place in some form or other is a matter
of constant experience. And if we may venture to regard
Inspiration merely as a mental phenomenon, it 15 not more
remarkable that man’s spirit should be brought into direct
connection with the Spirit of God, than that one mind
should be able to exercise a sympathetic influence upon
another. That man is complex and finite introduces no
difficulty which is not present in the ordinary processes of

thought and life.
consideration fixes a limit to the extent of
our inguiry; for all abstract analysis of In-
spiration is impossible, since the Divine ele-

It is impossible to
contemplate the Di-
vine and human
apart ; hence we
are limited to the
examination of

And, on the contrary, this

ment is already in combination with the
human when we are first able to observe its presence.
Our inquiry is thus limited strictly to the character of

servants enter into the glory which
even now is prepared for them (Rom.
viii. 18. 1 Pet. v. 1; i. 5, σωτηρίαν
ἑτοίμην ἂποκ.).

To neglect any one of these aspects
of Revelation, which sets forth its fun-
damental, continuous, and final opera-
tion, is to mutilate the completeness of
the Divine truth. The ‘great work of
Revelation, so to speak, yet remains.

The words do not occur in St. Mark,
St. James, St. Jude, nor in the writings
of St. John, except Apoc. i. 1, and
John xii. 38 (from LXX.) And con-
versely pavepow occurs very frequently
in St. John, and also in St. Mark, but
does not occur in St. Matt. or St. Luke.
On the connection of γνωρίζω, pave-
pow, ἀποταλύπτω, cf. Eph. iii. 8--ὅ.
Reomexya 2620-1 tie 2) 1 ῬΡον.

1, 4. The first regards the individual
knowledge, the second the outward
manifestation, the third the essential
permanence, of that which is set forth.

In the LXX. the metaphor of ἀποκα-
λύπτειν is clearly brought out in its
personal form in the phrases ἄποκ. τοὺς
opdsardpuovs (Num. xxii. 31), and Grok.
τὸ οὖς (Ruth iv. 4. ᾿Αποκαλυψις first
occurs in Sirac. xi. 27, but Jerome re-
marked (Comm. ad Galat. i. 12; Lib.
i. p. 887) that the word ‘‘ was used by
none of the wise of the world among
the Greeks.” It is found in Plutarch.
Cf. Plat. Gorg. 460 a, ete. (amora-
λύπτω). In like manner the Latin
Christians, beginning with Tertullian,
seem to have been the first, if not the
only writers, who employed revelatio
and the cognate words metaphorically.

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. OT

Inspiration. The real existence of such an influence is
proved at once by common belief and personal experi-
ence. The nature of its operation § tran-
scends the power of our thought; but it Pts ap
remains to examine the form which this Di- κα ἀπά
vine teaching bears when presented to men. And here
a characteristic difference may be observed. In heathen
nations the Sibyl or the Pythoness was the type of an in-
spired teacher; and Plato consequently places the prophet
low in the scale of men, as one in whom all human powers
of body and soul were neutralized.'| The dream, the
vision, the ecstasy, seemed to be the only means whereby
the Deity could come into contact with man, and thus all
personal consciousness was destroyed by the supernatural
influence. . In the records of the Bible, on
the other hand, the teaching of Inspiration
appears as one great element in the education of the world,
and therefore it has an essential connection with the age
and people to whom it is addressed, while its form varies
according to the needs of men.

Like every gift of God, inspiration is bestowed for some
special end to which it is exactly propor-
tioned. At one time we may picture to ee teak
ourselves the Lawgiver recording the letter. “πάν; μέ in any
of the Divine Law which he had received
directly from God, “inscribed upon tables of stone,” or
spoken “face to face.” At another we may watch the
sacred Historian, unconsciously it may be and yet freely,
seizing on those facts in the history of the past which were
the turning-points of a nation’s spiritual progress, gather-
ing the details which combine to give the truest picture of
each crisis, and grouping all according to the laws of a

Biblical records.

marvellous symmetry, which in after-times might symbol-
ize their hidden meaning. Or we may see the Prophet
gazing intently on the great struggle going on around him,

1 Cf. p. 82, n..1.
1

38 | INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

discerning the spirits of men, and the springs of national
life, till the relations of time no longer exist in his vision,
till all strife is referred to the final conflict of good and
evil, foreshadowed in the great judgments of the world,
and all hope is centred in the coming of the Saviour, and
in the certainty of His future triumph. Another, perhaps,
looks within his own heart, and as a new light is poured
over its inmost depths, his devotion finds expression in
songs of personal penitence and thanksgiving; in confes-
sions of sin and declarations of righteousness, which go
far to reconcile the mysterious contradictions of our nature.
To another is given the task of building up the Church.
By divine instinct he sees in scattered congregations types
of the great forms of society in coming ages, and addresses
to them not systems of doctrine, but doctrine embodied
in deed, which applies to all time, because it expresses
eternal truths, and yet specially to each time, because it
is connected with the realities of daily life.
But however various the forms of inspired teaching may
be, in one respect they are all similar. In
ton ee "every case the same twofold character is pre-
served which arises from the combination
of the divine influence with the human utterance. The
language of the Lawgiver, the Historian, the Prophet, the
Psalmist, the Apostle, is characteristic of the positions
which they severally occupied. Even when they speak
most emphatically “the words of the Lord,” they speak
still as men living among men; and the eternal truths
which they declare receive the coloring of the minds
through which they pass. Nor can it be said that it is
2asy to eliminate the variable quantity in each case; for
the distinguishing peculiarities of the several writers are
not confined to marked features, but extend also to a mul-
titude of subtle differences which are only felt after careful
study. Everywhere there are’ traces of a personality,
not destroyed, but even quickened by the action of the
divine power, — of an individual consciousness, not sus-

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 39

pended, but employed at every stage of the heavenly
commission.

Inspiration, then, according to its manifestation in Scrip-
ture, is Dynamical,’ and not Mechanical, —
the human powers of the divine messenger πα δου ιοεο βοᾷ
act according to their natural laws even “"“
when these powers are supernaturally strengthened. Man
is not converted into a mere machine, even in the hand
of God. But it may be asked whether this combination
of letter and spirit be perfect or partial; whether the
special human form be essential to the right apprehension
of the divine idea; whether the shell be absolutely needed
to preserve the kernel; or, whether the impress of per-
sonal character must be effaced before we can see the
godlike image, and the outward covering be removed in
order that the inner germ may grow and fructify.®

It might, perhaps, be a sufficient answer to such inquiries
to point out the absolute impossibility of
separating the two elements, the external we sunt ret of
and the internal, the historical and the doc- “°°”?
trinal, the objective and the subjective, however we choose
to name them. But the truth of this general statement
becomes more clearly apparent if regard be had to the

1 The cases of spiritual ecstasy men- acters of Balaam and Caiaphas remain
tioned in Scripture are obviously ex- unchanged when they utter unwil-
ceptional and distinct from prophetic lingly or unconsciously Divine truths.
inspiration. The second rapture of Saul
is easily intelligible from the circum-
stances of the narrative; and on the
former occasion it is expressly men-
tioned that God gave him another heart
before he prophesied (1 Sam. x. 6,
9—15). When St. Paul was carried up
to Paradise, the words which he heard
were not for the instruction of the
Church, but wispeakable words, which
it is not lawful (ἐξόν) for aman to utter
(2 Cor. xii. 4). The outpouring of
“tongues” was addressed to God, and
not to man (1 Cor. xiv. 2). 8 Cf. Tholuck, Glaubwiird. der Evang.

On the other hand, the personal char- Gesch 8. 429 ff.

2The word is open to many objec-
tions on cther grounds, and not least
from its technical application; but I
ean think of no better one which may
be conveniently used to describe an
influence acting upon living powers,
and manifesting itself through them
according to their natural laws, as dis-
tinguished from that influence which
merely uses human organs for its out-
ward expression, as, for instance, in
the accounts of the Demoniacs.

40 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

conception, the expression, and the communication of
thought. The slightest consideration -will show that
words are as essential to intellectual processes as they
are to mutual intercourse. For man the purely spiritual
_ and absolute is but an aspiration or a dream. Thoughts
are wedded to words as necessarily as soul to body.
Language is a condition of our being, determining the
conception as well as the communication of ideas, as
in the first record of our race we read that Adam, while
still in solitude, gave names to all the creatures which
passed before him." Without it the mysteries unveiled
before the eyes of the seer would be confused shadows;
with it they are made clear lessons for human life.

But, even if it were possible for the prophet to realize
truth otherwise than according to the capac-
ity of his finite mind, still something would
be wanting. It is not enough that the sacred teacher
should gaze upon the eternal truths of religion, like the
disembodied spirits in the Platonic Pheedrus,? he must be
able to represent them fitly to other men. And when ad-
dressed to man, the human element becomes part of the
message from heaven; for the divine can be grasped by
him only when defined and monlded according to the laws
of his own nature. The book is thus rightly
said to be inspired no less than the prophet.
The book reflects and perpetuates the per-
sonal characteristics of the prophet, but it does not create
them. Writing introduces no limitation into the repre-
sentation of truth which does not already exist in the first
conception and expression of it. The isolated writing
bears the same relation to the whole work of the prophet
as the prophet himself to the world from which he is
chosen. The partial and incomplete record preserves the
clear outline of such features in his character and mission as
were of importance for the guidance of the future Church.

the expression, and

the record of the
Divine truth.

1 Cf. Donaldson's New Cratylus, p. 62. 2 Phedr. 247 Ὁ; 249 c.

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 41

On following out the lines of thought thus lightly
sketched, it will appear, I think, that, from es
a Christian point of view, the notion of a af Sertpture te ple
perfect Dynamical Inspiration is alone sim- τ “
ple, sufficient, and natural. It presupposes that the same
providential Power which gave the message selected
the messenger; and implies that the traits of individual
character, and the peculiarities of manner and _ purpose,
which are displayed in the composition and language of
the sacred writings, are essential to the perfect exhibition
of their meaning. It combines harmoniously the two
terms in that relation of the finite to the infinite which
is involved in the very idea of revelation. It preserves
absolute truthfulness with perfect humanity, so that the
nature of man is not neutralized, if we may thus speak, by
the divine agency, and the truth of God is not impaired,
but exactly expressed in one of its several aspects by the
individual mind. Each element performs its perfect work;
and in religion, as well as in philosophy, a glorious reality
is based upon a true antithesis. The letter becomes as
perfect as the spirit; and it may well seem that the image
of the Incarnation is reflected in the Christian Scriptures,
which, as I believe, exhibit the human and divine in the
highest form, and in the most perfect union.

For when it is said that the Scriptures are everywhere
quickened by a principle of spiritual life, it
is already implied that they exhibit an out-
ward development. The Divine teaching,
though one, is not uniform. Truth is indeed immutable,
but humanity is progressive; and thus the form in which
truth is presented must be examined in relation to the age
in which the revelation was made. At one time it is to be
sought in the simple relations of the patriarchal household ;
at another, in the more complicated interests of national
existence; at another, in the still deeper mysteries of indi-
vidual life; at another, in the infinite fulness of the Sa-
viour’s work, or in the perplexing difficulties which beset

adapted to a pro-
gressive humanity.

42 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

the infant Churches. But each form has its proper and
enduring lesson: each record constitutes a link in the
golden ehain which, to use the Homeric allegory, has again
bound the earth with all its varied interests to the throne
of God.

The personal consequences which flow from this view
᾿ of the Inspiration of Scripture are too im-
Ramenunnicised portant not to find a passing notice here.
πο Truth is brought into a connection with life
by the recognition of the human element in its expression
which it could not otherwise have. The several parts of
the Bible are thus united, not only by the presence of a
common object, but also by the impress of a common
nature. The history of Christ Jesus is concrete doctrine,
as doctrine is abstract history. The Christian finds in the
records of the Lord’s life a perfect pattern for his own
guidance, as well as the realization of the Apostolic teach-
ing. However wonderful each action of the Saviour may
be as a manifestation of power, providence, and love, he
seeks yet further for its personal relation to himself; for
he knows that the Evangelists, men even as he is, felt
truly the inner meaning of the events which they record,
and truly told their outward details. All the holy writings,
as we read, have but one end, that we may be thoroughly
furnished to all good works, and this is obtained by their
entire adaptation to our complex nature. Nor will any
one who is conversant with the history of ancient systems
be inclined to think lightly of the use thus made of the
simplest instincts and powers of humanity in the revela-
tion of the highest mysteries. The fundamental error of
the most pious of the ancient philosophers lay in their
misapprehension of the relation of the finite to the in-
finite. They sought a system of absolute truth, indepen-
dent of the specific laws of human life, and vainly labored
to raise men out of the world. They had no gospel for
the siniple and poor, for the mechanic¢ and the slave. In |
the pursuit of wisdom they disparaged common duties,

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 43

and deferred the business of social life and of explanation
of the popular faith till they should have solved the riddle
of seli-knowledge.!| They cherished and set forward one
part of man’s nature to the destruction of the others. The
end of philosophy was declared to be the isolation of the
soul: the work of life only the contemplation of death.
Christ, on the contrary, finally uniting in one person God
and man, fixed the idea of spiritual life in the harmonious
combination of faith and works, and left His disciples in
the world, though not of it. The tree which symbolizes
the Christian faith springs from earth and is a resting-
place for the birds of heaven ;? the leaven spreads through
the whole * man; for humanity is not removed by the gos-
pel doctrine, but clothed with a spiritual dress.

The various proofs which may be adduced in support
of the doctrine of the plenary inspiration of
Holy Scripture, according to the sense in
which it has been already explained, are va-
rious in kind, and will necessarily appear more or less
forcible at different times and to different minds. On the

4. The proofs of
the Inspiration of
writings.

one hand, assuming that the writings of the
New Testament are, in part at least, the
works of men whose Divine commission was
attested by sensible miracles, we may appeal
to the fact that they claim to speak in the name and by
the authority of Him by whom their mighty works were
Or we may collect the passages which the

(a) External.

i. The supernat-
ural commission of
the Apostles.

wrought.?

1 Cf. Plat. Gorg. 527 Ὁ; Pheedr. 229 5. ti. The Acts. Ch. viii. 26, 29; x. 19;

2 Orig. Tom. x11I. in Matt. § 5. Οὐδὲν
μὲν τῶν ἀπτέρων, τὰ δὲ ἐπτερωμένα
πνευματικῶς.

8 Cf. Trench, Notes on the Parables,
p. 115. Olsh. in /.

4 Cf. Plat. Phed. 64 A; 67D.

5 The reality of an objective Inspira-
tion of the Apostles is clearly assumed
in the New Testament.

i. The Gospels. Matt. xvi.17; x. 19,
20; Mark xiii. 11; John xiy. 26; xvi.
12—15.

xi. 12, 28; xiii. 2; xv. 28; xvi. 6,7; xxi.
11:

iii. The Catholic Epistles. 1 Pet. i.
10—12; 2 Pet. i. 19—21; 1 John ii. 20.

iv. The Pauline Epistles. 1 Thess,
iv. 2 (ἃ Thess. iii. 6); 1 Cor. ii. 10; xiv.
37 (2 Cor. iii. 18); Gal. i. 11, 12; Rom.
viii. 16; xvi. 26; Eph. iii. 3—6; 1 Tim.
τὺ 1 Ὁ. LAM, Is LO ke

The same doctrine is implied in the
Pauline phrase Kat’ ἐπιταγήν, Rom.
xvi. 26; 1 Cor. vii. 6 (25); 2 Cor. viii. 8;

44 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

apostolic writers have quoted from the Old Testament, and
comparing the spiritual lessons which they
draw from them with the simplest mean-
ing of the text, form some general conclu-
sions as to the sense in which they regarded
the words of the prophets, as indeed the Word of God?
Or, descending still lower, we may show that
the Christian Fathers with one consent af-
firmed in the most complete manner the
inspiration of the Scriptures, placing the writings of the
New Testament on the same footing with those of the
Old, as soon as it was possible that the apostolic records
could rise with clear preéminence above the oral tradition
of the apostolic teaching.2. On the other hand, we may
examine the character and objects of the
books themselves, and put together the vari-
ous facts which appear to indicate in them the presence

ti. The analogy
-of the apostolic use
of the Old Testa-
ment.

vii. The testimony
of the Church.

(b) Internal.

of more than human authority and wisdom, no less in the
simplicity and apparent rudeness of their general form
than in the subtle harmony and marvellous connection of

their various elements.

1 Tim. i.1; Tit. i.3. And on the other
hand the corresponding change in the
believer—‘‘ the revelation of eye and
ear ??—is vividly set forth; 2 Cor. iii.
18; Col. iii. 10. This change extends to
each element of man’s complex nature.
His spirit (πνεῦμα) is aided by the
Spirit of God that it may know the
blessings of the Gospel (1 Cor. ii. 12).
His reason (vovs) is furnished with
new intuitional principles by which to
test the Divine counsels (Rom. xii. 2,
ἀνακαίνωσις τοῦ vods). His under-
standing (διάνοια, Eph. iv. 18) is en-
lightened so as to recognize the True
One (1 John v. 20. Cf. Eph. 1. 18,
πεφωτισμένους τοὺς ὀφϑαλμοὺς τῆς
καρδία“. al. διανοίας). And according
to the measure of this change Inspira-
tion is a blessing of all ages and all
Christians.

The distinction of τὸ ῥῆμα τοῦ Θεοῦ

And if this method of proof is

and 6 λόγος Tov Θεοῦ, which are both
rendered the Word of God in the Eng-
lish version, and Verbum Dei in the
Vulgate, is important in relation to the
doctrine of the Inspiration of Scripture.
The former phrase occurs: Matt. iv. 4
(= Deut. viii. 8); Luke (ii. 29); iii. 2;
John iii. 84; viii. 47; Rom. x. 17; Eph.
vi. 17; Heb. vi. 5; xi.3; 1 Pet. i. 25 (= 18.
x1.8). The latter is more frequent: Mark
vii. 18; Luke v. 1, etc.; John x. 35, etc. ;
Acts iv. 31, etc.; Rom. ix. 6; Col. 1. 25;
Heb. iv. 12, ete.; 1 Pet. i. 23, ete. The
distinction is lost also in the Syriac and
Gothic Versions. In Eph. vi. 17, Ter-
tullian (i. p. 152) strangely reads Sermo
Dei.

1 Cf. App. A. On the Quotations in
the Gospels.

2 Cf. App. B. On the Primitive Doe-
trine of Inspiration.

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 45

less direct and definite than the other; if it calls for calm
patience and compels thought in each inquirer; it is also
broader and more elastic, capable of infinite extensions
and applications. Nor is it less powerful even while it is
cogent. ΤῸ many, perhaps, the inward assurance which it
creates is more satisfactory than the rigid deductions of
direct argument. The unlimited multiplication of con-
vergent presumptions and analogies builds up a strong
and sure conviction possessing a moral force which can
never belong to a mere formal proof, even where the
premises are necessary truths.

To speak of the proof of the Inspiration of the Scrip-
tures involves, indeed, an unworthy limitation

: ; In what sense a

of the idea itself. In the fullest sense of the — proofey mspiration
word we cannot prove the presence of life, ‘eat
but are simply conscious of it; and Inspiration is the man-
ifestation of a higher life. The words of Scripture are
spiritual words, and as such are spiritually discerned.’ The
ultimate test of the reality of Inspiration lies in the intu-
ition of that personal faculty (πνεῦμα) by which inspired
men once recorded the words of God, and are still able to
hold communion with Him. Everything short of this
leaves the great truth still without us; and that which
should be a source of life is in danger of becoming a mere
dogma. At the same time, it is as unfair and dangerous
to reject the teaching of a formal proof as it is to rely upon
it exclusively. It cannot be an indifferent matter to us to
bring into harmonious combination the work and the writ-
ings of the Apostles; to follow and faithfully continue the
clear outlines of scriptural criticism as traced in the writ-
ings of the New Testament; to recognize the power which
the Bible has hitherto exercised upon the heart of the
Church, and the depths which others have found in it.
Such investigations will necessarily lead to other and more
personal questions. We shall ask naturally whether we
have any clear conception of the position which the first

11 Coz. vii. 12—136.

46 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

Christian teachers occupied, and the results which they
accomplished? Whether we have ever fairly estimated
the extent to which the different Books of Scripture are
penetrated by a common spirit? Whether the fault be
not in ourselves, if occasional difficulties are allowed to
destroy the effect of those divine words which have been
for ages a spring of life? And thus a new field will be
opened before us; and in this case ever-deepening convic-
tion is the result and the reward of labor. For there is
this essential difference between an outward and an inward
—a logical and a moral — proof, that while the one can
be handed down from one generation to another, in all its
formal completeness, gaining no fresh force and admitting
of no wider application, the latter only exercises its full
influence by the personal appreciation of each element of
which it consists, and adapts itself to every shifting phase
of thought from which it draws its strength.
To examine at length the details which suggest this
internal proof of inspiration is at once use-
dence af Iepva. ess and impossible. Their effect lies in the
oN aa individual point of sight from which they are
regarded, and their weight in their infinite
variety. But one or two remarks on the Gospels may serve
to illustrate different lines of thought which will furnish
abundant materials for private study; and it is by this only
that their real value can be estimated.
In the first place, the negative character of the Gospels,
the absence of certain features which we
Ἐπ grace should have expected to find in them, is too
1 eee striking not to arrest attention. They are
mentariness; while fragmentary in form. Their writers make no
attempt to relate all the actions or discourses
of our Lord, and show no wish to select the most marvel-
lous series of his mighty works; and probably no impartial
judge will find in any one of them a conscious attempt to
form a narrative supplementary to those of the others.
But if we know by the ordinary laws of criticism that our

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 47

Gospels are the only authentic records of the Saviour’s life,
while we believe that Providence regards the well-being
of the Christian Church, are we not necessarily led to
conclude that some divine power overruled their composi-
tion, so that what must otherwise seem a meagre and in-
complete record should contain all that is fittest histori-
cally to aid our progress and determine our faith? Nor
can it be unworthy of notice that while the ee
hey contain nearly
Gospels evidently contain so small a selection «ll hat we know of
from the works and words of Christ, so few Gece
details unrecorded by the Evangelists should have been
preserved in other ways. The interval between the Gos-
pel of St. John and the Synoptists indicates the existence
of many intermediate forms of doctrine of which tradition
has preserved no trace. The numerous witnesses of our
Lord’s works and teaching must have treasured up with
affection each recollection of their past intercourse ; but
the cycle of the Evangelic narrative is clearly marked ; and
it cannot but seem that the same Power which so definitely
circumscribed its limits determined its contents."

Again, the Gospels are unchronological in order. We
are at once cautioned against regarding them
as mere history, and encouraged to look for
some new law of arrangement in their con-
tents, which, as I shall endeavor to prove, must result from
a higher power than an unaided instinct or an enlightened
consciousness.

Once more, the Gospels are brief and apparently con-
fused in style. There is no trace in them of
the anxious care or ostentatious zeal which
mark the ordinary productions of curiosity
or devotion. The Evangelists write as men who see
through all time, and only contemplate the events which
they record in their spiritual relations. But, at the same
time, there is an originality and vigor in every part of the

ὃ. Their deficiency
in chronology.

ς. Their simplicity
of style.

1 Cf. App. C. On the Apocryphal Traditions of the Lord’s Words and Works

48 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

Gospels which become a divine energy in the Gospel of
St. John. As mere compositions they stand out from all
other histories with the noble impress of simplicity and
power; and it is as if the faithful reflection of the Image
of God shed a clear light on the whole narrative. The an-
swer was once given to the Pharisees when they sought to
take Jesus, that never man spake like that
man, and those who assail the authority of
the Gospels have been constrained to confess that never
was history written as in them.!
If we regard the subject of the Gospels it would indeed
be strange if this were not so. The New
theGoms ~~ Testament does not contain a mere record
of ordinary facts, or a collection of indiffer-
ent conclusions, but lays the historic groundwork of man’s
redemption, and builds up his practical faith. In narrative,
in doctrine, and in prophecy, the same great truths are
brought forth under different relations of time. And thus
the connection of events, the arrangement of arguments,
and the choice of symbols, may serve to exhibit in clearer
and more varied outline the whole structure of Christianity.
For nothing can be immaterial which is able to influence
our idea of the Saviour’s life, or to alter the application
of Christ’s teaching. The history must be not only true
to the outward form, but true to the inward spirit; the
proof must be not only convincing, but effectual; the pre-
diction must not only answer to the event, but cohere with
the whole scope of prophetic revelation. It may, indeed,
be easy to quote passages in which we do not see the im-
portance of the minuter details of the Scriptures; for we
cannot know the secret experience of all Christians; but
it would be equally easy to prove that there is no singu-
larity in expression or detail, no trait of personal fecling
or individual conception, in the Gospels, which does not in
some one place greatly affect our notion of Christ’s teach-
ing. And thus, unless the peculiarities of each writer were

John7: 46.

1 Cf. Gaussen, Theopneustia, pp. 288 ff. (Eng. Tr.)

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 49

chosen to exhibit a special aspect of truth, they must in
some degree distort it.

But though we shall dwell frequently in the course of
the following pages on the characteristic dif- ὌΞΟΥΣ
ferences of the Evangelists, we must not for- teaching of the Gos-
get that, while they work separately for the ar:
instruction of individuals, they have a common service to
perform in the edification of the Church. Their writings
must be combined as well as analyzed, and we must care-
fully construct the general doctrines which they teach us
by a comparison of scattered passages. All true sense of
the absolute unity of the Diatessaron, as distinguished
from its unity of form, is commonly lost by separating mir-
acles, prophecies, and parables, instead of combining them.
We regard them, as a child might regard the stars, as
chance sparks of heavenly light, because we have not ob-
served the law which rules their order. Yet it is in the
perfection and oneness of their social teaching, so to speak,
that the strongest internal proof of the plenary inspiration
of the Gospels is to be found. The office of the apostles
was not only personal, but public. They had not merely
to appropriate subjectively the truths of salvation, but to
set them forth for the instruction of the whole Christian
Society. Their inspiration is to the Church what enlight-
enment is to the believer. For as we hold that there are
rights which belong to the state rather than to the citizen,
so there are doctrines which pertain to the whole body of
the faithful rather than to its several members. Such doc-
trines are the great mysteries of nature — foreknowledge
and providence — which find their proper
centre in the social, and not in the personal ed a
existence. But, nevertheless, their truest res-
olutions must be sought in the life of Him, by whom the
whole world was reiinited to God. We must consider how
far each miracle and prophecy helps us to complete our
idea of the power and foresight of God, in reference to the
wants and works of man; and how far each parable sug-

50 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

gests the glorious truth of the inner harmony of the uni-
verse. The manner in which these questions — the foun-
dation-doctrines of a Christian community — are treated
by the Evangelists is such as to exclude the idea of a mere
personal intuition, for that leaves no room for those com-
binations in which the fulness of the Gospel lies. How-
ever far one Evangelist might have been led by the laws
of his own mind, it requires the introduction of a higher
power that. four should unconsciously combine to rear
from different sides a harmonious and perfect fabric of
Christian truth.

1. In order to understand the full force of miracles we
must bear in mind their double aspect — out-
ward as well as inward — as works of power

and works of redemption. The former view, which was
almost exclusively studied in the last two centuries, is now
well-nigh forgotten,! through that spirit of our own times,
to which we have already alluded; but still the miracles
are as important to the Christian faith providentially as
morally. And as their redemptive significance is deep and
varied, so is their outward manifestation perfect in extent
and glory. It has been well observed that there is nothing
in them contrary to nature, while all is above nature ; that
the laws of existences around us are not broken, but resolved
into higher laws; that there is no creation out of nothing,
but a freeing of the primitive order (κόσμος, mundus’) from
the lets and limitations of sin.
though less observed, that they penetrate into every class

a. Miracles.

Again, it is equally true, —

1 Pascal rises far beyond his own age
when he says, ‘‘ Les figures de Evan-
gile pour |’état de 1’4me malade sont des
corps malades.” (Pensées, li. 872, Fau-
gere). ;

2 The word κόσμος in this sense was
first used by Pythagoras (Plut. de Plac.
Phil. 17.1). A/undus oecurs in Ennius
(celi mundus), and yet Cicero evidently
speaks of the word as strange and un-
usual even in his time (de Uniy. x.

lucens mundus). It will not fail to strike
the attention, that while the Greeks and
Romans regarded the outward beauty
and order of creation as giving the tru-
est name to the world, the Hebraizing
Greek and Rabbinical writers should
have regarded “the ages” (αἰῶνες,
ΘΠ Ξὴ 9) as the right denomination ot
that where interest centres rather in the
moral than in the physical order.

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 51

of being with which we are connected — material, animal,
and spiritual; that they now involve and again exclude
natural means; that they alike give life and destroy it;
that they rise above the laws of matter and change its ac-
cidents. ‘The constancy and harmony of nature have been
converted into an argument against an almighty Provi-
dence ;' and in miracles we find the proper vindication of
the perpetuity and extent of the Creator’s power. They
prove His presence in all things against those philosophers
who, from the time of Epicurus,? confound the law and him
who works according to the law ; and, by a strange confu-
sion, substitute, as it were, a theory of motion for a living
force. There is, as I trust to show,.at once a perfect dis-
tinctness in the practical and doctrinal import of each
miracle, and a perfect unity in their final aim; so that
the completeness of their cycle and the variety of their
applications suggest to us the influence of a higher power
on the Evangelists than a mere “intuitional conscious-
ness.”

2. While the miracles show that a sustaining power is
everywhere present in nature, the parables
reveal no less clearly the divine harmonies
by which it is penetrated. For parables are more than
arbitrary similitudes. In part they explain those higher
relations of our existence to which the common events of
life should Jead us, and realize in religion the Socratic ex-
They connect the principles of action with the

b. Parables.

ample.

1 Cf. Galen. de usu Part. x1. 14 (quo- 2 Cic. de Nat. Deor. i. 25. Epicurus

Ct ie

ted by Pearson, On the Creed, p. 540 1).
The following passage of Goethe (Tho-
luck, Glaubwird, s. xiv.) expresses
plainly the assumption which lies at the
basis of much criticism at present: Du
hiltst das Evangelium, wie es steht, fir
die géttlichste Wahrheit; mich wiirde
eine yernehmliche Stimme vom Him-
mel nicht iberzeugen, dass das Wasser
brennt . . . Vielmehr halt’ ich dies fiir
eine Listerung gegen den grossen Gott
uid seine Offenbarung in cer Natur.

atomum, quum pondere et gray-
itate directo deorsum feratur, declinare
paullulum. It is remarkable that a
change of motion did not supply the
idea of some external power. ‘ Attrac-
tion’? is but a name to describe the ac-
tion of force, and assumes the existence
of that of which it cannot explain the
origin.

3 Cf. Rogers, Reason and Faith, Ed

tev. Oct. 1849, pp. 344-6.

52 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

principles of faith, and appeal to the heart of man as a
witness of his true duties to God and his fellow. In part,
they connect the natural with the spiritual world, and
show how the laws of natural progress correspond to the
course of spiritual development. And at the same time
they give us some glimpses of the union of man with
higher and lower intelligences, and explain that mutual
dependence of all things which the Manichzan and Gnostic
failed to recognize, and thence fell into the most fatal and
blasphemous errors, — till we are led to real-
ize the glorious words of St. Paul, that αὐ
creation (κτίσις) waiteth for the manifesta-
tion of the Sons of God, groaning and tra-
vailing in pain until now. |

3. Again, we are taught to recognize the working of
Providence not only in the outer world of
nature, but also in the inner world of action;
while experience shows that the control of the general
result is reconciled with individual freedom.’ To this end
the reality and depth of prophecy is set before us in the
records of Judaism, of which Christianity is, in the highest
sense, the proof and fulfilment.’ In the various events
detailed in the Old Testament Scriptures,
which were written for our learning, the
Jews became fiyures of us. The private fortunes of their
monarchs, and the national revolutions of their race; the
general import of their history, and the wider significance
of their prophecies, as well as the more explicit predic-
tions, all receive their complete accomplishment in Messiah

Rom. viii. 19—22.
Cf. Eph. i. 10, 20—
8; Col. ἡ. 20; Phii.
ti. 9, 10.

c. Prophecies.

1 Cor. x. 6, 11.

1 The confirmation of this great doc-
trine by statistics is one of the most
striking results of modern science. Cf.
atable from M. Quetelet in Mrs. Somer-
ville’s Physical Geography, ii. pp. 383-4.

2 Le Vieux Testament est un chiffre.
Pascal. Pensées, ii. 247; οἵ. pp. 242 ff.
The Jews had a proverb: Vana lex
donee venerit Messias. Cf. Orig. de
Prince. iv. 6, quoted in App. B. What

is needed to interpret this cipher is
shortly expressed in the words of our
Lord (Luke xxiv. 25), ὦ ἀνόητοι (vows)
καὶ βραδεῖς TH καρδίᾳ (διάνοια. ef. Eph.
1. 18, varr. lectt.). Compare also Rom. Ϊ.
21, ἐματαιώϑησαν ἐν τοῖς διαλογισμοῖς

. καὶ ἐσκοτίσϑη ἢ ἀσύνετος αὐτῶν
καρδία. Eph. iv. 17, 18, ἐν ματαιότητι
τοῦ νοὺς αὐτῶν ἐσκοτισμένοι τῇ
διανοίᾳ.

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 53

and His kingdom. It is then through the Evangelists that
the Holy Spirit has afforded us a true insight into the
inner meaning of the Prophets, who were the historians
of the elder dispensation, as in the Epistles He has set
forth the antitypes of the ancient law. That is surely a
meagre theology and unscholarlike criticism which finds
nothing more than a fanciful adaptation in the Scriptures
quoted in the opening chapter of St. Matthew, and nothing
deeper than an arbitrary variation in the different words
by which each passage is introduced. On the contrary, it
seems as if, from verse to verse, the full glory and wisdom
of the past were gradually disclosed to. us, as we are
directed to regard the types of the Messiah in the crises
of personal or national history; and then to acknowledge
the fulness of the more distant Christian analogies in
the outward fortunes of the Jews; and, lastly, to accept
the reality of the minuter deductions from their prophetic
teaching.’

But if we admit the Inspiration of Scripture as suffi-
ciently proved by external and internal evi-
dence, a difficulty still remains, — for how, it as ea ein ag
may be asked, can it be shown that the col- Statement of the
lection of inspired writings forms a complete
record of the revelation which it commemorates? There
was a time when the Bible, which we regard as one volume
and call by one name, existed only in its separate parts,

1 (a) Matt. i. 22, τοῦτο ὅλον γέγονεν (δ) Matt. ii. 23, ὅπως mAnpwSH τὸ

ἵνα πληρωδῇ. pnvev διὰ τῶν προφητῶν.
A personal historic type, Is. vii. 44. A deduction from prophetic Jan-
Immanuel (ef. viii. 1) — Jesus. guage. Psalm xxii. 6. Is, liii. 3.
(8) Matt. ii. 15, jv ἐκεῖ---[ἧἶ"να πλη- It is very remarkable that the final
pwan- conjunctions (iva, bmws) never occur
A national historic type, Hos. xi.1. with the optative in the New Testament,
Israe] — Messiah. unless Eph. i. 17, iii. 16, may possibly
(y) Matt. ii. 17, τότε ἐπληρώϑδε τὸ De exceptions. Is the explanation to
pnver. be sought for in the fact that the truest

An analogy in Jewish history, Jer. instinct leads us to regard every issue
Χ]. 1. The mother of Israel weeping as still working and waiting for a pres-
for her children taken from her. ent accomplishment?

54 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

till at length it gained its present form after long and
anxious questionings. And though we believe that history
bears clear witness to our canonical books, and to no
others, still history, it may be said, cannot assure us that
they contain all the points of divine truth which it is
needful for us to know. Whatever is taught by Inspira-
tion is authoritative; but how can we learn that all neces-
sary elements of inspired teaching have been committed
to writing? At the first glance the several books appear
to be disconnected and incidental. In many cases they
were composed to meet the wants of a special crisis, — to
instruct, to correct, to confirm individuals or churches.
There is nothing to show that the Apostles, if we regard
only the New Testament, entertained any design of
delivering to future ages a full written account of the
Christian faith, or a perfect system of Christian doctrine.
On the contrary, there is a marked difference in the points
of sight from which they regard the Christian dispensa-
tion; and they all seem to shrink in common from claim-
ing for their own writings a rank coérdinate with that of
the Old Testament Scriptures.

The slightest thought will show that such inquiries will
not admit of one peremptory answer, though
the traditional view οἵ Holy Scripture, by
which we regard the several books as neces-
sarily connected, renders us to a great extent insensible to
many of the difficulties which they really involve. This
traditional belief has, indeed, practically its proper use and
reward; but where investigation is possible, belief must
be the goal and not the starting-point, the conclusion and
not the premiss of our reasoning.

But while we allow that the difficulties thus raised are
sg Ne ταν real, they are still not singular or exceptional,
which are fomdin Dut:analogous to those common mysteries of
Seiko our being which are rarely felt, only because
they are universal. The action of Providence in every
case is lost ina mystery. In one aspect most things in the

The difficulties are
real, and yet

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 55

life of an individual seem to be casual and unimportant;
and yet, when we observe from time to time indications
of a providential plan in its general course, we practically
admit that the same superintending power penetrates into
those apparently trivial details which really mould the
character of the whole. So, again, in the history of nations:
it is at first difficult to recognize how the
feuds of party and the confusion of popular
cries can form any part of a divine scheme for the govern-
ment of the world; and yet, when we discover on a wide
survey traces of such a controlling influence, we are forced
to allow that it extends to common things, and works by
means which antecedently seem totally inadequate to the
issue. Or, to take yet another example: the
vast and various convulsions which have
broken up the surface of the earth, and covered it with
sears and ruins, seem little like the manifestations of
infinite wisdom; and still, when it is known that they were
needed to fashion the fair diversity of woods and waters,
and to bring within the reach of man the treasures stored
up by certain laws in the depths below, we acknowledge
that Providence not only inspires the general law, but acts
equally by those changes and outbreaks which interrupt
its ordinary working.

These examples of the action of Providence in the indi-
vidual, in society, in nature, will illustrate
the form in which we may expect it to be. en μος
shown in securing the completeness of the "fen w% Prove
records of revelation; for, in relation to
Holy Seripture, the belief in Providence is the neces-
sary supplement to the belief in Inspiration. And if we
find that God works concurrently with the exercise of
man’s free agency; that He finds even in the weak-
nesses and imperfections of His creatures efficient ser-
vice; that the traces of a plan and purpose which are dis-
closed by a comprehensive view of His dealings, suggest
the existence of order and completeness throughout, and

in society,

in nature.

56 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

reconcile us to the presence of disturbing influences, — we
may reasonably expect to meet with similar phenomena in
the relation of Providence to Scripture ; so that it will
be no fatal objection to the completeness of the Bible, that
it is composed of writings not only occasional and per-
sonal, but also beset with various conflicting difficulties, if
there are clear signs of a consistent historical recognition
of this completeness, and also traces of a mutual de-
pendence and general unity in the books themselves.
For though it is true that history cannot prove directly
the completeness of the Scriptures, it can
Universal story furnish strong presumptions that they are
complete. The same divine messengers who
committed to writing the original records of revelation,
embodied their teaching in a visible society. The Bible
and the Church trace back their claims to the same source,
and each can appeal to the other to bear witness to its per-
manent integrity. If then it appear, to take one example,
that the earliest description of the Christian body recog-
nizes exactly those elements which are found in the apos-
tolic writings; if the Articles of Belief: and the forms of
worship are exactly those which are either suggested or
prescribed in them; if Christians with a common consent
appealed to the New Testament, as soon as its constituent
books were collected into one volume, as an adequate and
final source of Christian doctrine; and if the same be
true of the Old Testament,—no one who believes that
the lessons of Providence are legibly written in the in-
stinctive judgments of society will doubt that the Bible
was intended to be that for which the Church has received
it — a complete record of all that was of permanent import
in successive revelations. That the proposed conditions
are satisfied by the mutual relations of the Scriptures and
the Church from age to age, history can show most clearly.
The indistinetness which hangs over isolated details arises
commonly from the narrowness of the field of sight. On
a wide view nothing can be more striking than the inde-

4
res

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 5T

pendence and unity of the written Word and the organized
Body. And this independence and unity offer the clear-
est proof of their individual symmetry and completeness.
Nor is this all: it is possible that some outward sym-
metry may be found to exist in the mutual
relations of the different fragments of which νεῖν confirm
the Bible consists; and the argument from anges Sertp-
design is proportionately more convincing as
the elements in which the design is traced are more nu-
merous and naturally less connected. That this is so,
seems indeed to be indicated by the very form of the
Bible. To take an illustration again from the New Testa-
ment : the obvious analogy between the quadriform Gospel
and the four classes of Epistles, the peculiar fitness of the
Acts as a mediative element to connect them together
doctrinally and _ historically, the lasting significance of the
Apocalypse as a prophetic and typical view of the fortunes
of the Church to the end of time, create an impression οἱ
original unity among the component parts which thus pro-
duce a well-proportioned whole. And if, on a further ex-
amination of the books, it appear that the different char-
acters of their writers, the variety of styles in which they
are composed, the manifold circumstances by which they
were called forth, contribute, in each case, some distinctive
feature to the image of truth which they combine to pro-
duce, is not the idea of completeness a natural conse-
quence of a combination as marvellous as it is unexpected?
But the subtle organization of Scripture, no less than that
of nature, is only revealed to a watchful and attentive eye.
A passing hint may arouse inquiry, but nothing less than
a patient and candid study of the Bible can convey any
notion of the intimate relations which exist between its
several parts. Each fresh point of sight presents to the
eye new harmonies of detail and form. On a full survey
contrasts are successively exposed and subdued; irreg-
ularities are brought within the general plan; ornaments
gain a constructive importance; and, as in some noble

58 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

monument, each well-wrought fragment is stamped with
the marks of independence and design. The circum-
stances under which each workman wrought, no less than
the peculiarities of his work, prove his real independence ;
and the manner in which every peculiarity contributes to
the whole effect, shows that all alike were obedient to the
design of one great architect.
If it be still said that there are gaps and chasms in the
Canon; that the structure does not, in-all
a tendency tosym-' yespects, correspond to the plan; that much
metry and order is é ; ;
all that we can yet appears unfinished and insecure, — it may be
see in the other .
works of God. enough to reply, that there is at least a clear
tendency towards unity in its different parts,
not discernible at first, but growing ever clearer to those
who look most closely into it; and that such a tendency
towards order and perfection is all that can as yet be
found in the worlds of nature and man, though these are
confessedly complete in design, as being the immediate
works of God. The distinctness of this first revelation is
obscured by the existence of evil in a thousand forms,
which seems to contradict our notions of almighty power
and love; and it is likely that the same kind of difficulties
should reiippear, however God makes himself known. If,
then, we acknowledge in nature a perfection of plan,
though we cannot make it out in all its details, and com-
plete by faith the order which we see commenced at inter-
vals, it 1s reasonable to regard the completeness of Scrip-
ture in the same way, and to submit patiently to the ex-
istence of uncertainties and difticulties in the Bible, which
we find also in the only other manifestations of God’s
working with which we can compare it. They may,
indeed, be necessarily introduced by the narrow range of
our observation and experience, or be absolutely necessary
for our probation and discipline. And though this mode
of arguing may perhaps seem weak and inconclusive to
those who have scarcely felt the difficulties which it is
intended to meet, yet it may be remarked that we can

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 59

have nothing to guide us but analogies and presumptions,
ideas of fitness and order, gathered from the outward goy-
ernment of the world, when we endeavor to reason on
God’s dealings with man. Nor can it be said again that
such analogies only exist between the revela-
tion in nature and the revelation to men; Guibas Ba attlie
for what is true of the original revelation is “""“"”"
true also of the permanent record. The individual char-
acter, as has been already shown, is an essential part of
both, as far as man is concerned. The finiteness and im-
perfection of human nature must everywhere be felt in
Divine things; and the supposition that a complete record
of revelation may be found in writings apparently casual
and fragmentary, introduces no difficulty which is not
already found in another form in the primary conception
of revelation, and in the first expression of its truths. In
all alike, God works through man according to the natural
laws of thought and action; and thus the One becomes
manifold, and the whole can be contemplated only in its
component parts.

From what has been said, it follows that the personal
conviction of the Inspiration and Complete-
ness of Scripture depends, in a great meas- UI. The | Inter-

pretation of Scrip-

sure, upon the accurate study of the Sacred hae τᾷ
Writings themselves; and thus it is im- jfold—to secure
portant to fix within certain limits the great

principles by which they must be interpreted. Nor is this
difticult in a general sense, however many difficulties may
be involved in the application of the principles to every
detail. Two great objects appear to be in- | eth Ais
cluded in the work of the interpreter: the δ. the spiritual
strict investigation of the simple meaning of “"~

the text, and the development of the religious teaching
which lies beneath it. The first regards the form, and the
second the spirit of Scripture. The one rests on the ac-
knowledged permanence of the essential relations between
thought and language; the other, on the Providential pur-

60 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

pose which is seen to exist in the successive records of the
Divine history of the world. The religious truth is con--
veyed through the medium of human conceptions; and
human conceptions are used for the expression of religious
truth. The essence of Inspiration does not lie in the form
alone, or in the spirit alone, but in their combination. If
the form be the result of direct Inspiration, it follows ‘that
Scripture contains a revelation of pure physical truth,
which is contrary to experience ; if, on the other hand, the
action of Inspiration be limited to the spiritual element,
it follows that this must be separable from the form, which
has been shown to be impossible.
At a time when extended criticism has proved that the
very inflections of words have a mental sig-
piétatinn sel 4p, wificance, and answer to some peculiarity of
on strict grammat- yace, 10 seems almost superfluous to remark,
that idioms of language are but the embodi-
ments of national character; that an idiom is the start-
ing-point and not the end of inquiry. Yet long tradition
has sanctioned the application of principles to Biblical
criticism which are abandoned in all other subjects; and
it has been held to be a final answer in difficulties of
expression in the Old and New Testaments that they
are “QOrientalisms.” If this be true, it is evident that
the difficulty is only removed one step further back: why,
it must be asked, was the Eastern phrase so turned? of
what mental condition is it asymptom? Surely we may
believe that the Hebrew spirit still lives in the character-
istics of the Hebrew language; and if so, the close analysis
of each Hebrew idiom will lay open something of the
inner workings of that mind through which the world was
prepared for “the kingdom of God.”

ΕΠ τὶ Bere The theory of “ Orientalisms” has exercised
of accurate analy- its most fatal influence on the interpreta-
ine New Teaament, tion of the New Testament. The presence
COREE of a foreign coloring in the Greek writings
of the Apostles is so striking, that we may be inclined

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 61

to smile at the labors of the purists of the last century.
But to one who looks beneath the surface, this combi-
nation of Hebrew idiom with Greek words is a fact of
the utmost significance. The Hebrews realized more viy-
idly than any nation the present working of God in the
world, and contemplated even nature from a theocratic
standing-point. The Greeks, again, scrutinized with the
nicest discrimination the powers of man and the objects
of sense; and, by a vocabulary of infinite fulness, per-
petuated the knowledge which they gained. And what
more fitting vehicle can we conceive for the
enunciation of the highest truth than that rer o te
Hebraizing Greek which unites all that was
noblest in the forms of Hebrew thought with all that was
richest in the stores of Greek expression ?

But it is said that the Alexandrine Greek was a mixed
and degenerate dialect, and that it therefore
offers no sure ground for minute criticism. Qn
With equal reason the student of Euripides ἔμ /r ee
might complain of the arbitrary license of
Homer or Theocritus, because they do not conform to the
Attic standard; and yet the most startling anomalies of
the earliest and latest authors can be reduced to an ar-
rangement in harmony with the general principles of
language. The transition from the Greek of Aristotle to
that of St. Paul is in fact less abrupt than might have been
expected; but even if it were as great as it is commonly
supposed to be, the real state of the case would remain
unchanged. The laws of syntax and the
sense of words may be modified in the lapse sues ΡΥ ιν
of time, or by external influences; but the mvc ναγίῶ
great law, by which words are the living ex-
ponents of thought, remains unchanged, and the modifica-
tions are themselves necessarily subject to some law. It
is reasonable to expect that the grammar of the New
Testament may not in every point coincide with the gram-
mar of Homer, or Herodotus, or Xenophon. The style of

62 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

St. Paul or St. John may differ as much from that of each
of these as they differ severally from one another. But it
is the work of the scholar to determine the specific char-
acter of the writer before him, and to explain in what
way he has been led to diverge from the normal type of
Rectits cha expression. And, further, the laws which
est revolutions in Cetermine the continuity of language are not
eae broken by the infusion of foreign elements,
as long as the language retains a living energy. The
history of our own literature proves that it is a mere
assumption that a language loses even in precision by the
incorporation of new forms and words. On the contrary,
increased facility of expression gives occasion for the fixing
of minute differences of conception which would other-
wise be evanescent. And when the Apostolic writers use
a Greek dialect, variously modified by Eastern thought,
they are not removed from the pale of strict criticism, but
rather present a problem of unusual interest from the vari-
ous relations of the elements which it combines.

Nor can it be urged against this view that the Apostles

And this ic tue “Cl Wnlettered men, and consequently un-
of rude dialectsas likely to speak with exactness; for it is cer-
meee πὸ tain that the use of provincial dialects is no
less strict than that of the purest idiom. The very power
of language lies in the fact that it is the spontaneous ex-
pression of thought. Education may extend the range of
knowledge, but experience is an adequate teacher of that
which lies before us. Even, naturally, Galilean fishermen
were no less qualified than others to watch the processes
of the spiritual life, and adapt to their own needs the
words which the Septuagint had already consecrated to a
divine use.

All intelligent interpretation of Scripture must then be
Lei based upon a strict analysis of its idioms and
erat words. To suppose that words and cases are

convertible, that tenses have no absolute
meaning, that forms of expression are accidental, is to

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 63

betray the fundamental principles on which all intercourse
between men is based. A disbelief in the exactness of’ lan-
guage is the prelude to all philosophical skepticism. And
it will probably be found that the same tendency of mind
which discredits the fullest teaching of words, leads, how-
ever little we may see it, to the disparagement of all out-
ward revelation.

But when the interpreter of Scripture has availed him-
self of every help which historical criticism
can furnish for the elucidation of the text, —
when, by the exact investigation of every
word, the most diligent attention to every
variation of tense and even of order, the clearest recollec-
tion of the associations of every phrase, he has obtained a
sense of the whole, perfect in its finer shades and local

2. Spiritual In-
terpretation based
on the Literal In-
terpretation.

coloring, no less than in its general outline and effect, —his
work is as yet only half done. The literal sense is but
the source from which the spiritual sense is to be derived ;
but exactly in proportion as a clear view is gained of all
that is special in the immediate object and position of each
writer, it will be found that the simple record appears to be
instinct with Divine life; for, as has been already noticed,
the external circumstances and mental characteristics of
the writer are not mere accidents; but, inasmuch as they
influence his apprehension and expression of the truth,
they become a part of his Divine message. And the
typical speciality which springs from this is the condition
at once of the usefulness and of the universality of
Scripture.

The existence of an abiding spiritual sense underlying
the literal text of the Old Testament is suf μά νν μμο
ficiently attested by the quotations in the mange of the Apo:
New. Unless it be recognized, many of the
interpretations of the Evangelists and Apostles must ap-
pear forced and arbitrary; but if we assume that it exists,
their usage appears to furnish an adequate clew to the in-
vestigation of its most intricate mazes. It must always be

64 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

a difficult task to appreciate rightly the spiritual lessons of
history, to detect the real analogy between past and —
present, to understand the fleeting symptoms of good and
evil, to compare the several sides of truth and error; but
the task is one which is ever assigned to men. Mere me-
chanical infallibility is but a poor substitute for a plenary
inspiration, which finds its expression in the right relation
between partial human knowledge and absolute Divine
Teo. truth. And if this view imposes upon the
the primary sense interpreter of Scripture a work of endless
rae ee labor, at least it clears from his way formida-
ble difficulties which would otherwise beset him, and that
not by any arbitrary division of the contents of the Bible,
but in virtue of its essential character. The inspired
truthfulness of the prophet does not lie in the view which
he takes of natural phenomena, but in the relation in
which this partial conception stands to some spiritual
lesson. It is a noble and glorious task to follow into their
remotest results, and reduce to their simplest forms, the
laws which govern the world in relation to ourselves; but
this is not the work of the messenger of revelation. It is
enough that he should view nature as his contemporaries
view it, while at the same time he adopts exactly so much
of the popular belief as serves to illustrate and explain
his message. The “days” of creation, the “windows of
heaven,” the “steadfastness of the round world,” the “hand
of God,” and the like, are expressions which, while they
are intelligible to the simplest minds, perpetuate at the
same time great facts which the highest culture can
scarcely realize. No part of human knowledge is absolute,
except such as follows directly from the laws by which the
mind of man is limited; and probably it will be found that
elements of permanent truth lie hid in the various aspects
of nature preserved in the Bible, as in the doctrines of
the Apostles there are certainly traces of the anticipation
of wants which have scarcely yet been fully realized after
the course of ages.

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 65

Meanwhile the Interpretation of Scripture no less than
its true Completeness is being ever set forth
in the history of the Church. The Christian 7% Iiterpretation

yf Scripture out-
is not even outwardly alone in the endeavor pl dl a an
to gain the manifold lessons of revelation.
The same Providence who guided the composition of the
Bible, has also furnished a Commentary on it in the for-
tunes of mankind. And it will easily be seen that there
is a perfect analogy between the Church and the Scriptures
in their relation to the private Christian. When united
they complete the circle of his external defences; but if
they be separated, he is led either into superstition or into
doubt. Both contain and convey mediately the grace
necessary for his support, and yet only so far as the
Holy Spirit works with and through them. The out-
ward form in each case brings the essence within the
reach of man, and places within our grasp that which
is otherwise too subtle for our present senses. The enun-
ciation and the embodiment of truth are adapted to our
finite nature; and it is alike unreasonable to say that we
do not need a true Bible and to maintain that a definite
Christian society is unnecessary for the full unfolding of
the spiritual life.

Yet there are difficulties in detail which must be brought
before the individual judgment. Careless-
ness, we allow, has given currency to false
readings in the text of Scripture; but the
number and variety of the authorities which may be used
to correct them is not only unequalled but unapproached
in tlie range of ancient literature. The laws of criticism
are absolute, and the Christian may confide with implicit
reverence in their issues. Heresy, again, may draw its
doctrine from the Bible; but what does that show, except
that Seripture has many sides, which must be combined
and harmonized, and not severed and distorted according
to the bent of our private will? The laws of language,
as those of criticism, are absolute, and the Christian may

ΟἿ

The province of
criticism.

66 INSPIRATION, COMPLETENESS, AND

trust in them as the certain outward expression of the
deepest truths.

Nor can the existence of these final difficulties appear

strange and unnatural. We have no reason

Criticism — hal- =
lowed by a spiritual to conc] ude, from our knowledge of the whole
Bee character of God’s dealings, that He might
be expected to preserve ever inviolate what He has once
given. The world, which was at first good, is now full of
evil; man, who was at first blessed, has fallen under the
curse of sin; and such contingencies seem to be involved
necessarily in the idea of a finite existence. But a redemp-
tion has been wrought for both; and so too, on the histori-
eal side of our religion, an uncorrupted Bible lies before us,
if we patiently and candidly search for it, and a true per-
sonal interpretation may be gained by sincere and faithful
study. In both cases, however, the task 15 something more
than a merely mechanical or intellectual process. Who-
ever has watched attentively the workings of his own
mind, will feel that in criticism and philology there is still
room for the operation of that Spirit of God which is
promised to the Christian scholar. Variations may exist
on the one side, and ambiguities on the other, which dis-
appear when brought before the scrutiny of the spiritual
judgment.

It will be my object in the following Essay to determine
in what way the principles thus indicated
may be applied to the study of the Gospels;
to determine how far their origin and con-
tents fall in with the general order of Providence, and
suggest the presence of that deep and hidden wisdom in
which we have found the characteristic of Inspiration.
And if it can be shown that the Gospel sums up in the
record of the Incarnation all that was evolved of spiritual
import in the long discipline from the Captivity to the
Advent; if it can be shown that the time at which they
were written was at once most suited to their publication,
and yet least likely to have given birth to them; if it can

Summary of the
plan of the Essay.

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 6

be shown that they grew up as it were spontaneously in
the Church without effort and without design, and yet
have a distinct relation in their four-fold diversity to the
past and future wants of the Church; if it can be shown
that in the difference of letter there is a perfect unity of
spirit; that there is a special tendency and plan in the
writing of each Evangelist, arising out of the position
which he held in the Catholic Church ; that the varieties of
detail and the succession of incidents converge to one com-
mon point, and conduce to one common end; if it can be
shown that in particular parts the teaching of the different
Gospels may be combined into a whole of marvellous sym-
metry and completeness, — the residuum of difficulties and
alleged discrepancies will seem of little weight. We shall
see a noble view opened of the relation of the Gospel to
the former and future history of the world, and of the
Gospels to the Gospel itself. We shall feel that deep
sense of the continunl presence of the divine influence, and
that firm conviction of the unerring truthfulness of the
‘sacred writers, which can only be gained by a comprehen-
sive view of the complete subordination ‘of every part of
Scripture to the training of man and the realization of his
hopes. We shall then find nothing superfluous in the
repetitions of the Gospels, and nothing inconsistent in
their variety, any more than in the fresh groupings and
different prospects of some earthly scene. We shall un-
derstand, with the great master of Alexandria, that “every
word, if rightly viewed, effects a special purpose ;” for
revelation is not a vain thing for us ; it is our life.

CHAP PER sk

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

Αὐτομάτη ἣ γῆ καρποφορεῖ, πρῶτον χόρτον, εἶτα στάχυν, εἶτα πλήρης

σῖτος ἐν τῷ oTaxui. —ST. MARK iv. 28.

ΤῊΝ Bible is the oldest and truest vindication of the
dignity of history. When the Jewish Church
numbered the ancient records of their state
among the works of the prophets, they ac-
knowledged that insight and foresight are only varieties of
the same faculty, differing in their objects and not in their
essence. The present, if we could read it rightly, contains:
the past and future, though that which is real and abiding is
enveloped in a mass of confused details, so that it is visible
only to the eye of the true seer. This follows indeed from
the nature of the case; for truth in itself is absolutely one.
But though it is one in itself it can only be manifested
partially; and human history, in the highest sense, is the
record of its successive manifestations in the life of men
and man. In this respect History may be likened to the
eradual unveiling of some godlike figure. The imagina-
tion of the inspired artist can divine its perfect form
from the contemplation of the first fragment, but to the
common sight it passes slowly from stage to stage to the
fulness of its finished beauty. But-each part which is re-
vealed remains open forever. History is not only progres-
sive in its course, but also progressive in the form of its
teaching. All its records are held together by a real har-
mony, and instinct with one design. Each fresh convul-

The true idea of
History.

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 69

sion leaves the earth further advanced towards its final
purpose, though for the time it is covered with ruins.
And in this sense History is a nobler Biography, the tale
of a nobler life than man’s; for even if at present we can
but see it dimly, there appears to be a common life not
only in nations, but in the world, if the best conception of
life which we can form is that of activity combined with
organization, the permanence of the whole reconciled with
the change of the parts, a power of assimilation and a
power of progress.

Any real appreciation of Christianity, in its world-wide
relations, must rest upon some such view of
History as this. Christianity cannot be sep- J” coming of
arated from the past any more than from the 97 unan Mstory:;
future. If we may venture so to speak, it
Was not an accident or an after-thonght, but foreknown
“before the foundation of the world.” The Incarnation,
as it is seen now, is the central point of all History. And
more than this, if we regard the great issues of life, all
past history, as far as it has any permanent significance,
appears to be the preparation for that great mystery, and
all subsequent history the gradual appropriation of its
results. Isolated efforts were made in ancient times to
anticipate the truth for which men were waiting; and op-
posing powers sought to check its influence when it was
set forth in the lite of Christ; but premature development
and open antagonism served in the end to display the
supremacy and consolidate the power of revelation. The
Gospel was no sudden or solitary message. The legend of
Pallas is the very converse of the Nativity. Christianity
is, in one sense, as ancient as the Creation, resting on a
foundation wide as the world and old as time. Step by
step the ground-work of the Church was laid in the silent
depths, and at last, when all was now ready, it rose above
the earth, that all men might consciously combine to rear
the spiritual temple of the living God.

What is true of the subject of the Gospel is true, in a

70 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

less complete degree, of the record. The writings of the
Re ee New Testament are not a separate and οχ-
alah nae ceptional erowth, but the ripe fruit of minds
world-wide tran- Which had been matured through long ages
Be of various fortunes and manifold influences.
The very language in which they are written is In some
sense an epitome of ancient history. For it was the will
of Providence that the people whom He destined to be-
come the special depository of His revelations should
not only develop their individual character, but also, by:
contact with Egypt, Persia, Greece and Rome, assimilate
the foreign elements necessary to the perfection of their
work. The history of the Jews thus becomes, as it were,
the key to the history ef the world; and, by regarding the
various stages through which it passed, it is possible to
distinguish the various constituents which combined to
form the character of the Apostles and to prepare men for
their teaching.
It follows, as a necessary consequence, that the Old
Testament is itself the divine introduction
thisatining nv, tothe New. In the records of the religious
Tame mt life of the Jews, in the settling of worship,
| and the widening of hope, it is possible to
see the foreshadowings of apostolic doctrine, while the
vicissitudes of their national history exhibit most clearly
the growing purposes of God. A kingdom was reared on
the ruins of the theocracy. A hierarchy succeeded to the
place of the vanquished kingdom. When the Law of
Moses had lost its power under the complicated forces of
advancing civilization, it was quickened with a new life by
the zeal of the prophets; and the labors of priests and
scribes in after-time formulized what the prophets had
taught, that a conquered and tributary people might yet
find a definite support for their ancient belief.
But the records of the Old Testament deal only with
the central periods of the history of Israel, the times of
direct spiritual instruction, of the Law, and the Prophets;

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 71

and the last period of preparation which followed the
Captivity, like the first preparation in Egypt,
is too often regarded asa blank. Yet it is
in this especially that we must trace the (hint pnt
growth of that spirit which fixed the limits τρῶς mpertane ow
of Judaism and prepared the way for the ad-
vance of Christianity. Even in the absence of a continuous
literature the progress of the people is marked clearly by
definite events, fruitful in lessons on the course of national
life.

The mission of Ezra, “the second Moses” as he was
called, like that of the first, was followed by
a period of silence. It was needful that the js punun mess
law which was written on tables should be
realized in life. Meanwhile Persia had a work to accom-
plish for Israel no less than Egypt; and till this was done,
the wisdom of the East was not yet exhausted. After-
wards the work of Persia was transmitted, in due time, to
Greece and Rome; and the Jew gained suppleness and
strength from a literature and an empire as wide as his
“own faith. His faith also was tried by the most varied
alternations of fortune. At one time a line of native
heroes gave unity and independence to a subject race ; at
another, a foreign despot attempted to found a wide do-
minion upon the basis of the ancient creed. Hope fol-
lowed hope; and the last form of Jewish nationality was
shaped under the heavy pressure of critical vicissitudes.
The rivalry of the Samaritans, the rise of the Hellenistic
Church, the tyranny of the Syrian kings, the fall of the
Maccabeean dynasty, the subjection of Palestine to an
Idumzean dependent of Rome, disciplined the people for
the coming of Messiah.

And while the outward fortunes of the Jews after the
Captivity were thus varied with progressive ἜΠΟΣ
phases of one growing purpose, the changes τίονα, during tie

Persian and

partly to be sought
in the past-nblical

in their inner life were not less remarkable.
The century after Ezra was a time of silence, but it was

2 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

also a time of activity. New faculties were called out by
a new order of things. An age of reflection followed an
age of inspiration. The guidance of prophets had _ fol-
lowed the close of the theocracy; and in turn the prophets
were replaced by doctors (Sopherim). Schools of learn-
ing methodized the study of the law. The scribe and the
lawyer succeeded to the authority of the priest; and, in
the words of the Talmud, “the crown of learning was
nobler than that of empire.”? The definite collection of
Holy Scriptures marked, indeed, formally, as well as prac-
tically, the cessation of the immediate teaching of the
Spuit. The Canon, regarded as a whole, demanded inter-
pretation, and defined the range of learning. Vernacular
paraphrases of the sacred Writings satisfied the wants of
the congregation, and deeper investigations into their
meaning occupied the place of philosophy.
The conquest of the East by Alexander inter-
rupted the course of this national development, and intro-
duced a new element into Jewish life. The Hebrew and
the Hellenist stood side by side, at one time in strange
combination, and again in angry rivalry. It seemed as if —
a new Israel were rising on the banks of the Nile, not only
trained in the wisdom of Egypt, but courting its favor.
And even in Palestine there were clearer signs of the
coming close of the Jewish dispensation than the existence
of Sadducees or Herodians. The unity of the nation was
still symbolized in the Temple, but the Synagogue recog-
nized the existence of its component parts. The people
looked backward or forward for the manifestation of God’s
Power, but for the moment they rested on the ordinary
protection of His Providence. They were, no less than
before, God’s heritage, but they were also numbered among
the kingdoms of the earth.

It is in the great changes thus roughly sketched that we
must look for the true connection of the two Testaments.

Grecian periods.

1 Steinschneider, Jidische Literatur, p. 359 (Ersch u. Gruber, Encykl. 1850).

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. le
-

Unless they are taken into account, the very language and
form of the Apostolic writings must be unin- ΡΝ
telligible; for every page of the New Τθβ- γοῦν ἐμίαν ἐλονρῆν
tament bears witness to the depth and per- pals then perk
manence of the effects which they produced. Bi

Nor is there anything unnatural in regarding a period un-
marked by any direct impress of Divine interposition, as
cherishing in darkness germs of spiritual life to be quick-
ened in due time. On the contrary, the great epochs of
revelation are widely separated by ages, which serve at
once for harvest and seed-time. Such were
the intervals of silence before the call of
Abraham, during the Egyptian captivity, and before the
mission of Samuel; and it may not be a mere fancy if we
discover some analogy between the period of natural de-
velopment in the Jewish nation which preceded the birth
of our Lord, and that period of natural and silent growth

silently and

which ushered in His ministry. The inward conflict was
completed before the outward manifestation was begun.
Even when the Divine power was withdrawn from visible
operation, it was no less certainly engaged in bringing
within its control new powers, and opening new fields for
its future work. The end itself came only with the “ ful-
ness of time.”

Slowly, and almost imperceptibly, this measure of time
was filled. The interval between the Cap-
tivity and the birth of Christ was not only
fertile in critical combinations of different elements, but

slowly.

ample space was given for each to work its full effect. For
two centuries after the Captivity the Jews! grew up under
the dominion of Persia; for about a century and a halt
they were under Greek rulers; for a century they enjoyed
independence under the Hasmonean princes; and for

11 the word had been current, 1 the people of Israel — Judeans — Jews ,
should have preferred to say Judwans. the first name marking their providen-
In this way a threefold name would tial, the second their local, the third
significantly mark a threefold history: their sectarian position.

»
{

1: THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL,

more than half a century Rome was supreme through the
government of her instruments. Or, if we include the Cap-
tivity, it may be said that for three hundred years the
spirit of the East was dominant in Judea, to be followed,
for a like period, by the spirit of the West.!
What then, to define more clearly the out-
line which has been already drawn, were the
characteristic infiuences of these two great periods? How
can we best represent their effects upon the “ people of
God?” ?

The Captivity in Babylon, as has been already noticed,
is In some’ respects analogous to that in
Egypt, in its relation to the history of the
Jews. In both cases the Jews were brought
into contact with a nation whose material power was
scarcely greater than its intellectual culture. In both cases
important changes were wrought in the organization of the
people which clearly represented the influence of their
But the two exiles were distinguished essen-
The oppression in Egypt was

This follows from
a general survey of
the effects of

I. The Persian
period, as to

conquerors.
tially in their character.
manifested in the personal bondage of individuals; the
captivity in Babylon was the political subjection of the
nation, In Egypt.we can see a people trained to patient
endurance and ready submission among masters whose idol
was science, and whose watchword was changelessness. In
Persia we can see the same people exhausted by vain hopes,
and, lamenting a fallen kingdom, led to contemplate the
sublime truths of a spiritual world among teachers whose

Ezra’s und der Heiligherrschafi, Got-
tingen, 1852). The smaller work of
Jost (Allgemeine Geschichte, ἃ. 5. w.

1 The division of the periods corre-
sponds to that of the first two schools
into which the Hebrew writers are di-

vided. The age of the Soprerim began
with Ezra, and ended with Simon the
Just. The age of the Tanaim began
after the death of Simon, and extended
to the close of the secoud century.

2 For the history of the Jews during
the Persian period Ewald is by far the
most important authority (Geschichte

1832) isa valuable summary. Raphall’s
History of the Jews (vol. i. ii., Londen,
1856) contains much useful matter, but
in a very uncritical form. For the
Jater period Jost’s longer work is avail-
able. Herzfeld’s Geschichte des Volkes
Israel, τι. 8. w., 1 have not been able to
see.

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. Td
perception of the antagonism of good and evil, even amidst
the worst corruptions, seems to have been only less clear
than that of their Persian conquerors. The Jews came up
out of Egypt an entire people, bound together by common
descent and common sufferings; the voice of Sinai was still
sounding in their ears when they approached the borders of
Canaan; the miracles of release were but a prelude to mir-
acles of conquest. They returned from Babylon no longer
as a separate nation, but as a colony, to form the cen-
tral point of a religious commonwealth ; they returned to
hear the last words of prophecy from those who had guided
their course, and to recognize in the writings of the past the
abiding lessons of God; they returned as tributaries to a
foreign power, and yet with a freedom for hierarchical de-
velopment which hitherto had been denied them. The
revolution in their national hopes, in their spiritual posi-
tion, in their social organization, was distinct and critical.!

The return from Babylon was partial, and not general.
The people of Israel passed from Egypt, one ,
united tribe, to take possession of a promised
kingdom, and to assert their national inde-
pendence. From Persia only a small band
of exiles came back to the home of their
fathers, while the mass of their countrymen still lingered
in the land of their captivity, and were content to retain
their faith while they sacrificed their patriotism. Hence-
forth the Jews ceased to form one people in a political
sense, though they had found a spiritual bond which could
transcend all national differences. While they fought for
different masters, and even met face to face in adverse
lines, they could still serve one God with undivided

(a) National hopes.
The Jews by losing
their independence
gained a truer spir-
itual union and
higher hopes.

1 Outwardly the annals of the Jews
from the time of Nehemiah (3B. c. 445)
to the invasion of Alexander (B. C. 332)
are indeed brief. One evei.t only is
ο mentioned — the murder of his brother
by a high priest in the temple: Joseph.
AM, αν 7. 1.

But there are traces of

oppression on one side, and heroic en-
durance on the other: Hecat. ap. Jo-
seph. ec. Apion. 1. 22.

The chronological errors of the Rab-
bins, in consequence of this silence of
history, which introduce a difference
of 240 years, are nuted by Raphall, i. 98,

τ THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

worship. But however insignificant the returning exiles
may have been in numbers and wealth, yet the return was
necessary ; and from being the centre of a kingdom Jerusa-
jem became the centre of a creed. But the difference was
most significant. The growth of a Church succeeded to
the growth of a people, and the sympathies by which its
members were united grew wider, as the sources from
which they rose became more truly spiritual. In losing
their independence the Jews lost also something of the nar-
rowness of their first views.1. No longer needing the close
limits of Canaan to shut them off from foreign influences,
they were prepared to maintain their faith in whatever
land they visited. Deprived of their hereditary dominion,
they were led to look forward to a more glorious period of
power, when a Son of David should found an eternal and
boundless kingdom. Under the presence of foreign rule
they clung to the sure promises of their higher destiny ;
and, with higher hopes than they had ever realized before,
a few poor exiles went forth to conquer the world.?

When once the people was inspired with this new prin-
Wed. ciple of life, the prophetic work was ended.
tion, As a conse- Jt remained only to ponder over the teach-
quence of this the, ;
prophetic work ing of the old prophets, and to read their
has words in the light of a new faith. The
promises were already given, and only asuspension of crea-
tive energy was needed that it might be possible to con-
template with steady and undiverted eye the treasures of
the past. In this sense the Jews were stationary during
the Persian period; but stationary only so far as they
entered on no new ground, while they were busy in master-
ing every position in that which had been already occupied.
And, as if to prepare them for such a period of repose and
silence, the last words of Malachi pointed to no new prophet,

1 It cannot, however, be determined Peuple dIsrael, Ὁ. 121; a brilliant
when the court of the Gentiles was ad- sketch of Jewish history from Ewald’s
ded to the Temple. Ewald, iv. 197. point of view.

"Of, Renan, Etudes L’histoire du

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. TT

but to Elias himself as the herald of the last and great-
est crisis in their history. To some the very name of Mal-
achi — the Messenger' — seemed to announce a new epoch,
and the later tradition which identified him with Ezra was
only a bolder expression of the same idea.

But when the personal work of the prophet was finished,
the need of the collective prophetic teaching
was deeper than ever; and the warnings of
ancient history were then sought for most
earnestly, when the records which contained them were,
for the mass of the people, as sealed books.
tion which grew up in exile adopted the Aramaic dialect
(Chaldee), which had been already introduced into Pales-
tine by the Chaldean invaders, and thenceforth Hebrew
ceased to exist as the national language. But the want
and the difficulty mutually relieved each other. The provi-
dential change of language suggested a general limit within
which the voice of inspiration might be heard, as the fear-
ful chastisements of the captivity turned men’s minds to

the prophetic writ-
mgs were collected.

The genera-

the old Scriptures with a devotion unknown before.

1 Cf. Ewald, p. 201, n.

2 The history of the Jewish Canon is
necessarily obscure. The books of Mo-
ses appear to have been united under
the title of the Law from a very early
period (2 Kings xxii. 8; cf. Josh. xxiv.
26, 1 Sam. x. 25?); but though the
later prophets exhibit a familiar ac-
quaintance with the works of their pre-
decessors, there is no evidence to show
that the prophetic writings were either
formed into a definite collection, or
connected with the law before the ex-
ile. The earliest trace of such a col-
lection of the prophets (omitting the
questionable passage, Dan. ix. 2) occurs
in Ecclesiasticus (xlviii., xlix), where
the writings of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and
Ezekiel are mentioned in detail, and
‘*the memorial of the twelve prophets”
blessed. The book of Daniel seems
thus not to have been reckoned among
the prephets at that time, though from

the absence of authentic evidence it is
impossible to mark the successive steps
by which the present Canon was deter-
mined. Prescriptive usage, as in the
case of the New Testament, is the clear-
est witness of its early history, till the
persecution of Antiochus, like that of
Diocletian, definitely separated the holy
writings of the suffering Church from
its remaining literature. But the fact
that the Hebrew book of Sirach was
not admitted into the Palestinian Canon
is a sufficient proof that the distinction
existed practically long before; and it
is generally allowed that the contents
of the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagi-
ographa were determined by “ the great
Synagogue,” which, according to a
Jewish tradition, first added the books
of Proverbs, Canticles and Ecclesiastes
to the last division. Zunz, Die Gottes-
dienstlichen Vortrage der Juden, Berlin,
1832, p. 14, n. Ὁ. Cf. Kehl, §§ 156 ff
7*

18 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.
The cessation of prophecy and the formation of the
Canon were accompanied by other changes
in the personal life of the Jews, not less im-
portant than these, and closely connected
with them. The Prophets had spoken of a
“new Covenant,” and of an inward worship of the heart,
The position of the peo-
In exile, far from

Meanwhile reli-
gion assumed a
more personal char-
acter, and

with ever-increasing clearness.
ple helped them to accept the lesson.
the sanctuary, they had learnt, as never before, the power
of prayer+ The simple religion of Moses had become
impossible; and, on the other hand, contact with Persia,
which stands out from all ancient nations in the simplicity
of a spiritual worship, naturally led them to realize the
purity of their faith, and idolatry passed away forever
from among them. The removal of this peril
opened the way to a further extension of
their divine knowledge. The time was come
when they could contemplate without peril the contending
powers of an unseen world; and the doctrine of spirits of
good and evil took shape, not as a foreign accretion, but as
a seasonable development of their first faith.’

Outwardly, however, the great change in the Jewish
nation after the return was the predominance
of the hierarchical element in the state. But
it was a hierarchy of education, and not of
caste. The records and the institutions of
Judaism were regarded as the hallowing power, and not
the class to whom the administration of them was commit-
ted. In the absence of direct prophetic teaching public
worship became the witness of God’s presence, and the

the view.of the spi-
ritual world was
widened.

The famous tradition of the restoration
of the lost books by Ezra is but an ex-
aggerated version of the work of col-
lection which really dates from him.
4 Ezra xiv. Iren. adv. Har. iii. 21, 2
(25), ete.

The existence of the great Synagogue
itself has been called in question on

insufficient grounds. Cf. Jost, Gesch.
i. 438-50; Ewald, iv. 191; and p 54,n. 1.

1 Ewald, iv. 80; and on the removal
of the ark, p. 197, n. The great assem-
bly introduced daily prayers: Zunz, a.
a.O.p.3l. Etheridge, Hebrew Litera-
ture, Ὁ. 93 ff. ;

2 Cf. Ewald, iv. 207 f.

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL, 79

requirements of the Law were extended with scrupulous
exactness to the details of private life. Two important
- changes in ritual signalized the new order of things. The
“dispersion” was recognized by the creation of syna-
gogues:' the close of the prophetic era by the stated read-
ing of the Law.?
results flowed, which exercised an important influence upon
the character of the people.
and excessive zeal which led men to limit
and overlay the freedom of daily conduct by
religious observances, tended to invest a select body of
teachers with almost absolute power. Thus the “scribes”
soon rose above the priests, and with them
tradition supplied the place of literature.
The same result was further strengthened by
the services of the Synagogue. The reading of the sacred
text was necessarily attended by a vernacular paraphrase
(Targum), oral, indeed, yet formed according to strict
rules, and handed down in regular succession.2 Thus
schools of biblical learning grew up around the synagogues, .
and the members of these passed naturally into the great
council of the nation (συνέδριον, γερουσία), or into the provin-
cial assemblies which were framed upon the same model.‘

From these necessary innovations other

The anxious
the growing regard
to the Law, and

the character of the
service ofthe Syna-
goyue.

1 The exact date of the institution
of synagogues cannot be determined.
Possibly Ps. lxxivy.8 may be a refer-
ence to them, and in that case their
existence shortly after the return would
be established; and this is on many
grounds the most reasonable belief.

The importaiice of the institution as
marking the new stage of tradition is
recognized in the use of the Synagogue
(as opposed to Church) for the whole
outward constitution of Judaism (Lut-
terbeck, Die Neutestamentlichen Lehr-
begriffe, Mainz, 1852, 1. 159).

2 The traces of the public reading of
the Law are as obscure as those of the
existence of a primitive Canon. The
custom was attributed in part to Moses,
and having existed partially at least

under the kings, was established on a
firm basis by Ezra. Lessons from the
prophets were added in the time of the
Maccabees; and at a much later period
passages from the Hagiographa were
introduced into special services of the
Babylonian Synagogue. Zunz,a.a. O.,
pp- 3—7.

3 Zunz. a. a. O. pp. 7, 8. Cf. Chap.
αι (ii) (B).

4The Sanhedrin probably existed
from the time of the return, and seems
to have been formed on the model of
the Mosaic council (Numb. xi. 16).
During the Persian period the atten-
tion of its members would be naturally
turned to internal affairs; and Ewald’s
conjecture (iv. 191) seems most just that
the traditions of ‘the great assembly”

80 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

But the very zeal with which the people sought to fulfil
the Law, contained the germ of that noxious
growth by which it was finally overpowered.
For there was a darker side to the prospects
of the Jews though their old perils were conquered. Not
only was the integrity of their national character endan-
gered, but they were exposed to the subtle temptation of
substituting formulas for life. Hence arose the necessary
reactions of dogmatism and skepticism ; hope strengthened
into affirmation, doubt descending to denial. Meanwhile
the fresh joy of life was sinking under the pressure of su-
perstition; and as the saddest symbol of the direction in
which they were turning, the people of God shrank from
naming Him who was their strength.!

The scanty remains of the literature? which may be re-
ferred to the Persian period reflect in frag-
mentary images the characteristic features
which have been noticed in it. The latest
writings which were received into the Hebrew Canon are
rather results of the former teaching of the nation by the
Law and the Prophets than new elements in its progress.
They were essentially Holy Writings (ἁγιόγραφα, Hethu-
vim), and not fundamental or constructive, the expression .
and not the spring of a Divine life. In the books of Chron-
‘cles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, it is possible to trace a special
purpose in the prominence given to ritual observances. In
Esther it might seem that we have a simply human narrative,

The dangers of
the period.

The general char-
acter impressed on
the Literature, and

really refer tothe first Sanhedrin. The Geschichte andert (Hcbraer; Israel; Ju-

greater political activity of the council
in the Grecian period is a sufficient
cause for the adoption of the Greek
title and the separation of the two
councils. The earliest allusion to the
Sanhedrin has been found in a frag-
ment of Hecatzus (Joseph. ¢. Apion.
i. 22) referring to c. B. c. 312 (Raphall,
Hist. of Jews, i. p. 86, fr. Frankel’s
Monatschrifi, Nov. 1851, p 48).

1 Wie der Volksname sich mit jeder
der drei grossen Wendungen dieser

dier) und jeder als kurzes Merkmal des
ganzen Wesens der besondern Wen-
dung gelten kann, ebenso und noch
mehr der Name Gottes; aber nichts ist
bezeicbnender als dass auf dem ein-
fachen aber hocherhabenen Jahve der
prachtvolle Jahve der Heere mit dem
sehr frei gebrauchten Jahve, auf diesen
endlichein ... . folgt. Ewald, iv. 224.

2 Though the remains of the literature
are small, the wise man complains of
the multitude of books. Eccles. xii. 12.

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 51

were it not for that under-current of faith which refers all
to the Providence of Him whose name is never mentioned.
The later Psalms are a softened echo of the strains of
David, and not new songs; hymns for the ordinary service
of the Temple, and not deep searchings of the heart. In
Ecclesiastes, again, the sublime questionings of Job «pass
into rhetorical arguments, directed to calm the bitterness
of outward suffering rather than to fathom the deep rid-
dles of humanity.’

The spirit of the period was rightly appreciated by those
who ruled it, and finds its true expression in
the three principles which are attributed to
the men of “the Great Assembly :” “ Be dis-
creet in judging; train up many scholars; make a hedge
around the Law.”? The difficulties of social and national
life, the conflicting interests of ruler and subject, the anx-
ious effort to realize in practice the integrity of state and
citizen, when both were imperilled by foreign supremacy,
are attested by the first command, which could never have
occupied such a place in a land of settled government and
certain independence. The second command. points to
the true source of strength in an age of transition and con-
flict. The evils of doubt and dissension are best removed
by the extended knowledge of the principles embodied in
the state. In proportion as the different classes of the
Jewish people were instructed in the writings of Moses and
the prophets, priestly usurpation on the one hand, and
popular defection on the other, became impossible. The
third command alone contains the warning of the coming
The fence was necessary, because the Law was not

the traditional esti-
mate of the time.

end.

1 Ewald places the composition of
Baruch and Tobit at the close of the
Persian period (pp. 230, 233), but they
seem to belong to a later time.

2 Aboth, i. 1. Cf. Ewald, iv. 219.
Raphall, Hist. of Jews, i. 118 ff., where
a somewhat different explanation of the
three commands is quoted from Fran-
kel’s Monatschrift, vi.

The Pirke Aboth has been published
with a German translation and com-
mentary by Dr. A. Adler, Fiirth, 1851
(2 Pts.), and also by R. Young, Edinb.
1852. It is the most important record
of Jewish thought during the whole
period, and the short maxims which it
contains, if written at length, are his«
tory

82 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

only fixed, but dying. Religion already seemed capable of
being defined by rule; duty had ceased to be infinite.
Stern uprightness, devotion to the law, scrupulous ritual-
ism, — all springing from a heroic faith and tending to a life-
less superstition, — such were the characteristics of the city
which on the frontier of the East awaited with undaunted
courage the approach of the conquering hosts of Alexander.
Inwardly as well as outwardly the Jewish nation was at
» The Grecian vat time prepared to support the antagon-
period. ism of Greece. The people had comprehen-
The Jews were pre- : .
pared for the con ed their relation to the world, and the bold
MCW GE exnvession of the national faith was the
motto of the last teacher of the great assembly. Simon
the Just said, “The world ( Olam) hangs on three things:
the law, worship,’ the practice of philanthropy.”? And
it was by the strength of this faith that Jerusalem stood
unshaken when Tyre fell.’ In addition to the lively con-
sciousness of a spiritual mission yet to be fulfilled, the Jews
found ready defences against the special dangers which
were involved in Grecian rule. The belief in the abso-
lute unity of God was so firm that the subtlest form of
polytheistic worship could no longer endanger its integrity.
The theocratic aspect of nature was so universal that the
refinements of pantheism could scarcely make their charms
felt. Ritualism was so deeply inwrought into common
life that the teaching of philosophy could at best only gain
a hearing in the schools. The work of the Eastern world
in training a chosen people was perfected; and it was re-
served for Greece to bring the bold teaching of reason and
nature into contact with the rigid forms of truth which
constituted the centre of the old Dispensation, as it re-
mained for Rome in after time to present the image of a

1 Avodah, i. e. service, worship, work. —Jife in its fullest development — rests
The old commentators agree in refer- on (1) Doctrine, that is spiritual re-
ring it here to the Temple worship of ligion; on (2) the service of God, that
sacrifice. is practical religion; on (3) love, as the

2 Aboth, ἃ. Adler gives a generalin- spring of action.
terpretation to the maxim. The world 3 Ewald, p. 250.

THE PREPARATION FORK THE GOSPEL. §3

kingdom of the world raised upon the foundation of civil
law and social freedom, in significant contrast with that
kingdom of God, of which the children of the prophets
failed to recognize the extent and comprehensiveness.

The introduction of this new element into Jewish life
brings with it, in part at least, a change of
scene. The storm of conquest and the vision Renciocssaet Mie
of empire passed away, but the true work of “πα
Alexander was perpetuated in the city which he chose to
bear his name; and which remains after two thousand
years the common portal of the East and West. Greek,
Roman, Byzantine, Arab, ruled in turn, but Alexandria
retained under every dynasty that same catholic character
which its founder symbolized by placing the temple of Isis
side by side with the temples of the gods of Greece.
Alexander prepared a stage in which ample scope and op-
portunity was given for every combination of thought and
feeling; and men were found to occupy it. The teaching
of Philo, Origen, and Plotinus was able to leave its individ-
ual impress on the three greatest forms of religious faith.

A large colony of Jews formed a part of the original
population of the new city; and, after more
‘than a thousand years, the descendants of
“Pharaoh’s bondmen” returned to the land
of their bondage. A second time, according to the old
conceit, Israel was preparing to spoil Egypt, now of her
intellectual as before of her spiritual heritage, while the
colony grew up in the enjoyment of perfect freedom, under
the continued influence of the Greek language and litera-
ture. For some time the mutual influence of the Churches
of Jerusalem and Alexandria was intimate and powerful.
Afterwards, from political and social causes, the separation
grew wider, till the foundation of the temple at Leontopo-
lis completed the schism. Yet even thus the ancient inter-
course was not broken off. No beacon-fires announced in
Egypt the due time of celebrating the new moons,’ as

A new centre of
Judaism.

1 Arrian, iii. 1. 2 Cf. Mishna, Rosh Hash. ii. 234.

84 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

determined by the Sanhedrin, but still the great body of
the Alexandrine Jews paid the tribute to the Temple.
Jerusalem was still regarded as their mother-city ; 1 and
when the famous synagogue at Alexandria was destroyed
in the reign of Trajan, it was said that “the glory of Israel
was extinguished.” From this time Judaism acknowledged
another centre; and three great streams flowed from Alex-
andria, Babylon and Jerusalem, which carried the name
and faith of the God of Israel through Africa, Asia, and
Europe.

The return from Persia was in itself, as has been shown
already, the beginning and the preparation of a dispersion :
the Greek invasion opened the way to its fulfilment, and
Greek rule neutralized the evils by which it was attended.

The liberal policy of Alexander towards the Jews was

imitated by his successors, and the progress
once politcal ad Of their dispersion was consequently acceler-

ated Ptolemy, it is said, placed Jewish
soldiers in occupation of Egyptian and African strong-
holds, in addition to those whom he carried with him after
his conquest of Jerusalem, and more particularly founded
the Jewish colony at Cyrene. Seleucus Nicator about
the same time adinitted Jews to the full citizenship of the
numerous towns which he founded throughout Asia Minor
and Syria, and Antioch became the seat of an important
Jewish settlement. Ata later period, Antiochus the Great
transferred two thousand Jewish families from Babylon
and Mesopotamia to the disturbed districts of Lydia and
Phrygia to secure their loyalty. On the shores of the
Caspian and in the highlands of Armenia the Jews increased
in number and influence under the protection of the Par-
thian dynasty. From Egypt they penetrated into Abys-
sinia, and probably into Arabia; and at last — to antici-
pate one detail —the work of dispersion was completed

1 Philo, 6, Flace. § 7. schrift. Dec. 1858. Merivale, Romans
2 Cf. Ewald, pp. 267 ff; Raphall, ii. wnder the Empire, iii. 361 ff.
64 ff., who quotes Frankel, Jonat-

4“
THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 85

‘when Pompey carried with him to Rome a train of Jewish
captives.

Meanwhile the influence of commerce was not less pow-
erful than the constraint of policy in scatter-
ing the Jews wherever civilization had pene-
trated. The power of the Greek arms and the Greek lan-
guage laid open new paths on every side, and Jews followed
the conquerors not only as soldiers but as merchants.
Energy characterized their efforts in the one case no less
than fidelity in the other, and the wealth which rewarded
their industry secured them independence and respect.
But the tendency of this dispersion of commerce was more
perilous than the dispersion of war. The forces which
were sufficient to support the people in their first conflict
were weakened by subdivision. Everywhere they were
mingled with the heathen population, and yet they were
doubly isolated; for as their religion divided them from
their follow-citizens, so the ties of their common nationality
were weakened by foreign habits. The political divisions
which followed the captivity were multiplied a thousand-
fold, and Judzea itself was gradually yielding to the influ-
ence of Greece when the precipitate fury of a persecutor
finally concentrated the spirit of the people in absolute
and heroic devotion to the law of Moses.
The persecution of Antiochus averted the
great outward peril by which the Jewish peo-
ple were threatened from the West. Sympathy was quick-
ened throughout the whole body, and directed to one centre.
The dispersion was reconciled with a real unity when
the Law was felt to supply the want of a fatherland. The
lesson which was first taught at the return was completed ;
and the Church finally assumed the place of the nation.

The independence, not only popular but personal, which
was in the end the result of the Greek con-
quest, deeply affected the whole internal con- Pay ies ἣν
dition of Palestine. The law became the
vital centre of a wide-spread Church, but the Church

commercial,

Reconciled witha
true unity.

Ὁ

86 THE PREPARATION FOR’ THE GOSPEL.

itself was no longer absolutely one. Distinct sects were

formed when the example of Greece had pre-
(a) The Jews in pared ἃ new way to speculation; and ac-
ἐπ τὴ τοι ae cording to tradition terrible portents pre-
the rise of sects, ceded the change. After the death of Simon

the Just, it is said, the scape-goat no longer
perished among the rocks, but escaped into the wilder-
ness. The western light of the golden candlestick, which
had always burned brightly, was now sometimes extin-
guished. The fire upon the altar languished. The bles-
sing upon the show-bread ceased.’ Antigonus of Socho,
the first among the doctors who bears a Greek name,?
marks the beginning of this era, and tradition describes —
him as the first of the Tanaim. The motto in which his
doctrine is summed up is, as it were, an epitome of the
coming controversy, combining the antithetical principles
which were afterwards dissevered. “Be ye not as ser-
vants who serve their Lord for the sake of a reward, but
as servants who serve their Lord without looking for a
reward ; and let the fear of Heaven be upon you.”? The
first clause offers a protest against the unworthy supersti-
tion of a ceremonial righteousness; the second reproves
that proud confidence in self which follows on the first lib-
eration from legal service. The two distinct truths which
lay at the root of Pharisaism and Sadduceism are recog-
nized together, and each excludes the exaggeration of the
other. The historical position assigned to Antigonus is in
exact harmony with his teaching. He is said to have been
the scholar of Simon the Just, the last member of the great
Synagogue, and the master of Sadoc and Boethus, the
founders of Jewish rationalism.t The teacher now rises
from the Church. Hitherto there had been no schools of

1 Prideaux, Connewxion, ii. 2, fr. Jerus. 4 The story (from the Aboth of R. Na-
Talm. than) is given by Raphall, i. 161. Soc-
2 Zunz, p. 36. rates, it will be remembered, numbered

3 Aboth, 3. This is said (Adler, p. 82) both Antisthenes and Aristippus among
to ke the first instance of the use of his scholars.
heaven for God.

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 87
faith, no famous men; but at length individual feeling
found its peculiar expression no less in thought than in
action.

Sadduexism was the first and boldest expression of the
growing passion for freedom. But the type
of freedom was sought in Greece, corrupted by
luxury and skepticism, and not in the prophetic
pictures of the spiritual Israel. After the first assertion of
man’s absolute independence, a doctrine tvhich contained
implicitly all the subsequent tenets of the school, the influ-
ence of the Sadducees on Judaism was purely negative.
Their existence was a protest against the sufficiency of the
Pharisaic system; but they offered nothing to replace it.

While some sought freedom, others, as is always the case,
strove to exclude the possibility of its opera-
tion. The rise of Sadduceism was coincident
with a reiiction in favor of tradition. The
Pharisees claimed to possess exclusively the full perfection
of the Law; and though the spirit by which the ancient writ-
ings were dictated passed away, the form in which they were
cast still moulded the oral supplements’ which were added
to complete them. The Halaka and the Zlaggada—the
Rule and the Word —represented in their general scope
the Law and the Prophets; and the primary Jidrash
(Interpretation) united precept and exhortation at once
with one another and with Holy Scripture.? But no claim

Sadducees ¢ free-
dom),

Pharisees (ritual-
ésni).

Cf. note at the end of the

1 The best authorities for early He-
brew literature are: Zunz’s Gottesd.
Vortr. d. Juden, already quoted, which
stands alone for critical accuracy and
completeness within its peculiar range;
Steinschneider’s article Judische Liter-
atur, in Ersch and Gruber’s Encyclo-
peedie (which has been revised and pub-
lished in English by the author); Eth-
ridge’s Hebrew Literature, London,
1855, a very unpretending and useful
summary. Ilirschfeld’s Geist der Tal-
mudischen Auslegung der Bibel, Berlin,
1840, is very diffuse and deficient in

clearness.
chapter.

2 As these words are of frequent oc-
currence, it may be well to trace their
meaning once for all,

(1) The general word for Biblical in-
terpretation in its widest (cf.
Aben Ezra ap. Buxt?. s. v.) is Midrash
(fr. darash, to investigate and inter-

sense

pret). Hence also an exposition or al-
legorical interpretation is called Da-
rash (the result of inquiry): the teacher
generally Doresh, Darshan (interpre

ter); and the school baith hammidrash.

FOR THE GOSPEL.

88 THE PREPARATION

was made to original divine legislation. It was said that
an oral Law had been given on Sinai, and that this which
had been handed down in due succession from the time of
Moses, when explained by the sayings of the great teachers,
constituted the necessary supplement to the written Law,
and completed a perfect code of life, of equal and paramount
authority in allits parts. It was the work of the Sopherim to
collect, of the Tanaim to arrange the substance of this oral
Law. Nor was this done hastily. The first formal classi-
fication of the contents of the Torah shebeal Peh—the
Law that is upon the li —is attributed to Hillel; and the
six Orders (Sedarim) which he distinguished formed the
basis of the work of Akiva and Jehuda, when at length, at

the end of the second century, the Mishna

the repetition

of the Law — was committed to writing.!

The word occurs 2 Chron. xiii. 22;
xxiv. 27. Gesenius gives fo rub as the
radical meaning of the verb: cf. Ges.
Thes. 8 v.

(2) The practical precept is Halaka, a
step, a rule, from halak, to go, hence to
spend one’s life, to live. Vhe compari-
son of derek (via, vita, cultus) shows
clearly how a step would naturally ex-
press a detached principle of life. The
cognate form halikah (only in pl.) oc-
curs trop. Prov. xxxi. 27.

(8) The narrative, extending from the
legend to the homily, is Haggada, Ag-
gada, from nagad, Hiph. Higgid, to
tell, relate.

Hirschfeld (Der Geist der Talmud.
Auslegung, p. 13) gives a different, and,
I think, an erroneous, explanation of
the words: halaukah, iteratio, yon ha-
lak, das Nachgehen, Folgen einer Vor-
schrift, Mithalten, und ‘‘der Varthei

sein.” Haggadah, dicta, sermones,
von nagad sprechen, erzahlen, meinen,
— Meinung.

1 The precepts of this oral law, in
allusion to their supposed source, were
called halacoth leMosheh meSinai (pre-
cepts of Moses from Sinai). This was
the original kabbala (tradition), a name
applied to the writings of the prophets

(Steinschn. ]. 6. p. 351). For centuries
this law was preserved by memory or
in secret rolls (megillath setharim). At
the end of the second century, when
the consequences of the defeat of Bar-
kokeba threatened the utter dismember-
ment of the Jewish nation, it was com-
mitted to writing by R. Jehuda (7191
A. C.), and, being embodied with other
materials, in six Sedarim (orders) under
the name of the Mishna (shanah, to
double, repeat; the word mishneh oc-
curs for a copy (of the law), Deut. xvii.
18; Josh. viii. 32), has remained the
central point of all later tradition.
Round the Sedarim of the Mishna a
complement of discussions (Gemara ;
Gamar, to complete) was gradually
formed, and the whole was completed
at Babylon in 498 a.c. The study of.
the Mishna and Gemara was properly
called Talmud (lomad, to teach), and
this name was applied to the works
themselves. A second Gemara(extend-
ing to four of the six orders) was fo1med
in Palestine, about the end of the fourth
century ; and this, in combination with
a text of the Mishna, slightly differing
from the Babylonian, forms the Jeru
salem Talmud.

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. RQ

The popular influence of this secondary Law is every-
where visible in the Gospels. It is absolutely
authoritative, and yet absolutely definite.
The tradition of the elders claims the obedi-
ence of the faithful; and “to teach with authority” — with

The influence of
tradition.

independent power—is contrasted with the teaching of
the βου] θα.
marks a crisis of religious feeling.

But in itself the recognition of such a code
As long as the charter
of faith is felt to consist in living principles, capable of
being clothed in ever-varying forms, no change can render
it obsolete or inadequate. If, however, its terms are once
fixed by some temporary interpretation, at the first revolu-
tion of thought or position it is found antiquated and
insufficient, and that help is sought from tradition which
really can be found only in the vitality of the original Law.
To invoke tradition as an independent authority is to
proclaim that the first Law is dead.

Between the false freedom of the Sadducee and the
ritualism of the Pharisee a third course lay
open. The Essenes sought rest in a mystic
asceticism Which promised freedom by the
conquest of sense, and true worship in the substitution of
the spiritual for the material.
every age, they began by asserting the sovereignty of God

Essenes (asceti-
cism).

Like similar reformers in

to the exclusion of man’s freedom.’ Jews by race, they

1 R. Eliezer boasted that he had never
said anything which he had not heard
from his teacher. (Steinschneider, a. a.
O. 364.)

2The relation in which the three
parties stand to another is a suffi-
cient proof that it is unnecessary to
seek the origin of the Essenes in any
foreign society. The triple tendency
ever exists in men, and in times of
strong religious feeling will find an
outward expression, in each case par-
tial and exaggerated, and approaching
more ΟΥ̓ 658 closely to the correspond-
ing developments of other periods.

The Palestinian origin of the Essenes
is rightly asserted by Hilgenfeld, Die
Jud. Apok. 245 ff. Alexandrine and
Pythagorean influences may have modi-
fied the details of the society in the
course of time; but the resemblance of
the Essenes, Therapeute, and Neo-
Pythagoreans, are explicable on other
grounds.

The derivation of the name
certain. Many deduce it from asa, to
heal. Hilgenteld proposes Hazin, Ho-
zim, seers, Which is supported by Sui
das s. ν.

3 Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 5, 9.

is un-

fie “

“5 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.
found their chief bond of union in mutual love, as members —
of a society rather than citizens of a nation.’ The institution
of celibacy and the community of goods reduced the rela-
tions of their domestic life to the simplest form ; but each
detail assumed something of the solemnity of worship.
Though ascetics, they did not wholly fly from the business
and society of men, but, living in scattered communities,
they offered a public testimony to truth, justice, and purity.”
At the same time, by varied fastings and lustrations, and by
the study of the sacred books,’ they aspired towards a closer
communion with the unseen world, and claimed to retain
among them the gift of prophecy; and “it is rarely,”
Josephus adds, “that they are found to err in their predic-
tions.” ὦ

The school of the Essenes, however different in its final
shape from that of the Pharisees, yet sprang
from the same causes. <A feeling of distrust
in life, a faithless unwillingness to tread in
the old paths, a craving after the protection
of astern discipline, at the same time a zeal
prepared for any sacrifice, found satisfaction in the minute-
ness of an oral law, or in the self-devotion of a religious
rule?

The Pharisees
and Essenes con-
nected by an ana-
cous legalism, which
appears in

1 Joseph. Bell. Jud. ii. 8; ([Hippol.]
Philos. ix. 18 ff.). Cf. Antiq. xviii. 2;
xv. 10, 4. Philo, Quod omnis probus
liber, §§ 12 f.; Apol. ἔν. ἂρ. Euseb. Prep.
Εν στ, 20; Plin ἘΠ. Nave vel: Lhe
first passage contains the authorities
for what I have stated, unless a direct
reference be given.

2 Hilgenfeld (a. a. O. p. 259 anm.)
seems to give rightly the sense of Jo-
seph. B. J. ii. 8, 4: ‘“‘ They have not one
city, but many dwell together in each
‘of their communities]? (as below ἐν
ἑκάστῃ πόλει τοῦ τάγματος). The
words thus become consistent with
those of Philo and Pliny; but the read-
ing in Hippolytus, μετοικοῦσι, om. τοῦ
τάγματος is more favorable to the com-
mon reading. Some Essenes even re-

garded marriage as a duty (Joseph. B.
Js 1.8, he):

3 Βίβλοις iepais.... καὶ προφητῶν
ἀποφδϑέγμασιν. The τὰ τῶν παλαίων
συγγράμματα (§ 6) seem to have in-
cluded more than the books of Scrip-
ture. (Cf. Hippol. ix. 22.) The Essenes
had also private books: τὰ τῆς αἱρέσεως
βιβλία (5 7).

4 He quotes three examples: Antiq.
Χχυ Nos Bell Jud 1.138; ΘΠ 7.9

5 The Essenes “‘reverenced the Law-
giver next to God,” and their ob-
servance of the Sabbath was most seru-
pulous (Joseph. 1. ¢.). They offered
sacrifices (ϑυσίας ἐπιτελοῦσι) also ;
but not at Jerusalem (Joseph. Antiq.
Xvili. 2). Philo, however, sas (p. 457
M.), ϑεραπευταὶ ϑεοῦ γεγόνασιν ov
ζῶα καταϑύοντες......

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 91

The Book of Ecclesiasticus, the sole relic of the Palestinian
literature during the Greek supremacy, is
marked by the traces of this anxious legal- Pevtssissticus, and
ism.’ Life appears imprisoned in endless
rules, and the teacher strives to restore its cheer t@inaas.
Subjection and humility are among the first virtues.’
Knowledge is hidden in proverbs and confined in schools.
To unriddle dark sayings is the duty of the wise man,
though it be “a wearisome labor of the mind.” He whio
“sees aman of understanding will get betimes unto him,
and wear the steps of his door.”® The renown of the scribe
is of all the most brilliant and the most enduring.? To give
glory to the priest is coupled with the showing fear
towards God.

The sayings of the later doctors are still more impressed
with the spirit of dependence. The stored
mind of the teacher is the source of wisdom, fe rediiontaur
and hope seems surest when it can be referred
to old belief.° “Jose, the son of Joezer, of Zereda, said:
Let thine house be the gathering-place of the wise. Dust
thyself with the dust of their feet; and drink their words
as a thirsty man.” “Joshua, the son of Perachja.... said:
Get for thyself a teacher; win for thyself a companion.”
.... “Abtalion said: Ye wise men, be careful in your
discourse, lest ye be ..... cast into a place of bitter
waters, and the scholars who come after you drink of them
and die.” .... “Hillel said: He who will make himself
a great name, loses his name; he who increases not,

1 There can, I think, be no reasona- 3 Ecclus. xiii. 2, 6; vi. 35.
ble doubt that the translation was made f
6. 130 B. C., and that consequently the 4 Ecclus. XXXvVili, 24; XXXIX. 11.
Hebrew original was written about 180 With this compare the corresponding
Ρ. c. Itseems probable that old mate- praise of the Law: xxiv. 23—29.
rials were included in the original book,
but I see nothing which may not be of
purely Palestinian origin. Cf. Ewald,
pp. 298 ff.

2 Ecclus. iv. 7; viii. 1, 8, 14; ix. 13;
xiii. 2. 6 Aboth, 4, 6, 11.

5 Ecclus. vii. 29—31. At the same time
the writer takes a wider view than com-
mon of the extent of God’s providence:
xviii. 19.

92 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

decreases; he who learns not, is worthy of death; and he
who makes use of the Crown [of the law for his own end]
is lost.”' “Shammai said: Make thy doctrine sure. Speak
little and do much.” ...... “Gamaliel said: Make to thyself
a teacher. Relinquish doubtful points; and give not tithes
often according to conjecture [but with strict accuracy ].”
For a time, however, the resuscitation of the national
spirit supplied the loss of the ancient spirit of
ii. The Hasmo- the prophets. The Maccaban struggles,

nean supremacy.

iad ee ard which averted the danger of a general
and writing. assimilation of the people to their Grecian

rulers, at the same time gave real life to the
study of Scripture, and called out new forms of thought
and writing. Hitherto the Law had concentrated upon
itself the affection and hope of the Jews. Since the return
they had been content to find in this the pledge and
foundation of their national stability, anticipating a future
which should only confirm and complete the character of
the present. But now again, in the heat of contest and
under the immediate consciousness of divine help, they felt
that the end could not be consummated in a mere “judg-
ment of the heathen,” but fixed their eyes again upon the
faded image of Messiah, and saw their fullest hope only
through the strife and trials which should accompany His
advent. In the moment of victory they knew that its issue
was transient. The temporal glory of a conqueror was
insufficient to satisfy the hopes of the nation, and Simon
was appointed “ruler and high-priest forever until there
arose a faithful prophet.”? A corresponding change passed
over their literature. The last echo of the prophets passed
away in the Book of Baruch, the writer of which, after
confession and reproof, describes in the magnificent imagery
of Isaiah the future triumphs of Jerusalem.2 But now

1 Aboth, 13, according to the transla- Yet it is προφήτης, not & προφήτης

tion of Adler: the Latin version of (John i. 21).
Surenhusius cannot be correct. 3 It is extremely difficult to determine
21 Mace. xiv. 41. Cf. iv. 46; ix 27. the date of the Book of Baruch. Possi-

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 93

Revelation succeeded to the place of Prophecy. It seemed
that the time was come when the veil might be raised from
the counsels of God; and the seer pointed to all things
working together for the immediate and final crisis.2
In addition to the “ Revelations” of Daniel,’ two Jewish
Apocalypses still remain, the Book of Henoch
and the so-called fourth Book of Esdras,
which show with singular clearness in what
way the writings of Daniel served as the foundation for
later dreams. Both exist only in translations, but other-
Wise, as it appears, with few deviations from their original
form. The former is evidently of Eastern, and probably
of Palestinian origin, while the latter with equal certainty

a. Apocalypses.
Tlenoch.
4 Esdras,

may be ascribed to Egypt.

bly it was written shortly before or after
the war of liberation; but on some
accountsI should prefer an earlier date.
The first part (i.—iii. 8) is evidently de-
rived from a Hebrew original; and the
Greek translator of this part probably
added the conclusion (iii. 9—end).

1 A revelation (ἀποικάλυψι5). withits
specific purpose, its artificial plan, its
symbolic imagery, its angelic ministra-
tions, possessing at once the unity of a
poem and the gorgeousness of a dream,
is in itself the last step in the develop-
ment of prophecy. It is also the most
attractive form in which hope can be
offered to a people which has learnt to
feel even in the deepest afflictions that
they form the turning-point of the
world’s history. But revelation differs
from prophecy not only in the details
of composition, but also in the point
from which it contemplates the future,
or rather the eternal. The Seer takes
his stand in the future rather than inthe
present; and while the Pi ophet seizes on
the prominent e!ements of good and evil
which he sees around him, as seeds of
fhe great ‘“‘age to come,” the Seer is
filled first with visions of ‘the Jast
days,” and so passes from those to the
trials of his time. In prophecy the

Both contain numerous data

divine and human—intuitive pre-
science and fragmentary utterance —
are interwoven in one marvellous web.
In ‘‘ revelation”? the two elements can
be contemplated separately, each in its
most active vigor, distinet predictions
and elaborate art. As a natural conse-
quence, ‘“‘ revelation” invites imitation
as well by its artificiality as by its de-
finiteness: its form is human, and its
subject-matter limited and uniform.
And thus, while few have ventured to
affect the style of the ancient prophets,
‘“« Apocalypses”’ have rarely been want-
ing to embody the popular belief of
those enthusiasts who, in all ages, ante-
date the final judgment of the world,
and see in passing events nothing but
certain signs of its near approach.

2 This is not the place to enter on the
question of the date of the Book of
Daniel in its present form; but I may
be allowed to remark that the canon-
icity of the book depends on the judg-
ment of the Jewish church, and not on
the date of its composition. If it can
be demonstrated that it belongs to the
Maceabiean era, it remains just as much
as before a part of Scripture, and a di-
vine comment on history,

04 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

which seem to point to the period of their composition,
but, at the same time, these are so ambiguous as to have
received the most various explanations. Without entering
into the details of the question, it appears most probabie
that the books were written at periods separated by about
a century — Henoch during the later times of the Greco-
Syrian empire, and Esdras when the power of Rome was
everywhere dominant in the East, and Octavian undisputed
master of the empire... But however this may be, there
can be no doubt that both Apocalypses represent purely
Jewish notions; and dealing with the problems which
Christianity solved, at no great interval from the time when
the great answer was given, they yield in strange interest
to few records ‘of antiquity. Even in respect of style, as
well as of substance, they repay careful study. The spirit
of God’s ancient people is indeed no longer clothed in the
utterance of divine prophets, but it is not yet shrouded in
-a dress of idle fables. There are symptoms of increasing
degeneracy and faithlessness in the later book; but when
Henoch and Esdras were written, the words of inspiration
were still powerful to rein the fancy and shape the visions
of seers, and the wildest imaginings which they contain
make little approach to the trifling of the Talmudists.?

At the same time that prophetic hopes reiippeared under
the form of Revelations, prophetic history
gave rise to those striking narratives of
individual life, Tobit and Judith, which
present the popular ideal of virtue, courage, and patience.
For these the Book of Esther offered a Scriptural model, as
that of Daniel for the Apocalypses and Ecclesiastes for the

b. Didactic nar-
ratives.

1 The general character of the book
at first sight suggests a date shortly
after the destruction of Jerusalem, and
this has been adopted by Gfrorer, Wie-
seler, and Bauer; but the description
of the ‘“‘three heads” (ὁ. xi.) appears
to point to the times of the Triumvi-
rates. Cf. Hilgenf. 218 ff.

2 Compare, for instance, the allusion

to Leviathanand Behemoth in Henoch
Ix. 7, with the well-known Talmudic
legend. The Book of Esdras contains
the Jezend in a transition state, vi.
49—52.

The Apocalypses of Henoch and Es-
dras will come under notice more par-
ticularly in the next chapter.

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 95

Books of Wisdom. Nor can it be unworthy of notice that
the latest books in the Canon offer a complete parallel in
theme and manner to the works which followed, while
they are clearly distinguished from them even by outward
marks of power and originality. As time advanced imagi-
nation supplied the place of vision, and fiction was sub-
stituted for history.

The Book of Tobit is at once the oldest, the most natural,
and the most beautiful of the scenes of later
Jewish life. The legalism of Jerusalem is
softened down in the regions of the far East, and it would
be impossible to find a more touching image of holiness
and piety, according to the current type, than that of the
Israelite captives of Nineveh. The various ties of family
are hallowed by the presence of pure love. The righteous-

Tobit.

ness of works appears in deeds of affection and merey
rather than in forms of simple ritual. The power of
private prayer is exalted by its manifold success. The
belief in the eternal purposes of God is firm and constant :
and hope is proportionately clear and strong. The Book
of Judith is conceived in a far different strain.

The ordinary relations of a household are

changed for the most terrible dangers of war; holiness in
living for valor in daring. It was written apparently when
a season of conflict was still impending, and the memory
of deliverance still fresh. A woman, and she a widow,
is able to overcome the captain of “the king of all the
-earth” by the power of the God of her fathers. ‘* There is
none that may gainsay her words” or her confidence ; and
why should Israel tremble before Syria? Faith can yet
do what faith has done.?

The first book of the Maccabees is the ΣΙ Maccabees.

only Palestinian record of the heroic struggle

which was inspired by such a hope, and is simple, natural,

“τ Judith.

1 The numerous recensions in which which they enjoyed. Cf. Fritzsche,
the Books of Tobit and Judith—like Το. Handb. Bint. Tob. §§ 83-8; Jud
those of Esther and Daniel—exist,is §§ 2—6.

a sufficient proof of the wide popularity

96 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

and accurate. The second book, of African origin, is more
ambitious, and at times legendary ; but both
are destitute of that prophetic insight which
elsewhere makes the chronicles of the Jews a commentary
on the fulfilment of the Divine counsels.

The relics of the ante-Christian literature of Palestine
terminate’ with the first Book of Mac-
cabees; but meanwhile, the Jewish spirit in
Egypt had not been inactive. The Greek
Bible had preserved that real union with ancient Israel
which the disuse of the Temple-service had threatened to
destroy; and from the first the growth of independence
and thought was more rapid among the Jews of Alexandria
than among those of Palestine. The city itself was stamped
with the impress of no distinct nationality, and controversy
was inevitable in a place where every system found its
representatives. But the Law and the prophets still con:
tinued to guide the philosophy of the Dispersion; and the
Greek dress in which they were clothed prepared for after
times the means of expressing intelligibly the principles of
Christianity. The history of the LXX is obscure and
perplexed.?,- So much, however, at least, is clear, that the
Pentateuch was translated first, no long time after the first
settlement of the Jews, and that the other books were
added at various intervals before the middle of the second
The character of the Alexandrine Church

2 Maccabecs.

(b) The Jews in
Egypt.
The Septuagint

century B. ὁ.

1 The Book of Jubilees perhaps may
*be added, cf. Ch. ii. 1.(d). The Tar-
gums were rather the gradual embodi-
ments of tradition than spontaneous
literary works.

2 The work of Hody, De Bibliorum
Text. Orig., Oxon. 1705, is still the most
important original investigation of the
LXX. Frankel (Vorstudien zu der
LXX., Leipz., 1841) deals well with de-
tails of Janguage and orthography.
Grinfield (Apology for the LXX. Lon-
don, 1850) pleads for the authority of
the translation.

83 It is a coincidence too remarkable |
to be left unnoticed, that about the
same time at which the translation of
the Pentateuch was completed, Man-
etho, an Egyptian priest, published in
Greek the first authentic account of the
Egyptian history and religion, based
upon the original records. Once again
Egypt and Israel came in conflict. The
writings of Callimachus illustrative of
Greek mythology, and of Aratus on
natural phenomena, belong to the same
period. Cf. Carové, Vorhalle des Chris«
tenthums, Jena, 1851, p. 176.

THE PREFARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 97

has not failed to influence the translation; and, in some
respects, it is rather an adaptation than a reproduction of
the original. Even in the Pentateuch the traces of a
growing refinement are discernible. The most remarkable
anthropomorphic phrases are softened, and
“the glory of the Lord” is substituted for τοίη the origi-
His personal presence. Some preparation,
at least, is made for the distinction of the Creator
from Jehovah; and the narrative of the creation is
moulded according to the current conceptions of a
primary ideal world and of the constitution of man’s
nature. The variations in the prophets are still more
remarkable; and it seems difficult to explain the omissions
which occur, except by the supposition of some intentional
reserve in publishing the expected glories of Messiah.?
But the LXX performed a still greater work than that
of extending a knowledge of Judaism to the
heathen world: it wedded Greek language 471 @ Meological
to Hebrew thought, the most exact form of
expression with the most spiritual mode of conception.
The intellectual vocabulary of the civilized world was
claimed for religious use, and theology became a science.
Active speculation followed as a necessary result. The
gifts and promises of Revelation were compared with the
faculties and wants of man. Traditional faith and new
philosophy were examined and combined with various suc-
cess; and the two events which mark the widest diver-
gence of the Alexandrine from the Palestinian Jews
belong to the same generation, and synchro-
nize with the Maccabzean struggles. About ,,/” growth of
the same time that the temple of Leontop-
olis was built, Aristobulus, a Jewish follower of Aristotle,’

1Cf. Gfrérer, a. a. O. ii. ff. 8 ff; Jewish thought at Alexandria, it is im-

Diehine, ii. i. ff. Frankel, 176 ff. portant to remember that the pursuit
2 Grinfie.d, p. 74, with reference to of philosophy was of late introduction,
Isai. ix. 6. and that the form first current was the

3 With regard to the development of Peripatetic. VPlatonism was only a re-

Hy)

98 ΤῊΣ PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

gave the first real impulse to that mystical and Hellenizing
tendency which was afterwards supposed to characterize
the synagogue and church of Alexandria. The two facts
mutually explain one another; for the growth of wider
views of the purposes of the Law, and a more spiritual
perception of its precepts, might seem to justify the aban-
donment of the literal Zion. The time was come, it was
said, when there should “be an altar to the Lord in the
midst of the land of Egypt,” as the prophet had spoken;
and when Egypt should be “blessed as God’s people.” ?
The voice of Paganism itself was now boldly used to
attest the supremacy of the faith of Israel.
In his commentary on the books of Moses,
Aristobulus introduced a long Orphice quotation, which
must have been cast in a Jewish shape either by himself
or by some one of his countrymen. The adaptation — for
it seems to have been an adaptation rather than a forgery
— was not without excuse, and found abundant parallels.
Orpheus seemed to stand apart from the later forms of
polytheism in the depths of a mysterious antiquity, and
thus the reminiscences of a patriarchal tradition could be
attributed to him without unnatural violence.
In like manner the Sibyl occupied an inde-
pendent position in the religion of Greece and Rome.
If Orpheus represented the recipient of a primeval reve-
lation, the Sibyl was an embodiment of the teaching of
nature. The writings of a Jewish or Chaldaic Sibyl con-
tain probably the earliest fragments among the Sibyilline

Aristobulus.

The Jewish Sibyl.

Clement of Alexandria recur in Euse-
bius. The objections to the authen-
ticity of the fragments are quite insuf-
ficient. Cf. Gfrérer, Philo, ii. pp. 71 ff;

action against skepticism, which springs
naturally from an exclusive study of
the abstract or useful sciences. Cf.
Matter, Hist. de V Ecole Alex. iii. 158 ff.

1 Isai. xix. 18, 19, 25. Joseph. Antiq.
xiii. 8. Cf. Hieron. Comm. in Isai.
Vienlence

2 Βίβλους ἐξηγητικὰς τοῦ Μωῦσέως
νόμου, Euseb. H. E. vii. 89. The frag-
ments of Aristobulus are preserved in
Euseb. Prep. Evang. vii. 18, 14; viii. (8)
9,10; xiii. 12. The passages quoted by

Dachne, ii. 78 ff; Ewald, iv. p. 294 n.

3 Oracula Sibyllina ... . recensuit
.... I.H. Friedlieb, Lipsiz, 1852. Cf.
Hilgenfeld, Die Judische Apokalyptik,
Jena, 1857, pp. 53—90. The text, how-
ever, is still extremely corrupt. I have
not seen Didot’s ed., Paris, 1856.

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 00

verses; and the very fact of their existence and currency
is a proof of the growing sympathy between Jew and
Greek. “God,” it is said, “dwells in all men, the test of
truth in common light.” Ὁ
ministers of His vengeance, — this office is reserved for
the “barbarian rule” of Rome,? — but “they shall be guides
to all men unto life.”* The corruptions of heathendom are
traced to their first source in the confusion of tongues;
and the triumphs of the true faith are pursued till it be-
comes the religion of the whole earth, till “prophets are
kings and judges of the world,” and a heavenly peace is
restored to nature and man.* In this respect the Sibylline
writings stand alone as an attempt to embrace all history,
even in its details, in one great theocratic view, and to
regard the kingdom of the world as destined to form proy-
inces in a future kingdom of God.

The writings of Philo exhibit the maturity of Alexan-
drine thought, which was thus early directed
to subtle allegory and wide hope. They bear
few marks of originality or order, and must be regarded as
the epitome and not the source of a system. Their char-
acteristic is meditation and not thought; their source the
accumulated treasures of the past, and not the opening of
any new mine; their issue eclecticism, and not discovery.
They may show how far men had advanced, but they open
no way for future progress. Filled with the most profound
belief in the divinity of the Jewish law, and not unin-
structed in the philosophy of Greece, Philo endeavors to
show the real unity of both, or rather to find in Moses the
true source of the teaching of Plato and Aristotle. The
spiritual instinct which had softened down the anthropo-
morphic language of the Pentateuch in the LXX transla-
tion, led Philo to explain away the traces of it which still
remained, The divine Logos, at once the Reason and the

His people are no longer only

Philo.

1 Prol.18. Cf. iii. 262. 4 iii. 781; 367 ff. ; 784 ff. Cf c. ii
2 iii. 638, 520. pp. 89 ff.
8 iii. 195.

100 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

Word of God, is brought into close and manifold connec-
tion with the world, while Jehovah (τὸ ὄν, rarely 6 ὦν) is
farther withdrawn from it. With the fullest consciousness
of the work which the Jews had to discharge as teachers
of mankind, Philo saw no way in which the work could be
accomplished but by the perpetuation of the ordinances of
the Law. He felt that the details of ritual were more than
symbols of abstract ideas, but he found no antitype to sub-
stitute in their place. And thus while his spiritualism re-
‘tained the restrictions of the old faith, it removed it from
the reach of the simple. So far from “ preaching a Gospel
to the poor,” it took away from them the outward pledge
of it in which they trusted. Its tendency was to exalt
knowledge in the place of action; its home was in the
cells of the recluse, and not in the field or the market; its
truest disciples were visionary Therapeute, and not apos-
tles charged with a gospel for the world, debtors alike to
Jew and Greek.

The society of the Therapeutz ' was indeed the practical
corollary of Alexandrianism. The same ten-
deney which had produced the society of the
Essenes in Palestine found a new development on the
borders of Lake Meeris. The discipline and occupation of
these ascetics seemed to offer so clear an image of later
monastic life that Eusebius claims them as Christians, and
probably they furnished the model on which the first
Egyptian communities were framed. They differed from
the Essenes both in the objects of their pursuit and in the
austerity of their rule. The examination of the deeper
symbolism of Scripture was a congenial subject to those
whose external position had long shut them out from the
literal observance of the Law; and the open corruption of
the court of the Ptolemies naturally called out the antag-
onism of an excessive self-denial. The active work which
formed an essential part of the system of the Essenes,
found no place in the cells of these Alexandrian devotees.

The Therapeute.

1 Philo, De Vita contemplativa, throughout.

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 101

For them the “ whole day from sunrise to sunset was spent
in mental discipline;” their one study was to investigate
the inner meaning of their national philosophy contained
in the “holy writings.” The use of hyssop to give flavor
to the ordinary diet of bread and salt and water was re-
garded as a delicate luxury. They sought only to appease
the appetites, and not to gratify them. But the satisfaction
of bodily wants was often forgotten in the pursuit of wis-
dom, and at all times “meat and drink” were held unwor-
thy of the light. In one respect only they shared in com-
mon pleasures, when on their weekly vigil they recalled in
sacred hymns and dances the great song of Moses and
Miriam, adapting the rich resources of Grecian poetry and
music to their divine themes.

The Book of Wisdom is the noble expression of a mind
which might have sought rest and joy in this
meditative life; nor need it be a matter of
wonder if the clearest foreshadowing of
some of the truths of Christianity proceeded from such a
source, if the attributes of the Divine Wisdom were gath-
ered to something of a personal shape, and the workings
of its powers extended to the whole world, by men who
lived in the contemplation of God’s dealings with mankind.
Yet it is Wisdom, not the Word, and much less Messiah,
which is exalted by the poet as “the creative, preserving,
guiding power.” To the recluse, far from the rude struggles
of life, — from “the publicans and sinners” of a suffering
world, — it might seem enough to paint the glories of wis-
dom and gaze forever on the picture, but Wisdom, cold
and partial, could not be the truth for which creation was
looking.

For this last growth of Judaism, if the fairest, was still
premature and fruitless. In its essence it 0
was the ideal of heathen religion, and the acter of Alexan-
negation of Christianity, because it raised
the soul in isolation from the earth, and excluded all re-
gard to the outer work of life and redemption. It was

The Book of Wis-
dom.

102 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

equally partial in its application and in its scope. It ad
dressed only one part of men’s nature, and one class of
men. It suppressed the instincts of civil and domestic
society, which Christianity ennobled; it perpetuated the
barriers which Christianity removed; it abandoned the
conflict which Christianity carries ont to victory. Yet
even thus the mystics of Egypt and Palestine maintained
a practical belief in the necessity of a spiritual faith.
Their own existence was a sign of “the last times,” but
they could not interpret it. They witnessed that Judaism
in its literal acceptation was insufficient to fulfil the desires
of men; but they could not, like John the Baptist, proclaim
the near approach of a coming kingdom.
The spirit of the Law and the Prophets had been em-
ΤΩ ΣΝ ΩΣ bodied in every great typical form. The
one hy He several phases of partial and independent
development were now completed. Judaism
had existed in the face of the most varied nationalities,
and had gained an elasticity of shape without losing its
distinctness of principle. But each concrete system which
was substituted for the faithful anticipation of the Messi-
anic times, led in the end to disappointment and confusion,
and the scattered exiles were unable to spiritualize the na-
tions among whom they sojourned. The hierarchy which
seemed so full of life in the age of Ezra degenerated into
a mere sect. The kingdom which had been thought to
herald the final triumph of the nation ended in a foreign
usurpation. The alliance with Greek philosophy had led,
on the one hand, to an epicurean indifference, on the other,
to an unpractical mysticism. But, meanwhile, the princi-
ples which lay at the basis of these partial efforts had
gained a substantive existence, and were silently working
in the whole people. The truths which had been felt once
still lived even under the ruins of the systems which had
been reared upon them. Law, freedom, thought, an intense
national pride and a world-wide dispersion, a past bright
with the glories of a Divine Presence, a present lost in

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 103

humiliation, a future crowded with pictures of certain tri-
umphs, combined to fashion a people ready to receive and
propagate a universal Gospel. A missionary nation was
waiting to be charged with the heavenly commission, and
a world was unconsciously prepared to welcome it.

The influences which had moulded the Jewish people
during the last three centuries before the
Christian era were not confined within that — mecorresponding
narrow circle. The age of Alexander was oe os
the culminating point of Greek thought as Pi Ne a
well as of Greek power. Afterwards the
scholar occupied the place of the poet, and a period of criti-
cism followed a period of creation. Aristotle, Pyrrhon, and
Epicurus brought the last new elements into the system of
ancient philosophy, and their successors combined, arranged,
methodized, but opened no new ways of knowledge. The
same interval which matured the falness of Jewish hope
served for the development of the final issues of Greek wis-
dom. And yet more than this: as the Jewish -
nationality was broken up by their wide dis-
persion, so the great tides of Western con-
quest swept away gradually the barriers by which the world
had been divided, and colonization followed in the train of
conquest. The citizen of Rome passed from province to
province, and, if he borrowed the Greek language, it was
to assert the Roman supremacy. As a neces-
sary consequence, the power of paganism
everywhere gave way. If philosophy had
undermined its theoretical basis, national intercourse had
weakened its practical effects. The life of paganism lay
in its speciality. Pagan belief was in each case the reli-
gious expression of the particular spot, bound up with its
character and history. Beyond its native limits its true
vitality ceased, and all that remained was a spasmodic ac-
tion. At the time when the Jew had discovered in his faith
a germ of universality unknown before the dispersion,
other religions were proved vain by their narrowness.

The dissolution of
nationalities and

of national reli-
gions.

104 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

The gods of Greece had faded away into dim shadows,
and Rome, when once she left the borders of Italy, had no
true gods, but admitted to a comprehensive Pantheon the
deities of each conquered race. Throughout the West
the religion of the state and the religion of the citizen
were divorced. Faith was dying, and yet the desire of
faith was evident: the old temples were deserted, and the
wildest mysteries found eager votaries.
But if Greece and Rome failed alike to found a univer-
_ sal religion, they showed its possibility. Each
Meanvhite ire in its turn had exerted a power capable of

Catholic ;,owers sur-

vive: Greck litera- uniting all men bya moral influence. Greece
i em Nad left a universal literature and language
by seizing the general laws of beauty and
thought. Rome had founded a universal empire by assert-
ing with instinctive justice the great principles of right in
her dependent provinces. The idea of a common human-
ity, transcending the differences of race and time, was out-
wardly established by the help of thought and law.!
For the universal powers of Greek language and Roman
right were not all which heathendom laid at
And philosophy, the foundation of Christianity. The great

by analyzing man’s

powers and in- work of Greek philosophy had been to dis-

stincts, prepared
the way for their tinguish the various elements which were
harmonious combi- - . come
nation. confused in the popular idea of religion, that
they might be prepared for a harmonious
combination. Theology, morality, law, worship, have been
so long and so clearly apprehended in their separate scopes,
that it is often forgotten that they were once entangled in
one complex notion. Step by step the great masters of
antiquity advanced towards the truth which they divined.
From the study of the universe they passed to the study
of man, marking his varied relations, analyzing his distinct
faculties, and asserting the manifold instincts by which he
1 Compare the marvellous description quoted from Cicero by Lactantius,

of the power of universal law (quam JInstit. vi. 8 (Cic. de Rep. iii. 22).
M. Tullius pene divina voce depinzit)

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 105

is impelled, while it remained impossible to reconcile them.
Partial truths obtained their boldest expression, freedom
and fate, a life purely sensuous and a life purely intellectual,
man’s body enthroned and imprisoned, Epicureanism and
Stoicism: such was the final contrast which St. Paul found
at Athens, and which Christianity harmonized.

Even in their negative aspect the results of systems,
varied as the elements of human nature, were
an important preparation for the Gospel, and 77,2
were in themselves an exhaustive commentary eek si oeilies
on Natural Religion, defining the extent of
its domain and the nature of its independence. The
~ central principle which should bind all men into one
family and unite earth to heaven —if heaven indeed were
—had been sought in nature, in individual reason, in civil
life, and all that magians, philosophers, statesmen, had
found were fair shadows, noble and bright at first, but
which were changed into terrible spectres. The religions
of the East had sunk into degrading superstitions and
strange sorceries. The speculations of Greece had been
directed into countless channels, all leading to blank
skepticism. The organization of Rome was on the point
of becoming the mere machinery of a military despotism.
Everywhere idolatry had wrought out its fearful issues,
and shameless wickedness had corrupted the streams of
social life.

Nor can it be urged with justice that this picture of the
exhaustion of ancient life ceases to be true if
we look beyond the limits of the Roman prrpbaicrgb ict 3
Empire. The religions of India and Seandi- oes of
nayia contained no element capable of reno-
vating a world; and as far as it is possible to penetrate
the darkness in which their beginnings are shrouded, they
appear to have fostered forms of corruption and barbarism
more desolating than the paganism of the West. The

1 Let any one compare, for instance, Arist. de Anima, iii. 5, with 1 Cor. xy.

106 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

Northmen were gathering strength for a contest yet
distant: the masses of Eastern Asia were in some sense
condemned by nature to slavery. In one ease civilization
was not yet possible, in the other it was essentially
defective. And in estimating the nature of an epoch it is
sufficient to regard the great centres of civilization. The
drama of history is ever enacted upon a narrow stage.
Fresh characters enter and play their parts in due course,
but till then they have no influence except through others.
The world has its representative nations to whom its
fortunes are entrusted, and who justly express its condi-
tion; and in this sense the Roman Empire at the beginning
of the Christian era was no less truly than popularly
identical with the civilized world.’
But in the midst of disappointment and exhaustion hope
tetra ἫΝ still lived. There was a vague presentiment
in the Roman Em- abroad that a new period was drawing near;
eT Se and the triumph of material power appeared
to offer the blessings which Christianity realized. The
birth of Augustus is said to have been accompanied by
prodigies which declared him to be the future master of
the earth, and old legends revived in his person.” Time
appeared to fulfil the auguries. The beginnings of the
empire gave promise of a government able to maintain the
welfare of the world; and the lull of general peace by
which it was ushered in was welcomed as the inauguration
of the new era. The nations were gathered into one, and
a ruler, such as the world had not seen, claimed them as
his inheritance. At such a time even outward unity might
well seem to promise secure happiness. The state, which
was always the real object of a Roman’s devotion, had
found a personal embodiment; and the people were willing
to concede to the emperor the divine titles which he
claimed” The stern image of might was decorated with

1‘H οἰκουμένη. 8 The climax was reached by Do-
2 Suet. Oct. c. 94. The whole chapter mitian, whose edicts ran: Dominus ei
is very curious. Deus noster sic fieri jubet (Suet. Domit.

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 107

something of oriental splendor. The verses of the sibyl
had already passed from Alexandria to Rome; and in
painting the future the legends of the golden age were
combined with the prophetic expectations of the East.

For it was in the East that hope rested. The strange
traditions of India and China are well known;
but in their present form they seem to have
received something of a Christian coloring,
though the Jews must have carried with them in their
dispersion the great outlines of their national faith.’ In
Palestine these outlines had been filled up in times of
spiritual trial. The Messianic promises had grown purer
and clearer by the ordeal of persecution and suffering ; and
the people which was of all the most despised cherished
the noblest belief in the time of its distress. The Jew
knew that a spiritual kingdom would come, of which the
Roman Empire was but a faint and partial image; and by
certain signs he felt its near approach. His view might be
imperfect or distorted, colored by the hope of material
triumph, or clouded by thoughts of vengeance, yet his eye
was fixed heavenward, and he stood ready for the conflict.
The spectacle is one of sublime interest ; and to understand
the fulness of the Jewish faith it is necessary to go back
once more and trace the outlines,of the Messianic hope as
it was shaped, through long ages of discipline, after the
age of the prophets had closed.

Hope still looked
to the East.

6. 135). Cf. Tac. Ann.i.10. Salvador, Ρ. 11. Schlegel’s Philosophy of His
Hist. de la dom. Rom. i. 384 ff. tory, p. 190 (Eng. trans.).
1 Cf. Hue’s Christianity in China, i.

108 THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL.

NOTE ON CHAPTER I.

The following slight synopsis of Jewish literature will serve as a clew
to much that will be said afterwards. (Alexandrine writers and works
are distinguished by Italics.)

3d Cent. B. c. ANTIGONUS of Socho.
The Pentateuch translated into Greek; the other books of
the Old Testament at various times afterwards.
Baruch i.—iii. 8.
The Septuagint completed.

2d Cent. Βα. ARISTOBULUS (fragments).
Jesus the son of Sirach (Ecclesiasticus); Sepher Ben Sira
perhaps contains fragments of the original book.
Tobit.
170 The Psalms of Solomon. (Greek: Fabr. Cod. Pseud. V.
T’. i. 914 ff.)
150 Additions to Daniel and Esther.
(?) Judith. .
(?) Baruch, the present recension.
Jewish Sibylline Oracles.
120 The Apocalypse of Henoch. (£thiop. trans.)
Ecclesiasticus translated into Greek.
(3) The Wisdom of Solomon.
EZECHIEL (fragments).
The elder PHILO.
The Book of Jason, on which 2 Macc. was based.

1st Cent. B. c. i. Maccabees (Greek trans.)

90 ii. Maccabees.
The Letter of Jeremiah.

(?) iii. Hera, translation and revision of the Hebrew book.
iv. Book of Maccabees.
iv. Hera (Athiop. Ar. Lat. trans.)

(?) Prayer of Manasses (cf. Fritzsche, Exeg. Hand. 158).
iii. Maccabees (perhaps later).
HILEBL:
SHAMMAT.

ist Cent. Pp. c. Targum of Onkelos on the Pentateuch (Zunz, p. 62).
Targum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel on the Prophets (id. p. 62).
GAMALIEL.
PHILO (c. 20 B. c.—d0 A. C.).
The Book of Jubilees (Ethiop. trans.).
JOSEPHUS (37—c. 100 A. C.).
AKIVA (Τ 122 or 135).
R. MEIR.

THE PREPARATION FOR THE GOSPEL. 109

2d Cent. Pp. c. xxxii. Middoth of R. Eliezer (Zunz, p. 86).
Megillath Taanith (fragm.) (id. p. 127).
Simon Ben Jochai.
JEHUDA Hannasi, or Hakkodesh, or Rabbi ({ 190).
Elements of the Books Jetzira and Zohar.

3d Cent. Ρ. c. Mishna.
Sifra debe Rab (on Leviticus), (Rab 1 243).
Sifri debe Rab (on Numbers and Deuteronomy).
Toseftas (addenda) of R. Chija and R. Hoschaja.
Seder Olam (Zunz, p. 86).

4th Cent. p.c. Mechilta (on part of Exodus), (Zunz, p. 47).
Sifri Sutta (fragm. on Numbers), (Zunz, p. 48).
Malacath Hamashecan (id. p. 87).
Bereshith Rabba (= last five chapters, Zunz, pp. 174 ff.).
Jerusalem Gemara (Talmud).

5th Cent. Ρ. σ. Babylonian Gemara (Talmud).
498
10

CHAP PAR At.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

Οὐχ ἑαυτοῖς ἡμῖν δὲ διηκόνουν αὐτά. ---1 Sr. PeTERi 12.

‘Yur Book of Genesis connects the promise of Redemp-

tion with the narrative of the Fall.
each crisis in the providential history of the
world this promise was brought within nar-
rower limits, and illustrated by fresh details.

Zhe Biblical doc-
trine of Messiah in
the patriarchal,

After the

Flood, one of the sons of Noah was especially connected

1 The various works on the growth
and form of the Jewish doctrine of the
Messiah, particularly after the close of
the prophetic era, seem to me to con-
tain materials for a history of the doc-
trine rather than the history itseif.
Schéttgen (Hore Hebraice et Tal-
mudice, Dresd. 1733-42) has accumu-
lated a most valuable collection of
Jewish traditions, but apart from minor
inconsistencies, he exhibits no critical
perception whatever of the relative
value of the authorities which he
quotes, and often seems to me to mis-
interpret the real tenor of their tes-
timony. The writers who have followed
him have for the most part confirmed
his errors. Nork (Rabbinische Quellen
τι. 5. w. Leipzig, 1839), who has collected
with fair accuracy the sum of Hebrew
tradition, is most offensive and un-
just in the use which he makes of it.
Gfrorer (Das Jahrhundert des Heils,
Stuttg. 1838) has given the best general
view of the subject, but he is not free
from the great faults of Schottgen,
which found their natural issue in

Strauss’s Leben Jesu. As a correction
to these exaggerated pictures of the
completeness of the Jewish doctrine of
Messiah the remarks of Br. Bauer
(Kritik der Evang. Gesch. Leipzig, 1846,
i. 391 ff.) on the non-existence of any
such elear doctrine, however exagger-
ated they may be on the other side,
are worthy of consideration. Ebrard’s
answer (Aritik der Evang. Gesch.
Erlangen, 1850, pp. 651 ff.) seems to me
partial and inadequate.

Bertholdt’s Christologia Judeorwm
(Erlang, 1811) possesses no distinctive
or ciitical value, and Bp. Blomfield un-
fortunately relied upon him in his
Dissertation upon the traditional knowl-
edge of a promised Redeemer (Cambr.
1819) for the state of Jewish belief in our
Lord’s time. Hengstenberg’s Christol-
ogy (Eng. Tr. Edinb., 1856, vols. i. ii.)
is rather a collection of criticisms on
the Messianic passages of the Old Testa-
ment than a connected view of the doc-
trine; and the same remark applies to
Pye Smith’s Scripture Doctrine of Mes-
siah. Lond., 1887.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAI. lil

with the future triumph of God.'| Abraham was called,
and the assurance was given to him that the blessing of the
earth should spring from his seed. The fortunes of the
twelve patriarchs were prophetically foreshadowed, and the
sceptre was assigned to Judah. But up to this point no
personal trait of a Redeemer was given Hope was
turned from mankind generally to a race, a nation, a tribe;
but, in accordance with the simplicity of early faith, it was
left otherwise vague and distant.

The legislation of Moses contained the next revelation of
“the great age to come,” and the first descrip-
tion of the prophet by whom it should be
inaugurated. The Law from the first exhibited the image
of a nobler Law; and that which was permanent and
essential in the relation which it established between God
and man was transferred to a future Lawgiver. At the
same time the hope of the world was definitely fixed in
Palestine by the witness of a heathen seer. The promise
of Moses was confirmed by the unwilling testimony of
Balaam, who looked forward to the triumph of the Jewish
race and the Jewish King, and condemned himself; just
as, in after-times, Caiaphas admitted the necessity of Christ’s
sacrifice, and condemned his nation.

The establishment of the kingdom gave an occasion for
a further enlargement of the conception of
Messiah’s person and work, and a narrower
limitation of the stock from which he was to spring. One
family was selected from the chosen tribe; and the
“sceptre” was now reserved for the Son of David. The
later period of the kingdom saw the gradual unfolding of
the idea of this future king. Human tyranny served to
place in clearer light the fulness of Messiah’s love; the
idolatrous faithlessness of the people, the irresistible per-

Mosaic, and

Regal periods,

1Gen. ix. 27. The rendering of ciat gloriam suam ὧν tabernaculis
Onkelos, whatever may be thought of Sem.
its correctness, makes this more clear: 2 The doubtful term Shi/oh (Gen. xlix.
Dilatet Deus Japheth; et habitare fa- 10) cannot be urged against this view.

112 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

suasiveness of His teaching; the growing consciousness of
sin, the efficiency of His priestly intercession.

The Captivity completed the circle of the Messianic
hopes, by turning the eyes of the people to
the divine glory of the coming King, and the
universal extent of His dominion. The Son of David was
recognized under the wider title of the Son of Man; and
His kingdom appeared as the last and mightiest of the
monarchies of the world.

In this way the earliest hope of mankind was centred
in a Person; and the image of the future
Saviour was drawn from the varied forms in
which God made Himself known in the history of the
chosen people. The same discipline which shaped their
character chastened and ennobled their hopes. The old
hope gave birth to a new one, and yet survived the trans-
formation, because it was true, though partial; and at the
close of the prophetic era three great Messianic types
remained —the Mosaic, the Prophetic, the Apocalyptic —
representative in some degree of the three periods of
inspired teaching; and according as these different types
were adopted exclusively or variously combined, the faith
of later generations was dwarfed or enlarged.

The Apocryphal books, as is well known, contain no

reference to a personal Saviour. The first

The Apocrauphal ον
books silent as to book of Maccabees records the decision of
i ay “the Jews and the priests, that Simon be
ruler and high-priest forever (εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα)
till a faithful prophet arise ;” but it seems doubtful whether
there is any reference in these words to the great Prophet
of whom Moses spoke, or to the forerunner of Messiah. The
omission 15 probably due to the character of the books, and
not to the absence of the hope, which is clearly expressed
in other contemporary writings. Similar writings in the
Old Testament (6. g. Ezra, Nehemiah) contain no Mes-
sianic predictions; and the Book of Baruch, the only echo
of the prophets which remained in the Maccabean age,

In the Captivity.

Gencral results.

1 Mace. xiv. 41.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 113

announces in ancient words the restoration and triumph of
the chosen people.’ “I will cause them to

return [saith the Lord] to the land which I ¢entenpiate a na
sware to their fathers, to Abraham, and

to Isaac, and to Jacob, and they shall be lords over it; and
I will multiply them, and they shall not be diminished;
.... and I will no more move my people Israel from the
land that I gave them.”? “Take a good heart, O Jerusa-
lem.2 He that named thee shall comfort thee. Wretched
are they that afflicted thee, and rejoiced over thy fall.
Wretched are the cities to which thy children were in
bondage. Wretched is the land that received thy sons.
. .... For fire shall come upon her from the Eternal for
Jong days, and she shall be inhabited by evil spirits for the
longer time. Look round to the East, O Jerusalem, and
behold the joy which is coming to thee from the Lord.
Behold thy sons are coming, whom thou sentest forth : they
are coming, gathered together from the Kast to the West
by the word of the Holy One, rejoicing in the glory
of God. .....For God shall show thy brightness to
every country under heaven. ..... They went out from
thee on foot, led by enemies, but God is leading them to
thee, lifted up on high with glory, as children of the king-
dom.”* The same ideas recur in the Book of Tobit. The
God who scattered them shall gather His people together
again, “and bring them to their own land. And they
shall build His house, not such as was the former house,
until the seasons of the age (καιροὶ τοῦ αἰῶνος) be fulfilled ;°
and afterwards they shall return from the places of their
captivity, and build Jerusalem gloriously.”°..... “Je-
rusalem shall be built with sapphire and emerald,’ and her
walls with precious stone, and her towers and battlements

1 But the language used of the Law 4 The other reading, ὡς ϑρόνον βασι-
as eternal and life-giving (iv. 1), and in λείας» gives the same general sense, but
an especial sense a revelation of God’s the metaphor is very harsh.

person (iii. 37 f.), is particularly worthy 5 Quoadusque repleatur tempus male-
of notice. dictionum. Vet. Lat.
2 ii. 34, 35. 3 iy. 30 ff. 6 xiv. 5. 7 xiii. 9 ff.

10*

114 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

in pure gold; and the streets of Jerusalem shall be paved
with beryl, and carbuncle, and stone of Ophir.” .....
« And all nations shall turn truly to fear the Lord God, and
bury their idols; and all nations shall bless the Lord; and
His people shall confess God, and the Lord shall exalt His
people; and all who love the Lord God in truth and
righteousness shall rejoice, doing mercy to our brethren.”
But these wide anticipations of coming glory appear
vague and incomplete when compared with
The Messianic the clear-drawn visions of that Apocalyptic

idea further de-

veloped, 1. i the literature’ in which we must next trace the
ie Cat progress of the Messianic faith.

The earliest fragments of the Sibylline
writings*® which belong to the beginning of the Maccabean
ΕἸΠΕ ΑΕ τς period, complete the picture of the national
Oracles. triumph by the recognition of the great Con-
160—149 B.C. 3 :

queror When the need of man is sorest,
and pestilence and war are spread over the world; when
king seizes king, and nation ravages nation, and rulers fly,
and the earth is changed, and a barbarian power desolates
all Greece; when the earth is unsown and unploughed,
covered with the unburied dead,*—then it is said,’ “God
shall send from the sun a King, who shall cause every land
to cease from evil war, slaying some, and fulfilling a faith-
ful covenant with others. Nor shall He do all this by His
own counsels, but obeying the high decrees of the mighty
God. Then, again, the people of the mighty God shall be
laden with noble wealth, with gold and silver, and with
array of purple; and the earth shall bring forth to perfec-
tion, and the sea teeming with blessings..... But, again,
the kings of the Gentiles with gathered might shall assail
this land, bringing fate upon themselves; for they shall

MCL p98, Mel: the Apocalyptic writings are by Liicke

2 Lib. iii. with the exception of vv. (Versuch einer vollstandigen Hinleitung
1—96, 818—828, and one or two smaller in die Offenbarung des Johannes, 2te
interpolations. Cf. Hilgenfeld,a.a.O. Aufl. Bonn, 1852), and Hilgenfeld (Die
58 ff. Gfrorer, Philo, τι. 5. w. ii. 121 ff. Judische Apokalyptik, Jena, 1857).

* The best general introductions to 4 Vy. 682—651. 5 Vv. 652 ff.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 115

wish to ravage the fold of the mighty God, and to destroy
the noblest men..... But swords of fire shall fall from
heaven, and on earth great flames shall come..... and
every soul of man and every sea shall shudder before the
face of the Immortal. .... And then shall [the foes of His
people] recognize the Immortal God, who brings these
judgments to pass, and there shall be wailing and crying
over the boundless earth, as men perish..... But the sons
of the mighty God? around His temple all shall live in
quiet..... forthe Immortal is their defender, and the hand
of the Holy One. And then shall all the islands and cities
say: How does the Immortal love these men, for all things
strive with them and help them... .. Come, let us all fall on
the ground and entreat the Immortal King..... Let us
send to His temple, .... and all heed the Law of the Most
High God..... And then? shall God raise up a kingdom for-
ever (εἰς αἰῶνας) over all men..... And from every land
men shall bear frankincense and gifts to the house of God.
.... And prophets of the mighty God shall take away the
sword, for they shall be judges of mortals and righteous
kings. Rejoice, then, O Virgin, and exult; for to thee
hath He given gladness forever who created heaven and
earth. In thee [O Sion] shall He dwell; and for thee
shall He be an Immortal Light.”

But even in these oracles the glory of the king is lost
in the glory of the nation. The house of OY FED
David is forgotten in the recollection of the — te siryltine con-
theocracy.’ The permanent establishment of ΠῚ
the Law as the rule of the whole earth is the object of
highest hope,’ or second only to that final consummation
of the world, when a fiery flood shall destroy all that is

1 Vv. 702 ff. appears to be to Zerubbabel; and the
2 Vv. 766 ff. king whom “God shall send from
3 The remainder of this passage (787— heaven, who shall judge each man in
794) is a close imitation of Is. xi. 6—8. blood and flash of fire’ (vv. 286-7),
Cf. 367—380. though he appears with the attributes

4 The only reference to the family of οἵ Messiah, can be no other than Cyrus.
David is vy. 288-90, but the reference 5 Cf. vv. 573 ff.

110 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

corrupt and perishable in man and nature, and leave the
good in eternal purity. “The people,” it is said, “shall be
guides of life to all mortals;'” but there is no mention of
a spiritual covenant. There are no glimpses of a Gospel
or of an Incarnation. The blessings of the future are
drawn after the types in Deuteronomy, and the plagues
which are denounced against the wicked recall the scenes
of the Exodus and the conquest of Palestine.

Still the belief in a Messiah is recognized, and the glori-
ous future is connected with His advent.
Nor is His descent from the Sun — the seat
of the empire of light—the only sign of His
divine nature. In a later fragment, which dates from the
time of the last triumvirate, Messiah appears in contrast
with Beliar, the great manifestation of the power of evil?
“ A holy king shall come to hold the sceptre of every land,
for all ages, as time hastes on... .. But forth from the peo-
ple of Sebaste® shall Beliar come afterwards; and he shall
plant the lofty mountains [in the valleys], and stay the sea,
the mighty fiery sun, and the bright moon, and wake the
dead, and perform many signs among men; but they shall
not bring their promised end in him, but they shall be
deceptive, and in truth they shall deceive many men
(€poras), both faithful and chosen Hebrews, and also other
lawless men, who have not yet heard the word of God.
But when the threats of the mighty God draw near, a
flaming power shall come in a billowy flood (δι οἴδματος)
upon the earth, and consume Beliar and all the haughty
men who placed their trust in him..... God shall roll the
heaven as a book is rolled, and the whole spangled firma-
ment shall fall on the glorious earth and ocean. A torrent
of devouring fire shall flow unwearied, and consume the
land, and consume the sea, and the firmament of heaven,
and days; and creation itself it shall melt together, and

Its further en-
largement.

1 Ver. 195. 2 Vv. 49 ff. Magus, Sebaste = Samaria? or to Nero);
3 This name must have been inserted for it could not have been used of the
afterwards (with a reference to Simon Romans before the death of Antony.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 117
refine it and purify it (és καϑαρὸν διαλέξει). And no longer
shall the laughing globes of’ the [heavenly] lights [roll on.
There shall be] no night, no dawn, no many days of care,
no spring, no summer, no winter, no autumn. And then
shall the judgment of the mighty God come in the midst
of the mighty age when all these things come to pass.”!
Shortly after the first collection of Sibylline oracles was
formed at Alexandria, the hopes of the Pales-
tinian Jews were raised to the highest pitch
by the successes of John Hyrcanus, only to
be lost again in the rising conflict of sects,
and the weakness and crimes of his successors. These al-
ternations of joy and sorrow found their expression in the
Apocalypse of Henoch.? No apocryphal book is more re-
markable for eloquence and poetic vigor; and the range
of subjects which it includes is as noble as its style. In
its present form, the book aims at little less than a compre-
hensive vindication of the action of Providence, both in
the physical and in the moral world. At one time it en-
courages men quailing before outward enemies; at another,
it rebukes a people torn by inward divisions: now it offers
an explanation of the mysteries of creation; and now it
seeks the type of present dangers in the catastrophe of
primeval history. It is probable that these different parts
owe their origin to distinct authors, and that they were
interwoven into the present book by a later compiler. But
the distinction of the constituent elements is of compara-
tively little importance at present, since the book assumed
a certain unity during its last revision, and offers a gen-

(b) The Book of
Henoch.

¢ 107 Β. c.

1 It is sufficient to refer generally to
Matthew xxiv., 2 Thess. ii., Apoc. xx.,
for striking parallels to many of the
thoughts in this passage.

2 Liber Henoch, Acthiopice. A. Dill-
mann, Lipsiw, 1851. Das Buch Henoch.
Ubersetzt und erklart von Dr. A. Dill-
mann, Leipzig, 1883. These two edi-
tions supersede those of Bishop Lau-

rence: The Book of Enoch, ete., Oxford,
1821, 33,38, and Libri Enoch versia
Ethiopica, Oxon., 18388. Where the
difference appeared to require notice 1
have given Laurence’s rendering in
brackets [L.] or in the notes. The edi-
tions of Hoffmann and Gfrérer have no
independent value. Cf. Dillm. Lindeit,
pp. Ivii. ff.

118 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

erally consistent view of the office of Messiah.’ But while
the whole book is thus impressed with a certain stamp
of uniformity, the central portion, round which the other
prophecies are grouped, glows beyond the other parts with
a spiritual fervor, pure, intense, and passionate. If the
deeper mysticism and colder speculations of the Apocrypha
leave no place for the doctrine of Messiah; if the priestly
and prophetic office of the great king was merged by the
Sibyl in the prophetic office of the nation, in Henoch the
Advent of Messiah is contemplated with a joyful and cer-
tain hope. The might and tyranny of heathen oppressors
serve only to suggest the certain retribution and just ven-
geance which hangs over them; the victories which have
been gained by the people of God are but a prelude to
wider conquests. A judgment is reserved for sinners; a
triumph is prepared for the righteous: and Messiah is the
divine instrument of this twofold issue. Such is the mes-
sage of “faith and truth”? which the voice of the ancient
patriarch proclaims to a people conscious of their heav-

1 Ewald, in an admirable essay on
the book (Ueber d. A’thiop. B. Henoch
Entstehung, Sinn wu. Zusammensetz.
Transact. of the Royal Soc. of Géttin-
gen, 1856, pp. 107 ff.), supposes that it
consists of fragments of four books.

i. The first book, the original proph-
ecy, written in a period of outward
trouble and danger, during the first
years of John Hyrcanus, c. B. c. 144,
represented by capp. XxXXvii.—lxxi.
with some interpretations.

ii. The second book, written a few
years later, when prosperity had given
rise to internal schisms, c. B. Cc. 135, of
which fragments occur i.—v.; vi. 1, 2;
vill. 4; ix. 1—6, 8—11; x. 4—10, 12; xi.
2; xXii.—xvi.; 1xxxi. 1—4; Ixxxiv.; xci.
4: ev.

iii. The third book, written a little
Jater, ὁ. B. C. 128, philosophical in char-
acter, as the first is poetical and the
second rhetorical. Fragments of this

occur, XX.—XXXvVi.; ]xxii.—IJ]xxxil. ;
Ixxxili. 1—9; Ixxxv.—xe; cevi.—[eviii.]

iv. The Book of Noah, occurring in
scattered fragments, vi. 3—8; ix. 7; x.
1—3, 11; xi. 22; Ixix. 2. ; xvii.—xix.;
xxxix. 1, 27; Ix. 1—10, 24 f.; Ixiv—
Ixix. 16. This book was written some
years after the last.

The whole book of Henoch assumed
its present shape, according to Ewald,
during the first half of the century
before Christ. I have given these de-
tails, not because I think it possible to
accept a result so complicated, but be-
cause the divisions throw considerable
light upon the internal structure of the
book. Other theories of its composi-
tion may be seen in Hilgenfeld, a. a. O.
pp. 95 ff. Perhaps all that can be
affirmed with certainty is the later
origin of the Noachian portions.

2 Cf. Dillm. p. 82; Ewald, p. 128.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 119

enly mission and fresh from brilliant struggles, and yet
trembling and divided.'

The first introduction of the Messianic subject is marked
by several peculiarities, which at once call
attention to its importance. The Vision of the Messianic
which contains the most complete portrait- ©” “""
ure of the coming Kingdom is emphatically the Vision
of Wisdom; and this “ beginning of Wisdom” is addressed
to all “the dwellers on the earth, both those of old time,
and those who shall come after.” Even God Himself is
addressed by a new title in connection with these Messi-
anic revelations, as “the Lord of Spirits,” the Supreme Soy-
ereign who establishes, by His spiritual hosts, order and
righteousness in the various realms of creation.

The vividness of the prophecy is already foreshadowed
by the form which it assumes. In one pas-
sage the Seer is represented as approaching
the Divine presence, and contemplating the
person of Messiah. “I saw,” he says, “in heaven One,
Ancient of days,? and His head was white as wool; and
with Him was another, whose countenance was as the ap-
pearance of a man, and full of grace, like to one of the
holy Angels. And I asked one of the Angels, who went
with me and showed me all hidden things, of that Son of
Man, who He was, and whence He was, and wherefore He
went with the Ancient of days? And he answered me and
spake to me: This is the Son of Man, to whom righteous-
ness belongeth, with whom righteousness dwelleth (hath
dwelt, L.), and who revealeth all the treasures of that

The general con-
ception.

1In giving a general view of the
Messianic descriptions of Henoch, I
have quoted the book in its final shape,
not only because it is most convenient
to do so, but because the book was
current in this form at the Christian
era, for the arguments of Hoffmann
(Schriftb. i. 871) in favor of a later
origin are quite unsatisfactory. It will
be seen that the great mass belongs to

Ewald’s “‘ First Book.” Inthe‘ Second
Book” the righteousness of Messiah is
His characteristic attribute, just as the
people of God are described as “the
righteous” more usually than “ the
elect.”

2 Dillm., cin Haupt der Tage, betagtes
Haupt. The allusion to Dan, vii. 18,
justifies the translation.

120 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAIL.

which is concealed, because the Lord of Spirits hath
chosen Him; whose lot before the Lord of Spirits hath
surpassed all through His uprightness forever (in everlast-
ing righteousness, L.). And this Son of Man whom thou
hast seen shall raise the kings and the mighty men from
their beds, and the powerful even from their thrones; and
shall unloose the bands of the powerful [with which they
bind God’s people], and break in pieces the teeth of sinners.
And He shall hurl the kings from their thrones and their
kingdoms, because they magnify Him not, nor praise Him,
nor acknowledge with thankfulness whence the kingdom
is lent to them. .... And they shall be driven from the
dwellings of the assembly of His Church, and of the faith-
TT ecenpagee
The attributes of majesty and humanity, of dominion
Messign’e cnarae. «Ud righteousness, with which Messias is
terarddivineater- here clothed, continually reappear throughout
tie the Visions, and the manifestation of these in
the deliverance of the faithful and the final retribution of
the wicked, forms the general object of His work. With-
out adding any new element to the fulness of the old
prophets. the writer of Henoch endeavors to combine into
one grand image the scattered traits in which they had
foretold the working of their great king; and if he only
dwells on the resistless might and certain triumph which
should attend His advent, he differs from later zealots in
retaining the essential character of superhuman glory with
which Daniel had portrayed Him. He appears in several
places to recognize the preéxistence of Messiah, while, at
the same time, he describes Him as very man ; and, though
the interpretation of these passages has been questioned,?
the clearness with which the eternal predestination of Mes-
siah, and the intimate relation in which He stands at once
to God and to the whole world of spirits, is one of the
most conspicuous points in the teaching of the book.

1 ¢. xlvi. 2 Wrongly, I believe. Cf. Laurence, Prel. Diss. 11. f.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 121
“Before the sun and the signs of heaven were created,
before the stars were made, the name [of the Son of Man]
was named (invoked, L.) before the Lord of Spirits.”?
“He was chosen and hidden in the sight of God before the
world was created, and He shall be to eternity in His
sight.”? At the day of His appearance, “the kings and
mighty men and dwellers on the earth shall laud and
praise and magnify Him who ruleth over all, who was hid-
den. For aforetime He, the Son of Man, was hidden,
whom the Most High kept in the presence of His power,
and revealed to the elect.”* And thus it is said that
Henoch, in his life time, was “translated from among the
dwellers on the earth to that Son of Man, to the Lord of
Spirits.”4 Even before His manifestation, the Messias was
the joy of men and angels; for “the Wisdom of the Lord
of Spirits revealed Him to the Holy and the Righteous...
for in His name are they delivered, and He is the avenger
of their life.’> And Henoch heard “the voice of the
Angel Rufael praise the Elect One and the elect people”
before the throne of the majesty of God.’ The very stars
and elements and powers of nature “rejoiced greatly, prais-
ing and magnifving [God], because that to them was
revealed the name of that Son of Man.” 7 |

1 Compare the Rabbinical saying,
that ‘‘the name of Messiah existed be-
fore the foundation of the world.”

2 Cap. xlviii. 3,6. ‘The e:ect and
the concealed one existed in His pres-
ence before the world was created and
forever.”? (Laur.)

3 Cap. Ixii. 6, 7; δ. xi. 10, Laur.

4 Cap. Ixx.1. This difficult passage,
which is the clearest testimony to the
preéxistence of Messiah, belongs, ac-
cording to Dillmann, tothe Noachian”’
additions to the original book, and so
dates from the first century B. c.(Dillm.
pp. ΧΙ. 1.). Laurence’s translation is
quite different: ‘‘ After this the name
of the Son of Man, living with the
Lord of Spirits, was exalted by the

inhabitants of the earth.” Cf. Dillm.
].c. Ewald (p. 124 ἢ) gives another
translation: ‘“* Afterwards was Henoch
celebrated among men as living with
Messias, and with God.” ....

5 Cap. xlviii. 7. ‘‘ He revealed the
wisdom.” ... .— Laur.

Ὁ Cap. xl. 5, 9.

7 Cap. )xix. 26 (Iviii. 88, Laur.) From
this passage it appears natural to con-
clude that the unutterable name — ‘‘the
oath * —by which the whole world was
ruled (c. ]xix. 14 ff.) was the name of
Messiah. Cf. Apoc. ii. 17. According
to the present text, the title ‘“‘ Lord of
Spirits’? is once applied to Messiah,
c. Ixii. 2, but there is probably some
corruption.

192 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

In contrast with this Divine aspect of Messiah are the
many titles which declare His humanity and
essential subordination to God. He is “the
Righteous One,” chosen by God for his uprightness; “the
Elect One”? “according to God’s good pleasure;” “the
Anointed,” * “the Son of Man,” “the Son of woman,” #
while still also “the Son of God.”* And though these
titles belong in a peculiar sense to Messiah, as the type
and head of His Church, they are extended also to all be-
llevers, who are called “the righteous,” “the elect,” “the
children of God.” Even the form under which Messiah
was first described is applied in a lower scale to Henoch,
who is addressed by an angel as “the Son of Man who is
born to righteousness, and on whom righteousness dwell-
eth, and whom the righteousness of the Ancient of days
leaves πο." ὁ In the imagery of one of the Visions, Mes-
sias is “born as a white bullock,” 7 and all the beasts of the
field, and all the birds of the air, feared Him, and prayed
to Him always. “And I looked,” the Seer continues, “ till
all their races were changed, and they all became white
bullocks.”.... And when the judgment is accomplished,
it is said: “The whole host of heaven and all the Saints
who are above, and the host of God, the Cherubim and
Seraphim and Ophanim, and all the angels of might, and
all the angels of dominion, and the Elect One, and the
other powers which are on the land above the water, shall
cry on that day, and with one voice exalt and praise and
laud and magnify [God] in the spirit of faith, in the spirit
of wisdom and of patience, and in the spirit of mercy, and
in the spirit of right and of peace, and in the spirit of

His humanity.

1 Capp. xxxviii. 2; liii. 6. 5 Cap. ev. 2 (only).
2 Cap. xlv. 8, 4, ete. This is the most
usual title of Messiah. Si€ap. bcxia 14. (box. 17. aun). Gt.
8 Capp. xlviii. 10; lii. 4 (only). ΟΕἿΣ. 10:
4 Cap. Ixii. 5 (only). The form of the
title appears to be suggested by the con- 7 (Ixxxix. 45, Laur.). By this figure

text. There is, I believe, no reference He is likened to the Patriarchs. Cf.
to Gen. iii. 15. Dillm. p. 286.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 123
goodness, and shall all say with one voice, Praise be to
Him, and praised be the name of the Lord of Spirits, for-
ever and ever.” !

But while Messiah is thus represented as man, and, per-
haps, classed among created things, He stands
far above all in the greatness of His gifts.
Not only is He placed by God on the throne of His maj-
esty to execute judgment in the world, but “wisdom is
poured out like water, and there is no end of His majesty.
He is mighty in all the secrets of righteousness, and un
righteousness passes away before Him like a shadow. . . .
In Him dwells the spirit of wisdom, and the spirit of Him
who giveth knowledge (the spirit of intellectual wisdom,
L.), and the spirit of teaching and power, and the spirit
of those who have fallen asleep in righteousness. And He
shall judge the hidden things; and no man shall be able to
utter an idle speech before Him, for He is chosen before the
face of the Lord of Spirits according to His good pleasure.”?

The effect of the manifestation of Messias follows im-
mediately from His character. “In those
days shall a change be wrought for the holy
and the elect; the light of day shall dwell
upon them, and majesty and honor shall turn to them.
And on the day of distress ruin shall be heaped upon sin-
ners. .... And in those days the earth shall give back
that which has been entrusted to it, and the kingdom of
death shall give back that which has been entrusted to it,
and Hell (Scheol) shall give back that which it owes. And
[Messias] shall choose the righteous and holy among them,
for the day is come that they should be delivered.” ®

His excellent gifts.

The effect of Ihs
coming.

1 Cap.1xi.10, 11. From the position that day ” (Ix. 13); yet he defends it as

in which the words ‘‘ the Elect” occur,
and from a comparison of the context,
a question may perhaps arise whether
the reading is correct. Laurence’s
translation is not very probable: “And
all the angels of the Lord, namely of
the Elect one, and of the other Power,
who was upon earth over the water on

containing ‘‘an obvious reference to
Gen. i. 1,” and “the declaration of a
.... precise and distinct Trinity of
Percons under the supreme appellation
of God and Lord.” Prel. Diss. Ὁ. lii.

2 Cap. xlix. (c. xlviii. Laur.)

8 Capp. 1. li. The doctrine of the
resurrection is again described with

124 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

But the final establishment of Messiah’s kingdom? is
preceded by a time of devastation and con-
quest on earth —a “period of the sword.”
“f saw, and a great sword was given to the
sheep — the long oppressed people of God; then the sheep
went forth against the beasts of the field, — their ancient
oppressors, — and all the beasts and the fowls of heaven
fled before their face,” 2 and turned too late to prayer and
repentance. This occupies the eighth of the ten “ weeks”
into which the history of the world is divided; “and the
sword is given that judgment and righteousness might be
executed on them who act with violence, and the sinners
given over into the hands of the righteous.”* “ And the
hearts of the saints were full of joy that the number of
righteousness was fulfilled, and the prayer of the righteous

The wars which
precede it; and

singular force and detail, c. 1xi. 5, 6.
One point is particularly deserving of
notice: in speaking of the future state
of the wicked, the writer always speaks
of their spirits only (Dillm. p. 165).
The reiinion with the body — the condi-
tion of sharing Messiah’s kingdom — is
reserved for the righteous. Cf. Hom.
Odyss. xi. 487 ff.; Plato, Resp. 386 c.
The same doctrine occupies a prom-
inent place in the Mormonite system.
Spencer's Letters, pp. 154 ff.

1 The mutual relation of the different
parts of the “end of the world” is
naturally obscure, and the obscurity is
increased by much confusion both in
the language and in the text of the book.
The general interpretation which 1 have
given appears to be intelligible and con-
sistent; but two difficulties remain, as
to the times of the appearance of Mes-
siah, and of the great judgment. In
6. xc. 87, the birth of ‘“‘ the white bul-
lock, with great horns” (Messiah) is
described as taking place after the
period of the sword, and before the
great conversion of the world (§ 38),
though all men were already collected
at the Holy City (é.e., in the ninth
week), and this, I believe, is the opinion

of the writer. And, correspondingly,
it appears to be his intention to place
the great judgment at the end of the
tenth week, after the peaceful reign
over the converted world, though in
c. xc. 20—27 it is described immediately
after the period of the sword, probably
as being its final consummation and
spiritual antitype (ef. xIvii. 4; xlviii. 2).
The character of Messiah as the resist-
less and righteous Judge requires that
all judgments, even the period of the
sword (c. xlviii. 4 ff.), should ultimately
be referred to Him. The clearer state-
ments must interpret the more general.

2 Cap. xc. 19(Ixxxix. 27, Laur.). But
even the most terrible calamities are
regarded as a judgment on sinners
(and not a trial for the elect, cf. cap.
Gol afte):

8 Capp. Ixili. xx xviii. 6.

4 Cap. xci. 12 (xcii. 18, 14, Laur.), cf.
¢. xxxviii.5. ven in this chapter the
different stages of the great end of all
things seem to be distinguished: ‘the
period of the sword,” ὁ 4—6; ‘‘ the rev-
elation of the secrets of the righteous,”
88; “the manifestation of Messiah,”
§ 2. See, also, c. ΧΟΥ͂Σ, 12; xevi. 1.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 125

heard, and the blood of the righteous required before the
Lord of Spirits.”? At the end of this week
the people of God have reared houses for
themselves “in their own pleasant land,” and built “a
new temple for the great King,” “greater and nobler than
the first,” and “all the sheep are therein.” “ And in that
place I saw a fountain of righteousness which was in-
exhaustible; many fountains of wisdom encircled it, and
all that were thirsty drank thereof, and were full of wis-
dom, and had their dwelling with the holy and righteous
and elect.”” In the ninth week “the righteous judgment
is rendered, ....and all men look to the way of upright-
ness;” “and all the beasts of the field and all the fowls
of heaven gathered themselves to the house [of God], and
tHe Lord of the sheep had great joy that they were all
good and returned to His house. And I looked till the
sheep laid down the sword that was given to them, and
brought it back to His house, and it was sealed before the
face of the Lord. ... And the eyes of all were opened
that they should see that which is good (the good one, L.),
and there was not one among them who saw not.”* And
after this, at the end of the tenth week, shall be the eternal
judgment over the angels. . . . . “ And the former heaven
shall vanish and pass away, and a new heaven shall appear,
and all the powers of heaven shall give light forever
sevenfold. And after that shall be many weeks without
number in goodness and righteousness, and sin shall be no
more named forever and ever.”* “And it shall come to
pass in these days that the elect and holy children [of God,
the Angels] shall descend from the heights of heaven, and
join their Lord with the children of men.”* “And from
henceforth there will be nothing that corrupts (transitory,
Dillm.) any more, for He, the Son of Man, has appeared,
and sits upon the throne of His majesty, and all evil shall

its final blessedness.

J Cap. xlvii. 4. 4 Cap. xci. 17 (xcii. 16, Laur.) Cf
2 Cap. xviii. 1. 6. xcii. 4, 5.
8 Cap. xc. 33 f. 5 Cap. xxxix. 1. Cf. Dillm. 1. ¢

Lie

126 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

vanish and pass away before His face.”?... “And the
chosen One shall dwell among His chosen people.” ? “And
they shall be arrayed in the robe of life; ... and the Lord

of Spirits shall dwell over them, and they

«ρος. iii. 20.

shall dwell with that Son of Man, and eat

with Him, and lie down and rise up forever and ever.’” #
The interval between the dates of the Books of Henoch
and Esdras” was one of humiliation and trial

(second) Book of for the faithful Jew.

Esdras.

The kingdoms of the

world grew stronger, and he was gradually

brought again under their dominion.

The very forms in

which the revelations are clothed furnish apt symbols of
the times in which they were respectively written, and of

IC apelixix. 29.

2 Cap. xiv. 4.

5 Cap. Ixii. 16, 14.

4 The traces of “‘mysticism” in the
Book of Enoch are very rare; but they
tend to show that the personification
of JVisdom and the Word was entirely
unconnected with the doctrine of Mes-
siah. ‘‘ Wisdom found no place where
she should dwell; then had she a dwell-
ing in heaven. Wisdom came to dwell
among the children of men, and found
no dwelling-place ; then Wisdom re-
turned to her place, and took up her
abode among the angels. And unright-
eousness (Folly) came forth from her
abode [the indefinitencess of the phrase
is worthy of notice]: she found those
whom she sought not and dwelt among
them, [welcomed] as the rain in the
wilderness, and as the dew on the
thirsty land” (c. xlii). In another
place it is said: ‘‘The Righteous One
[Messiah] shall arise fiom sleep, and
Wisdom shall arise and be given to
them [the elect]” (c. xci. 10). Once
more: **The wisdom of the Lord of
Spirits revealed [the Son of Man] to
the holy and the righteous” (6. xlviii.7).
Again, Henoch is described as bidding
his son collect all his househo'd to-
gether, ‘‘for,” he says, ‘‘ the Word
calls me, and the Spirit is poured out

upon me.” .... (xci. 1). So, agafh,
c. xiv. 24: “ΤῸ Lord called me and
spake to me; Come hither, Henoch,
and to my Holy Word.” The passage
xc. 88 (Ixxxix. 47, Laur.) is, I believe,
in spite of Ewald’s authority (p. 159 n.),
an interpolation; and Dillmann’s ex-
planation is at Jeast very ingenious.
The literal rendering as it stands is:
‘the first in the midst of them became
[a word, and that word became] a large
beast.” Nor can I think that 6. lii. 1,
‘When he brings His Word upon you
shall ye not be destroyed,” refers to
Messiah personally. Cf. Dillm. 1]. ce.

5 Liicke, Hinleitung, u. 8. w. ὃ 12.
Hilgenfe'd, Jud. Apok. 187 ff. The best
edition is that of Gfrérer, Prophete
veteres Pseudepigraphi, Stuttgard, 1840,
pp. 66 ff., who gives Laurence’s Latin
version of the Ethiopic (Oxon. 1820)
with a collation of the old Latin, and
the Arabic version (by Ockley in Whis-
ton’s Primitive Christianity, vol. iv.,
1711). The Dissertatio Critica of Van
der Vlis (Amsterd., 1889) I have not
been able to use. The quotations are
given according to the divisions in
the English version; the references in
brackets are to Gfrérer’s divisions. The
Ethiopic text is followed, unless the
contrary is stated. The English ver-
sion follows the Latin.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 127

the general feelings by which they are pervaded. <A
patriarch translated from earth to heaven, and admitted to
gaze face to face on the hosts of the spiritual world, is the
fitting herald of wisdom, righteousness, and judgment to a
people who, even in suffering, see in their tyrants only the
objects of coming vengeance. A prince in exile with an
exiled nation, the witness of heathen wickedness and the
victim of tormenting doubts, pleads with significant energy
the cause of a people whom their God seems to have
forsaken and given up to the oppression of an alien.) The
mysteries of the physical creation are as nothing to one
who is bewildered by “the counsels of the Most High,”
though he is referred back to the lessons of
nature that he may acknowledge his weak-
ness.”

This fundamental difference of tone between the two
Apocalypses appears to explain their diver-
gences in detail. The burden of Esdras 15. οἱ ji, em
throughout, “How long, Ὁ Lord?”? The
present world is utterly corrupt; a few only shall share in
the promised redemption. Fasting and tears are the pre-
paration for his visions; and the seer no longer looks upon
the mysteries of heaven, but listens to them as they are
revealed by the ministry of angels.‘ Everywhere the
language is that of an exile among the foul corruptions of
Egypt, to whom the promised land is: no longer the
gathering field of nations, “the joy of the whole earth.”
The “woes of Messiah” are described with a terrible
fulness, which is hardly exceeded by the despairing
traditions of the Talmud.’ “ Behold, the days shall come
that ..... the way of truth shall be hidden, and the
land of faith shall be barren (sterilis a fide V.L.). But
iniquity shall be increased, ..... and the land shall be
wasted utterly... ... The sun shall shine suddenly in the

Distinguished
Jrom Henoch by

1 Cf. ὁ. vi. 9 (iv. 15). Esau appears 2 iv. 5 ff. (ii. 7 ff.)
to represent the Idumzan Herod. Hil- 8 Cf. iv. 35 (ii. 44), etc.
genf. p. 195, 4 Cf. iy. 21 (ii. 30). 5 Cf. pp. 127, 8

128 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

night and the moon in the day, and blood shall drop from
wood, and the stone shall give his voice and the people

shall be troubled. ........ There shall be a sound (Chaos
V.L.) also in many places; ..... and friends shall destroy

one another. Then shall wit hide itself, and understanding
withdraw into his secret chamber, and shall be sought of
many and yet not be found. Then shall unrighteousness
and incontinency be multiplied upon earth. One land
shall ask another and say, Is righteousness gone through
thee, or one doing righteousness (justum faciens V.L.)?
And it shall say, No. At that time shall men hope, and
obtain nothing; they shall marry, and not rejoice; they
shall labor, but their ways shall not prosper.”? And these
woes and evils are supposed to follow by an inevitable law
from the working of nature. “For the world hath lost his
youth, and the times begin to wax old. For the world
is divided into twelve parts, and the ten parts of it are
gone already and half of a tenth part...... And look
how much the world shall be weaker through age, so much
the more shall evils increase upon them that dwell there-

Ale te) etm “For the grain of evil was sown in the heart
of Adam from the beginning, and the fruit of ungodliness

hath been brought forth and multiplied up to this time,
and shall yet be brought forth until the time of harvest
come.”® So “when commotion shall be seen in the world
between several nations, and nations shall be disturbed,
and the people shall be polluted, and princes shall hasten
to mutual slaughter, and leaders shall be struck with
consternation, then understand that of these the Most
High hath spoken as coming before his appointed time.” ὁ
The stern spirit of exclusiveness through

«(2 Resemexc ~ which the blessings ushered in by these ter-
rible signs are reserved for the Jewish na-

tion alone, is another sign of the overwhelming sorrows

1 Ch. v. (Sii.). 8 iv. 80 (ii. 38).
2 xiv. 10 ff. (xiv. 8 ff.). Cf. v. 54, 55 ;
iy. 50. 4ix. 3 ff. (ix. 2 ff}.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 129

under which the writer of the book was bowed down.
“ And now, O Lord, .... . if the world (ὁ αἰών) be made
for our sakes,! why do we not possess an inheritance with
the world? how long shall this endure?”2)> And when he
inquires as to the end of all things and the terrible issues
of Adams sin, the answer is given: “The Most High hath
made this world for many, but the world to come for few.”
..... “There be many created, but few shall be saved.” 3
“For you is Paradise opened, the tree of life is planted, the
time to come is prepared: .. .. . and, therefore, ask no
more questions concerning the multitude of them that
perish ;”* nay, rather “inquire how the righteous shall be
saved, whose the world is and for whom the world is
created.” ὃ

At length, when deceit and oppression and terror have
filled the world, Messiah shall come, “even
He whom (Unctus V. L.) the Highest hath
kept for the end of days of the seed of David,”
(Om. V. L.), like “a lion from a wood,” “rebuking the
eagle for her unrighteousness and utterly consuming her.”
“The rest of my people shall He (7 A‘th.) deliver with
mercy, them that have been preserved in my judgment,”
and “He shall make them joyful until the coming of the
day of judgment, whereof I have spoken unto thee from the
beginning.”® Under another image Messiah is described
as a man rising from the mysterious sea, into whose depth
none can look;’ for “no man upon earth can see my son
[saith the Lord], or those that be with Him, but in the day
[of His appearing].” “And afterwards, that man flew

The coming of
Messiah.

1 Cf. vi. 55 (iv. 63): ‘All this have I
spoken before thee, O Lord, because
thou madest the world for our sakes; ”
and vii. 10, 11 (v. 10).

4 viii. 1, 3, 52—55.

5 ix. 13. The searceness of the good
is given as areason for God’s delight in

2 vi. 57—59.

3 The entrance to the fair city was
made “one only path, even between
fire and water, sosmall that there could
but one man go there at once” at the
time of Adam’s transgression, while
before it was wide and sure, ο. vii. 1—13.

them (vi. 35, A&th.).

6 Ce. xi. 37 ff. (xi. 41 ff.); xii. 8, 31—34
(xii. 36 ff).

7 ¢. xiii. 51, 52.

8 0. xiii. 1—18. Convalescebat cum
millibus celi. V. I.

130 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

with the clouds of heaven, and wheresoever He turned
His countenance and looked, all things forthwith vanished
Detores him; 7 erie. and there was gathered together a
multitude of men out of number, from the four winds of
the heaven, to subdue the Man that came out of the sea.
But I beheld, and lo, He had raised for Himself a great
mountain and flew up upon it. ..... And as the multi-
tude came against Him, He neither lifted up His hand, nor
took his sword, nor any instrument of war, but only there
went forth out of his mouth a billow of fire. .... and
burned them up every one, until nothing was left of them,
but only the dust of their ashes and the smoke of their
cenloeration,”. - τ .*. Afterwards I saw the same Man
come down from the mountain and eall unto Him a
peaceable multitude; and there came much people unto
Him. Then was I struck with great fear, and I awaked.
..... And this is the meaning of the vision:! The man
whom thou sawest coming up from the heart of the sea,
the same is He whom God the Highest hath kept a great
season, to redeem the world unto Himself (qui per semet
ipsum liberabit creaturam suam V.L:)..... And the
Most High shall begin to deliver those that dwell on the
earth. [And He shall come to their astonishment (V. L.).]
And one shall undertake to fight against another, one city
against another, one place against another, one people
against another, and one realm against another. And
when these things shall come to pass, and the signs shall
happen which I have showed thee before, then shall that
Man (filius meus V. L. et Ar.) be declared, whom thou
sawest (μέ virum V. L.) ascending. And when all the
people hear His voice they shall leave the battles they
have in their own land one against another. And an
innumerable multitude shall be gathered together desiring
to slay Him. But He shall stand upon the
top of Mount Sion. And Sion shall come,
and shall be showed to all men, prepared and built, like

Apoce, xxi. 10,

1 ¢. xiii. 25—47.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 131

as thou sawest that mountain to come forth and be formed
without hands. And this is my Son, who shall rebuke the
nations for their sins, ..... and He shall destroy them
without labor like coals of fire (per ignem que igni
assimilata est V. L.). And whereas thou sawest that
another peaceable multitude was gathered wnto Him;
‘these are the nine (decem V. L.; novem et dimidia Ar.)
tribes which were carried away prisoners out of their own
land...... But they took this counsel among them-
selves, that they would leave the stock of their people
(multitudinem gentium V. 1.) and go forth into a country
where never mankind dwelt, that they might keep their
statutes which they had never kept in their own land.
And they entered through the narrow passages of the
Euphrates. ..... Forthe Most High held still the flood
till they were passed over;.... . .and now the Highest
shall stay the springs of the stream again that they may
go through ;* therefore sawest thou the multitude come
together.” ..... .

The reign thus commenced in terrible and overwhelming
desolation shall last for four hundred years.*
“After these years,” it is said, “shall my son 77cm of Mew
Christ die, and all men that have breath.
And the world shall be turned into the old silence seven
days, like as in the first beginning, and no man shall
remain. And after seven days [the world that yet awaketh
not, V. L.] shall be raised up; and the corruptible world
shall retire afar. And the earth shall restore those that
are asleep in her, and so shall the dust those that are in
silence, and the secret places shall deliver those souls that
were committed unto them. And the Most High shall
appear upon the seat of judgment; and His mercy shall
coine (7. 6.. to the distressed faithful. Pertransibunt miseria,

1 Cf. Baruch, Ep. Syr. init. sias meus cum his qui cum eo [sunt], et
2 Cf. Apoc. xvi. 12. letificabit eos qui resuscitabuntur.
3 ¢. vii. 23—85. The clause iswanting Filius meus Jesus V L. Filius meus
‘in 2th. y. 29. Revelabitur enim Mes- Messias Ar.

132 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

V.L.), and His clemency shall cease, and his long-suffering
shall have an end, but judgment only shall remain, and
truth shall stand, and faith shall bud, and the work shall
follow, and the reward shall be showed, and justice shall
watch, and injustice shall not slumber.” For “the day of
doom shall be the end of this time and the beginning of
immortality for to come, wherein corruption is past.”!....
The great outlines of these apocalyptic visions offer a
striking parallel to the teaching of the apos-
ee oe. ‘tles. The times of war and tumult which
i portend the coming of Messiah, His sudden
appearance with a heavenly host, the destruction of the
wicked by the breath of His mouth, the reign of triumph,
the general resurrection and last judgment, are brought out
with distinct clearness. Nor is this all; in spite of the im-
portance attached to the “good works laid up in heaven,”
faith is required as a condition of salvation, Legalism is
spiritualized by the recognition of a higher energy. Buta
sorrowful gloom is over all. Messiah Himself dies. Chaos
resumes its old sway. The earth is not quickened with a
new life, but passes away in a second creation.
Errors such as these were the natural result of times of
oppression; and we may believe that the
of banner author of the Book of Ezra would have wel-
cmt mtarr eomed Christianity as glad tidings; and that
not Bokof even if he had asked, with others, Are there a
Sew that be saved? he would probably have
acquiesced in the answer. But there was a yet narrower
and sterner form of Jewish hope in which exclusiveness
degenerated into the wildest intolerance, and the observ-
ance of the Law into the most passionate formalism.
This spirit was evoked in its full energy by the rise of
Christianity, and distinctly animates the Book of Jubilees?

1 vii. 48 (vii. 12). The book is mentioned under this title
2 Translated by A. Dillmann in_ by Epiphanius adv. Her. xxxix. § 6. ἐν
Ewald’s Jahrbicher der Biblischen Tots ᾿Ιωβηλαίοις εὑρίσκεται, τῇ καὶ
Wissenschaft, 1849, pp. 280 ff.; 1850, 1ff. Δεπτογενέσει καλουμένῃ... .. Τὸ

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 133

which is one of the strangest relics of early Jewish litera-
ture. This remarkable narrative may be called a “haga-
dical” commentary on Genesis, and it derives its name from
- the fact that its entire arrangement is based on the festal
cycle of forty-nine years. The object of the writer is to
methodize the chronology of primeval history, to explain
its difficulties, to enforce its lessons. In connection with
the Apostolic writings, the chief importance of the book
lies in the fierce severity with which it inculeates the ritual
of the Law, and in the haughty pride with which it limits
the special privileges of Israel. The Sabbath appears as
no earthly institution, but as ordained first for angels, and
observed in heaven before the creation of man,!_ The very
object for which the people of Israel was chosen was that
they might keep it. The eating of blood is an offence on
the same level as the shedding of blood.2. The cruel deed
of Simeon and Levi is blessed 3? and precedence over all
men is given to Levi and his seed, and that they should
“be as the Angels of the presence.” It is taught that the
Mosaic ordinances were not only observed by the patri-
archs, but written in heavenly tables and binding forever
And nothing less than the successful claims of Christianity
to have fulfilled and spiritualized the precepts of the Law,
can explain the stress which is laid upon its permanent
force, and the hopeless penalties which are attached to the
neglect of it. In the presence of ritualism such as this the
vision of Messiah almost fades away. The personal char-

Ixxviii. 18, 24. Cf. Ed. Bened. 1. c.;

Dillm. pp. 88 ff.
1 ¢. ii. pp. 235-6.
2 Pp. 245, 248.

also called ἡ τοῦ Μωὔΐὔσεως ἀποκάλυψις,
μικρογένεσις, τὰ λεπτὰ Γενέσεως
(Dillmann, pp. 74,76). Its date is some
time in the first century (id. p. 88), later

Cf. c. 50.

than the Book of Henoch (id. p. 90)
and earlier than the Testaments of
the twelve Patriarchs (id. p. 91). The
Ethiopic version was made from a
Greek text: whether this was the origi-
nal text is uncertain from internal evi-
dence, and Jerome evidently alludes to
a Hebrew original of the book. Zp.

8 Pp. 37—39.

4 Pp. 245, 12 (the
nacles celebrated by Abraham), 4
(Tithes), 9 (Circumcision), 49 (Pass
over). In the face of this stern ritual-
ism it is strange that a tradition should
exist which derives Gal. vi. 15 from the
ἀποκάλυψις Mwicews. Cf. Meyer,].c

feast of Taber.

134 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.
acter of the Redeemer is lost in the vague anticipation of
a general return from the dispersion.’ The transition from
“this world” to “the world to come” is found in a gradual
progress of moral and physical evil, “till the children are
gray-headed,” followed by a period of deepening repen-
tance and increasing strength, which culminates in an age
when men shall enjoy a thousand years of perpetual youth,
and no Satan or destroyer disturb their happiness.” ὃ

At the same time that the attempt was made to furnish
a supplement to Scripture in the Apocalyptic
writings, the books of Scripture themselves
were submitted to a formal interpretation.
Egypt and Palestine shared alike in the work of transla-
tion, as they joined in completing the image of Messiah’s
triumph; and the Septuagint and the Tar-
gums remain as the monuments of their la-
bors. Regarding only their present form, the
LXX. is the most ancient version; and it is perhaps char-
acteristic of the time and place at which it was made? that
it contains scarcely any passages which bring forward the
person of Messiah in a clearer light than the original text.’
In some places the original ambiguity between a race and
a person is decided by the selection of the race as the
source of the Divine blessings; in others the future hope
appears to be lost in the present which served as the type
of it; in others the fulness of the original prediction is
lowered and compressed; but generally the words of the

2. The doctrine of
Messiah in the exe-
getic literature.

(a) The Septua-
gint.

1 No mention is made of the promise ec. iii. 18—21. Cf. Clem. Hom. iii. 20.

to Eve, p. 288.

2 Ce. i. exxiii.; pp. 282, 23, 24.

8 The Ascensio Esaie (Gfrorer, Pro-
phete veteres Pseudepigraphi, pp.1ff.),
though a Christian Apocalypse, con-
tains some peculiar elements of Jewish
tradition. The description of the sue-
cessive descents of Messiah through
the seven heavens preparatory to His
incarnation is well worthy of notice,

Nero is directly identified with Anti-
christ, ο. iv. 1

4 Cf. p. 96.

5 Of these the most remarkable is
Numb. xxiv. 7 (quoted by Philo, ii. p.
423 M.). Isai. xxxviii. 11 is very ques
tionable; and even in the first passage
there is no distinct reference to Mes-
siah. Compare also Amos ix. 12 (Acts
xv. 17).

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 135
original are reproduced without any
elucidate them.’

But the case is far different with the Targums; and next
to the writings of the New Testament the
Targums of Onkelos? and Jonathan furnish
the best contemporary evidence as to the nature of the
received view of the Messiah at the commencement of the
Christian era. This testimony, however, is not only
authentic expression of the current belief, but rather
embodiment of traditional teaching. The introduction of
oral Chaldaic paraphrases in the public reading of the
Scriptures dates from the time of Ezra; and there is every
reason to believe that written translations existed as early
as the first century before Christ, though for a long time
interpreters would naturally shrink from committing their
versions to writing. Passing by the scanty notices of these
first versions, the paraphrase of the Law by Onkelos, and
that of the Prophets by Jonathan ben Usiel, are at once
the oldest and the most important.
to the first half of the first century, though the evidence
by which their date is determined is scanty and incomplete.’
The first, as was required by the nature of the subject, is
strictly accurate and clear, rarely departing from the origi-
nal text except to avoid the semblance of anthropomor-
phic doctrine. In the latter, wider scope was offered to
the translator, as well through the greater freedom allowed
in the treatment of the prophetic books, as by the necessity

attempt to apply or

(Ὁ) The Targums.

an
an

Both appear to belong

1Cf. Gen. iii. 15, αὐτός σον τη-
ρήσει κ΄ LXX. (ef. Philo i. p. 124),
συντρίψει Rom. xvi 20; but probably
Typ. is an old mistake for τειρήσει.
Gen. xlix. 8—10, Ta ἀποκείμενα αὐτῷ
LXX. ᾧ ἀποκεῖται, 5. οὗ ἐστίν all. (ef.
Just. Dial. c. Tryph. § 190 : Creduer,
Beitr. ii. 51 ff.) Num. xxiv. 17—19;
LXX. = ἡγούμενος y.19 (Cf. Credner,
a.a. 0. 64). Isai. iv. 2, Jost in LXX.
Tsai. ix. 6, τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ. Μεγάλης
βουλῆς ἄγγελος 1ΧΧ). Isai. Χ]. 1 11
LXX. of Israel and not of Messiah ;

vv. 2, 8,in Matt. xii. 18—21 * LXX
Isai. xlix. 1 ff. is ambiguous, apparently
of Israel. Ps. ii. 6, ἐγὼ δὲ κατεστάδϑην
LXX. Ps. ex. (cix.) 5, συνέϑλασεν
LXX. Hagg. ii. 7, τὰ ἔκλεκτα LXX.

21 have not been able to make use
of Luzzato’s Rabbinical Essay on Onke-
los: Philoxenus, ete. Vienne, 1880.

® The arguments of Gfrérer are, on
the whole, sufficient to prove that they
were made before the final overthrow
of Jerusalem (Jahrh. d. Heils, i. 36—88)

136 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

of giving distinctness to the sublime predictions which
they contained. It is probable that both have been inter-
polated in some degree by later hands; but the attempts to
show that they have been modified with a polemical object
against the Christians must be considered to have failed."
The Targum of Onkelos, from its literal exactness, could
not contain many explicit references to the
Messiah. Two passages only are quoted in
which he introduces the title, but those are
of the utmost importance, as recognizing generally the
period of Messiah’s coming, and the majesty of His king-
dom. In translating the well-known words of Jacob’s

ἡ. The Targum of
Onkelos.

blessing till Shiloh come, he says till Messiah

Gen. «lix. 10.

Num. xxiv. 17.

comes, whose is the kingdom, and to whom is
the gathering of the nations.
ing rendering of the prophecy of Balaam: A
king shall rise from Jacob, and a Messiah
shall be anointed from Israel.

And he gives a correspond-

The last words are perhaps

in themselves ambiguous, but when taken in connection
with constant Jewish tradition their meaning cannot be

doubtful.

1 Zunz, Gottesd. Vortrige, pp. 61 ff.
The Messianic passages from the Tar-
gums are collected by Buxtorf, Lex.
Talmud, p. 1268 ff., with some slight
errors; and in a convenient form, with
the Hebrew text aud double English
translation, by R. Young, Phe Chris-
tology of the Targums, Eding., 1853.
In addition to the Targum of Onkelos
on the Pentateuch, there is a second,
originally known as the Palestine Tar-
gum, which exists at present in a
double recension on the Jerusalem
Targum and the Targum of the
Pseudo-Jonathan. Yn its present form
this probably dates from the second
half of the seventh century (Zunz, 77),
though based on older materials. Its
character is rather that of /nterpreta-
tion (Midrash) than of Translation.
Fragments exist of a Jerusalem Tar-

gum on the Prophets(Zunz, 77 ff.) The
Targums on the Hagiographa are per.
haps later. That on the Psalms, Prov-
erbs, and Job is assigned by Zunz te
the same country (Syria) and date,
without determining what this is: the
Targum on the Psalms speaks of Con-
stantinople(Zunz, p 64n.). Theauthor
of the Targum of the five Migilloth
(Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Es-
ther, Canticles) lived probably “ zem-
lich lange nach der talmudischen
Epoche” (id. p. 65). No Targum of
Wzra, Nehemiah, or Daniel exists.
That on Chronicles is of very late date.
The account of the Targums by Zunz
(ch. v.)is most masterly and exact, and
contains in a brief space and ascholar-
like form all, I believe, that is yet
known certainly as to their history.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 137

The Messianic interpretations of Jonathan are numerous
and interesting, agreeing in most-cases with ᾿ς ye paremm
the current of later teaching. Thus, he says, of Jonathan ben
A king shall come forth from the sons of iri.
Jesse, and Messiah shall arise from his sons’ οὐ 2 οι
sons. This is the branch of the Lord, the son 4 Tritt. &
given to the house of David, who shall endure
Forever, in whose time shall be much peace ;
yet He shall execute a terrible vengeance on the enemies
of His people, like a fiery flying serpent. By x xiv. 2,
fim shall the nations be broken in pieces: ts.x.%.
and they shall bring offerings to Him, because — B® *vi-1,5-
fle shall be established in goodness, and be seated on 1118
throne in truth ; and He shall be fora crown
of joy. At the same time the Messiah appears
not only as a conquering and triumphant
king, but also as the servant of the Lord, the
servant whom He had chosen, who should
prosper. And though Jonathan sees in the description of
Christ’s sufferings only the chastisement of the Jewish na-
tion, yet he connects this period of distress with Messiah’s
coming. Lecause God hath cleansed their souls from sins,
they shall see the kingdom of their Messiah, they shall
have many sons and daughters, they shall prolong their
days, and keeping the Law of the Lord they shall be happy
according to His good pleasure.

So also in the other prophets Messiah is that second
David, the king of Israel, whom the Lord κα πὶ δ.
should raise up; who should go forth from σεν xrx.9;xxxiit.
them, and be revealed from the midst of them, a
and teach them the worship of the Lord, as the mystical
shepherd to whom the flock should be re-
stored, in whom all the just should trust, and o& τυραν Ἂν
all the humble dwell under the shadow of His
kingdom. And as He was to be the son of David, and
Himself the spiritual David, so was He to come forth
from Bethlehem, David’s city, being named from the be

155

Is. ix. 6,

15. raviii. 5.

Ts. xlii.1. Cf. Zech.
iii. 8.

Ts, xliti. τὸς

Js, tii, 18.

138 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

ginning, and destined to rule over all the
kingdoms of the earth?
The later Targums on the Pentateuch exhibit a striking
contrast to the rigid simplicity of Onkelos,
and in their Messianic passages show clearly
the hopes and influence of a later age. In
addition to the two passages which he applies to Messiah,”
they explain fifteen others as referring to His
time. Moses came forth from the desert,
Messiah, it is said, shall come out of Rome [the Roman
Empire ?], in the great paschal night of the second deliv-
erance of Israel. Then, though the people be
scattered to the uttermost parts of heaven, the
Word of the Lord shall gather them thence by the hand of
Elias the great priest, and bring them thence by the hand
of Messiah the King. The idea of the terrible conflict of
good and evil “in the last days” had assumed a form and
consistency not found in the earlier writings. Then shall
the serpent strive to sting men in the heel, but

Zech. vi. 15.

ili. The later Tar-
aums on the Penta-
teuch.

Ex. xii. 42.

Deut. xxx. 4.

Gen. tii. 15.
Weak 19. the sons of the-woman shall secure their de-
Ex, avi. 10. liverance in “the heel of time,” the days of

Numb. xxiv. 20.

Messiah. All the sons of the Hast, in league
with Amalek, whose sin shall never be forgot.
ten, shall then join battle with the house of Israel, and fall
forever, for the cry of Messiah is among His people. Al-
ready a second Messiah —the son of Ephraim — appears
in contrast with Messiah the King, and they
are compared respectively to the laver in the
court of the tabernacle and the vessels in the tabernacle

itself. But still Eder, a watch-tower near

Bethlehem, is spoken of as the place from
which Messiah shall be revealed in the end of days.’

—

Numb. xxiii. 21.

Hie, at, 9) 1.

Gen. xxxv. 21.

1 The references to 1 Sam. ii 10, and
2 Sam. xxiii. 3, are at least uncertain;
that to Isai xlv. 1 obviously incorrect.

2 Both Targums extend the applica-
tion of Gen. xlix. 11,12 expressly to
Messiah.

8 The same interpretation appears
also in a passage contained in the Tar-
gum of Jonathan on Mic. iv. 8 (And
thou tower of Eder), which, however,
seems to be an interpolation: Et tu
Messia Israelis, gui occultaris propter

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 139

The Targums on the Hagiographa contain but few dis-
tinct Messianic allusions. The only Psalms
which are directly applied to the Messiah
are Ps. xxi., xlv., Ixi., xxii. The six measures
of barley which Ruth received from Boaz are
interpreted to symbolize the six righteous men who should
spring from her... .. David, Daniel with his companions,
and King Messias. In the paraphrase of
Lamentations, it is said: Zhow [Ὁ Lord]
shalt proclaim freedom to thy people, the house of Israel,
by the hand of Messiah, as thou didst by the hand of Mo-
ses and Aaron, in the time of the Passover ;
and thou Zion shalt be freed by the hand of
Messiah, and of Elias the High Priest. In Ecclesiastes
it is expressly said that the day of the coming
of King Messiah is a mystery, as the day of «
death , and who is he who shall discover it
by wisdom? Several passages in Canticles are referred to
the Messiah ; and special mention is made of the two deliv-
erers who should arise, Messias the son of
David, and Messias the son of Ephraim.

But while the Apocalyptic and Interpretative literature
of the Jews shows the form which the Mes-
sianic hope had assumed as a theological 720 Mirae
dogma at the beginning of the Christian era, 7e0h fe 416 pope
it conveys little information as to the hold
which the doctrine retained on the mass of the people.
The teaching of the schools could scarcely touch the sym-
pathies or influence the character of “the multitude who
knew not the law;” and the literature which
survives in after generations is generally that
which was in advance of the age in which it appeared.

One important fragment, however, of what may be
called the popular literature has been preserved. The
“Psalms of Solomon”! appear to belong to the times of

iv. The Targum
on the Hagiogra-
pha.

Ruth tii. 15.

Lam. ti. 22.

Lam. iv. 22.

Eccles, vii. 25.
Γι 1}.

Cant. iv. 5.

John vii. 49.

peccata Ecclesiw Zionis,ad te regnum 1 The Greek translation, which alone
venturum est. remains, is given by Fabricius, Cod.

140 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

the Antiochean persecution,’ and to express the deep peni-
tence and the devout hope of a pious Jew
Sone Pealmsof at that crisis. They are distinguished from
the Apocalyptic writings by a clearer rec-
ognition of the sins of the people, and from the books
of the Apocrypha by a greater simplicity and a closer
adherence to the language of the Old Testament. The
view which they give of Messiah is proportionately distinct
and full, especially in the exhibition of the spiritual character
of His reign. After general prayers for mercy and resto-
ration (vii., x1.), and beyond the anticipation of a divine
visitation for judgment (xv.), the recollection of the
promise “to David and his seed forever” rises in marked
preéminence (xvii.). Though His throne be cast down, yet
shall it be raised up. A king, it is said,? a Son of David,
shall be girded with strength to bruise unjust rulers, to
cleanse Jerusalem, to remove sinners, to gather together
the just from all the places in which they have been
scattered. He shall shake the earth with His word, the
writer adds, and bless His people, and the Gentiles shall
serve Him. He shall be “free from sin” (καϑαρὸς ἀπὸ
ἁμαρτίας), “an anointed Lord” (χριστὸς κύριος ), and “shall
not be weak” through the strength of God. And “happy
are those who are born in His days, to see the blessings of
Israel, which God shall bring to pass in the congregation
II. The Messianic a ΤΩ
hope of the Jews as The language of these Psalms offers a near
pra el approximation to the tone of those who first
Wal ok welcomed the Messiah; but the various de-
tails gathered from a scanty literature are first combined

Pseudep. V. T. i. 914 ff. The Psalms 2 Psalm xvii. 5, 8, 28 ff.

are translated, and assigned to asecond

Solomon of the time of the Return, 3 Psalm xvii. 36. Ewald (iv. 344 π.)

by Whiston, Authentic Records, ete, conjectures that this may be an error

i. pp. 117 ff. Cf. Ewald, iv. 348 f. of translation for Xp. κυρίου. Cf. Lue.
1 Cf. Ewald, iv. 348 n. The language ii. 11 (varr. lectt.), 26.

of Psalm viii. seems decisive on this
point. 4 Psalms xvii. 50; xviii. 7.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. ~ 141

into a living picture in the records of the New Testament.
Without the historical narrative the sum

of the theological teaching is confused and 4}. The New Tex
often unintelligible. But in a few scattered

phrases the Apostolic writers have preserved a striking
outline of the different forms which the national hope of
the Jews assumed at the time and on the scene of Christ’s
appearance. The variety and distinctness of the traits
which they have marked, their simplicity and naturalness,
their vital connection with existing circumstances, and the
confirmation which they receive from subsequent history,
are alike worthy of careful study; and taken together they
combine to give a vivid and life-like image of the popular
creed as it was apprehended by men who were ready to die
for it.

The early literature of the Jews recognized the existence
of very different ideas of the Messianic work.
The difference which was thus admitted in
theory was embodied in life. The faith and spirit of the be-
liever in this case, as in every other, moulded the substance
of his belief; and Holy Scripture seemed to promise to each
in the coming deliverance exactly that freedom for which
he longed most ardently. Atonement, independence, resto-
ration, dominion, union—such were the manifold ideas
included in the glorious prospect of Messiah’s kingdom.

But while the form of the hope was indefinite, its
presence was universal. In some form or
other general expectation was quickened in Wile spread afte
Judza, and in Samaria, and among the Jews ;
of the dispersion ;! “ Jerusalem and all Judea, and all the
region round about Jordan went out” to John’s Baptism,
without distinction of rank or sect, “musing whether he
were Christ.”? In the most different stations were those
who “waited for the kingdom of God.” “To this the

The variety and

1 Jobn i. 41; iv. 25; Acts xxvi. 7. mon people seem to have heard him
2 Matt. iii. 5; Luke iii. 15; John 1.20; most gladly: Matt. xxi. 23-27; Mark
iii. 28. Yet here,aselsewhere,thecom- xi. 27—33; Luke xx. 6.

142 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hoped
to come.” And at a later time Simon the
mystic and Barkokeba the zealot found mul-
titudes ready to welcome in them either the “ great power
of God” or the “star which should rise out of Israel.”
Even in the great diversity of opinion which existed as
to Messiah, some points seem to have been
settled by general tradition or consent. It
was held that the time of His advent, though
fixed in the Divine counsels, was unknown by men, who
meanwhile were looking anxiously in “the distress of
nations” for those “signs” which they had been taught to
expect as the first announcement of “the fulness of the
time.” General belief pointed to an appearance startling
and sudden, in the “ wilderness” or in the “secret cham-
ber.” Even the Pharisees asked Christ “when the kingdom
of God should come.”* And here, too, special blessings
were reserved for such as looked for them. In the capital
of Herod there was one “just and devout,
waiting for the consolation of Israel, to whom
it was revealed that he should not see death till he had
seen the Lord’s Anointed.” And others shared the hope
and assurance of Simeon, since Anna could speak freely
of Jesus “to those who were waiting for the
redemption of Jerusalem.” ?
The uncertainty which attached to the time extended
also to the manner of Messiah’s appearance.
The question of the Magi when they inquired
for Him “who was Jorn King of the Jews,” showed a faith
not general at the period. In recognizing a child as King
their spiritual insight may be conipared with that of
Simeon and Anna. By others it was made
an objection to the claims of our Lord, espe-
cially by His own countrymen, that His family was known

Acts xxvi. 7.

The Time of Mes-
siah’s coming.

Luke ii. 25, 26.

Luke ii. 88,

The Manner.

Matt. xiti. 54—58.

1 Luke xvii. 20.
2 All. 6. ADLX., ete., ἐν Ἱερουσαλήμ. All. τοῦ Ἰσραήλ, 5. ἐν τῷ “Ia.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 143

to them and dwelt among them. “ We know this man
whence he is,” said the people of Jerusalem,
“but when Christ cometh no man knoweth
whence He 18.) “How can this man, whose father and
mother we know,” asked the multitudes at Capernaum, say,
“I came down from heaven?” They expected to hear
the ery, “Lo, here is Christ, or lo there,” and to see him
declared at once in the fulness of power and strength as
the deliverer of His people. ἢ

As the star in the East was to be the physical emblem
of Christ’s coming, so was it universally
believed that Elijah would prepare His way
at once, by restoring the ancient faith of the people, and
by consecrating Him to His office. ‘This belief was already
part of the popular teaching, and even the disciples seemed
to have looked for its literal accomplishment, when they
suggested the difficulty: How say the scribes
that Elias must first come? Nor was this
all; as Elijah represented the majesty of the prophets, so
Jeremiah symbolized their devotion; and he who had
“prayed much for his people and the Holy
City,” was specially named among the com-
pany of Messiah at his appearance.’

Such being among the acknowledged signs of the
Messiah, it was determined with equal
agreement that He should spring from Beth-
lehem, the city of David. The answer of the
priests to Herod is confirmed by the doubts
of those who at a later time questioned the Messiahship of
one whom they supposed to be a Galilean, for they asked,
Did not the Scripture say that Christ cometh
of the seed of David, and from Bethlehem,
whence David was ?

And not only was the Messiah to spring 7” Pavitic 7.
from David’s city; He was emphatically David’s son.’

John vii. 27.

The signs.

Matt. xvii. 10 ||.

2 Macc. xv. 14.

The Birthplace.

Matt. ti. 5,

John vii. 41, 42.

1 Matt. xvi. 14. Cf. 4 Esdr. ii. 15 2 The title itself does not oceur in
(Isaiah). the writings of St Joln,and yet yn the

144 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

Such was the answer which the Pharisees made to the ques-
tion of our Lord; and when the multitudes
were amazed at the miracles of Jesus they
said, Zs not this the Son of David? evi-
dently understanding by the words the prom-
ised King. The blind on two occasions addressed Him by
the same title, Have mercy on us, thou Son
of David. And the name was spread abroad
even among strangers: “A woman of Canaan
.... cried unto Him, saying, Have mercy on me, Lord,
thou Son of David.” So when the pilgrim multitude led
Him in triumph, the song was still, “/Zosanna
to the Son of David,” “blessed be the king-
dom of our father David, which cometh in the name of the
Lord ,”! and when the triumph was over the
children in the temple once more caught up

Matt. xxii. 42 ||.

Mati. xii. 23.

Matt. ix. 27.
Matt. xx. 30 ||.
Hatt. xv. 22.

Matt. xxi, 9.

Matt. xxi. 15.

the words.

The type of royal power was naturally that on which
the mass of the Jews dwelt with the liveliest
hope, but the image and promise of Moses
moulded the expectations of some among
them. These looked for a prophet rather than for a king,?
though they entertained no clear conception of the scope
of his teaching; and the “likeness” of which Moses spoke,
led them to anticipate an outward resemblance in life
rather than in work between the lawgivers of the Old and
New, which attained in later times a fabulous minuteness.®
A trace of this tendency occurs in the Gospels: when the
multitudes said, This ts of a truth that

The Mosaic type.

Deut. xviit. 15.

John vi. 31 ff.

prophet which

should come into the world,

they soon called to mind the manna in the wilderness, and

passage just quoted he implicitly recog-
nizes it. Cf. Apoc. v. 5; xxii. 16, n ῥίζα
Δαυΐδ. In the Epistles the Davidic
descent of Christ is only twice alluded
to: Rom. i. 3; 2 Tim. ii. 8.
1 Mark xi. 10. Cf. Luke i. 32, 69.
2John vi. 14. Elsewhere ‘the

Prophet’? and “the Messiah” are
distinguished: John i. 21; vii. 40. Cf.
John i. 46. Perhaps the expressive
title, ‘‘ He that cometh ” (Matt. xi. 3]|).
is to be referred to this source.

3 Cf Gfrérer, ii. 899 #. Infr. p. 150.

THE JEWISII DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 145

asked for a sign like this through which they might be-
lieve. But the Mosaic type of Messiah was first capable
of a full realization on the foundation of a Christian
Church, and consequently it appears prominently in the
Acts of the Apostles. Before that time the woman of
Samaria, who might be supposed to feel most deeply the
need of a second Moses, expressed most truly the belief in
His advent.’ In the later books of the New Testament
the completeness of the mutual relation between Moses
and Christ is perfected by the allusions to a spiritual
Balaam; and in the imagery of the Apocalypse a second
song of Moses celebrates the final triumph of the new
Deliverer.®

At the same time the higher side of Messiah’s nature
was not denied or forgotten. The tempta-
tion turned upon the assumption of the title
of “Son of God;”* and during our Lord’s
ministry the evil spirits sought to precipitate and so to
mar His work by proclaiming His divine character. The
mystery, however, which was hidden from the eyes of the
multitude, to whom it seemed blasphemy, was proclaimed
or acknowledged at solemn crises. Thus John the Bap-
tist, Nathanael, Peter, and Mary, bore witness to Christ as
the Son of God; and the Sanhedrin recognized the title
as belonging to Messiah when the High Priest, in the
presence of the assembly, solemnly adjured Jesus, saying:

The Divine char-
acter.

1 Acts iii. 19 ff. ; vii. 37 ff i. By our Lord Himself: John iii. 17,
18(?); v. 25; ix. 85(?); x. 36; xi. 4.

2 John iy. 25. The Messianic doc- jj, By believers: Matt. xvi. 16 (St.

trine of the Essenes probably assumed peter not in ||, but ef. John vi. 69);

chi form. [Mark i. 1]; John i. 84, 50; xi. 27;

81Pet. ii. 15; Jude 11; Apoc. ii. 14 [ΧΧ- 811. aa a
(ii. 15). There is no trace of this ‘‘Anti- iil. By Jews’: Matt. peril τ caraidicce
christ” in early Jewish writings. Ar- 40, 48; ¢f John xix. 7 Ui δι; Luke
millus belongs toa much later period. xxii. 70.

iv. By evil spirits: Matt. iv. 3, 6 |);

4 The following table gives, I think, viii. 29 ||; Mark iii. 11; Luke iy. 41.

a correct summary of the usage of The sailors (Matt. xiv. 33) and the
Messiah’s title, ‘Son of God” ([6] vids centurion (Matt. xxvii. 54; Mark xy.
τοῦ Jeov), in the Gospels: 89) see in Christ vids ϑεοῦ,

146 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

Tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son
of God.
The fatal error of the Jewish people lay in the opposite
Theme ttuman rection; for in the fond anticipations of a

character disree second David, as some divine champion, they
garded. i ἢ

disregarded the true humanity of the Mes-
siah. . Looking for a sign from heaven, they could not read
the signs on earth before them. The disci-
ples “were sorry” when Christ spoke to them
of His coming passion. St. Peter even began
to rebuke Him for admitting that such humiliation was
possible. Till His death, some had hoped that it had
been He who should have redeemed Israel,
but then their hope was lost, till Christ
Himself showed them that the prophets had
foretold all these things; and by the help of this divine

teaching they set forth from that time the suf-
se iisp ferings of Messiah from the Scriptures. Such

being the feelings of those who were nearest
to Christ, it cannot but be strange that the people were
more perplexed by His lowliness.2,~ When He spoke of
Himself as the Son of man, the people answered: .....
Who is this Son of Man?* Even when they were most
startled by His works or words of power, they generally
saw in Him no more than a prophet, or waited for some
more striking revelation of His majesty. “Jf thou be the
Christ, tell us plainly,” was the complaint at one time; and
at another, when they “wondered at His gracious words,”
“they said, Is not this Joseph’s son?”
A partial conception of Messiah’s work necessarily fol-

Hatt. xxvi. 63.

Matt. xvii. 25.

Matt. xvi. 22.

Luke xxiv. 21.

Luke xxiv. 46.

1The statements of Justin (Dial. 2 Cf. pp. 122, 129.
§ 49) and Celsus (Orig. c. Cels. ii. 29)
cannot invalidate this evidence. The
forms which the Messianic hope assumed
among the Jews were various, and the 4 Cf. Matt. xxi. 11, 46; Mark ii. 12;
prevalence of one form among a par- vii. 37; xi. 18; Luke iv. 82, 87; v. 26;
ticular class, or ata time, cannot ex- vii. 16 [ix. 9; xxiii. 8]. See also John
clude the others. vii. 26, 81; viii. 53.

8 John xii. 84. Cf. John ix. 35, varr.
lectt.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 147

lowed from a partial conception of His nature. To the
Jews this appeared to be bounded by the
establishment of a glorious kingdom and the
confirmation of their law. A second and
spiritual birth of God’s people or God’s servants seemed
alike impossible and unnatural; and Nico-
demus, according to the spirit of his country-
men, might well find it difficult to understand how it
should be required of him to lay aside the opinions and
prejudices which had grown about him from his infancy,
before he could even see that kingdom for which he
sought. The brethren of Jesus, who saw His works, still
wished for an open manifestation of His power and oftice,
for they could not “ believe” in a Messiah who hid Himself
from the great world! Peter was eager to
pay for his Master the tribute to the Temple,
after his inspired confession. The fiery zeal
of the sons of Zebedee led them to seek places next to
their Saviour’s throne; and the Apostles inquired of the
risen Lord whether he would “at that time

restore the kingdom to Israel.” Some indeed

seem to have looked further for “a restitution of the
world;” but it was reserved for Samaritans, conscious of
doubt and sin, to feel that Messiah? would “ announce all
things,” — even the true forms of worship, — and be “ the
Saviour of the world.” ὃ

The partial con-
ception of Messiah's
work,

John iii, 2—4.

Matt. xvii. 24 fF.

Matt. ax. 21.

Acts i. 6.

Lord's examination before the San-
hedrin, it is evident that He had not

1 John iii. 2—4 ; vii. 3—5. In the
latter passage it is evident that the

brethren of the Lord sought only to
precipitate the declaration of this Mes-
siahship. They lacked that faith which
could rest wholly in Him and abide
His time. Cf. Jolin ii. 29, 24.

2 The title Messias occurs only in
John i. 42; iv. 25. Can it be without
meaning that the Hebrew word is pre-
served exactly in these two places,
where the simple faith in the ancient
promise seems liveliest ?

3 From the circumstances of our

openly proclaimed Himself as the Mes-
siah, or the adjuration of the High
Priest -had been unnecessary. In like
manner it is clear that the abrogation
of the Mosaic Law had not formed
part of His public teaching. The for-
mation of an outward Church neces-
sarily preceded the announcement of
this truth. It is also important to
notice, that in early Jewish writings
there is no trace of a belief in the sub-
stitution of a spiritual for a ritual law,

148 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

But while the poor and simple “guileless Israelites,”
rude Galilezans, fiery zealots, clung severally to

eee | Ome peculiar Messianic hope, those Jews who
the Messianic had been brought into closer connection with
woe tase.’ Greek literature or Roman dominion seem to
have looked on the popular belief as exag-

gerated or groundless fanaticism. The “leaven of Herod”.
had penetrated the nation of God. Many thoughts were
working, though as yet unrevealed, at the time when
Simeon foresaw that the Saviour was set as
well “for the fall” as “for the tising of
many,” and “for a sign which should be spoken against.”
Hillel, “the second restorer of the Law,” said that there
would be no Messiah. According to him, the promise and
its fulfilment belonged to the time of Hezekiah; and
though, in fact, he may have rejected only the notion of a
temporal kingdom, his opinion gained extensive currency
ΤΠ in its literal sense." Philo speaks only in one
The tye of an place of the coming of a deliverer. “A man

“idealizing” party.

Luke τὶ. 34 ff.

shall come,” says the oracle, “leading a host,
and he shall subdue nations great and populous by the
aid of God, who shall send the help that befits the holy.
And this is an undaunted bravery of soul, and a most
mighty strength of body,? two things of which even one is
formidable, but if both meet they are wholly irresistible.
But some of the foes [the oracle says] are unworthy to be
defeated by men, against whom [God] will array swarms
of wasps for their most shameful destruction, warring in

which assumed a definite form after tainly to Messiah, yet the passage
the tenth century. claims attention: ἀλλά τις ἐπιφανεὶς
ἐξαπιναιῷς προφήτης Seopdpntos Seo-
πιεῖ καὶ προφητεύσει, λέγων μὲν
οἰκεῖον οὐδὲν, οὐδὲ γὰρ, εἰ λέγει,
δύναται καταλαβεῖν ὅ γε κατεχόμενος
ὕντως καὶ ἐνϑ)ουσιῶν, ὅσα δὲ ἐνηχεῖς-

2 Philo, de Prem. § 16 (page 428 M.), Tat διελεύσεται, καϑάπερ ὑποβάλλον-
(Numb. xxiv. 7, LXX.). The reference τὸς ἑτέρον. No description, perhaps,
to ‘‘aninspired prophet” (de Monarh. could offer a more instructive contrast
i. § 9) is too general to be applied cer- to the prophetic office of Christ.

1 Sanhedr. c. 98. Cf. Just. M. Dial.
68, 71, 77. Thus at a later time the
priesis and zealots were ranged on op-
posite sides: Gfrorer, ii. p. 439.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 149

defence of the holy ones. [It says] moreover, that this
Jhero] shall not only enjoy surely, without bloodshed,
victory in war, but also an unassailable right of sovereignty,
for the help of those who may become his subjects through
good-will, or fear, or reverence.” It is only necessary to
read the context to. feel how little importance Philo laid
on the presence or work of this victorious deliverer. The
hope which he cherished rested on the promises made to
the whole nation, and not on the predictions of a single
deliverer; and thus, while his expectation of a personal
Messiah was apparently feeble, he paints in glowing colors
the blessedness of a coming reign of virtue, when the ene-
mies of God shall be confounded, and His people gathered
from the utmost corners of the world to dwell in their own
land. Then, he says, wars shall cease among men, and
wild beasts shall forget their fierceness. And the scattered
children of God shall return under the guidance “of a
form (ὄψεως) more divine than that of man, unseen by
others, and visible only to those who are being saved; and
they shall find three advocates (παρακλήτους) of their
reconciliation (καταλλαγῶν) with the Father :— Firstly, the
kindness and goodness of [God] who invites them; ....
secondly, the holiness of the patriarchs of their race; ... .
and thirdly, that, through which especially the favor of
those things which have been mentioned prevents them,
the reformation of those who are being led to a [new] truce
and covenant, who have been able with difficulty to come
from a pathless wandering to that path whose end is no
other than to please God —as sons a father. Then shall
the ruins of their cities be repaired ; the prosperity of their
fathers shall seem but little in comparison with the peren-
nial springs of God’s favor by: which they will be cheered ;
and their enemies shall be filled with dismay and sorrow
when they see the sure and unchangeable prosperity of
God’s people.” *

1 Philo, de Execrat. §5 8,9. Philo quotes, in his Messianic descriptions,
19»

150 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

While Philo cherished in this way a sure belief that his
nation was destined to take the foremost

Che te oa Place in the world, Josephus appears to
pa ee ᾿ abandon the trust in a national restoration,
as well as that in a personal Saviour. Rome

is acknowledged as the mistress of the world: Vespasian
is proclaimed to be the king who should rise from the
East. In a narrative of the early history and final struggle
of the Jews, which become inexplicable without the recog-
nition of the one central hope by which they were
quickened, he never once betrays any personal interest,
much less belief, in the doctrine of Messiah. Yet even
thus he bears ample testimony to the powerful hold which
it maintained on the nation. “ When Fadus was procu-
rator of Judea,” he relates, “a certain sor-
cerer (γόης), by name Theudas, persuaded
the great mass of the people (τὸν πλεῖστον ὄχλον) (Ὁ
take up their property and follow him to the river
Jordan, for he announced that he was a prophet, and
said that he would divide the river by his command,
and give them an easy passage; and saying this he deceived
many 3”? so faithfully did the nation cherish the recollec-
tion of their first deliverance as the image of that which
should come. The same characteristic marks the history
of “the Egyptian false prophet, who came into the country,
being a sorcerer, and having persuaded men that he was a
prophet, collected about thirty thousand of those whom he
had deceived. And these he led from the wilderness to
the Mount of Olives;”? .... “for he said that he wished
to show them how at his bidding the walls of Jerusalem
would fall, through which he promised that he would afford

Popular risings.

Levit. xxvi.; Deut. xxviii.; Numb. was present, but it by no means sup-
xxiv. 7; and also Isai. liv. 1; Ps.cxx. 8. ports the identification of the Word
Cf. Gfrérer, Philo, i. 882. Dihne, 1.482 and the Messiah, but rather distin-
ff. Possibly the “divine vision” may guishes them.

be an idealized antitype of the “ pillar
of fire”? which attended the Jews on
their first Exodus, in which the Word 2 Joseph. B. J. ii. 18, δ.

1 Joseph. Antig. xx. 4,1.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 151

them an entrance into the city.”' And these impostors

were but specimens of a class of “vagabond men and
deceivers, who, under the pretence of divine inspiration
(ϑειασμοῦ), compassed revolutions and changes, and _per-
suaded the multitude to indulge in mad hopes (δαιμονᾶν),
and led them forth into the wilderness, as though God
would show (? δείξοντος) them there signs of freedom,” or,
as it is expressed in the parallel passage, promising “to
show evident prodigies and signs, wrought according to the
foreknowledge of God.”? The final insurrection is the
clearest proof of the general spread of this Messianic
enthusiasm, for Josephus allows that “that which especially
incited the Jews to the war was an ambiguous oracle found
in their sacred writings, to the effect ‘that at that time
one out of their country should rule the world (τῆς
oixovpevys).”® And even in the last extremity of the siege,
“many prophets were sent by the chiefs among the com-
mon people, charging them to wait for the help of God;”
and these found ready credence, so that six thousand fell
in the porch of the temple, whither they had fled “ expect-
ing to receive the signs of safety.” *

The hope entertained by the Jews was indeed so
notorious that it did not escape the notice
of Roman historians; and they attached so
much importance to the predictions on which
it was based, as to find their fulfilment in the elevation of
Vespasian to the imperial throne. “A few,” says Tacitus,

1 Joseph. Antig. xx. 7, 6. In the schneider supposes, Theolog. Fl. Josephi,

other passage there is no allusion to
this promised miracle.

2 Joseph. 1. ce. Josephus contrasts
these fanatics with the zealots (λῃσταί,
sicarii) as being “in hand more pure,
but in purpose more impious.” JB. J.
ii. 13, 4.

8 B. J. vi. 5, 4. The reference is
« Probably to the prophecy of Daniel,
aud not to that of Balaam, as Bret-

§10. Cf. Antig. x. 11, 7.

4 B. J. vi. 6, 2.

The paraphrase which Josephus gives
of the promise to Abraham is charac-
teristic : προεδήλου τὸ γένος [τὸ]
αὐτῶν εἰς ἔϑνη πολλὰ καὶ πλοῦτον
ἐπιδώσειν, καὶ μνήμην αἰώνιον αὐτῶν
ἔσεσϑαι τοῖς γενάρχαις (Antig. i.
14, ΑἿΣ But it is to be remembered that
neither Philo nor the Targum under-
stood this of Messiah.

152 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

in speaking of the prodigies which preceded the destruction
of Jerusalem, “turned these events into a cause of alarm ;
the greater number were possessed with a belief that it was
written in the ancient writings of the priests that it would
come to pass at that very time, that the East would grow
mighty, and that men proceeding from Juda would gain
the empire of the world. An ambiguous oracle, which had
foretold [the fortunes of 7 Vespasian and Titus.”?.....
Suetonius relates the same circumstance almost in the
same words, adding, however, that the belief was ancient,
uniform, and universally current throughout the East.
But however strong the hope was, even after the
destruction of Jerusalem, it was quenched,
ἘΠ ἘΠΕ ne. at no distant time, in the blood of the noblest
ie eh er’ Jews. The disastrous rising of Barkokeba
was the last public profession of the earlier
ereed. Afterwards a gloom settled over the image of
Messiah, and increasing sorrows were described as the
sure signs of His approach.

The Eliezer, surnamed the Great, said :? “ A little before
the advent of Messiah® shamelessness shall
be increased ; and there shall be great dearth

of corn; the vine shall bear fruit, but [from the excess of
revellers} wine shall be sold dear. The mightiest empire
in the world shall be overwhelmed with evil judgments,

1. The Mishna.

and no chastisement shall have place. The synagogues.
shall be converted into houses of shame; the borders of
Judea shall be laid waste, and all the region shall be made
desolate. Noble men shall go round from town to town
and meet with no offices of mercy. The wisdom of
teachers shall seem of ill-savor; the innocent shall be

1 Tac. Hist. v.18; Suet. Vesp.4. Per- multuantes urbe expulit, may refer to
crebuerat oriente toto vétus οἱ constans the intrigues of some fanatics.
opinio, esse in fatis, ut eo tempore 2 Sota, § 15 (iii. pp. 808-9, ed. Suren-
Judza profecti rerum potirentur. The hus). Cf. Edzard, Avoda Sara, pp. 248 f.
well-known passage, Suet. Claud. 25, 3 Ὦ ΓΞ 3 In calcaneis M? Cf
Judzos impulsore Chresto assidue tu- Buxtf. Lex. Rabb. 5. ν. Wagenseil, 1. c.»

4 ae ν

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 153

despised ; and the failing of truth shall be great. Young
men shall confound the face of the old; the old shall rise
before the young. The son shall provoke the father; the
daughter shall rise against her mother, and the daughter-
in-law against her mother-in-law ; in fine, every one shall
have for his foes those of his own household. In truth,
that age shall have the face of a dog, and the son shall not
reverence his parent. On whom, then, must we trust? On
our heavenly Father.” 1

This remarkable passage stands, I believe, alone in the
Mishna;* but in the Gemara many other
strange and inconsistent traditions occur, pm cay
which seem at times more like the expression
of despair than of faith. The « birth-pangs of Messias”
passed into a proverb;* and some Rabbis declared that
they wished not to behold His coming! Drought, famine,
thunder, and wars, were among the signs which should
precede Him; and it was said that the sight of men should
fail for anguish and sorrow. Nor was the moral state of
the world expected to be better than the material. The
divine teaching was to fail, and all men were to become
Sadducees: “when men grow fewer and fewer,” so the
tradition runs, “expect Messias;* when the world is over-
whelmed with evils as with a flood; when the last supply
is consumed and the last hope gone.”

The prevailing tone of these traditions is due in all
probability to the disappointment of earlier
dreams. Various limits had been fixed for
the coming of Messiah, and, as Raf’confessed,
al were passed. Some had likened the duration of the

The time of Mes-

δια) coming.

1 Cf. Lactant. Instit. vii. 15 Ὁ. however seem to be accurate. The
2 Various Opinions as to the coming Messianic interpretations of the Old
and work of Elias are given: Edaj.s. Test. common to the New Test. and

f. (iv. p. 362). Jewish writers are given in Note (1) at
8 Ὦ ἘΦ "53 (ὠδῖνες, Matt. xxiv.8; {πὸ end of the chapter.
Mark xiii. 8). 5 Sanhedr. 91,1 (referring to 2 Sam

4 Schéttg. ii. 546-7; 971. I have not xxii. 28): Schottg. ii. 154; 968.
verified Schéttgen’s references, which 6 Schittg. ii. 966.

154 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

world to a week of heavenly days, six thousand years of
trial and labor followed by a millennial sabbath. Two
thousand years, it was thought, elapsed before the Law,
two thousand were to pass under the Law, and two
thousand years were reserved for the victories of Messiah,
Others thought that the world would last eighty-five years
of Jubilee (4165 or 4250 years), and that Messiah would
come in the last.2. The Romans, it was said at one time,
shall oppress Israel for nine months.’ Others again meas-
ured four hundred years from the last desolation of the
Holy City as the utmost limit of delay; but the time went
by, and then men cried in despair, “Let his bones be
broken who computes the limits of Messiah’s coming.” 4
Different explanations were proposed for the delay. The
strangest fancy perhaps was that it was occasioned by the
necessity for all the souls in the receptacle of spirits
(Guph) to be embodied first 3° but in some form or other
it was generally referred to the sins of the people. “If
Israel keep but one sabbath, or one fast duly, Messiah at
length will come.”® He came, according to another wild
legend, on the day of the destruction of the Temple, but
was suddenly carried away to be revealed at His proper
time.” And with strange and tragic irony others said, He
is even now sitting among the poor and wounded at the
gates of Rome, and men know Hin not.®

The twofold description of Messiah’s advent was ex-
plained by the different circumstances under
which He might come. He would come, it
was said, if the people were wholly good or wholly
wicked; if good, then He would appear, according to the
words of Daniel, on the clouds of heaven; if evil, then

The manner.

i Edzard, 1. c. p. 66. This idea was 5 Edzard, p. 28. Cf. pp. 224 ff,
popular with the Christian Fathers: 6 Edzard, p. 247.
cf. Barn. Ep. 15; Tren. v. 28, 8. Lac- 7 Midr. Echa. 59, and Jer. Berach.

tant. Znstit. vii. 14, and nott. 5,1. Cf. Jost, Gesch. ἃ. Judenth. 404 n.
2 Schottg. ii. 963. Cf. Targ. Mic. iv. 8.
3 Id. 970. 8 Schottg. ii. 969. Edzard, p. 254, or,

4 Id. 965. as Others said, in £den (id. }. c.).

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 155

meek and lowly, as foretold by Zechariah. As to the
nature of His kingdom, the later tradition in one respect
was uniform. There will be no difference, it was said,
between these days and the days of Messias, except in the
subjugation of the Gentiles? But as to its duration
opinions widely differed. Passages were quoted from the
Prophets which appeared to fix forty or seventy years, or
three generations, or a thousand, or seven thousand years
for its continuance And “in those days the Nazarites
shall drink wine;”
lytes ;” but “all the Gentiles of their own accord shall be
brought to Messiah,” and “all shall be clean.”* Thus some
said, “in the days of Messiah there will be thirteen tribes,
and the thirteenth will be Messiah’s;” but others again
doubted whether the ten tribes would be restored.*

The later Jewish books contribute some further details
as to the expectation of Messiah, though
perhaps little stress can be laid upon their ori-
ginality.® It is said that anew Elias, born, like
the first, of barren parents, will herald His approach by a
preaching of repentance, according to some only three days
before Messiah.’ Messiah Himself will appear in the
North, and His advent will be marked by a βίαν. ὃ Moses
and Elias will attend Him, and He “will stand upon the
roof of the Temple;” and the Shekinah will continue
with men for three years and a Πα] 1 The same Passover
night which witnessed the chief crises in the fortunes of
the human race will also witness Messiah’s coming.” And

and “there shall be no more prose-

8. Other Jewish
works.

1 Schéttg. ii. 969. In this connec- 19). Cf. Sanhedr.c. xi.3. Targ. Zech.
tion (Zech. xii. 10—12) the idea of a x. 4.4, Esdr. xiii.; supr. p. 131.
Messiah, “the son of Joseph,” was 6The preéxistence of Messiah is
first entertained: Succa Bab. 52. Cf. taught in the later writings. It was
Gfiérer, ii. 258 ff. Infr. p. 160, n.9. ‘the Spirit of Messiah which brooded
The death of Messias is admitted in 4 over the waters at the creation.” Cf.

Esdr. vii.; supr. p. 107. Nork, p. ix. and nott.
2 Edzard, p. 208. Cf. Gfrérer, Juhrh. 7 Schittg. ii. p. 533.
d. Heils, i. 219. Bertholdt, p. 41. 8 Id. pp. 588, 531.

3 Schittg. ii. p.973. 41d. pp. 613 ff 914. pp. 544, 188, 548.
5 Schottg. ii. p. 207 (fr. Ezek. xviii. 10 Jerome mentions this ‘ Jewish

156 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

some speak of a mediatorial death and exaltation, of a res-
urrection of the patriarchs and of the just, of the removal
of the Redeemer (Goel) to heaven?’ Then all the feast-days
will be abolished except the day of atonement, and sacri-
fices shall cease, and there will be no distinction of clean
and unclean.2, The kingdom of Messiah will be strong in
spite of the banded heathen. The oppressors of Israel
will be destroyed, and all others made to do service to
God’s chosen people. Then the blessings of Eden will be
restored; all creation will be relieved from the consequen-
ces of man’s sin; and God will walk as in old times among
His people, and man will not fly from the presence of His
Maker.’

There is still another form of Jewish literature which
has exerted a powerful influence upon the
later doctrine of Messiah, but it is uncertain
whether the mystic teaching of the Kabbala
was directed in any degree towards the subject at the be-
ginning of the Christian era. Mysticism and philosophy
looked first within rather than without for the fulfilment
of the aspirations which they cherished ; and they probably
received from Christianity the impulse by which their later
course was shaped.*

4. The mystic lit-
erature of the Jews.

tradition” as the ground of the 2 Schottg. ii. pp 612 ff.

“ Apostolic tradition’ of the watch-

ings of Easter-eve — the nox vigiliarum
(Comm. in Matt. xxv. 6). The passages
referring to this usage are given by
Bingham, dntig. xxi. 1, 82. Schottg.
li. pp. 531, 563.

1 Schittg. ii. pp. 566, 578 ff , 595. The
notion of ἃ “" suffering Messiah ”’ belongs
exclusively to a late period. He ap-
pears as the son of Joseph or Ephraim,
as opposed to the son of David; but the
earliest trace of this belief occurs in
the Babyl. Gemara. Cf. Targ. Cant.
iv. 5; (Jerus.) Ex. x]. 11. Pearson On
the Creed, 164 nofe ; Strauss, Leben
Jesu, ii. 324; Gfrorer, ii. 262; 270-1.
Cf. infr. p. 160, on Zohar.

8 Gfrérer, Jahrh. d. Heils, i. pp. 418 f.

Buxtorf’s essay, De Messia venture
(de Synag. Jud. c. 1. Ugolini, Thes. iv.),
contains very little of importance, but
gives a curious description of the ten
expected signs of Messiah (pp. 1154 ff.),
of the ten consolations (pp. 1160 ff.),
and of the great feast which should
mark His advent (pp. 1162 ff.).

I have collected in a note at the end
of the chapter the Messianic passages
quoted in the New Testament, which
are interpreted in the same manner in
Jewish writings.

4 Cf. Zunz, cap ix. xxi.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 157
Like other Eastern nations, the Jews were naturally in-
clined to theosophic speculation, and though
this tendency may have been repressed by
the definite teaching of revelation as long as
they were confined within the sacred boundaries of Pales-
tine, it found a freer scope after the exile. The prophecies
of Ezekiel suggested a congenial subject for mystical inter-
pretation. In their general imagery they appeared to
reflect the symbols of a strange nation, and to invite the
study of Eastern wisdom. The Vision of
the Divine glory — the chariot-throne on
which the Lord was seen by the river of Chebar — formed
the text for the inquiry into the essence and majesty of
God; as the narrative of Genesis seemed to contain under
a veil the secrets of creation. ound these
two centres — the manifestation of God’s
glory in Himself and in Creation —Theology
and Nature — fancies and thoughts clustered, and at length
gained consistency. Enthusiasts saw the shadows of their
own dreams in the divine history of their nation, and fan-
cied that the patriarchs were their teachers. Whatever
they felt to be true in foreign systems was found latent in
some symbolic word or number. All inward and outward
experience was held to be only a commentary on the fulness
of the Law and the Prophets.

The progress of mysticism is generally the same: a
vague aspiration, a pregnant word, a tradi-
tion, gathering form and fulness in the lapse
of time, an incongruous system, treasured in the secret
discipline of schools, and at length committed to writing.
And such was the history of the Kabbala.t Already, in
the Apocryphal books of the Old Testament, there are

T he origin of this
literature.

Ezek. i.

Its great subdivis-
ions.

Its growth.

(Zunz, 44 n.; ef. ed. 402, n.); and even

after the technical sense of the word

1 The name belongs to a much later
period. The root is kabal, to receive

{by tradition], and the word was origi-
nally Applied to all the books of the
Old Testament besides the Pentateuch

was established, it was still commonly
used for ‘oral tradition” in the 18th
and 14th centuries (Zunz, 1. c.).

158 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

traces of the recognition of esoteric wisdom in the
“ Chariot” and the “Creation;” and at Alexandria the
new theory found a rapid and natural development.’ In
Palestine and Babylon the same teaching spread, but
under close restrictions. It was forbidden for any one
under thirty years of age to read the Vision of Ezekiel.
The public exposition of the “ works of creation” or of the
“chariot” was unlawful,’ and single hearers were selected
with special care. The very form of instruction was enig-
matic. The truth was expressed in short “sentences for
thinking men;” principles only were given, and not the
application of them.
As long as the Kabbala remained in this form, it is evi-
dent that it must have continued subject to
ioe ier specu, external influences. Its teaching included
ἐλ our the knowledge of all mysteries ; and as Chris-
tianity most truly purified the speculations
of the Neo-Platonists and the polytheism of Julian, so
also it must have modified the secrets of Jewish tradition.
The philosopher, the statesman, and the mystic, would
have shrunk equally from the conscious appropriation of
Christian doctrine; but some principles, when once enun-
ciated, approve themselves so certainly to the heart and
reason, that it becomes a question afterwards whether they
spring from revelation or from intuition. Thus open on
one side to the Persian doctrine of emanation, and on
the other to the Christian doctrine of the Incarnation, the
Kabbala grew in silence, till at last, in the seventh or
eighth centuries, the traditionary dogmas were embodied
in written commentaries.’ Of these, two remain widely
separated in the times of their redaction, but both probably
were based on traditions of equal antiquity. The Sepher

1 Zunz, pp. 162,163. Sérac.xlix.10. There are in the Talmud traces ox the
2 Mishna, Chagiga, α. ii.,§ 1. Non existence of secret interpretations of
exponunt .... opera creationis cum the Mercaba and Bereshith, Zuuz, 104,
duobus neque currum cum uno, nisi
fuerit sapiens qui sensum intelligit. 5 Zunz, 165.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH, 159
Jetsira, or Book of the Creation, dates, in its present form,
from about the eighth century:!' the Sepher ha Zohar, or
Book of Splendor, owes its existence to R. Moses of Leon
in the thirteenth century.’

It follows, from what has been already said, that little
stress can be laid on the passing coincidences
between the Kabbalistic books and the New
Testament. In their fundamental principles,
the two present a total contrast. The Jetsira develops a
system of pantheism utterly at variance with Christianity ;
and the same pantheism lies at the basis of Zohar, At
the same time speculations on the Divine Nature are
necessarily so vague, that recent theologians have found
in Zohar the whole of Christianity. ‘The two natures of
Messiah, and His threefold office, are said to be symbolized
in the tree of the ten Sephiroth, and in the Chariot ;* and
those more abstruse questions as to the Person of Christ,
which agitated and divided the Church, are said to be

anticipated and decided in the mystical dogmas of Simeon

False interpreta-
tions of Zohar.

ben Jochai.

1 Zunz, 165, who gives numerous ex-
amples of later idioms and words. The
Talmud contains a reference to a Sepher
Jetsira, which Zunz supposes to be an
error for Halcoth Jetsira mentioned
elsewhere(p. 464n.). Popular tradition
ascribes its authorship to R. Akiba, or
even to Abraham. In the absence of
an exact criticism of its composition it
is impossible to fix the date of its first
elements. Cf. Jellinek, Beitrage zur
Gesch. d. Kabbala, i. Leipsic, 1852.

2 This has been satisfactorily estab-
lished by Jellinek in his tract, JJoses
ben Schemtob de Leon und sein verhalt-
niss zum Sohar, Leipsic, 1851. The
warm approval of Jost is sufficient to
remove any lingering doubt as to the
vorrectness of Jellinek’s conclusion :
A. Jellinek und die Kabbala, Leipsie,
1852. Cf. Zunz, pp. 404 ἢ. Jellinek
detects the presence of nine different
authors in the present work (Jost,

p. 10); and it is impossible not to hope
for some clear results from his later
studies.

The other opinions as to the origin
of Zohar are given by Joel, Die Jeli-
gions-philosophie des Sohar, 1849, pp.
61 ff.

3 Schottg. ii. pp. 294 ff. ; 350 ff 866 ©.
His arguments rest on the convertibility
of the terms Shekinah, Metatron, etc.,
with Messiah, which seems to be un-
warranted. Messiah is comparatively
rarely mentioned by name, and where
the title occurs there is little to justify
the identification. Cf. Schéttg. ii. pp.
267, 278, 289, 412, 418. The most re-
markable passage (p. 341) seems to have
but little of aChristian tone. The pas-
sages here referred to maintain ex-
pressly the twofold Messias—the Son
of David and the Son of Ephraim :
cf. p. 360.

160 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

The direct and unquestionable traditions as to Messiah,
which are embodied in Zohar, are more inter-
esting. He is to be revealed first in Galilee}
coming from the garden of Eden; and a star
in the East is to herald His approach: the land which was
first laid waste by invaders is to receive first its consolation
He is to spring from the race of Boaz and David ;? and the
dove which brought to Noah the tidings that the flood had
abated shall hover over Him, and place a crown upon His
head Τὸ Him the little ones shall be gathered, and He
shall collect the captives from all the corners of the earth.’
He shall enter Jerusalem, according to the prophet, riding
on an ass;° and “drink the cup” of suffering as men;’ and
Messias, the son of Joseph (or Ephraim), shall die, and rise
again; and the dead shall be raised.

But while it is impossible to show that the mysticism
which gave this form to the doctrine of Mes-
siah after the Christian era had led to any
clear conception of a suffering Saviour before
His Advent,’ it unconsciously prepared the way for a true
recognition of His Divine nature. Even in the Pentateuch
there are traces of arevealed as well as of a hidden God,
of one on whom man may look and still live, of an angel
(Maleach) who exercises the functions of deity. This con-
ception of the external manifestation of the Deity was

Authentic Messi-
anic traditions.

The indirect influ-
ence of these specu-
lations.

1The reason alleged is given by
Jerome (Comm. in Matt. v. 16) ut ubi
Israelis fuerat ab Assyriis prima cap-
tivitas, ibi redemptoris preeconium nas-
ceretur.

2 Schottg. 11. 524, 525; i. ii.

3 Id. ii. 525. 41d. p. 587.

5 Id. pp. 541, 542.

6 Id. p. 548.

7 Id. pp. 112, 550.

8 Id. pp. 557, 565, 572.

Schottgen in his Lectiones Rabbinicw
ji. δὲ 8 ff. endeavors to establish that
Rk. Simeon Ὁ. Jochai—the reputed
author of Zohar,— must have been a

Christian, from the summary of his
teaching. An answer of Glessner is ap-
pended, with a rejoinder of Schottgen,
but nevertheless his case seems quite
insufficient.

In note (2) at the end of the chapter
some account of the later Samaritan
Christology is given.

9 Friedrich’s refutation of Bertholdt’s
argument in support of the ante-
Christian doctrine of a suffering Mes-
siah, may be added to the other refer-
ences which have been given on this
subject: Discuss. de Christol. Samar.
Lib, Lips. 1821, pp. 12 ff.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 161

followed in the later books by a corresponding representa-
tion of His invisible energy. In the Book of Proverbs,
Wisdom (Ahokma, σοφία) appears in some degree to fill
up the chasm between God and the world; and in the
Apocryphal writings this mediative element is apprehended
with greater distinctness, but at the same time only par-
tially, and with a tendency to pantheistic error, Mean-
while the growing belief in an angel-world, composed of
beings of the most different natures and offices, gave con-
sistency to the idea of a Power standing closer to God
than the mightiest among the created hosts. The doctrine
thus grounded fell in exactly with the desire of the philo-
sophic interpreters of Scripture to remove from the text the
anthropomorphic representations of the Supreme Being;
and with varied ingenuity and deep insight into the rela-
tions of the creature and the Creator, the finite and the In-
finite, they constructed the doctrine of the Word (Memra,
λόγος).

The belief in a divine Word, a mediating Power by
which God makes Himself known to men in
action and teaching, was not confined to any ΕΣ ent te
one school at the time of Christ’s coming. It
found acceptance alike at Jerusalem and Alexandria, and
moulded the language of the Targums as well as the specu-
lations of Philo. But there was a characteristic difference
in the form which the belief assumed. In Palestine the
Word appears, like the Angel of the Pentateuch, as the
medium of the outward communication of God with men;
in Egypt, as the inner power by which such communica-
tion is rendered possible. The one doctrine tends towards
the recognition of a divine Person subordinate to God;'
the other, to the recognition of a twofold personality in the
divine essence,

The earliest Palestinian view of the Word
is given in the Targum of Onkelos. In this it is said

1. Jn Palestine.

1 Yet the personal Metatron was created. Cf. Dorner, i. 60.

14*

162 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

the Lord protected Noah by His Word when he entered
the Ark: that He made a covenant between
Abraham and His Word: that the Word of
the Lord was with Ishmael in the wilderness;
with Abraham at Beersheba; with Isaae when
he went among the Philistines; with Jo-
seph in Egypt. At Bethel, Jacob made a covenant that
the Word of the Lord should be his God.
Moses, at Sinai, brought forth the people to
meet the Word of God. In the Book of Den-
teronomy, again, the Word of the Lord appears as @ con-
suming fire, talking to His people from the midst of the
mount, and fighting for them against their enemies; and
the same image recurs in the Targum of Jonathan on the
books of Joshua and Samuel.

The Targun of
Onkelos.

Gen. vii. 10.
Gen. xv.1; xvii. 2.

Gen. xxi. 20.

Gen. xxviit. 20.

Exod. xix. 11.

Deut. tii. 2; iv. 24.

In the later Targums on the Pentateuch, the works of the

Word are brought out more plainly.
creates man, and blesses him, and detects his
By lim Enoch is translated, and Hagar
He appears to Abraham in the plains of
Mamre, and provides the ram for him on Moriah.

The later Tar-
gums.

fall.

comforted.

He is

present with Jacob at Bethel, in Haran, and in the going

down to Egypt.

At the Exodus He destroys the first-born

of the Egyptians, and delivers His people with mighty signs,

and becomes their king."

1 In due connection with the Wemra
is the Shekinah, the one regarding the
active operation of God, the other His
visible presence. The Shekinah, how-
ever, is rarely mentioned in the Tar-
FUMS 16... HOC NOV 8... ΝΗ ν. Ὁ;
“the Shekinah of the Lord 5 (Onkelos);
and more frequently in the later Tar-
gums. Cf. Buxtf. Lex. Rabb. s.v. Gen.
ix. 27, already quoted, p.111n. 1 offers
the most remarkable example of the
introduction of the Shekinah], but fre-
quently in Zohar ; while the title Wemra
is exclusively confined to the Targums,
or immediately derived from it. In
some parallel passages of the Targum

both terms occur. Thus in Num. xxiii.
21, Onkelos paraphrases: The Word of
the Lord shall be their help, and the
Shekinah of their King among them;
and Pseudo-Jonathan : The Word of
the Lord shall be their help, and the
triumphal strain of King Messias shall
sound amongthem. Again, in Ex. xx.
24, the Shekinah in Onkelos replaces
the Word of the Lord in Pseudo-Jona-
than. And conversely in Ex. xix. 17;
Deut. xxiii. 14, Shekinah in the Pseudo-
Jonathan answers to the Word of the
Lord in Onkelos.

The first of the passages just quoted
has been brought forward to establish

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 163

The representation of the nature and functions of the

Word in Philo is far removed from the sim-
plicity of this recognition of an outward Me- | 2 ἐν
diator. Various influences combined to mod- Τῆς variety and
ify his doctrine, and the enunciation of it is ni
perplexed and inconsistent. The very title,
Logos, with its twofold meaning, speech and reason, was a
fruitful source of ambiguity ;' and this first confusion was
increased by the tempting analogies of Greek philosophy
in conflict with the Hebrew faith in the absolute unity of
God. As a necessary consequence, the Logos is described
under the most varied forms. At one time it is the mind
of God in which the archetypal world exists, as the design
of an earthly fabric in the mind of the architect? At an-
other time it is the inspirer of holy men, the spring and
food of virtue. At another time it is the Son of God, the
First-born, all-pervading, all-sustaining, and yet personally
distinct from God. At another time the conception of two
distinct divine personalities yields to the ancient dogma,
and the Logos, while retaining its divine attributes, is re-
garded only as a special conception of God, as reasoning,
acting, creating.

The contrast between the wavering con-
ceptions of Philo and the simple statement
of the Targumists is seen clearly in the pas-
sages where they recognize in common the presence of

Egypt.

inconsistency
Philo's views.

Philo’s interpre-
tations
with those in
Targums.

compared

the

the identity of the Word of the Lord
with Messiah, [Schottgen iii. 5,6; Ber-
thoidt § 24. The passage quoted by the
latter (note 3) from Targ. Jon. Is. xlii.1,
is differently given by Schottgen iii.

cent.) on the authority of R. Huna
(1290 A.D.) contain nothing to identify
Him with the Word or Shekinah.
Compare the names given by Philo
de confus. ling. § 28. The union of the

431; in quo Verbum meum (majestas Shekinah with Messiah is taught in
mea) sibi complacet]; butevenifit were Zohar. Cf. Bertholdt, § 24, n. 3.

less equivocal it could have but little 1The distinction is recognized in

weight against the whole tenor of early
Jewish writings. Not only is the pro-
pesed interpretation doubtful, but else-
wlere unparalleled. It is worthy of
Lotice that the eight names of Messiah
given in the Midrash Mischle (xiith

the contrast of the λόγος προφοριικός
and the λόγος ἐνδιάϑετος, de vita Mos
iii. 12 (ii. p. 154).

2 De mund. opif.§ 4 ff. (i. pp. 4 ff)
The whole passage is most characteristic
aud instructive.

164 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

the Logos in the narrative of the Pentateuch. Phila
speaks of the Logos as that through which the world was
created, but at the same time as an “instrument ” (dpyavov),”
“which still, in after time, the pilot of the universe handles
as a rudder, and so steers the course of all things.”’ The
angel which met Hagar was “the divine Word,” but
Hagar is said to be “routine learning” (ἡ μέση καὶ ἐγκύκλιος
παιδεία), Which twice flying from the presence of sovereign
virtue (Sarah) is brought back by the divine Word to the
house of her Lord. Jacob met the Word of God at
Bethel, even one of those “ Words which God sends to
bring help to the lovers of virtue.’ “An angel, a servant
of God, the Word, changed the name of Jacob, but the
unalterable God changed the name of Abraham.”®... The
Word was the cloud which separated the hosts of Israel
and Egypt, to whom “the Father who created (γεννήσας)
the universe assigned the special gift, that standing on the
confines He should separate the created (τὸ γενόμενον) from
Him that made it. The same is at once the suppliant of
the mortal ever pining (κηραίνοντος) for the incorruptible,
and the envoy of the prince to the subject. Moreover, he
rejoices in the gift, and, magnifying himself, sets it forth,
saying: And I stood between the Lord and you, being
neither unbegotten as God, nor begotten as you, but a
mean between the extremes, in contact (ὁμηρεύων) with
both.”?

Even from these examples —and they might be multi-
plied indefinitely — it is evident that Philo had no uniform

1 De Monard. § 5 (i. p. 225). ὥν. The treatise de post. Cain. §§ 6,
2 Leg. Alleg. i. § 9(i. p. 47); iii. § 81 25, 26 (i. pp. 229 241, 242) contains a
(i. p. 106). De Cherub. § 35 (i. p. 162). very interesting series of examples of
3 De Migr. Abr. § 1 (i. p. 487). its usage.
4 De Cherub. § i. (i. p. 188) Cf. de 6 De mut. nom. ὃ 18 (i. p. 591).
Prof. § 37 (i. p. 576). 7 Quis rer. div. her. § 42 (i. p. 501).

5 De Somn. § 12, i. p.631. The plural With the language here used compare
form (λόγοι) is worthy of notice. It the title δεύτερος Seds quoted from
occurs in the simplest sense in Leg. Philo by Eusebius, Prep. Ev. vii. 18.
Alleg. § 62, i. p. 122, where οἱ ἄγγελοι This title is indeed implied in Leg.
kal Advot aie contrasted with αὐτὸς 6 Alleg. § 18 (i. p. 128).

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 165

and distinct doctrine of the Logos. The term in its man-
ifold senses continually rules his thoughts,
and he deals with this more frequently than peaindairaiek
with the great idea to which it was properly risa cin fini Pais
. ogee general tendency

applied. An apparent analogy, a striking — may te traceu.
incident, a passing phrase is sufficient to .
modify his statement and direct the course of his reason-
ing. With him speculation had arrived at that stage
in which language domineers over thought. But though
it is impossible to decide absolutely that Philo attrib-
uted to the Word a personal and divine essence, and still
more to bring all his statements into harmony with one
dogmatic scheme, there is, nevertheless, a general ten-
dency towards one issue among the conflicting details
which his writings contain, one great current of thought
which can be traced throughout them in spite of the mani-
fold eddies by which it is disturbed. When he writes
most independently he assigns to the Logos divine
attributes! and personal action ;” and at the same time he
affirms, in the most decided manner, the absolute indivisi-
bility of the divine nature? The Word is neither an
emanation nor a created being, but rather God Himself
under a particular form, conceived as the source and centre
of vital energy. Combined with his other teaching, this
view naturally leads to the conception of a twofold
personality in the Godhead. Even while he shrinks from
the recognition of such a doctrine, his arguments must
have led men to reflect upon it; and in this way, without
laying the actual foundation for the truth, he prepared the
ground on which it might be laid.

But the preparation which Philo made for the Gospel

1 As the creation de Monarch. § 5, 1. 658; εἰκὼν δεοῦ, de mund. opif. ξ 8,
ii. 225, and preservation of the Universe, 1. 6, ete. ; ἡμῶν τῶν ἀτελῶν Seds, Ley
Frag. ii. p. 655. ὁ ϑεῖος λόγος περιές Alleg. § 73, 1. 128; ὕπαρχος de Somn
χει τὰ πάντα καὶ πεπλήρωκεν. Cf. § 41, i. 656; ef. 1. 308.

Quis rer. div. her. § 38, i. p. 499, de Pro-
Jugis, § 20, i. p. 562.
2As the ἀρχιερεύς, de Somn. § 37, 4 De Somn. ὃ 389, i. 655.

3 Quod det. potiori. insid. § 24, i. 209

166 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH,

was purely theological and speculative. His idea of the
Logos was wholly disconnected from all
Yet the doctrine Messianic hopes.’ It was in fact, to a great

of the Word vre- ᾿ d ;
mained wholly un- (degree, a philosophical substitute for them.

of tie Mewiah, Philo may have conceived of the Word as
acting through Messiah, but not as one with
Him. The lines of thought which pointed to the action
of a second Person in the Godhead, and the victories of
some future human conqueror, were not even parallel, but
divergent. It was reserved for St. John to combine the
antithetic truths in one short divine phrase. Then, for the
first time, God, Man, Shekinah, Word, were placed to-
gether in the most simple and sublime union: Zhe Word
was God, and the Word was made man and
tabernacled among us?
Little still remains to be said as to the relation which
the Messianic hope, which has been now
traced in its various forms and bearings, bore
to its fulfilment. One or two points, however, which are
is Dak often overlooked in a mass of detail, may
ness of the Jewish Ceserve some notice. And the first thing
me which must strike any one who has observed
the manifold sources from which the several traits of
Messiah’s person have been drawn, is the fragmentariness
of the special conceptions formed of Him. Most of the
separate elements, of which the whole truth consisted,
were known, but they were kept distinct. One feature
was taken for the complete image; and the only temper
which excluded all error was that of simple and devout
expectation.
Yet while the results of the long and anxious thought
of the people were thus partial and uncombined, each suc-

John i. 14.

General summary.

1 On this point the testimony of Ori- λόγον εἶναι τὸν υἱὸν Tod Seod, ὡς ὃ
gen is most important, 6. Cels. ii. 81, Κέλσος εἴρηκε. . . ..
ἐγὼ δὲ Kal πολλοῖς ᾿ἸΙουδαίοις καὶ
σοφοῖς γε ἐπαγγελομένοις εἶναι συμ. 2 Cf. Apoc. xxi. 8 (shakan, habitavit
βαλὼν οὐδενὸς ἀκήκοα ἐπαινοῦντος τὸ =aKnvdw, Jud. viii. 11, ete.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. 167

ceeding generation added something to the heritage of
the past, and made a wider faith possible.

Step by step the majesty of Messiah was 7% Prosressive-
traced in nobler lines, in Henoch and Esdras;

and if the subtle speculations of the Hellenists on the
action and revelation of God had no direct Messianic
application, they familiarized the minds of men with
thoughts essential to the apprehension of the doctrine of
an Incarnation.

“Everything was ready” for the work, but the work of
the Spirit was not yet done. The essentially
divine nature of Messiah was not acknowl-
edged. The import of His human nature was not felt.
The full character of His work with regard to man, to the
nation, to the world, was not apprehended. The con-
sciousness of personal sin, turning the mind of the believer
to the thought of a new birth, was hardly awakened, The
adoption of the nations to be joint-heirs with Israel to a
spiritual kingdom must have seemed impossible till man’s
personal relation to God was fully recognized. And the
wider effects of redemption could be regarded only as
material blessings till the full bearing of redemption on
mankind was realized. Yet men were everywhere “ feeling
after” the truth which lay near to them. And as it 15
impossible to conceive that any Jew could have pictured
to himself Christ as He really came, so it is equally impos-
sible to imagine any other Saviour, who could have
satisfied all the wants which were felt at the time of His
coming.

Times of triumph and sorrow, the government of judges,
kings, and priests, the open manifestation of
divine power and the brilliant display of
human courage, the teaching of prophets and
the teaching of experience, the concentration of Eastern
meditation and the activity of Western thought, the skepti-
cism of learning and the enthusiasm of hope, each form of
discipline and each phase of speculation, had contributed

Its defects.

Yet the prepara-
tian was completed.

168 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

to bring out into clear forms upon one narrow stage the
spiritual capacities and aspirations of men. Everything
was ready, and a brief space was sufficient for the prophetic
work of Messiah. Disciples were waiting to recognize
Him; enemies had already rejected Him. His words
found everywhere a direct and characteristic application.
His presence was an instantaneous test of all that was
partial or transitory. The simple announcement of His
Advent was the Gospel; the record of His works and
words in various scenes and before various classes, the ful-
ness of its special adaptations, not for one time only, but
for all times. For the manifoldness of the elements which
were combined in the Jewish people at Christ’s coming
provided not only for the rapidity of its comprehension,
but also for the typical completeness of its history. And
the narratives of this history, in their origin and growth, in
their common harmony and special differences, in their
fruitfal combinations and distinet individuality, will now
claim our attention. The voice and power of the Saviour
lives in them, and it is no false reverence which bids us
“fly to the Gospels as unto the Body” (capxi) — the very
outward manifestation — “ of Christ.” ἢ

1 Ign. ad Philad. 5.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

169

NOTES ON CHAPTER II.

NOTE I. — MESSIANIC PROPHECIES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT COM-
PARED WITH THE CORRESPONDING INTERPRETATIONS OF

JEWISH COMMENTATORS.

Of the ninety-four passages from the Old Testament which are quoted
in a Messianic sense by the Apostolic writers, I have not been able to trace
more than forty-four which are interpreted in the same manner in Jewish

writings.

Many of these, however, are important, and all are interesting

as throwing a general light upon the system of Jewish interpretation.

Isai. vii. 14; Matt. i. 23, 24.

MIE; V2; — ii. 6.
Jer. XXXi. 15; — ii. 18.
Isai. xl. 3; — iii. 3.

sao 10» — iv. 15, 16.

— liii. 4; — viii. 17.

Mal. iii. 1; — xi. 10.

Not applied to Messiah. by the Jews:
Schottg. ii. 159; nor yet the name
Immanuel. The words were referred
at an early time to Hezekiah: Cf.
Just. M. Dial. δὲ 68, 71,77. Sanhedr.
98. Pearson On the Creed, pp. 323—
324 (ed. Cambr.). Hengstenberg,
Christology, i. p. 63 (Eng. Tr.).
Explained in the same way in Tar-
gum (ad loc.). Pirke R. Eliezer. So
also Kimchi and Abarbanel (Schotte.
ne .213)> Cf. ΡΥ]. Ὁ Jud. ΣΙ:
Just. M. Apol. i. § 34. It is doubtful
whether any other interpretation was
ever current: Hengstenberg, i. 187.
|Cf. Zohar, ad Gen. 100 (Schottg. ii.
448); and ad Exod. 3 (Schottg. i. 4) |.
[Cf. Pesikta Sotarta, 58, ad Num.
xxiv. 17 (Schottg. ii. 97; 141).]

Not till Jalkut Sim. ii. 182 (Schottg.
ii. 160.)

Sanhedr. 98. Schotte. ii. 188. For
the history of the interpretation,
compare Hengstenberg, ii. 311 ff.
Tanchuma, 66 (Schottg. i. 111): God
said: As there were spies in the Old
Testament, so shall there be in the
times of the New Testament, a mes-
senger to prepare my way before me,
as it is written. Cf. Schemoth R. 131.
Debarim R. 256, in connection with
Is. xl. 4 (Schottg. ii. 224).

170

Isai. xlii, 1—4;

Zech. ix. 9;

Pscexvil. 22%

— cix. 1;

— xxi. 1, 18;

Isai. liv. 13;

— li. 1;
Zech. xii. 10;
Joel ii. 283-32;
Gen. xxii. 18;
BS liv; 2s

= ie

Isai. xlix. 6;

Amos ix. 11 a2;

Isai. viii. 14;
e— 1,07;

Ps. xvili. 4;

Isai. lix. 20, 21;

Matt. xii. 18—21.S0 Targum.

— xxi. 5.

— xxi. 42.

— xxii. 44.

—- xxvii. 35, 46.
John vi. 45.

— Xi. oo:

— xix. 37.
Acts ii. 17—21.
— iii. 25.

— iv. 25, 26.
— xiii. 33.

-- 47.
— xv. 16, 17.

Rom. ix. 32, Bo:

‘— x. L.

— x. 18.

— xi. 26, 27.

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

Kimchi, Abarbanel.
Cf. Midrash Tehillim, 23 (Schottg. ii.
113), Pesikta R. (Schottg. ii. 130).
Cf. Hengstenbersg, ii. 197.

Sanhedr. 98; Berachoth, 56; Pirke R.
Eliezer, 31 (Schottg. ii. 220). In
Midr. Scham. 66, there is a compari-
son of the first Goel (Moses: Ex. iy.
20) with the second (Schottg. 1. ¢.).
Cf. Bereshith R. 98 (Schottg. ii. 1045) ;
Schottg. i. 169; ii. 136, 139.

No trace in old writers (Schottg. i.
173, 174), but so applied in Zohar and
later commentators: Schottg. ii. 87,
88, 106, 107, 140, 290, 334, 407, 609.
Midr. Tehil. ad loc. (Schottg. i. 192;
ii. 246). Bereshith R. 83, ad Gen.
xXxxviii. 18, quotes v. 3 of Messiah
(Schottg. i. 192).

The Psalm generally was so applied
in later writings: Pestkta R. Midr.
Tehil.

Pesikta R.; Bereshith R.; Schemoth
R.; Debarim R. (Schottg. ii. 185, 65,
67). :

No trace; but see Sanhedr. 98, quoted
above.

Sucea 52, of Messiah the son of Jo-
seph. So Kimchi.

Siphri (Schottg. ii, 210).
bar R. 231. Tanchuma, 14.
Bammidbar R. 181 (Schottg. ii. 67)
gives a different interpretation.
Mechilta 3. Pirke R. Eliezer, 28.
Avoda Sara, 3 (Schottg. ii. 227, 228).
Midr. Tehil.; Bereshith R. (Schottg.
ii. 228, 104).

Bereshith R. (Schottg. ii. 102).
Sanhedr. 96. The name of Messiah
is said to be filius cadentis.

Sanhedr. 38 (Schottg. ii. 160).
Pesikta R. Vajikra R. Bereshith R.
(Schottg. ii. 179, 100).

No trace in early writings.
(Schorte. ii. 239).

Sanhedr. 98. Bereshith R.37 (Schottg.
ii. 187, 181).

Bammid-

Zohar

THE

15]. χὶ. 10;

— Ixiv. 4;

Ps. cix. 1;
Levit. =xvi. 11, 12;

Deut. xxi. 23;
Isai. liv. 1;

— lvii. 19;
Pee xiv: 6. 73

Isai. viii. 17, 18.
Ps. xciv. 7—11.

— cix. 4;

Jer. xxxi. 31—34,
Hab. ii. 3, 4;
Hagg. ii. 7;

Isai. xxviii. 16;

— liii. 9, 4;
Dan. vii. 13;
Zech. xii. 10—12.
Pa. i. 9;

JEWISH DOCTRINE OF

Rom. xy. 12.
— 1 Cor. ii. 9.

—x.4.
— xy. 95.
2Cor. vi. 16.

Gal. iii. 13.

— iv. 27.

Eph. ii. 17.
Hebr. i. 8, 9.

— ii. 13.
— iii. 7—11.

—vy.6.

— viii. 8—12.
~ #9

τ ahi 37, vd.
— xii. 26.

1 Pets 1: 9:

— ii. 22, 24.
Apoe. 1.7, 13.

᾿ὰ
— ii. 27.

—— 1.

MESSIAH. 171
Targum. Sanhedr. 93. Rashe. Kim.
chi. Abarbanel (Schottg. ii. 161).
Pesikta R. Schemoth R. (Schottg. ii.
195).

Cf. Targ. Isai. xvi. 1.
Cf. supra.

Pesikta Sotarta, 34.
(Schotte. ii. 150).

Cf. Schottg. ad loc.
Gibborim, 49 (Schotte. i. 749).
shith R. 37 (Schottg. ii. 384).
Only in Zohar: Schottg. ii. 115.
Targum. So Aben Ezra (Schott. i.
924).

Cf. Schottg. i. 933? from Isai. xlii. 1.
Midr. Tehil. 36. Shir hashirim, 25
(Schotte. ii. 243).

No Jewish writer regarded Melchiz-
edek as a type of Christ (Schottg. i.
949). Cf. Schottg. ii. 645 for a spu-
rious passage from Bereshith R.
Pesikta R. (Schottg. i. 970).

Sanhedr. 97 (Schottg. ii. 215).
Debarim FR, 250 (Schottg. ii. 217; ef.
75).
Targum 2
Rashe.
Cf. supra.
Sanhedr. 98 (Schottg, i. 1151).
Cf. supra.

Cf. supra.

Tanchuma

Bere-

Cf. Schottg. ii. 170. So

The above list is derived almost exclusively from Schottgen, and not
from the original authorities, nor have I verified the references, but it will
be found, I trust, sufficiently accurate to serve as the basis of further in-
vestigations. The history of the later Jewish doctrine of the Messiah is
at present as confused and unsatisfactory as that of earlier date.

Since the preceding chapter was written I have read Jost’s later history
( Geschichte des Judenthums, i. Leipsic, 1857). The account which he gives
of the Jewish Messianic hope at the time of our Lord (pp. 394—402) seems
to me to omit several important features; and while the Christian scholar
will gratefully acknowledge his candor and largeness of view, yet his con-
ception of the rise of Christianity is necessarily imperfect in its essence,
His arguments have not induced me to change any of my conclusions;
and, in spite of his criticism, I still think that Ewald has apprehended
most fully the nature of the elements in Judaism, which contributed to
form the foundation of a Catholic Church,

112 THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH.

NOTE IJ. —THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THE SAMARITANS.

The narrative of St. John (c. iv.), and the ready welcome which was
afterwards given by the people of Samaria to the teaching of the Apostles
(Acts viii. 4 ff.), combine to invest the Messianic expectations of the
Samaritans with great interest. And this interest is further increased by
the fact that Simon Magus, the most influential fulse teacher of the first
age, was himself a native of a village of Samaria (Just. M.-Apol. i. 26;
Clem. Hom. ii. 22), and found the readiest acceptance of his prophetic
claims among the Samaritans (Acts viii. 9,10; Just. 1. ¢.). Little remains,
however, of the scanty Samaritan literature, and that only in an imperfect
and altered form (Gesenius, Anal. Oriental. i. 1824; Jost, Gesch. d. Juden-
thums, i. 83 ff.). But the same causes which confined the literary activity
of an isolated people, tended to preserve their traditions and usages un-
altered; and at an early period an attempt was made to derive some clear
knowledge of the opinions of the Church from the testimony of its priests.
The correspondence was opened by J. C. Sealiger in 1589, and was con-
tinued by some English scholars in 1672—1689, by Ludolf, 1585, and by
Sylyv. de Sacy in the present century. The whole correspondence has been
collected and edited by Sylv. de Sacy in an essay in JWotices et extraits des
MSS. de la Biblioth. du Roi, xii. 1 ff. 1831, which still remains the classical
authority upon the subject. (Cf. Sylv. de Sacy, Mémoire sur (état actuel
des Samaritains, Paris, 1812)

In the English correspondence the doctrine of Messiah — H/ashab or
Hathab, i. e., the Converter, at present Hl Muhdy, 7. e., the Guide (Robins.
ii. 278), in the Samaritan nomenclature — forms a prominent subject. In
a letter written to the English in 1672 the Samaritans ask, ‘‘ What is the
name of Hashab who shall appear? and when shall we have consolation,
and come from under the hands of the sons of Ishmael?” (Sylv. de Sacy,
pp. 181, 191.) In the reply reference is made to Gen. iii. 15; xlix. 10;
Deut. xviii. 15; Numb. xxiv. 17. The Samaritans in answer express sur-
prise that no mention is made of Gerizim (p. 209); but they recognize the
application of the prophecies, with the exception of Gen. iii. 15; xlix.10,
and speak of the expected Deliverer as “ἃ flaming furnace, and a lamp
of fire (Gen. xy. 17), to whom the nations shall be subjected.’’ Our doc-
tors have taught us, they add, that “this prophet will arise, and that all
people will be subdued unto Him, and believe on Him, and on the holy
law, and on Mount Gerizim; and that the religion of Moses will appear
with glory; and that the first name of this prophet who shall rise will be
[M.], that he will die and be buried near to Joseph the son of Phorath
(¢. e., M*D 13, Gen. xlix. 22); and that the tabernacle will be brought to
sight by his ministry (which was supposed to be hidden on Mount Geri-
zim. Cf. Friedrich, de Christol. Samar. p.76), and be established on Mount
Gerizim.” In the later correspondence with Sylv. de Sacy (1808) it is said:
‘“The doctrine of Hathab, who will come and manifest His spirit, is a
great mystery. We shall be happy when He comes. We have prodigies

THE JEWISH DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH. ἘΠῚ

by which we shall recognize them, and we know His name [Messiah]
according to the Rabbis. That which you say of Shiloh is true; he hated
the law of Moses” (p. 30). On this last point the Samaritan doctrine is
especially worthy of notice. The allusion to Shiloh (Gen. xlix. 10) is not
applied to the Messiah, but to an enemy of the Law, perhaps, it is said, to
Solomon (p. 29). These particulars, derived from letters, are confirmed in
detail by a conversation which Dr. Wilson held with De Sacy’s correspond-
ent on the Samaritan Christology, but the conversation furnished no
fresh information on the subject (Lands of the Bible, ii. 51 ff.).

It must be allowed, however, that beyond the mere general expectation
of a deliverer to restore the glory of the Law upon Gerizim, based ap-
parently on Deut. xviii. 15, little else is certainly established by this evi-
dence. The form in which the inquiries were suggested may be supposed
in several cases to have modified the answers. On the other hand, nothing
can be more arbitrary than the statement of Br. Bauer, who supposes that
the Samaritans borrowed the notion of Messiah entirely from the later
Jews. Cf. Friedrich, Discussionum de Christologia Samar. liber, Lipsiz, 1821.
Gesenius, de Samar. Theologia, Halle, 1824.

At present, the miserable remnant of the Samaritans who still occupy
a few houses at Nablous appears to be fast hastening to extinction, perse-
cuted and demoralized (Barges, Les Samar. de Naplouse, Paris, 1855. Jost,
Gesch. ἃ. Judenth., pp. 79 ff. Robinson, Biblical Researches, ii. 275 ff.; iii.

‘9 ff. Ed. 2).

15*

ΟΣ Blas il Oeics ie ie ie

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

'H τῶν πρεσβυτέρων παρακαταϑήκη διὰ τῆς γραφῆς λαλοῦσα ὑπουργῷ χρῆται

τῷ γράφοντι πρὸς τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἐντευξομένων..- — CLEM. ALEX.

A DISTINCT conception of the spirit of the Apostolic age
is necessary for a right understanding of the

The spiritual
position of the
Apostles incompati-
ble with the design
of forming a per-
manent Christian
literature, and yet

relation of the Gospel to the Gospels — of
the divine message to the lasting record —
at the rise of Christianity.}
placed in so clear a light the fulness and

Experience has

comprehensiveness of the Christian Scrip-
tures, that it is natural to suppose that they must have oc-
cupied from the first the position which the Church has

assigned to them.
in fact and in thought.

But this idea is an anachronism both
The men who were enabled to

penetrate most deeply into the mysteries of the new reve-
lation, and to apprehend with the most vigorous energy
the change which it was destined to make in the world,
seem to have placed little value upon the written witness

1 The literature of the subject is so
extensive that it would be impossible
to give even a general summary of it.
Many of the most important essays will
be mentioned in the course of the
chapter. Those of Gieseler ( Historisch-
kritischer Versuch uber die Enstehung
- .. . der Schriftlichen Evangelien,
Leipzig, 1818) and Ewald (Jahrbicher,
1848, ff.) represent with the greatest
power the extreme form of the
“oral” and ‘documentary’ hypoth-
eses. Thiersch has some good general

remarks in his Versuch zur Herstellung
des historischen Standpunkts fir die
Kritik. d. Neutest. Schrift. (Erlangen,
1845), and the tract by which it was fol-
lowed, EHinige Worte iiber εἰ. Aechth. εἰ.
Neutest. Schrift. (Erlangen, 1846), but
with many exaggerations. The object
of the present chapter is rather to ex-
cite and guide inquiry than to discuss
fully the question of the origin of the
Gospels in all its bearings —a subject
far too vast for the space which can be
given to it

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. ira

to words and acts which still, as it were, lived among them
They felt as none else ever can feel the greatness of the
crisis in which they were placed, and the calm progress of
common life appeared to be forever interrupted by the
spiritual revolution in which they were called to take part.
The “coming age” to which they looked was not one of
arduous conflict, but of completed triumph. The close of
the old dispensation and the consummation of the new
were combined in one vision. The outward “fashion of
the world ” —the transitory veil which alone remained —
was “passing away.” The long development of a vast
future was concentrated in the glory of its certain issue.
But while everything shows that the Apostles made no
conscious provision for the requirements of after times, in
which the life of the Lord would be the subject of remote
tradition, they were enabled to satisfy a want which they
did not anticipate. The same circumstances
which obscured their view of the immediate
future gave to the time in which they lived
its true significance. They pierced beneath the temporal
and earthly to the spiritual and eternal. Men wrote his-
tory as it had never been written, whose present seemed
to have no natural sequel, and unfolded doctrine with far-
seeing wisdom, while they looked eagerly for that divine
presence in which all partial knowledge should be done
away, That which was in origin most casual became in
effect most permanent by the presence of a divine energy;
and the most striking marvel in the scattered writings of
the New Testament is the perfect fitness which they ex-
hibit for fulfilling an office of which their authors appear
themselves to have had no conception.

The intensity of the hope cherished by —7renationaclor:
the first Christian teachers was not more asia slim
unfavorable to conscious literary efforts on fron Meratue;
their part than their original national char-
acter. It was most unlikely that men who had been ac-
customed to a system of training generally, if not exclu-

favorable to its
Jormation.

176 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

sively oral, should have formed any design to commit to
writing a complete account of the history or of the doc-
trines of the Gospel. The whole influence of Palestinian
habits was most adverse to such an undertaking. The
rules of Scriptural interpretation, the varied extensions
of the Law, and the sayings of the elders, were preserved
either by oral tradition, or perhaps, in some degree, in
secret rolls, till the final dispersion of the Jewish nation
led to the compilation of the Mishna. Nothing less than
the threatened destruction of the traditional faith occa-
sioned the abandonment of the great rule of the schools.
“Commit nothing to writing”! was the characteristic prin-
ciple of the earlier Rabbins, and even those who, like
Gamaliel, were familiar with Greek learning, faithfully ob-
served it. Nor could it be otherwise. The Old Testament
was held to be the single and sufficient source of truth and
wisdom, the reflection of divine knowledge, and the em-
bodiment of human feeling. The voice of the teacher
might enforce or apply its precepts, but it admitted no
definite additions. The various avenues to an independent
literature were closed by the engrossing study of the Law;
and an elaborate ritualism occupied the place of a popular
exposition of its precepts. The learned had no need for
writing, and the people had no need for books. The Scrip-
tures contained infinite subjects for meditation in their
secret depths; and the practice of Judaism furnished an
orthodox commentary upon their general purport, open
alike to all, clearly intelligible and absolutely authoritative.
Tradition was dominant in the schools, and from the
schools it passed to the nation; for the same ~

Ca es influence which affected the character of the
vomit! “* teachers must have been felt still more pow-
erfully by the great mass of the Jews. In

their case the want of means was added to the want of
inclination. In the remoter regions of the north, the im-
pediments to the simplest learning were still greater than

1 Cf. Jost. Geschichte des Judenthuims, 1. 567.

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 177

those which prevailed at Jerusalem. The school of Ti-
berias grew up only after the fall of the Temple; and the
faithful zeal of the Galileans may be rightly connected
with their intellectual simplicity. To descend one step
further: the art of writing itself was necessarily rare
among the peasantry, and the instinct of composition pro-
portionately rarer. From all these circumstances, from
their nation, their class, their province, their education, the
first Christians were primarily unfitted for forming any
plan of a comprehensive religious literature. If they were
writers, it could only have been by the providential influ-
ence of circumstances, while they were oral teachers by
inclination and habit.
But it may be rightly said, that such obstacles as these
are only important when they fall in with
= - 1. These generat
others which he deeper; for men become _ otstacies to the con-
great writers, even in common life, not so « ’Cnsanun tinny
much by discipline as by instinct. In the case pds δ τιν
of the Apostles, however, these further ob- ea en
stacles were not wanting; their external dis-
inclination for literature was unremoved, if not increased,
by their special work. Both from the nature of their
charge and the character of their hearers, they sought
other means of fulfilling their great commission than such
as books afforded. Their Master enjoined on them during
His presence, and at the moment of His departure, to
“preach the Gospel.” And while they fulfilled the office
for which they were fitted, no less by habit than by the
effusion of the Holy Spirit, they could not have felt that
more was needed for the permanent establishment of the
Christian society. “How shall men believe without a
preacher” (κηρύσσων) ? is the truest expression of the feel-
ing and hope of the Apostles. They cherished the lively
image of the Lord’s life and teaching without any written
outline from His hand; and they might well hope that the
Spirit which preserved the likeness in their hearts might
fix it in the hearts of others. Christianity was contrasted

178 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

with Tudaism as a dispensation of the Spirit and not of
the letter; the laws of which were written not on tables
of stone, but on the souls of believers. The sad experience
of ages has alone shown the necessity that an unchanging
record should coéxist with a living body: in the first gen-
eration, the witness of word and the embodiment of the
word in practice belonged to the same men.
It must not, however, be supposed that this tendency
to preach rather than to write was any
inn dua te nue drawback to the final completeness of the
AS aa wte Apostolic Gospel. It was, in fact, the very
condition and pledge of its completeness.
Naturally speaking, the experience of oral teaching was
required in order to bring within the reach of writing the
vast subject of the Life of Christ; and it cannot be urged
that any extraordinary provision was made for the fulfil-
ment of a task which is now rightly felt to have been of
the utmost importanee. The Gospel was a growth, and
not an instantaneous creation. The Gospels’ were the
results, and not the foundation of the Apostolic preaching.
Without presuming to decide how far it would have been
possible, according to the laws of divine action, to produce
in the Apostles an immediate gense of the relation which
the history of the Life of Christ occupied towards the
future Church, it is evident that the occasion and manner
in which they wrote were the results of time and previous
labor. The wide growth of the Church furnished them
with an adequate motive for adding a written record to
the testimony of their living words; and the very form
of the Gospels was only determined by the experience of
teaching. The work of an Evangelist was thus not the
simple result of divine inspiration or of human thought,
but rather the complex issue of both when applied to such

1 By the Gospels in this connection I respects, as exhibiting the result of the
understand the first three ‘‘Synoptie” peculiar experience of one Apostle,
Gospels. The Gospel of St. John and not the first and common experi-
stands on a different footing in some ence of all.

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 179

a selection of Christ’s words and works as the varied
phases of the Apostolic preaching had shown to be best
suited to the wants of men. The primary Gospel was
proved, so to speak, in life, before it was fixed in writing.
Out of the countless multitude of Christ’s acts, those were
gathered, in the ministry of twenty years, which were seen
to have the fullest representative significance for the exhi-
bition of His divine Life. The oral collection thus formed
became in every sense coincident with the “Gospel ;” and
our Gospels are the permanent compendium of its contents.
This, then, was the first great stage in the Apostles’
work —the first step in the composition of |,

3 importance
the Gospels —to adapt the lessons which pegs
they learned with Christ to the requirements ——— |
of the growing Church. Every detail of their conduct tends
to indicate the clearness with which they apprehended the
requirements of their office, and fulfilled them by the guid-
ance of the promised Spirit. They remained together at
Jerusalem in close communion for a period long enough
to shape a common narrative, and to fix it with requisite
consistency. They recognized that their message was
popular and historic. The place of instruction was the
synagogue and the market-place, and not the student’s
chamber. The qualification for the Apostolate was per-
sonal acquaintance with Christ; and St. Paul admitted
the condition, and affirmed that he had fulfilled it. Of the
great majority of the Apostles, all that we know certainly
is, that they were engaged in this first charge of instruct-
ing orally the multitudes who were waiting to welcome
their tidings. The common work of “the
twelve” was prayer, and the ministry of the
word, though the labors of all are summed
up in the acts of two or three. The rest of the Apostles
were engaged with St. Peter on the day of
Pentecost, and guided by their teaching (δι-
δαχή) the new converts. Signs were wrought
by their hands to arrest the attention of their hearers

Acts vi. 4.

Acts ii. 37.

Acts ii. 42.

Acts ti. 48; v. 12.

180 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

(τέρατα) and symbolize the purport of their message
(onpeta) — the testimony of the resurrection.
pred ta δὴ The Apostles, in a body, were brought be-
ony fore the council and beaten and forbidden ¢o
ae ae speak in the name of Jesus. And when all
others were scattered, they remained stead-
fastly at Jerusalem, watching the progress of the Church,
supplying its wants, and regulating its discipline. Zhe
twelve foundations of the wall of the city of
God bore the names of the twelve Apostles.
The earliest fathers saw in this energy of teaching the
τος right fulfilment of the mission of the Apos-
Para θα ρος, They were likened to the twelve gems
upon the robes of the great High Priest,
which should give light to the Church.' “ The elders re-
frained from writing,” it is said, “ because they would not
interrupt the care which they bestowed in teaching orally
by the care of composition, nor expend in writing the time
required for the preparation of their addresses.” “ Perhaps
they felt,” it is added, “that the functions of the speaker
and writer were incompatible ; and saw in books only the
written confirmation for after time of the instruction which
they conveyed at present.”?
Common language bears unequivocal witness to the
general prevalence of the same view. Tull
gua men om the end of the first century, and probably
till the time of Justin Martyr, the “Gospel”
uniformly signifies the substance and not the records of
the Life of Christ. The evangelist was not the compiler
of a history, but the missionary who carried the good
tidings to fresh countries; the bearer, and not the author
of the message. Timothy was charged to “fulfil the work
of an evangelist ;” and evangelists are enumerated by St.
Paul with apostles and prophets and teachers among the
ministers of the Church.’

Apoc. xxi. 14.

1 Tertull. adv. Mare. iv. 18, p. 229. 8 Eph. iv. 11; 2 Tim.iv.5. Cf. Euseb.
2Clem. Alex. Eclog. Proph. § 27, H. E. iii. 37. Neander, Pflanz. u. Leit.
p. 996 P. i. 205 n.

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 181

In the mean time, if any written evidence for the facts
of the Gospel were needed, it was found νῶς SE
already in the deep words of the prophets. — ment the written
In passing over to Christianity, the Jew did pe
not lay aside his reverence for the Scriptures, but rather
seemed to have gained the clew to their meaning which
he had before wanted. “All the prophets”
spoke of Christ, and to this central subject
everything was referred. Nor was this conviction, how-
ever difficult it may be for us to apprehend its intensity,
partial either in its acceptance or in its action. The same
appeals are made to the fulness of the Scriptures in the
teaching of St. Paul and of the'twelve, before the assem-
blies of Jews and of Gentiles. The written Gospel of the
first period of the Apostolic age was the Old Testament,
interpreted by the vivid recollection of the Saviour’s
ministry. The preaching of the Apostles
was the unfolding “of the Law and the
prophets.” 1

Even in the sub-apostolic age the same general feeling
survived, though it was modified by the grow-

Acts iii. 21, 24.

Acts xxviii. 23.

This conviction

ing organization of the Christian Church. με practically
The knowledge of the teaching of Christ and 2? "cls of le
of the details of His life were generally de-

rived from tradition, and not from writings. The Gospels
were not yet distinguished by this, their prophetic title.
The Old Testament was still the great storehouse from
which the Christian teacher derived the sources of consola-
tion and conviction. And at the close of the second century,
Irenzeus, after speaking of the Scriptures — the sum of the
Apostolic teaching —as “the foundation and pillar of our
faith,” speaks of a “tradition manifested in the whole
world,” and “kept in the several churches through the
succession of the presbyters.” °

1 Compare Acts ii. 16, 25, 34 ; iii. 18, 2 The substance of this paragraph is
21, 22, 24; iv. 11; viii. 82 ff.; ix. 22; xiii. wrought out in detail in The History of
27, 88; xvii. 2,3; xviii. 28. the Canon of the N. Testament, pp. #0 δὲ

182 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

In one respect the testimony of Irenzeus — the connect-
ee ing link of the east and west — is extremely
ΠΣ important, as distinctly recognizing the his-
toric element in the Apostolic tradition.
The great outlines of the life of Christ were received, he
says,’ by barbarous nations without history (sine literis) by
ancient tradition; and this combination of facts and
doctrine existed from the first. “The Gospel,” —the sum,
that is, of the oral teaching, — in the language of Ignatius,
represents “the flesh (σάρξ) of Jesus.”? The Saviour’s
personal presence was perpetuated in the living voice of
His Church. At a still earlier time the writings of the
New Testament contain abundant proof that the “Gospel”
of the first age was not an abstract statement of dogmas,
but a vivid representation of the truth, as seen in the
details of the Saviour’s life. The Acts of the Apostles and
the Apostolic letters —the first preaching and the subse-
quent instruction of the Churche at the facts of
the life of Christ were the rule by which the work of the
Christian teacher was measured. : |
The first common act of the Apostolic body affirms in
the most striking manner the position which

(a) The descrip- i :
tion of the Apostol- they claimed to fill with regard to the Sa-
ae ρα viour’s ministry. Not only was it necessary
that the Apostles should be “a witness of the resurrection,”
but the qualification to give this testimony
was to be derived from a continuous inter-
course with the constant companions of the Lord “from
the baptism of John to the Ascension.” The Resurrection
was the victory which the preacher had to proclaim; but
the victory was the issue of a long battle, and found its
outward completion in a triumph. Each event in the life
of Christ contributed to the final issue; and as the busy
prelude of word and work first introduced the closing
scenes of suffering and glory, so was it in after times. The
ministry of the Saviour was felt to be the necessary prepa-

Acts i. 21, 22.

1 χρη. c. her. iii. 4, 2. 2 Ignat. ad Phil. 5.

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 183

ration for His Passion. The Apostles could not but speak
the things which they had seen and heard!
The teaching and the acts of Christ were a
necessary part of the message of men who were specially
charged with the witness to his resurrection?

The special records of the preaching of the Apostles
confirm the impression which is produced fs πόθ
by the general description of their office. of the Apostotic
The Gospel was felt to contain not only Paster
a doctrine (διδάξαι) but an announcement
(ἀναγγεῖλαι) ; and the simplest expression of its contents was
“the testimony of the resurrection of the
Lord Jesus,’ or, in two words only, “the
Lord Jesus.” When Philip preached at Samaria he spoke
of “the things concerning the kingdom of
God, and the name of Jesus Christ,’ of the
outward establishment of the Church, and of
the personal work of the Saviour; and the same twofold

Acts iv, 20.

Acts xx. 20, ©
Acis tv. 33.

Acts xi. 20.

Acts viii. 12.

subject was the substance of St. Paul’s preaching at Rome,
when he “veceived for two whole years all
that came unto him.’ Nor are examples
wanting to show in what way the historic groundwork of
the faith was laid. In the two cases in the Acts where
the message of Christianity is delivered in detail to those
who were waiting for instruction, the great announcement
is conveyed by the outline of the ministry of Christ. St.
Peter before Cornelius, and St. Paul in the

Synagogue at Antioch, sketch shortly the i ee
significant traits of the Saviour’s life within

the very limits which were marked from the first, “the
Baptism of John,” and the Ascension. There is, however,
a difference between the two addresses, which is of con-
siderable moment towards the appreciation of the form in

Acts raviti. 31,

1 In this passage “Peter and John” in which passage St. Paul specially no
are represented as speaking, and it is tices the office of the Apostles to wit
impossible not to recall 1 John i. 1—3. ness ‘‘ to the people.”

2 Acts ii. 32; iii. 16; iv. 88; xiii. 81,

184 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

which the Apostolic teaching was conveyed “pudlicly, and
Srom house to house.” The address of St.
Paul was public, and, so to speak, ecclesiasti-
eal; that of St. Peter was private and catechetical. The
one appears to lead to further inquiry, the other is crowned
directly by baptism. The words of St. Peter convey, in
fact, a short gospel, and in this, not only the substance but
also the evidence of the later creed. He marks the date
of Christ’s appearance (after the Baptism which John
preached ), the place from which He came, and the inau-
euration of His work (how God anointed Jesus of
Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power), the point
from which His ministry commenced, and the extent to
which it spread (beginning from Galilee... . throughout
all Judea), the signs by which His presence was attended,
and the different localities in which they were shown (é
the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem), His crucifixion,
His resurrection on the third day, His manifestation to His
chosen witnesses, His great charge, His coming to judg-
ment. But while the personal instruction of individuals
appears to have embraced the whole ministry of Christ,
the public testimony of the Apostles was centred in the
| facts of the Passion and Resurrection. These
form the prominent subjects of the message

Acts xx. 90.

Acts ti. 22 ff. ; iit,

13 ff; iv. 8 f.; ὡς
ay av. 2,3; ar. which they delivered to the general gather-

ing of the Jews and to the council, in the
synagogues and before the judgment-seat; and the same
cardinal events which are described with the greatest
fulness in the written Gospels are noticed with the most
minute details in the speeches of the Acts."

1 The betrayal (Aets 11. 23); the con-
demnation by the Sanhedrin (xiii. 27);
the failure of the charge (xiii. 28); the
conduct of Pilate (iii. 13), and of Herod
(iv. 27); the choice of Barabbas (iv. 14);
the urgency of the people and rulers at
Jerusalem (xiii. 27, 28); the crucifixion
(iv. 10; v. 30; xi. 39) by Gentile hands

(ii. 28); the burial (xiii. 29); the resur-
rection on the third day (x. 40); the
manifestation to chosen witnesses (x.
41) “ΤῸ many days” (xiii. 31), ‘‘ who
did eat and drink with Him after He
rose’ {x. 41); the charge to the Apos-
tles (x. 42); the ascension to the “" right
hand of God” (ii. 38; iii. 21).

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 185

The letters of the Apostles are the sequel to their
preaching, called out in most cases by special
circumstances, and dealing rather with the
superstructure than with the basis of Christi-
anity. The common groundwork of facts is assumed as
lying at the bottom of all reasoning, but as a natural con-
sequence it is not noticed, except by implication or allusion.
Christ was set before the eyes of the Galatians
as crucified, with the clearness of a vivid
picture (zpoeypady κατ᾽ ὀφϑαλμούς). The “ Gos-
pel” which St. Paul proclaimed to the Corinthians was
the story of the death and resurrection of Christ. In
speaking to the Thessalonians it is evident that he had
dwelt upon the great issue of the Resurrection, the second
coming of the Lord. And everything tends to show that
“the traditions”! which formed an important part of the
Apostolic teaching included the details of the Lord’s minis-
try, which were committed to the Evangelist as the rule of
his work. But the Epistles themselves were not designed
for primary instruction, but for the further instruction of
those who were familiar with the great outlines of the
“revelation of godliness” which were embod-
ied in the baptismal confession. This confes-
sion, however, was the standard of Christian thought; and
in spite of the character which was necessitated by their des-
tination, the Epistles contain in scattered notices a fairly
complete sketch of the life of Christ, such as might be

Gal. iii. 1,

1 Cor. xv. 1—4.

1 Tim. wii. 16.

1 This follows from the usage of the
correlative words παραδιδόναι παράδο-
σις, παραλαμβάνειν. Luke i. 2, καϑδὼς
παρέδοσαν ἡμῖν of aw ἀρχῆς αὐτόπται
καὶ ὑπηρέται. . . . (the events of the
ministry of Christ.). 1 Cor. xi. 328,
Ἐγὼ yap παρέλαβον ἀπὸ (not παρά)
τοῦ Κυρίου ὃ καὶ παρέδωκα ὑμῖν... ..
(the details of the Last Supper). 1 Cor.
xv. 8, παρέδωκα... . ὃ καὶ παρέλα-
Boy (the details of the Passion and
Resurrection). These unequivocal ex-
amples of a historical tradition illus-

trate the other passages in which the
words are used in a more general sense:
Rom. vi. 17, εἰς bv παρεδόϑητε τύπον
διδαχῆθπ. 1 Cor. xi. 2; Jud. 3, τῇ
ἅπαξ παραδοδείσῃ τοῖς ἁγίοις πίστει;
2 Thess. ii. 15; (iii. 6}; Gal. i. 9; 1 Thess.
ii. 18. Compare also παρακαταδϑήκη,
παραδήκη, 1 Tim. vi. 20; 2 Tim. i. 12, 14,
with Clem. Eel. Proph. § 27, ἢ yap τῶν
πρεσβυτέρων παρακαταδήκη διὰ τῆς
γραφῆς λαλοῦσα ὑπουργῷ χρῆται τῷ
γράφοντι πρὸς τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἐν"
τευξομένων.

16*

186 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

gathered from the letters of a missionary of the present
day thoroughly familiar with the substance of the Gospels.
The Epistles of St. James and St. Jude are in this re-
spect distinguished from the other Apostolic
Seo ees"? writings, for, with the exception of the allu-_
sions to the “ presence” of the “ Lord Jesus
Christ,” they contain no allusions to the details of His
work.' But even thus they bear indirect testimony to the
existence of a traditional Gospel. The language of St.
James offers the most striking coincidences with the Jan-
guage of our Lord’s discourses ;? and St. Jude speaks of
“the most holy faith,” the basis of the Christian life, not as
a simple principle, but as a sum of facts.’
The first Epistle of St. Peter bears in every chapter the
vivid image of Christ’s sufferings (i. 213 11. 21
Pains FETE dt ths a. LAs ied bossy. 4). It-séemes ac iiahe
Apostle delighted to turn back with penitent
and faithful gaze to the scene of his own fall and his Mas-
ter’s love, as he pictures Him silent and uncomplaining
before His accusers, and bears witness to others of what he
had himself seen (v. 1). But St. Peter does not confine
his allusions to the humiliation of Christ, to His rejection
(ii. 4, 7, 8), His crucifixion (ii. 24), His death (i. 2, 19): he
speaks of His eternal election (i. 20), and records with con-
fident hope His resurrection (1. ὃ, 21 ; iii. 21) and exaltation
to the right hand of God (ili. 225 cf.1. 21). The scenes of
suffering are connected with corresponding scenes of glory
(1. 11, ai μετὰ ταῦτα δόξαι); and while the Apostles allude
with apparent distinctness to the last charge of Christ (v.
2.3) and the descent of the Holy Spirit (i. 12), he looks
forward to the glorious coming of the great Judge as the
consummation of His work (i. 5, 7, 135 iv. 5).
The second Epistle is chiefly remarkable for the detailed

1 James ν. 8; Jude 24. Credner Fini. § 321, p. 608. In James
2 James i. 5,6 || Matt. vii. 7; xxi. 22; v.12 || Matt. v. 36, 37, there is a coin-
James i. 22 || Matt. vii. 21; James ii. 18 cidence with the Clementine reading
|| Matt. v. 7; James iii. 1} Matt. xxiii. (Hom. iii. 65; xix. 2).
8; James iii. 12 || Matt. vii. 16. Cf. 8 Jude 20.

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 187

reference to the Transfiguration (i. 16 ff), which, in the
midst of marked peculiarities of language,
offers a most interesting parallel to the evan-
gelic narrative. The words of the heavenly voice are to
a great extent coincident with those recorded by St.
Matthew, with the natural omission of the last clause ;!
but the comparative elaborateness of the description seems
to offer an instructive contrast to the simplicity of the
earlier Gospel.

St. Paul says, in writing to the Corinthians, that his
single determination was to proclaim to them
Christ crucified; and the “cross of Christ”
is the centre and sign of his Epistles. The
phrase, “the cross” (1 Cor. 1. 18; Gal. v.11), “the cross of
our Lord Jesus Christ” (Gal. vi. 14), “the cross of Christ”
(1 Cor.i.17; Gal. vi. 12; Phil. i. 18), is peculiar to his
writings, for the single additional passage in the Epistle to
the Hebrews (Heb. xii. 2, @ cross of shame) is purely his-
toric, and it cannot but appear characteristic of the view
which he took of the Christian faith.’ In various places
he marks the supreme judge (1 Tim. vi. 13, under Pontius
Pilate*), the time (1 Cor. v. 7, Christ our Passover is
slain), the instruments (1 Thess. 11. 15, the Jews who killed
the Lord Jesus) of the Lord’s death. But the death of
Christ was, as it were, only the way to the resurrection ;
and in the writings of St. Paul the two events are put for-
ward as forming the very substance of “the Gospel”
(1 Cor. xv. 1 ff.),? and as such are constantly combined

2nd Epistle.

ili. St. PAUL.

Ei Gor toe:

1 The reading εἰς ὃν εὐδόκησα for
ἐν @ εὐδ. (which some good MSS. read)
is found also in Hom. Clem. iii. 53.

The recurrence of the word ἔξοδος
in a metaphorical sense is remarkable
in 2 Pet. i. 15 || Luke ix. 31.

2.6. g. φωνῆς ἐνεχϑείσης ὑπὸ τῆς
μεγαλοπρεποῦς δόξης ---- ἐν τῷ ὕρει τῷ
ἁγίῳ.

8 In connection with this it may be
observed that the metaphorical sense of

σταυρόω (Gal. v. 24; vi. 14) is peculiar
to St. Paul.

4 The mention of Pontius Pilate is
remarkable, according to the common
translation, as the reference in that
case must be rather to the event of
John xviii. 36 ff. than of Matt. xxvii.
11. It is better, however, to take ἐπί,
as in the Creed, simply as marking the
date.

5It is very important to notice

188 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

(Rom. iv. 24, 25; xiv. 9). Yet even thus the completeness —
of the narrative is preserved. “Christ died ..... and
was buried..... and rose again on the third day” (1 Cor.
xv. 4 ff). Afterwards the reality of the resurrection 15
attested by the subsequent appearances to Cephas, to the
twelve, to above five hundred brethren, to James, to all
the Apostles, to St. Paul himself (1 Cor. xv. 5—8). In
several places the Apostle assumes the fact of the Ascen-
sion (Rom. viii..24; Eph. i. 20; Col. iii. 1), and in one
phrase he clearly alludes to it (1 Tim. iii. 16, ἀνελήφϑη.
Cf Mark x viol 9<Acts a)2):

In respect to the prominence thus given to the last
scenes of our Lord’s life, the Epistles of St. Paul are in
harmony with the narrative of the Gospels. It was felt
that the whole life of Christ was outwardly summed up in
its crowning issue, in the depth of shame and in the fulness -
of triumph; but the preparation is not unnoticed by St.
Paul. At the first, “Christ made Himself of no reputa-
tion, and took upon Him the form of a servant” (Phil.
1.5 ff), “being rich, for our sakes He became poor” (2 Cor.
vil. 9), “born of a woman” (Gal. iv. 4), sprung from the
Jews “according to the flesh” (Rom. ix. 5), “the seed of
Abraham” (Gal. 1]. 16), “of the seed of David” (Rom.
1.3; 2 Tim. il. 8), brought in subjection to the law (Gal.
iv. 4, ὑπὸ νόμον). circumcised (Col. ii. 11), associated with
others as His brethren (Gal.i.19). In His life “He pleased
not Himself” (Rom. xv. 3), but left an image of “meek-
ness and gentleness” (2 Cor. x. 1) in the midst of afflictions
(Col. 1. 24; 2 Cor. 1. ὅ; 1 Thess. i. 6); and the pattern of
the life of Christ is that to which the Christian must aspire,
and to which he will at last attain (Eph. iv. 13). One
scene only, the institution of the Last Supper, is described

that St. Paul speaks of this Gospel ἀπὸ τοῦ K.not παρὰ Tov K.) the
as “handed down” (xv. 1, 8. He account of the institution of the Eu-
first received (παρέλαβε) and in turn charist (1 Cor. xi. 28). Cf. Neander,
transmitted (παρέδωκε) the Gospel. In Gesch. d. Pflanz. u. s. w. i. 180 ff
the same way he speaks of “receiving Supr. p. 185, n. 1.
‘mediately) from the Lord” (taped. ea oe ae

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 189

in detail, and in that the language is almost coincident
with that of the narrative in the Gospels (1 Cor. x. 16;
xi. 23 —26).'

The Epistle to the Hebrews touches on each of the great
features in the Saviour’s life, as His incarna-
tion (ii. 9 ff.), His descent from Judah (vii. 376 fpistle tome
14), His temptation (il. 18; iv. 15), His
consecration to His ministry (v. 5), His humiliation (ii. 9
ff.) and sufferings (v.8), His agony (v. 7, with peculiar de-
tails), and crucifixion (vi. 6) outside the walls (xiii. 12), and
His exaltation to the right hand of God (vill. 1; ix. 24 ff)?

The references which St. John makes in his epistles to
the circumstances of the life of Christ are
exactly accordant with the character of his
Gospel. He dwells on the preéxistence of the Son of God
(iv. 9), and, at the same time, affirms with the most
complete distinctness His real incarnation (iv. 2), and
bodily presence (i. 1, ai χεῖρες Hu. ἐψηλάφησαν), and death
(i. 7; ii. 2). In the same way, without noticing the
resurrection expressly, he speaks of the mediatorial work
of Christ in the presence of the Father (ii. 1), and His
future “coming in the flesh” (2 Ep. 7, ἐρχόμενον). The
beginning and close of the Lord’s ministry, His baptism
and death, are shown to be mysteriously united, inwardly
in the completion of a divine testimony, and outwardly in
one of the last incidents of the Passion (vy. 6). In St.
John the spiritual significance is extended over the literal,
but a foundation of historic details lies at the foundation
of the higher lesson.

The connection of the Evangelic narra- he substance of
tive with the Apostolic Epistles is not, how- iS ee
ever, confined to mere allusions. The spirit % 7?"
and tone of the letters presuppose some such record as

iv. St. Joun.

1 If the text of Luke xxii. 19, 20, be that an interpolation has been made
correct, the coincidence is verbal, but from 1 Cor. xi. 25 ff
the confusion which exists in these 2 Cf. Stanley, Ep to Corinthians, pp
verses renders it more than probable 580 ff. 2 Ed.

190 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

that which is contained in the histories. The substance
of the Gospels is an adequate explanation of the form of
the first Christian teaching, and it is impossible to con-
ceive of any other. If it be true that scarcely any clear
references to the recorded discourses of the Lord are con-
tained in the Kpistles, for the parallels to 1 Cor. vii. 10
(Matt. v. 32) and 1 Cor. 1x. 14 (Luke x. 4, 7, cf. 1 Tim, v.
18) are at best uncertain, it is no less true that the life and
words of Christ are everywhere assumed as the basis of all
doctrine. He is Himself wisdom (1 Cor. i. 80), the centre
of truth (Eph. iv. 21), “the true” (1 John v. 20); His
commandments are absolute (1 Cor. xiv. 27); His words
are the decisive rule of “sound” doctrine (1 Tim. vi. 3);
His example the one perfect model (1 Pet. ii. 21; Phil. ii.
53; 1 John 11. 6). It is everywhere assumed that the
Christian is familiar with the portraiture of his Master,
and each of the traits which are preserved in these passing
notices is seen in its full expression in the Gospels. The
New Testament, as a whole, is a key to the sub-apostolic
history; the Gospels, not perhaps in their writtea but in
their oral form, are the key to the Epistles.!

Thus far, then, it has been shown that the characteristic
work of the Apostles was preaching, and not
writing ; that they were inclined to this form
of teaching by character and training, no less than by their
special commission; that the first “Gospel” was conse-
quently an oral message, and not a written record; that
the books of the Old Testament were the sufficient
Apostolic Scriptures (cf. 2 Tim. iti. 15). It has been
further shown that this oral Gospel of the Apostles was

Summary,

1 It is remarkable that there is (as far
as I know) no direct allusion to the
miracles of our Lord in the Epistles;

often brought out in the Lord’s life in
His ‘ casting out devils.” Itisa similar
fact, that in the writings of the apostolic

but it is possible (Stanley, 1. c.) that the
word δαιμόνια in 1 Cor. x. 20, 21, which
occurs elsewhere in St. Paul only in
1 Tim. iv. 1, may be chosen with a dis-
tinct reference to the antagonism so

fathers there are(I believe) no allusions
to the miracles of the Apostles. The
omission in both eases arises from the
nature of the writings.

THE ORIGIN OF 191

THE GOSPELS.

historic; that the Apostles were expressly declared to be
witnesses of the whole ministry of Christ; that their
preaching rested on the details of His life; that their
letters presuppose an acquaintance with the facts of the
Gospel, and preserve such an outline of its contents as is
filled up in our Gospels. It remains still to inquire
whether there is any direct evidence for connecting our
present Gospels with the oral cycle of evangelic facts
which is thus seen to have existed; and whether the
theory of a common oral origin is consistent with the
peculiarities of form which they exhibit.

On the first point early testimony is explicit and uniform,
Each of the first three Gospels is distinctly

= Il. The “itt
connected by adequate evidence with the goss ΠῚ
ν 4 7A ry τῇ Ξ Ν / a . I. Distinctly von
previous preaching of Apostles, as being ρον δον
intended to supply a permanent reeord ot Sonne preach-
NY.

that which was betore only traditional. The

written Gospels are acknowledged in history to be the last
stage of the Apostolic preaching, the preparation for the
passage into a new age.

The earliest account of the origin of a “Gospel” is that
which Papias has given on the authority of
the elder John.’ Papias was himself a “ di-
rect hearer” of this John, and John was “a
disciple of the Lord,” if the text of Papias be correct, and,
at any rate, contemporary with the later period of the
Apostolic age. ‘ This also, then, was the statement of the
elder. Mark having become Peter’s interpreter, wrote
accurately all that he (Peter) mentioned (ἐμνημόνευσε) ;*

(a) St. MARK 3 on
the evidence of
Papias ; and

1 Euseb. H. Δ. iii. 39.

Routh, Πρ].
Sacr. i. pp. 13 ff.

2 This word is ambiguous, like ἀπε-
μνημόνευσε below, and may mean * 7'e-
membered,” or mentioned.” Itis used
in both senses in the chapter of Euse-
bius in which the quotation occurs.
The first sense is that in which it is
commonly taken here, but after further
consideration I am inclined now to

prefer the second rendering as more
consistent with the other forms in’
which the tradition is preserved. A
passage of Eusebius (Dem. Lv. iii. 5),
however, seems to favor the other ren-
dering in the second ease: Πέτρος οὐδὲ
καϑῆκεν ἐπὶ τὴν εὐαγγελίου γραφὴν
50 εὐλαβείας ὑπεροχήν" τούτου Μάρκος
γνώριμος καὶ φοιτητὴς γεγονὼς ἄπο-
μνημονεῦσαι λέγεται τὰς τοῦ Πέτροι

192 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

though he did not [record] in order that which was either
said or done by Christ (od μέντοι τάξει τὰ ὑπὸ -τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἢ
λεχϑέντα ἢ πραχϑέντα). For he neither heard the Lord nor
followed (παρηκολούϑησεν) Him; but subsequently, as I said
[attached himself to] Peter, who used to frame his teach-
ing to meet the wants [of his hearers], but not as making a
connected narrative of the Lord’s discourses (ὥσπερ σύνταξιν
τῶν Κυριακῶν ποιούμενος λόγων. All. λογίων). So Mark com-
mitted no error, as he wrote down some particulars (ἔνια
γράψας) as he narrated them (ἀπεμνημόνευσεν) ; for he took
heed to one thing, to omit nothing of things he heard, and
to make no false statement in [his account of] them.”

This most important testimony notices the three points
on which stress has been already laid, the historic charac-
ter of the oral Gospel, the special purpose with which it
was framed, the fragmentariness of its contents; and it was
on such an oral basis that our present Gospel of St. Mark
is said to have been founded, according to the evidence of
one who must have known the Apostles.

Later writers, partly as it seems from an independent
tradition, and partly from this statement of
Papias, repeat the same general statement of
the relation of St. Mark to St. Peter with various differ-
ences of detail. Irenzeus defines more exactly the time of
the publication of the Gospel, though the reading is
uncertain. “ After the decease (ἔξοδον, cf. 2 Ῥοί. 1. 15) of
these (Peter and Paul), Mark, the disciple and interpreter
of Peter, himself also handed down to us in writing
the things which were preached by Peter.”! Clement of
Alexandria records, as “a tradition of the elders of former

later writers.

περὶ τῶν πράξεων τοῦ Ἰησοῦ Siadé- H. E. vy. 8. The reading, μετὰ τὴν
gers .... πάντα yap τὰ παρὰ Μάρκῳ τούτου (sc. τοῦ κατὰ Ματϑαῖον evay-
τοῦ Πέτρου διαλέξεων εἶναι λέγεται γελίου) ἔκδοσιν (Cramer, Cat. in Mare.
ἀπομνημονεύματα. Comp. also Clem. p. 264) is worthy of notice, as the date

Alex. ap. Euseb. H. E. vi. 14. ....7bv jis not consistent with the other ac-
Μάρκον μεμνημένον τῶν λεχϑέντων counts. Elsewhere Ireneus calls Mark
ἀναγράψαι τὰ eipnueva..... interpres et sectator (1. 6. ἀκόλουδο5)

1Jren. adv. Her, iii. 1. Cf. Euseb. Petri (iii. 10, 6).

THE ORIGIN OF THE

GOSPELS. 193

time” (παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνέκαϑεν πρεσβυτέρων), an account,
which, though very similar to that of Papias, appears to be
distinct from it. “[It is said] that when Peter had
publicly preached (xypvgavros) the word in Rome, and
declared the Gospel by inspiration (πνεύματι ἐξειπόντος τὸν
λόγον), those who were present, being many, urged Mark,
as one who had followed him from a distant time, and
remembered what he said, to record (ἀναγράψαι) what he
stated (τὰ εἰρημένα) ; and that he, having made his Gospel,
gave it to those who requested him; and that Peter, when
he was aware of this, took pains neither to hinder him nor
to encourage him in the work (προτρεπτικῶς μήτε κωλῦσαι
”1 Origen says still more expressly that
“ Mark made his Gospel as Peter guided him (i¢yyjoaro).”?
Tertullian, in like manner, remarks that “the Gospel of
Mark is maintained to be Peter’s, whose interpreter he
was, .... for it is possible that that which scholars
publish should be regarded as their master’s work.” *

The tradition was repeated in later times, but generally
in the later form which Eusebius gave to it, according to
which St. Peter expressly “sanctioned the writing [of
Mark] for the use of the Church,” in accordance with a
divine revelation; a statement which is at direct variance
with the authority which Eusebius quotes, and internally
improbable.*

μήτε προτρέψασϑαι).

1 Clem. Alex. Fragm. Hypotyp. p.
1016 P. Euseb. H. £. vi. 14. So also
Adumbr. in Pet. Ep. 1. p. 1007; Marcus
Petri sectator palam pradicente Petro
evangeiium Rome coram quibusdam
Cesareanis equitibus et multa Christi

revelation, are evidently later embellish-
ments of the tradition.

2 Comm.in Matt.i. Euseb. 1.2. yi. 25.

3 Contr. Marc. iv. 5.

To these writers Justin
added, who speaks of ‘‘the memoirs

M. may be

testimonia proferente, penitus ut pos-
sent que dicebantur memoriz com-
mendari, scripsit ex his que Petro dicta
sunt evangelium quod secundum Mar-
cum vocitatur.

The false references which Eusebius
(ΠΗ. £.ii. 15)and Jerome (de virr. illustr.
8) make to this passage, as though St.
Peter did confirm the Gospel by special

(ἀπομνημονεύματα) of Peter” with an
obvious reference to St. Mark; Dial. ο’
106. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 130 f.

4 The later writers are quoted by
Credner, Zinl. p. 113 ff.

In another place Eusebius (H. £. ii.
16) represents St. Mark as δ preaching’
himself in Egypt the Gospel which he
composed.”

194

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

The history of the present Gospel of St. Matthew is
beset with peculiar difficulties, and the earli-
est writers are silent as to the circumstances
which attended its composition. While using the Greek
text as unquestionably authentic, they recognize unani-
mously the existence of a Hebrew archetype, of which
they seem to regard the canonical book as an authoritative
translation or representative, but still without offering any
explanation of the manner in which this substitution was
made. Papias, probably on the testimony of the elder
John, though this is not clear, states simply that “Matthew
composed the oracles in the Hebrew language; but each
interpreted them as he could.”! This evidence then
carries us back to a time when no Greek Gospel bearing
the name of St. Matthew was generally current, though a
Hebrew Gospel, —for λόγια, “ oracles,” can mean no less, —
of which he was the author, was known and used. In the
next generation the Greek Gospel was used most commonly
by Justin, though he is silent as to the authorship ;? and in
the time of Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian! and Ire-
neus,’ the present Gospel was recognized by the Church as
the authentic work of St. Matthew. But the reception of
the Greek text did not interfere with the earlier belief.
The existence of a Hebrew original is confirmed by the
statements of Irenzus® and Origen,’ on the authority of
“tradition” (as ἐν παραδόσει μαϑών), and by the general
consent of later opinion, as well as by the story of Pante-
nus, who is said to have found in “India” “the Hebrew

(0) St. MATTHEW.

1 Papias ap. Eusebius, H. Ε. iii. 39.
Matdaios μὲν οὖν Ἕβραϊΐδι δια-
. λέκτῳ τὰ λόγια συνεγράψατο, ἢ ρ-
μήνευσε δ᾽ αὐτὰ ὡς ἠδύνατο ἕκασ-
Tos. The form of the sentence is
remarkable, and the aorist. marks a
change before Papias’ (or John’s) time.
Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, 79.

2 Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 154 ff.

3 Clem. Alex. Hypotyp. 1. ¢. Cf.
Euseb. H. Ε-. vi. 14.

4 Tert. c’ Marc: iv. 2 τ. fidem ex
apostolis Joannes et Matthzus insinu-
ant.

5 tren. adv. Her. iii. 11,8... 6 Λόγος

. ἔδωκεν ἡμῖν τετράμορφον τὸ εὐ-
αγγέλιον, ἑνὶ δὲ πνεύματι συνεχόμε-
νον.

6 Iren. adv. Her. τ. 1. Cf. Euseb.
JER ION 3.8:

7 Orig. Comm. in Matt.i. Cf. Euseb
Η. E. vi. 25.

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 195

writing of Matthew,” which was left there by the Apostle

Bartholomew.’ But none of these writers allude to the
origin of the Gospel. This is first described by Eusebius,
in a passage which bears strong internal marks of proba-
bility, though it is impossible to point out the authorities
on which it rests. “Matthew,” he says, “having formerly
preached to Hebrews, when he was about to go to others
also, having committed to writing in his native tongue the
Gospel according to him, filled up by his writing what was
wanting in his presence (τὸ λεῖπον τῇ αὐτοῦ παρουσίᾳ, ἡ. 6., the
loss they felt as he was no longer with them) to those from
whom he set out.”? This may be a mere conjecture by
which Eusebius explains the earliér tradition, but in the
absence of all opposing evidence it must be allowed to have
some weight.

The early accounts of the origin of the Gospel of St.
Luke were strictly parallel to those of the
origin of St. Mark, but less detailed. “ Luke,
the follower of Paul,” says Irenzus,’ “set down in a book
the Gospel which he (Paul) used to preach (τὸ ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνου
κηρυσσόμενον evayy.).” Tertullian speaks of St. Paul as
“the idluminator of Luke,” and says that “the summary
(digestum) of Luke was generally assigned to Paul.”*
The allusions which St. Paul makes to “his Gospel”
(om: 11. 16; xvi. 25; 2 Tim.ii. 8. Cf..2 Cor.-viii. 18) and
to St. Luke, soon gave occasion to suppose that he himself
used the Gospel of St. Luke. Even Origen speaks of “the
Gospel of Luke as that praised by Paul;”° and the tra-
dition assumed a more definite shape in the writings of
Jerome® and the Pseudo-Athanasius. It is remarkable,
however, that Eusebius refers to the conjecture (φασι)

1 Kuseb. H. &. v.10. Cf. Hieron. de
virr. illustr. 36.

ἐν gee
predicavit....

qui semper cum Paulo
et cum eco evyangeli-

2 Euseb. H. £. iii. 24

5 Tien. adv. Her. iii. 1.1. Cf. Euseb.
IT. E. y. 8. Elsewhere Irenzus calls
Luke “inseparabilis a Paulo et coéper-
alius cjus in evangelio” (adv. Her. iii.

zavit et creditus est nobis referre evan-
gelium. (1. 6.).
4 Tert. adv. Marc. iv. 2; iv. 5.
5 Orig. ap. Euseb. H. E vi. 25
6 Hieron. de virr. illustr. Τ.

196 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

without trace of approval, though the corresponding tra-
dition, which confers the direct authority of St. Peter on
the Gospel of St. Mark, rests on his authority.
But, apart from tradition, the preface with which St.
Luke opens his Gospel throws a striking
Ge Lines Peehie. light upon its composition. The words have
ares es been made the subject of the most varied
controversy, though the true sense seems to lie upon their
surface. Both in the description which he gives of other
“ Gospels,” and in the peculiar character which he claims
for his own, St. Luke appears to confirm the views already
given of the prevalence and nature of the unwritten Gos-
pel of the first age. The common basis of the Evangelic
narratives is said to be the oral “tradition of those who
from the beginning (cf. Acts i. 21, 22) were eye-witnesses
and ministers of the word.” The two elements in the
Apostolic character which have been already pointed out,
personal knowledge (αὐτόπται) and practical experience
(ὑπηρέται), are recognized by St. Luke as present in those
who originally “handed down” (παρέδοσαν) the history
which many attempted to draw up and arrange afresh
(ἀνατάξασϑαι) in a connected shape (dvar. διήγησιν. ..
καϑὼς π.). The work of these first unknown Evangelists
was new only in form, and not in substance. The tradition
which they incorporated in a narrative was not peculiar to
themselves, but common to all (xa3. παρ. ἡμῖν) 1: for the
common belief was independent of these written records.
St. Luke speaks of the “attempts” as of something which
had no influence at the present.2 The “facts” were “fully
believed” (πεπληροφορημένων, not πληροφορηϑέντων, Rom. iv.
21) apart from the evidence of such documents. Theophi-

1 Euseb. H. £. iii. 4. “have attempted.” Possibly some
feeling of this difference influenced
Origen’s judgment, when he saw in
the word ‘attempt’ itself a reproof
of unauthorized temerity (Hom. in
3 -Emexeipnoayv, “ attempted,” not Luc. 1.).

2 Bp. Marsh justly insists on the im-
portance of the phrase: The origin of
the first three Gospels, Ὁ. 364.

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 197

lus was already “instructed” in “the words”! of the exact
truth of which St. Luke wished to assure him; and _ his
instruction was derived not from books, but from that oral
teaching (κατηχήϑης). Which is described by the same term
from the first foundation of the Church (Acts xviii. 25;
Gal. vi. 6). So far, then, the statements of St. Luke cor-
roborate in the fullest manner the view which has been
taken of the origin of written Gospels. The narrative
was the embodiment of the oral accounts; the “facts”
(πράγματα) were coordinate with “the word ;” the work of
the Evangelist was arrangement rather than fresh compo-
sition; the subjects with which he dealt were at once
matters of firm conviction and ordinary instruction. The
grounds on which St. Luke rests his own narrative involve
the same principles. It is evident at first that he repre-
sents his Gospel as a faithful embodiment of the “ Evan-
gelic tradition.” He finds no fault with the basis on which
the earlier writers rested. His own determination is placed
on an equal footing with theirs (ἔδοξε κἀμοί) ; but he claims
for himself a knowledge of the Apostolic preaching con-
tinuous from the first, complete, exact, and for his writing
a due order (Luke 1. ὃ, παρηκολονθηκότι ἄνωϑεν πᾶσιν ἀκριβῶς
καϑεξῆς σοι γράψαι). Kach word in the’ sentence contrib-
utes an important element to the completeness of the
whole idea. St. Luke appears to speak of a gradual un-
folding of the whole Gospel in the course of the Apostolic
work which he had watched from the first step throughout
in every detail. The same term (παρακολουϑεῖν) describes
the personal attendance on a teacher (Papias, |. ¢. ap. Euseb.
Hf, F. iii. 39), and the careful following of a doctrine
(1 Tim. iv. 6; 2 Tim. iii. 10). The long companionship
seems to be the criterion of the complete knowledge. And
this view of the notion implied in “ following”
the meaning of the next words. St. Luke’s “continuous

illustrates

/
1“The words” (οἱ λόγοι) being the constituent elements of ‘the word” (6
λόγος). Cf. 1 Tim. iv. 6.

ΤΣ

198 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

familiarity ” with the subject gave him a knowledge of the
whole cycle of the “tradition,” and not only of particular
periods or of particular parts of it. His knowledge started
from the first, and extended to every point; and the
peculiar advantages of the Evangelist are enforced by the
notice of his special care (ἀκριβῶς) and plan. But the
notion of order (καϑεξῆς) does not necessarily involve that
of time, but rather that of moral or logical sequence
(cf. Acts xi. 4). The two may coincide, and in the exhi-
bition of a perfect life they will in the main, but chronology
is not paramount in the Gospels, and the language of St.
Luke does not imply that he designed to follow it. Like
the teaching on which it was first based, the record is
subservient to special requirements. It is complete in
regard to its object, but not absolutely ; a message of good
tidings, and not a biography; united in its several parts by
a spiritual law, and not by a table of dates.

Hitherto all the evidence which can be gathered from

Biabis i tT the circumstances of the early Church, and
character of the the traditions of the origin-of the Gospels,
ee has tended to establish the existence of an
original oral Gospel, definite in general outline and even
in language, which was committed to writing in the lapse
of time in various special shapes, according to the typical
forms which it assumed in the preaching of different
Apostles. It is probable that this oral Gospel existed
from the first in Aramaic and Greek, as would naturally
be the case in a country where two languages were gener-
ally current. The teaching of St. Matthew “among his
own countrymen” is expressly said to have been in
“ Hebrew,” and it is not less certain that Greek must have
been the common medium of intercourse with the Hel-
lenists. The step from these oral narratives to written
records in Hebrew and Greek is simple and natural; but
nothing has been said yet of the internal evidence to be
derived from the Gospels themselves; and still it is on this
that the decision of the question of their origin mainly

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 199
depends. General indications and_ beliefs, probabilities
and seeming coincidences, must be abandoned if they are
clearly opposed to the internal character of the books — to
the peculiarities of their mutual relations, to the extent
and limit of their similarity and difference, to the general
unity by which they are held together, and to the special
characteristics by which they are distin-
guished. It may be asked whether there is
any intimate external connection between
the Gospels? Whether the resemblances which exist
point to the existence of a common source or to mutual
dependence? Whether, in the latter case, it 1s possible
to determine the order of precedence, or in the former
the nature —oral or written —of the original records?
Various answers have been given to these questions, but
the first, at least, may be regarded as definitely settled.
No one at present would maintain, with some of the older
scholars of the Reformation, that the coincidences between
the Gospels are due simply to the direct and independent
action of the same Spirit upon the several writers. The
explanation of the phenomena which they present is sought
by universal consent in the presence of a common element,
though opinions are still divided as to its nature. The
original source of the resemblance may lie in the influence
of an original tradition, or of a popular narrative, or in the
earliest written Gospel itself; but the existence of some
such source is admitted on all sides. The merits of the
different hypotheses must be decided by their fitness to
satisfy the various conditions of the question; and before
attempting to decide their claims, it will be necessary to
gain a distinct notion of the nature and extent of the
concordances of which an explanation is required.’

(a) The nature of
the problem which
they present.

1 For the study of the parallelisms
of the Gospels abundant helps are pro-
vided. Greswell’s Harmonia Evan-
gelica (Ed. 4ta. Oxon., 1845) is perfect
in respect of typography, but the text

is bad and altogether unprovided with
critical apparatus, so that it cannot be
safely used alone. Stroud’s New Greek
Harmony (Lond., 1853) is second only
to Greswell in the convenience of its

200 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

The concordances of the synoptic Gospels may be classed
under three heads: — general agreement in
the plan and arrangement of the materials;
constant identity of narrative in form and
substance; and verbal coincidences. With these concord-
ances are combined differences in detail and expression,
large interpolations of peculiar matter, distinct revisions,
so to speak, of the same record, so that the points of
meeting between the different writers are scarcely more
numerous than the points of divergence, and the theory
which explains the existence of the former must not leave
the existence of the latter unnoticed or unexplained.

The general plan of the first three Gospels exhibits a
remarkable correspondence. The history of
the Infancy contained in St. Matthew and
St. Luke finds no parallel in St. Mark, but afterwards the
main course of the three narratives is throughout coinci-
The preparation for the Ministry, John the Baptist,
the Baptism, the Temptation, the return to Galilee, the
preaching in Galilee, the journey to Jerusalem, the en-
trance into Jerusalem and the preaching there, the Passion,
the Resurrection — such is the common outline which they
all present, and the same relative order of the subordinate
incidents is always preserved by St. Mark and St. Luke,
and also by St. Matthew, with the exception of some of
the earlier sections. The most remarkable differences lie
in the presence of a long series of events connected with
the Galilean ministry, which are peculiar to St. Matthew
and St. Mark,! and a second series of events connected
with the journey to Jerusalem, which is peculiar to St.
Luke.

i. The concord-
ances between them
threefold.

a. In general plan.

dent.

typographical arrangement, and it has
a fair apparatus criticus. Anger’s
Synopsis Evangeliorum Matt. Mare.
Luc... . . (Lipsiz, 1851) contains a
most complete and elaborate summary
of all the early evangelic fragments
and quotations in addition to the can-
onical text and critical apparatus, but

the arrangement is not so distinct as that
in Greswell and Stroud. For practical
purposes, Anger, combined with Stroud
or Greswell, will furnish all the student
can require.

1 Matt. xiv. 22—xvi. 12.=Mark yi. 45
—viii. 26.

2 Luke ix. 51—xviii. 14.

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 201

Nor is the obvious similarity of the synoptic Gospels
confined to their broad outlines. The inci-
dents with which their outlines are filled up
are often identical and always similar. The absolute
extent of this coincidence of incident admits of a simple
representation by numbers; and though the relations
which are given are only approximately true, they convey
a clearer notion of the nature of the phenomenon than any
general description. The proportion may be exhibited in
several modes, and each method places the truth in a new
light.

If the total contents of the several Gospels be repre-
sented by 100, the following table is obtained :'

ὃ. In incident.

Peculiarities. Concordances,
St. Mark, : : , 7 93
St. Matthew, : : ς 7 ...Ὁ 58
St. Luke, i : ; : 59 41
[St. John, : 3 ; 480 8]

From this it appears that the several Gospels bear
almost exactly an inverse relation to one another, St. Mark
and St. John occupying the extreme positions, the propor-
tion of original passages in one balancing the coincident
passages in the other. If again the extent of all the
coincidences be represented by 100, their proportionate
distribution will be : 3

St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, : ‘ 3 53
St. Matthew, St. Luke, : : - ; oe UN
St. Matthew, St. Mark, . , ‘ . ; 20
St. Mark, St. Luke, . ; : ‘ ‘ , 6

Or, if we follow another principle of comparison, and
take the whole number of distinct sections in the synoptic
Evangelists as 150 approximately, the peculiarities and
concordances of the Gospels may be thus exhibited :

1 Stroud, Harmony of the Gospels, p. 2 Compare Norton’s Genuineness of
117. the Gospels, i. 373 ff.

202 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

Peculiarities. Concordances.
St. Luke, . : te toe ) τὰ
St. Matthew, . ‘ 14 65 ts 15 δ
St. Mark, 2
o3 97

The relations thus obtained harmonize on the whole
with the former, but it appears that in regard to their
mutual connections the Gospels of St. Matthew and St.
Mark have ἃ much greater similarity of subject, and those
of St. Matthew and St. Luke a somewhat greater similarity
in the mere extent of coincidence, than conversely. Other
interesting combinations might be obtained from an ex-
amination of the range of greatest coincidence and most
distinctive peculiarities; but, looking only at the general
result, it may be said that of the contents of the synoptic
Gospels about two-fifths are common to the three, and that
the parts peculiar to one or other of them are little more
than one-third of the whole. In St. Mark there are not
more than four and twenty verses to which parallels do
not exist in St. Matthew or St.. Luke, though St. Mark
exhibits everywhere traits of vivid detail, which are
peculiar to his narrative.

It is not, however, enough to consider general coinci-
dences of substance and subject. Such a
view conveys a false and exaggerated idea

of the likeness between the Gospels. In spite of their
general resemblance they are severally distinct in style and
effect. The identity of range is combined with difference
of treatment, peculiarities of language with unity of scope.
The verbal coincidences between the different Gospels,
while in themselves sufficiently remarkable, are yet consid-
erably Jess than might appear from the popular statement
of the facts. The passages common to St. Matthew and
some other of the Synoptic Gospels form a little more than
four-sevenths of the whole, but the corresponding verbal
coincidences are less than one-sixth. In the other Gospels
the proportion of verbal coincidences is still less. Those in

6. In language.

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 203
St. Luke form about one-tenth, and in St. Mark about one-
sixth of the whole Gospels, while the general coincidences
form respectively about two-fifths and thirteen-fourteenths.’
Thus the approximate relation between the general and
verbal coincidences of the Gospels may be represented
tabularly :

St. Matthew. St. Luke.
ἵν a | 1 5 ἢ

St. Mark.
99 εἶ

Nor is this all: in the distribution of the verbal co-
incidences a very simple law is observable.
They occur most commonly in the recital of
the words of our Lord or of others, and are
comparatively rare in the simple narrative. Thus, of the
verbal coincidences in St. Matthew about seven-eighths,
of those in St. Mark about four-fifths, and of those in St.
Luke about nineteen-twentieths occur in the record of the
words of others.

If, again, these verbal coincidences are further analyzed,
several interesting results are obtained. In the passages
common to all these Evangelists about one-sixth consists
of verbal coincidences, and of these one-fifth occurs in the
narrative, and four-fifths in the recitative parts. In the
same sections the additions common to St. Matthew and
St. Mark contain five-sixths of their verbal coincidences in
the recitative portions; and those common to St. Mark
and St. Luke,? and St. Matthew and St. Luke, with two
unimportant exceptions, present no verbal coincidence
except in such portions.? In the sections common to two
Evangelists a similar law prevails. The verbal coinci-
dences between St. Matthew and St. Luke are very

The distribution
of verbal coinci-
dences peculiar.

1 Forthese proportionsIamindebted New Testament, y. 317), that when St.

to Mr. Norton, /. 6.

2 The most remarkable similarities of
fact and differences of language occur
in Mark y. 3 ff. ||; Luke viii. 27 ff.

8 One important observation was
made by Marsh (Michaelis, /ntrod. to

Matthew and St. Luke verbally agree
in the common sections, St. Mark al-
ways agrees with them also. There is
not a single instance of a verbal agree-
ment in these sections between St.

Matthew and St. Luke only.

204 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

numerous in the recital of our Lord’s words, but the
coincidences in the narrative cannot be rated at more than
one-hundredth part of the others. Only one instance of
verbal coincidence occurs in the numerous sections com-
mon only to St. Mark and St. Luke, and ‘in this the
coincidences in the narrative to those in the recitative part
are as five to one. In the sections common to St. Matthew
and St. Mark alone a different proportion obtains. In
these the verbal coincidences in the narrative part are
somewhat more than one-third of the whole number; but
it is remarkable that in one important section (Mark vi.
17—29; Matt. xiv. 3—12) the only trace of a verbal
coincidence occurs in the words ascribed to John the
Baptist.

But in order to give these proportions only their due
force, account must be taken of the proportion which the
narrative and recitative parts of the Gospels bear to one
another. Roughly, then, it may be said that the narrative
in St. Matthew forms about one-fourth of the Gospel, in
St. Mark about one-half, in St. Luke about one-third. If
these proportions are combined with the aggregate of
coincidences in the several Gospels, and the contents of
each Gospel represented by 100, the following table is
obtained :

(a) (B) (y) (5)
Narrative. Recitative. Coincidences. Coincidences
in (@). in (B).
St. Matthew, 4 25 9 2.08 14 56
St. Mark, . F Ba 50 pee) 1333
St. Luke, 3 , 34 66 «90 9.50

Or, in other words, verbal coincidences are more fre-
quent in the recitative than in the narrative portions of
St. Matthew, in the proportion (nearly) of 12:5, of St.

_ Mark, of 4: 1, and of St. Luke, of 9:1.
of theconmontances The general harmony and distinctness of
Maik dietthin” the results which have been obtained by these
various analyses shows that they must be
taken into account in considering the general problem of

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 205

the concordances of the Synoptists. There is a marked
difference between the composition of the recitative and
narrative parts of the Gospels. In the former there is a
prevailing unity, in the latter an individual style. The
transition from the one to the other is often clear and de-
cided, and the most remarkable coincidences are, in sev-
eral instances, prefaced by the most characteristic differ-
ences, It is evident then that the problem involves two
distinct conditions, and a satisfactory solution must account
not only for the general similarity which the Gospels ex-
hibit in their construction and contents, but also for the
peculiar distribution of their verbal coincidences. Any
theory which leaves one or other of: these points unex-
plained must be considered inadequate and untrue.

The difference in language between the narrative and’
recitative parts of the Gospels points the
way to those characteristic peculiarities by i: 'nc een
which they are respectively marked, which 772m! with Meir
are, as has been already said, scarcely less ;
striking than their general likeness. The three records
are distinct, as well as similar, in plan and incident and
style. Each presents the form of a complete whole, whose
several parts are subordinated to the production of one
great effect. Each contains additions to the common mat-
ter, which are not distinguishable externally from tiie other
parts; and the Gospel of St. Mark, which contains the
fewest substantive additions, presents the greatest number
of fresh details in the account of common incidents. Each
is marked by peculiarities of language, which, notwith-
standing the limits within which they are confined, pene-
trate throughout its contents. In many cases, as in the
genealogies, and in the narratives of the Passion and the
Resurrection, these differences amount to serious difficul-
tics, from our ignorance of all the circumstances on which
the accounts depend; and even where it is not so, they
are distinct and numerous, and offer as clear a proof of

206 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

the actual independence of the Gospels as the concord-
ances offer of their original connection.!

Such, in a brief summary, are the peculiarities which
the Synoptic Gospels present, and which the
true account of their origin must explain.
This explanation has been sought in the
application of two distinct principles. One class of solu-
tions rests upon the assumption that the later Evangelists
made use of the writings of their predecessors; another
supposes that the similarity is to be traced to the use of
common sources, either written or oral. To these distinct
methods of solution a third class may be added, which
consists of various combinations of modified forms of the
two others.

The first class of solutions contains every possible com-
bination of the Gospels. Each in turn has
been supposed to furnish the basis of the
others; each to occupy the mean position 5
each_to represent the final narrative. This variety of
vpinion is in itself an objection to the hypothesis, for it is
a case where it might seem reasonable to expect a clear
and unquestionable proof of dependence. But it is further
evident that the assumption of a mutual dependence,
while it may explain the general coincidences between the
Gospels, offers no explanation of the peculiar distribution
of the coincidences, or of the differences between the
several narratives. It appears to be inconsistent with the
results of a careful analysis of the language and of the
contents of the Gospels. Every attempt to show on this

(6) The solutions
proposed.

i. Mutual depen-
dence.

1 The peculiarities of plan, incident,
and language, which characterize the
different Gospels, will come under no-
tice subsequently; at present, it is
enough to state the results which will
be then established. The most minute
and valuable contribution to the criti-
cism of the verbal characteristics of the
evangelists is that of Gersdorf, Beitrage
zur Sprach-Characteristik der Schrift-

steller des Neuen Testaments, Leipzig,
1816, which at the same time offers the
most striking confirmation of the text
of the oldest family of MSS., but it
treats the subject grammatically rather
than linguistically.

2 Compare Marsh’s Dissertation, etc.
pp. 172 ff. The exceptions which he
notices have been removed. Cf. Reuss,
Die Gesch. d. Neuen Testamenés, ς 180.

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 207

hypothesis why a later Evangelist has omitted details which
are noted by an earlier one; why he adopted his language
up to a certain point, and then suddenly abandoned it;
why he retained in some sentences nothing more than a
remarkable word, and in others the fulness of an entire
answer, has always failed. Nor is this an inconsiderable
objection. If the coincidences of the Gospels are due to
mutual use, the divergences cannot but be designed. Such
a design, however, as would satisfy this hypothesis is not
discoverable in the Gospels. The true purpose which may
be traced in the writing of each Evangelist is naturally
explicable on very different principles from those which
are involved in the minute criticism and elaborate recon-
struction of former works. The superficial incongruities
and apparent contradictions which are found in the differ-
ent Gospels are inconsistent with the close connection
which the hypothesis requires; and the general notion is
as foreign to the spirit of the Apostolic age as it is to the
current of ecclesiastical tradition. In its simple form, the
“supplemental” or “dependent” theory is at once inade-
quate for the solution of the difficulties of the relation of
the synoptic Gospels and inconsistent with many of its
details; and, as a natural consequence of the deeper study
of the Gospels, it is now generally abandoned, except in
combination with the other principle of solution.

This second principle consists in the recognition of one
or more common sources from which our
present Gospels are supposed to have been
derived. But the principle admits of very
varied application. The common sources may have been

ii. Common sour-
ces,

1 This principle is stated by Epipha-
nius in general terms: Her. li.6. οὐχὶ
ἑκάστῳ ἐμέρισεν 6 eds ἵνα of τέσσα-
pes εὐαγγελισταὶ... τὰ μὲν συμφώ-
νω5 καὶ ἴσως κηρύξωσιν, ἵνα δειχϑῶσιν
ὅτι ἐξ αὐτῆς τῆς πηγῆς ὥρμηνται, τὰ
δὲ ἑκάστῳ παραληφϑέντα (Ἰ. παραλειφ-

ϑέντα), ἄλλος διηγήσεται (I. -ηται)
ὃς ἔλαβε παρὰ τοῦ πνεύματος μέρος
cod > / .
715 ἀναλογίας. But he does not fur-
ther explain what he understands by
““the same source,” though his words
evidently suit better an oral than a
written source.

208 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

written or oral, and thus two distinct theories arise, which
have in turn been subjected to various modifications.

The simplest form in which the hypothesis was first dis-
tinctly brought forward consisted in the rec-
ognition of certain original Greek documents,
which were supposed to have furnished the foundation of
the synoptic Gospels, and then to have passed out of use.’
A closer examination of the synoptic Gospels showed the
inadequacy of this supposition to explain the phenomena
which they present; and the historical difficulties which it
involved were even greater than those of the “supplemen-
tal” hypothesis. The changing limits of coincidence and
variation, together with a general identity of plan, remained
still unexplained; and the loss of a Greek Protevangelium
necessarily appeared inconceivable. In ἃ short time anew
theory was proposed. An Aramaic document was substi-
tuted for the Greek one; and it was argued that the various
Greek translations of this original text might be expected
to combine resemblances and differences like those which
exist In the Gospels.2. This opinion Was not exposed to
some of the most obvious objections which were urged
against a Greek original, and it carried the explanation of
the partial coincidences of the Evangelists one step fur-
ther; but it was in detail scarcely more tenable. Though
the loss of an Aramaic text is in itself not unlikely, yet
the absence of all mention of the existence of such a doc-
ument is a serious objection to its reality ;* and the trans-
lation of a common original would not explain the peculiar
distribution of the verbal coincidences of the Gospels
which has been pointed out. In addition to this, the exist-
ence of any single written source would leave the phe-

a. Written.

1J. D. Michaelis (Jntrod. 4th Ed.). 2 Lessing (1778); Semler (1783); Nie-

The idea was first cursorily expressed meyer (1790), ete. Cf. Marsh, p. 186 ff.

by Le Clere (1716). Cf. Marsh, pp. 184 8 Some endeavored to obviate this

ff. Schleiermacher afterwards revived objection by identifying the Aramaic

the opinion in his Essay on St. Luke, Gospel with “ the Gospel according to

1817. the Hebrews,” οὐ the Hebrew St. Mat-
thew. Cf. De Wette, inl. § 84 a.

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 209

nomena of the differences of the Gospels still unaccounted
for. To explain these, fresh and more complex hypotheses
were devised. It was at last argued that the original
Aramaic Gospel, which formed the basis of the common
parts of the three Gospels, was used by the three Evangel-
ists after it had been variously increased by new additions.
It was further supposed that St. Mark and St. Luke used
a Greek translation of the original Aramaic Gospel free
from interpolation ; and that the Greek translator of the
Hebrew St. Matthew made use in the first instance of
St. Mark, where he had matter in common with St. Mat-
thew, and in other places, where St. Mark failed him, of
St. Luke.’ This hypothesis is certainly capable of being
so adapted as to explain all the coincidences and differ-
ences of the Gospels, as, in fact, it is little more than the
complement of an analysis of them; but the extreme arti-
ficiality by which it is characterized renders it wholly im-
probable as a true solution of the problem. Such a com-
bination of research and mechanical skill in composition
as it involves is wholly alien from the circumstances of the
apostolic age, and at variance with the prevailing power
of a wide-spread tradition. In dealing with this elaborate
scheme the instinct of criticism at once anticipated the
result of closer inquiry. In spite of the acuteness and in-
genuity by which it was supported, it found little favor,
and served to bring into discredit the belief in common
written sources of the Gospels, by showing that any com-
bination less subtle and varied was unable to satisfy all the
conditions of the case.

In the meantime a clearer light had been thrown upon

1 Kichhorn’s first hypothesis natu- ory of Gratz. Cf. Meyer, Comm. ii. d.
rally intervenes, but it is needless to WN. 7. i. 1. p. 22.
criticize this, or his later and still more
elaborate one. The first is examined 2 Marsh, Essay on the Origin of the
by Marsh (1. ο. infr.), and the latter first three Gospels, appended to his
described by De Wette, Fin/. § 84 p. translation of Michaelis’ /nfroduction,
The same remark will apply to the the- Ed. 2. Vol. iii. part 2, Lond. 1802.

18*

210 THE- ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

the existence and character of the traditional Gospel,! ana
the recognition of its general influence was
combined with former hypotheses. It was
supposed that the Aramaic record of St.
Matthew and the memoirs which St. Mark framed from
the preaching of St. Peter were the written basis on which
the present Gospels were formed by the help of the current
tradition? But the same arguments which established the
independence of the written Gospels when their similarity
was deduced from their mutual dependence, equally estab-
lish it when they are referred to a current tradition as their
original source. And, on the other hand, while it is certain
from the testimony of St. Luke that various narratives of
the whole or of parts of the Apostolic tradition were cur-
rent, yet these unauthoritative or partial documents, as has
been already shown, are incapable of giving an explanation
of the complicated phenomena of the Gospels, to whatever
source they are themselves referred. At the same time
they may have exercised a considerable influence upon the

b. Written and
oral.

mass of Christians, preserving among them the general
form and substance of the tradition; and while they
satisfied the want of the Church at large, they may have
contributed to confine our knowledge of the Lord’s life
within the present narrow limits by discouraging the
search for further information. But the existence and use
of these isolated narratives, like the corresponding records
of the Jewish tradition, were signs, and not causes, of the
presence of an oral history; and, as long as the Apostles
survived, the pure tradition must have been still preserved
among them, independent of such helps. ΤῸ seek for such
fragments in our existing Gospels is simply to open the
way to mere conjecture. In default of all external evi-
dence, it is impossible to separate the present Gospels, on

1 Especially by Gieseler, Historisch- (Hinl. §§ 86 ff.), and with somewhat
Kritischer Versuch u. s. w. Leipzig, different details by Reuss (Gesch. d. NV.
1818. T. § 185 ff.).

2 This view is supported by Credner

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 211

internal grounds, into any distinct constituent parts. Each
is a separate organic whole, simple and uniform, even
where it has the closest resemblance to the parallel record.

A fresh attempt, however, has been made lately! to
dissect the Gospels into their original com-
ponents, which claims notice from its bold-
ness, and serves at the same time as an
example of the arbitrary results of subjective criticism.
An original Greek Gospel, containing the records of the
Baptism, the Temptation in its simplest form, and the
Passion, is taken as the substruction; and it is further
conjectured that this was used by St. Paul, and perhaps
composed by the Evangelist, St. Philip. This document
was followed by the Hebrew “collection of sayings” (λόγια)
of St. Matthew, which included the greater part of the
Lord’s discourses with introductory narratives. Then fol-
lowed the narrative of St. Mark, which, though an inde-
pendent work, was yet written by one who was acquainted
with the two furmer records. These three elements, to-
gether with new additions and passages from “a book of
higher history,” were wrought up into the present Gospel
of St. Matthew. Afterwards, three anonymous Evangelists
are supposed to have revised the narrative, which received
its last form at the hands of St. Luke. Such a hypothesis
can scarcely claim much attention as an explanation of the
actual origin of the Gospels, though it may throw some
light on the growth of the tradition of which they are the
records. It is as a whole inconsistent with the unity of

The Gospels are
organic wholes.

plan and the unity of language by which the Gospels are
marked. If they were really the mere mosaic which
would result from such a combination, it would be im-
possible that they should be so distinctly individualized
by peculiarities of form and construction which penetrate.
through every part of them. Above all, and this remark
applies to all the explanations which depend on the use of
common documents, such a hypothesis is inconsistent with

1 By Ewald, Jahrbwucher, 1848, 1849.

212 THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

the language of St. Luke’s preface, which points clearly to
an oral tradition as the source of his own Gospel, and by
implication of the corresponding parts in the other Gospels;
and this last alternative of a common oral source of the
synoptic Gospels is, perhaps, alone able to satisfy, simply
and completely, the different conditions of the problem
which the Gospels present.

It has been shown already that the hypothesis of an
oral Gospel is most consistent with the gen-
eral habit of the Jews! and the peculiar
position of the Apostles: that it is supported by the
earliest direct testimony, and in some degree implied in
the Apostolic writings. The result of the examination of
the internal character of the Gospels is not less favorable
to its adoption than the weight of external evidence.
The general form of the Gospels points to an
oral source.

c. Oral.

εἰ . J . e 5
In relation to the A minute biography or a series

Jorm and sub-
et of the Gos of annals, which are the simplest and most

natural forms of writing, are the least natu-
ral forms of tradition, and the farthest removed from the
Evangelic narratives, which consist of striking scenes and
discourses, such as must have lived long in the memories
of those who witnessed them. Nor are the Gospels fash-
ioned only on an oral type; they are fashioned also upon
that type which is preserved in the other Apostolic writings.
The oral Gospel, as far as it can be traced in the Acts and
the Epistles, centred in the crowning facts of the Passion
and the Resurrection, while the earlier ministry of the
Lord was regarded chiefly in relation to its final issue. In
a narrative composed on such a plan, it is evident that the

1 At a later period, Eusebius says of ready quoted. In later times it has

Hegesippus, that ἄλλα ὡς ἂν ἐξ ᾿Ιουδαϊ-
κῆς ἀγράφου παραδόσεως μνημονεύει,
characterizing at once the man and the
nation. (ΗΠ. £. iv. 22.)

2 The hypothesis was first proposed
in detail by Gieseler in the work al-

been supported by Guericke, Hinl. § 19,
Thiersch, Versuch zur Herstellung, wu.
s. w. 119 ff., and Norton, Genuineness
of the Gospels, i.note D. Dr. Davidson
(Introd. i. 404 ff.) allows considerable
weight to tradition, while he admits
the use of written documents.

THE ORIGiN OF THE GOSPELS. 213

record of the last stage of Christ’s work would be con-
spicuous for detail and fulness, and that the events chosen
to represent the salient features of its earlier course would
be combined together without special reference to date or
even to sequence. Viewed in the light of its end, the
whole period was one in essence, undivided by years or
festivals, and the record would be marked not so much by
divisions of time as by groups of events.’ In all these
respects the synoptic Gospels exactly represent the proba-
ble form of the first oral Gospel. They seem to have been
shaped by the pressure of recurring needs, and not by the
deliberate forethought of their authors. In their common
features they seem to be that which the earliest history
declares they are, the summary of the Apostolic preaching,
the historic groundwork of the Church.

The transition from the earliest oral Gospel to the
“specific forms which it afterwards assumed is
capable of being easily realized. The great
steps in the process are still marked in the
Gospels themselves. The Gospel of St. Mark, conspicuous
for its vivid simplicity, seems to be the most direct repre-
sentation of the first evangelic tradition, the common
foundation on which the others were reared. In essence,
if not in composition, it is the oldest; and the absence of
the history of the Infancy brings its contents within the
limits laid down by St. Peter for the extent of the Apos-
tolic testimony. The great outline thus drawn admitted
of the introduction of large groups of facts or discourses
combined to illustrate or enforce some special lesson. In
this way the common tradition gained its special charac-
ters, but still remained a tradition, gaining fixity and
distinctness, till it was at last embodied in writing. For
the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke represent the

and to their subse-
quent modifications.

1 Such groups of events occur inthe the healing of the withered hand; of
constant connection of the healing of the fear of Herod, the feeding of the
the Paralytic and the call of Matthew; five thousand, and the confession of
of the plucking the ears of corn and Peter.

Peg THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS.

two great types of recension to which it may be supposed
that the simple narrative was subjected. St. Luke presents
the Hellenic, and St. Matthew (Greek) the later Hebraic
form of the tradition, and in its present shape the latter
seems to give the last authentic record of the primitive
Gospel.’ Yet in both these a common tradition furnished
the centre and basis on which the after works were built
up. The original principles of combination regulated the
later additions, and a clear resemblance of shape remained
in the fuller narrative.

In this way the successive remoulding of the oral Gospel
according to the peculiar requirements of
different classes of hearers, furnishes a natu-
ral explanation of the general similarity in
form and substance between the several Gospels, combined
with peculiarities and differences in arrangement and
contents. The assumption of a common oral source is
equally capable of explaining the phenomena of the
language of the Gospels. The words of the Lord and the
questions proposed to Him would necessarily first be fixed,
while the narrative by which they were introduced re-
Single phrases would be impressed
with peculiar force; and the recurrence of strange words
in the same connection, in the different Evangelists, even
when the construction of the sentence is changed, seems
scarcely to admit of a simple explanation, except on the
admission of a traditional record.2. And while the free

In relation to the
language of the
Gospels.

mained more free.

1 The order thus given, St. Mark, St. μου ἐλϑεῖν, Matt. xvi. 24 || ||; γεύσων-
Luke, St. Matthew (Greek), represents Tat ϑανάτου, Matt. xvi. 28 || ||; δυσκό-
the probable order of precedence of Aws, Matt. xix. 23 || ||; Matt. iv. 5 =

the forms of the narrative which they
give. It may or may not coincide with
the order of writing; for it is of course
possible that an earlier form of the
apostolic tradition may have been com-
mitted to writing at a later period.
This is an important fact which seems
to have been wholly overlooked by
critics.

2 E.g.,dmapon, Matt. ix. 151}; ὀπίσω

Luke iv. 9, πτερύγιον ; Matt. vii. 5 =
Luke vi. 42, διαβλέψεις ; Matt. xi. 11
= Luke vii. 28, ἐν γεννητοῖς γυναικῶν ;
Matt. xxi. 44 = Luke xx. 18, συνῦλασ-
ϑήσεται, λικμήσει ; Mark vi. 41 = Luke
ix. 16, κατέκλασε; Mark xiv. 15 =
Luke xxii. 12, @vdyatov; Matt. xxiv.
22 — Mark xiii. 20, κολοβοῦν ; Matt.
xxvi. 55= Mark xiy. 48, συλλαβεῖν.
Compare also Matt. iii. 3 || ||. τὰς τρί:

THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. 215

development of common materials gave full scope for
variations in detail, as well as for interpolations of fresh
matter, it includes the preservation of language hallowed
by long use in its well-known shape. Nor is it an unim-
portant fact, that in this respect also St. Mark occupies
the mean position between the other Evangelists, as would
naturally be the case if he represents most closely the
original from which they started.

But while it is allowed that the prevalence of an oral
tradition, varied by the influence of circum-
stances, might furnish an adequate explana- ων ign’ re
tion of the concordances and differences of
the Gospels, the very plasticity of tradition is turned into
an argument against the hypothesis. It has been argued
that tradition is the parent of fable, and that to admit a
traditional source for the Gospels is to sacri-
fice their historic value. The objection Ea aie gt am:
appears to rest upon two misconceptions.
It disregards, so to speak, the traditional education of the
period, and arbitrarily extends the period during which the
tradition was paramount. It bas been shown already that
the Jews preserved with strict accuracy the interpretations
of the Law and the sayings of the great teachers; and even
if it had not been so, it would have been sufficient to point
to the difference between an age of hearing and an age of
reading to remove the suspicion raised against the tradition
of the first age from the uncertainty of tradition now. But,
more than this, the Evangelic tradition existed as such
alone only during the lifetime of those who were the
authors of it. No period was left for any mythic embel-
lishment. As long as the first witnesses survived, so long
the tradition was confined within the bounds of their
testimony ; when they passed away, it was already fixed in
writing.

βους αὐτοῦ ; Matt. iv. 10 = Luke iy. 8, coincidences are all noted by Bp. Marsh
προσκυνήσεις, where the Evangelists in his Comment. pp. 211 ff.
agree in differing from the LXX. These

216 THE ORIGIN OF TIE GOSPELS.

Other objections may perhaps be urged against the
hypothesis of a definite oral Gospel,! chiefly from a misun-
derstanding of the spirit and work of the Apostolic times;
but, without affecting to say that it removes every difficulty
in the mutual relations of the written Gospels, it explains
so much with perfect simplicity and naturalness, that it
would be unreasonable not to acquiesce readily in the
existence of some doubts. Parts of the tradition may
have been committed to writing from time to time; many,
as St. Luke says, may have attempted to arrange the whole
in a continuous narrative, but still it remained essentially
a tradition in the first age, and as such found its authorita-
tive expression in our Gospels. Under what characteristic
forms and with what various shades of feeling the common
materials were moulded, remains a subject for future
inquiry.

1 Hug, Einl. 95 ff. Wiesse, Die Evan- gives a good outline and criticism of

gelienfrage, 141 ff. Comparealso Baur, the different schemes of the origin of
Die Kanon Evangelien, pp. 82 f., who the Gospels.

ΓΙ ΑΡΤΡΠΝΗ a

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

Willst du ins Unendliche schreiten,
Geh nur im Endlichen nach allen Seiten. — GOETHE.

TuHE Bible, like the Church, gains fresh force and strength
in times of trial. As long as it is unassailed,
it is also in a great measure unstudied. It ΠΡ ics icant
is received as a whole with unquestioning ‘sy οὐ θὲ
reverence, but the characteristics of its com-
ponent elements are undistinguished. A vague sense of
the general unity of the books of which it is composed
takes the place of a clear view of their organic union.
Their independence and variety, their vital connection
with periods widely separated in time and thought, their
individual traits and original objects, are neglected in that
traditional view which sees in all one uniform and change-
less revelation, neither special in its destination nor
progressive in its course.

These remarks, which apply with more or less force to
all the books of Scripture, are especially
applicable to the Gospels. The assaults gee cn
which have been made in late times upon PoWwit ou ty mod:
their historic truth have brought out with
the most striking clearness their separate characteristics,
and it has even been argued that they were composed
designedly to further particular views. This exaggeration
of the truth, though wholly inconsistent with their perfect
simplicity, is yet a valuable protest against that theory

218 e« THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

which represents them as casual collections of evangelic
fragments, and opens the way to a true appreciation of
their claims. Together they bear the same relation to the
whole apostolic tradition as they bear severally to one
another. The common record and the sepa-
rate records have a representative value.
The three synoptic Gospels are not mere
repetitions of one narrative, but distinct views of a complex
whole. They are the same, and yet they are tresh. The
great landmarks of the history are unchanged; the same
salient points reappear in all, but they are found in
-new combinations and with new details, as the features of
a landscape or the outlines of a figure when viewed from
various points.

Outwardly, the Gospels are the reflex of individual
impressions. We never find, even in the
prophets, that the personal character of the
divine messenger is neutralized; and much
more may we expect to find a distinct per-
sonality, so to speak, in the writing of the
Evangelists, whose inspiration was no ecstatic impulse, but
the consecration of a whole life, the conversion of an entire
being into a divine agency. For the Gospels, like the
Gospel, are most divine because they are most human. As
the clear expression of that which individual men seized
and treasured up as the image of their Saviour’s life, they
convey to other men the same living picture in the
freshness of its local coloring. And this coloring is of the

The general char-
acter of their dif-
JSerence.

1. This individual-
ized character is
implied in the idea
of an inspired his-
tory.

1 A curious trace of the recognition the authority and source (e.g., κατὰ

of the representative character of the
written Gospels is found in the inscrip-
tions of the Gospels in Codd. 69 (Cod.
Leicestr.), 178: ἐκ τοῦ κατὰ Ματϑαῖον
ἁγίου εὐαγγελίου κ. τ. A. A similar
inscription occurs in two of Matthaei’s
MSS.

It may be observed that the force of
the preposition in the phrase τὸ κατὰ
[ΚΜ] εὐαγγέλιον points primarily to

Θουκυδίδην), ‘the Gospel of Christ
according to [the arrangement and
teaching of] M.,” though it may, ina
secondary sense, include authorship.

From Mr. Scrivener’s admirable col-
lation, I find that the reading in Cod. ᾿
Leicestr. is ἐκ Tov κατὰ [M] εὐαγγέ-
λιον. In St. John, εὐαγγέλιον ἐκ τοῦ
κατὰ Ἰωάννην.

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 219

essence of the picture. The only conception which we
can form of the inspiration of a historic record lies in the
divine fitness of the outward dress in which the facts are
at once embodied and veiled. No record of any fact can
be complete. The relations of the most trivial occurrence
transcend all power of observation; and the truthfulness
of special details is no pledge of the truthfulness of the
whole impression. The connection and relation and subor-
dination of the various parts, the description and suppres-
sion of particular incidents, the choice of language and
style, combine to make a history true or false in its higher
significance, and belong to that “poetic” power which is
the highest and rarest gift of the historian. This power
the Evangelists possessed in the fact that they were
penetrated with the truths of which they spoke. The
Spirit which was in them searched the deep things of God,
and led them to realize the mysteries of the faith, not
indeed in their infinite essence, but as finite conceptions,
Aud would not such writers above all others compose in an
unconscious order? would not the great facts of the Gospel
assume in grouping and detail the subjective impress of
their minds, as they selected and arranged them with all
truthfulness and divine enlightenment? Popular history
is universally the truest reflex of popular opinion; and
where distortion and embellishment are excluded by the
multiplicity of the record, the human interest of the
narrative is one of the most powerful means for the
propagation of the divine message. The Gospel em-
phatically speaks to men by men, and recognizes their
intellectual differences, which it converts in different ways
to God’s glory. In like manner the Evangelists wrote the
story of man’s salvation, each as the type of one mighty
section of mankind, as they personally felt the need of a
Saviour, and acknowledged His power. The truth on
which this statement rests lies at the very foundation of
the Christian faith, for as the Son of God was made man
for our redemption, so the Spirit of God spoke through
men for our instruction.

aN) THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

The contrast between the Gospel of St. John and the
Synoptic Gospels, both in substance and in
Leda το individual character, is obvious at first sight ;
not only natural, but the characteristic differences of the syn-
but even necessary, : ἐ
rom optic Gospels, which are formed on the same
foundation and with common materials, are
less observed. Yet these differences are not less important
than the former, and belong equally to the complete
portraiture of the Saviour, which comprised the fulness of
an outward presence, as well as the depth of a secret life.
In this respect the records correspond to the subjects.
The first record is manifold; the second is one; the first is
based on the experience of a society, the second on the
intuition of a loved disciple. Even in date they arise out
of distinct periods. The spiritual Gospel belonged to a
late stage in the growth of the Church, when Christianity
was seen clearly to rise above the ruins of an “old world ;”
the “fleshly” Gospels were contemporaneous in essence
with the origin of the Church itself, and were shaped by
the providential course of its early. history. But this
natural and social growth, so to speak, invested the synop-
tic Gospels with a permanent and special power, which
must continue to work its effects as long as human
character remains the same. Each narrative, in which the
common facts were moulded, was in this way the sponta-
neous expression of a distinct form of thought, springing
out of peculiar circumstances, governed by special laws
of combination, destined at first to meet the wants of a
marked class, and adapted to satisfy in after times the
requirements of those who embody from time to time, in
changing shapes, the feeling by which it was first inspired.
In whatever view we regard the origin of the Gospels, this
multiformity appears to be as necessary as it was natural.
On the one side the separate aspects of the subject and the
various elements combined in the early Church, on the
other the recurrent phases of the human mind, which are
found in every age, seem to call for some distinct recogni

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 221

tion, and to suggest the belief that each Gospel may fulfil
a representative function in the exhibition of the Divine
Life. Nor can such a belief be dismissed at once as resting
on mere fanciful analogies, though it is as difficult to
express in their full force the arguments by which it is
supported as it is to resolve a general impression into the
various elements by which it is produced. The proper
proof of the fact that each Gospel has its distinctive worth
springs from personal investigation; but such at least was
the conviction in which the great students of former times
applied themselves to the examination of the Gospels;
and the fuller materials and surer criticism which are now
the inheritance of the scholar, promise proportionately
larger results to that labor which is most truthful, because
it is also most patient and most reverent.

_ Thé subject of the Gospel—the history of the new
creation —the manifestation of perfect hu-
manity — “the prophetic image of the glori-
fied life” !— transcends, according to the
analogy of the earlier Messianic types, the scope of one
narrator. The first creation was the creation of a harmo-
nious world, the second was the reunion of the elements
which sin had divided. Step by step in the progress of
Jewish history, successive features of the coming Saviour
were embodied in the Law, —-the kingdom, the prophets,
the seers; and the record of the fulfilment of that to which
these all pointed could scarcely have been less varied.
The twofold nature and complete manhood of Christ seem
to require a representation at least as distinct as the
prophetic teaching of the Law from the visions of Daniel.
In earlier times patriarchs and kings and prophets fore-
shadowed in their lives fragments of the work of Messiah ;
and so when He came, His work contained implicitly the
fulness of that which they prefigured. The archetypal life

1. The nature of
the subject.

! Εὐαγγέλιον --- τοῦ ἐξ ἀναστάσεως definition of Basil (De sp. S. xy. ap.
Biov προδιατύπωσις is the pregnant Suic. Thes.s. vy. €evayy-).

19*

piles THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

which summed up the fragmentary teaching of the pss
embraced the various separate developments of the future.
On the one side we see the many forms of the humanity
of Christ; on the other the unchanging immanence of His
Godhead. The bearings of each act, and the teaching of
each discourse, are necessarily infinite, for He spoke and
acted as the representative of men.’ Variety in the record
is necessary to the completeness of the portraiture; the
manifoldness even of the outward life of the Lord exceeds
the limits of one historic type? The written memorial is
necessarily partial, and, to borrow the language of geome-
try, superficial; while the living fact is entire and solid.
To the simple believer the whole becomes intelligible by
the separate contemplation of the parts.
And if Christ be our Pattern, as well as our
Redeemer: if we must realize the fulness of His manhood
for the direction of our energies, as well as truthfulness
of His Godhead for the assurance of our faith : —it must be
by comparing the distinct outlines of His life, taken from
the different centres of human thought and feeling; for it
is with the spiritual. as with the natural vision, the truest
picture is presented to the mind, not by the absolute
coincidence of several images, but by the harmonious
combination of their diversities.
The varied fulness of Christian truth is seen from the
first in the constitution of the Church. The
αι conn, first circle of its human teachers represents,
aching. 2” in characteristic distinctness, the different as-
pects under which it may be viewed, develop-
ing in harmonious completeness the outlines which the
prophets had drawn before.’ It seems, indeed, at first

Eph. iv. 15.

1 = Μ “pp 4 . 5» / Ἐν » \ , >
1 Compare Neander’s Life of Christ, ovK ἤρκει εἷς εὐαγγελιστὴς πάντα εἰ-

6 ΤΙ (E. Tr.); Church History, ii. pp. 1 πεῖν; ---ἤρκει μὲν ἀλλὰ... [ἐκ τεσ-
—5 (E. Tr.); Olshausen’s Commentar. σάρων] μεγίστη τῆς ἀληϑείας ἀπόδειξις
Einl. § 2. γίγνεται.

2 The judgment of Chrysostominthis 3. Neander( Gesch.d. Pflanz. d.Christl.
respect appears to fall short of the full Kirche, 564—795) has followed out the
truth (Hom. i. in Matt. ap. Suicer 4. 6.) various forms of carly Christian teach-

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 223
sight, when we picture the apostolic age as a living scene,
as if all unity of doctrine were lost in the diversities of
the Apostles, as they appropriated and embodied each in a
finite form the infinite principles of their common Master.
With some the mysterious glories of the ancient creed
were mingled with the purer light of Chris-
tianity ; and they transferred the majesty of
the Mosaic law, which they had observed with reverent
or even ascetic devotion,’ to the new and spiritual faith.
St James? sets before us this form of Christianity. He
contemplates it from the side of Judaism, as the final end
and aim of the earlier training. Standing,
lieve, in a close natural relation with the Saviour, he puts
aside all remembrance of that connection, and even of the
personal presence of the Lord,’ that he may dwell with the
freedom and vigor of a prophet on the principles which He
had established. His view of Christianity, to use a popu-
lar word, is objective. In this aspect “faith” is an intellec-
tual belief in a fact, while “works” are the only outward
proof of spiritual vitality. The Gospel is contemplated as a
Law, though it is “a royal Law,” and “a Law of freedom.”

St. JAMES.

as we may be-

The essence of external religion (ϑρησκεία),
which the ancient ritual regarded, is laid open
in the practice of Christian virtue. Christian-
ity is thus like a flower, which is fuller indeed and more per-
fect than the bud from which it opens, while it still rests
upon the same support and”is confined within the same
circle.

James ti. 8: t. 25;
ti. 12.

ing with equal judgment and sagacity.
In times of inward discord no truth
can be more precious than ** the mani-
foldness of Christ in its oneness; and
nowhere is it more distinctly seen than
in the Scriptures.

1 Cf. Hegesippus ap. Euseb. ἢ]. L. ii.
23.

2 Cf. Gal. ii. 12; Actsxyv.138. Though
St. Peter was “the apostle of the cir-
cumcision,” he does not personify the

Jewish party, but rather, as the repre-
sentation of the Catholic Church, me-
diates between them and St. Paul. Cf.
Neander, Gesch. d. Pflanz. 507.

3 The name Jesus Christ only occurs
twice; i. 1; ii. 1; and the epistle con-
tains no allusion to the Passion and
Resurrection of Christ, though it pre-
sents some of the closest parallels to
the language of the Gospels. Cf. p.
186 7. 2.

224 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

The antithesis to this view is found in that of one who
was called to believe in a glorified Lord, and
not to follow a suffering Teacher. St. Paul
was separated from the other apostles by the widest differ-
ences of habit and training, and the change which attended
his acceptance of the Gospel was as violent as it was sud-
den. With him Christianity was not so much a _ prepared
result as a new creation; and when the Church chose his
conversion for special commemoration, it can hardly have
been without the instinctive feeling that this was to him
what death was to the other saints, —the entrance into a
higher life. ‘Old things had passed away ;”
and only “faith”—the willing surrender of
the whole being to a supreme power—was
felt to furnish the entrance into the heavenly kingdom.’
In such a connection “ works,” which might proceed from
the spirit of servile obedience, sunk into the rank of a
mere symptom, instead of being the central fact. Yet these
antithetical views of “faith” and “works” —the outer and
the inner—are not contradictory, but supplementary.
They can be no more set in opposition than the convexity
and concavity of a curve. The common terms must be
interpreted in accordance with the position of the writers
before they are compared. And at last the teaching of the
Apostles must be combined and not identified, for we lose
the fulness of the truth if we attempt to make out their
literal accordance. They wrought differently for the estab-
lishment of the Christian society, and they wrote differ-
ently to direct its future development.

But there was yet another side of Chris-
tianity which was exhibited in the apostolic
teaching It was not only a system of practical religion

St. PAuL.

2° Cor. τ. 17
(τὰ apxaia).

St. PETER.

1Cf. Acts xiv. 27, ϑύραν πίστεως, 1.0. ἀπάγγειλον ἡμῖν τίς ἡ δύρα τοῦ
which stands in close relation with the Ἰησοῦ τοῦ σταυρωϑέντος.
words of our Lord (John x. 7), and the 2The teaching of St. John, as has
remarkable phrase which occurs in the been remarked already, belonged to a
history of St. James: Heges. ap. Euseb. later period. See Chap. vy.

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 225
and a form of spiritual growth, but it was also a fresh ele-
ment in the social world. St. Peter exhibited this organ-
izing power of the new faith. According to the significant
promise which was expressed in his name,! he laid the
foundations of the Jewish and the heathen
churches, while the task of fixing or complet-
ing their future structure was left to others.
His activity was not directed by a review of the conditions
of man’s outward piety, or the requirements
of his spiritual instincts, but sprung from his
lively hope in a sovereign Lord.

Each of the great aspects of human life, outward and
inward, in the individual and in society, are thus repre-
sented in the forms of apostolic teaching. The external
service of God by works of charity, the internal sanctifi-
cation of man’s powers by faith, and the perpetual main-
tenance of the rights and blessings of a Church, combine
to complete the idea of Christianity as exhibited by the
first circle of the Apostles; and we are naturally inclined
to look for some analogous variety in the form of the
inspired records of His life from whence the apostolic
wisdom came.

If we extend our view yet further beyond the limits of
the Jewish people, these different tenden-
cies which existed among the Apostles will
be found exhibited on a much larger scale
and in more distinct clearness. The universality of the
Gospel was attested from the first by the fact that it was

Acts ii.
x. 44—48.

87—41;

1 Pet. ¢. 3.

3. The forms of
thought current in
the Apostolic age.

1 Cf. Pearson On the Creed, p. 336 n.
Yet it is of importance to bear in mind
the distinction between πέτρος and
πέτρα (Matt. xvi. 18), between the iso-
lated mass and the living rock. The
oue is the representation of, and sug-
gests the existence of, the other (ef.
Donaldson, New Cratylus, § 15). Cypr.
De unit. Eccles. 4; Hoe erant utique et
ceteri aposto!i quod fuit Petrus, pari
consortio prediti et honoris et potesta-

tis, sed exordium ab unitate proficisci-
tur [et primatus Petro datur, ut una
Christi Ecclesia et cathedra una mon-
stretur. Et pastores sunt omnes, et
grex unus ostenditur, qui ab apostolis
unanimi consensione pascatur], ut ec-
clesia Christi una monstretur. The in-
terpolation of this passage shows what
Cyprian would have written if he had
acknowledged any such claims as the
Bishop of Rome makes now.

226 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

welcomed by representatives of every class; and without
leaving the records of the New Testament we read that it
found reception with the earnest Jew who
was waiting jor the consolation of Israel,
and served God in the Temple with prayers and fasi-
Inket os, ings day and night; with the retainer of

Roman. Cesar’s household (Cf. Tae. Ann. xv. 44:

SEG xiii. 32), removed alike from the influence of
tradition, feeling, or philosophy; with the outeast publi-

αὐ δε ο ἊΝ can, who stood afar off, as unworthy to ap-
oh a a proach his God; with the Areopagite,

nehe wosti BA, awakened to a sense of a future judgment;
Avexanvnins. and, finally, with the cultivated disciple of
few’ the Alexandrine Schools, fervent in spirit
and mighty in the Scriptures.'_ And these are not merely
individuals, but just types of the various
classes into which the Roman world was
divided in its religious aspect. The characteristic feelings
which they embodied express the cardinal tendencies of
men, and mark the great divisions of the apostolic work.
The Apostles had to unfold and declare the significance’
of the Past. They had to point out the
substance of Christianity as shadowed forth
in the earlier dispensation. They had to make known the
mighty Lawgiver of a new covenant, the divine King of a
spiritual Israel, the Prophet of a universal Church. They
had to connect Christianity with Judaism.

Yet more: they had to vindicate the claims of the
Present. hey had to set forth the activity
and energy of the Lord’s life, apart from the
traditions of Moriah and Sinai; to exhibit the Gospel as a
simple revelation from heaven ; to follow the details of its
announcement as they were apprehended in their living
power by those who followed most closely on the steps of
Christ. They had to connect Christianity with History.

JEW.

As looking to the

Past,

Present,

1 The phrase ἀνὴρ λόγιος (Acts xviii. to earlier notices of Egypt. Herod
24)—a learned man—carries us back ii. 3.

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 227

From another point of view they had to proclaim the
hopetulness of the Puture. They had to
show that the Gospel fully satisfies the in-
most wants of man’s nature; that it not only removes
“the leprosy of castes and the blindness of pagan sensu-

Future, *

ality,” but gives help and strength to the hopeless sufferer,
who has no one to put him in the healing
waters, while it confers pardon on the return- 7,707" τοῖα
ing prodigal and happiness on the believing
robber. They had to connect Christianity with man.

Nor was this all: many there were whom their deep
searching of the human heart had taught to
feel the want of a present God. These longed ρα [lations
to see their ardent aspirations realized in the
life of the Saviour whom they had embraced, and to find
their hopes confirmed and directed by His own words.
For such a spiritual history was needed; and the Christian
teachers had to exhibit our Lord in His
eternal relations to the Father, alike mani- ne ον 8. ce
fested in the past, the present, and the
future, as the Creator, the Redeemer, and the Judge.
They had to connect Christianity with God.

This variety in the forms of the Apostolic preaching,
which was directed to meet the hope of the
Jew and the energy of the Roman, to satisfy ,,,00 7 7"
the cravings of our moral nature and the aed 9 Αἱ
wants of our speculative reason, could not
fail to infiuence the form in which the facts of the life of
Christ were apprehended and grouped. These facts were
the groundwork of all Christian teaching, and in virtue of
their infinite bearings admitted of being variously com-
bined. In this way the common evangelic narrative was
modified in the special labors of the different apostles, and
that which was designed to meet the requirements of one
period was fitted to meet the requirements of all. For it
is not enough to acknowledge the marvellous adaptation
of the Gospel to the apostolic age. It was equally destined

228 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

for all times; and in this sense our present Gospels, the
records of the apostolic preaching, combine to form a holy
τετρακτύς, “a fountain of eternal truth,” in a deeper sense
than any mystic harmony of the ancient sage.

There are many whose thoughts still linger in the past,
Peel τᾶν and who delight to trace with a vain regret
thought are repro- “the glories which have passed from earth.”
ra To them St. Matthew speaks, as he did to
the Jew of old, while he teaches that all which was great
and good in former days was contained in the spirit, and
not in the outward shape, and exhibits the working of
Providence in the course of national history. There are
many, again, whose sympathies are entirely with the
present, who delight in the activity and warmth of daily
life, who are occupied with things around them, without
looking far beyond their own age and circle. To them
St. Mark addresses a brief and pregnant narrative of the
ministry of Christ, unconnected with any special recital of
His birth and preparation for His work, and unconnected,
at least in its present shape, with the mysterious history
of the Ascension. Many, also, there must be in every age
who dwell with peculiar affection on the Gospel of St.
Luke, who delight to recognize the universality of our
faith, whose thoughts anticipate the time when all shall
hear the message of Christianity, who know no difference
of class and acknowledge no claims of self-righteous-
ness, but admit the bonds of a common humanity, and
feel the necessity of a common Saviour. And, lastly, are
there not those, even in an era of restless excitement, who
love to retire from the busy scenes of action to dwell
on the eternal mysteries which St. John opened for silent
contemplation: men of divine eloquence and mighty in the
understanding of the word, who water the
churches which others have planted? No
period of life, no variety of temperament, is left without
its Gospel. The zealous and the pensive, the active and
the thoughtful, may draw their peculiar support from the

1 Cor. iit. 6.

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 229

different Evangelists, and find in them their proper end
and road.

These reflections, however, anticipate in some degree
the answer to the question which arises more
directly from the previous remarks. The Ἐ’ Τῆς Evanget-
varieties of opinion and feeling which dis- oY Catia
tinguished the apostolic age and the body of
the Apostles themselves, which were indeed only special
forms of unchanging instincts of man’s nature, suggest
with more or less probability the antecedent likelihood of
a manifold — even of a fourfold — Gospel. How far then,
it may be asked, are our present Gospels fitted to represent
the influence of these typical differences? How far are
these differences implied in the character and position of
our Evangelists? How far have they been historically
recognized, either in the arbitrary conclusions of heretics
or in the catholic teaching of the Church ?

On applying these questions to the Gospels the first
feeling probably will be one of disappoint-

ment. It must appear strange that only one, 7 Zrangel

ists generally not

bears the name of an Apostle who is dis- @muictom it is
tinctly individualized in the events of the

narrative itself. Nor is the obscurity of the early history
of the Gospels relieved by the clearness of later records.
With the exception of St. John, no one of the Evangelists
rises into any prominence in the memorials of the first age,
and tradition adds little to the few casual notices in which
their names are found. But if we look deeper, this circum-
stance is itself a testimony to the simple truthfulness of the
Keclesiastical belief, when the names of the Gospels are
contrasted with the more conspicuous titles of the Gospels
of St. James and Nicodemus, and the preaching of St.
Peter and St. Paul; and, on the other hand, all that can be
gathered from external sources as to the position occupied
by the authors of the books points to their representative
character. In the broadest features of time and position
there can be no doubt but that the Evangelists were widely

230 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.
separated from one another. Whatever may have been
the exact dates of the several books, they
were certainly composed at long intervals,
still longer if measured by the course of
events and not by the lapse of years. The first probably
was composed in its original form while the disciples went
daily to the Temple at the hours of prayer ; the last when
Jerusalem was trodden under foot of Gentiles and her
house left unto her desolate. The fundamen-
~ tal difterence which is involved in this change
of national position was further increased by
the personal characteristics of the Evangelists. The pub-
lican of the Galilean lake, the companion of
St. Paul, and the “son” and interpreter of
St. Peter, are severally distinguished from one another no
less than from the prophet of the Apocalypse; and the
differences which thus lie upon the surface gain additional
clearness in proportion as they are traced in detail as far
as the meagre memorials of the first age enable us to

yet widely separated
in date and char-
acter. Acts wi. 1.

Luke σαὶ. 24.
Luke xiii. 35.

1 Pet. v. 13.

follow them.

Tradition is constant in affirming that St. Matthew

St. MATTHEW.

wrote his Gospel in Judea,— “while Peter

and Paul were founding the Church at
Rome,” as Irenzeus adds,!—for the use of Jewish converts,
and in their national language.” “Having formerly preached

1 Adv. Her. vi. 25 (ap. Euseb. H. £.
y. 8).

2 The original language of the Gos-
pel of St. Matthew and the claims of
the present Gospel to Apostolic au-
thority have been made the subject of
considerable discussion; yet an impar-
tial view of the evidence which bears
upon the question seems to point toa
clear result. All early writers agree in
affirming that St. Matthew wrote in
‘‘ Hebrew”? (Aramaic), and from them
this belief gained universal currency
till the era of the Reformation (Eras-
mus). At the same time all equally
agree in accepting the Greek Gospel as

the Gospel of St. Matthew, without
noticing the existence of any doubt as
to its authenticity. The earliest wit-
ness is Papias. ‘ Matthew,’ he says,
on the authority, as it appears, of the
elder John, “composed the oracles (τὰ
λόγια) in the Hebrew dialect; but each
interpreted them as he could” (cf. p.
194 η 1). One point in this testimony
which seems to have been overlooked
is of importance. The tenses mark two
periods of the circulation of the He-
brew Gospel: one during which the
Hebrew alone was current, and an-
other in which the original authority
of Papias lived, when individual trans-

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 251
to the Hebrews, when he was about to go to others also,
he committed to writing in his native tongue his Gospel
(τὸ κατ᾽ αὐτὸν εὐαγγέλιον), and so filled up by his writing
that which was lacking in his presence.” This testimony,
it is true, refers to the Aramaic archetype, and not to our
present Greek Gospel, but that Aramaic record furnished
at once the substance and the characteristics of the Greek
revision.
form in plan and style that it cannot have suffered any
considerable change in the transition from one language
to the other; and there is no sufficient reason to depart

The existing narrative is so complete and uni-

jJation was no longer needed (ἡρμή-
vevoe not ἑρμηνεύει). In other words,
an authorized Greek representative of
the Hebrew St. Matthew must have ex-
isted in the generation after the Apos-
tles. The next witness is Irenaus, who
says that “‘ Matthew published a writ-
ten Gospel in the Hebrew dialect ” (ap.
Euseb. H EZ. y. 8}, while he everywhere
accepts the present text as an authentic
work of the Apostle. The evidence of
Origen is to the same effect (ap. Euseb.
H. E. vi. 25); and it is unnecessary to
extend the inquiry lower down, for all
external evidenée is absolutely uniform

in attesting the existence of a Hebrew -

archetype, and the authority of the
present Gospel as the work of St. Mat-
thew. But on the other side it is ar-
gued from internal evidence that the
present Gospel bears no marks of being
a translation, that several details in it
point to alate and not to an early date,
and that there is no evidence to show
that any one who mentious the Hebrew
original hadseen it. The last objection
is evidently unreasonable. Till it can
be shown that the writers quoted are
untrustworthy generally, it is purely
arbitrary to reject their statement be-
cause it is not sufficiently explicit. The
two other facts are perfectly consistent
with a belief in the Hebrew original
and in the Greek St. Matthew. It has
been shown that the oral Gospel prob-
ably existed from the first, both in

Aramaic and in Greek, and in this way
a preparation for a Greek representa-
tive of the Hebrew Gospel was at once
found. The parts of the Aramaic oral
Gospei which were adopted by St.
Matthew already existed in the Greek
counterpart. The change was not so
much a version as a substitution; and
frequent coincidence with common
parts of St. Mark and St. Luke, which
were derived from the same oral Greek
Gospel, was a necessary consequence.
Yet it may have happened that as long
as the Hebrew and Greek Churches
were in close conncction, perhaps till
the destruction of Jerusalem, no au-
thoritative Greek Gospel of St. Mat-
thew, ὁ. e., such a revision of the Greek
oral Gospel as would exactly answer
to St. Matthew’s revision of the Ara-
maic, wascommitted to writing. When,
however, the separation between the
two sections grew more marked, the
Greek Gospel was written, not, indeed,
as a translation, but as a representation
of the original, as a Greek oral coun-
terpart was already current; and at
the same time those few additional
notes were added which imply a later
date than the substance of the book
(Matt. xxviii. 15). By whose hand the
Greek Gospel was drawn up is wholly
unknown. The traditions which assign
it to St. John or St. James are without
any foundation in early writers.

O32, THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

from the unhesitating habit of the earliest writers who
notice the subject in practically identifying the revised
version with the original text, though, indeed, it was not
so much an independent version as an adaptation of the

oral Greek Gospel to the “preaching” of St. Matthew.

The details of St. Matthew’
ed are very scanty.
little doubt that the “Matthew” of the first
Gospel is the same as the “ Levi” of the second

St. MATTHEW.
Matt. ix. 9.
Mark ii. 14.
Luke v. £7.

s lite which have been preserv-

There can, however, be

and third, though the persons were distin-

guished even in very early times?

The change of name,

which seems to have coincided with the crisis in the life of
the Apostle, and probably bore some reference to it,” finds a

1 The view which has been given of
the relation of the present Gospel of
St. Matthew to the original Aramaic
text and the oral Greek Gospels, which
was the common basis of the two other
Synoptists, receives a remarkable con-
firmation from the peculiarities of the
Old Testament citations which it con-
tains. These may be divided into two
distinct classes: the first consisting of
such passages as are quoted by the
Evangelist himself, as fulfilled in the
events of the life of Christ; the second,
of such as are inwoven into the dis-
course of the different characters, and
form an integral part of the narrative
itself. Of these the first cass belongs
to the distinctive peculiarities of the
Gospel; the second to its general found-
ation. The one may be supposed to
have had no representative in the cur-
rent Greek tradition; the other to have
existed in a Greek form from the first.
Exactly in accordance with this suppo-
sition it is found that the first class is
made up of original rendeiings of the
Hebrew text, while the second is, in
the main, in close accordance with the
LXX., even where it deviates from the
Hebrew. This will appear from an ex-
amination of the passages in question:

(i) Peculiar quotations: i. 23 (καλέ-
govowy); ii. 15, 18; iv. 15, 16; viii. 17;

xii. 18-ff.; xiii. 85; xxi. 5; xxvii. 9, 10.
Ci. iG:

(ii) Cyclic quotations: iii. 3; iv. 4, 6,
7, 10 (προσκυνήσει5); xv. 4, 8, 9; xix.
5 (18 f.); xxi. 42; (xxii. 32); xxii. 89, 44
(ὑποκάτω), xxiii. 89; xxiv. 15; xxvii
46.

In all these cases (ii) parallels occur
in the other Synoptic Gospels agreeing
(as St. Matthew) with the LXX. Some-
times, however, quotations in St. Mat-
thew coincide with synoptic parallels,
where both differ from the LXX.: xxi.
18; xxvi. 81. In other cases a coinci-
dence with the LXX. is found where
the same quotation is not preserved in
the context of the Synoptists, though
there is evidence that it formed part of
the oral narrative: xiii. 14; xi. 10 (ex
Mark i. 2). Cf. ix. 18 = xii. 7 (καὶ od);
xxi. 16. Matt. xxii. 24, 37, are quota-
tions of the substance rather than of
the words, and differs equally from
the LXX. and parallels.

Bleek (quoted by De Wette, Lindl. ὃ
976) called attention to this difference in
the text of St. Matthew’s quotations,
but did not rightly apprehend its bear-
ing.

2 Heracleon ap. Clem. Al. Strom.
iv. 9.

8 Matthew, i. e. 77772 = Θεόδωρος.

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 233
complete parallel in the corresponding changes in the cases
of St. Peter and St. Paul, even if it appear strange that, no
passing notice of the identification occurs in the catalogues
of the Apostles. According to the present text of St.
Mark, Levi (Matthew) is called “the son of Alpheus ;”!
and in the absence of any further mark of distinction, it
has been usual to identify this Alpheus with the father of
James; in which case St. Matthew would have been
nearly related by birth to our Lord. His occupation was
that of a collector of dues (6 τελώνης) on the sea of Galilee ;
and this alone shows that he cannot have observed the
traditions of the Pharisaic school.? At a later time he is
described as a rigorous ascetic, living “on seeds and fruits
and herbs, without flesh,” * as if} by a natural reaction, he
had exchanged the license of his former life for the sternest
self-denial; but this austerity, which was rather that of an
Essene than of a Pharisee, appears as part of his practice,
and not of his teaching; nor can it have been without
influence on the progress of the Christian faith that the
Hebrew Evangelist was one who, if it was only on the
narrow scene of a Galilean town, had yet ventured beyond
the strict limits of national hope. St. Paul, who was
trained in “the straitest sect of his religion,’ when once
convinced, hastened to the opposite pole of truth; St.
Matthew, passing to the new faith by a less violent
transition, naturally retained a firmer hold on his earlier
belief. His apostolic commission tended to strengthen this
feeling; for, according to a very early tradition, he re-
mained at Jerusalem with the other Apostles for twelve

8 Clem. Al. Ped. ii. 1. This trait
again brings him into connection with
James ‘the Just.”? Euseb. ἢ. Z. 22.
The same tradition throws some light

1 Mark ii. 14. In this place D and
some other MSS. read Ἰάκωβον τὸν
Tov ᾿Αλφαίου. The position which St.
Matthew occupies in the catalogues of

the Apostles throws no light upon this upon a singular passage quoted from

relationship (Matt. x. 3; Mark iii. 18;
Luke vi. 15; Acts i. 18). In these his
connection with Thomas appears to be
more clearly marked.

2 Cf. Lange, Leben Jesu, i. 238.

the ‘‘ Gospel of the Ebionites:” ἦλδον
καταλῦσαι τὰς Svolas, καὶ ἐὰν μὴ
παύσησϑε τοῦ ϑύειν οὐ παύσεται ἀφ᾽
ὑμῶν ἡ ὀργή (Epiph. Her. xxx. 16).

20"

934 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

years after the death of the Lord, busy among his own
countrymen.’ When this work was ended, he preached
the Gospel “to others;” but no trustworthy authority
mentions the scene of his missionary labors, which in later
times were popularly placed in “ Ethiopia.”? The mention
of his martyrdom is found only in legendary narratives,
and is opposed to the best evidence, which represents him
to have died a natural death.’

These notices, however slight, yet contribute in some
measure to mark the fitness of St. Matthew for fulfilling a
special part in the representation of the Gospel. The time
and place at which he wrote further impress upon his work
its distinctive character. The Hebrew Christians, during
a succession of fifteen bishops, outwardly observed the
customs of their fathers, and for them he was inspired to
exhibit in the teaching of Christ the antitypes of the
Mosaic Law, to portray the earthly form and theocratic
glory of the new dispensation, and to unfold the glorious
consummation of “the kingdom of heaven,” faintly typitied
in the history of his countrymen.

The history of St. Mark is somewhat more distinctly
known than that of St. Matthew; but a
double name, as in the case of St. Matthew,
has given rise to the conjecture that two persons —John
Mark,* the companion of St. Paul, and Mark the Evangelist

St. Mark.

1 Predic. Petri ap. Clem. Al. Strom.
vi. 5, § 58, μετὰ δώδεκα ἔτη ἐξέλϑετε
εἰς τὸν κόσμον μή Tis εἴπῃ, οὐκ ἢκού-
σαμεν. This belief was already “a
tradition”? in the time of Apollonius
(c. 180 a. D.): ἔτι δὲ ὡς ἐκ παραδόσεως
τὸν σωτῆρα φησὶ προστεταχέναι τοῖς
αὑτοῦ ἀποστόλοις ἐπὶ δώδεκα ἔτεσι
μὴ χωρισϑῆναι τῆς Ἱερουσαλήμ (Eu-
seb. HW. FE. vy. 18). Cf. Routh, Pell. Sacr.
i. p. 484.

2 Eusebius says simply (1. c.) when he
went ἐφ ἑτέρους. The later tradition
is given by Socrates, H. £.i.19. Cf
Credner, Hinl. § 35.

3 Heracleon, ap. Clem. Al. Strom. iy.
9, § 73. The apocryphal ‘Acts and

Martyrdom of Matthew,” which relatcs,
in extravagant terms, his miracles and
death in the country of the Anthropo-
phagi, contain no fragment of any gen-
uine tradition, unless it be in the men-
tion of his Hebrew prayer (Act. Matt.
§ 22, p. 182, ed. Tischdf.). The names
Mardatos and Matdias are constantly
confounded: e. g. [Hippol.] Philos. vii.
20, where Miller has wrongly intro-
duced Matdaioy into the text.

4 Acts xii. 12, Ἰωάννης 6 ἐπικαλού-
μενος Μάρκος; xii. 25, 1. τὸν ἐπικλη-
ϑέντα M ; xv, 87, 1. τὸν καλούμενον
M. Sometimes simply “John: Acts
xiii, 5, 13.

.) > od

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. “γ.)
and “son of St. Peter” —are to be distinguished.’ The

general voice of tradition is against this distinction ;? and
the close connection in which St. Peter stood to the
former Mark, offers a sufficient explanation of the origin of
the title-applied to him. When the Apostle was delivered
from prison, after the martyrdom of St. James, he went to
the house of “ Mary the mother of Jobn, surnamed Mark,

where many were gathered

birth St. Mark was a Jew, and a cousin
(ἀνεψιός) of Barnabas, himself a Levite of

together.” By
Col. tv. 10, 11.

Acts iv. 36.

Cyprus, from which some concluded that St.
Mark was of priestly descent.’ He appears at an early time
in connection with Paul and Barnabas,.before
their special commission to the Gentiles ; and
when this was given, he accompanied them
on their first missionary journey as their “minister”

(ὑπηρετής).

Acts ati. 95.

Acts xiii. δ.

But after visiting Cyprus, with which he may
be supposed to have been previously ac-

Acts xiit. 13; xv. 38.

quainted, he left them, and returned to Jeru-
salem, being unprepared, as it would seem, for the more

arduous work of the mission.’

It is perhaps a mark of the

same hasty temperament that he was ready, not long

1 The Jate list of the *‘ seventy disci-
ples”? contained in the works of Hip-
polytus distinguishes three, — the Evan-
gelist, the cousin of Barnabas, and
John Mark (pp. 953 f. ed. Migne).

The title vids (1 Pet. v. 18) certainly
seems to mark a natural, and not a
spiritual, relationship.

2 It must, however, be admitted that
the tradition first appears at a later
time. Itis not, as far as I know, men-
tioned by Eusebius, or any earlier
writer; but occurs first in the preface
to the Commentary on St. Mark, which
is generally attributed to Victor of An-
tioch (Cramer, Cat. i. p. 263): Μάρκος

. ἐκαλεῖτο δὲ ὁ Iwavyns; andina
note of Ammonius (cf. Cramer, Cat. ii.
p. 4) on Acts xii. 15, though with some

doubt (τάχα οὗτός ἐστι Μάρκος 6 εὐ-
αγγελιστήῆς. .. πιϑανὸς δὲ ὁ λόγος
Kk. Τ,, Δ). Yet cf. Hieron. Comm.
Philem. 24.

8 Prol.in Marc.(Vulg.).
in Marc. ap. Credner, § 48.

Bede, Prol.

4 Chrysost. ap. Cram. Cat. in loc.
ἅτε ἐπὶ μακροτέραν λοιπὸν στελλομέ-
νων ὅδον. It has been conjectured that
the singular epithet ‘‘ stump-fingered ”’
(κολοβοδάκτυλοϑΞ), applied to St. Mark
in the Philosophumena (vii. 80), may
refer to this as marking him as a δ de-

‘serter’ (pollice truncus, poltroon), the

physical idea being substituted iu the
course of time for the moral one (Tre-
gelles, Journ. of Philology, 1855, pp.
224 ff.).

236 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

afterwards, to take part in the second journey of St. Paul;

and when St. aul refused to allow this, in

consequence of his former desertion, he went
again with Barnabas to Cyprus. The next notice of St.
Mark, which occurs after an interval of some years, speaks
of steady work and endurance. St. Paul
mentions him among those few “fellow-
workers who had proved a consolation to
him ;” and in a contemporary epistle he again
At a still later period St. Paul
tome; and it was at

Acts xv. 36—389.

Col. iv. 10, 11.

Philem. 24.

names him with St. Luke.
desires his help at
tome, according to the popular belief, that
he specially attached himself to St. Peter; but this belief
may have arisen from the opinion, which was common in
early times, that St. Peter spoke of Rome
under the mystical name of Babylon, though
it is more natural to suppose that St. Mark accompanied
him on some unrecorded Eastern journey. However this
may be, his close connection with St. Peter as his “inter-
preter” (ἑρμηνευτής, ὁ. ¢., secretary) -is well established 57
and it was in this relation that he composed his Gospel
from the oral teaching of his master.2 After the death of
St. Peter he is said to have visited Alexandria, where he
gained, according to the strange notion of later times, the
admiration of Philo, and died by martyrdom, according to-
the common legend?

It is, perhaps, a mere fancy, but it seems natural to find
in St. Mark a characteristic fitness for his special work.

2 Tim. iv. 11.

1 Pet. v. 13.

1 Papias (Johannes Presb.) ap. Euseb.
H. E. iii. 89 (Μάρκος ἑρμηνευτὴς Πέ-
Tpov "yevouevos), Ireneus, adv. Her.
[1.1 (M. 6 μαϑητὴς καὶ ἑρμηνευτὴς
Πέτρου) Tertullian, adv. Mare. iv. 5
iMareus quod edidit Evangelium Petri
affirmatur, cujus interpres Marcus).
The sense of €punvevths is fixed by
Jerome (ad Hedib. ii.): Divinorum sen-
suum majestatem digno non poterat
{B. Paulus) Greci eloquii explicare ser-

mone; habebat ergo Titum interpre-
tem, sicut et B. Petrus Marcum, cujus
evangelium, Petro narrante et illo scri-
bente, compositum est.

2 Cf. pp. 191 ff.

3 Hieron. de Vir. I/lustr. 8 (mortuus
est octavo Neronisanno). The detailed
traditions of his martyrdom are worth:
less: [Hippol.] 1. 6. Chronic. Alex. ap.
Credner, p. 100.

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 237
One whose course appears to have been marked through-
out by a restless and impetuous energy,’ was not unsuited
for tracing the life of the Lord in the fresh vigor of its
outward power. The friend alike of St. Paul and St.
Peter, working in turn in each of the great centres of the
Jewish world, at first timidly sensitive of danger, and after-
wards a comforter of an imprisoned Apostle; himself “ of
the circumcision,” and yet writing to Gentiles,’ St. Mark
_ stands out as one whom the facts of the Gospel had moved
by their simple force to look over and beyond varieties of
doctrine in the vivid realization of the actions of “the Son
of God.” For him, teaching was subordinate to action;
and every trait which St. Peter preserved in his narrative
would find a faithful recorder in one equally
suited to apprehend and to treasure it. The
want of personal knowledge was made up
by the liveliness of attention with which the Evangelist
recorded, “without omission or misrepresentation,” the
words of his master. The requirements of a Roman audi-

His connection
with St. PETER.

ence (πρὸς τὰς χρείας ἐποιεῖτο τὰς διδασκαλίας | 6 Heérpos*]) fixed
the outlines of the narrative; and the keen memory of a
devoted Apostle filled up the picture with details which
might well remain in all their freshness on such a mind as
his. For St. Peter himself was of a kindred nature with

1 This same trait appears even in an
early incident of his life, if Townson
(followed by Olshausen, Greswell, and
Lange) is right in identifying him with
“the young man” who followed Jesus
at His betrayal with hasty zeal {(περι-
βεβλημένος σινδόνα) and afterwards
fled with equal precipitancy (Mark xiy.
51, 52).

Can there also be any basis for the
singular tradition which represents him
as one of the seventy disciples who was
offended by the hard saying of the Lord
at Capernaum (John vi. 54), and left
Him till brought back by St. Peter?
(Epiph. Her. li. 6). The same story

occurs in [Hippolytus] (1. 6.), but there
St. Luke also is joined with him.

2 This follows from the explanation
of Jewish customs (ii. 18; vii. 1—4;
xiv. 14; xv. 6), opinions (xii. 18), local-
ities (xiii. 8), no less than from the
general character of the Gospel.

The idea that the Gospel was orig-
inally written in Latin (subscriptions
to Syr. and Syr. Philox., and some
MSS. cf. Tischdf. p. 325), was a mere
conjecture from the belief that it was
“preached” at Rome. The story of
the autograph at Venice and Prague is
well known, Credner, § 55.

8 Papias, ap. Euseb. H. Z£. iii. 39.

4 Papias, /. ¢.

238 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

St. Mark. He, too, could recall scenes of inconsiderate —
zeal and failing faith; while in his later years he still dwelt
on each look and word! of his heavenly Lord, whom he
had early loved with more than a disciple’s affection.?
Thus it was that the master and the disciple were bound
together by the closest sympathy. The spirit of the
Apostle animates the work of the Evangelist: the spirit
of his completed life. For St. Peter’s work was already
done when he had vanquished at Rome, as before in Pales-
tine, the great Antichrist of the first age ;° and it remained
only that he should be united in martyrdom with St. Paul,

with whom he had been before united by the

1 Pet. v. 12.
Phil, 24.
2 Tim. iv. 11.

speak to all ages.

ministry of common disciples, through whom
the Apostles of the Jew and Gentile yet

The doubts which attach to the details of the history of
St. Matthew and St. Mark recur also in the

St. LuKE.

history of St. Luke.*

It has been argued

from the language of St. Paul that he was of Gentile de-
scent ;° and in later times he was commonly supposed to

1 A remarkable instance of this oc-
curs in his Epistle (1 Pet. v. 2), ποιμά-
vate τὸ ἐν ὑμῖν ποίμνιον τοῦ Θεοῦ,
which points significantly to John xxi.
16. The metaphor does not occur in
the Pauline Epistles [οἷ Eph. iv. 11;
Heb. xiii. 20; Acts xx. 28, 29]. In v. 8,
τῶν κλήρων should not be translated
(as E. V ) God’s heritage; but the sense
is rather: ‘‘ Be not lords over (Psa. ix.
31, LXX.) those assigned to your au-
thority, but ensamples to the flock com-
mitted to your love.” There is one
flock, but many /ots; and thus again
we are recalled to John x. 16, in which
we are told of one flock (ποίμνη) and
many folds (αὐλή). ᾿

2 John xxi. 15 (ἀγαπῶ, φιλῶ).
3 Simon Magus (Euseb. H. E. ii. 14).
The true historical relation of this

‘“* sorcerer’ to the apostclic work is too
often neglected, though, indeed, it has

not yet been sufficiently explained.
Cf. History of N. T. Canon, pp. 300 ff.

4 The original form of the name Lu-
canus (Aovkas) is preserved in some
Latin MSS. (a, ὃ, 7.2 for. Cf. Tischdf.
pp. 826, 546). Similar contractions oc-
cur in Epaphras and Silas.

The identification of Silas with St.
Luke, which was proposed by Evanson
(Dissonance, ete , pp. 106 ff.), and has
been lately revived, seems to be incon-
sistent with the narrative of Acts xvi,
and to rest on no sound arguments.
The same may be said of the identifica-
tion of Luke with Lucius, cf. p. 239, n.
5. Such conjectures spring from sim-
ple impatience to acquiesce in the frag-
mentariness of Scripture.

5 Col. iv. 14,11. The phrase of ὄντες
ἐκ περιτομῆς might be used fitly in
contrast with a Gentile proselyte; and
it was the general opinion in Jerome’s
time that St. Luke was a proselyte:

ἐγ} 51

al” PR,

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

have been a native of Antioch,! the centre of the Gentile
Church, and the birth-place of the Christian name, But
this belief, though natural in itself; rests on no conclusive
evidence; and the further details which are given as to
the mode and place of the Evangelist’s conversion,’ and
as to his original social? and religious position, can be
regarded only as conjectures. So much, however, at least,
can be set down with certainty, that he was the friend and
companion of St. Paul; and, from a comparison of Col. iv.
14, with Philem. 24, 2 Tim. iv. 10,11, there remains no
reasonable doubt that the Evangelist is the same as “the
beloved physician” who continued alone in faithful attend-
ance on the Apostle in his last imprisonment.!. Nor can
the recent theories as to the composition of the Acts be
considered to have set aside the natural interpretation of
the change of person which marks St. Luke as the com-
panion of St. Paul’s second journey. From

the narrative it appears that he joined St.

Paul at Troas on the eve of his entrance into Macedonia ;°

Acts xvi. 8—10.

Licet plerique tradant Lucam Evan-
gelistam, ut proselytum, Hebreas lit-
teras ignorasse (Hieron, Quest. in Gen.
c. xlyi.). The name seems to have been
referred to the Evangelist by all the
early commentators: [Ambr.]; Pela-
gius; Chrysost. ad loc., Adamant.
Dial. c. Mare. § 1, Ὁ. 260, ed. Lomm.
Cf. Can. Murat. init. Lucas iste medi-

1 This is stated first by Eusebius (7.
E. iii. 4, τὸ μὲν γένος ὧν τῶν am ᾽Αν-
τιοχεία5), and copied from him by Je-
rome (De virr. Illustr. 7, Antiochensis.
Comm. in Matt. Pref. natione Syrus
Antiochensis), and later writers (The-
ophylact, Euthymius). It is instructive
to notice how the tradition grows more
definite in time. Chrysostom, on the
other hand, while dwe:!ing constantly
on the associations of Antioch, takes
no notice of such a connection (Lard-
ner, Credibility, v. 133).

2In addition to the tradition of St.

Luke’s gentile descent and conversion
by St. Paul (cf. p. 238 nn.), was another
that he was one of theseventy disciples
(cf. p. 237, n.1). This first appears in
the Dialogue against the Marcionites,
appended to Origen’s works, and seems
from the context to have been suggested
by doctrinal reasons (Dial. 6. Mare. ὃ
1, p. 259, ed. Lomm.). It is repeated
by Epiphanius ( Her. 11. 11, p. 433), with
the addition that he preached in Gaul;
but Eusebius was unacquainted with
the legend. Euseb. H. ΚΕ. i. 12. The
identification of St. Luke with one of
the two disciples at Emmaus is equally
unsupported.

3 The legend that he was an artist,
which became very popular in later
times, is not found before Nicephorus
Callistus (+1450). Lardner, Credibility,
vi. 112.

4 Cf. p. 288, n. 5.

5 1 the reading of D and Augustine
(De Serm. Dom. ii. 17 (57), in Acts xi

240

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

and when Paul and Silas left Philippi, after their impris-
onment, he seems to have remained there,

Acts xvi. 16—40.

and not to have

accompanied St. Paul on his

later journeys till after the uproar at Ephesus, when St.
Paul met him again at Philippi before his

Acts xx. 6,

return to Palestine.

From this time St. Luke

zemained in constant attendance (συνεργός) on the Apostle,
during his journey to Jerusalem, and on his

Philem. 4.
Acts xxi. 1, 17.
Acts xxvii. 1.

2 Tim. iv. 11.

voyage to Rome, where he appears to have
remained till the latest period of St. Paul’s

life. Of the later history of St. Luke nothing
is known;' but he is generally supposed to have written his
Gospel and the Acts in Greece; though even on this point

tradition is not uniform.

The distinctive characteristic of St. Luke’s life lies in
‘the one certain fact of his long companion-

His connection
with St. PAUL.

ship with St. Paul.

The earliest writers insist

on this with uniform and emphatic distinet-
ness.2> It became a custom to speak of St. Luke as “the

28 (συνεστραμμένων δὲ HuG@v), rests
on any early tradition, St. Luke would
appear to have been in connection with
St. Paul at a much earlier period. This
reading may perhaps hang together
with the identification of St. Luke with
Lucius of Cyrene (Acts xiii. 1), a no-
tion which was current in Origen’s
time, unless it is assumed that the Lu-
cius in Rom. xvi. 21, was a different
person (Orig. ad Rom xvi. § 89). This
identification has found favor among
many modern scholars (lardner, Cred-
ibility, vi. 124 f.), though it has very
little in its favor. On this supposition
St. Luke would be a kinsman (συγγε-
vis) of St. Paul; a fact which could
hardly have failed to’ be preserved by
tradition. Ireneus (adv. Heer. iii. 14,
1) points out accurately the companion-
ship of St. Luke with St. Paul, as
shown in the Acts.

1 In the absence of all early evidence
to the contrary, it may be supposed

that he died a natural death. Cf. Lard-
ner, Credibility, vi. 129.

2In Achaie Beeotieque (alii Bithy-
nieque) partibus: Hieron. Comm. in
Matt. Pref. Compare the various sub-
scriptions given by Tischendorf, p. 546.
Some of the copies of the Peshito
(Jones, p. 159) place its writing at
Alexandria, an opinion which recurs
in Ebed Jesu’s Catalogue, Assem. Bibl.
Orient. ili. p. 3, probably from a con-
fusion with St. Mark.

The history of the Acts is generally
taken to fix the date of the writing of
the Gospel], which is supposed to fall
shortly before the close of the period
of ‘‘two years”? (Acts xxviii. 30), 1. 6.
before a. ἢ. 68. All that can be cer-
tainly affirmed is, that it preceded the
Acts (Acts i. 1); for it seems rash te
conclude that the Acts necessarily con-
tains the history up to the point of its
publication.

3 Cf. pp. 195 f.

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 241

brother whose praise in the Gospel is throughout all
churches ;”! and, as soon as the time of Ori-
gen, it was supposed that St. Paul spoke in
his Epistles of the written Gospel of St. Luke, when he re-
ferred to that oral teaching which probably itself furnished
its substance and character.2. Such companionship at once
bespeaks natural sympathy, and increases it; and whether
the allusion to “the beloved physician” points
to any special service which St. Luke had ren-
dered to the Apostle, or not, the epithet specially arrests
attention in the connection in which it occurs. Nor can it
be without influence upon our estimate of St. Luke’s char-
acter that he wrote the Acts. The:very design of such a
history, if considered in relation to the Apostolic age, was
remarkable; and the form in which it is cast, portraying
the development of the Church, “from Jerusalem to
Rome,” through each stage of its growth, bears witness to
a mind in which the future of Christianity was more dis-
tinctly imaged even than in the visions of St. John. The
book seems in its prophetic fulness to be a true “ philoso-
phy of the history” of the Church. It closes only when
the Gospel had encountered and conquered a typical cycle
of dangers. The universal promulgation and gradual ac-
ceptance of the Christian faith is there already prefigured
in its critical moments; and the Evangelist who dwelt on
such a picture must have been naturally fitted to trace the
life of Christ in its wide comprehensiveness, as the Gospel
of the nations, full of mercy and hope, assured to a whole
world by the love of a suffering Saviour.’

St. John survived to see the outward establishment of

2 Cor. viii. 18,

Col, iv. 14.

1E. g. Hieron. Comm. in Matt. 1. α.
Lucus Medicus, natione Syrus Anti-
ochensis, cujus Jaus in Evangelio, qui
et ipse discipulus apostoli Pauli... .

2 Euseb. H. £. vi. 25. Cf. p. 195. On
the possible use of some written records
of the life of Christ by St. Paul, com-
pare Neander, Gesch. εἰ. Pflanz. 131 f.

3 The special inscription to Theophi-

lus (Luke i. 8) may seem to be an objec-
tion to this universality of character
assigned to St. Luke’s Gospel, but
really it seems to support it. Theophi-
lus is evidently represented as a man
of rank (KpaTioros) and intelligence:
and the true scholar (if I may so speak)
is essentially the man of the widest
sympathies.

242 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

that Catholic Church which St. Luke foreshadowed. In
him two eras met, so that the mysterious
promise of his Master was fulfilled,’ as he
“tarried till the Lord came” in power and judgment, to
sweep away the ensigns of the old theocracy, and appear
in the Christian body. “The world” might well seem to be
“passing away,” as the shifting scene in some great tragedy,
or rather as the veil which is cast over the Eternal,” to one
who had passed through the crisis of the first age. He
who had anxiously followed Jesus into the
judgment-hall, lived to know that His name
was preached from India to Spain; he who had frequented
the Temple, even after he was filled with the might of
Christ, survived its ruin, and died in a city consecrated to
the service of a heathen deity ; he who would
have called fire on the heads of the Samari-
tans, at last speaks in our ears only the words
of love in a Christian assembly.’ Indeed the
differences between St. John and the Synoptists— may we
not say between the Son of Thunder and the Christian

bishop ?—are so striking that they must be
og ees = veserved for further examination; yet who

does not feel that the Apostle “who leaned
upon the breast of Jesus,”* was naturally most qualified

St. JOHN.

John xviii. 15.

Acts xix. 35.

Luke ix. 54,

1 John xxi. 22, Ἐὰν αὐτὸν ϑέλω μέ-
νειν ἕως ἔρχομαι, τί πρὸς σέ: The
stress lies on the idea of an extended
interval (ἕως ἔρχομαι Πὰν 118;
Vulg. dum venio], donec venio, as Cod.
Fuld. in vy. 23, and Aug. once, 111. 2466
D.), and not an indefinite and single
limit (ews ἂν ἔλϑω. Vulg. quoad usque
veniat, 1 Cor. iv. 5). The famous
legend of St. John’s grave at Ephesus
is well told by Augustine, T’ract.in Joh.
CXXiv. 2.

21 John ii. 17, 6 κόσμος παράγεται
compared with 1 Cor. vii. 31, παράγει
τὸ σχῆμα τοῦ κόσμου. The double
change appears to be significant. For
the image of παράγεσϑαι compare 1

John ii. 8, ard perhaps App. Mithr.
117, etc. SpiauBov παράγειν.

3 Jerome (Comm. in Ep. ad Galat.
Lib. iii. vi. 10, p. 528) gives the noble
story, which cannot be too often quoted.
It is remarkable that it is not found in
any earlier writer.

4 Augustine has along and eloquent
passage on the active and contempla-
tive lives which he finds symbolized in
St. Peter and St. John, Tract. in Joh.
exxiv. 5, which he briefly sums up:
Perfecta me sequatur actio, informata
mez passionis exemplo; inchoata vero
contemplatio manent donee yenio,
complenda cum venero

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 243
to record the deepest mysteries of His doctrines? that he
to whom the mother of the Lord was entrusted was most
fitted to guard “ the inheritance of the universe?” that he
who had outlived the first earthly forms in which Christi-
anity was clothed must have been able to see most clearly,
and set forth most fully, its unchanging essence, “as he
soared like an eagle above the clouds of human infirmity,
and contemplated with keen and steady gaze the light of
eternal truth.”?

Without exaggerating the importance of such details of
the lives of the Evangelists as have been just
collected, it may be said that, as far as they
throw any light upon their character and po-
sition, they show them to have represented different types
of Christian doctrine, and to have written under circum-
stances favorable for the expression of their distinctive
views. The places at which the Gospels were probably
written — Judea, Italy, Greece, Asin, — and the persons for
whom they were immediately designed, harmonize with
what may be regarded as the individual bias of the writers.
So far as any likelihood exists that each Gospel will bear
the marks of personal feeling and outward influence, this
individuality is seen to be no accidental admixture of a
human element, by which the divine truth was marred,

The general result
of the position of
the Evangelists.

1 August. De Cons. Ev. i. 6, 9. Cf.
Tract.in Joh. xxxvi.5. Restat aquila:
ipse est Joannes, sublimium predicator,
et lucis internx atque xterne fixis ocu-
lis contemplator. By the side of these
passages must be placed another, not
less true nor less needful to be remem-
bered: Audeo dicere fratres mei, forsi-
tun nec ipse Joannes dixit ut est,-sed
ut ipse potuit; quia de Deo homo dixit:
et quidem inspiratus a Deo, sed tamen
homo. Quia inspiratus, dixit aliquid;
si non-inspiratus esset, dixisset nihil:
quia vero homo inspiratus, non totum
quod est dixit; sed quod potuit homo,
dixit (Tract. in Joh. i. 1). The whole
context, in spite of the strangeness of
the imagery, is well worthy of study,

Early tradition is uniform in repre-
senting the Gospel as written at Ephe-
sus: Iren. adv. Her. ii. 1; Hieron. De
virr. Illustr. 9. Cf. Can. Murat. sub.
init. Compare also the subscriptions
of the Oriental versions, Tischdf. N. 7.
p. 696. The notion that it was written
at Patmos seems to rest on the unsup-
ported statement of Pseudo-Hippol.
De XII Apost. p. 952.

The date at which it was written
cannot be determined with accuracy.
The earliest writers, rightly, I believe,
place it last in time: [Can. Murat.};
Iren. 1. c.; Clem. Alex. ap. Euseb. Ηα
E. vi. 14; (Orig. ap. Euseb. H. £. vi
25) Jerome, |. ο.

244 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

but, on the contrary, a trace of the working of God’s Spirit,
by which such persons were moved to write as would best
represent to the Church the manifold forms of the life of
Christ. We may detect in every picture of the Saviour
the unchanging Deity; but at the same time the Absolute,
so to speak, is clothed in each case with special attributes,
which are determined by the sacred writers as they dwelt
on the several sides of Christ’s human nature. Each gives
a true image, but not a complete one; and if in old times
Messiah was variously represented as the second Lawgiver,
the mighty King, and the great High Priest, we need feel
no wonder that three Evangelists portrayed His presence
in the fashion of a man, while the fourth revealed that
crowning doctrine of the Christian faith, which, if it existed
in the depths of the ancient Scriptures, had been unob-
served by the ον The same Spirit worked in all, — the
Spirit of wisdom and knowledge, of practical and spiritual
judgment, — and enabled them to find the perfected ten-
dency and plenary development of their own hopes and en-
ergies in the teaching and life of Him in whom all the pow-
ers of man were united with the fulness of the Godhead.
The reality of the distinctive characteristics of the Gos-
| pels will appear yet more clearly, if we con-
δος ead sider their relation to the different sects
uttested. by which exhibited the exclusive development
ofeparatewes, Of the several elements which the Catholic
Church recognized and united in her teach-
ing.? It has been seen that variety of feeling existed even
in the apostolic body ;° and when this was reproduced in
the Christian society, it soon gave rise to those “ divisions ”
which lie at the bottom of the great parties into which
Christendom has been since severed. One said, “I am of
Paul ;” and another, “I am of Apollos;” and another, “I

1 Just. Mart. Dial c. Tryph.§ 49, p. lowing paragraph in connection with

268 A. various sects, will be given in App. D
~ The chief fragments of the ‘‘Apoc- 3 Pp. 228 ff.

ryphal” Gospels noticed in the fol

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 945

am of Cephas;” and another, “I am of Christ;”! when

the first tidings of the Gospel had hardly died away on
their ears? The inward tendency had already become a
conscious feeling, and was rapidly hastening towards a
Men were no longer content to find
that for which they were seeking in the life of Christ;
they wished to isolate it. The logical exhibition of
Christianity, its mystic depths, its outward and _ ritual
aspect, its historic power, were thus separated and substi-
tuted for its complex essence; just as the Sadducee, the
Essene, the Pharisee, and the Herodian, had already found
in the Law a basis for their discordant and exclusive
systems.’ Yet it would be an anachronism to suppose that
the Corinthian Church exhibited at once definite and cir-
cumscribed parties. The spirit of party was not immedi-
ately embodied; but in the course of time the fundamental
differences which it represented were boldly and clearly
systematized. Some were not content to cherish the ancient
Law with natural reverence and pride (Nazarenes), but

dogmatic decision.

insisted on the universal reception of the

Mosaic ritual (/’dionites).

EBIONITES.

ἐντὸς ak es wages

Jesus nothing but the human Messiah, coér-
dinate with Adam and Moses,‘ and in the Christian faith

1It is worthy of notice that the
phrase is ἐγὼ δὲ Χριστοῦ, and not ἐγὼ
δὲ Ἰησοῦ. The personal name, which
is universal in the Gospels and common
in the Acts and the Apocalypse, is nat-
urally rare in the Epistles, unless the
human nature of the Lord requires to
be brought into clear prominence. Cf.
2 Cor. iv. 5, 10,11; Hebr. ii. 9; xii. 24,
and often.

21Cor.i.12. Cf. Neander, Gesch. d.
Pyhlanz, 834 ff. After all that has been
written on “the Christ-party,” I still
believe that the words of St. Paul refer
to those who preferred to cling to
Christ alone, without accepting the
Christian doctrine mediately through
the Apostles. The present century has

seen such a sect formed in America.
It is impossible not to feel that the
many essays on these ‘‘ parties” are
conceived wholly in the spirit of our
own time, without any realization of
the life of the first age.

8 Cf. Neander, Church History, i.
52 ff.

4 Cf. Clem. Hom. iii. 21 (Adam); ii
38 (Moses). Cf. Hom. iii. 20; xviii. 18;
and iii. 20, [ὁ ὑπὸ χειρῶν ϑεοῦ Kvopo-
ρηϑεὶς &vSpwros| ὃς am ἀρχῆς αἰῶνος
ἅμα τοῖς ὀνόμασιν μορφὰς ἀλλάσσων
τὸν αἰῶνα τρέχει, μέχρις ὅτε ἰδίων
χρόνων τυχών, διὰ τοὺς καμάτους
Seod ἐλέει χρισϑείς, εἰσαεὶ ἕξει τὴν
ἀνάπαυσιν. Cf Uhlhorn, Die Hom τ
Recogn. d. Clem. Rom, 164 ff.

21*

246 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

nothing but the perfection of Judaism,' whether they
regarded this from the practical (4dionites proper) or
mystical point of sight (Gnostic Lbionites.”) St. Paul was
emphatically “their enemy,’ and the universal Gospel
which he preached “a lawless and idle doctrine.”? By the
common consent of early witnesses, the various sects which
arose from the embodiment of these principles agreed in
taking the “Gospel” of St. Matthew as the basis of their
evangelic record, This appears to have existed among
the Nazarenes in a comparatively pure Hebrew (Aramaic)
form; and even in Jerome’s time the copy which they used
preserved a very clear resemblance to the Canonical Gospel,
differing chiefly by interpolations, which were rendered at
once easy and natural from the isolation of the Jewish
Christians.*. The two other parties included under the
common title of A’bionites seem to have preserved peculiar
Greek recensions of the same fundamental narrative. The
Ebionites in a stricter sense had nothing in their Gospel
to answer to the first two chapters of our present text, and
Epiphanius describes the book generally as “incomplete,
adulterated and mutilated.”*® The fragments which he
quotes point also the further conclusion that it was de-

1 Either as identifying Christianity
with the real essence of Judaism (the
Homilies); or as recognizing in Juda-
ism the preparation for Christianity
(the Recognitions). Cf. Uhlhorn, a. a.
O. 258 ff.

2 On the twofold distinction in rela-
tion to the Person of Christ, see Euseb.
HA. E. iii. 27 (vi. 17); Epiph. Her. xxx.
16.

8 Ep. Petri {Hom. Clem) ec. 2. τινὲς
yap τῶν ἀπὸ édvav τὸ δι’ ἐμοῦ νόμι-
μον ἀπεδοκίμασαν κήρυγμα, τοῦ ἐχ-
ϑροῦ ἀνϑιρώπου ἄνομόν τινα καὶ
φλυαρώδη προσηκάμενοι διδασκαλίαν,
καὶ ταῦτα ἔτι μου περιόντος ἐπεχει-
ρησάν τινες ποικίλαις τισὶν ἑρμηνείαις
τοὺς ἐμοὺς λόγους μετασχηματίζειν εἰς
τὴν τοῦ νόμου κατάλυσιν. ὡς καὶ ἐμοῦ
αὐτοῦ οὕτω μὲν φρονοῦντος μὴ ἐκ

παῤῥησίας δὲ κηρύσσοντος" ὅπερ ἀπείη.
The whole passage is most instructive,
and the allusion to Gal. ii. 12, ὑπέστελ-
Aev καὶ ἀφώριζεν ἑαυτὸν κ. τ. A. une
mistakable. Compare also Hom. xvii.
19, where St. Paul is assailed under the
person of Simon Magus, with a verbal
reference to Gal. ii. 11 (εἰ κατεγνωσμέ-
νον με A€yels)

4 Cf. Hieron. ad. Matt. xii. 138; De
virr. Illustr. 3.

5 Epiph. Her. xxx. 18, οὐχ ὅλον
πληρέστατον ἀλλὰ νενοϑευμένον καὶ
ἠκρωτηριασμένον. On the other hand,
the Nazarenes ἔχουσι τὸ κατὰ Ματ-
ϑαῖον εὐαγγέλιον πληρέστατον' EBpa-
ἐστί (Her. xxix.9), though Epiphanius,
in the next sentence, says that he does
not know whether ‘‘ they removed the
genealogy.” Yet cf. Her. xxx. 14.

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 247
rived from the Aramaic, and not from the Greek text. But
it was otherwise with the Gnostic-Ebionite Gospel. The

text of this’ presents the most constant coincidence with
the language of the Greek St. Matthew, and it can hardly
have been derived from any other source. The variations
which it presents are generally such as admit of explanation
from polemical motives, and where it is not so, allowance
must still be made for freedom of quotation, and for the
influence of tradition.? One fact, however, is clearly prom-
inent throughout these intelligible varieties of recension,
that the Gospel of St. Matthew was felt to be distinctively
the Jewish Gospel. The life of the second Lawgiver was
the common foundation which Judaizing Christians of
every shade of opinion used for the construction of their
distinctive records,

The special history of the Gospel of St. Mark is more
obscure. Even at the beginning of the fifth
century no distinct commentary upon it was
yet written® The “preaching of Peter,”
which enjoyed a wide popularity in the second and third
centuries, has nothing but the name in common with St.
Mark;* and the accounts of “the Gospel according to
Peter” are so meagre that no satisfactory conclusion can
be drawn as to its origin and characteristics.” Yet there is
one clear and decided statement that some sectarians paid a
peculiar regard to the Gospel of St. Mark. After noticing
the exclusive reverence which the Ebionites and Marcion-
ites paid respectively to the Gospels of St. Matthew and

DocEeTs.
(St. Mark.)

1 As gathered specially from the 5. It is, however, worthy of notice
Clementines. that St. Peter is represented as urging
2 Passages occur which show clearly his hearers in the same terms to avoid
that the writer of the Homilies was the Pagan and Jewish forms of worship
acquainted with the contents of the Cf Credner, Beifrage, i. 851 ff. Schwe-
three other canonical Gospels. Cf. gler, Nachapost. Zeit. ii. 80 1.
Canon of N. T. p. 317.

8 Cramer, Cat. in Mare. Hypoth. p.
263 ( Victor Ant.).

4 See particularly the passages quoted
by Clement of Alexandria, Strom. vi.

5 Cf. Serapion, ap. Euseb. H. 2. vi.
12. Routh, Rell. Sacr. i. pp. 452 ἢ.
Serapion connects the Gospel with
Marcianus (? Marcus) and the Docete.

248 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.
St. Luke, Irenzeus adds that those who separated Jesus
from Christ, —the human instrument from the divine
Spirit, — maintaining that Jesus suffered, while Christ con-
tinued always impassible, preferred the Gospel according
to St. Mark.’ It might seem that they dwelt more partic-
ularly on the works of Messiah’s power, and not on the
mystery of His incarnation; and found their Gospel in
the recital of miracles and mighty acts, which bore the
impress of God, rather than in words and discourses which
might seem like those of man.

It has been seen that the Gospel of St. Matthew under-
went several recensions. The developments
of the Judaizing tendency were various, for
it was the spirit of a people and not of an
individual. But the doctrine of St. Paul, which bore
the clear image of one mind, was made the basis of a
single marked system. In the first half of the second
century, Marcion, the son of a Bishop of Sinope,? gave his
name and talents to a sect which proposed to hold the
pertected doctrines of the Gentile Apostle. So far from
finding any right of perpetuity in the Jewish Law, he
ascribed its origin to the Demiurge, from whose evil rule
men were set free by the Saviour. In Christianity, accord-
ing to his view, all was sudden and unprepared :? a new
and spiritual religion was revealed immediately from
heaven to supplant the earthly kingdom which had been pro-

MARCIONITES.
(St. Luke.)

2 Epiph. Her. xiii. 1 [Tertull.] de
Prescr. Her. 11. The statement, how-
ever, has been doubted, for Tertullian
takes no notice of it. The writer un-

iirens iad; eler= ti. ley Out
autem Jesum separant a Christo, et
impassibilem perseverasse Christum,
passum vero Jesum dicunt, id quod se-

cundum Marcum est preferentes Evan-
gelium, cum amore veritatis legentes
illud corrigi possunt. Olshausen (Echth.
d. Evang. 97) rejects this statement, but
without sufficient ground. The de-
scription which Irenzeus gives agrees
with a form of Docetism which (ef. p.
247 n. 4) was actually connected with
the Gospel according to Peter. Cf.
[Hippol.] adv. Her. viii. 10, p. 267.

der the name of Tertullian attributes
to Cerdo the Canon which is eisewhere
assigned to Marcion.

8 Tertull. adv. Mare. iv. 11; Subito
Christus; subito et Johannes. Sic sunt
omnia apud Marcionem, que suum et
plenum ordinem habent apud creato
rem... Cf, iii,.6,

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 949

mised to the people of Israel by their God. As a necessary
consequence of his principles, Marcion could not accept the
Catholic Canon of the Scriptures, but formed a new one
suited to the limits of his belief. His “ Apostolicon” was
confined to ten Epistles of St. Paul, and his Gospel was a
mutilated recension of St. Luke. For him the Pauline
narrative was the truest picture of the life of Christ, though
even this required to be modified by a process which was
easily practicable at a time when the Evangelic text was
not yet fixed beyond the influence of tradition.

The peculiar characteristics of St. John’s Gospel could
not fail to attract some of the early mystic ee

7 The VALENTIN-
schools. The deep significance ofits lan- ss.

. ° (St. John.)

guage, the symbolic use of the words “light ”
and “darkness,” “life” and “death,” “the world,” “the
word,” and “the truth,” furnished the Eastern speculator
with a foundation for his favorite theories. If we may
trust Irenzeus,? the terminology of the Valentinians was
chiefly derived from that of St. John; and, conversely, in
recent times many have supposed that the Gospel itself
was due to Gnostic sources. The affinity which it has
with part of the Gnostic scheme is at least undoubted ; and
Heracleon, the most famous scholar of Valentinus, wrote
the first commentary upon it,’ following, according to
Tertullian, his master’s example, in using “the pen instead
of the knife to bring the Scriptures into agreement with
his tenets.” *

This severance of the Gospel-histories by different sects
exhibits most distinctly the reality and nature of their
difference. For if they have no special character, on what
hypothesis can we explain their connection with partial

1 After long discussion even the Ti- εἴρηκεν [6 ᾿Ιωάννης] καὶ Χάριν καὶ
bingen critics appear to have acquiesced Μονογενῆ καὶ ᾿Αλήϑειαν καὶ Δόγον Kad
in the belief that the Gospel of St. Luke Ζωὴν καὶ ΓΑνϑρωπον kal ᾿Εκκλησίαν.
ye ee Bae ae eae ae Ein- 3 Cf. Orig. in Joh. x. § 21. Hist. of
a = .v.). Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, N. T. Canon, 884 ff.

2 Iren. adv. Her. i.8,5: πατέρα yap 4 Tertull. de Preser. Her. 88.

250 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.
exhibitions of Christian truth? How were the separate
books adopted by peculiar schools, which pursued to an
excess the idea which we have supposed to predominate in
them? Those who admitted only one Gospel, even if they
mutilated and altered it, must have found in it some pecu-
liar points of contact with their own position; and rightly
found them, for heresy is but the inordinate desire to
define, distinguish, and isolate those manifold elements
which are combined in the perfect truth.

Sectaries divided the Gospels as being separately com-
plete; the Church united them, as constitu-
ents of a harmonious whole. The first
distinct recognition of the four Gospels
presents them also as one. “The Creator Word, who sits
upon the Cherubim, when manifested to men, gave us the
Gospel in a fourfold form, while it is held together by one
Spirit ;” and in the same place Irenzeus labors to prove, by
various analogies, that the Gospels could not be more or
fewer than four, the number of the faces of the Cherubim,
which were “images of the life and work of the Son of
God.”! The same mysterious emblem of
Ezekiel was constantly applied to the Evan-
gelists in later times throughout the Christian
world, but generally as modified in the Apocalypse, where
the idea of individual life prevails over that of a common
being. Yet, while the early fathers agreed in the general
explanation of the vision, they differed widely in details.

(Ὁ) The judgment
of the Church.

The
symbols.

Evangelic

1 Tren. adv. Her. iii. 11, 8: ὁ τῶν
ἁπάντων τεχνίτης λόγος, ὃ καϑήμενος
ἐπὶ τῶν Χερουβὶμ. καὶ συνέχων τὰ πάν-
τα, φανερωὺ εὶς τοῖς ἀνωρώποις, ἔδωκεν
ἡμῖν τετράμορφον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, ἑνὶ
δὲ πνεύματι συνεχόμενον ... καὶ yap
τὰ Χερουβὶμ τετραπρόσωπα' καὶ γὰρ
τὰ πρόσωπα αὐτῶν εἰκόνες τῆς πραγ-
ματείας τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ.

2 Irenzeus (1. 6.) regarding, as Augus-
tine remarks (De Cons. Ev. i. 9 [6}),

only the commencement, and not the
scope, of the books, assigns the ‘‘ man’?
to St. Matthew, the ‘‘eagle” to St.
Mark, the ‘‘ dion” to St. John, and the
or” to St. Luke. This opinion is
repeated by Juvencus, Lv. Hist. Pref.
The opinion of Jerome is followed by
Ambrose (in Luc. Pref. §§ 7, 8; ef.
Comm. in Luc. x. 117, 118); Sedulius,
Carm. Pasch. i. 355 ff., and generally
in later times. All writers agree in
assigning the “ὁ ox” to St. Luke.

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 251
In the West, the interpretation of Jerome gained almost
universal currency, and in Jater times he has been confirm-
ed by the usage of art." According to this the “man” is
assigned to St. Matthew, the “lion” to St. Mark, the “ox”
to St. Luke, and the “eagle” to St. John, as typifying
respectively the human, active, sacrificial, and spiritual
sides of the Gospel. Augustine, who inverts the order of
the first two symbols, and probably with justice, agrees
with Jerome in drawing a line between the creatures of
the earth and of the sky;? and a trace of this distinction is
found at a still earlier period. Clement of Alexandria
relates it as a current tradition in his time, that “St. John,
when he found in the writings of the other Evangelists the
bodily history of the Lord, composed a spiritual Gospel,” *
and such language is not an inapt description of the relation
of the Synoptists to St. John.

But though the early Church apprehended with distinct-
ness the characteristics of the Gospels, Au-
gustine seems to have been the first who
endeavored to explain their minute differ-
ences by a reference to their general aim; and his work 15
better in conception than in execution. The age was
hardly ripe for the task; and Augustine had not the critical
tact for performing it. The mass of Christians too gladly
welcomed the inspired histories on their apostolic claims to
submit their composition and arrangement to internal
scrutiny. It was enough for them that they were written
by holy men of God, without attempting to determine
their mutual relations. And even the scholars among
them were better qualified to discuss the manifold bearings
of an isolated passage, than to form a general idea of the

The Essay of St.
Augustine.

1 These emblems of the Evangelists terwards they appear as four streams

are not, however, found before the
Mosaics of the 15th century (Minter,
Sinnbilder d. Alten Christen, i. pp. 44
ff.). The earliest symbols are four rolls
round a representation of the feeding
of the 4000 (Minter, i. 44, Pl..13.) Af-

issuing from a rock, on which Christ,
or the Lamb, or the Cross, stands (ef.
Cypr. Ep. 78, 10).

2 Hieron. in Ezek. i. 7 ff Aug. De
Cons, Ev. |. ο.

$ Clem. Al. ap. Euseb. H. £. vi. 14.

oe THE CIIARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.

historic features of a whole book. On the other hand, we
must remember that a rich inheritance of tradition was
treasured up in the early Church; and the attempt of
Augustine, combined with the general statements of former
writers, sufficiently shows the method in which these would
have sought for an explanation of the variations of the
Evangelists. His essay is the formal expression of their
silently-recognized belief.

The view which has just been sketched of the relation

ses es, of the canonical Gospels to the varieties of
of this view of the Opinion existing in the apostolic age, and to
Sey the great principles from which they spring,
which are as permanent as human nature itself, suggest
necessarily various reflections as to their relation to our-
selves, Above all, it will remove that dead conception of
a verbal harmony between them which is fatal to their
true understanding. Their real harmony is essentially
moral, and not mechanical. It is not to be found in an
Ingenious mosaic, composed of their disjointed fragments,
but in the contemplation of each narrative from its proper
point of sight. The threefold portrait of Charles I. which
Vandyke prepared for the sculptor is an emblem of the
work of the first Evangelists: the complete outward shape is
fashioned, and then, at last, another kindles the figure with
a spiritual life. Nor are the separate portraitures less
pregnant with instruction than when they were originally
drawn. If we study the records in their simple individu-
ality, forgetting for the time the other traits which fill up
the picture, we shall probably find more in this view of
their distinctness than a mere speculation; it will show us
the life of Christ in relation to the master-spirit of our
own constitution. The Gospel will be seen to be particu-
lar, as well as universal. We shall gain a conception of
the multiform aspects of Christianity in the many-sided
presence of its Founder. We shall see its manifoldness, as
well as its unity. We shall no longer regard it as a phil-
osophic ideal of religion, but as a living revelation, devel-

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS. 253

oped and perfected among men. We shall recall the
period when the several Gospels satisfied the various moral
and spiritual wants which must remain the same to the
end of time, and trace the divine sanction which they give
to the different tendencies of human thought and action.
We shall rise upwards from the perception of individuality
to that of variety; from variety to catholicity. The vari-
ous outward forms of Evangelic teaching, recognized by
the Apostles and ratified by the Church, will teach us to
look for some higher harmony in faith than simple unison.
We shall ackrswledge that it is now as in days of old,
when the same unchanging scheme of redemption proceed-
ing from one God, “seeking the weal of men through
divers ways by one Lord,” was seen under changeful
varieties of external shape.t The lesson of experience
and history, the lesson of reason and life, will be found
written on the very titles of the Gospels, where we shall
read with growing hope and love that “God fulfils Himself
in many ways.”

1Clem. Alex. Strom. vi. 13, § 106: ληφϑεῖσα. ἀκόλουδον γὰρ εἶναι μίαν
μία yap τῷ ὄντι διαϑήκη ἣ σωτήριος ἀμετάϑετον σωτηρίας δόσιν παρ᾽ ἑνὸς
ἀπὸ μεταβολῆς κόσμου εἰς ἡμᾶς διή- Θεοῦ SC ἑνὸς κυρίου πολυτρόπως ὧφε-
κουσα κατὰ διαφόρους γενέας τε καὶ λοῦσαν. . . . Cf. Lib. vii. 17, § 107.
χρόνους διάφορος εἶναι τὴν δόσιν ὕπο- :

CHEAP TE iV.

THE GOSPEL OF ST, JOHN.

Two worlds are ours: ’tis only Sin
Forbids us to desery

The mystic heaven and earth within,
Plain as the sea and sky. — KEBLE.

Ir is impossible to pass from the Synoptic Gospels to_
that of St. John without feeling that the

rat, ener’ transition involves the passage from one
oe world of thought to another. No familiarity
with the general teaching of the Gospels, no

wide conception of the character of the Saviour, is suffici-
ent to destroy the contrast which exists in form and spirit
between the earlier and later narratives; and a full recog-
nition of this-contrast is the first requisite for the under-
standing of their essential harmony. The Synoptic Gos-
pels contain the Gospel of the infant Church; that of St.
John the Gospel of its maturity. The first combine to
give the wide experience of the many; the last embraces
the deep mysteries treasured up by the one. All alike are
consciously based on the same great facts; but yet it is
possible, in a more limited sense, to describe the first as
historical, and the last as ideal; though the history neces-
sarily points to truths which lie beyond all human experi-
ence, and the “ideas” only connect that which was once
for all realized on earth with the eternal of which it was
the revelation. This broad distinction renders it necessary
to notice several points in the Gospel of St. John, both in

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

itself and in its relation to the Synoptic Gospels, which
seem to be of the greatest importance to-
wards the right study of it. No writing, per-
haps, if we view it simply as a writing, com-
bines greater simplicity with more profound depths. At
first all seems clear in the child-like language which is so
often the chosen vehicle of the treasures of Eastern medi-
tation; and then again the utmost subtlety of Western
thought is found to lie under abrupt and apparently frag-
mentary utterances. The combination was as natural in
the case of St. John, as it was needful to complete the
cycle of the Gospels. The special character of the Gospel
was at once the result and the cause of its special history ;
and when we have gained a general conception of the
Gospel in itself, the relations of difference or agreement in
which it stands to the other narratives will at once become
intelligible. .

The facts bearing on the lite of St. John which are
recorded in the Gospels are soon told. He
was the son, apparently the younger son,’ of
Zebedee and Salome? His father was a
Galilzean fisherman, sufficiently prosperous to
have hired servants,’ and, at a later time, his
mother was one of the women who followed the Lord, and
“ministered to Him of their substance.”* Nothing is
recorded which throws any light upon the character of
Zebedee, except the simple fact that he interposed no

Characteristics of

St. John.

I. The Gospel in
itself.

1. Its history.

(a) The life of St.
John.

1 That he was the younger son ap-
pears to follow from the order in which
the “James and John the

of the last passage with John xix. 26,
it has been concluded that Salome was

lames the sister of ** the mother of the Lord,”

brother of James” are generally given
in the Gospels; Matt. iv. 21, etc.;
Mark i. 21, etce.; Luke v. 10, etc. The
names occur in the other order, * Pe-
ter, John, and James,” in Luke viii. 51;
ix. 28, though the reading is doubtful.
In Acts xii. 2, James is styled “ the
brother of John.”

2 Mark xv. 40; xvi. 1, compared with
Matt. xxvii. 56. From the comparison

but the interpretation of the passage is
uncertain. Later traditions suppose
various other relationships between the
families of Joseph and Mary and Zebe-
dee. Cf. Winer, RWB. Salome ; Thilo,
Cod. Apoer. 362 ff.

8 Mark i. 20. Cf. John xix. 27.

4 Mark xvi. 1, compared with Luke
viii, 3.

256 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

obstacle to his sons’ apostleship; but Salome herself went
with Christ even to His death, and the very greatness of
her request? is the sign of a faith living and fervent, how-
ever unchastened. St. John, influenced it may be by his
mother’s hopes, and sharing them, although “simple and
unlettered,”? first attached himself to the Baptist, and was
one of those to whom Jesus was revealed by him as “the
Lamb of God.”? Henceforth he accompanied his new
Master, and, together with his brother and St. Peter, was
admitted into a closer relationship with Him than the
other Apostles. In this nearer connection St. John was
still nearest,®> and as he followed Christ to judgment and
death,® he received from the Cross the charge to receive
the mother of the Lord as her own son.’ After the Ascen-
sion St. John remained at Jerusalem with the other Apos-
tles. He was with St. Peter at the working of his first
miracle; and afterwards he went with him to Samaria.’
At the time of St. Paul’s first visit to Jerusalem he was
absent from the city; but on a later occasion St. Paul de-
scribes him as one of “the pillars of .the Church.”? At
what time, and under what circumstances, he left Jerusalem
is wholly unknown; but tradition is unanimous in placing
the scene of his after-labors at Ephesus.’ His residence
there must have taken place after St. Paul’s departure, but
this is all that can be affirmed with certainty. It is gene-
rally agreed that he was banished to Patmos during his
stay at Ephesus, but the time of his exile is very variously
given." The legend of his sufferings at Rome, which was

1 Matt. xx. 20 ff. Cf. Mark x. 35 ff. rus); ix. 28 (at the Transfiguration),
The same characteristic appears under Mark xiv. 33 (at Gethsemane).
a different form in the wish of her two 5 John xiii. 28; xxi. 7, 20 (M- ov
sons, Luke ix. 54; and in spite of other ἠγάπα 6 Ἰησοῦ).
interpretations, it is best to refer the 6 John xviii. 15; xix. 26.
surname, Boanerges (Mark iii. 16), 7 John xix. 27.
which is applied to them, to a natural 8 Acts i. 18; iii. 1 ff.; viii. 14

warmth of temperament. 9 Gal. i. 18 ff.; ii. 9.
2 Acts iy. 19: 10 Iren. adv. Heer. iii. 1, 1.
3 John i. 35 ff. 11 Iren. v. 30,3(Euseb. H. Ε. v. 8) (Do

4 Luke viii. 51 (at the house of Jai- métian); Epiph. Her. 51, 38 (Claudius)

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 257
soon embellished and widely circulated, is quite untrustwor-
thy ;' and the details of his death at Ephesus are equally
fabulous, though it is allowed on all hands that he lived to
extreme old age.’

But while no sufficient materials remain for constructing
a life of the Apostle, the most authentic tra-
ditions which are connected with his name
contribute something to the distinctness of his portraiture.’
The lessons of his Epistles and Gospel are embodied in
legends which characterize him as the zealous champion of
purity of faith and practice within the Christian body, and
in one legend, at least, the symbolism of the Jewish
dispensation is transferred to the service of Christianity, as
in the visions of the Apocalypse. On the one hand St.
John proclaims with startling severity the claims of
doctrinal truth,* and the duties of the teacher;’ on the
other he stands out in the majesty of a sacred office,
clothed in something of the dress of the old theocracy$
The two views involve no contradiction, but rather exhibit
the wide range of that divine love which cherishes every
element of truth with the most watchful care, because it is
of infinite moment for the well-being of man. The associ-

Later legends.

μεν, μὴ καὶ τὸ βαλανεῖον συμπέσῃ,

in oleum igneum demersus nihil passus
est. Hieron. ad Matt. xx. 28.

2 Tren. ii. 22,5: μέχρι τῶν Τραϊάνου
χρόνων. Hieron. ad Galat. vi.10. For
the traditions which describe him as
still living in his tomb at Ephesus, com-
pare Credner, Hinl. 220 f. The passage
of Augustine (Jr Ev. Johann. Tract.
124, 2) is perhaps the most interesting
notice of the belief.

3 These traditions have been collected
and discussed by Stanley, Sermons and
Essays on the Apostolic Age, pp. 275 ff.

4 Tren. iii. 8,4 (on the authority of
Polycarp. Euseb. H. #. iv. 14)....

Ἰωάννης, 6 τοῦ κυρίου padnrhs, ἐν TH.

᾿Εφέσῳ πορευδϑεὶς λούσασϑαι καὶ ἰδὼν
ἔσω Kipwaov, ἐξήλατο τοῦ βαλανείου
μὴ λουσάμενος ἀλλ᾽ ἐπειπών" Φύγω-

ἔνδον ὄντος KnpivSou, τοῦ τῆς ἀλε.
elas ἐχϑροῦ. Cf. Epiph. Her. xxx.
24, where a similar legend is told of St.
John and “ Ebion.”’

5 In the beautiful story of the young
Robber — μῦϑος οὐ puxsos— which is
tco long to quote: Euseb. H. £. iii. 23
(on the authority of Clement of Alex-
andria).

6 Polyerates, ap. Euseb. H. Ε΄. iii. 31
(v.24): ἔτι δὲ καὶ Ἰωάννης ὁ ἐπὶ τὸ
στῆδος τοῦ κυρίου ἀναπεσών, ὃς ἐγε-
νήϑη ἱερεὺς τὸ πέταλον πεφορεκὼς
καὶ μάρτυς καὶ διδάσκαλος οὗτος ἐν
Ἐφέσῳ κεκοίμηται. For the use of τὸ
πέταλον compare EX. xxviii. 82; xxix.
6; Levit. viii. 9(LXX.). Cf. Bingham,
Antiquities, li. 9, ὁ ὃ.

- ΟΣ

258 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

ations of the past are not rudely cast aside when they can
no longer betray. To a Christian among Christians the
perils and supports of faith appear in new lights; and the
one famous phrase, “ Little children, love one another,”
becomes a complete rule of life, when it is based upon the
perception of Christian brotherhood and received as the
charge of a father in Christ.’ As compared
with the other representative Apostles, — St.
Peter, St. James, and St. Paul, — the position
of St. John is clearly marked. He belongs rather to the
history of the Church, if the distinction may be drawn,
than to the history of the Apostles, and is the living link
which unites the two great ages. He is the guardian of a
faith already established, and not, like St. Peter, the
founder of an outward Church. His antagonist is Cerin-
thus, the founder of a false representation of Christianity,
and not Simon Magus, who appears in the position of an
Antichrist. In his teaching “the faith” is contemplated in
its fandamental facts, which include all there is of special
application in the reasoning of St. Paul and in the pro-
phetic exhortations of St. James. In the language of the
last chapter of his Gospel, which itself is the meeting-point
of inspiration and tradition, he “abode till the Lord came,”
and speaks in the presence of a Catholic Church, which
rose out of the conflicts which had been guided to the
noblest issue by the labors of those who preceded him.
This last chapter of his Gospel is in every
way a most remarkable testimony to the in-
fluence of St. John’s person and writings.
Differences of language,? no less than the abruptness of

The typical char-
acter of St. John.

(b) The authenti-
city of the Gospel.

1 Hieron. Comm. in Ep. ad Galat. vi.
10; Beatus Joannes Evangelista cum
Ephesi moraretur usque ad ultimam
senectutem et vix inter discipulorum
manus ad ecclesiam deponetur, nec
possit in plura vocem verba contexere,
nihil aliud per singulas solebat proferre
collectas, nisi hoc: Filioli, diligite alte-

rutrum. Tandem discipuli et patres qui
aderant, tedio affecti quod eadem sem-
per audirent, dixerunt: Magister quare
semper hoc loqueris? Qui respondit
dignam Joanne sententiam: Quia pre-
ceptum Domini est, et si solum fiat,
sufficit.

2 Yet these differences by no means

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 259

its introduction and its substance, seem to mark it clearly
as an addition to the original narrative; and
the universal concurrence of all outward evi-
dence no less certainly establishes its claim
to a place in the canonical book. It is a ratification of the
Gospel, and yet from the lips of him who wrote it; it al-
lows time for the circulation of a wide-spread error, and
yet corrects the error by the authoritative explanation of
its origin. The testimony, though upon the extreme verge
of the Apostolic period, yet falls within it, and the Apostle,
in the consciousness (as 1t seems) of approaching death,
confirms again his earlier record, and corrects the mistaken
notion which might have cast doubt upon the words of the
Lord.

The earliest account of the origin of the Gospel is already
legendary,’ but the mention which it contains
of a subsequent revision may rest upon the
facts which are seen to be indicated by the
concluding chapter. So much, however, is attested by
competent authority, that St. John composed his Gospel at
a later time than the other Evangelists ;* and it can scarcely
be wrong to refer the book to the last quarter of the first

The testimony of
the last chapter.

The late date 6,
the Gospel.

amount to a proof of difference of
authorship, but only of a difference of
date. The last verse of the chapter
(xxi, 25) is open to more serious objec-
tions, both internal and external.

1 This seems to be the object of xxi.
23. The danger and the correction of
such an error as is noticed belong
equally to the period of the extreme
age of the Apostle.

2 Can. Murat. (Hist. of N. T. Canon,
p 559): Cohortantibus condiscipulis et
episcopis suis dixit (se. Johannes):
Conjejunate mihi hodie triduum, et
Guid cuique fucrit revelatum alteru-
trum nobis cnarremus. Eadem nocte
reyvelatum Andree ex apostolis, ut re-
(oznoreentibus cunctis, Johannes suo
Lomine cuncta describeret. Jerome
probab:y alludes to this tradition when

he says: Ecclesiastica narrat historia,
cum a patribus [Johannes] cogeretur
ut scriberet, ita facturum se respondisse,
si indicto jejunio in commune omnes
Deum precarentur; quo expleto, reve-
latione saturatus, in illud procemium
celo veniens eructavit: Jn principio
erat Verbum... (Hieron. Comm. in
Matt. Proem. p. 5). Cf. Clem. ap.
Euseb. H. Z. vi. 14.

3 Clem. Alex. ap. Euseb. Π. Ε. vi.14:
ὁ Κλήμης . .. παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνέκα-
Sev πρεσβυτέρων τέϑειται. .. τὸν
Ἰωάννην ἔσχατον συνιδόντα ὅτι τὰ
σωματικὰ ἐν τοῖς εὐαγγελίοις δεδήλω-
ται, προτραπέντα ὑπὸ τῶν yvwpluwr,
πνεύματι δεοφορηδέντα, πνευματικὸν
ποιῆσαι εὐαγγέλιον. Irenwus (Adv.
Her. iii. 1, 1; ap. Euseb. H. E. v. 8);
Origen (ap. Euseb. H. L. vi. 25).

260 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

century, and in its present form probably to the last
decennium of the period. This late date of the writing is
scarcely of less importance than its peculiarly personal
character, if we would form a correct estimate of the
evidence which establishes its early use and authority. It
passed into circulation when the first oral Gospel was
widely current in three authoritative forms, and it bore
upon its surface, no less than in its inmost depths, a stamp
of individuality, by which it was distinguished from the
type of recognized tradition. Yet these facts, which must
at first have limited the use of the book, contribute to the
clearness of the testimonies by which the use is evinced.
There is not in this case the same ambiguity as to the
origin of a striking coincidence of language, as in the early
parallels with the Synoptic Gospels, since there 1s no trace
of any definite tradition similar to the record of St. John.
The record was itself a creative source, and not a summary;
the opening of a new field of thought, and not the gathered
harvest. Clear parallelism of words or ideas with St.
John’s Gospel in later writers attests the use of the book,
and cannot be referred to the influence of a common
original.

The earliest Christian writers exhibit more or less dis-

Pec et a tinetly the marks of St. John’s teaching."
of the Apostolic This 15 most clearly seen in Ignatius, who,
"τιν perhaps, more than any other among the
sub-apostolic fathers, resembled him in natural character.
Without an acquaintance with St. John’s writings, it is
difficult to understand that he could have spoken in some
cases as he does; but if he were acquainted with them, the
subtle resemblance which exists is at once intelligible’
Polycarp, in like manner, obviously refers to a passage in
the first Epistle of St. John ;° and Papias, according to

1 Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 31,48, 8 Polyc. ad Smyrn.7: πᾶς γὰρ ὃς ἂν
100, 225. μὴ ὁμολογῇ Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐν σαρκὶ

2 Cf. Ign. ad Smyrn. 8, ὅ, 12; ad Eph. ἐληλυϑέναι, ἀντίχριστός ἐστι (1 John
7; ad Magn.1; ad Rom. 7. iv. 8. Cf. Nott. critt. ad loc.).

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 261

Eusebius, “made use of testimonies” out of it. The im-
portance of this evidence is the greater, because it proceeds
from a quarter in which we might naturally look for the
most certain information. Polycarp was himself a disciple
of the Apostle, and Papias conversed with those who had
been. Nor is it an objection that the coincidences are with
the Epistle rather than with the Gospel, for the two writings
are so essentially united that their apostolical authority
must be decided by one inguiry.

In the next generation the traces of the use of the
Gospel, and not only of the general infin- ως
ence of St. John’s writings, are indisputable. me Farmers of the
The “elders,” who are quoted by Ineneus, “°" ““““*
interpret a saying of our Lord recorded by St. John,? and
the Asiatic source of the reference contributes something
to its weight. Though the question has been keenly de-
bated, with some exaggeration on both sides, there can be
no reasonable doubt that Justin Martyr was acquainted
with St. John’s Gospel, and referred to it as one of those
written by apostles, as contrasted with those which were
written by their followers Quotations from the book
occur shortly afterwards in the writings of Apollinaris,*
Tatian,’ Athenagoras,’ Polycrates,’ and in the Epistle of
the Church of Vienne’ The first direct quotation of the

1 Papias ap. Euseb. H. E. iii. 24. ὕπ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ ΧΩΡῚΣ αὑτοῦ γέγονεν

2Ίνοη, v. 85, 2: ὡς οἱ πρεσβύτεροι οὐδὲ ἕν. Cf. capp. 5. 18
λέγουσι. .. καὶ διὰ τοῦτο εἰρηκέναι 6 Athenagoras, Supplic. pro Christ.
τὸν Κύριον, ἐν τοῖς τοῦ πατρός μου 10; ἄλλ rue vids ΤΟΥ Θεοῦ λόγος
μονὰς εἶναι πολλάς (John xiv. 2, ἐν τῇ Τοῦ πατρὸς at ἰδέᾳ καὶ ἘΡΕΠΎΕΙΟ “πρὸς
οἰκίᾳ τοῦ πατρός μὸν μοναὶ πολλαί αὐτοῦ γὰρ καὶ δι αὐτοῦ πάντα ἐγένετο,
εἰσιν). The use of the phrase of St. ἑνὸς ὄντος τοῦ πατρὸς Kal τοῦ υἱοῦ
Luke (ii 49, ἐν τοῖς τοῦ πατρός pov) is (John 1. 8; xvii. 21---29).
worthy of notice 4 Polyer. ap. Euseb. Η. Ε. ν. 24: ἔτι

3 Hist of N. T. Canon, 178, 201. : καὶ Ιωάννης ὁ ἐπὶ τὸ στῆ ΡΝ τοῦ

υρίου ἀναπεσὼν .. . (John xiii. 25).

4 Claud. Apollin, ap. Routh, Pell. 8 Routh. Rell. Sacre, 1. 300: τὸ ὑπὸ
Sacre, i. 161: 6 τὴν ἁγὶαν πλευρὰν χοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν εἰρημένον ὅτι Ἐλεύ-
ἐκκεντηδείς, ὁ ἐκχέας ἐκ τῆς πλευρᾶς σεται καιρὸς ἐν ᾧ πᾶς ὁ ἀποκτεί-
αὐτοῦ τὰ δύο πάλιν καϑάρσια, ὕδωρ καὶ yas ὑμᾶς δόξει λατρείαν
αἷμα, λόγον καὶ πνεύμα (John xix. 34). προσφέρειν τῷ O€@ (John xiv

5Tatian, Urat.ad Grec. 19: πάντα 2.),

262 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

Gospel by name oceurs in Theophilus;? and in the last
quarter of the second century it was universally received
as an authentic and unquestioned work of the Apostle.
As such, it is included in the early Eastern Canon of the
Peshito, and in the Western Canon of Muratori; and from
this time all the great fathers of every section of the
Church argue on the basis of its universal reception an:l
Divine authority.

The reception of the Gospel among heretical teachers
was scarcely less general than its reception
in the Catholic Church. Its individuality

preserved it from the conflict which the
Synoptic Gospels supported with other versions of the
same fundamental narrative. There is an apparent allu-
sion to it in the “great announcement” which was attrib-
uted to Simon Magus;? and it is evidently referred to in
the writings of the early Ophites® and Peratici.* It is still
more worthy of notice that it is quoted in the Clementine
Homilies, which are the production of another school.
Basilides, “who lived not long after the times of the
Apostles,” and Valentinus distinctly refer to it;° and
Heracleon, the scholar of Valentinus, made it the subject
of a commentary.’

The testumony of
heretical writers.

5 Clem. Hom. xix. 22: ὅϑεν καὶ 6
διδάσκαλος ἡμῶν περὶ τοῦ ἐκ γεν ε-
THS πηροῦ καὶ ἀναβλέψαντος παρ᾽
αὐτοῦ ἐξετάζουσι τοῖς μαϑηταῖς, εἰ

i Theophilus, ad Autol. ii. 22: ὅϑεν
διδάσκουσιν ἡμᾶς αἱ ἁγίαι “γραφαὶ καὶ
πάντες οἱ πνευματοφόροι, ἐξ ὧν ᾿Ιωάν-
ns λέγει: ἐν ἀρχῇ ἣν ὃ λόγο“. . -.

2 [Hipp.] adv. Her. vi. 9: οἰκητήριον
δὲ λέγει εἶναι [ὁ Siuov| τὸν ἄνϑρω-
Tov τοῦτον τὸν ἐξ αἱμάτων γεγενημέ-
vov... (Johni. 18).

8 [Hipp ] adv. Her. vy. 9: περὶ οὗ,
φησίν, εἴρηκεν 6 Σωτήρ᾽' Ei ἤδει-
τίς ἐστιν ὃ αἰτῶν, σὺ ἂν ἤτη-
σὰς παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἔδωκεν ἄν
σοι πιεῖν ζῶν ὕδωρ ἁλλόμενον
(John iv.10); and many other passages.

4 [Hipp.] adv. Her. vy. 12: τοῦτό ἐστι,
φησί, τὸ εἰρημένον, Οὐ yap ἦλϑεν ὁ
υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνδρώπου εἰς τὸν κόσ-
μον; ἀπολέσαι τὸν κόσμον, ἀλλ᾽
ἵνα σωδῇ ὃ κόσμος BV αὐτοῦ.

οὗτος ἥμαρτεν ἢἣ οἱ γονεῖς
αὐτοῦ ἵνα τυφλὸς γεννηδ ἢ,
ἀπεκρίνατο. οὔτε οὗτός Te ἥμαρ-
τεν οὔτε οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ,
GAN ἵνα 8 αὐτοῦ φανερωδῇ
ἢ δύναμις τοῦ Θεοῦ τῆς ἀγνοίας
ἰωμένη τὰ ἁμαρτήματα (John ix. 1 ff.)
Cf. Uhlhorn, Die Homilien w. 8. το. 122 ff.

6[Hipp.] adv. Her.: τοῦτο, φησὶν
[ὁ βασιλείδης]), ἐστὶ τὸ λεγόμενον ἐν
τοῖς εὐαγγελίοι' ἣν τὸ φῶς τὸ
ἀληϑινὸν ὃ φωτίζει πάντα
ἄνϑρωπον ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν
κόσμον (John i. 9).

7 Origen. in Joann. Tom. xii. §§ 10 ff.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 963

The chain of evidence in support of the authenticity of
the Gospel is, indeed, complete and contin- ts
uous, as far as it falls under our observation, τ κλερεήῆδης χαρά
Not one historical doubt is raised from any “"”"*
quarter, and the lines of evidence converge towards the
point where the Gospel was written, and from which it was
delivered to the Churches. On the other side one fact
only can be brought forward. [10 is said, on the authority
of Epiphanius, that the Gospel, as well as the other writings
of St. John, were attributed to Cerinthus by
a sect called Alogi Their name indicates eo ae ν
the ground on which they proceeded. Their
objections to the apostolic origin of the book. were, as far
as can be ascertained, purely internal; and it is not difficult
to trace the course which the objectors may have followed,
till they reached their final result. Such internal objec-
tions can always be strengthened by pointing out the
defects which, from the nature of the case, must necessarily
exist in the outward proof of the origin of a book im an
age and in a society almost without literary instinct. But
the true historic view, which regards the whole growth of
Christianity within and without, furnishes a convincing
answer to such skepticism, which is essentially partial.
The development of later speculation becomes first ex-
plicable when it is traced out as the result of one definite
impulse. The general tendency of all casual testimony is
found to coincide with the conclusion which is assumed on
all sides without hesitation when Christian literature first
rose into importance. And a deeper study of the internal
features of the Gospel will show that what appear to be
difficulties and divergences from other parts of Scripture,
belong to the fulness of its personal character,’and con-
tribute equally to the completeness of the teaching which
it conveys, and to the perfection of that image of the
Saviour which it presents, in combination with the records
of the other Evangelists.

1 Epiph. Her. li. 3. Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 1805 ff.

264 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

Ὁ:
The internal character of St. John’s Gospel offers in fact
an almost boundless field for inguiry. It pre-
sents the results of the most consummate art
as springing from the most perfect simplicity.
The general effect of its distinct individuality is heightened
by a careful examination of the various details by which
the whole impression is produced. In language, substance,
and plan the narrative differs from the Synoptic Gospels;
and each of the points thus offered to investigation will
require some notice.

The language of St. John presents pecniiarities both
in words and constructions which mutually
illustrate one another. In both an extreme

simplicity and an apparent sameness cover a depth of
meaning, which upon a nearer view is felt to be inexhaust-
ible. The simplicity springs from the contemplation of
Christianity in its most fundamental relations; the same-
ness, from the distinct regard of the subject in each sepa-
rate light, by which every step in the narrative is, as it
were, isolated, instead of being merged .in one complex

2. The internal
character of the
Gospel.

(a) Its language.

whole.

The Introduction to the Gospel furnishes the most com-_
plete illustration of its characteristic vocabu-
lary.. “The Word,” “the Life,” “the Light,”
“the - Darkness,” “the “Truth,” “the Wond.722*Glory.”

i. The vocabulary.

᾿Αλλὰ μὴν Kal τὴν πρώτην ἐμήνυσε
τετράδα... . Πατέρα εἰπὼν καὶ Χάριν
καὶ τὸν Μονογενῆ καὶ ᾿Αλήϑειαν), is
full of interest.

The term the Word (ὃ Adyos), abso-
lutely as a title of the Son of God, is
found only in the Preface to the Gos-
pel (i. 1; 14), where it occurs four times.
It occurs in the cognate phrase the
Word of God in the Apocalypse (Apoc.
xix. 18); and in a passage in the Epis-

1JIn examining the language of St.
John I have derived very considerable
help from the valuable work of Lu-
thardt, Das Johanneische Evangelium.
Niirnberg, 1852. Throughout I have
compared and corrected my own con-
clusions by his, with the greatest ad-
vantage.

2 The use and meaning-of these words,
which were applied in very early times
to strange and mystical schemes (Iren.

1. 8.5 ff σαφῶς οὖν δεδήλωκεν ὃ ᾿ΙἸωάν-
νης διὰ τῶν λόγων ταύτων τά τε ἄλλα
καὶ τὴν τετράδα τὴν δευτέραν, Λόγον
καὶ Ζωήν, “AvSpwmrov καὶ Ἐκκλησίαν"

tle to the Hebrews (iv. 12, 13), the sim
ple and derived meanings of the term,
as the Revelation, and the Person in
whom the revelation centres, are com-

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 265

“Grace,” are terms which at once place the reader beyond
the scene οἵα limited, earthly conflict, and raise his thoughts

bined with the notion of an account to
be rendered. Inthe LXX. λόγος is the
usual representative of “27, and oc-
curs in those passages in which later
interpreters have found the traces of
a fuller revelation of the Divine na-
ture: e.g., Ps xxxii. 6; cvi.20. Isa.
XXxviii. 4, etc. In the Latin Versions
of the New Testament, as represented
by MSS. of every class, λόγος is trans-
lated by Verbum, which falls very far
short even of a partial rendering of the
Greek. There is, however, evidence
that in the second century sermo.was
also current, which is, in some respects,
a preferable rendering (Tertull. adv.
Hermog. xx. etc. and constantly); and
Tertullian seems to prefer ratio, though
he implies that that had not been
adopted in any version (adv. Prax. v.
Ideoque jam in usu est nostrorum, per
simplicitatem interpretationis, sermo-
mem dicere in primordio apud Deum
Suisse, cum magis rationem competat
antiquiorem haberi, quia non sermona-
lis a principio sed rationalis Deus. . . .
In de Carne Chr. xviii. he reads verbum
caro factum esf).

The Life (7 ζωή) is a term of much
wider application. It occurs not only
in the preface of the Evangelist, but
also in the discourses of our Lord, and
in one phrase full of deep meaning —
“to enter into life” (εἰσελϑεῖν εἰς THY
(whv)—it is found in the Gospels of
St. Matthew and St. Mark (Matt. xviii.
8, 9; xix. 17. Mark ix. 43, 45. Cf.
Matt. vii. 14). In the Epistles of St.
Paul the word is only less important
than in St. John (Cf. Rom. v. 10; viii.
10. Col. iii. 4. 2 Tim. i. 1); and it is
tound, though rarely, in the other
Epistles (Cf. Hebr. vii. 16. Jac. i. 12.
1 Pet. iii 7. 2 Pet. i. 8). In the writ-
angs of St. John; Christ is presented as
the Life under various aspects. At one
time He proclaims Himself to be ‘‘ the
Resurrection and the Life” (ἐγώ ᾿εἰμι ἡ
ἀνάστασις καὶ 7 ζωή) in the presence

of material death (John xi. 25), and
again as * the Way, the Truth, and the
Life” (ἐγώ εἰμι 7 ὁδὸς καὶ ἡ ἀλήδεια
καὶ ἡ ζωή) in the presence of religious
doubt (xiv. 6). In this latter sense
St. John says, *‘ The Life was the Light
of men” (καὶ ἣ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν αν-
δρώπων. i. 4), that ** Light of Life’ (τὸ
φῶς τῆς (wijs), as it is elsewhere called
(viil. 12), which he shall have who fol-
lows Christ. **The Life’ QO. John i. 2;
v. 20) lies beneath all physical and
spiritual being and action, absolutely
one, and universally pervading. At
other times the single gift aud source
of life is contemplated in the separate
parts or modes in which it is presented.
“JT am the bread of Life” (ἐγώ εἰμι ὃ
ἄρτος τ. ζωῆς. vi. 35,48); “the words
(ῥήματα) which I have spoken unto
you, they are spirit and they are life”
(vi. 68, ef. v. 68); “1 will give to him
that thirsteth of the fountain of the
water of life’? (Apoc. xxi. 6. Cf. xxii.
1, 17; vii 19. John iv. 14); “to him
that overcometh will I give to eat of
the tree of life’ (τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς.
Apoe: τ (Ch ΧΕΙ 2) 14. 0)» “ois
[the Father’s] commandment is life
eternal ” (xii. 50); ‘* this is life eternal,
that they know thee (ἵνα γινώσκωσιν)
the only true God, and Jesus Christ
whom thou hast sent” (améoTeAas
xvii. 8); ‘‘ these things have been writ-
ten .... that ye may have life in His
(Christ’s) name” (xx. 31). Elsewhere
it is regarded as something present in
the Father (v. 25), in the Son (v 26,
ζωὴν ἔχειν ἐν ἑαυτῷ), and in those
united in fellowship with Christ (vi. 58,
54; v.40; iii 15, 16. 8°). varying in de-
gree (x. 10, va ζωὴν ἔχωσιν kal πε-
ρισσὸν ἔχωσιν), present in one sense (v
24). and yet future (xii. 25. Cf. vi. 27;
iv. 86). personal (1 John v 12, 16), and
yet extending to ὁ the world” (vi. 51).
[Compare the use of ζωοποιέω ν. 21;
vi. 63, and in St. Paul, and 1 Pet. iii
18.]

266 THE GOSPEL ΟΕ. 51. JOHN.
to the unseen and the eternal. The conflict of good and
evil is presented in an image which conveys in final distinet-
ness the idea of absolute antagonism. The Incarnation it-
self is regarded as the great climax of the revelations of
Him in whom all things “were” and by whom all things
“became.” Yet the Life and the Light and the Truth, are
no mere abstractions, but centre in a person. The one pre-
dominating idea, partial and yet true, passes into the other
in the consideration of new relations. The Life, which, in
its fullest sense, is the most noble expression of creative
power, becomes the Light in regard to men; and the sum
of that which the Light reveals is the Truth. From stage to
stage the whole is laid open which was contained implicitly
in the first prophetic announcement. For nowhere is the

spiritual depth of St. John’s Gospel more clearly imaged

The grand notion of ‘ Life” as the
divine basis of all being, is limited in
that of ‘“‘ Light,” which is one of the
forms in which it is presented to men
(1.4) ‘God is light” (1 John i. 5), even
as Christ is light (i. 4—9; iii. 19; xii.
46), ‘the light of the world ” (viii. 12),
during His presence (xii. 35, 86; ix. 5),
and after His bodily withdrawal (1
John ii.8), in which the believer abides
(1 John ii. 10) and walks (1 John i. 7).
The opposite to this heavenly light (ef.
xi. 9, 10), is “the Durkness” (σκοτία
metaph. only in St. Jolin, σκότος only
jij. 19. 1 John i. 6), in which others
walk (viii. 12; xii. 85. 1 John ii 11)
and abide (xii. 46) and are (1 John i. 9),
and which overwhelms them (xii. 35),
and blinds them (1 John ii. 11), though
it cannot overwhelm the Light (i. 5).
[Compare the use of φαίνειν, φανεροῦν,
φωτίζειν.

In another aspect the revelation which
brings life and Jight, and in one seise
is life and light, is the Truth. In the
use of this word St. John, standing in
marked contrast with the synoptists,
offers a close parallel with St. Paul.
Christ Himself is the truth (xiv. 6),
even as the revelation (Adyos) of God

(xvii. 17); and the Holy Spirit as the
Guide of the future Church, is essen-
tially ‘‘the Spirit of truth” (xiv. 17;
xv. 26; xvi.13. 1 Jolin iv. 6), and ‘the
Spirit is the ‘Truth’ (1 John v. 6). But
while the Truth is expressed in Jan-
guage (viii. 40), it extends to action (iii.
21. lJohn i. 6, ποιεῖν THY ἀλήδειαν)
and brings with it freedom (viii. 32)
and holiness (xvii. 17, 19). [Compare
the use of ἀληϑής, ἀληϑινός.]

The sphere to which this all-embrac-
ing revelation is addressed is ‘the
world”? (ὃ κόσμος), a word which,
while it occurs in this application in
St. Matthew (xiii. 88; xxvi. 13), and
St. Mark (xvi. 15), and more frequently
in St. Paul, is yet so common in its
ethical sense in St. John as to be highly
characteristic of his writings. Christ
“takes the sin of the world” (i. 29. 1
John ii. 2), ‘gives life to the world”
(vi. 385. Cf. v. 51. 1 John iv. 9), came
“to save the world” (xii. 47; iii. 17.
1 John iv. 14. Cf. iv. 42), is “the light
of the world *’ (viii. 12; ix. 5); and
conversely. ‘‘the world could not re-
ceive’ Him (xiv. 17), but hated Him
(xy. 38).

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 267

than in the one term which is most commonly and most
rightly associated with it. When St. John surveys in his
own person, in a few sentences, the great facts of the In-
carnation in their connection with all the past and all the
future, and as they reach beyond the very bounds of time,
he speaks of the Lord under a title (Adyos) which is only
faintly and partially imaged by “the Word.” The render-
ing, even on the one side which it approaches, limits and
confines that which in the original is wide and discursive.
As far as the term Logos expresses a revelation, it is not
an isolated utterance, but a connected story, a whoie and
not a part, perfect in itself, and including the notions of
design and completion. But the meaning of Logos is only
halfembraced by the most full recognition of the idea of a
given revelation, conveyed by one who is at once the Mes-
senger and the Message, speaking from the beginning in
the hearts of men, of whom He was the Life and Light,
and by the mouth of those who were His prophets: it in-
cludes also that yet higher idea, which we cannot conceive
except by the help of the language which declares it, accord-
ing to’which the revelation is, in human language, as
thought, and the Revealer as reason, in relation to the
Deity. In this sense the title lifts us beyond the clouds of
earth and time, and shows that that which has been real-
ized among men in the slow progress of the world’s history,
was, towards God, in the depths of the Divine Being before
creation. These vast truths, which are included in the one
term by which St. John describes the Lord, had been dimly
seen, from one side or the other, by many who had studied
the records of the Old Testament. Now they brought for-
ward the notion of a divine Reason;in which the typical
“ideas” of the world were supposed to reside: now of a
divine Word, by which God held converse with created
beings; but at this point the boldest pansed.!. No one had
dared to form such a sentence as that which, with almost
awful simplicity, declares the central fact of Redemption,

1 Cf. pp. 161—166.

268 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

in connection with time and eternity, with action and with
being: “ The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,”
and it may well seem that the light of a divine presence
still ever burns in that heavenly message, thus written for
us, as clearly as it burnt of old on the breastplate of priest,
or among the company of the first disciples. If any one
utterance can bear the clear stamp of God’s signature,
surely that does which announces the fulfilment of the
hopes of a whole world with the bolduess of simple aftir-

mation, and in language which elevates the soul which

embraces it.!

If we pass from the vocabulary of ὃ

t. John to the form

of his sentences, what has been said of the

ii. Zhe composi-
tion.
Simplicity.

former

still holds good in
The characteristics which mark the elements
of his language, mark also his style of composition.

new relations.

There

is the same simplicity and depth in the formation of his

1In addition to the characteristic
words of St. John, which have been
already noticed (p. 241, n. 2), there are
many others which illustrate in a re-
markable way the spirit of his Gospel.
Among these may be mentioned:

Sdvaros (in 1 Ep. and Apoc.),

μαρτυρία, μαρτυρεῖν (Gosp. Epp.
Apoc.),

κρίσις, κρίνειν (Gosp. Apoc.),

ἔργον, τὰ ἔργα (Gosp.),

πιστεύω εἰς (Gosp. 1 Epp. πίστις

only 1 John, v. 4, ἢ πίστις not in
Gosp.),
ὄνομα (Gosp. Epp. Apoc.),
γινώσκω (Gosp. Epp. Apoc.),
σημεῖον (Gosp. Apoc.),
ἁμαρτία (Gosp.1 Ep.),
σάρξ (Gosp.),
ἀγαπᾶν, ἀγάπη (Gosp. Epp.),
εᾶσδϑαι, Sewpety (Gosp. 1 Ep.),
ἐρωτᾶν (Gogp. Epp.),
ὁ πατήρ (Gosp. Epp. Apoc.),
πρόβατα, τεκνία (605. 1 Ep.),
παροιμία (Gosp. also 2 Pet. ii. 22),
ἀμήν, ἀμήν (Gosp.),
πιάζειν (Gosp. Apoc.),

ὄχλος (sing.), in pl. only vii. 12, with
var. lect.

τὰ ἴδια (also Acts xxi. 6).

The amount of words peculiar to St.
John is very large. In the Gospel I
have counted sixty-five, and there are
possibly more. In the main these
spring out of the peculiar details of
his narrative: 6. g. ἀντλεῖν, ἀποσυνά-
γωγος, γλωσσόκομον, κλῆμα, σκέλος,
τίτλος, ὑδρία, ψωμίον. Some are
characteristic: Δίδυμος, Ἑβραϊστί,
ἀρνίον, σκηνοῦν. Many words occur
with remarkable frequency in St. John,
as οὖν, ἵνα, μέντοι, ἴδε, οὔπω», πώποτε,
ἐγώ, ἐμός, and their usage is full of
meaning.

The absence of some words is equally
worthy of notice, as, for instance, δύ-
ναμις, δυνάμεις, ἐπιτιμᾶν εὐαγγέλιον
(and derivatives), παραβολή, παραγ-
έλλειν, πίστις, σοφία, σοφός. In
this connection it may be noticed that
St. John speaks of John the Baptist
simply as John; the title does not oc-
cur in the Gospel — a small trait which
would not have been preserved by a
later writer.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 269

recurrent constructions as in the choice of his familiar
words; and these qualities bring with them, in each sepa-
Like the key-words of
his language, his constructions are almost without excep-
tion most obvious and plain.’ The effect which they
produce is not gained by any startling or subtle form of
expression, but only by a calm and impressive emphasis.
Clauses are rather appended than subordinated. Every
thing is placed before the reader in a direct
form, even in the record of the words of
others, when the oblique narration is most natural; ‘“ Many
of the people, therefore, when they heard this saying, said,
Of a truth this is the Prophet. Others said, This is the
Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee ?”?
If remarks are added either to bring out more strongly the
features of the scene, or to connect the history with the
immediate time, they are added for the most part in abrupt
parentheses: “Jesus, therefore, being wearied with His
journey, sat thus on the well. It was about the sixth hour.

rate sentence, clearness and force.

Directness.

There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water.” ®

One result of this form of writing is circumstantiality.
The different details which are included in
an action are given with individual care.
Word is added to word, when it might have been thought
that the new feature was already included in the picture;
and yet in such sentences as “Jesus cried out in the
Temple, teaching and saying,” “they questioned Him, and
said to Him,” and the like, it will be found that there is
something gained by the distinct expression of each mo-

Circumstantiality.

In John

1 A remarkable sign of this is found
in the singular fact that St. John never
uses the optative (Credner, Fini. § 96).
In xiii. 24, the reading καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ
Εἰπὲ τίς ἐστιν is certainly correct.

In like manner the particle ἄν is only
found in the construction with the in-
dicative (iv. 10, ete.), except in the
connection ὃς ἄν, ὅστις ἄν, ὅσος ἄν.

2 John vii. 40,41. Cf. i. 19—27; ix.

Sifts) ville 225 1x. 471 ΣΙ; 90.
iv. 51, the authorities are divided, and
if ὁ παῖς αὐτοῦ be the right reading, it
probably stands alone as an example
of oblique construction (cf. Luthardt,
p.37). The common reading in xiii.
24, πυϑέσϑαι Tis εἴη, is incorrect. Cf.
supr. n. 1.
3 iv. 6.
Xviii. 40.

Cf. x. 22; xii. 90;, yi. 10:

2a”

970 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

ment in the narrative which might otherwise have been
overlooked.!

Another mode in which this fundamental character of
St. John’s style shows itself is repetition.
The subject, or chief word of the whole
sentence, is constantly repeated, both in the narrative and
in the recital of our Lord’s discourses. “In the beginning
was the Word; and the Word was with God; and the
Word was God.” “Jesus then, when he saw her weeping,
and the Jews that were with her weeping.” .... “If I
bear witness of myself; my witness is not true. There is
another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the
witness which he witnesseth of me is true.” ?

This tendency to emphatic repetition may be seen again
in the way in which the persons involved in
the dialogue are brought out into clear an-
tagonism. Sentence after sentence opens
with the clauses, “ Jesus said,” “the Jews said,” so that the
characters engaged in the great conflict are never absent
from the mind of the reader;* and a similar emphasis is
gained in other sentences by the introduction of a demon-
strative pronoun, when an important clause has intervened
between the subject and the verb: “He that seeketh His
glory that sent him, the same (otros) is true.” 4

It is to be referred to the same instinctive desire to

Repetition.

-Individuality of
narrative.

11. 25; vii. 28. Compare i. 15, 82; 24.1; xi. 33; ν. 91. 32: Compare ὁ.
viii. 12; xii. 44, etc. A very simple 10; v. 46, 47; xv. 4 ff.; xvii. 25.
and common example of this charac-
teristic occurs in the constant use of
ἀπεκρίϑη Kat εἶπεν for the usual ἀπο-
Kpivels εἶπεν or ἀπεκρίδη λέγων of
the other Evangelists. The two ideas 4 vii. 18. Compare vi. 46; xv. 5.
are coérdinated, and not subordinated. 2John 9; i. 31; iii. 82; v. 88; x. 25
The phrase occurs. if I have noticed (οὗτος). i. 18,833 -¥5 E1883. Sie)
rightly, thirty-three timesin St. John, x. 1; xii. 48; xiv. 21, 26; xv. 26 (ἐκεῖ-
and elsewhere only Mark vii. 28; Luke 0s). The former pronoun occurs in
xiii. 15; xvii. 20. the other Gospels in this kind of con-

It is a consequence of the same struction several times (Matt. xiii. 20
principle that we find such phrases as_ ἢ; Mark vi. 16; Luke ix. 48): the lat-
ἐγὼ... ἐξῆλϑον καὶ ἥκω οὐδὲ ter, as far as I know, only twice: Mark
nee €CAHAVAG (viii. 42). vii. 15, 20.

3 FE. g. viii. 49 ff.; x. 23 ff. It is, how-
ever, to be remarked that in these cases
the verb is put first: iv. 7 ff. ete.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 71

realize the full personality of the action, so to speak, that
St. John frequently uses the participle and

substantive verb for the more natural finite ,7e"™ αἱ
verb. The distinction between the two

forms of expression is capable only of a rude representation
in English; yet even so, it is possible to appreciate the
difference between the phrases “I bear witness,” and “I
am one who bears witness,” and to feel that the idea of the
action predominates in the one, and that of the person in the
other." Elsewhere the force of the clause is heightened, in
a way which the English idiom cannot express, by the
position of the verb at the beginning of the sentence. The
central idea of the whole is given first, and the remainder
of the sentence is made dependent upon it.?

All these peculiarities converge to the same point. The
simplicity, the directness, the particularity, | paar:
the emphasis of St. John’s style, give his sets of these char
writings a marvellous power, which is not, Bibra
perhaps, felt at first. Yet his words seem to hang about
the reader till he is forced to remember them. Each great
truth sounds like the burden of a strain, ever falling upon
the ear with a calm persistency which secures attention.
And apart from forms of expression with which all are
early familiarized, there is no book in the Bible which has
furnished so many figures of the Person and Work of
Christ which have passed into the common use of Chris-
tians, as the Gospel of St. John. “I am the bread of life ;”
“T am the light of the world ;” “I am the good shepherd ;”
“T am the vine;” are words which have guided the
thoughts of believers from the first ages.’

LV. 80° Vins 16> xi. Le xvi, 19, 23: 2 EF. q. iv. 28, 30, 52, 53; vi. 7—11;
If i. 9, ἦν τὸ φῶς---ἐρχόμενον, isanin- vii. 45f. This is specially the case in
stance of this construction, the words the phrases λέγει αὐτῷ, ἀπεκρίϑη αὐτῷ
must be explained not of one act, but ὁ Ἴ. Cf. p. 270, n. 3.
of a series; not of the Incarnation 3 vi. 48, ἐγώ εἶμι ὁ ἄρτος Te
only, but of a continuous manfestation. ζω ἢ 5. vi. 51, ἐγώ εἰμι ἄρτος ὁ
This construction occurs also in the ζῶν. viii. 12, ἐγώ εἶμι τὸ φῶς τοῦ
other Gospels, Cf. Winer, Gramm. κόσμου. x. 7, ἐγώ εἶμι ἡ Supa τῶν
§ 45, 5. προβάτων. y.9, ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ Svpa. x.

972 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

The combination of the sentences in St. John offers a
complete analogy to the construction of
them. What has been said.of the words and
the constituent members of his sentences,
applies equally to entire paragraphs. There is the same
circumstantiality in the picture, as a whole, as in the
details. Words, clauses, paragraphs, follow one another, in
what may be taken for needless repetition, till the mind
grows sensible of the varied light in which the object is
placed, and grasps the complete image. The final effect of
the entire narrative is inartificial, and yet intense and
powerful. The multiplication of simple elements issues in
a result of acknowledged grandeur; and the mode in which
the result is produced leads the mind to dwell upon it with
patient study. Sentences are added one to another rather
than connected. Only the simplest conjunctions! are used,
even when the dependence of the successive clauses is
subtle and hidden. Equally often the narrative or dis-
course is continued without the help of any conjunctions,
especially when the deepest feeling is roused, and the full
heart embraces the whole scene, without distinguishing the
subordination or sequence of the details; “And He said,
Where have ye laid him? They say to Him, Come and
see. Jesus wept.”” Statement follows statement, and the
reader is left to work out for himself the law by which
they are bound together. It is as if St. John felt that each
truth involves all truth; and that the truth was to be |
described, as he had seen it, by the portraiture of its

The combination
of sentences.
Simplicity.

11, 14, ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ποιμὴν ὃ καλός. xi.
25, ἐγώ εἰμι ἣ ἀνάστασις καὶ ἣ ζωή.
xiv. 6, ἐγώ εἰμι ἣ 650s καὶ ἡ ἀλήδεια
καὶ ἣ ζωή. χν. 1, ὅ, ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ἄμπε-
λος.

The frequency of the pronoun ἔγώ in
St. John’s Gospel, compared with the
Synoptists, points to the fulness of this
personal revelation of our Lord. The
simple phrase ἐγώ εἰμι occurs in all
the Gospels.

1 The most common are Καί and δέ,
though both occur much less frequently
in St. John than in the other Evangel-
ists. The conjunction τέ, which is
rare in the Gospels, occurs only ii. 15
(τέ --- kal); iv. 42; vi. 18. In the two
latter cases there is a various reading,
δέ, supported by important evidence.

2xi 34. 33.
A τ τὺ

Gf, 13: Ὁ, 8. Ἧι τ,

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 273
several aspects, and not as it were discovered or displayed
by any process of argument. For him knowledge was
sight.’

But while the particles in St. John occupy generally a
very subordinate place, two which express a
designed object (iva) and a natural result
(οὖν), however much these ideas may be
hidden from the ordinary sight, are singularly frequent and
important. The view which they open of the continuous
working of a divine Providence, and of the sequence of
human actions, is exactly that in which St. John may be
supposed to have specially dwelt, and which he brings out
with the greatest distinctness. “The Jews said unto him,
It is not lawful for us to put any man to death; that (ἵνα)
the saying of Jesus may be fulfilled, which he spake signi-
fying what death he should die.” “When he had heard,
therefore (οὖν), that he was sick, he abode two days still in
the same place where he was.” ὅ

Characteristic
particles,

11 John i. 1. The frequency of the
words ϑεωροῦν, ϑεᾶσϑαι, ἑωρακέναι,
which has been already noticed, is an
indication of this characteristic of St.
Jolin. It is worthy of notice that in
the Gospel and first Epistle he uses only
the perfect of δρᾶν (ἑώρακα), which
occurs twenty-six times. There can be
no doubt that ἐθεώρουν is the true
reading in vi. 2.

2 xviii. 92. This form of expression,
iva TAnpws7, is even more frequent in
St. John than in St. Matthew, and it is
found not only in the narrative of the
Evangelist (xii. 88; xviii. 9, 32; xix.
24, 36), but also in the discourses of our
Lord (xiii. 18; xv. 25; xvii. 12). The
elliptical phrase, ἄλλ᾽ ἵνα, which oe-
curs Mark xiy. 49, is also worthy of
particular notice: i. 8; ix. 8; (xi. 52;)
xiii. 18; xiv. 381; xv. 25. 1 John ii. 19.
Other examples of the use of ἵνα are
juteresting. In many cases it is used
where in classieal Greek a combina-
tion of the article with the infinitive
would be the natural construction: iy.

84, ἐμὸν βρῶμά ἐστιν ἵνα ποιήσω τὸ
Sed. vi. 29; (40;) xii. 28, ἐλήλυϑεν 7
ὥρα ἵνα δοξασϑῇἢ. xiii. 1; xv. 8; xvi.
80; xvii. 8. 1 John i. 9; ii. 27; iv. 17.
Cf. xiii. 2, 34; xv. 12, 18,17. 1 John
iii. 11, 23; v. 3. At other times it takes
the place of a simple infinitive: xvii. 24,
SéAw va.... @ow; iv. 47; xvii. 15;
xix. 31, 38; xi. 50; xvi. 7. 1 John iii.
1; v.20. In both these cases the idea
of purpose and design seems to have
led to the change of expression, and
this notion is very apparent in some
simpler examples: xvi. 2, ἔρχεται ὥρα
iva was .... 8d&. x.17. Cf. iii. 17;
xii. 47; v. 7. 1John v. 16.

8 Examples of the various character-
istic uses of οὖν in St. John will be
found in the following passages: ii.
22; iii. 25, 29; iv. 1, 6,46; vi. δ; vii. 25,
28 ff.; viii. 12, 21, ff., 31, 38; x.7; xii. 1,
8, 9, 17, 21; xi. 31 ff. ete. The word is
almost confined to narrative, and oc-
curs very rarely in the discourses. The
sequence which it marks-is one of fact
and not of thought. In the Epistles

974 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

Another form of connection is equally characteristic of
St. John, and equally instructive. Successive
sentences, no less than the parts of a single
sentence, are combined by the recurrence of
a common word. The repetition of the key-words of the
former sentence in that which follows, unites the new
statement with that which preceded, and yet invests it, at
the same time, with an individual worth. Sometimes the
subject is repeated: “I am the good shepherd. The good
shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.”' Sometimes
what appears a subordinate word is transferred to the first
place: “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay
down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends.”?....
Sometimes a clause is repeated which gives the theme
of ‘the passage: 6 1 am ‘the (true vies). 06 Ὁ sam
the vine: ye are the branches;”*.... and again, one
which repeats its closing cadence:* “The world hated
them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not
of the world. .... They are not of the world, as I am

Connection by a
key-word.

not o1 tae world... 7.3

Sanctify them in the truth ....

that they may be sanctified in the truth.” ?
This repetition is connected with another peculiarity of

Parallelism.

St. John’s style, which is observable both in

the simple sentences and in the connected
record —the spirit of parallelism — the informing power

it occurs only 8John 8. In 1 John ii.
24; iv. 19, it is wrongly inserted in
some copies.

1x.11. In referring here and else-
where to our Lord’s discourses as re-
corded by St. John for illustrations of St.
John’s style, I may repeat (to avoid mis-
construction) what has been said before
of the relation of the Evangelist to the
words which he records. Nothing can
be further from my wish than to question
the Divine authority of the Evangelic
records of the Lord’s teaching. But
few can suppose that the Evangelists
have preserved generally either the
exact or the entire words of the dis-

course recorded. St. John in particu-
lar, from the individual character of
his Gospel, appears to present exactly
so much of each discourse as his natu-:
ral peculiarities of conception and lan-
guage fitted him to preserve, fulfilling
in this way his providential function
in the instruction of the Church. The
record is absolutely true, and yet not
complete.

2 xv. 18, 14.

3 xv. 1, 5.

4 xvii. 14—19.

ὃ This remarkable characteristic finds
a place even in the history; xviii. 18,
25.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. Sto

of Hebrew poetry — which runs through 10. It would not
be possible to find a more perfect example of parallelism
than the blessing of the Lord: “Peace I leave unto you;
iy peace I give unto you; not as the world giveth, give I
unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it
be afraid.”! .... But such instances are naturally very
rare, as they are essentially poetical, though simpler forms
both of direct? and antithetic® parallelism occur throughout
the book. That parallelism, however, which is most
characteristic of St. John, is a progressive or constructive
parallelism,’ or rather a symmetrical progression. The
subject is stated and pursued to a definite result ; it is then
stated again, with the addition of the new conclusion, and
earried to another limit. In this way the truth is pre-
sented, as it were, in a series of concentric circles, ever
widening; each one in succession includes all that have
gone before, and is in part determined by them.’

This characteristic parallelism in thought and language,
which is found in the narrative and dis-
courses of St. John, leads the way to the yim δες,
truest appreciation of the entire Gospel. It Ji αν a
is, in fact, the divine Hebrew Epic. Every
part is impressed with the noblest features of Hebrew
poetry, and the treatment of the subject satisfies the con-
ditions of variety, progress, and completeness, which, when
combined with the essential nature of the subject itself,
make up the notion of a true Epic. The history is not only
of national, but of universal interest. The development of
faith and unbelief in the course of the Saviout’s life, up to
the last agony of the Passion and the last charge of the

1 xiv. 27. 18, 25. ἦν δὲ [Πέτρος] ἐστὼς καὶ dep-
2 ΚΟ. g. viii. 28. μαινόμενος ---ΟΥ as the theme: e.g. Χ.
8 E. g. vii. 6; viii. 14, 35, 88; xvi. 16, 7, 9, ἐγώ εἰμι ἣ Spa; x. 11, 14, ἔγώ
28. εἶμι 6 ποιμὴν ὃ καλός. Cf. xvii. 14—
4 One simple formin whichthisshows 10.
itself is the repetition of a clause either 5 The discourses in chaps. X. XvVii.
as the burden: ὁ. g. vi. 39, 40, 44, ἐγὼ will furnish a sufficient illustration of
ἀναστήσω ἐν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ; xviii. this method of arrangement.

276 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

risen Lord, presents a moral picture of unapproachable
grandeur. The separate incidents subserve to the exhibi-
tion of the one central idea of “the Word made flesh
> and everything is contemplated in
its truly poetic, that is, in its permanent and typical,

dwelling among men;

aspect. Outward magnitude alone is wanting; and if the
narrative falls short in mere extent, this secondary acci-
dent cannot neutralize all the other details in which the
Gospel fulfils the requirements of an Epic.

But the fact that the Gospel is in the highest sense a

per seen POEM is not to be so interpreted as to bring
in virtue of itssw- into a prominent light the notion of art or
it composition, The Gospel is a poem, because
it is the simple utterance of a mind which received into
itself most deeply, and reproduced most simply, absolute
truth. It is an Epic, because it is the divine reflection of
the Life of the Son of God, not taken in a special aspect,
but as the Word manifested to men. This circumstance
alone distinguishes it from the other Gospels, which are
memoirs rather than poems, because they present the Life
of Christ under limited relations, and not chiefly or uni-
formly in its relation to the Infinite. And if that be a true
definition of poetry which describes it as the power of
giving “Infinity” to things, that is no less truly poetry
which preserves, in a peculiar sense, the idea of its “In-
finity” in the record of the Divine Life.

This view of St. John’s Gospel will be of considerable

Ee ave help in understanding its plan; for while it
orject of the Gos- δ the most natural outpouring of a soul full
ea of the life of Christ,’ the idea which was
foremost in the Apostle’s mind regulates the order of his
narrative. The idea clothes itself in facts; and the sym-
metry, which elsewhere is the effect of purpose, is here the
result, as it were, of an inner law. The subject which is
announced in the opening verses is realized, step by step,
in the course of the narrative. The Word “came to His

DG aN OU se Oils XT. 50.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. Ait

own,” and they “ received Him not;” but others “ received
Him,” and thereby became “sons of God.” This is the
theme, which requires for its complete treatment, not a true
record of events or teaching, but a view of the working
of both on the hearts of men. The ethical element is
coordinate with the historical; and the end which the
Evangelist proposes to himself answers to this double cur-
rent of his Gospel. He wrote that men might believe the
fact that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and believing
— by spiritual fellowship — might have life in his name.

After the Introduction (i. 1—18), which includes within
a narrow compass an outline of the personal pie ΤῊ
being of the Word, of His Revelation to men, im, ese
and of His Incarnation, the main body of the é
Gospel falls into two great divisions, the first (i. 19—xii.)
containing the record of the Life of Christ, the second the
record of His Passion (xili.—xx.). The whole is then
closed by an epilogue, which carries forward the lessons
of the Gospel to the history of the Church (xxi.). The
division between the two great sections is marked by a
two-fold pause. The Evangelist sums up the faithlessness
of the Jews, and connects their final rejection of Messiah
with the declarations of prophecy; and then records the
words in which the Lord declared His relation to the
Father and the world, foreshadowing the judgment which
should follow on the rejection of His message.

The first section may be generally described as the mani-
festation of Christ to men. Throughout the _
whole of it, and nowhere afterwards, Christ tion “vr ‘Guat
is described as the Light. Under this image "”

He is first presented by St. John in the Introduction, and
at the close of the twelfth chapter the Lord Himself, when

1 xx. 81, ταῦτα δὲ γέγραπται, ἵνα trast to the popular theories of a polem-
πιστεύητε ὅτι Ingots ἐστὶν ὃ Χριστὸς ical object in the Gospel. The Gospel is
ὁ vids τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ ἵνα πιστεύοντες indeed truly polemical so far as the Truth
ζωὴν ἔχητε ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι a’tod — is the only complete answer to al! error.
words which offer an instructive con- 2 xii. 36—48; 44—50.

278 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

He surveys the course of His teaching, repeats it for the
last time.’ A second idea is scarcely less characteristic :
Christ is not only the Light, but He came to give Life?
“He that followeth Me,” to use the remarkable words
which he addressed to the Jews, “shall have the light of
life.” The manifestation of Christ centres in these truths,
and is exhibited under two distinct aspects. The first
conveys the announcement of the Gospel
(i. 19—vi.) ; the second, the conflict (v.—xii.).
At first, during a wide range of labor in
Judea, Samaria, and Galilee, among persons most widely
separated by position and character, the revelation is made
without exciting any direct antagonism. The elements of
the future conflict are present, but visible only to the eye
of Him who “knew what was in man.”? The Gospel is
laid before the world, and the reception which it was
destined to meet is shown in detail in the portraiture of
typical cases. The testimony of the Baptist and of signs
(1. 19—11. 25) is followed by personal revelation (iii—iv.).
The group of the first disciples, Nathanael, Nicodemus,
the Samaritan woman, the Galilean nobleman, exhibit
various forms of faith and unbelief, and behind these indi-
- vidual characters glimpses of the popular feeling are given,
which serve as a preparation for the next
stage of the history. In this, the conflict
between Christ and “the Jews” grows more and more
hopeless, till the “chief Priests and Pharisees” finally de-
termine to put Him to death. The desire “to kill Him” is
marked at the opening of the period, and traced out on
several successive occasions, till the feeling of the people
was ratified by the deliberate judgment of the Sanhedrin.‘
In the mean time the same course of events which aroused

The Announce-
ment.

The Conflict.

1 The image occurs, i. 4—9; iii. 19; 81]. 25, ἐν τῷ AvSpoTw.
Vili. 12: ix. δ; xii. 35, 46.

2 The phrases ἔχειν ζωήν, ete. occur 4 v.18, ἐζήτουν ἀποκτεῖναι. vii. 1—
‘thirty times in this section and only 25; viii. 87-40; xi. 58, συνεβουλεύ-
six times in the remainder of the Gos- σαντο ἵνα ἀποκτείνωσιν αὐτόν. Cf.
pel. vili. 59; x. 81; xi..8.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 279

the animosity of the Jews tried the spirit of the disciples.
There is a conflict within as well as without; and they
who had welcomed the first proclamation of the Gospet
advance or fall back in faith as Christ revealed more fully
His Person and Work.’ This revelation proceeds in a
three-fold order. In the first section, Christ is presented
as the support of action and life (v., vi.) ; in the second, in
amore special sense, as the Light (vil—x.) ; in the third,
as the giver of life in death (xi, xil.), Each of these ideas
is illustrated by miraculous working; and the miracle both
points the lesson, and serves as the centre and starting-
point of the discourses which are grouped about it. Now,
Christ gives strength to the impotent man, feeds the multi-
tude in the wilderness, triumphs over the power of nature
(v., vi.); now He gives sight to the man born blind
(ix.); now he calls Lazarus from the grave (xi.). Each
division is bound to that which precedes by the recollection
of earlier conflicts ;? and the whole finds its consummation
in the twelfth chapter, which presents, in the most striking
contrasts, the fruits of faith and unbelief in act (xu. 1—22)
and sign (28—30) and word (44—50). Then, at the close
of Christ’s open ministry, Greeks come to claim admittance
to Him, of whom the Pharisees said in anger, “ Behold, the
world is gone after Him” (xii. 19—22); and who said
Himself, speaking of His death, “If I be lifted up from the
earth, I will draw all men unto me” (xii. 82).
The second great division of the Gospel (xill.—xx.)
differs from the first, both in the unity of |
ii. The issues of
scene and the briefness of the period over Christ's manisesta-
which it extends, and in the general charac- pads
ter of its contents. The first describes the manifestation
of Christ to men; the second presents the varied issues of
that manifestation. In regard both of its substance and of
its style it falls into two parts, of which the first (xili—

1 The different working of the Lord’s 69; vii. 12, 43; ix. 16; x. 19.
words upon His hearers is constantly 2 vii. 19 ff compared with y. 16 τῶ;
brought out by the Evangelist, vi. G0— xi. 8, compared with x. 89,

280 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

xvii.) contains the record of the Saviour’s love as seen in
His unrestrained intercourse with His disciples in the im-
mediate prospect of His death; while the second exhibits
the narrative of the Passion, as the crowning point of faith
on one side and unbelief on the other, of humiliation and
victory, of rejection and confession. A Church is founded
on the cross; a ministry 1s commissioned in the chamber
where the Apostles were gathered together in “fear of the
Jews.” } |
The one great subject of the Lord’s last discourses is
the “new commandment,” the love of Chris-
oe tans’ springing’ “out. of His lovetand “ais
Father’s love for them.2 The point of de-
parture is a symbolic act, which places in the clearest light
the ministry of love; then, after the dismissal of the traitor
(xii. 81), the Christian law is proclaimed, with the warning
against St. Peter’s hasty assurance (xi. 34—88). First,
love is contemplated as it works in the absence of the Lord
(xiv.), then as it springs from vital union with Him, the
only source of love (xv.), then as it is fulfilled in the
strength of the promised Spirit (xvi). And last of all, the
priestly prayer of Christ (xvil.) is itself at once the fullest
outpouring of love, and the surest pledge of the support of
love among Christians. After the record of
the Passion, in which the glorified human
nature of the risen Saviour is specially brought out, follows,
as a last appendix, the promise and _ the
charge for the future. A last miracle con-
veys the lesson of encouragement to those who toil long:
a last commission distinguishes the work which Christ’s
servants have still to do for Him?
Even in this rapid outline it is impossible to overlook
the unity of purpose and plan which runs through St.

The Passion.

The Epilogue.

1 Cf. xix. 34. 1 John νυ. 6, 8—xx.19. xvii.) and only thirteen times besides
in the remainder of the Gospel.

2 The words ἀγαπᾶν and ἀγάπη occur 8 The following sketch of the con-

thirty times in these chapters (xiii— struction of St. John’s Gospel may be

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 981

John’s Gospel. It is not, as the other Gospels, an individ-
ual view of a common subject, but the sub-
ἈΜῊΝ Σ Ἵ (c) The substance
stance is itself peculiar. It is not only per- 4 St. John’s Gos-
Sale . . ; pel.
sonal in its conception and working out, but it
deals with the history of the Lord personally. It lays open

of use in completing some of the gaps in the summary which has been given, and
guiding the way to minuter inquiry.

THE INTRODUCTION. i. 1—18.
The Word in His own Nature. i. 1—5.
His Revelation to men. 6—18.
The Incarnation. 14—18.

I. THE MANIFESTATION OF CHRIST TO THE WORLD. i. 19—xii

1. THE PROCLAMATION. 1. 19—iv.
(a) The Testimony. 1. 19—1ii. 12.
a. The Testimony of John. 1: 19—37.
ὃ. The Testimony of disciples. i. 88—62.
6. The Testimony of signs (The water made wine), ii. 1—12.
(b) The Work. ii. 18—iv. 54.
a. With Jews. 11. 138—iii.
The people (ii. 18—25).
tepresentative men (iii).
Nicodemus, the teacher of the law (1—21).
John the Baptist, the last prophet (22—36).
6. With Samaritans. iv. 1—42.
The woman (iv. 5—380).
The people (iv. 99 ---42).
ec. With Galileans. iv. 48—54.
The people (iv. 48—45).
The nobleman (iv. 46—54). (Nobleman’s son healed).

2. THE CONFLICT. v.—xii.
(a) The Prelude. v.—vi.
Christ the support of action and life.
(The impotent man healed.)
(The feeding of the multitudes.)
(The walking on the sea.)
(b) The Contrast. vii.—x.
Christ the source of truth, light, guidance.
(The man blind from his birth healed.)
(c) The Separation. xi.—xii
Christ the giver of life to the dead. xi.
(Lazarus raised.)
The judgment of men (xii. 1—29); of the Evangelist (xii
387 —41); of Jesus (xii. 44—50).
11. THE ISSUES OF CHRIST’S MANIFESTATION xiii.—xx.
1. THE CONSOLATION. xiii.—xvili.
(a) Types. xiii.
The true pattern. xiii. 1—17.
The traitor. 18—80.

24*

282 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

to us the thoughts which lie beneath actions, and traces
the gradual revelation of character. But while it is thus,
in some sense, more complete than the other Gospels, in so
far as it contains the complete spiritual portraiture of the
Lord, which is the key to all His outward life, yet in fact
it is as incomplete as they are. It is a poem and not a
life ; the exhibition of the most divine truth of which the
world has been witness, and not the narrative of events
which externally considered were infinite. The Old Tes-

The charge. xiii. 31—385.
The unstable. 36—88.
(δ) Love to Christ in absence. xiv.
The union of Christ with the Father. xiy. 1—11.
This the source of the Christian’s strength. 12—é8l.
(c) Love to Christ the spring of love. xv.
The mutual love of Christians. xy. 1—17.
The hatred of the world. 18—27.
(4) The Promise. xvi.
The Comforter. xvi. 1—15.
The Return. 16—24.
The Interval. 25—88.
(e) The Prayer. xvii.
For Christ himself. xvii. 1—5.
For the apostles. 6—19.
For all believers. 20—26.
2. THE VICTORY. xviii.—xx.
(a) The betrayal. xviii. 1—18, 25—27.
Judas. xviii. 1—14.
St. Peter. 15—18, 25—27.
(Ὁ) The Judgment. xviii. 19—xix. 16.
The Jews. xviii. 19—24.
Pilate. xviii. 28—xix. 16.
(c) The End. xix. 17—42.
The elevation on the cross. xix. 17—27.
The death of Jesus. 28—387.
The burial. 38—42.
(d) The New Life. xx. 1—29.
The revelation. xx. 1—18.
The commission. 19—28.
The abiding blessing. 24—29.
Conclusion. 380—81. :

THE EPILOGUE. xxi.
The sign of the Future. xxi. 1—14
(The Miraculous draught of Fishes.)
The varied call of the disciples. 15—24
Conclusion. 25.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 283

tament prophecies,! the miracles,’ the discourses which it
notices are in one aspect confined in range, and yet they
open out a way for every thought, and point to the Incar-
nation as the solution of every doubt. The materials are
rather pregnant with varied instruction than copious,

1 The quotations from the Old Testa- changed from the original text; some
ment which occur in St. John are char- are deductions or adaptations based on
acteristic of his general manner. Some the inner meaning of the prophetic
are yerbal citations; some are slightly words.

I. VERBAL QUOTATIONS.
John x. 34 = Ps. Jxxxi. 6(LXX. ἐν τῷ νόμῳ ὑμῶν = Hebr.)
[— xii. 13] = Ps. exvii. 25, 26 (LXX. σῶσον δέ for ‘Qoavvd).
— xii. 38 = Is. iii. 1 (LXX. — Hebr. om. Κύριε).
— xix. 24 = Ps. xxi. 19 (LXX. = Hebr.)
— xiii. 18 = Ps. xli. 9 (Hebr. not LXX.):
— xix. 87 = Zech. xii. 10 (Hebr. not LXX.)

II. VARIED QUOTATIONS.
1. CHANGES OF EXPRESSION.

John i. 23 = Is. xl. ὃ (εὐϑύνατε for ἑτοιμάσατε --- eddelas
ποιεῖτε in LXX. and Hebr.).

— xii. 14,15 = Zech. ix.9(uh φοβοῦ — καδήμ. ἐπὶ πῶλον ὄνου
for χαῖρε σφόδρα --- emi BeB. ἐπὶ ὑπο-
ζύγιον in LXX. and Hebr.),

— xii. 39—41 = Is. vi.9, 10 (τετύφλωκεν --- πεπώρωκεν. Sense of
Hebr. Varies from LXX.).

2. CHANGES OF ForRM.

John ii.17 = Ps. Ixviii. 10 (καταφάγεται for κατέφαγεν).
— vi. 31 ff. = Ex. xvi. 4, 15; Ps. xxvii. 24.
— νἱ. 46 -- 15. liv. 13 (add. καὶ ἔσονται).
—viii.l17 = Deut. xix. 15.
—xv.25 =Ps. xxxiy. 19 (direct (as Hebr.) from participial
form).

III. ADAPTATIONS.
Jobn vii. 38. Cf. Is. xii. 8; xliv. 3, ete.
[-- xii. 84. Cf. Ps. 1xxxviii. 36].
— xix. 66. Cf. Ex. xii. 46. Ps. xxxiii. 21.
SROs Of. ba Kv, 10s
From the form of these quotations it acles recorded by St. John occupy in
would appear that St. John was famil- his narrative has been already marked,
iar both with the Hebrew text and with Taken by themselves, they present a
the LXX. whole pregnant with instruction.
2 The general position which the mir=
I. THE MIRACLES OF OUR SAVIOUR DURING HIS MINISTRY.
1. SOVEREIGNTY OVER NATURE— ABSOLUTELY.
The water made wine (ii. 1—11).

A type of the independence (v. 4) and transmuting power of
the spiritual life.

284 THE GOSPEL OF 8ST. JOHN.

exhaustive in their application rather than in their form;
but the more the student pauses upon what seem abrupt
transitions, fragmentary utterances, simple repetitions, the
more he will advance to a certain perception of the abso-
lute unity by which the whole Gospel is bound together,
and of the infinite fulness of the revelation which it
contains in the record of “the Word made flesh.”

These reflections, which affect the contents of the Gospel
as well as its style and form, lead to the
second great point of our inquiry, — the rela-
tion in which the Gospel of St. John stands to
the Synoptic narratives. The general features of difference
between them have been already noticed ;' but it remains
to examine somewhat more in detail the special points of
variation and coincidence, which stamp them with the
marks of a real independence and of an underlying unity.

II. The relation .
of St. John to the
Synoptic Gospels.

2. SOVEREIGNTY OVER NATURE— RELATIVELY TO MAN.
(a) Disease.
a. The ruler’s son (iv. 46—54).
Mediative faith: above nature (v. 50).
ὃ. The man at Bethesda (v. 1—9). >
Personal faith: above ritual (v. 9).
(b) Disorder.
a. Natural wants (Gen. iii. 17).
Feeding the jive thousand (vi. 5—59).
Leading to higher aims (v. 58).
ὃ. Outward impediments.
Walking on the sea (vi. 15—21).
Leading to higher faith (v. 20).
c. Personal defects.
The man born blind (ix. 1—7).
Leading to higher responsibility (v. 89).
τσ) Death.
The raising of Lazarus (xi.).
Christ the source of Life (v. 25).
Il. THE MIRACLE OF THE RISEN SAVIOUR.
The multitude of fishes (xxi. 1—8).
The type of the successful work of the Church.

It is not, I believe, fanciful to see a
significance even in the number of these —

tion. Seven, according to the early

miracles. Seven are included in the
record of Christ’s ministry, and an
eighth completes the typical represen-
tation of His work after the resurrec-

belief, was the figure of a completed
creation: eight, the figure of the resur-
rection, or new birth (Cf. Aug. Zp. lv.
23).

1 Pp. 241, 251, 258 ἢ

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 985

The points of difference between St. John and the
Synoptists are commonly classed under two
heads, — differences as to the place and form
of our Lord’s teaching, and differences as to
the view which is given of His Person.

The Synoptists, it is said, describe the public ministry
of Christ as extending only over one year,
and closing with a visit to Jerusalem, which
was at once the first and the last which He made. St.
John, on the other hand, records a visit to Jerusalem at the
very commencement of His work, and notices several visits
afterwards, which were spread over a period (apparently)
of three years. The Synoptists, again, combine to present
a picture of Christ’s teaching characterized by simplicity,
terseness and vigor, illustrated by frequent parables and
summed up in striking proverbs, while St. John attributes
to Him long and deep discourses, in which the argument is
almost hidden by unnatural repetitions, and in which
practical instruction is lost in the mazes of mystical specu-
lation. In the former our Lord is described as a great
moral reformer, laying open the fundamental principles of
the Law which he came to fulfil, speaking as a man among
men, though clothed with the dignity of a prophet; in the
latter, from first to last, He is invested with a divine glory,
claiming for Himself a relation with the Father which
aroused to the utmost the anger of His enemies, and
inspired His followers with hope, even in the prospect of
bereavement. And yet further, it is urged that the differ-
ences are not confined to general differences of time and
manner and character, but extend to important details of
fact, since the miracles, which are represented by St. John
as the turning-points of our Lord’s course (as the raising
of Lazarus) are unnoticed by the Synoptists.

One answer may be made in common to all these objec-
tions, and to the last no other is necessary. They proceed
upon the assumption that the Gospels are complete biogra-
phies. They would be of great weight if, on other grounds,

1. Points of dif-
JSerence

as objections,

286 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

there were any reason to suppose that the Evangelists
either told all the facts which they knew, or
came phectiors entertained the idea of writing histories. It
pieteness of each has, however, been already shown that such
a view of their purpose is wholly untena-
ble. The historical framework of their writings subserved
to a doctrinal development. The form and extent of the
narrative was determined by ontward circumstances. The
omission of one or other series of events or discourses is
not equivalent to an exclusion of them, unless it can be
shown that the two supplementary records are inconsistent.
All truthful inquiry into the mutual relations of the Gospels
must be based upon the fullest recognition of the fragmen-
tariness. The question is not, Whether this fact is left
unnoticed by one? nor even, Why it is left unnoticed?
but, Is it actually set aside by some other record? Is it
irreconcilable, either in occurrence or in conception, with
what we learn from other sources? When the ground
is thus limited, few who have studied the manifold aspects
of the most common-place life will be prepared to affirm -
that differences of tone and style, however marked, are
necessarily inconsistent when they are attributed to the
same character; few who have been familiarized with the
wide divergences in detail of authentic narratives profess-
edly complete, will insist with excessive confidence on
different ranges of subject in narratives composed for a
special purpose, to which completeness was always sub-
ordinate.
But, besides this general answer, there are other pre-
sumptions which are sufficient to justify in
(a) The aiger- fact what has been urged only as a possibility.

ences as to locality

ant manner of The first objection that the locality and mode
emplaincach other; of our Lord’s teaching, as recorded by St.

John, are both different from those described
by the Synoptists, is as much an undesigned coincidence

as a difficulty. It would be natural to suppose that the

1 Pp. 176 ff 212.

THE GOSPEL OF 51. JOHN. 287

one would be, so to speak, a function of the other. The
hearers and the doctrine are obviously connected by con-
siderations of fitness. If it were the case that the method
of instruction were the same while the persons were widely
varied, or the persons the same while the teaching was
changed, it might be fairly asked whether such differences
would be likely to exist within the narrow limits over
which the Lord’s ministry was extended. But, as it is, if
it appear that there is a clear propriety in the twofold
variation, answering alike to the immediate object and
to the permanent office of the books, then the ground of
objection becomes an indication of providential design.
The want of all ages is found to be satisfied in the record
of the Saviour’s labors in different countries and among
different men.

That there was such a division in the Jewish nation, as
is implied in the characteristics of the mass Ως την
of our Lord’s hearers in the Synoptists and essai)
St. John, is unquestionable. On the one side i
the peasantry of Galilee —that “warlike race,” as Jose-
phus describes them, who had in earlier times withstood
the chariots of Sisera, and were yet again to vindicate
their independence against the arms of Rome! —still clung
to the literal faith of their fathers in simplicity and zeal.
They wished to raise Jesus to an earthly throne,’ and led
Him in their Paschal train to the Holy City.’ Their relig-
ion lay in action and their faith in obedience. But far
different was the state of those Jews who had been brought
into contact with Greek intellect or Roman order. For
them new regions of thought were opened, which seemed

1 Compare Dr. Stanley’s Sermons on 8 John xii. 12—19. While St. John

the Apostolic Age. p.84, γι.

2 John vi. 15. The address which fol-
lowed in the synagogue at Capernaum
to those who were already partially in-
structed, may be compared with that in
the synagogue at Nazareth (Luke iy. 16
ff.), at the beginning of Christ’s miuis-
try, as to its tone and results.

recognizes the peculiar character of
this Galilean multitude, he does not
detail the teaching addressed to them,
which we find in the other Evangelists.
This clearly points to a difference of
scope and not to a divergence of tra-
dition.

288 THE GOSPEL JF ST. JOHN.

to indicate that religion was only for the wise. They felt
the full difficulty of founding any universal earthly sway,
and either rejected the Messianic hopes as the result of
fanaticism, or saw in the course of things around them
the signs of some mighty spiritual change which should
more than fulfil the metaphors of the ancient prophets.
To the former class, whetlrer at Capernaum or at Jerusa-
lem, we find the truths of Christianity addressed in their
plainness and active power. Parables and maxims are
multiplied to enliven their apprehension and direct their
energy... And on this teaching the missionary Gospels
were naturally based, the Gospels of the Church’s infancy
and growth, because the same conditions which shaped
its form in the first instance called for its preservation
afterwards. But to those who were reared under other
influences, to the student of the law, “the teacher of Israel,”
to the Samaritan, perplexed with doubts about the traditions
of her fathers, to the cavillers who reposed in blind confi-
dence on the Law, which was daily presented to them in
the splendor of a noble ritual, to the disciples growing
in faith, and yet unable to bear all that a loving Teacher
would disclose, other modes of instruction were adapted.
Now an awakening dialogue, now a startling revelation,
now an outpouring of righteous zeal or gentle tenderness,
furnished the materials for that Gospel which penetrates
to the depths of individual life. Yet the popular and the
personal styles of thought and language are perfectly
harmonious. The histories which severally record them
are not contradictory but complementary. They do not
exclude but imply one another. They recognize generic
differences which, as we know, existed among the Jews at
the time; and itis no small proof of their authenticity
that they satisfy the requirements of those great national
parties in Judgea, which could scarcely have been realized

1 The parables addressed tothe rulers ence and (as it seems) for the instruc-
and Pharisees in Matt. xxi. 28; xxii.1 tion of the multitude. Cf. Matt. xxi.
ff. were addressed to them in the pres- 26, 46.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 289

by a writer whose ideas were drawn from a time when the
centre of Jewish life was destroyed.

Yet it may be said, that this general harmony between
the two forms of teaching and the two classes
of hearers is no answer to differences as to
the time and place of Christ’s ministry, as
given by the different Evangelists. Jf the
time were extended, if the place were varied, then the
change in style would be intelligible; but the narrative of
the Synoptists recognizes no such extension or movement.
Here the incompleteness of the records precludes the
possibility of a perfect answer; butit is enough that the
Synoptists at least allow that the ministry of our Lord may
have been as long and as diversified as St. John relates;
and, indeed, many old writers, in their anxiety to establish
a harmony between the Gospels, found in the fourth only
an appendix to the other three, designed to fix their chro-

the
allow
extended

Moreover
Synoptists
of an
ministry,

nology and supply details which they left unnoticed.
The very nature of the first promulgation of the Gospel,
if we apprehend it according to the com-

mon laws of history, demanded a lengthened
period for its accomplishment.’

which is antecedent-
ly prodable, and

Apart from

any express data, it must seem incredible that the course

1 It is useful to call to mind constantly
the extreme uncertainty which hangs
over the exact length of our Lord’s min-
istry. The only certain limits within
which it must lie are the “ 15th year of
the reign of Tiberius ” (Luke iii. 1, a. Ὁ.
28) and the recall of Pilate, just before
the death of that emperor, A. D. 37,
which leaves room enough for the tra-
dition mentioned by Irenzus, on the
authority of Asiatic tradition, that our
Lord was at least 40 years old at the
time of His death (Iren. ii. 22,5). Even
in the time of Irenseus there was no sat-
isfactory information on the point; and
the uncertainty of the Jewish calendar
will not allow of any conclusion based
on the day of the Pascual festival. Al-

lowing that St. John only mentions
three passovers (excluding y. 1), 1 know
of no arguments which can prove that
he notices every passover in the course
of our Lord’s ministry; and in such a
case it seems by far the wisest course to
leave the question undecided, as the
Gospels leave it.

I ought to refer the reader to the strik-
ing arguments of Mr. Browne (Ordo Sa-
clorum) in support of the belief that the
Lord’s ministry was limited to one year.
If there were direct evidence in support
of the omission of τὸ πάσχα in John vi.
4, his case would be very strong. As it
is, the point, as it seems, must be left
wholly undetermined,

290 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.
of events which the Synoptists relate could have been
compressed into a single year. Such narrow limits leave
no adequate space for the development of faith in the
disciples ; for the transition from hope to hatred in the mass
of the people; for the varied journeys on both sides of
Jordan and to “the borders of Tyre and Sidon;” for the
missions of the Apostles and the Seventy, without suppos-
ing a haste — almost a precipitancy —in the consummation
of Christ’s personal work, which finds no parallel in the
history of His preparation or in the labors of the Apostles.
~ But, in fact, the Synoptists imply, in rare
passages, the existence of a much more ex-
tended ministry than they have described.
St. Luke, in a casnal date, marks the occurrence of a pass-
over in the middle of his narrative;? and the various
allusions to Jerusalem which are scattered through the first
three Gospels show that the Lord must have been there
before the time of the Passion;? while St. John, on the
other hand, expressly notices that an earlier visit was made
purposely in such a way as to avoid popular notice,
“because the time (καιρός) was not yet fulfilled.” ®
The objection which is drawn from the variations in the
form of our Lord’s teaching admits also of a
The diversity is not only a
necessary result of the diversity of hearers,
as an extended scene was required by the
nature of the message, but is actually recognized as exist-
There are mutual coincidences
between St. John and the Synoptists which break the
abruptness of the transition from the one to the other

actually acknowl-
edged by them.

And in the form
of our Lord’s teach-
ing offer parallels
to St. John.

similar answer.

ing in our present records.

1 Luke vi.1, ἐν σαββάτῳ δευτερο-
πρώτῳ, yet it must be noticed that the
word is omitted by important authori-
ties.

2 Cf. Matt. iv. 25; xxiii. 37—89 (πο-
σάκις, ἄπαρτι); xxvii. 57. Luke x. 38
ff. (Cf. John xi. 5). See also Matt. xix.
1/Cf. John x. 40); viii. 18.

9 John vii. 6, 10. St. John himself
in this passage implies that Galilee was
the chief theatre of our Lord’s teach-
ing and works (vii. 3, 4), though he had
recorded two previous visits to Jerusa-
lem. In other places he leaves ample
room for the Galilzan ministry; ii. 12;
lV, 4355400 νι Υ Ds vale,

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 991

One fragment preserved by St. Matthew and St. Luke
presents the closest resemblance in tone and manner to
the discourses in St. John ;! and St. John, while he avoids
the exact type of the parable, has preserved the relation of
addresses and acts, which are only parables transformed.?
Tn this respect it might seem that the differences of teach-
ing lead us beyond the two great classes of hearers in
Galilee and Jerusalem, and offer a characteristic trait which
distinguishes the mass of Galilzean followers from the closer
circle of the Apostles.

It is not necessary to examine at length the last objection,
which rests on the twofold view of the Lord’s

(b) Differences as

Person given in the Gospels. So far as the το our Lords Per-
differences on which this is based have any ~"
real existence, they have been already noticed. They
belong to the essence of supplementary records of Christ’s
life. They are recognized in the Creeds as well as in the
Bible. And all the circumstances connected with the
fuller revelation of his glory were calculated to eall it
forth. The time, the persons, the occasion, were suited for
the teaching of the greater mysteries which must have
been taught if Christianity is true. And there is a propor-
tion preserved between the communication of the doctrine
and the record of it which harmonizes with the general
character of Scripture. The deeper truth was committed
not to the multitude, but to the few; and the writing in
which it is preserved was not the common witness of the
Church, but the testimony of a loved disciple.

The consideration of the differences be- Points ofcoin
tween the Synoptists and St. John has
already led to the notice of some of their coincidences.

1 Matt. xi. 25—30. Luke x. 21—24. tery of His death under symbolic lan-
guage bothin St. John and in the Syn-
2 John x. 1—13; xv. 1—6; xii. 24; optists: John iii, 14; Matt. xii. 49;
xvi. 51, John xiii. 4-12, Compare Jolin ii. 20; Luke xiii. 82. For a still
Jolin iii. 29 with Matt. ix. 15. earlier revelation of the same truth,
Itis worthy of notice that our Lord compare Jolin i. 29 with Luke ii. 35.
is represented as veiling the great mys- Compare p. 273 n. 5.

292 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

These extend to facts, to teaching, and to character; and
contribute in no slight degree to invest the fourth Gospel
with those attributes of reality and life, which are too
commonly lost sight of in the discussion of its peculiar
characteristics.

The manner in which St. John alludes to some of the
cardinal points of our Lord’s life, illustrates
the usage of the Synoptists with regard to
the lapse of time which takes place in their history. He
assumes as known that which he nowhere specifies. His
full meaning is first perceived when contemplated in the
light of facts which are only recorded by others. Though
he does not relate in the course of his narrative the details
of the Incarnation, the Baptism, the Last Supper, or the
Ascension, yet he gives peculiar and unequivocal intima-

tions of each event. The first statement of

the Incarnation is absolute; it stands as a
vast truth apart from all relation to individuals.’ But at
the beginning of our Lord’s ministry, before He had
“manifested forth His glory,” “the mother of Jesus”
looked to Him in perfect dependence on His power, now
that He had commenced His public ministry and gathered
His disciples round Him. The life of “subjection,” which
was at length closed, explains the nature of her request;
and the critical character of the moment is brought out yet
more distinctly in the answer, “ Woman, what have I to
do with thee?” which places in the clearest contrast the
freedom of spiritual action and the claims of private duty.
The history of the Infancy and the first miracle at Cana
mutually explain each other. An act which is related by
one Evangelist carries out the thoughts which are noticed
by another.’ Perfect independence issues in perfect har-

(a) In fact.

The Incarnation.

1 John i. 14, 6 λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο. vat, with the corresponding words
2 John ii. 1 ff. St. John alone of the from the cross (xix. 26), Γύναι, ἴδε 6
Evangelists does not mention the name vids σου, as St. John stood by, ready to
of ‘‘the Mother of the Lord.” It is a ‘take her to his own home.”
yoint full of instruction to compare
the phrase (ii. 4). τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί yv- 3 Luke ii. 51.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 293

mony. In another aspect of the same great fact St. John
dwells on the doctrine, while the Synoptists detail the
events. St. Matthew and St. Luke narrate at length the
history of the Miraculous Conception, and St. John dwells
with especial fulness on the eternal Sonship of Christ,
which is its divine correlative. The two truths must stand
or fall together; for a Cerinthian mean can never express
that union of God and man, which is alone suflicient to
assure our hearts of redemption.

If we pass from the Incarnation to the Baptism, we find
in this also the same silence and the same
implied knowledge of the circumstances of
the occurrence. When John the Baptist first appears, his
The Christ is recognized. When
Jesus comes, as it appears, from the scene of the Tempta-
tion,! he revealed Him to others and witnessed, saying, “I
have seen the Holy Spirit descending as a dove from

The Baptism.

great work is done.

heaven, and it abode upon Him.” ?

The allusions to the Christian sacraments are equally
characteristic, though they are of a different
kind. Nothing is said of the institution of
the Eucharist or of Holy Baptism, and yet
the conversation with Nicodemus*® and the discourse at
Capernaum stand in the closest relation with them, and
unfold and enforce the inner meaning of rites with which
the Apostle must have been familiar as ordinances of
Christ.

The references to the Ascension are, perhaps, the most
remarkable example of the manner in which
St. John includes the historical fact in the
spiritual necessity of it. He gives at length the discourses

The Eucharist:
Holy Baptism.

The Ascension.

1 This seems to be the natural way of
connecting the narratives of St. John
and the Synoptists, and to involve no
difficulty.

2 The apparent discrepancy between
John i. 91 and Matt. iii, 14 disappears
when we remember that the fulfilment

of Joln’s public mission was to be
indicated by a definite sign (John i.
81—35), and thus his personal knowl-
edge (Matt. iii. 14, 15) was independent
of his power of prophetic recognition
(John i. 81).

3 iii. 5. Cf. [Mark] xvi. 16; Acts ii. 38.

25*

294 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

in which the need and the consequences of the event are
explained at full; after the Resurrection, he records the
remarkable address of our Lord to Mary, in which it is
contemplated as an immediate occurrence; and yet he says
nothing of the fulfilment of the promise. It is enough
that the fact was a part of the divine order. As such for
him it was, and his readers knew from other sources how
it took? place.®

The marked distinction between the teaching of our
Lord in St. John and in the Synoptists has
been recognized most fully; but it has been
shown that there are points of connection by which the
two are in some degree united.
of being presented somewhat more in detail, in regard of
the substance as well as of the manner of the teaching.
There is, indeed, something of characteristic difference

(b) In teaching.

This connection admits

1 John xx 17. With this may be
compared the fact that while St. John
gives most fully the Discourse on the
Mission of the Comforter, St. Luke
records the descent of the Holy Spirit
(Acts ii.), though he does not notice
the antecedent promise. So again, St.
John alone notices the special commis-
sion of the Apostles (xx. 21,22. Cf.
Matt. xxviii. 19, 20), which is after-
wards seen to be realized in the history
of the Church.

In illustration of the usage of St.
Joln it may be remarked that St. Paul
presupposes the mystery of the Incar-
nation without expressly stating it:
Rom. i. 4; ix. 5. Gal. iy. 4, 5; and
includes the Ascension in the Resur-
rection: 1 Thess. i. 10. The Pauline
teaching of the second Adam (1 Cor.
Xv. 45) may also be compared with
John iii 6.

2 At the one meeting-point of all the
Gospels before the history of the Pas-
sion (John vi. 1 ff. and parallel ae-
counts) their harmony is perfect. The
recurrence of Κόφινος, which is only
used in the account of this miracle in

the New Testament, in all the narratives
is worthy of notice.

Among other facts which St. John
mentions incidentally as well-known
are the calling of “ the twelve” (ἐκλέ-
ξασϑαι, John vi. τὸ. Cf. Luke vi. 18):
the difference between our Lord’s birth-
place and place of abode (John vii. 42):
His relation to Joseph (i 46; vi. 42).

3 This clear presupposition of an ac-
curate acquaintance with the facts of
the life of Christ, which is shown in
these minute references, and penetrates
the whole Gospel, has two important
bearings, which, although necessarily
connected, yet refer to different lines
of thought In detail it tends to estab-
lish the minute truth of the events re-
corded by the Evangelists; and more
generally, by showing that the spiritual
aspect of the evangelic facts was re-
vealed at a time when the simple nar-
ratives were already current, it refutes
the theory of an imaginary history
invented to supply a mental want.
The truth lay in the facts; but the facts
were accepted in themselves before
their inner meaning was laid open.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 295
both in the conception and in the expression of the same
truths, but such that the difference contributes to the com-
pleteness of the final idea. Thus, in St. Matthew the
crowning doctrine of the Holy Trinity is expressed in the
formula of Baptism; in St. John it is contemplated in the
personal relation of the Christian to the Father and the
Son and the Comforter." The mystery of the Atonement
lies at the bottom of many of our Lord’s last words to His
disciples, but it nowhere is stated with such simple dis-
tinctness as in the phrase recorded by St. Matthew and
St. Mark, in which it is said that “the Son of man came
..:. to give His life In the
Synoptists, no less than in St. John, Christ claims for
Himself the possession of “ all power,”® the forgiveness of
sins, the sole revelation of the Father.£. In both there are
traces of the same images, of the same thoughts, of the
same language.” And it is most important to observe that
St. John nowhere attributes to our Lord the key-words of

a ransom for many.”?

1 Matt. xxviii. 19; John xv. xvi. xvii.

2 Matt. xx. 28; Mark x. 45 (λύτρον
ἀντὶ πολλῶν). The word λύτρον is not
found elsewhere in the New Testament.
᾿Αντίλυτρον occurs 1 Tim. ii. 6.

3 Matt. xxviii. 18. Cf. xxii. 41—46.

4 Matt. xi. 27.

5 The following examples will be suf-
ficient to justify what is said:

1. COINCIDENCES IN IMAGERY.

John iii. 3 (the new birth); Matt.
xviii. 3 (become as little children).

John iv. 35; Matt. ix. 87 (the great
harvest).

John xiii. 1 ff; Luke xii. 37 (the Mas-
ter serving). Cf. Luke xxii. 27.

John xiii. 16; Matt. x. 24, 25 (the
master and servant).

John iii. 29; Matt. xxii. 2 (the bride-
groom).

2. COINCIDENCES IN THOUGHT.

John y. 14; Matt. xii. 483—45 (the
worse thing).

John ix. 39; Matt. xiii. 13.
xii. 40 (the eyes blinded).

Cf. John

John xiii. 20; Matt. x. 40 (the Father
received by the faithful).

John v.30; Matt. xxvi. 39 (the Fa-
ther’s will done).

John iii. 17; Luke ix. 56 (the mission
to save).

John vii. 29; x. 15; Matt. xi. 27 (the
Father known to Christ).

8. COINCIDENCES 1N LANGUAGE.

John iy. 44; Matt.
prophet without honor).

John xii. 25; Luke xvii. 33 (the soul
loved and lost).

John y. 8; Mark ii. 9 (the words of
healing).

xiii. 57 (the

To these may be added the parallel
reports of the judgment of the people:
John iy. 19; Luke vii. 16—John vi. 42;
Matt. xiii. 55—John vii. 15; Matt. xiii.
54. And while the Synoptists (Matt.
xxvi. 61) mention the special charge
against the Lord of speaking against
the Temple, St. John alone gives the
words which led to the charge (John
ii. 19. Cf. Matt. xii. 6).

296 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOIN.

his own terminology. In his Gospel, as in the others,
Christ speaks of Himself as “the Son” or “the Son of
man,” and never as “the Word.” !

One other point of coincidence between the Synoptists
and St. John still remains to be noticed, — the
coincidence of the characters which they de-
scribe. The scene varies, the manner varies, the substance
(in some sense) varies, but the great figures who give life to
the picture are the same. This kind of resemblance, which
in fiction is one of the subtlest refinements of art, in such
writings as the Gospels is a clear sign of absolute truth.
Where it cannot spring from elaborate design, it must be
the result of faithful portraiture.

It has been often and most truly said that the character
of our Lord, as drawn by the Evangelists, is
in itself the one sufficient proof of their
veracity. No character could have been
further removed from the popular ideal of the time; none
more entirely beyond the conception of men reared amidst
dreams of national hope, and checked at every step by the
signs of foreign power. A natural awe commonly hinders
us from picturing to ourselves the Person of our blessed

The character of
the Lord.

1 John iii. 10—21, and 27—35, might
at first sight seem exceptions to this
remark. Yet, on a careful reading of
the passages, it seems impossible not to
feel that the Evangelist is in part com-
menting on and explaining the testi-
mony which he records. The com-
ments seem to begin respectively at
verses 16 and 81. These additions will
seem less singular if we remember that
they set forth the spiritual essence of
Christianity in relation to the legal
righteousness and to the preparatory
mission of the Baptist. _

These explanatory comments receive
a striking illustration from a single
phrase introduced into John xvii. 3.
The title Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς in such a
connection is wholly without parallel
jn the Gospels; and we must, I think,

regard Tov μ. GA. Θεὸν and I. Xp. as
explanations of the preceding, added
by the Evangelist, which do not modify
but enly define the sense. Cf. 1 John
v. 20. The title Jesus Christ is com-
monly given to our Lord in the Acts
and Epistles, but occurs only in the
introductions to the Gospels: Matt. i.
1, 16,18; Mark i. 1; John i. 17, or, in
other words, in those sections which
formed no part of the original tradi-
tion. This peculiarity is important, as
showing the two stages in the history
of the Gospels, though it will not bear
out the conclusion which Dr. Dobbin
(Davidson, Introd. i. 421 ff.) drew from
it, as to the priority of the Gospels in
their present form tothe Epistles. Cf.
pp. 211 ff.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 297

Lord with any individual distinctness. In one sense it is
true that He has no individuality, for the aspects of His
human nature are practically infinite; but we do not even
apprehend His character individually in the different lights
in which it is presented. The mind shrinks from analysis,
lest criticism should take the place of devotion; and yet
there is a sense in which even we may “see Christ in the
flesh,” and strengthen our faith by the contemplation of
those traits of a divine humanity, which furnish for all
ages the perfect type of life. Touching only on one small
border of this subject, we may notice some features in the
character of our Lord which are traced both in the Synop-
tists and St. John. The variety of the circumstances
establishes the truthfulness of the impression, and helps to
present the Saviour to us, not as a mere embodiment of an
idea, as some have taught, but moving in a world of action,
and influenced by the complex feelings to which we are
subject. At the beginning and the close of His work, St.
John, as we have already seen,' shows how He drew a line
between natural and spiritual claims; so in the Synoptists,
“He stretched forth His hand to His disciples, and said,
Behold my mother and my brethren,” when, for a moment,
His earthly kindred sought to interrupt His work of
mercy.?_ By the well at Sychar He sat down “ wearied,”
and then forgot His request and His fatigue in conversing
with the Samaritan, so that “His disciples prayed Him,
saying, Master, eat. But He said unto them, I have meat
to eat that ye know not of.”® And so again, after He had
retired into the wilderness with His disciples, for “they
had no leisure so much as to eat,” when He saw much
people, He “was moved with compassion toward them,
and began to teach them many things.”* In each case the
same bodily want is recognized, and in each ease it yields
to the pressure of a higher desire. The Jews, when they
1 p. 292, n. 2. 8 John iv. 6, 7, 31 ff

2 Matt. xii. 46 ff.; Mark iv. 82 ff;
Luke viii. 19. 4 Mark vi. 81 ff. Cf. Mark iii. 20.

298 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

saw His acts of authority, said unto Him, “ What sign
showest Thou unto us, seeing that Thou doest these
things? Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this
temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” “An evil
and adulterous generation,” He said, in another place,
“seeketh after a sign; and there shall be no sign given to
it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas.”* In both cases the
manner, the thought, the lesson, is the same. We feel that
both are utterances of the same Person, and yet such that
no mere power of imitation could have passed from one to
the other. John, when in prison, sent to ask Christ, “Art
Thou He that should come, or do we look for another?
Jesus answered, ....Go and show John again those
things which ye do hear and see.” “If I had not come and
spoken unto them, they had not had sin... .. If I had
not done among them the works which none other man
did, they had not had sin.”? The testimony of word
and deed, that is enough to reassure the last prophet who
would have hastened, it may be, the glory of Christ’s
kingdom, and to condemn those who “had seen and hated
both Him and His Father.” A short sentence from the
lips of One who “knew what was in man” lays open the
whole inner life and brings to its final issue the struggle
which divides it, whether of faithful repentance, as, when
He said, “Go, call thy husband,” or of sad abandonment,
as, when He gave the command to him whom He loved,
“Go thy way, sell whatever thou hast, and give to the
poor.”® Nicodemus, when he seemed to claim for himself
the gift of wise discernment, was met by the answer,
“Except aman be born again, he cannot see the kingdom
of God.” When the disciples disputed “Who is the
greatest,” Jesus set a little child in the midst of them, and
said, “Except ye be converted, and become as little child-
ren, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” * The

1 John ii 19; Matt. xii. 39. 3 John. iv. 16; Mark x. 21.
4 John iii. 8 (οἴδαμεν, ver. 2); Matt.
2 Matt. xi. 4; John. xy. 24. xviii. 1 ἢ:

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 299

multitude crowded round Him in wild anger, and “ He hid
Hiinself, and going through the midst of them so passed
by,” if, perhaps, their sin might be yet averted." The same
simple words, “ Follow me,” mark the discipleship of Philip
in St. John, which elsewhere determine the call of Mat-
thew. The over-zealous request of St. Peter was antici-
pated by a question which reproved his zeal, and in the
same way the salutation of Nathanael seems to have
replied to the doubts with which his mind was filled’ In
St. John, as in the Synoptists, the dealing of our Lord with
those who came to Him is everywhere marked by the
same absolute insight, so that His words were the touch-
stone by which their thoughts were revealed. Love is
blended with judgment, and the voice of encouragement
with the call to faith, in a way which finds no parallel in
history. The image is divine, and bears witness to a
divine prototype.

The vastness of the character of the Lord is best seen
by contrast with any of the other characters
in the Gospels. These, however noble, are 4, pac”
yet limited, and capable of being realized in
a definite form. Every one has a distinct conception of
St. Peter and St. John. They have an individuality which,
in this sense, our Lord could not have; and St. Peter,
above all, is the one in whom this is most marked. Quick
in action even to rashness, and bold in word even to
presumption, he is yet the founder of the outward Church.
In St. John, and in the Synoptists, the essential outlines
of his character answer to the symbolic name which all the
Evangelists notice as given to him by Christ;* and several

1 John viii. 59; Luke iy. 80. (κληϑήσῃ) may have been repeated at
2 John i. 48 (cf. xxi. 19); Matt. ix.9 the commission of the Twelve, though
(cf. viii. 22). Compare also the δεῦτε there is nothing in the language used
ὀπίσω μου, Matt. iv. 19. in describing that event which neces-
8 Matt. xvii. 25; John i. 47, 48. sarily leads to that conclusion (Matt.
4 John i. 42, Σὺ ef Σίμων ὁ vids Ἰωά- x. 2, Σίμων ὁ λεγόμενος Πέτρος. Luke
you: σὺ κληϑήσῃ Κηφᾶς ὃ ἑρμηνεύε- iii. 16, καὶ ἐπέϑηκε ὄνομα τῷ Σ. Πέ’
ται Πέτρος. This prophetic naming τρὸν. Luke vi. 14, ὃν καὶ ὠνόμασε

300 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

corresponding traits may be placed together so as to show
the real unity which lies beneath the different narratives.
In the first two Gospels it is related that when our Lord
began to speak of His coming sufferings at Jerusalem,
“Peter took Him and began to rebuke Hin, saying, Be it
far from Thee, Lord: this shall not be unto Thee.” In St.
John, when at the last supper Christ served His disciples,
and girded Himself to wash their feet, “ Peter saith unto
Him, Thou shalt never wash my feet.”? He cannot for a
moment endure the thought of the humiliation of his Lord,
whether among His enemies or His own followers; and if
he adds afterwards with the overhaste of a natural reaction:
“Lord, not my feet only, but also my head and my hands ;”
it is, as when at the Transfiguration, he would have “ built
three tabernacles” for Christ and Moses and Khas, “not
knowing what he said,” but eager to realize to the full a
blessing of which he only half perceived the import, and
unable to wait in calm assurance on the will of His Master?
This impatient energy, which seems to be ever striving
after the issues of things, made him give expression in
many cases to the thoughts which others cherished, per-
haps vaguely.2 Thus it was in his noble confession of
Christ’s divine majesty, in which St. John has preserved
one trait of singular interest. According to the details
which he has recorded, the confession itself was connected
with action: “Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast
the words (ῥήματα) of eternal life,’* and in virtue of this

Πέτρον). St. Mark uses the same phrase
of the title of the sons of Zebedee:
καὶ ἐπέϑηκεν αὐτοῖς ὀνόματα Boavep-
yés, a title which evidently points to
some special fact, which can hardly
have been connected with their ap-
pointment to the Apostolate. The con-
trast between John i. 42, σὺ εἶ Σίμων
and the phrase preserved by St. Mat-
thew in the record of the confession is
very striking: Matt. xvi. 17, σὺ εἶ Πέ-
tpos. The prophecy was then ful-
filled.

1 Matt. xvi. 21 ff ; Mark viii. 31 ff;
John xiii. 8.

2 John xiii. 9; Matt. xvii. 4; Mark
ix. 5, 6; Luke ix. 88.

3 This is seen in several little traits:
Mark xi. 21, dvauynodels 6 Π. λέγει.
Matt xxi. 20, ἰδόντες of μαϑηταὶ édsav-
μασαν. Luke viii. 45, εἶπεν 6 ΤΙ. καὶ
oi σὺν αὐτῷ. Mark vy. 81, ἔλεγον ot
pasntal αὐτῷ.

4 John vi. 68, 69. The words are the
true complement of Luke v. 8. Cf.
Matt. xvi. 17; Mark viii. 29; Luke ix. 20.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 301

practical power he received the special charge: “Do thou
when thou art converted strengthen thy brethren.”! Else-
where he would know of the future of himself or others:
“ Behold, we forsook all and followed Thee, what shall we
have therefore?”? Lord, and what shall this man do?”
He cannot rest in uncertainty where knowledge might
prove the guide to deeds. If the Lord spoke of “blind
leaders,” he said, “Declare unto us this parable;” if of
watchful service, “ Lord, speakest Thou this parable unto
(πρός) us, or even unto all?” if of a traitor among the
Apostles, he beckoned to “the disciple who leaned on
Jesus’ bosom,” “Tell who it is of whom He speaks;” 1 of
a coming separation, “Lord, why cannot I follow Thee
now?”* Frequently the characteristics of St. Peter are
seen in action. Now he would pay the Temple tribute for
Christ, as jealous for His ritual “righteousness ;” now he
follows Him “with a sword” to Gethsemane.> We feel at
once that the walking on the waters and the failing faith
are a true figure of his following Christ to the place of
judgment and then denying Him.° Then follows the swift

1 Luke xxii. 82 f. σύ ποτε ἐπιστρέ-

Was.

2 Matt. xix. 27.

scene as it may be supposed to have
happened.

Cf. Mark x. 28. All the Evangelists fix the place

Luke xviii. 28.

3 John xxi. 21, Κύριε οὗτος δὲ τί.

4 Matt. xv. 15; Luke xii. 41; John
xiii. 24 (Cf. p. 269, n. 1): John xiii. 37.
Compare the question, Matt. xviii. 21:
“Lord, how oft shall my brother sin
against me, and I forgive him?”

5 Matt. xvii. 24; John xviii. 10.

6 Matt. xiv. 28; xxvi. 35, and paral-
lels. Much discussion has been raised
as to the narratives of the denial of St.
Peter, and the differences which occur
in them are generally insisted upon as
offering the clearest proof of the im-
possibility of maintaining the verbal
accuracy of the Evangelists. A com-
parison of the texts in question rather
creates surprise that difficulty should
have been felt by any who picture the

as the same, ‘‘the court of the High
Priest” (ἢ αὐλὴ τοῦ ἀρχιερέως, Matt.
xxvi. 58; Mark xiv. 54; Luke xxii. 54,
δῦ; John xviii. 16, 17). The narrative
of St. John, which distinguishes a ᾿
hearing before Annas from the hearing
before Caiaphas, yet clearly implies
that all the denials were made in the
same spot (xviii. 18, 25). From this
fact, connected with Luke xxii. 61,
etc., it seems probable that “ the house
of the High Priest” included the offi-
cial apartments of Annas and Caia-
phas. (Cf. Strauss, § 127.)

But it is said, the persons who pro-
voke Peter to the denial are differently
given. This requires careful notice.
(1) All the Evangelists agree that the
first question was put by ἃ damsel”

302 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

and complete reaction. St. John first looks into the empty
sepulchre, but St. Peter first enters it! St. John first
recognizes the risen Lord on the sea of Tiberias, but St.
Peter first casts himself into the water to be with Him.
Perfect truthfulness alone can account for the minute har-
mony of all the features in such a character, portrayed in
books most widely separated in origin and date.

More difficulty has been felt in combining into one
picture the various traits which have been
recorded of the person of St. John. He is
but rarely mentioned in the Synoptists, and
a mighty revolution was interposed between these earlier
notices and the testimonies of his own writings. Besides
this the character itself is one which almost eludes descrip-
tion. The intense concentration and power of an inner
life flashes out at some rare moments, but commonly the

The character of
St. John.

life flows on with deep and still course.

(Matt. xxvi. 69, μία παιδίσκη. Mark
xiv. 66, μία τῶν παιδισκῶν τοῦ ἀρχιε-
o€ws. Luke xxii. 56, παιδίσκη τις.
“ohn xviii. 17, ἢ παιδίσκη ἢ Supwpds).
St. John adds that she was ‘“ the por-
tress,” St. Luke that the question was
put as St. Peter ‘‘ sat by the fire; ” so
far all is perfectly harmonious, for I
do not notice the variations in the
words of the question, which are Greek
renderings of the Aramaic, and _ per-
fectly agree in sense. (2) In the nar-
rative of the second denial the persons
who assail St. Peter are variously given.
St. Matthew (71) says ‘another wo-
man” (ἄλλη); St. Mark (69) ‘the same
damsel” (ἢ παιδίσκη), St. Luke (58)
‘another man” (€Tepos); St. John (25)
simply, “they said” (εἶπον) The
phrase of St. John brings the whole
scene before us as the others describe
it in detail. A crowd is gathered round
the fire (John xviii. 18); the portress
tells her suspicions to the bystanders
(Mark xiv. 69); the accusation is re-
peated by various persons, and St.
Peter left the group (Matt. xxvi. ΤΊ,

St. John was,

ἐξελϑόντα εἰς τὸν πυλῶνα), repeating
his hasty denial (Mark xiv. 70, ἠρνεῖτο.
No one uses the imperfect in the former
case). (8) This most natural concep-
tion of the event is further brought
out on the third denial. St. Luke (59)
says, ‘‘ another said, Of a truth this fel-
low also was with Him; for he is a
Galilean.’ St.John (26), ‘One of the
servants of the High Priest, being his
kinsman whose ear Peter cut off, saith,
Did not I see thee in the garden with
Him?” Here St. Matthew and St. Mark
notice the number of the assailants:
“they that stood by said’ (Matt. xxvi.
73, of ἑστῶτες εἶπον. Mark xiv. 70,
οἱ παρεστῶτες ἔλ εγο νὴ. Thenarra-
tives present us with three acts of de-
nial, as they may be most naturally
supposed to have taken place in a
crowded court, in the excitement of a
popular ferment.

On the conduct of St. Peter himself
Luthardt has some good remarks: ὦ. a,
O. 108 ff.

1 John xx. 6.

2 John xxi. 7.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 503

indeed, a “Son of Thunder,”! but the thunder is itself the
unfrequent witness of the might of elements long gather-
ing. There is a difference between the style of St. John
and that which we should assign to the Galilzean apostle,
but the style is only the reflection of his completed charac-
ter. There is the difference between a former and a latter
faith, such as we find also between the recorded acts and
epistles of St. Peter; but in the Apocalypse, and the Cath-
olic letters of St. John, we trace the identity of his nature
in the course of its development. The same zeal which
would have called fire from heaven on the inhospitable
Samaritans, though guided now to another end, denounces
plagues and destruction on him who takes from or adds to
the words of his prophecy? The same jealousy for Christ
which forbade the working of one who followed not with
them, though purified by a higher faith, warns the elect
lady not to bid God speed to him who ubideth not in the
doctrine The same fervent spirit in defence of truth is,
as has been seen, recognized by tradition, and that, too,
combined with the tenderest love.’ Nor is there any incon-
sistency in such a combination. The same deep teeling is
the source of both characteristics. And as the affectionate
letters to the Philippians and to Timothy, with their clearer
revelations of divine truth, only unfold to us another view
of the great Apostle, so the Gospel of St. John, in its ful-
ness of meditative devotion, helps us to realize the whole
Christian course of him who first, with eager hope, acknowl-
edged in Jesus the Lamb of God, and saw in the Spirit
of God farthest into the history of the Church, and guarded
inost jealously its early creed.” Throughout the whole life
of St. John, —in Samaria, in Patmos, in Ephesus, in the
old world of Judaism, in the new world of Christianity,

» The form of the surname is well 2 Luke ix. 45; Apoc. xxii. 18.
explained by Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. ad 3 Luke ix. 49; 2 John, 9, 10.
Mare. iii. 17; the general sense by 4 Cf. p. 234 f.

Meyer, and most recent commentators
on the passage. 5 John i. 35—37; Apoc. i. 10.

304 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

and in that meeting-point of the two dispensations, which
was the fiery trial of the early Church; in the most distant
times, and in the most diverse lands, we ever find the same
personal devotion to the Lord, as the embodiment of the
Divine, — alike distinguished from the zeal of St. Peter
for His outward glory, and the energy of St. Paul for His
extended influence, — enlightened, indeed, and spiritualized
by the growth of Christianity in himself and in the world,
and yet unchanged. The youthful, womanly form, which
art has assigned to St. John, has served to remove from
our minds the stronger features of his nature. Yet these
may not be forgotten, for even in this aspect the eagle is
his true symbol. His love was no soft feeling, but a living
principle, an absolute devotion to truth, as he had seen and
known it in the Person of his Lord. He stands forth as
the ideal of a thoughtful Christian, relentless against evil,
and yet patient with the doubting. He “tarried till the
Lord came,” and left his Gospel as the witness and seal of
the accomplishment of the apostolic work.’

From this point of sight the new scope of his Gospel
answered to the conditions of anew world.
The period which intervened between the
dates of the Synoptic Gospels and St. John’s
was, beyond any other, full of the distress of nations with
perplexity, and marked by the shaking of the powers of
heaven, which proved, so to speak, to be
the birth-pains of the Christian Church?
When St. John wrote, the Jews were led away captive into

St. John’s Gospel
in relation to a new
world.

Judaism.

1 There is not space now to dwell on xii. 22), St. Philip (i. 44 ff; vi. 5; xii.

the other characters traced in St. John,
but one general remark must be made.
The number of distinct persons por-
trayed by him is a singular mark of
the authenticity of his narrative. In
the Synoptic Gospels no one stands
out from the Aposties except St Veter,
and perhaps the sons of Zebedee, but
in St. John we have characteristic
traits of St. Andrew (i. 41 ff.; vi. 8,9;

21 ff. xiv. 8 f.), St. Thomas (xi. 16; xiv.
5; xx. 24 ff.), St. Jude (xiv. 22). The
parallel between Luke x. 39 ff with
John xi. has been often drawn.

2 Duke xxi: 25; 26. ΟἿ: Tac: Aisioa:
2, 3. Sometimes the language of the
historian coincides verbally with Scrip-
ture: Preter multiplices rerum luma-
narum casus, cw/o terraque prodigia et
fulminum monitus.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 905

all nations,! and men asked why God had cast away His
people? what there was in the Gospel-history which ex-
plained the rejection of the seed of Abraham, of whom,
as concerning the flesh, Christ came?

On anotner side, St. Paul had given to Christianity its
intellectual development. He had completed
the work which St. Peter had begun, and
maintained the freedom of the Gentile con-
verts who had been first received by the Apostle of the
Circumcision. The storm which had raged
from Jerusalem to Pontus, from Antioch to
Rome, had now ceased, but the fashion of the Church was
changed, and men asked what ground there was in the
teaching of the Messiah for this new form of Christianity ?

And yet again, Christianity had come into contact with
Philosophy. The voice of the preacher had
been heard in Alexandria by the scholars of
Philo, and at Hierapolis by the friends of
Epictetus; and many must have inquired how far the new
doctrines served to unfold the inner life of man? how far
they fulfilled the aspirations of the Academy, and realized
the morality 6f the Porch.

To all these deep questionings, unencountered for the
most part by the former Evangelists, who
regarded rather the outward form of the aes palit
Christian faith than its rational or spiritual “e7ecton of Me
development, St. John replies by the teaching
of the Lord’s Life. The Jews, as a nation, had rejected
the Saviour: He came to His own, and His own received
Him not2 Throughout the whole ministry of Christ, as
recorded in the fourth Gospel, the progress of this wilful
blindness is traced, till the record closes with the fatal
sentence: Though Jesus had done so many miracles before
them, yet the Jews believed not on Him; as Esaias prophe-
sied when he saw His glory, and spake of Him.

Christianity, as
a system.

Acts x. 47.

Philosophy.

Col. iv. 18.

1 Luke xni. 24. 8 John i. 11; xii. 37—41. Cf. p. 279.
2 Johni. 11 (τὰ iia, of ἴδιοι). One peculiarity of St. John’s lan

26*

306

THE GOSPEL OF

ST. JOHN.

Nor are the great doctrines on which St. Paul delighted
to dwell, —the doctrines of faith, of love, of

Christian doc-
trine.

providence, of a redemption, of a Holy

Spirit, — brought out less distinctly by St.

John than the fall of the Jews.!

It is true that we can

trace these great elements of Christianity in the symbolic
teaching of the Synoptists, and in scattered sayings; but

they form the staple of St. John’s narrative.

The lesson

is at least codrdinate with the fact; and the plain revela-

guage in this view is to be noticed. He
speaks of the opponents of the Lord
almost always as “‘the Jews” (οἱ “Iov-
δαῖοι), which phrase is never used by
the Synoptists in this sense, who em-
ploy the specific terms, ‘“‘the Phari-
sees,” ete St. John uses the term ** the
Pharisees” frequently in a definite sense
{2 αν τοῦ; Βα ΠΕ ΘΙ ὙΠῸ
scribes” (John viii. 3 is even on this
account to be condemned), ‘the law-
yers,” ‘‘the Sadducees.” The Synop-
tists, on the other hand, only put the
title ‘* the Jews” in the mouth of Gen-
tiles: Matt. ii.2; Matt. xxvii. 11 ff and
parallels, with very rare exceptions,
where they add notes, as it were, to the
original narrative: Matt. xxviii. 15;
Mark vii. 8; Luke vii. 8; xxiii. 51
(though these two last instances are
more remarkable). St. John regards
the nation after its final apostasy, and
the distinctions of party are lost in
their common unbelief. It seems
strange that some commentators should
have grounded an objection on this
‘“ undesigned coincidence” between the
scope and the language of the Gospel.
The usage of St. Luke in the Acts nat-
urally agrees with that of St. John.

Some alleged historical difficulties
will be noticed afterwards in Chap.
Vill.

1 It would carry us too far to do more
than allude to the parallel which may
be drawn between St. John and St.
Paul on these great topics. The fol-

lowing hints may suggest a line of
inquiry:

a. Faith. Never the abstract πίστις,
but always active as πιστεύειν els, a
transference of our hope to another
and not a mere assent toa fact, πιστεύ-
ely τινι, a construction which occurs
commonly in this sense (iv. 21, 50, ete ).
Thus the act of faith appears as the
ground of sonship (i. 12), life (iii. 15,
etc.; xi. 25, 26, etc.), support (vi. 35),
inspiration (vii. 88), guidance (xii. 36,
46), power (xiv. 12), ‘the woik of
God” (vi. 29). In the Synoptists
“ faith’ (πίστιϑ) is the mediative energy
in material deliverances (Matt. ix. £2;
Mark ν. 34; x. 62; Luke vii. 50; viii.
48; xvii. 19: xviii. 42), as the types of
higher deliverance, and the measure of
material power (Matt. ix. 29; xxi. 21;
Mark xi. 22).

b. Love. John xiii. 34; xv.12. (Con-
trast Matt. xxii. 39). 1 Cor. xiii.

c. Providence. “" Predestination.”’
John vi. θά, 65; ili. 27; vi. 87, 44; v.21;
Vey GON(Ch: wine 0) Ἐν; ἘΥΝ 1. ὉΠ
this connection 7 Spa, of the crisis in
each stage of our Lord’s Life, and spe-
cially of His Passion, as its crowning
point: ii. 4; vii. 80; viii. 20; xii. 28, 27;
xiii. 1; xvi. 4; xvii. 1. Cf. 6 Kaipos,
vii. 6-8.

d. Redemption.
51; xii. 24; xiii. 31.
with John iii. 16.

6. The divisioninman. 1.18. Comp.
Rom. vii. 6 with John 111. 6, and John
vi. 63 with 2 Cor. iii. 6.

i. 29; iii. 14, 15; vi.
Comp. Rom. y. 8

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. 307

tions which he made, as he recorded the deep words on
which he had long pondered, furnish the means of recog-
nizing the actual fulness of the other Gospels. Without
St. John, it might seem possible to say, with a recent
writer, “Not Paul but Jesus;” but with him, the unity of
the New Testament is vindicated, and the chain of its
connection finished,

The intimate connection of St. John’s Gospel with the
greatest problems of thought and life has
never been questioned. A few werds are
sufficient to show that the Apostle had felt that there are
mysteries beyond all human understanding; and he was
contented to state them in the simplicity of antithetic
truths. From the first consecration of social intercourse
at the Marriage Feast to the last utterances of a Master’s
love, the course of spiritual life and death is traced in its
progressive stages, as the words and works of the Lord

Human thought.

are recorded, year by year, advancing together in ever-
widening spheres to their final consummation. The
sublime prayer of Plato’ is answered by that Word
which abides in us and we in Him. The

possibility of the true life, of which Stoicism

was but a counterfeit, is secured by the promised Com-
forter, through Whom we shall do the works

which Christ did, and greater works than John xiv. 15.
these, because He has gone to the Father?

This was the teaching from the Life of Christ which
was required by the age at which St. John wrote, and it
has been seen that he was peculiarly fitted to supply it.
His early call to the Apostleship enabled him to regard

John xv. 7.

1 Plat. Phed. 85 πὶ. δεῖν yap... τὸν 2 Perhaps it is from looking at the
βέλτιστον τῶν ἀνδρωπίνων λόγων Aa- mysterious depths of thought and lan-
βόντα καὶ δυσελεγκτότατον, ἐπὶ τού- guage, often unintelligible to the
του ὀχούμενον, ὥσπερ ἐπὶ σχεδίας, thinker and speaker, that St. John re-
κινδυνεύοντα διαπλεῦσαι τὸν Ploy, εἰ cords the unconscious testimony of
μή τις δύναιτο ἀσφαλέστερον καὶ ἀπκιν- unbelievers: xi. 51; xix 21, 22; (xviii.
δυνότερον ἐπὶ βεβαιοτέρου ὀχήματος ἢ 38).
λόγου δείον τινὸς διαπορευϑῆναι.

308 THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN.

Christianity from a Christian point of sight; he had to
experience no sudden conversion, like St. Paul; he had to
abandon no ancient prejudices, like St. Peter; his whole
nature seems to have been absorbed in the contemplation
of the Light, and the Life, and the Truth; and while others
wandered on distant missions, it was his work to cherish
the Mother of his Lord, to see visions, and to meditate on
what he had heard, and looked upon, and
handled, of the Word of Life. The prophe-
cies which ushered in the new dispensation failed; the
tongues which gave utterance to the raptures of the first
believers ceased; the knowledge of the early Church van-
ished before the fuller development of Christianity; but
love still remained, and at Ephesus, which combined all the
refinement of Greek culture with the freedom of Eastern
thought, St. John wrote “the Gospel of the world,” re-
solving reason into intuition, and faith into sight.

1 John i. 1.

ΕΠ ΥΤΙ ΙΝ VE:

THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL OF THE SYNOPTIC EVAN-
GELISTS.

Willst du dich am Ganzen erquicken:
So musst du das Ganze im Kleinsten erblicken. — GOETHE.

HirHeErTo it has been our object to show that the four
Evangelists were naturally fitted to record the Life of
Christ, under the different forms in which it met the wants
of the early Church and is still apprehended by ourselves.
It has been seen that the Apostolic age was marked by
the existence of representative types of religious belief;
that the Gospel narrative was shaped in the first instance
by the pressure of immediate needs, and afterwards reduced
to writing under circumstances which tended to perpetuate
the characteristics which had been preserved by various
classes of the first teachers and hearers; that the fourth is
distinguished from the other three, by a difference which
is likened to the relation of the spirit to the body, of the
universal to the special, or again, of the testimony of the
loved disciple to the common testimony of the Church.
In the present Chapter we shall examine more minutely
the mutual bearings of the synoptic Gospels. With this
object we shall review in detail the accounts which they
contain of the great crises of the Life of our Lord, in order
at once to test more rigorously, and define more clearly,
the general view which has been proposed. If it be said
that the variations to be alleged can be explained by nat-

310 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

ural causes, we at once admit the statement; for it has
been shown that one of the elements of Inspiration is the
selection of a messenger by God, who shall express truth
in its human form with the fulness and force of his proper
character. The differences in the Gospels may, and in
some sense must, have arisen naturally; but in the same
sense the whole working of Providence is natural, and the
results of individual feeling in past time have been con-
secrated for our instruction by the office of the Christian
Church. |

The mode in which the different Evangelists deal with
the history of the Incarnation and Birth of our Lord offers
a perfect illustration of their independence and _ special
characteristics. St. Mark, who records the active ministry
of Christ, gives no details of His Infancy; and both from
internal and external grounds there is reason to believe
that in this respect he observed the limits of the first oral
Gospel. The narrative of the mysteries of the Nativity
belonged to the period of the written testimony, and not
of the first proclamation; and St.-Matthew and St. Luke
combine to reveal as much of the great facts as helps us
to apprebend, not the event itself, but the mode in which
it was welcomed by those with whom God was pleased to
work in its accomplishment. The genealogy with which
St. Matthew opens his Gospel introduces at once its pecu-
liar subject.t. The first words are an echo of Old Testa-

1 The questions involved in the two
genealogies of our Lord are so numer-
ous and intricate that it is impossible to
enter upon them here. The omission
of the discussion is of little conse-
quence, as it has been most ably con-
ducted by Dr. Mill (The Evangelical
Accounts of the Descent and Parentage
of the Saviour vindicated, Cambr. 1842)
and by Lord A. Hervey (The Genealo-
gies of our Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ, Cambr. 1858). A summary of
the results which these critics have ob-
tained is given in a little tract, The

Genealogies in St. Matthew and St.
Luke, London, 1856. Without affirm-
ing every detail in the explanations
proposed, we may be satisfied that
every discrepancy can be explained;
and more than this is not to be expected
in a case where necessarily much of
the history is most obscure. Both gen-
ealogies without doubt give the de-
scent of Joseph,—the universal belief
till the sixteenth century, —St. Mat-
thew his degal descent, showing that
our Lord was Solomon’s heir (2 Sam.
vii. 13—17; 1 Chron. xvii. 14), though

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 311

ment language,' and the symmetrical arrangement of the
generations is equally significant in relation to Jewish
history and to Jewish thought. But apart from the form,
St. Matthew dates the Messianic hope trom David and from
Abraham, and binds Christianity with the promises of the
ancient covenant.? St. Luke, on the contrary, places the
corresponding descent not before the Birth but after
the Baptism, and represents Christ as the second Adam,
“the Son of God.”? In the one we see a royal Infant
born by alegal title to a glorious inheritance; and in the
other a ministering Saviour who bears the natural sum of
human sorrow. Even in the lines of descent which extend
through the period common to the two genealogies there
is a characteristic difference: St. Matthew follows the
course of the royal inheritance of Solomon, whose natural
lineage was closed by the childless Jehoiachim: St. Luke
traces through Nathan the natural parentage of “the son
of David.” In St. Matthew the Birth of Christ is con-
nected with national glories; in St. Luke with pious hopes.
Instead of recalling the crises of Jewish history* and the
majesty of the typical kingdom, the Pauline Evangelist
begins his narrative with a full recital of the personal acts
of God’s mercy to the just and prayerful, and of His all-
powerful grace® to the holy and believing.’ In St. Matthew

the line of Solomon failed in Jehoia- Luc iii. f.) For a comparison of St.

chim (Jer. xxii. 29, 30), and St. Luke
his natural descent, showing that he
was lineally descended from David (2
Sam. vii. 12; Ps. Ixxxix. 35, 36) through
Nathan. For the details of the sub-
ject I must refer to the works above
quoted.

1 Matt. i. 1, βίβλος γενέσεως. Cf.
Gen. v. 1.

2 Matt. i. 1.

®“ Cum [{Lucas] Adamum Dei filium
voeat, significat Christum ex virgine
ortum, secundum esse Adamum, ejus-
que ortum per Spiritum Sanctum non
milus esse opus potentiz divine singu-
Jare quam Adami fuerat” (Wetst. ad

Paul’s and Philo’s teaching on the sec-
ond Adam, compare Babington, Journ.
of Philology, i. pp. 47 ff.

4 Matt. i. 2, 6, 11.

5 The words χάρις, xaplCouat, are
not found in St. Matthew or St. Mark.
The former occurs in the Introduction
of St. John, and in all the groups of
the Epistles.

6 Luke i. 6, 18, 28, 45. On the last
passage Ambrose says (Jn Lue. ii. § 26),
* Quecunque crediderit anima et con-
cipit et generat Dei Verbum, et opera
ejus agnoscit.... Si secundum carnem
una mater est Christi; secundum fidem
tamen omnium fructus est Christus.”

512 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

we read of the Incarnation as it was revealed in a dream
to Joseph, in whom may be seen an emblem of the ancient
people ; but in St. Luke the mystery is announced by “the
mighty one of God”? to the Blessed Virgin, the type of
the Christian Church? In St. Matthew the Nativity is
ushered in by prophecy; in St. Luke it is heralded by
those songs of triumphant faith which have been rehearsed
~in our public services for thirteen centuries; and even
these, from hymn to hymn, seem to gather fulness and
love: the “help of Israel” and the “horn of David” is
welcomed as one who shall bring “joy to all the chosen
nation,” and give “light to the Gentiles.” In St. Luke
the shepherds,—the humble watchers of nature, —the
despised successors of the patriarchs,?>— cheered by the
voice of angels, recognize and proclaim the praises of the
Saviour* of the meek in heart; and the devotion first
offered in the stable of the village inn is completed by
the thanksgivings of the aged Simeon and Anna in the
Temple: in St. Matthew the Magi,—the wise inquirers

The same writer points out in a word
the difference between Zachariah and
the Blessed Virgin (Zn Lue. ii. § 15):
‘‘ Hee jam de negotio tractat: ille ad-
huc de nuntio dubitat.”

1 Gabriel: Luke i. 19. Cf. Dan. viii.
Geile

2 Ambr. In Luc. ii. § 7. It has been
argued (even by Neander, Z. J. § 14, 7.)
that the different modes in which God
is recorded to have communicated with
man, in St. Matthew by dreams, and
in St. Luke by angels, show the extent
of the subjective influence of the writ-
er’s mind upon the narrative. But
surely those are right who see in this
difference the use of various means
adapted to the peculiar state of the
recipient. Moreover, as St. Matthew
recognizes the ministry of Angels
(xxXvili. 2), so St. Luke relates Visions
(Acts x.9—16; xvi.9; xviii.9,10). Cf.
Gen. (XX. 5; ΧΧΥΙ 12 Sex, 98
(Dreams) — xviii. 2; xix. 1 (Angels).
With regard to the names of the angels

it may be observed that the adoption
of foreign terms does not imply the
introduction of a foreign belief. Cf.
p. 78.

It is to be noticed that the contents
of the divine messages (Matt. i. 20, 21;
Luke i. 30—83) are related conversely
to the general character of the Gos-
pels, as a consequence of the difference
of character in those to whom they
were addressed. The promise of Re-
demption is made to Joseph; of a glo-
rious kingdom to the Virgin.

3 Abba Garien dixit ...ne doceat
quisquam filium suum... pastorem...
eo quod opificium ipserum est opificium
latronum”’ (Wetst. in Lue. ii. 8).

4 The words σωτήρ (Cic. In Verr. ii.
63), σωτηρία, σωτήριος, are not found
in St. Matthew and St. Mark. They
occur John iy. 42, 22; 1 John iv. 14.
The progression in Luke ii. 18—20 is
very beautiful: wonder — meditation
— praise.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 313

into the mysteries of the world, — led by a strange portent
in the sky, offer adoration’ and symbolic tribute to the
new-born king of the Jews. In the one we read of the
fulfilment of the Jewish idea of a royal Messiah: in the
other, the realization of the cravings, clear or indistinct, of
the human heart. In the one we see typified the univer-
sal reign of Christ, and in the other His universal mercy.
Once more, St. Matthew alone records the murder of the
Innocents, the flight into Egypt, the cause of the final
settlement at Nazareth; St. Luke, on the other hand, has
preserved the details of the Purification, and adds the one
incident which links together the Infancy and the Ministry
of Christ in the trait of a perfect obedience and a divine
consciousness.”. In the former the hostility of earthly
powers to the kingdom of Christ is seen to work out the
designs of God; in the latter the law is fulfilled in the
redemption of the Saviour from the service of the Jewish
Temple.

The consideration of these various details will show the
reality of the difference in spirit and form
between the two narratives; but the artifi-
ciality of the contrast lessens the sense of
their complementary character throughout.
It is impossible to read them in succession without feeling
that we pass from one aspect of the great central fact to

This contrast in
detail the sign of
a contrast in gen=
eral character.

1 The word προσκυνεῖν is not applied
by St. Luke to our Lord till after the
Resurrection: xxiv. 52, where also it is
probably an interpolation. Cf. p. 330,
n. 2.

2 A comparison of Matt. ii. 11 with
Luke ii. 24 (Levit. xii. 8) leads us to
place the Purification before the Visit
of the Magi. Luke ii. 39 does not ex-
clude the flight into Egypt, and cer-
tainly shows the independence of the
Evangelists. Nor does there appear to
be any discrepancy between Matt. ii.
22, 23 and Luke ii. 4. The divine com.
mand (Matt. ii. 20) would suggest a
return to Bethlehem, in which such

marvellous things had been wrought;
and how can we account for Joseph’s
selection of Nazareth as a place of
abode so readily as by supposing that
he was previously connected with it?
Cf. Just. M. Dial. § 78, p. 303 D.

As for the ἀπογραφῆ, it is enough to
say with Wetstein: “Ὁ Epocha tam cele-

bris non potuit Lucam latere.” Cf.
Acts vy. 87 (1851). I leave this note as
it was written eight years since. No

one now after Zumpt’s Essay (Berlin,
1854) can doubt that Quirinus was
governor of Syria at the time of our
Lord's birth as well as ten years after-
wards.

314 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

another, that each picture is drawn with perfect inde.
pendence, and yet so that the separate details are exactly
capable of harmonious adjustment. There is nothing in
the one which could lead to the creation of the other;
their boundary lines just meet where the character of the
scene changes, and they must be united with care that
their real continuity may be discovered. Yet if we regard
the precise words of the Evangelists, without introducing
glosses of our own, their harmony is complete. And if we
penetrate to the ideas which they present to us as fulfilled,
these are seen to have a permanent importance for the
right conception of the history. For both narratives point
yet higher in word and idea than the special limits to which
they naturally tend, and unite in the spiritual teaching of
St. John: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word
was with God, and the Word was God, ....and the Word
was made flesh, and dwelt among us.”

Justin represents Trypho as saying that “the Messiah
would be unconscious of His own office and
unendowed with power, till He had been
consecrated by Elias.”! The narrative of the
Baptism in St. Matthew points out the
element of truth which was contained in this belief. The
work of the Baptist included the crowning rite of the old
covenant, the confession of a spiritnal need under an out-
ward shape. Repentance,—the complete change of mind
which was the fitting preparation for the kingdom of
heaven, was consecrated in a sacramental sign, and the
last ordinance of Judaism was in essence and form a
prophecy of Christianity. The new Elias recognized his
personal unworthiness to baptize Jesus “ unto repentance,”

II, The Baptism.

St. Matthew.

1 Dial. c. Tryph. ἡ 8, p. 226 B: Xpio- to those who have learnt from St. Paul

\ >/ 5 ν ͵7 Py,
τὸς δέ εἰ Kal γεγένηται καὶ ἔστι που,
ἄγνωστός ἐστι καὶ οὐδὲ αὐτός πω
c ΣΟ 94 av / /
ἑαυτὸν ἐπίσταται οὐδὲ ἔχει δύναμίν
τινα μέχρις ἂν ἐλϑδὼν Ἠλίας χρίσῃ
αὐτὸν καὶ φανερὸν πᾶσι ποιήσῃ.

2 Yet even in this thereis no difficulty

the cardinal doctrine of the Redemp-
tion (2 Cor. v. 21), and see in our Lord
the “ideal”? man, in the noblest sense
of ancient philosophy, the ‘ last
Adam” in the language of revelation.
In proportion as this truth is forgot-

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 315
and yet he knew not that He was the Messiah till the
promised sign appeared.t Simple faith in his mission shut
out all conjecture and suspended, it may have been, all
hope. But the very act which he would have hindered
brought with it the token for which he was waiting. It
was fitting, alike for him as the faithful prophet of the
Advent, and for Christ, as “subject to the Law,” to fulfil
every rite sanctioned by God,— the perfect righteousness
of the Jewish covenant. And thus at this point of their
contact, the form of the New was shaped by the rules of
the Old; and the gift of the Spirit for Christ’s work on
earth was connected with a legal observance.
St. Luke, on the other hand, does not dwell
on this relation. On the contrary, he connects the Bap-
tism of our Lord with that of “the multitude” generally,
instead of isolating it as a fact wholly alone.’
the event as it affected the Saviour among others, and not
apart from them. In this aspect he records His prayer
when the heavens were opened rather than the concession
by which the act was prefaced.4| From a like reason he
gives the heavenly voice as it was addressed to Christ :
“ Thou art my beloved Son; in Zhee I am well pleased ;”
and not as addressed to John or the people at large:

St. Luke.

He regards

« This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased,” as
the words are preserved in St. Matthew. Nor is there
any discrepancy in this various transcription of the one
divine testimony.® Here, as elsewhere, the spiritual mes-

ten, the fact itself became an offence.
Thus in “the Gospel according to the
Hebrews” the following passage oc-
curred: ‘* Ecce mater Domini et fratres
ejus dicebant ei: Joannes Baptista bap-
tizat in remissionem peccatorum: ea-
mus et baptizemur ab eo. Dixit autem
eis: Quid peccavi, ut vadam et baptizer
ab eo? Nisi forte hoc ipsum quod dixi
ignorantia est’? (Hieron. adv. Pelag.
111. 2, p. 782).

1 John i. 33. Cf. p. 314.n. 1,

2 Matt. iii. 15: ἄφες ἄρτι: οὕτως yap

πρέπον ἐστὶν ἡμῖν πληρῶσαι πᾶσαν
δικαιοσύνην. Πρέπειν occurs here only
in the Gospels: there is a contrast with
> \ / v .
ἐγὼ Xpetay ἔχω inv. 14

3 Luke iii. 21: ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ

na faa /

βαπτισϑῆναι ἅπαντα τὸν λαόν, καὶ
Ἰησοῦ βαπτισϑέντος καὶ προσευ-
χομένου, ἀνεῳχϑῆναι τὸν οὐρανόν.

4 The same peculiarity occurs in St.
Luke’s account of the Transfiguration :
ix. 20, (18). Cf. v. 16; vi. 12; xia;
(xxii. 41).

5 Augustine (de cons. £v. i. 2, § 14)

316 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

sage becomes articulate only to the individual soul;! the
material sign is intelligible only by divine revelation?

The Temptation necessarily followed the - Baptism?
The first act of the public ministry of the

IL. The Temptation. -
Lord was to reverse the outward cireum-
sb stances of the fall. In the fulness of the
e . - τὶ i “= ΜΝ "A.
ee Spirit He passed into the wilderness to re

gain the Paradise which Adam lost;* He
was with the wild beasts, in the graphic words of St. Mark,
who compresses into this one pregnant sentence the cen-
tral lesson of the trial, and adds no further details of its
course. The two other Evangelists record the same
events with an important variation in order, and some
slight verbal differences. The representative points of the
temptation, for the narratives imply much which they do
not contain,’ are given in each case in the order which

says well: “ Diversitas locutionum ad-
huc etiam utilis est, ne uno modo dic-
tum minus intelligatur.”.. In the
account of the Transfiguration — the
outward manifestation of Christ’s glory
—all the Evangelists have οὗτος ἐστίν.

1 It is, however, important to main-
tain the objective reality of the voice
and sign, though faith was necessary
in order to obtain their true meaning.
Cf. John xii. 283—80. Acts ix. 7 (ἀκού-
OVTES τῆς φων 5); xxii.9(OUK ἤκου-
σαν τὴν φωνήν; Dan. x. 7). Cf
Characteristics of Gospel Miracles, pp.
120 ff.

2 Cf. Hieron, ad Matt. iii. 16, “ Ape-
riuntur autem coeli non reseratione ele-
mentorum sed spiritualibus oculis.”

On the traditional variations as to
the details of the Baptism, see Just. M.
Dial. § 88, pp. 815 D; 816 Ὁ. and Otto’s
notes; Anger, Synopsis Evv. § 15.

In St. Mark’s account of the Baptism
the present participles are characteris-
tic: ἀναβαίνων, σχιζομένους, καταβαί-
νων. Healoneadds ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ (i. 9),
while the other Evangelists’ mention
our Lord’s residence there (Matt. ii. 23;
uke ii. 51).

3 It is instructive to compare the dif-
ferent phrases by which the Temptation
is introduced:

Matt. iv. 1: avnydyn.... ὑπὸ τοῦ
Πνεύματος πειρασϑῆναι (conducting).

Mark i. 12: τὸ Πνεῦμα αὐτὸν ἐκβάλ-
Aet (constraining).

Luke iv. 1: ἸΙησοῦς δὲ πλήρης Πνεύ-
ματος ἁγίου... ἤγετο ἐν τῷ Πνεύ-
ματι (inspiring).

It has been noticed already that the
Temptation precedes the narrative in
Jobn i. 19.

4 Bengel, ad Marc. 1.c.: ‘‘ Res magna,
Gen. i. 26... Imperium in bestias, cu-
jus Adamus tam mature jacturam fece-
rat, in summa jam exinanitione exer-
cuit: quanto magis exaltatus: Ps. viii.
8.” The forms of the Temptation have
been often compared with the tempta-
tions of Adam: 6. g. Hilar. ad Matt.
111. 5.

5 BE. g. Luke iv. 1, 2: ἤγετο εἰς τὴν
ἔρημον ἡμέρας τεσσεράκοντα πειραζό-
μενος ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου. Cf. Hom.
Clem. xi. 35, ὃ ἀποστείλας ἡμᾶς Κύ-
ριος ἡμῶν καὶ Προφήτης ὑφηγήσατο
ἡμῖν ὡς ὃ πονηρὸς τεσσαράκοντα ἧμέ-

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 317

preserves a climax from the particular position occupied
by the writer. Taking the arrangement of St. Matthew,
we see our Lord triumphing over the natural wants of
humanity; refusing to tempt the sustaining power of
Providence; and finally shrinking from a momentary alli-
ance with the powers of darkness, even to establish the
temporal Messianic sway, when He saw the
glory of the kingdoms of the world. The
first temptation occupies the same position in St. Luke.
Personal and material cravings are from any side the first
and simplest form of temptation; but the order of the
two latter temptations is reversed. The preservation of
the just relation of the Saviour to God occupies in St.
Luke the final place which St. Matthew assigns to the vin-
dication of Messiah’s independence of the world. Jn St.
Luke the idea of a temporal empire of Christ passes more
clearly into that of mere earthly dominion, which is dis-
tinctly regarded as in the power and gift of Satan.’ The
crowning struggle of Christ is not to repress the solicita-
tion to antedate the outward victory of His power, but to
maintain His human dependence upon His Father’s will.
Before Messiah the king the temptations arise in the order
of His relations to sense, to God, to man; before the man
Christ Jesus, in his relations to sense, to
man, to God. The sequence is one of idea
and not of time. The incidents are given wholly without
any temporal connection in St. Luke, and the language of
St. Matthew is more definite only in appearance? The
narrative, indeed, is one which may perhaps help to show
the impossibility of applying to things spiritual and eternal
that “phantom of succession,” in the shadow of which
we are commonly forced to speak and act. However this
may be, the closing words of the two narratives corres-

Matt. iv. 8.

1 Zim. τὶ; 3.

pas διαλεχϑεὶς αὐτῷ... .. Cf. Hom. 2 Luke iv. 8, καὶ εἶπεν... ὅ, καὶ ἄνα-
xix. 2. γαγών... .9, καὶ ἤγαγεν... Matt. iv. 3,

1 Luke iv.6: ἐμοὶ παραδέδοται, καὶ καὶ προσελϑών.... δ, τότε παραλαμ-
ᾧ ἐὰν ϑέλω δίδωμι αὐτήν. βάνει... .8, πάλιν παραλαμβάνει.

27*

318 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

pond to what appear to be their fundamental notions. St.
Matthew records the ministry of angels to a heavenly
Prince;? St. Like shades the brightness of the present
triumph with a dim foreboding of the coming sufferings
of the Saviour: then the Devil departed from Him — but
only —-for ἃ season?

The importance which the Jews attached to the conse-
cration of the Messiah by Elias has been
already noticed; and tradition was much
occupied with the various other functions
which the great prophet should discharge in the prepara-
tion of the heavenly kingdom.’ But Elias, the represen-
tative of the second stage in the Jewish dispensation, was
not alone, though he occupied the most prominent. place
in the popular anticipations of a glorious future. The
Mosaic type of the Messiah was not lost, though it had
fallen into the back-ground; and there were some who
argued that as the ancient lawgiver had reflected the

1V. The Trans-
figuration.

divine glory from his countenance, so it should be with
the prophet like to him whom the Lord
should raise up in after time, for Moses was
The expec-

Deut. xviti. 18.

both a minister and an image of the Messiah.
tation thus formed received a literal and yet a spiritual ful-
filment. The partial and borrowed glory with which
Moses had shone became a complete transfiguration in the
case of Christ. That was from without; this from within.
That was a sign to all the people; this only to the chosen
three, to the zealous, the reverent and the loving. What
in old times was given as a token of visible splendor was
now changed into a source of silent faith* But even
under these changed relations, the correspondence of the

two events “upon the mount” is very striking. It is im-

1 Matt. iv. 11, καὶ ἰδού, ἄγγελοι προ-
σῆλδον καὶ διηιςόνουν αὐτῷ, compared
with Mark i. 18. ἦν μετὰ τῶν ϑηρίων
. καὶ οἱ ἄγγελοι διηκόνουν αὐτῷ. Cf.
Luke xxii. 48.

2 Luke iv. 13, ἀπέστη am αὐτοῦ ἄχρι
καιροῦ. Cf. John xiv. 80.

5 Cf. Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in Matt.
xvii. 10 (ii. p. 339).

4 Contrast Matt.
TO ailig PAS) Hii

xvii. 9 with Ex.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 319

possible to read St. Matthew’s account of the Transfigura-
tion without recurring to the scene in the Exodus when
the face of Moses shone, and the children of
Israel were afraid to come nigh to him; and
the peculiar language which he uses coincides exactly with
the form of Jewish tradition. He alone records the pros-
tration of the disciples through their excessive fear, and
the Master’s strengthening touch and cheering words,
uttered once before upon the stormy lake.? It is with
equal significance that St. Matthew —the Hebrew Evan-
gelist — relates, without the implied reproof which is added
by St. Mark and St. Luke,* the wish of St. Peter to erect
three tabernacles, one for Christ, and one for Moses, and
one for Elias, — to give, as it were, ἃ permanent standing
place to the Jewish law and its prophetic development in
connection with the Gospel,— when in truth they were just
departing! St. Luke, on the other hand, again at this new
crisis recalls to notice the perfect manhood of the Saviour.
He who was praying when He was specially marked out
for His public ministry, prays also at His insti lation to
the mediatorial office. . The characteristic difference
between St. Luke and the other Evangelists

is yet more clearly brought out by the more ance san
considerable peculiarities of their narratives.

St. Matthew and St. Mark place in immediate connec-

Exod. xxiv. 29, 30.

1 Matt. xvii. 2, καὶ ἔλαμψε τὸ πρόσω- xvii. 2) and λευκός ἐξαστράπτων (Luke
πον αὐτοῦ ws ὁ ἥλιος (ef. xiii. 48). ix. 29).
* Fulgida facta fuit facies Mosis instar 2 Matt. xvii. 6,7, μὴ φοβεῖσδε. Cf.
solis’”’ (Wetst. ad loc.). The feature Matt. xiv. 27: xxviii. 10.
common to all the Evangelists,“ His 8 Mark ix. 6, οὐ yap ἤδει τί λαλήσῃ.
raiment became white,” is singularly Luke ix. 33, μὴ εἰδὼς ὃ λέγει.
illustrated by Bereshith R. (Wetst. 4. 4 Luke ix. 33, ἐν τῷ διαχωρίζεσδϑαι.
c.): ‘ Vestes lucis, he vestes Adami It may be remarked that the heavenly
primi.” Cf. Apoe. vii. 13 ff The ma- voice follows on the departure of Moses
terial imagery of St. Mark is worthy of and Elias. When they passed away
notice, λευκὰ ὡς χιών, οἷα yva- came the words, common to all the
pevs ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ov δύνα- Evangelists, “This is my beloved Son
Tat λευκᾶναι (Mark ix. 8),com- ... Hear Him.”
pared with λευκὰ ὡς τὸ φῶς (Matt, 5 Luke ix. 29, ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσδαι.

320 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

tion with the Transfiguration! ‘a remarkable conversa-
tion about Elias, which serves to point out the spiritual
connection of the new and old. The substance is the
same in both; but St. Mark expresses with greater dis-
tinctness the contrast between the traditional idea of Elias’s
coming, and its real effects upon Messiah’s kingdom ;?
Elias had indeed come and restored all things, but for the
advent of a suffering Redeemer, and not for the conquest
of a mighty prince. St. Luke omits this discourse, but he
gives the subject of that more mysterious conversation
when Moses and Elias “talked”? with the Lord. The
addition is one of the greatest interest, for it connects the
recital of Christ’s sufferings with the fullest manifestation
of His glory. The Passion, with its triumphant issue, was
the point to which the Law and the prophets tended, and
thus we read that the representatives of both talked to
Christ of the Exodus which He was about to fulfil in Jeru-
sulem.* The Apostles themselves were as yet unprepared
for the tidings. As at Gethsemane they were heavy with
sleep, but at last when they were awake they saw Christs
glory, and the two men that stood with Him.

While there are these significant variations’ in the
details of the narrative itself, all the Evangelists relate the
same previous conversation and the same subsequent
miracle. The prediction of the disciples’ trials, the image

1The question Ti οὖν, Kk. τ. A.,
Matt. xvii. 10 (ef. Mark ix. 11) seems to
refer to v. 9, so that the sense is: If this
visit of Elias must not be proclaimed
till Thou comest in Thy power, can we
still believe that he shall, according to
the teaching of the scribes, prepare
Thy way?

2 Mark ix.12. Olshausen, rightly, I
think, considers this to be the purport
of the verse. Kal πῶς introduces an
objection grounded on the resumption
of the former clause (If it be so, how
then ...), which is resolved by Αλλά
(Nay, doubt not: I tell you.. .).

3 Matt. xvii. 8; Mark ix. 4 (συλλα-
λοῦντεΞ5).

4 Luke ix. 81, 82, ἔλεγον τὴν ἔξοδον
αὐτοῦ ἣν ἔμελλε πληροῦν ἐν Ἱερουσα-
Anu. The construction of λέγειν is”
unusual, but occurs again Rom. iv. 6,
and in tbe earliest classical writers in
the sense of ‘‘ recounting,” ‘‘ relating
the details of,” ‘‘ describing.” The
word ἔξοδος itself is less definite than
decease, and may be best illustrated by
the technical sense (Arist. Poet. xii.)
“The closing scene of a Tragedy.”

5 The additions in Mark ix. 10, Matt.
xvii. 5 (ἐν ᾧ εὐδόκησα) are character-
istic.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 921

of their Lord’s triumph, and, flowing from it, the certainty
of the disciples’ help, exhibit a glorious sequence from
every point of view, which few will attribute to an apt
coincidence or to a conscious design.

It does not form any part of our plan to examine at
length the synoptic histories of the Passion,
or to compare them in detail with that of St.
John.’ It will be enough for the present to notice the
chief peculiarities of the different Evangelists, so that it
may be seen how far they explain the aim and office of
each, without regarding the whole progress or the minute
relations of the different narratives. Both historically
and doctrinally the Passion appears as the central and
crowning point of the Gospel. Where all else is described
in rapid outlines this is recorded with solemn particularity,
and the characteristic traits in each account are propor-
tionately more numerous and salient than elsewhere.
Without asserting that these furnish a complete solution
of the difficulties by which they are accompanied, they
contribute at least an important element towards the
investigation of them. They place us, in some measure,
in the position from which the several Evangelists regarded
the course of the whole scene, and charge the picture with
the varied forms of busy and restless action, which the
great master of Venice has dared to portray with vivid
and startling reality.

The peculiarities in St. Matthew’s narrative are numer-
ous and uniform in character. With more or
less distinctness they all tend to show how
the Messiahship of Jesus was attested dur-
ing the course of events which checked the
faith of some; and the same feeling which directed the

V. The Passion.

St. MATTHEW.

Cf. Luke xsiv. 21.

1 The chronology of the Passion ‘ Crucifixion” is perhaps offensive from
Week —a subject which cannot be left the fulness of Jife which it exhibits, yet
unnoticed —is examined in a note at on deeper study we feel that the Pas-
the end of the chapter. sion must have been witnessed in some

2 The first effect of Tintoretto’s great such form.

ὦ THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

selection of the points of the narrative, influenced the
manner of their treatment. In the form, as well as in
many of the details, there is something of an Old Testa-
ment complexion which completes the impression produced
by the circumstances themselves. These are, indeed, in
some cases singularly significant. In St. Matthew alone
we read the last testimonies which were given to the Mes-
siahship of the Lord by Himself and by His enemies.
Nowhere else is there the same open and unreserved dec-
laration of the Saviour’s majesty as in St. Matthew’s
description of the Betrayal and the Judgment. The crises
of apparent hopelessness are exactly those which call forth
the most royal declarations of sovereign power. When
the disciples would have defended their Master at Geth-
semane, He reminds them that He could bring to His aid
legions of angels, but that the Scriptures must needs be
fulfilled; that His kingdom is not to be supported or
destroyed by the sword; that He must finish His work
on earth before He comes in the clouds of heaven.’ So
again, when He stands before the great tribunal of the
chosen nation, in answer to the solemn adjuration of the
High Priest,? He claims the name and the glory of the
Christ. Upto that moment He was silent, but then at
last the recognition of the sacred power of the minister
of God brought with it the words which proved to be
the final condemnation of Judaism. Then it was that as
Christ He was mocked by the people;*? and, meanwhile,
the remorse and death of Judas witnessed in another
place to the fulfilment of Messianic types in the Psalms and
Prophets.* So far Christ is seen to be openly proclaimed

1 Matt. xxvi. 52—54. Cf. John xviii. word Χριστέ is wanting in the other

Gospels. Compare also xxvii. 17 with

2 Matt. xxvi. 63, 64, ἐξορκίζω σε κατὰ
τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος iva ἡμῖν εἴπῃς
... This clause is peculiar to St. Mat-
thew,

3 Matt. xxvi. 68, Προφήτευσον ἡμῖν,
Χριστέ, tis ἐστιν ὃ παίσας σε; the

Mark xv. 9.

4 Matt. xxvii. 3—10. The fulfilment
of prophecy in the history of the Pas-
sion is specially noticed by St. Matthew
(xxvi. 56, TOD TO δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν
...compared with Mc. xiv. 49), some-

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 323

and rejected by His people; but He is also regarded under
a peculiar relation to Gentiles. The dream of Pilate’s
wife, and the symbolic purification! of the governor him-
self, express the influence which the righteousness? of the
Saviour exercised upon their imagination and judgment.
The one carries us back to the early history of the Jews,
when the fortunes of the nation were fashioned by the
dreams of heathen princes,— of Abimelech, of Pharaoh,
of Nebuchadnezzar ;* the other points forward to the ter-
rible consummation of the curse now uttered in reckless
unbelief One other testimony remains; St. Matthew
alone tells us that the earth was shaken and the rocks rent,
and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,> at the
death of Christ, whose power was felt in the depths of
Nature and of Hades when men asked in
mockery for the confirmation of His words:
fle said, Iam the Son of God.

The details peculiar to St. Mark are less numerous, but
hardly less characteristic. It has been re-
marked often that the account of the young
man who fled naked proves that we have in the second
Gospel the narrative of an eye-witness, who was nearly

Matt. xxvii. 43.

St. MARK.

omnia enim tum valida et fortia pene-
trans Dei Verbum et potestas «terne
virtutis irruperat. E£f monumenta
aperta sunt: erant enim mortis claustra
reserata. Zt multa corpora sanctorum
dormientum surrexerunt: illuminans
enim mortis tenebras et infernorum

times directly as here and xxvi. 31 || Mc.
xiv. 27 (Zech. xiii. 7), and sometimes
indirectly, xxvii. 34 (Ps. Ixviii. 21), 43
(Ps. xxi. 9). The contrast between
Matt. xxvi. 24|| Me. xiv. 21 (ὡς γέγραπ-
Tot) and Le. xxii. 22 (κατὰ τὸ ὡρισμέ-
voy) is full of meaning. The quotation

in Xxvil. 35 is certainly an interpolation.

i Ch Deut. scsi. 6.7.

2 Matt. xxvii. 19, Μηδὲν σοὶ καὶ τῷ
δικαίῳ ἐκείνῳ... xxvii. 24, ᾿Αϑῷός εἰμι
ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος τούτου [τοῦ δικαίου] ;
but the last words are probably an in-
terpolation.

3 Gen. xx 3; xli. 25; Dan. ii. 8.

4 Matt. xxvii. 25,70 αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐφ᾽
ἡμᾶς Kal ἐπὶ τὰ τέκνα ἡμῶν.

5 Hilar. ad Matt. xxvii. 51, 52: ““ Mo-
vetur terra: capax enim hujus mortui
csse LOn poterat. Petre scisse sunt:

obscura collustrans, in Sanctorum ad
preesens conspicatorum resurrectione
mortis ipsius spolia detrahebat.” The
use of the phrase of ἅγιοι is remarka-
ble, which does not occur elsewhere
absolutely in the New Testament, ex-
cept of Christians, and not at all in the
Gospels: Acts ix. 18, 32, 41; xxvi. 10;
Rom. xii. 13, ete.; Apoc. xi. 18; xviii.
20. And yet more, the form of expres-
sion, πολλὰ σώματα τῶν ἁγίων
eve ἠγέρϑησαν, cannot be overlooked
in the interpretation of the passage.

324 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

concerned in an incident which would have seemed trivial
to others! One or two other minute points lead to the
same conclusion. In the account of the testimony of “ the
false witnesses,” St. Mark appears to have preserved words
of the Lord which do not occur in the other Evangelists ;”
and he alone notices the disagreement of their testimony?
In the same way he characterizes Simon the Cyrenian as
the father of Alexander and Rufus,* and in him alone we
read that Pilate investigated the reality of the death of
Christ.’

The special details by which the narrative of St. Luke
is distinguished are more obviously marked
by a common character, and seem in some
measure as a complement to those of St. Matthew. For
while the peculiar traits preserved by St. Matthew exhibit
in various aspects the Messianic dignity of the Lord, those
preserved by St. Luke seem rather to present notices of

St. LUKE.

1 Mark xiv. 51, 52. Cf. p. 287, 7. 1. tact with the Gospel of St. John. The
difference between the recorded words
of our Lord and the report of the wit-
nesses is striking: 7 can destroy (Matt.
xxvi 61, δύναμαι καταλῦσαι): 1 will
destroy (Mark xiv. 58, καταλύσω), as
compared with Destroy ...and I will
3 Mark xiv. οὐδὲ οὕτως ton ἦν ἡ raise (John ii. 19, Avoare... καὶ
μαρτυρία αὐτῶν. We have inthe tes- ἐἔγερῶ).
timony of the witnesses a point of con- 4 Mark xy. 21.

2 Mark xiv. 58, Tov ναὸν τοῦτον τὸν
χειροποίητον... ἄλλον ἄχει-
ροποίητον. The words do not oc-
cur elsewhere in the Gospels; but com-
pare Hebr. ix. 11, 24; 2 Cor. v. 1.

5 Mark xv. 44,45. The quotation in xv. 28 is certainly an interpolation.
The details common to St. Matthew and St. Mark which are not found in St.
Luke are numerous:
Matt. xxvi. 81,32. Mark xiv. 27,28. The future foretold.

— — 387,38. — — 83,34. The selection of Peter, James, and
John.

— — 40—45. — — 87—41. The three warnings.

-- — 48. — — 44. The sign of the kiss.

- — 59--66. — — 55—64. The false witness.

— xxvii. 12—14. — xv. 4,8. The Lord’s silence before Pilate.
Cf. John xix. 9.

-- — 26. -- — 16. The scourging. Cf. John xix. 1.

τὸς — 21--]. — - 16—20. The mockery of the soldiers with
the reed (Matt.) and crown.

--͵᾿ — 3b. -- — 28. The deadening draught.

— -— 39, 40. — — 29,30. The mockery of the passers-by. Cf

Luke xxiii. 35.
— — 46-49. = | = 84-35. heer, ofagony.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS.

human sympathy, points of contact with common life, evi
dences of a perfect manhood. This is more evident if
account is taken of the details common to the two other
Evangelists which St. Luke omits; and, though it may
appear fanciful to insist on every difference 2s an example
of a difference of scope (chiefly through the faults in our
apprehension and representation of them), yet the total
effect of contrast and combined effect cannot be doubted,
St. Luke alone has preserved the question which showed
the devotion of the disciples to their Lord, when the bold-
ness of one raised the sword in His defence :' he alone re-
cords the thrice repeated declaration of Pilate, that “he
found no fault in Him;”? and notices the accusation for
civil crimes,®? and the examination before Herod.‘
we read of the angel which “strengthened” the Lord’s
human nature at the Agony;’ of “an hour of His enemies
and of the power of darkness,” when their malice could
find full scope; ° of that look which recalled to St. Peter the
greatness of his fall;* of the words in which He resigned
His Spirit to His Father.
which He removed the injury which had been wrought by
mistaken zeal;° the last word of warning, in which He
turned the thoughts of mourners to the personal conse-
quences of the deed which moved their compassion ;"” the

In him

The last word of mercy, in

1 Luke xxii. 49, Ἰδόντες δὲ of περὶ
αὐτὸν τὸ ἐσόμενον εἶπαν Κύριε, εἰ
πατάξομεν ἐν μαχαίρᾳ. The words
seem to exclude any idea but that of
sacrifice in a desperate cause.

2 Luke xxiii. 4, 14, 22.

8 Luke xxiii. 2, .... διαστρέφοντα
τὸ ἔϑνος ἡμῶν καὶ κωλύοντα φόρους
Καίσαρι διδόναι...

4 Ambros. ad Luc. xxiii.4—12. ‘In
typo etiam Herodis atque Pilati, qui
amici ex inimicis facti sunt per Jesum
Christum, plebis Israel populique gen-
tilis figura, quod per Domini passionem
utriusque sit futura concordia” ...

5 Luke xxii. 43,44. The extent and
character of the variations in the evi-

dence as to the authenticity of this pas-
sage point (like similar variations in
other parts of the Gospel) to a double
recension of the Gospel, proceeding, as
it appears, from the Evangelist himself.

6 Luke xxii. 53, αὕτη ὑμῶν ἐστὶν 7
ὥρα καὶ ἣ ἐξουσία τοῦ σκότους. CF.
iv. 18, 6 διάβολος ἀπέστη ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ
ἄχρι καιροῦ.

7 Luke xxii. 61, καὶ στραφεὶς 6 Κύ-
ριος ἐνέβλεψεν τῷ Πέτρῳ...

8 Luke xxiii. 46, Πάτερ, εἰς χεῖράς
gov παρατίϑεμαι τὸ πνεῦμά μου. ‘The
echo of the words still lingers in the
phrase of St. Peter: 1 Pet. iv. 19.

9 Luke xxii. 51.

10 Luke xxiii. 27—31.

326

THE DIFFERENCES IN

DETAIL

last prayer of infinite love, in which He pleaded for those
who reviled and slew Him;! the last act of sovereign

grace in which He spoke a blessing from the cross ;*
recorded alone by the companion of St. Paul.

are all

In St. Mat-

thew we saw that the dead did homage to the crucified
Messiah: in St. Luke?® αὐ the multitudes that came together,
and saw the things which were done, returned, beating their

breasts for sorrow.

1 Luke xxiii. 34. Πάτερ, ἄφες αὐ-
τοῖς" οὐ γὰρ οἴδασιν τί ποιοῦσιν. These
words reappear in the narrative of the
martyrdom of James, ‘‘ the brother of
the Lord,” preserved by Eusebius, H.
E. ἢ 23, Παρακαλῶ Κύριε, Θεέ, Πάτερ,
ἄφες αὐτοῖς" οὐ γὰρ οἴδασι τί ποιοῦ-
σιν.

2 Luke xxiii. 48.

8 Luke xxiii. 48.

4 It may not be out of place to notice
one apparent discrepancy in the ac-
counts of the Passion on which the
opponents of the literal accuracy of the
Evangelists insist with the greatest con-
fidence. It is said that each of the four
Evangelists gives the inscription on the
cross in different words. The state-
ment is certainly so far true that each
Evangelist gives a phrase which is not
entirely coincident with that given by
any one of the others, but a close ex-
amination of the narratives furnishes
no sufficient reason for supposing that
all proposed to give the same or the
entire inscription. St. John, indeed,
uses such terms as to Jeave no doubt as
to his record: ἔγραφεν δὲ καὶ τίτλον
ὃ Πιλᾶτος «.. ἣν δὲ γεγραμμένον...
Ἰησοῦς ὃ Ναζωραῖος ὃ βασιλεὺς τῶν
*Tovdaiwy (John xix. 19). These Greek
words then we may be assured were
certainly placed upon the cross; but if
we compare the language of St. John
with that of St. Mark, it will be obvi-
ous that St. Mark only designs to give
the words which contained the point of
the accusation,— the alleged usur pation
of royal dient -- μαὴ ἣν ἡ ἐπι:

γραφὴ τῆς αἰτίας αὐτοῦ ἐπι-
γεγραμμένη. Ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν ᾿Ἰου-
δαίων (Mark xy. 26); and these words
which contain the charge are common
to all the Evangelists. The language
of St. Matthew and St. Luke again,
though this might be disputed, seems
to imply that they have preserved re-
spectively the two remaining forms of
the trilingual inscription: ἐπέϑηκαν

νον THY αἰτίαν αὐτοῦ γεγραμμένην"
Οὗτός ἐστιν ᾿Ιησοῦς 6 βασιλεὺς τῶν
Ἰουδαίων (Matt. xxvii. 81)--- ἦν δὲ καὶ
ἐπιγραφὴ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ: Ὃ βασιλεὺς τῶν
Ιουδαίων οὗτος (Luke xxiii. 38). If
this natural conjecture be admitted,
the difference is a proof of complete-
ness, and not of discrepancy. St. Mat-
thew would certainly preserve the He-
brew form in his original Gospel; and
the title in St. Luke as given in Cod,
Corb., ‘* Rex Judeorum hic est,’ seems
like the scornful turn of the Latin title.
However this may be, there is at least
no possibility of showing any incon-
sistency on the strictly literal interpre-
tation of the words of the Evangelist.

The difference between John xix. 14
(ἕκτη) and Mark xv. 25 (τρίτη. Cf.
xv. 83; Matt. xxvii. 45; Luke xxiii. 44)
seems clearly to point to a different
mode of reckoning (Cf. John xviii. 28.
Ewald, Christus, 217). Again, no one
would find a contradiction in the fol-
lowing sentence: βαστάζων τὸν σταυ-
ρὸν ἐξῆλϑεν.. - ἐξερχόμενοι δὲ εὗρον
Σίμωνα: βρρον ἠγγάρευσαν ἵνα ἄρῃ
τὸν σταυρόν (John xix. 17; Matt.
xXvii. 32).

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. Sat

The various narratives of the Resurrection place the
fragmentariness of the Gospel in the clearest
light. They contain difficulties which it is
impossible to explain with certainty, but
there is no less an intelligible fitness and purpose in the
details peculiar to each account. The existence of diffi-
culties in brief records of such a crisis is no more than a
natural consequence of its character. The events of the
first great Easter morning were evidently so rapid in their
sequence and so startling in their lessons, that a complete
history would have been impossible."| Even in ordinary
circumstances the effects produced by the same outward
phenomena, and the impressions which they convey to dif-

VI. The Resur-
rection.

ferent persons in moments of great excitement, are so
various, that we are in some measure prepared for appar-
ent discrepancies in the recital of the facts which accom-
panied what was the new birth of believers no less than of
the Saviour. At the same time, we know so little of the
laws of the spiritual world, and of the conditions under
which beings of another order are revealed to men, that it
is idle to urge as a final inconsisteucy the diversity of vis-
ions which, while truly objective, may still have depended,
in a manner which may be faintly conceived, on the charac-
ter of the witnesses to whom they were given. And _ be-
sides all this, there are so many tokens of unrecorded facts
in the brief summaries which are preserved, that no argu-
ment can be based upon apparent discrepancies sufficient
to prove the existence of absolute error.”, Where the evi-

1 Jn this sense the closing words of
St. John’s Gospel, which are passed
over too often as a mere hyperbole,
contain a truth, which, as it holds ina
lower sense of the details of every hu-
man life, is absolutely true of the de-
tails of the Perfect 106 --- ἅτινα ἐὰν
γράφηται kad ἕν, οὐδὲ αὐτὸν οἶμαι Tov
κόσμον χωρῆσαι τὰ γραφόμενα βιβλία.
This perception of the infinity of life
makes the historian a true poet.

2 For instance, from John xx. 7, it
appears that Mary Magdalene did not
enter the sepulchre at the first visit;
and this fact gives a clew to the expla-
nation of the Angelic Visions. In Matt.
XXViii. 16 (οὗ ἐτάξατο αὐτοῖς) there is
a reference to other revelations of the
Lord to the Apostles than that which
the Evangelist has recorded. St. Luke
(xxiv. 84) notices incidentally an ap-
pearance to St. Peter which he has not

328 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL
dence is confessedly imperfect, it may be wise to hesitate,
but it is presumptuous to condemn; and the possibility
of reconciliation in the case of partial and independent
narratives is all that the student of the Gospels requires.
When it is seen that this possibility is further combined
with the existence of a special character in the separate
accounts, the whole question will be presented in a truer
and more instructive form. We shall learn to acquiesce in
the existence of diversities which we cannot finally solve,
when we find enough recorded to satisfy the individual
designs of the Evangelists and the permanent needs of
Christians.

It is necessary to repeat these obvious remarks, because

the records of the Resurrection have given
The true aspect
of the narratives.

occasion to some of the worst examples of
that kind of criticism from which the other
parts of the Gospels have suffered, though not in an equal
degree. It is tacitly assumed that we are in possession
of all the circumstances of the event, and thus, on the
one hand, differences are urged as fatal, and on the other,
elaborate attempts are made to show that the details
given can be forced into the semblance of a complete and
connected narrative. The true critic will pause before he
admits either extreme. He will not expect to find in each
Gospel, nor yet in the combination of them, a full and eir-
cumstantial record of a mere fact of common history ; and
he will be equally little inclined to bind down the possible
solutions of the difficulties introduced by variations and
omissions to one definite form. He will rather acknowl-
edge the characteristics of the truth in narratives Incom-

detailed; and the same appearance pearance to James, which is elsewhere

seems to be referred to by St. Paul
ΠΟΥ: Σν: δὴ. pst. Panta Cor xv. 6)
helps us to distinguish the appearance
to the gathered chureh in Galilee from
the last appearance to the Apostles
(Luke xxiv. 44 ff.), with which it has
been confounded; and notices an ap-

only recorded in apocry phal traditions.
If any further testimony to the multi-
plicity and variety of the revelations
of the Risen Lord is required, it is
given in the widest terms by St. Luke
in Aets i 8 (ἐν πολλοῖς τεκμηρίαις,
ὀπτανόμενοϑ).

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 329

plete as historical relations, and yet most perfect as lessons
of divine truth embodied in representative facts.

Regarding the recorded details of the Resurrection from
this point of view, we can dismiss without i
any minute inquiry the various schemes ses an Prom
which have been proposed for bringing them, 6%?" of swarate
as they stand at present, into one connected
narrative. Whether the harmonist has recourse to a mul-
tiplication of similiar incidents, or, with a truer insight
into the style of the Scriptures, sees in the several accounts
perspective views, as it were, in which several incidents
are naturally grouped together,’ we may accept the gen-
eral conclusion without insisting on the several steps by
which it is reached. That will rather be an object of
study, to regard each separate account as conveying a dis-
tinct image of the signs and results of Christ’s victory.
The fullest and truest view of the whole will then natur-
ally follow. The most general will result from the most
particular; the final impression, from a combination of
wholes and not from a mosaic of fragments.

The narrative of St. Matthew is, as is commonly the
case, the least minute. The great features of
the history are traced with bold outline.
Faith and unbelief, fear and joy, are seen together in the
closest contrast; and over all is the light of a glorious
majesty abiding “even unto the end.” Heaven and earth
are combined in one wide view;? Messiah reigns, and the
opposition of His enemies is powerless. The visit of the
women, the angelic ministry, a source of deadly terror to
the guards, of “great joy” to the believing, the appear-
ance of the Lord, the falsehood of the watch, the division
among the disciples, the last charge, combine to form a
noble picture, yet so as to convey no impression of a com-
plete narrative. But the peculiar traits in this brief sum-

St. MATTHEW.

1 This form of explanation is well fol- Gesch ), though with his usual errors
lowed out by Ebrard (Arit. d. Evang. in taste.
2 Matt. xxviii. 18.

28*

330 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

mary are both numerous and important. St. Matthew
alone notices the outward glory of the Resurrection, the
earthquake, the sensible ministry of the divine messenger,
-the watch of enemies replaced by the guarding angel.
The vigilance of Roman soldiery and the authority of
priestly power are seen to be unable to check the might of
the new faith. The majesty of the triumphant Messiah
is shown again by a fact which St. Matthew has preserved
as to the feelings of His disciples. He alone notices the
humble adoration of the risen Lord before His Ascension,
and, as if with jealous care, traces to its origin the calumny
“currently reported” among the Jews “to
this day.” St. Mark mentions the command
to the disciples to go to Galilee, but St. Matthew alone
relates the final charge to the assembly of believers, which
was given in solemn majesty, and it may be on the very
mountain on which Christ first taugnt them. Thus it was
foreshown that Jerusalem was no longer to remain the
Holy City, the final centre‘of the Church. The “scattered
flock” were again gathered together by their Master in
the despised country from which they had first followed
Him The world-wide extent of His king-
dom is at once proclaimed. Their commis-
sion extended “to all the nations;” and the highest
mystery of the faith is conveyed in the words which are
the passport into the Christian community.

The narrative of St. Mark is attended by peculiar diffi-
culties. The original text, from whatever
cause it may have happened, terminated ab-
ruptly after the account of the angelic vision? The his-

Matt. xxviii. 11 ff.

Matt. xxviii. 19, 20.

St. MARK.

5 Mark xvi. 8, ἐφοβοῦντο yap. It
is vain to speculate on the causes of
this abrupt close. The evidence in fa-

1 Lange, Leben Jesu.
2 Matt. xxviii. 9,17. Contrast Mark
xv. 19. In Luke xxiv, 52 the words

προσκυνήσαντες αὐτὸν are very doubt-
ful.

8 Matt. xxviii. 16, τὸ ὄρος οὗ ἐτάξατο
αὐτοῖς.

4 Matt. xxvi. 81, 82 (προάξω ὑμᾶς εἰς
τὴν Γαλιλαίαν).

vor of the remaining verses seems to
establish their canonicity, though they
cannot be regarded as part of the orig-
inal narrative of St. Mark. There is
no inconsistency between Mark xvi--13
and Luke xxiy. 34, 35, but rather a

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 991

tory of the revelations of the Lord Himself was added at
another time and probably by another hand. Yet in both
parts of the record one common feature may be noticed,
which seems to present the peculiar characteristic of the
Gospel. The disciples hesitate before they accept the fact
which surpassed their hope. There is doubt before there
is faith. Thus, as St. Mark preserves an especial assurance
of the reality of Christ’s death, so he confirms most
strongly the reality of His resurrection. His narrative
shows that the witnesses were not mere enthusiasts who
believed what they wished to be true. The
women “told nothing to any man” when
they had first seen the angelic vision. The apostles only
yielded finally to the reproof of their Master
when they had rejected in their bitter mourn-
ing the testimony of those to whom He had appeared.
This gradual progress to faith exhibits that outward side
of the history which is further illustrated by the details
which the Evangelist has preserved from the Lord’s last
charge. The promises of miraculous power
assume in this a speciality and distinctness
to which there is elsewhere no parallel; and the brief
clause in which the progress of the Church and the work-
ing of its ministers is described, leads the reader to see
on earth the present power of that mighty Saviour, who
in this Gospel only is described as “seated on the right
hand of God.”?

St. Luke presents many of the same details as St. Mark,
but at a greater length and apparently with
a different object. He does not dwell eg
directly on the majesty of the Resurrection, as St. Mat-
thew, nor on the simple fact of it, as St. Mark, but rather
connects it with the Passion, and unfolds the spiritual
necessity by which suffering and victory were united.

Mark xvi. 8.

Mark xvi. 1.

Mark xvi. 17, 18.

most true trait of nature: cf. Luke 1 Mark xvi. 19. Cf. Matt. xxvi. 64;
xxiv. 87. Noris there any connection Luke xxii. 69; (Acts vii. δῦ, 56); Col.
of time in xvi. 15, καὶ εἶπεν, κ. τ. A. iii. 1; Hebr. x. 12.

982 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

Thus it is that he records that part of the angelic mes-
sage in which the death and rising again
of Christ were traced in His own words.
And the Lord Himself; whether he talks with the two
disciples or with the eleven, shows the “necessity” of
those events by which their faith was shaken.’ In this
connection the eucharistic meal at Emmaus gains a new
meaning. That which was before clearly connected at
least with the observances of the Jewish ritual is now
separated from all legal observances. The “ disappear-
ance” of the Lord is, as it were, a preparation for His
unseen presence; and at the same time the revelation to
the eleven shows that He raised with Him from the grave,
and up to heaven, al! that belongs to the perfection of
man’s nature.” The last view which St. Luke gives of the
office of the risen Saviour corresponds with the earlier
traits in which he shows His relation to mankind. In St.
Matthew He is seen as clothed “ with all power in heaven
and on earth,.... present with the disciples to the end of
the age.” In St. Mark He is raised to heaven, to a throne
of sovereign power, as One to whom nature does homage.
In St. Luke He is the High Priest in whose
name repentance and remission of sins is to
be proclaimed to all nations,—the Mediator who sends

forth to men the promise of His Father.
There is yet another aspect in which the Resurrection
is presented in the Gospels which can only

Luke xxiv.7.

Luke xxiv. 47, 45.

St. JouN. : : .
be indicated now, though it presents lessons

of marvellous fulness. St. John traces its effects, not on a
church, nor on an active ministry, nor on mankind at
large, but on individuals. The picture which he draws
can be completed by traits taken from the other Evange-
lists; and if this be done, there is probably nothing else
in the Gospels which gives the same impression of sim-

1 Luke xxiv. 26, οὐχὶ ταῦτα ἔδει πα 2% Luke xxiv. 86 ff. (σάρκα καὶ oo
Sev; v. 44, δεῖ πληρωδῆναι τὰ γε- TEA).
γραμμένα. Cf. xxiv. 7.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 333

plicity and comprehensiveness, of independence and _har-
mony, of perfect truthfulness and absolute wisdom. The
Resurrection, then as now, is proved to be the touchstone
of character. In the presence of this great fact the
thoughts of many hearts are revealed. Per-
sonal devotion, even if mistaken and limited,
is received with a welcome of joy. Hope, which had
sunk by a natural and violent reaction even
to despair, is cheered by a word of peace,
and strengthened to utter the highest confession of faith.’
Silent love looks and believes. To the eye
of the beloved disciple the Lord was known
when hidden from others; and while some hastened to
embrace or worship Him, it was his part to wait in
patience, and in this sense also to tarry till the Lord came.
However incomplete the comparison between parallel
evangelic narratives which has been made in

John xx. 15, 16.

John xx. 24, ff.

John xxi. 7,

The results of these

this chapter may be in some of its details, it characteristic ai
wets » x ferences.

seems impossible not to feel that it throws a

striking light upon the individuality, the independence,
and the inspiration of the Gospels. A more complete
examination, which should take account of every shade of
difference, such as could only be apprehended by personal
study, would fill up an outline which is too
plain to be easily mistaken. The character-
istic traits which have been noticed appear in the records
of a series of incidents which have been selected for their
intrinsic importance, and not arbitrarily. They are so
subtle that no one could attribute them to design; and
yet so important that they convey their peculiar effect to
the narratives. Without any constant uniformity they
converge towards one point; and even when their con-
nection is least apparent, they present a general impression

The Individuality,

1 Matt. xxviii. 9, Χαίρετε. Here σεν. Cf. Luke xxiv. 12, which isa very
only in the Gospels. ancient gloss, if not a part of the orig-
2 John xx. 26, 28. inal text.
3 John xx. 8, καὶ εἶδεν καὶ ἐπίστευ-

BBE THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

of a definite law to which they are subject. Diversity of
detail is seen to exist without contrariety; and the exhi-
bition of a spiritual purpose with the preservation of literal
accuracy.

Individuality is a sign of independence. The more
exactly any one compares parallel passages
of the Gospels the more certainly he will
feel that their likenesses are to be referred to the use of a
common source, and not to the immediate influence of one
Gospel upon another. The general’ form is evidently
derived from some one original type; the special elabora-
tion of it is due to personal knowledge and apprehension
of the events included in the fundamental cycle of teach-
ing. The evidence of the evangelists is thus one and yet
independent. They do not reproduce one uniform history ;
but give distinct histories according to the outlines of a
comprehensive aud common plan.

We may proceed yet one step further. Individuality
and independence, when presented in such a
form as to exhibit complementary spiritual
aspects of the same facts, are signs of inspi-
ration. From one side it is possible to refer the phe-
nomena which they offer to the mental characteristics of
the Evangelists; but it has been seen that the human
element is of the essence of inspiration. The Bible is
divine because it is human. The: Holy Spirit speaks
through men as they are, and the fulness of their proper
character is the medium for conveying the fulness of the
truth. It follows, then, that in proportion as it can be
shown that there is a distinctness of purpose, though most
free from the marks of conscious design, in the several
Gospels,— in proportion that there can be shown to exist
in them significant differences consistent with absolute
truth, there is a sure pledge of their plenary inspiration in
the truest and noblest sense of the words. Nothing less
than the constant presence of the Holy Spirit, if we can
in any way apprehend the method of His working, could

independence, and

inspiration of the
Evangelists.

OF THE SYNOPTIC KYANGELISTS. 335

preserve perfect truthfulness with remarkable variations ; a
perfect plan with childly simplicity ; an unbroken spiritual
concord in independent histories.

NOTE TO PAGE 321.
ON THE DAY OF THE CRUCIFIXION.

The difficulties connected with the chronology of the Paschal week are
acknowledged on all hands to be very considerable, and ee et a,
the various solutions which have been proposed have gene.
tended to perplex the question still more by introducing (a) The Crucifix-
uncertainty into the interpretation of the terms involved. pad Se ried ee
The examination of these difficulties may be divided into
two distinct parts, — the determination (1) of the day of the month, and
(2) of the day of the week, on which the Lord suffered. Of these the
first includes the alleged discrepancy between the Synoptists and St. John
as to the time and character of the Last Supper; the second, on the other
hand, is chiefly of interest for the interpretation of the Gospels. The two
questions are quite independent, and will be considered separately.

I, All the Evangelists agree as to the name of the day of the Crucifixion ;
and in the absence of all evidence to the contrary, it is entirely unreason-
able to suppose that the name is used in more than one sense. The day
was The Preparation (ἣ παρασκευή), or rather A Preparation (παρασκευή).

Matt. xxvii. 62, τῇ δὲ ἐπαύριον ἥτις ἐστὶν μετὰ Thy παρασκευήν.

Mark xv. 42, ἐπεὶ ἦν παρασκευή, ὅ ἐστιν προσάββατον.

Luke xxiii. 54, καὶ ἡμέρα ἦν παρασκευῆς καὶ σάββατον ἐπέφωσκεν.

John xix. 31, ἐπεὶ παρασκευὴ ἦν (cf. ν. 42); ν. 14, ἦν δὲ παρασκευὴ τοῦ
πάσχα.

What then was the Parasceuwe— The Preparation? There can be no
doubt that in early Christian writers, as in modern Greek, this was the
name of Friday (Clem. Alex. Str. vii. p. 877, § 75, 7 Mlapaokevh .. . ἐπιφη-
μίζεται... ἡ ᾿Αφροδίτης. Cf. Polyc. Mart. 7,79 Παρασκευῇ δείπνου ὥρα.
Tertull. De Jejun. 14). Friday was indeed the preparation for the weekly
Sabbath, and as such it was natural that the name should be used for it
so commonly that at last it became the proper name of the day.! But the
name and character of Sabbath was not confined to the weekly day of
rest. There were other festival-days which had the same Sabbatic charac-
ter, and foremost among them the first day of the feast of unleavened

1The word appears, as it were,ina ἐγγύας μὴ ὁμολογεῖν αὐτοὺς ἐν σάβ-
transition-state in a decree of Augustus βασιν, ἢ τῇ mpd ταύτης παρασκευῇ
preserved by Josephus: Ant. xvi. 6,2, ἀπὸ Spas ἐνάτης". .

336 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

bread (Lev. xxiii. 15, τὰ σάββατα. Cf. νυ. 11, Hebr. vv. 24, 39); and thus
the day before these festival-sabbaths would likewise include a Preparation,
in the same way as that before the weekly sabbaths. ΑἹ] festivals did not
partake in this Sabbatic character, and consequently the enumeration of
days in Judith (viii. 6, evhotevey... χωρὶς προσαββάτων καὶ σαββάτων, καὶ
προνουμηνιῶν καὶ νουμηνιῶν καὶ ἑορτῶν καὶ χαρμοσυνῶν οἴκου ᾿Ισραῆλ) proves
nothing as to the exclusive use of the word προσάββατον, by which St.
Mark explains παρασκευή, for the weekly Preparation.1

If it is allowed that there is nothing in the Synoptic Gospels, so far as
the title of the day is concerned, which determines
whether it is to be understood of the weekly or of the
festival preparation, St. John seems to leave no real room
for doubt. In point of grammar, παρασκευή τοῦ πάσχα
—the Preparation of the Passover — might mean the Fri-
day in the Paschal week ; but it seems incredible, if we take into considera-
tion the significance of St. John’s dates, that the Evangelist should reckon
by the week and not by the symbolic feast, of which he is recording the
fulfilment.2 In connection with the whole narrative, “‘the Preparation of
the Passover” cannot mean anything but “‘the Preparation for the Passo-
ver,” or in other words the fourteenth Nisan, the eve of the Paschal sup-
per, which was eaten at the bezinninz of the fifteenth Nisan, according to
the Jewish reckoning, 7. e., after sunset of the fourteenth, according to
our own.®

The dates furnished by the Synoptists fall in with this interpretation.
On “‘ the first day of unleavened bread,”’ which is identi-
fied with the fourteenth of Nisan by the significant addi-
tion, ‘‘ When they sacrificed the Paschal-offering”’ (Mark
xiv. 12, τῇ πρώτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν ἀζύμων ὅτε τὸ πάσχα ἔϑυον;
Luke xxii. 7,7 ἦμ. τ. a¢. ἐν ἢ ἔδει τὸ πάσχα ϑύεσϑαι;
Matt. xxvi. 87, τῇ δὲ πρώτῃ τῶν aC), the disciples inquired ‘‘ where they
should prepare the Passover.”? Then follow in unbroken succession the
Last Supper (Matt. xxvi. 20; Mark xiv. 17, ὀψίας γενομένης ; Luke xxii.
14, ὅτε ἐγένετο 7 Spa), the departure to Gethsemane (Matt. xxvi. 31; Mark
xiv. 27, ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ ταὐτῃ), the arrest, the examination (Matt. xxvi. 74,
and parallels, ἀλέκτωρ ἐφώνησεν), the deliberation (Matt. xxvi. 1, πρωΐας
γενομένη5), and the various steps of the Passion. Now it appears that the

(b) The Prepa-
ration day fixed by
St. John as the Eve
of the Passover.

1 M. Lutteroth, in an ingeniousessay late John xix. 42, because of the Friday

(Le Jour dela Preparation, Paris, 1855),
has endeavored to identify the Prepa-
ration with the tenth of Nisan, the day
on which the offering was set apart.
Luke xxii. 7, seems to be decisive
against this supposition, and M. Lut-
teroth appears to feel the difficulty
which the most forced interpretation is
insufficient to remove.

- 2 This will be felt at once if we trans-

of the Jews (Bleek, Beitr. 1117).

3 In conformity with this the Jewish
tradition represents ‘‘the Eve of the
Passover?’ as the time of the Crucifix-
ion (Bleek, Beifr. 148). The connection
between the two uses of παρασκευὴ is
well seen in the connection of 222. the
eve of a feast, and SM2572Z Friday
(Buxt. Lex. p. 1659).

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 357

fourteenth was kept ata later time as a day of rest especially in Galilee
(Mishna, Pesach. iv. 1, 5; ap. Bleek, Beitr. 1221), that is probably the
natural day, excluding the evening. ‘This fact supports the idea, which is
probable in itself, that the question of the disciples was asked immediately
upon the sunset of the thirteenth. The Preparation is evidently contem-
plated as foreseen by the owner of the house, and need not have occupied
much time.2 The evening of the Supper would thus be as St. John repre-
sents it, the evening at the beginning of the fourteenth. The same day
after sunrise next morning is rightly described as a Preparation-day, —
“the Preparation of the Passover,” though the Preparation, in the strict-
est sense of the term, was limited to the last three hours, from “ the ninth
hour.”

This view of the time of the Last Supper is supported by a variety of
indirect arguments, common to St. John and the Synop-
tists, which appear to be so cogent in themselves that
many critics who affirm the inconsistency of the two
forms of the narrative, assume that the original basis of the Synoptic
Gospels presented the same chronology as St. John, and that these coin-
cidences spring from the partial preservation of the first text.

But before noticing these less distinct intimations of the date, there are
yet two other passages of St. John which seem to leave
no room to doubt his meaning, if it be not clear already.
On the morning of the day of the crucifixion the Jews,
as he writes, would not enter the judgment-hall of Pilate,
“that they may eat the Passover” (John xix. 28, ἵνα φά-
γωσι τὸ πάσχα). Nothing but the determination to adapt these words to
a theory could suggest the idea that ‘‘ eating the Passover” applies to any-
thing but the great Paschal meal.4 Our ignorance as to the custom of the
Jews at the time makes it impossible to determine the extent of impurity
contracted by entering the house of a heathen, but it would at any rate
last till sunset, in which case the person thus impure could not be present
at the sacrifice of the offering in the Temple. Nor is it less decisive on
the point that towards the close of the evening on which the Last Supper
took place, and when it was nearly ended, the disciples thought that Judas

2. Indirect Evi-
dence.

(a) St. John im-
plies that the Pass-
over was not eaten
on the Crucifixion
Day.

1 Sapientes dicunt, in Judza opera-

bantur vespera Paschatis. (“A793
E°rmit5) usque ad meridiem. Sed in

Galilea nihil omnino operabantur ; et
nocte schola Schammai vetat, schola
Hillelis permittit usque δα scintilla-
tionem solis. Cf.§ 6. The whole chap-
ter is worthy of study in illustration of
the care with which even the fourteenth
Nisan was observed. Cf. Pesach. ν. 1,
p. 159.

2 Mark xiv. 15, δείξει ἀνώγαιον μέγα
ἐστρωμένον ετοιμον.

8 The phrase occurs in the account of

the institution of the Passover, Exod.
xii. 21, ϑύσατε τὸ πάσχα, and, though
the words might perhaps be extended
to the keeping of the whole rite, yet
they properly describe the sacrificial
act as distinguished from the entire fes-
tival (ποιεῖν τὸ πάσχα, Num. ix. 2, 6,
20; etc.). Cf. Deut. xvi. 2, 5, 6; Ezra
vi. 20, 21, ἔσφαξαν τὸ πάσχα... . καὶ
ἔφαγον τὸ πάσχα.

4'The passages quoted in support of
the rendering, ‘‘ celebrate the feast, by
eating the Chagiga,” fail in true paral-
lelism (Bleek, Beitr. 109 ff.).

338 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

was dismissed that he might buy the things which were needed for the
feast (John xiii. 29, ὧν χρείαν ἔχομεν εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν), which was already
defined as ‘‘the feast of the Passover” (xiii. 1, mpd δὲ τῆς ἑορτῆς τοῦ
πάσχα). On the fifteenth such purchases would have been equally illegal
and impossible.
This passage leads to the series of other passages already alluded to,
which so far determine the day of Crucifixion as to show
ee oe that it was not fifteenth Nisan. This day — the first day
ply that the Cruci- Of unleavened bread — was a Sabbath, on which the Sab-
Jixion day was not atic law of rest was specially binding (Exod. xii. 16;
the fifteenth Nisan εἴν 2 5
(a Sabbath). Lev. xviii. 7). Now the Synoptists and St. John alike
exclude the notion that the day of the Crucifixion was
such a “Sabbath.” Apart from the extreme improbability that such a
festival as the first day of unleavened bread would be described as “ Fri-
day” or “ Preparation-day,” everything is done without scruple which
would have been unlawful on a Sabbath. A commission to make pur-
chases is regarded as natural (John xiii. 29); the Lord and His disciples
leave the city contrary to the command (Exod. xii. 22); men come armed
for the arrest of Christ! (Luke xxii. 52); the Jewish council meets for
judgment ; Simon comes (as it appears) from his ordinary work (Mark xv.
21; Luke xxiii. 26, ἐρχόμενον am ἀγροῦ); the condemned are executed and
taken down from the crosses, and at the close of the day spices are pre-
pared for the embalming of the Lord (Luke xxiii. 55), and because of the
Preparation (that is, of the approaching Sabbath) He is laid in a tomb
which was near (John xix. 42), whereas if it were the fifteenth, the day
itself was a Sabbath.2 To those familiar by experience with Jewish usages,
as all the Evangelists must have been, the whole narrative of the Cruci-
fixion, crowded with incidents of work, would set aside the notion that
the day was the fifteenth. Where the idea was excluded by facts, there
would be no need of words and no fear of ambiguity; and if we keep
clearly in view the Sabbatical character of the fifteenth, we shall be satis-
fied that all the Evangelists equally forbid us to place the Crucifixion on
such a day.
One or two allusions, which perhaps cannot be urged as arguments
without claiming greater authority for the symbolic
(c) The symbol- meaning of Holy Scripture than many would concede,
ism of the Passion . ᾿
favors the four. seem to point clearly to the result which has been thus
teenth of Nisan. obtained from the positive evidence in favor of the four-
teenth Nisan, and the negative evidence against the fif-
teenth. St. John, by applying to our Lord words from the institution of
_ the Passover,’ evidently contemplates Him as the true Paschal Lamb, and

1 And this, it may be noticed, when acts mentioned, on the Sabbath: the
the rulers determined to avoid the feast enumeration itself seems sufficient for
(Matt. xxvi. 5; Mark χίν. 2, μὴ ἐν τῇ any one acquainted with the Jewish
ἑορτῇ). law.

2 Bleek (1. 6.) quotes authorities to 3 John xix. 86, compared with Exod.
show the illegality of doing the several xii. 46.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 999
the harmony of the narrative is completed by the supposition that the
time as well as the mode of the Lord’s death coincided with that of the
typical victim.! St. Paul repeats the same idea more distinctly, 1 Cor. v. 7,
τὸ πάσχα ἡμῶν ἐτύϑη Χριστός' ὥστε ἑορτάσωμεν x. τ. A.; and it has been

argued with great plausibility that if he had regarded the institution of
the Eucharist as taking place at the Paschal meal, he would not have said
simply ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ ἣ παρεδίδετο (1 Cor. xi. 23). Noris it to be forgotten
that these references of St. Paul are the more important as proceeding
from a distinct source.

On such a point historical tradition may seem to some to be of no great
weight, but it is evident that the tendency of any change
in the tradition would be towards the identification of
the Last Supper with the Paschal meal, and not towards
the distinction of the two, if they had been originally connected. Now,
as far as appears, early tradition is nearly unanimous in fixing the Cruci-
fixion on the fourteenth, and in distinguishing the Last Supper from the
legal Passover.2 This distinction is expressly made by Apollinaris,? Clem-
ent of Alexandria, Hippolytus,5 Tertullian, Irenzus,® who represent very
different sections of the early Church. Origen, according to the Latin
version of his Commentary on St. Matthew, seems to identify the Supper
with the legal Passover, but the passage is confused.7 From the time of
Chrysostom the meal was generally identified with the Passover;8 but
Photius expressly notices that two writers who differed widely on other
points of the Paschal controversy agreed in fixing the Passion on tue
fourteenth, contrary to the later opinion of the Church, and therefore
reserves the question for examination.? The quartodeciman controversy

8. Historic Evi-
dence.

1JIn this aspect the time, the ninth
hour (Matt. xxvii. 46; Mark xv. 34;
Luke xxiii. 44), is very important. This
was the beginning of the solemn Prepa-
ration (comp. p. 335, n. 1). ;

2 Cf. Routh, Rell. Sacr. i. 168.

38 Fragm. ii. ap. Routh, i. p- 160, λέ-
γουσιν [οἱ δι ἄγνοιαν φιλονεικοῦσι
περὶ τοὐτων] ὅτι τῇ ἰδ᾽ τὸ πρόβατον
μετὰ τῶν μαϑητῶν ἔφαγεν ὁ Κύριος,
τῇ δὲ μεγάλῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν ἀζύμων αὐτὸς
ἔπαϑεν" καὶ διηγοῦνται Ματϑαῖον οὕτω
λέγειν ὡς νενοήκασιν. ὅδεν ἀσύμφω-
vos τε νόμῳ Hh νόησις αὐτῶν, καὶ στα-
σιόζειν δοκεῖ κατ᾽ αὐτοὺς τὰ εὐαγγέ-
Ata. This fragment is specially impor-
tant as pointing to what may have been
the source of the confusion, the differ-
ent reckoning of the Jewish ecclesias-
tical and natural days: the evening at
the beginning of the fourteenth seems
to have been coufounded with the eve-
ning at the end of the fourteenth (the

natural day), 7. e., the evening of the
fifteenth and the time of the Paschal
meal.

Apollinaris (in Fragm. iii.) elsewhere
states distinctly that the Lord, “the
great sacrifice,” was crucified and
‘* buried on the day of the Passover,”
the fourteenth, “the true Passover of
our Lord.”

4 Clem. Alex. Fragm. p. 1016, Pott.

5 Hipp. Fragm. i. ii. (p. 869, ed.
Migne).

6 Tertull. adv. Jud. 8; Iren. iv. 10,1
(28) (quoted by Browne, Ordo Seclo-
rum, Ὁ. 66). Yet Ireneus calls the
meal “ἃ Passover”? (ii. 22, 2).

7 Orig. Comm. in Matt. § 79.

8 The interesting Catena on St. Mark
published by Cramer contains both
opinions (Cram. Cat. in Marc. pp. 420,
421), the second with a reference to St.
Jolin.

9 Phot. Cod. 115, 116.

340 THE DIFFERENCES IN DETAIL

itself has no decisive bearing on the date. The evidence as to the point
on which the controversy turned is too meagre and ambiguous to allow of
any satisfactory conclusions being drawn from it.1
But in answer to all these arguments which are drawn from direct and
indirect evidence of every kind, it is said that the Syn-
Sure ΓΕ optists plainly speak of the Last Supper as the Paschal
Tat Stupor: meal. It might, perhaps, be enough to answer that they
define the day of the Crucifixion at least as plainly, and
that St. John, who is in perfect harmony with them as to the day, shows
that the meal was not the Paschal meal, as, indeed, it could not be, if it
was on “the Preparation-day.”’ Either, then, they must include a gross
contradiction in their narrative, or we must misinterpret their meaning as
to the day or the meal; and certainly not as to the former, because that is
fixed by a complicated chain of evidence, while the other is expressed in
one or two phrases which admit readily of a different sense, when once we
reflect that the very circumstances of the case must have put out of ques-
tion for Jews what appears to us to be their most natural meaning. It is
said that the disciples speak of “preparing for eating the Passover”
(Matt. xxvi. 17; Mark xiv. 12; Luke xxii.9); that Christ Himself pro-
poses to eat it (Matt. xxvi. 18); Mark xiv. 15; Luke xxii. 8); that the dis-
ciples actually “prepared the Passover” (ἡτοίμασαν τὸ πάσχα; Matt.
xxvi. 19; Mark xiv. 16; Luke xxii. 13); that in the course of the meal
which followed immediately afterwards the Lord said, “1 desired to eat
this Passover with you” (ἐπεθύμησα τοῦτο τὸ πάσχα φαγεῖν wed ὑμῶν,
Luke xxii. 15). If these words stood alone, there can be no doubt that we
should explain them of the Paschal meal taken at the legal time; but the
Evangelists who use them exclude this sense by their subsequent narra-
tive, and there are in the contexts indications of the sense in which they
must be taken. The Lord, in sending His disciples to
make the preparation, said, ‘‘ My time is near” (Matt.
xxvi. 18), as if to explain something unusual in His com-
mand. He sent, as the words imply, to a disciple who was expecting
Him, and speaks with authority as “the Master’ (ὁ διδάσκαλος, Matt.
xxvi. 18; Mark xiv. 14; Luke xxii. 11). May we not then suppose that
the preparation which the disciples may have destined for the next day
was made the preparation for an immediate meal which became the
Paschal meal of that year, when the events of the following morning
rendered the regular Passover impossible?? If this seems a forced sense,
we must remember that while the memory of events was still fresh, as it
was when the oral Gospel was fixed, statements which are perplexing to
us may have been readily intelligible from a knowledge of the connecting
facts. Nothing at least can be more unlikely than that the narratives
should be severally inconsistent with themselves. Ritual difficulties which

How this inust be
understood.

1 Cf. Bleek, Beitr. 156 ff. The use of πάσχα for the Christian

2 Hippol. Fragm. i. p. 869, ovTos yap Eucharist would render the confusion
> / Φ . . 5 . Β . .
ἦν τὸ πάσχα TO προκεκηρυγμένον Kal easier in after time; cf. Mingarelli, Did.
τελειούμενον τῇ ὡρισμένη ἡμέρᾳ. de Trin. ii. 16.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 541

we can fecl only by effort and careful study, would be felt instinctively by
the Evangelists. They and their first readers could not have referred the
events of the Crucifixion-day to the “ Sabbath”’ on the fifteenth, and con-
sequently could not, as we might do, refer the words which describe the
supper which preceded it to the legal Passover.

II. It remains to notice very briefly the second point of inquiry. Long
use and tradition seem to have decided this already, but
it may be questioned whether there are not grounds for i. The weck-
doubting the correctness of the common opinion. In the πὼς Sea
record which St. Matthew has preserved of the saying of
the Lord as to “the sign of Jonah,” it is stated that “the Son of Man
shall be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth’’ (Matt. xii.
40, τρεῖς ἡμέρας καὶ τρεῖς νύκτας). Admitting that the parts of the days
of the burial and the resurrection are to be reckoned as “ days,” yet even
thus the pericd from Friday tili Sunday is only three days and ¢wo nights.
Are we then to conclude that the separate enumeration of days and nights
is without any special force, and strictly speaking inaccurate? or to sup-
pose that the term “‘ Preparation-day ”’ has Jed to the very natural but erro-
neous identification of the day of the Crucifixion with Friday? The evi-
dence on both sides is but slight. On the one hand it may be said that Str.
John spoke of the Sabbath which followed the Preparation as being of
special solemnity (John xix. 31, ἦν δὲ μεγάλη 7 ἡμέρα ἐκείνου τοῦ σαββά-
του), and this would certainly be the case if the fifteenth of Nisan, a festi-
val Sabbath, coincided with the weekly Sabbath; and so also St. Luke
appears to mark only one day as intervening between the burial and the
resurrection (Luke xxiii. 54, 56, σάββατον ἐπέφωσκεν .. . τὸ μὲν σάββατον
ἡσύχασαν). But St. Matthew describes the day after the Crucifixion in so
remarkable a manner, as to lead to the belief that he did not regard it as
the weekly Sabbath: “ The next day that followed the day of the Prepara-
tion the chief priests came to Pilate” (τῇ δὲ ἐπαύριον, ἥτις ἐστὶν μετὰ τὴν
παρασκευήν, Matt. xxvii. 62). Such a circumlocution seems most unnatu-
ral if the weekly Sabbath were intended; but if it were the first day of
unleavened bread, then, as the proper title of that day had been already
used to describe the commencement of the Preparation-day (Matt. xxvi.
17, τῇ δὲ πρώτῃ τῶν ἀζύμων), nO characteristic term remained for it. More-
over, the day in itself was a “great Sabbath,” and could be described as
such by St. John, without supposing any coincidence of the weekly and
festival Sabbaths. And the whole Sabbatic period, extending from the
beginning of the fifteenth of Nisan to the dawn of the first day of the
week might, perhaps, without violence be called a Sabbath; or at least
the rest on the fifteenth might be implied in the statement of the rest
observed on the Sabbath. Such a period would completely satisfy the
term fixed by “the sign of Jonah,” and the text of the Gospels, with the
exception of the one passage in St. Luke, which forms an apparent diffi-
culty, leaves the length of the entombment undetermined, except so far
as it is fixed by “the first day of the week,” and the legal resting-time
whrich interrupted the preparations of the disciples.1

1 The other dates which refer to the interval are: (1) Matt. xxvii. 63, εἶπεν

29*

942

DIFFERENCES OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS.

But without pursuing the question further at present, what has been
said may be sufficient to direct attention to the investigation, which seems
to call for more notice than has been hitherto given to it.

«ὐν μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμέρας ἐγείρο-
μαι: κέλευσον οὖν ; cf. Mark viii. 31,
del... META τρεῖς ἡμέρας ἀνα-
στῆναι; Mark ix. 81; x. 84, ἀσφαλισ-
Siva τὸν τάφον ἕως τῆ" τρίτης
ἡμέρας. (2) John ii. 19, λύσατε τὸν
ναὺν τοῦτον καὶ [ἐν] τρισὶν ἡμέραις
ἐγερῶ αὐτόν. Cf. Matt. xxvi.61; Mark
xiv. 58; διὰ τριῶν ἡμερῶν. Matt.

xxvii. 40; Mark xv. 29, ἐν τρισὶν ἡμέ-
pats. (3) Matt. xvi. 21; xvii. 28; xx.
19; Luke ix. 22; xviii. 33; xxiv. 7, 46,
τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ ἀναστῆναι. (4) Luke
xxiv. 21, τρίτην ταύτην ἡμέραν ἄγει.
It will scarcely be denied that the ob-
vious meaning of these phrases favors
the longer interval, which follows from
the strict interpretation of Matt. xii. 40.

SAP TER VEL:

THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT OF THE SYNOPTIC
EVANGELISTS.

Le coeur a son ordre. — PASCAL.

Tue differences of arrangement in the Synoptic Evangel-
ists are more obvious and not less important
than the differences in detail. Numerous japon sorte te
groups of events present the same arrange- S"eceii ese
ment in every case, but other events are trans-
posed, so as to convey a new lesson from the new position
in which they stand. While there is very much which is
common to all the Synoptists, the incidents peculiar to
each produce the same kind of individuality in the whole
narratives, as the special details impart to the separate ele-
ments of which they are composed. Each Evangelist has
a characteristic arrangement, coincident up to a certain
point with that of the others, and yet so far different that
harmonists are commonly driven to violent expedients —
assumptions of the repetition or confusion of similar events
— to bring all into agreement. But before taking recourse
to such solutions of the difficulty we may fairly ask, whether
the order of the Evangelists is a violation or an abandon-
ment of chronological sequence. If the succession of time
is subordinated to the succession of idea, then it is but lost
labor to seek for a result which our materials are not fitted
to produce. The object of the student will be to follow out
the course of each revelation of the Truth, and not to frame

844 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

annals of the Saviour’s Life. There are, indeed, times
marked out by marvellous coincidences and significant
relations in which we may see something of the symmetry
of the divine plan of history, but evidence is wanting to jus-
tify the extension of a system of minute dates to the teach-
ing of the Lord. If what has been already said of the
fragmentariness of the Gospels be true, and the character
and express language of St. John’s Gospel seem to be con-
clusive on this point, then it is from the first unlikely that
writings which do not aim at completeness should observe
Selection is
in the one case what arrangement is in the other. The
first was guided by an instinctive perception of representa-
tive facts; the other by an instinctive perception of their
An inspired order is the cor-

with scrupulous exactness the order of time.

relation to a central idea.
relative of an inspired abridgment. The existence of the
one sugeests the existence of the other, or at least removes
any presumption against the disregard of the common

rule cf composition.
If, however, the text of the Gospel bear clear traces
of a systematic attention to chronology, the

The Gospels ex- - a
hibit few tracesof argument based on a mere analogy which
ig might be expected to hold between matter
But in fact it is not so. The

examination of a few chapters of the Synoptic Gospels

and form must be set aside.

will leave little doubt that temporal sequence was not the
standard of their arrangement. Their whole structure, as
well as their contents, serves to prove that they are me-
moirs and not histories. Definite marks of time and place
are extremely rare; and general indications of temporal or

local connection are scarcely more frequent. The ordi-

1 From the time of the Temptation
to the Transfiguration I have noticed
ouly the following distinct connections
of detailed events:

1. Matt. viii. 18, 34. The storm
stilled; the Gadarene demoniacs; the
yeturn. So Mark iy. 35 ff. (connecting

these events with the great day of Par-

ables: cf. Matt. xiii.53); Luke viii. 22 ff.
2. Matt. ix. 18, ταῦτα αὐτοῦ λαλοῦν-

Tos. Of the new and old; Jzirus’

daughter. Cf. Mark v. 22; Luke viii.

ΔΝ , . .
41, καὶ ἰδοῦ, fixing no connection of
time.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 345

nary words of transition are either indefinite or are dis-

junctive.’

are more like collections of anecdotes than histories.

3. Matt. ix. 82, αὐτῶν δὲ ἐξερχομέ-
νων. The healing of two biind; the
healing ofa dumb man (peculiar to St.
Matthew).

4, Matt. xii. 46, ἔτι αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος ;
xiii 1, ἐν TH ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ (yet cf. Acts
τ ἢ. Aare ἵν, ke καὶ πάλιν. Luke
viii. 4, συνιόντος δὲ ὄχλου. The blas-
phemy of Pharisees; the true kindred;
the day of Parables. Compare No. 1.

5. Matt. xiv. 22; Mark vi. 45, evdéws
ἠνάγκασεν. The walking on the water
immediately after the feeding the five
thousand.

6. Matt. xvii. 1; Mark ix. 2, wey
ἡμέρας εξ. Luke ix. 28, ὡσεὶ ἡμέραι
vxTw. The coming of the kingdom;
the Transfiguration.

7. Mark i. 29, καὶ εὐθὺς ἐξελϑόντες.
Luke iv. 38, ἀναστὰς δέ (Matt. viii. 14,
καὶ eAd@y... noconnection: ef. y 23;
Mark i. 99). The demouiac in the syn-
agogue; Peter's wife’s mother cured.

8. Luke vii. 11, ἐν τῇ ἑξῆς (all. τῷ
€fjs). The centurion’s servant; the
widow’s son.

These data are evidently insufficient
to determine one certain order of
events; nor are the ambiguities re-
moved by taking into account the no-
tices that some events followed others:
Matt. ix. 9, 27; xii. 9, 15;. xv. 21, 29.

It may be observed that the style of
St. Matthew produces the greatest ap-
pearance of continuity, though prob-
ably he offers the most numerous diver-
gences from chronological order. (Cf.
Matt. viii 1, bxAOL πολλοῦ" 2—4,
καὶ ἰδού... μηδενὶ εἴπῃς: 5, εἰσελ-
δόντος ; 14, καὶ ἐλδών; 18, ἰδὼν δέ;
23, καὶ ἐμβάντι; χὶν. 13,14). St Luke,
on the other hand, is the least con-
nected. The great series of events
which he connects with the last jour-
ney to Jerusalem (xi.—xvii.), is at once
one of the strongest arguments against
the observance of time by the Evangel-

Outwardly, at first sight, the Synoptic Gospels

ists, and the most striking illustration
of their mode of connection.

1 Jn this respect the usage of each
Evangelist is peculiar. The following
connecting plirases may be uoticed:

1. In St. Matthew:

(a) Tote (at that time; no close se-
quence. The word does not oceur in
this manuer in St. Mark; cf. Luke xxi.
10) iii. 5, 18; (iv. 1); ix. 14, 37 {ἐν 35);
δι τε ἢ 1}. ἐν, eo USL. GOs) Vs 1. 15.
Xvi. 243: xvili. 21; xix.18,.27; xx. 20;
xxiii. 1. In iv.1; xiii. 35, it marks a
direct sequence.

(b) δὲ. iv. 18; vy. 1; viii. 18; xi. 2;
xv. 82; xvi. 18.

(d) ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ καιρῷ, xi. 25; xii.
1; xiv. 1. ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ὥρᾳ, xviii. 1.
ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις, 111.1. ἐν τῇ
ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ, xiii. 1.

(6) To these may be added the use of
éxewdev, ix.9, 27; xii. 9, 15; xiii. 53;
xv. 21, 29.

2. In St. Mark:

(a) Kal... πάλιν; ii. 1,13; iii. 1; iv.
1 (καὶ πάλιν); vii. 81 (καὶ πάλιν); viii.
1, ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις πάλιν.

(b) kal, i.21, 40; ii. 18, 28; iii. 7, 13,
20, 81; iv. 21, 24, 26, 805 vi. 1, 7, 14, 30;
vii. 1, 28; viii. 22, 27.

3. In St. Luke:

(a) καὶ ἐγένετο (ἐγένετο δέ) (occurs
in St. Luke forty-one times; in St.
Mark twice; in St. Matthew, καὶ ἐγέ-
veto ὅτε ἐτέλεσεν (συνετ. viii. 28),
else once, ix. 10), v.1, 12,17;
ix 18;

five times:
Vide 9. 15. vil, 11 vile. 22%
a Ue. gam

(Ὁ) καί, iv. 16, 81; vii. 18; viii. 26;
ise 10. 61. Ka 36,

The connections of xi.—xvii. will be
noticed afterwards.

940 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

we compare any series of incidents which they contain
with a similar series in any historian, ancient or modern,
we shall find at once that, apart from all other differences,
there is a fundamental difference in the way in which the
incidents are put together. In the one the circumstances
of time and place rule the combination; in the other the
spiritual import, not independent of these, but yet rising
above them, is distinctly predominant.

But while it is maintained that the separate Gospels are
not to be forced into any chronological har-
mony; that the law of their composition is
moral and not temporal; that there is a pro-
gressive development in the several histories,
co neglect which is to lose the very outline of their divine
meaning; yet the order of time, as far as it can be ascer-
tained, is not to be neglected. The occasion frequently
gives its character to the action. A marked connection
brings out with unerring power some latent trait which
might otherwise have been overlooked.t’ Thus it is that
particular days seem to stand out with signal prominence
in the history of Christ, as portraying a crisis of faith and
unbelief in a rapid concurrence of events.” The days them-
selves stand isolated, while as distinct wholes they have an
internal unity. But beyond such a limited influence of
time as this, there is an influence which extends to a much
In the perfect Life all succession proceeds by
asupreme law. The progress in the lessons which it unfolds
will answer absolutely, as among men partially, to its out-
ward development. It is, then, impossible but that there

The order of time
generally coinci-
dent with aspiritual
order.

wider range.

1 The healing of the woman with the receive a new life. It is impossible not

issue, which in all the accounts inter-
rupts the history of the raising of Jai-
rus’ daughter, offers the most remark-
able illustration of this, The beginning
of the woman’s plague was coeval with
the maiden’s birth. The one had suf-
fered for twelve years when she was
made whole; the other had lived for
twelve years when she fell asleep to

to recognize in this a typical meaning.
The faith of the Gentiles seizes the gift
which is destined for the Jew. This is
beautifully brought out by Hilary, Jn
Matt. ix. § 6.

2Two such days may be noticed:
Luke iv. 883—42, a day of faith; Mark
111. 22—v.22, a day of opposition, warn-
ing, power.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 347

should be some broad lines of agreement in order between
records of Christ’s work based on its varied spiritual mean-
ings. General agreement will be diversified by character-
istic divergences. The agreement will be sufficiently wide
to convey to us some sense of the infinite harmony of every
part and relation of the human life of the Saviour; the
divergence sufficiently striking to save us from sacrificing
the manifold bearings of eternal truth to a rigid order
of time.

If this view be correct, the technical work of the har-
monist is limited to a narrow compass. When
he has shown that the few incidental fixed
dates in the Gospels are consistent with one
another, all objections drawn from the dis-
cordant order which they present otherwise
fall to the ground. He is then free to interpret the letter
by the spirit; and to lay open that inner harmony which
springs out of the union of various purposes, and leads to
the full portraiture of a divine work. The reality of such
a harmony is involved, as we have seen, in the very idea
of Inspiration, and it is, perhaps, a corollary from the exist-
ence of a four-fold record. Yet it is to be felt rather than
analyzed. The subtlest signs by which it is characterized
vanish in the rude process of dissection. To present it
clearly, and even then very inadequately, would be to write
a commentary on the Gospels; and for the present it must
be enough if we can determine some of the great features
by which it appears to be distinguished.

We have already seen that St. Matthew connects the

The Harmony of
the Gospels to be
sought in the combi-~
nation of the pur-
poses which they
work out.

beginning of the Gospel-history with the glo-
ries of the typical kingdom and the hopes of
the first covenant. At the very outset he
announces the Messiah as the son of David
and the son of Abraham, the branch and seed
to which all prophecy looked.

I. St. Matthew's
Gospel.

The History of
the promised Mes-
siah.

The Introduction
(i. ti.)

The genealogy, confined

within the limits of the national promise, is the introdue-

348 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

tion to his narrative; the birth of the Christ? his first sub-
ject. The inner scope of the whole Gospel is directed to
the development of this idea in the light of ancient revela-
tion” The fear of Joseph is connected with
the righteousness of the law; and the imper-
fection of this righteousness is at once intimated by the

Matt. i. 18.

1 There can be little doubt that the correct reading in Matt. i. 18, is τοῦ δὲ
Χριστοῦ ἢ γένεσις οὕτως ἣν.
2 The following analysis may guide the student in pursuing the teaching of
St. Matthew.
INTRODUCTION. i., ii.
The Royal pedigree (i. 1—17).
The Virgin’s Son, the promised Saviour (18—25).
The homage (ii. 1—12).
The persecution (18—23).
(In all the words of prophets are fulfilled.)
1. THE PRELUDE. iiii., iv.
(a) The Baptist (iii.):
The Messenger (l1—6). The Message (7--12). The Recognition
(18—17).
(b) The Messiah (iv ):
The Trial (1—11). The Home (12—16). The Message (17). The
Call (18—22). The Work (28—25).
2. THE LAWGIVER AND PROPHET. v.—xiii.
(a) The new Law in relation to the old (v.—vii.)
(δ) The testimony of signs (viii., 1x.).
Characteristics (viii. 1—15).
The Suppliant (Resignation, 1—4); the Intercessor (Faith,
5—13); the Restored (Service, 14, 15).
The Lord and the Disciples (viii. 18—ix. 17).
Self-denial (18—22).
Power (Nature, 23—27; Spirits, 283-34; Sin, ix. 1—8).
Mercy (9-- 19).
Prudence (14—17).
The Results (ix. 18—34).
Faith confirmed (20—22); raised (28—26); attested (27—381).
Unbelief hardened (32—34).
(c) The Commission (ix. 86—xi.).
The Charge (x.).
The Hearers (xi.).
John (1—15); the People (16—19).
W oes (20—24); Thanksgivings (25—380).
(d) The Contrast (xii.).
The letter and the spirit of the Law.
Example (1—9); Miracle (10—18).
The kingdom of Satan and the kingdom of God (22—87).

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. ot)

reference to the sins of the people from which Christ should
save then. But the holy name Jesus — sym-
bolical at once of the ancient triumphs of Is-
rael and of the future triumphs of the Church — is merged

Matt. i. 21.

The sign of Jonas (88—45).
Natural and spiritual kindred (46—50).

(e) Parables of the kingdom: its rise, growth, consummation (xiii. ).

ὃ Toe Kine. xiv.—xxv.
(a) The character of the King, compared with

Temporal dominion: ;
The feast of Herod; death of John (xiv. 1—12).
The feast of Christ (Jews); the disciples saved (18---88).

Hierarchical dominion:
The tradition of the elders (xv. 1—20).
The Syropheenician heard (21—28).
The Gentiles healed and fed (29—39).
Truth hidden from some (xvi. 1—12), revealed to others (198-20.

(b) Glimpses of the kingdom.
The prospect of suffering (xvi. 24—28).
The vision of glory (xvii. 1—18).
The secret source of strength (14—21).
The citizens.
Moral principles: Obedience: a sign (xvii. 24—27); Humility,
Unselfishness, Forgiveness (Xviii.).
Social characteristics: Marriage, children, riches, sacrifice
{πξῖχ.}
Yet all without intrinsic merit (xx. 1—16).
(c) The King claims his heritage.
The Journey (xx. 17—384)
The triumphal Entrance (xxi. 1—17).
The Conflict (xxi. 18—xxii.).
The sign (xxi. 18—%2) The first question (23—27). The por:
traiture (28—xxii. 14). The temptation (15—40). The last
question (41—46).
The Judgment (XxXiii-—XXv.).
The Teachers (XxXiii.).
The City (xxiv.).
The World (xxv.).
4, DEATH THE GATE OF THE ETERNAL KINGDOM. xxXvi.—xxviil.
(a) The Passion (xxvi., XXvii.).
Contrasts: foreknowledge, craft (xxXvi. 1—8).
love, treason (6—16).
The Last Supper: woes foreseen and faced (17—29).
The rash promise: power misjudged (30—395).
The inward Agony (36 —46).
The outward Desertion (87—56).
The Confession of Christ (57—68).

300 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

for the moment in that mysterious title which was conse-
crated by the memory of an ancient deliver-
ance. The sense of God’s personal presence,
which, when shadowed forth in former times, had sustained
the king of Judah against the armies of Syria and Damas-
cus, is at length confirmed by a literal fulfilment of the
symbol. Jimmanuel is no longer a figure, but a truth.
The parable becomes a fact; the word of hope, a confes-
sion of faith.

The first chapter declares the title of Messiah, the
second foreshows His reception. Adoration on the ‘one
side, persecution on the other; the ministry of the powers
of heaven, the tyranny of the powers of earth; bloodshed
and flight and exile; such are the beginnings of the king-
dom. Ile who is saluted by prophets as God
with us, is, according to the tenor of their
teaching, a Wazarene, poor and despised, in the eyes of men.

So far we have a preface to the Gospel pregnant with
symbolic facts. Next follows a brief sum-
mary of Messiah’s work, presented in a rapid
contrast between His preaching and the
preaching of His herald. Both proclaim the same mes-

sage.’ Both choose the field of their labor
ue “according to the declarations of prophecy.
But with this the resemblance ends. The
work of John is that of the Law, to awaken and convict.

15. vit.

Matt. ii. 23.

1. The Prelude.
(iit. tv.)

The denial of Peter (69—75).

The death of Judas (xxvii. 3—10).

The death of Christ (11-50).
Christ and Barabbas (15—26). Christ and the soldiers (27—81)-
Christ and the bystanders (382—456).

The Burial (57—61). The watch (62—66).

(δ) The Triumph.

The Rising in glory (1—-10).
The false report (11—15).
The great commission (16—20).

1 Matt. iii. 2; iv. 17, Μετανοεῖτε, ἤγ- reading in the second case is not simply
γικεν yap ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν. Ἤγγικεν 7) Bao. τ. ovp. See Scholz
It may be doubted whether the true ad loc.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 501
He confronts the two great sections of the Jewish Church!
with terrible denunciations against the pre-

scriptive holiness of descent and ritual. For

hope he points only to Him who should come. In act,
if not in word, he acknowledges the fulfilment of his
office in the recognition of Messiah.2 And then the
scene changes. The wilderness, which was

the place of John’s teaching, is the place of

Christ’s Temptation. When John is cast into prison,
Christ definitely begins His work.’ Instead of repelling
or dismissing men, Christ calls them to fol-
low Him and share His labor. Te announces
in the synagogues the Gospel of the king-
dom,* and confirms His word by signs of
power and love.

From this point we are led to regard our Lord more in
detail under His different offices, as Law-
giver, Prophet, and King. One trait prepares
the way for the other, so that it is difficult to
make a very definite line of demarcation between the
different sections of the history; but, while the transitions
are gradual, the general progress of idea is beyond ques-
tion. The beginning is a counterpart of the revelation from
Sinai; the close a fulfilment of the covenant with David.

In this aspect the Sermon on the Mount is first seen in
its true bearing on the scope of St. Matthew.
That which was for St. Luke but as one dis-
course among many, was for St. Matthew the
introduction and key to all.6 The phrase with which it is

Matt. tii. 7.

Matt. vii. 1; iv. 1.

Matt. iv. 18 ff.

Matt. iv. 23 ff.

2. The Messiah
as Lawgiver and
Prophet. (v.—aiti.)

(a) The New
Law. (v.—vii.)

1 From not observing the point of
this, some have felt a difficulty at the
mention of these sects. St. Matthew
gives the relation of the religious par-
ties of the Jews to John, as St. Luke
of each social alass. Both form to-
gether a whole: τῶν Φαρ. καὶ Σαδδ.

2 Thus he yields to the words, πλη-
paca πᾶσαν δικαιοσύνην (Matt. iii. 15).
Compare John i. 31.

8 Matt. iv.12,17. Yet He had taught
before: Jolin iii. 22 ff.

4 Matt. iv. 28, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς
βασιλείας. The phrase is characteris-
tic of St. Matthew, ix. 85 (a remarkable
parallel); xxiv. 14. In Marki. 14, it is
a false reading.

5 Matt. xxviii. 18, 20.

6 There cannot, I think, be any rea-
sonable doubt that the discourse related

352

THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

opened marks the solemn majesty of its delivery. Words

of blessing are the preface of the new dispensation?

Step

by step the nature of Christ is unfolded as the consumma-

tion of the Jewish Theocracy.’

in Luke vi. 20 ff. is the same as that
related by St. Matthew. The differ-
ences on which some have laid stress
vanish upon an accurate examination
of the text. The scene in St. Matthew
is τὸ ὄρος (vy. 1), a word of general
meaning: St. Luke defines the spot
more precisely as τόπος πεδινός (vi. 1
not πεδίον), a plateau on the mountain,
below its highest peak (καταβάς), such
as would naturally be chosen for ad-
dressing amultitude. I see no contra-
diction between ἔστη in Luke vi. 17,
and καϑίσαντος αὐτοῦ in Matt. v. 1.
The words refer to different moments,
and St. Luke preserves a trait of the

The great features of the

latter in vi. 20, €mapas τοὺς ὀφϑαλ-
μοὺς αὐτοῦ εἰς TOUS μαϑητά-.

1 Matt. ν. 1. ἀνοίξας τὸ στόμα (cf.
Eph. vi. 9). Spanheim, Dub. Hvang.
111. p. 875. In v. 21 ff. ἀρχαίοις is cer-
tainly (as apparently all the ancient
versions) ‘to the men of old.” Cf.
Rom. ix. 12 (ix. 20 LXX); Gal. iii. 16;
Apoce. vi. 11; ix. 4; Matt. xxii. 31.

2It is worthy of remark that the
Kingdom is noticed in the first and last
(v. 8, 10); nor would it be difficult to
point out a relation observed in the
order of the blessings. Verses 4 and 5
in E. V. should be transposed.

3 The following outline of the Sermon on the Mount will make this clearer: —

1. THE CITIZENS OF THE KINGDOM (vy. 1—16).

(a) Their character (1—12).
In themselves (8 —6).
Poor in spirit.
eousness.
Relatively (7—12).
Merciful to men.
secuted.

Meek.

Peace towards God. Pursuing peace.

Sorrowing., Hungering after right-

Per-

The example of the prophets.

(Ὁ) Their influence (18—16).
To preserve (13):
2. THE NEw Law (17—48).

To guide (14—16).

(a) The fulfilment of the Old generally (17—20).
(Ὁ) The fulfilment of the spirit of special commandments.
Murder. Adultery. Perjury. Revenge. Exclusiveness. (21—48.’

8. THE NEw LIFE (vi.—vii. 28).

(a) Acts of devotion (vi. 1—18).

Alms (1—4).
(6) Aims (19—84).

Prayer (5—15).

Fasting (16—18).

The true treasure (19—21).
The single service (22—24).
The perfect repose (25—84).

Charitable in judging (1—5).
Circumspect in teaching (6).
Faithful in well-doing (7—12).

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 353

Christian commonwealth, the character! and influence of
its citizens, the principles of the Christian law, and the
practice of the Christian life, are deduced from the ordi-
nances, and often expressed in the words, of the Old
Testament. The voice which speaks is one of absolute
authority, but it proclaims everywhere not abrogation but
fulfilment.

The promulgation of the new Law is followed by the
record of a series of miracles* which enforce 4) me testimony
and explain the true position and authority Ὁ sigs (viii. ἴω.)
of the Lawgiver. He fulfils the spirit of the Ἀπὸ. »# 1-1”.
Law and acknowledges its claims, while He violates the

(4) Dangers (vii. 13—23),.
From himself (13, 14).
From false teachers (15), to be tested by
Works of faith (16—20), not by
Works of power (21—23).
4. THE GREAT CONTRAST (vii. 24—27).

1 If we represent to ourselves the company, the emphatic duets in v. 13, 14 will
appear very striking.

2 The following scheme of the Miracles recorded by St. Matthew will serve te
show their relation to the framework of his Gospel. Noone scheme, of course,
can exhaust the lessons of the miracles. This only shows their bearing in suc-
cession upon one great idea. The miracles peculiar to St. Matthew are marked
by italics:

1. THE MIRACLES OF THE LAWGIVER.
(a) In relation to the Old Law.
a. The spirit before the letter (v. 3).
The leper cleansed (viii. 2—4).
b. Faith before descent (v. 10).
The healing of the centurion’s servant (viii. 5—18).
6. The service of love before ritual observance (v. 14).
The healing of Peter’s wife’s mother (viii. 14, 15).
{Many healed, as Esaias prophesied, viii. 16, 17 ]
(0) In Himself, as all powerful over,
a. The material world.
The stilling of the storm (viii. 23—27).
ὃ. The spiritual world.
The Gadarene demoniacs healed (viii. 28—84).
e. The power of sin.
The paralytic healed (ix. 1—8).
{c) In relation to man, as requiring faith:
a. Actively, to seize the blessirg.
The woman with issue healed (ix. 20—22).
b. Passively, to receive it.
Jairus’ daughter raised (ix. 18—26).
τ 90}

354 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

letter ;! He points to faith, and not inheritance, as the basis
of His kingdom; He shows that active gratitude for God’s
mercies is unrestrained by ceremonial injunctions.” Or, to
regard the subject from another point of sight, the same
miracles indicate in succession the certainty, the spirituality,
and the completeness of His works; and if we turn from
the works themselves to those for whom they were wrought,
we notice resignation as the true mark of the suppliant ;
faith, of the intercessor; service, of the restored. Outcast,
stranger, and friend, are alike heard. All is, indeed, infinite

c. As a measure of the blessing (v. 29).
The two blind men (ix. 27—81).
d. As the means of understanding it.
The dumb devil east out (ix. 82—84).
[Many healed, ix. 35 }
2. THE MIRACLES GF THE PROPHET OF THE KINGDOM.
(a) Vindicating the law of conscience (in Action).
The withered hand healed (xii. 10—14).
(Ὁ) Rescuing the sight and speech from the power of evil.
The blind and dumb devil cast out (xii. 22—30).
8. THE MIRACLES OF THE KING.
(a) As to His people.
a. Jews.
In relief of want.
Feeding of the five thousand (xiv. 15—21).
In relief of toil (v. 24).
Walking on the sea (xiv. 22—85).
5. Gentiles.
In answer to prayer.
The woman of Canaan (xv. 21—28}.
[Many healed, xv. 30, 31.}
In reward of patience (v. 32).
The feeding of the four thousand (xv. 32—89).
(δ) As to His title.
a. Perfect by human preparation (v. 21).
Healing the lunatic (xvii. 14—21).
ὃ. Legitimate by divine right (wv. 25, 26).
The stater in the fish (xvi. 24—27).
[Many healed, xxi. 2.]
(c) As to His government.
a. Merciful according to our prayer (v. 32).
The two blind men healed (xx. 30—384).
b. Just according to our fruits (vv. 19—22).
The fig-tree cursed (xxi. 17—22).
1 It was unlawful to touch a leper: Matt. viii. 5; Lev. v. 3.
2 Matt. viii. 16 indicates that the miracle was wrought on the Sabbath. Cf.
Luke iy. 81, 38.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. δὺ

because it is divine. The significance of the signs deepens
as we look to their different bearings.

The common relation of Christ to the people being thus
indicated, He is seen in a clear relation to
His disciples. He claims perfect self-denial 9“ "™**~"*
and he exhibits perfect power and mercy and wisdom.
The material and spiritual worlds obey His voice: the bands
of sin are loosened by His word. But, at the same time,
faith is ‘exhibited as the measure of man’s syst ir. o0.
blessing, and the means whereby he may rec- Matt. wr. 6, 22.
ognize the presence and the power of God. as
The outward cure is the image of an unseen salvation.
The blind do not see till they believe; and
when utterance is given to the dumb, the neg
Pharisees can say that the devil is cast out through the
prince of the devils.

The character of the Lawgiver next passes into that of
the Prophet. The mission of the apostles is
the public establishment of the kingdom, of
which the nature and authority are already
declared. Discourses predominate largely over miracles.
The facts are constructive and not initiatory.

mission.

Matt. x.
The great charge is placed in vivid juxtaposi- matt. «i. 1-19;
: : ° 20—30.
tion with a portraiture of the people among
whom the apostles should work. Woes are balanced by
thanksgivings. The true disciples are shown to be, not
the wise, but the simple; not the spectators of mighty mir-
~acles, but the meek and lowly of heart.
> . (a) The Contrast.
Then follows a contrast which penetrates the λαμ, «ii. 1-- 18.
whole range of life. The letter and the spirit
of the Law are contrasted by the light of Seripture,' of
reason, of miracle; the kingdom of Satan Oe
¥F Matt. xii, 22--57 ;
with the kingdom of God; the sign of Jonas — aii. 38-45.
: ae : : Matt. wii. 46-50.
with the questionings of the Jews; the kin-
dred of blood with the kindred of the spirit. And at this

1 The remarkable passage, rv. 5—7, is peculiar to St. Matthew.

356 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

point, while the multitudes press to hear, the formation
and growth of “the kingdom ” in its widest
(e) Parables of ᾿ “ ᾧ Θ ὰ
the kingdom. relations is explained by analogies from the
Matt. xiii. 1—52. ΓΞ . . .
natural world,' rich in instruction for the
believing, and mere riddles for the faithless. We read
S) ;

1 The following are the Parables re- fore in the record of the miracles, and
corded in St. Matthew, which, it will be in the general plan of the Gospel. The
seen, fall into two divisions, which cor- parables peculiar to St. Matthew are
respond with the Prophetic and Kingly marked by italics:
aspects of Christ’s character, as seen be-

1. IMAGES OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF CHRISTIANITY.
(a) Its source.
a. From God.
The sower (xiii. 8—8).
b. Yet counterfeited by the devil.
The tares (xiii. 24--- 80).
(8) Its progress.
a. In outward extent.
The mustard-seed (xiii. 31, 82).
b. In inward influence.
The leaven (xili. 33).
(c) Its relation to men.
a. Asa gift from heaven.
The hid treaswre (xiii. 44).
b. As a power in the individual.
The merchant seeking pearls (xiii. 45, 46).
6- As a wide-working instrument.
The drawnet (xiii. 47—50).
2. IMAGES OF THE LIFE OF MEN.
(a) Love.
a. A spontaneous feeling.
The lost sheep (xviii. 12—14).
ὃ. A debt due to God.
The unmerciful servant (xviii. 28—25).
(b) Dependence.
The laborers in the vineyard (xx. 1—16).
(c) Activity.
a. Obedient in spirit, as of sons of God.
The two sons (xxi. 28—82).
ὃ. Unselfish, as of stewards of God.
The wicked husbandmen (xxi. 83—41).
(d) Reverence.
The marriage of the king’s son (xxii. 1—14).
(e, Responsibility.
a. At all times.
The ten virgins (xxv. 1—13).
ὃ. In all positions.
The talents (xxv. 14—380).

2 St. Matthew alone expressly gives planatory of His teaching, wv. 14, 15.
Christ’s reference to prophecy as ex- It is implied in the other accounts.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 357
of the Divine power which founds it, and of the simul-
taneous influence of evil;' of its outward majesty and of
its inward power; of its objective value and of its subjec-

tive claims ;? and, lastly, of its universality.

On earth con-

fusion and error prevail to the last, but there will be a day

of final separation. Christ
prophet in His own country.

Himself is no

Matt. ziti. 53 ff.
He does there Biomirnet

few mighty works because of their unbelief; and yet He
is preparing to claim His royal inheritance.
The royal dignity of Messiah is introduced by an inci-
5

dent which, but for this connection, appears,
to break the tenor of the history.
anny of an earthly sovereign —the feast of
Herod and the death of John —stands in
clear opposition to the love of Him whose
compassion was moved by the sight of the

8. The Messiah as

1 ss

‘Die tyre 4s:

i Matt. xiv.—xxv.
(a) The charac-

ter of the King,

as compared with

earthly and

Matt. xiv. 1-33.

gathered multitudes, so that He healed and fed them in

the wilderness.

tradition of the elders is set aside as opposing

Herod, though grieved, works murder;
Christ saves even beyond the extent of man’s hope.
poral dominion presents one side of the con-
trast: hierarchical dominion, the other.

Tem-

hierarchical do-

minton.

Matt. xv. 1—29.

The

the Law of God; and the blessings extended to Jews are
now symbolically assured to Gentiles, as citizens of the

future kingdom.

The faith of the Canaanite and the

patience of the waiting multitude win the help which

1The real force of this parable
(24—30) seems to have been lost by not
attending to the word ὡμοιώϑη, as dis-
tinguished from ὁμοία ἐστί. The
Church is subject tooutward influence;
it is made like to some things, as it 18
like to others. Cf. xviii. 28; xxii. 2;
xxv.1. The full foree of (Cama, which
had the semblance but not the fruit of
wheat, is well given in the words of
Origen: Non solum est sermo Christus,
et est sermo Antichristus: veritas Chiris-
tus, et simulata veritas Antichristus:
sapientia Christus, est simulata sapi-

entia Antichristus ...quoniam omnes
species boni quascunque habet Christus
in se in veritate ad xdificationem homi-
num, omnes eas habet in se diabolus
in specie ad seductionem sanctorum.
(Comm. in Matt. 88.)

2 xiii. 45, ὁμοία... dvSpdémw... (η-
τοῦντι not ὁμοία μαργαρίτῃ asin v. 44.
The spirit of the kingdom works in the
man. In 44, 45, 47, a threefold form of
image is given, corresponding to a
threefold aspect of the operation of the
Gospel (ϑησαυρῷ: avdpémrw, σαγήνῃ)

358 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

excites the surprise of the disciples. Yet even thus it is
not given to all to see Christ. The signs of
the times are unintelligible to the blind of
heart; while to the faithful God Himself reveals the deep-
est mysteries.

St. Peter’s inspired confession opens the way to further
elimpses of the kingdom. Yet the earliest
manifestation of Christ’s glory, like the splen-
dor of the eastern sky, betokens the coming
storm. The announcement of shame
and death is the introduction to the vision of
majesty. The Transfiguration of Messiah is
connected with the first distinct announce-
ment of His sufferings, with the prospect of His human
conflict, and the vindication of His divine right. Thence-
forth He speaks more in detail of the citizens of the king-
dom: of their moving principles, obedience,
humility, unselfishness, forgiveness; and of
their social characteristics, of the rights of
marriage, as a religious bond; of the duties of wealth, as a
blessing derived only from God. Yet all claims of merit
~ are excluded. Many first shall be last. The
warning voice of the parable which closes
the section shows that our reward rests in God’s good
pleasure.

The journey to Jerusalem presents once again the con-
flict between the hopes of the disciples and
the work of Christ. Their prayer for dignity
is answered by the foretelling of suffering ;
and on the other hand,:the eyes of the blind are opened,
though the multitude rebukes them, as they cry for mercy
to the Son of David ‘The title of Messiah, with which

Matt. xvi. 1-20.

(b) Glimpses of
the Kingdom.
Matt. xvi. 5.

Matt. xvi. 24—28.
and

Sorrow

Matt. xvit. 21, 26.

Matt. avii. 24—
Tvl.
Matt. xix.

Matt. ax. 1-16.

Matt. xa, 20—34.

1It is worthy of notice that this stores true vision to man. In Mark

phrase is used in the one other place in
which sight is restored to the blind at
their own prayer: Matt. ix. 27. We
may feel that the act of faith which
acknowledges Jesus as the Messiah re-

viii. 22, sight is restored by interces-
sion; in John ix. 3,4, by a direct act
of divine mercy: so many are the ways
in which God enlightens us. Cf. Matt.
xii. 23; xv 22; xxi. 9, 15.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS.
the Gospel began, is thus resumed at its close.’ In virtue
of His royal power He purifies the temple of
God, and marks by a type the national bar-
renness of Israel,—a disobedient and faithless people.
Then follows the conflict. The question of
eavillers is followed by a portraiture of their
eharacter. The political objections of the Herodian, the
intellectual difficulties of the Sadducee, the legal disputes
of the Pharisee, are answered.2. A counter
question closes finally this second Tempta-
tion; and a triple judgment pronounced on
the teachers, on the city, on the world, prepares the way for
the Passion. The record of the public ministry of Christ
ends where it began, in the teaching of the Law. But
woes answer to blessings ; the sentence of the Scribes to the
Sermon to the multitudes: the first had declared the ful-
filment of the spirit of Judaism, the last exposes the cor-
ruption of its practice. And when Christ turns to His
disciples the words of judgment still remain. He destroys
their present hope of an earthly kingdom by prophesying
the destruction of Jerusalem; and, yet more, He passes on-
ward to the end of the outward Christian Church, to that
final day when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of
His glory, and judge all nations as their King.’

Matt. xxi. 18-22.

Matt. xxi. 23--xxti.

Matt. xxii. 41--46.
Matt. xxiii.--xxv.

The narrative of the Passion, like so much 5 Dore) Ge
τε gate of the Eternal
else in St. Matthew, proceeds by contrasts. Aigdom.

(a) The Passion.

Calm foreknowledge and restless craft; de-
votion and treachery; the advance to death and the rash

promise; the inward agony

1 The multitudes, and afterwards the
children, cry: Hosanna to the Son of
David (Matt. xxi. 9, 15). This saluta-
tion does not occur in the other Gospels.

2The variety of language of the
Evangelists gives a full picture of the
spirit of Christ’s enemies: Matt. xxii.
18, γνοὺς τὴν πονηρίαν. Mark xii. 15,
εἰδὼς τὴν ὑπόκρισιν. Luke xx. 23,
κατανοήσας Thy πανουργίαν.

and the outward desertion,

3 Matt.xxy. 31. The whole discourse
is peculiar to St. Matthew; and this is
the only place in which our Lord as-
sumes the title of King. Cf. Matt. v.
85; xxi. 5; Luke xix. 38; John xix.
27.

The reader of Plato will call to mind
the magnificent myth of Er the Arme-
nian (Zoroaster, Clem. Alex. Str. v. §
104): Resp. x. pp. 614 ff.

360 TIE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

heighten the effect of a pieture which only familiarity
can weaken. And the contrast does not end even here.
The confession of the Lord and the denial of the servant;
the death of Judas and the death of Christ; the care of
friends and the vigilance of enemies, carry it
on to the last with a divine power. Love
still lingers by the grave which seemed to be closed over
all hope.

The history of the Resurrection completes the lesson of
the whole Gospel. We have passed from the
spirit of the Mosaic Law to the foundation
of the Church, and the inspiring strength of the Atone-
ment. The temporal hopes of the ancient people have
been gradually replaced by their spiritual antitypes; the
costly offerings of the Magi by the precious ointment of a
believing woman; the adoration of sages by the simple

faith of a despised Canaanite. Yet once

Matt. xxvii. 61.

(b) The Triumph.

Ca vert 15 again the Lawgiver of the New Covenant

addressed His disciples from the Galilean
mountain, but He dwelt no longer on the people of the
past, but on the Church of the future: the command-
ments to the men of old were fulfilled in the teaching of
Christianity. Once again the promised King
appeared, and received the homage of His
subjects, but it was as the Lord of heaven and earth, and
not as the Prince of Israel. Once again the
Prophet of our Faith spoke comfort to His
Apostles, while He assured to them the essence of the the-
ocratic rule in the promise of the abiding presence of Im-
manuel: Lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the
world.’

Mait. xaviit. 19.

xxviii. 20.

1 The Gospel of St. Matthew is not gelist. Among these the following are
very broadly characterized in language the most important : —
or construction. Thestyle isnot nearly 1. Ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν (rasta
so Hebraizing as that of St. John, nor ©2227). The kingdom of heaven,
is the language so rich as that of St. which occurs thirty-two times in St.
Mark. Yet there are some words and Matthew, and not in the other Evan-
phrases which mark the Hebrew Evan- gelists, who use in parallel passages

OF THE

SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS.

361

The Gospel of St. Mark offers a great contrast to that

of St. Matthew in its general effect.
peculiarities of language and minuteness of
detail which are least observable in St. Mat-

The

Il. St. Mark.
Christ working
among nien,

thew are most obvious in St. Mark; and, conversely, St.
Mark offers nothing which answers to the long expositions

of the Lord’s teaching in St. Matthew.

This fundamental

difference is seen at once in the relative pro-

portion in which the records of miracles and

The
action.

Gospel of

parables stand to one another in St. Mark.
The number of miracles which he gives is scarcely less

ἡ βασιλεία Tod Seov, the kingdom of
God. (Matt. vi 88; xii. 28; xxi. 31, 48.)

2. ὁ πατὴρ ὁ ἐν οὐρανοῖς (ὃ οὐρά-
vios), which occurs fifteen times in St.
Matthew, twice in St. Mark, and not
at all in St. Luke (in xi. 2, it is a false
reading). Generally it will be observed
that of οὐρανοὶ is the seat of the heay-
enly powers; ὅ οὐρανὸς the physical
heaven.

3. Tids Δαυείδ, seven times in St.
Matthew, three times each in St. Mark
and St. Luke.

4. ἡ ἁγία πόλις, the Holy City.
Matt.iv.5; xxvii.53. Not in the other
Evangelists. Cf. Matt. xxiv. 15, τόπος
ἅγιος. Apoc. xi. 2; χχὶ. 2 (ἡ πόλις ἡ
ἁγία); xxi. 10.

5. ἡ συντέλεια τοῦ αἰῶνος, the con-
summation of the age (“ the end of the
world”). Matt. xiii. 89 (συντ. αἰ.) 40,
49; xxiv. 3; xxviii. 20. Hebr. ix. 26,
συντέλεια τῶν αἰώνων, the meeting of
the Old and New. Cf. Job xxvi. 10,
LXX. ap. Schleusn.

6. ἵνα (ὅπως) πληρωϑῇ τὸ ῥηϑέν,
eight times in St. Matthew. Not else-
where in this form. In St. John, ἕνα
mAnpwsn ὃ λόγος (ἣ γραφή); in St.
Mark once, ἵνα πλ. ai γραφαί.

7. τὸ pndev twelve times (ὅ pnveis,
iii. 3); ἐῤῥήδη six times. Not else-
where of Scripture (Mark xiii. 14, a
false reading). Cf. Gal. iii. 16. St.
Matthew always uses τὸ ῥηϑὲν when

quoting Scripture himself. In other
quotations he has γέγραπται, as the
other Evangelists. He never uses the
singular γραφή.

8. καὶ ἰδού (in narrative) in St. Mat-
thew twenty-three times; in St. Luke
sixteen; not in St. Mark.

9. (παρεγένοντο)... λέγοντες abso-
lutely, without the dative of person.
Cf. Gersdorf, Beitrage, 95 f.

10. ἐϑνικός, Matt. v. 47; vi. 7; xviii.
17. Cf. Gal. ii. 14.

11. ὀμνύειν ἐν. twelve times in St.
Matthew. Cf. Apoc. x. 6.

Several other peculiarities collected
by Credner (inl. 37) and Gersdorf
establish the unity of authorship, but
do not appear to be obviously charac-
teristic of the position of the author,
€. J., EWS οὗ, πᾶς ὅστις, τάφος, ava-
χωρεῖν, προσελϑεῖν, μαϑητεύειν, μα-
λακία, ἐγείρεσϑαι ἀπό, the position of
the adverb after the verb, ete. Cf. p.
Sol, τι. 4.

Still more characteristic is the intro-
duc‘ion of prophetic passages by the
Evangelist himself (cf. p. 282, n.1): i.
23 || Is. vii. 14; ii. 15 |] Hos. xi. 1; ii. 18 j]
Jer SXxvill. 15% ji. 22% ἦν. 15,16] Jes
tx.1,2; viii. 17 || Is. liti. 4; xii. 18 fF I}
is tlio Ff; wii. 85 || Ps. ieevit. 2:
xxi. 5 || Zech. ix. 9; xxvii. 9, 10 || Zech.
xi. 135. The general references to Mes-
siah’s work (distinguished by italics)
deserve especial notice,

902 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

than that in the other Synoptic Gospels,’ while he relates
only four parables.2 Like St. Peter,® he is contented to lay |
the foundation of the Christian faith, and leave the super-
structure to others. It is enough that Christ shouid be
presented in the most vivid light, unfolding the truth in
acts rather than in words; for faith will translate the pass-
ing deed into an abiding lesson. Everything centres in
the immediate facts to be noticed. Without drawing a
complete history, St. Mark frames a series of perfect pic-
tures. But each is the representation of the outward fea-

1 The Miracites recorded by St. Mark fall into the following groups: —
1. SIGNS OF THE SAViIOUR’S WORK (i. 238—ii. 12).
The devil cast out in the synagogue (i. 28—28 )
The fever healed in the house (i. 80, 31).
Tlie leper cleansed (i. 40—45).
The paralytic pardoned and restored (ii. 3—22).
2. SIGNS OF THE SAVIOUR’S TEACHING (iii. 1—6; iv. 85—v).
(a) Freedom of action.
The withered hand restored on the Sabbath (iii. 1—6).
(0) Trials of faith.
The storm stilled (iv. 35—41).
The legion cast out (v. 1—20).
The woman with issue healed (v. 25—34).
Jairus’ daughter raised (v. 21—24, 85—43).
3. SIGNS OF THE KINGDOM (vi. 30—52; vii. 24—viii. 9, etc.).
(a) The extent of the Kingdom.
The satisfaction of the Jews: five thousand fed (vi. 830—44).
The passage (vi. 45—52).
The satisfaction of Gentiles:
The Syrophenician (vii. 24—380).
The deaf and dumb man (vii. 81—87).
The four thousand fed (viii. 1—9).
(Ὁ) Special lessons.
Discernment. The blind man at Bethsaida (viii. 22—26).
Faith. The lunatic (ix. 14—29).
Mercy. Bartimzeus (x. 46—52).
Judgment. The fig-tree (xi. 12—14).
The most remarkable omission is that Miracles peculiar to St. Mark are dis-
of the ‘*Centurion’s servant.” The tinguished by italics.
2 They are the following: —
(a) Parables of the growth of the Kingdom.
The sower (iv. 1—20). The seed growing secretly (iv. 26—29}
The mustard seed (iv. 830—82).
(δ) Parable of judgment.
The husbandmen (xii. 1—12).

8 Dr. Stanley’s Sermons on the Apostolic Age, p. 102.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 363

tures of the scene. For this reason the Evangelist avoids
all reference to the Old Testament.' The quotations which
occur in the Lord’s discourses remain, but after the intro-
duction he adds none in his own person. The living por-
traiture of Christ is offered in the clearness of His present
energy, not as the fulfilment of the past, nor even as the
foundation of the future. His acts prove that He is both;
but this is a deduction from the narrative, and not the sub-
ject of it.

It follows from what has been already said, that the
chief point for study in St. Mark’s Gospel is
the vividness of its details, and not the subor- ara of St. Mark to

: : . ὦ be sought in details.
dination of its parts to the working out of
any one idea. The narrative does not, indeed, vary consid-
erably in its contents from the other Synoptic Gospels, and
offers several broad divisions which mark successive stages
in the work of Christ.2,. But turning from the construction

1 The quotation in xv. 28 isan inter- afterwards. It may be noticed that the
polation. The quotation in 1. 2, 8 seems word νόμος never occurs in St. Mark;
to show that the Evangelist purposely itis frequent in the other Evangelists,
avoided references to the prophecies but is not found in St. Peter.

2 The following outline will convey a general notion of the construction of the
Gospel, and supersede the necessity of examining it in detail :—

THE PREPARATION. i. 1—13.
1, THE Work FORESHOWN By AcTS. i. 14—ii. 12.
(a) The call (i. 14—20).
(Ὁ) Signs (i. 21—ii. 12).
Possession; fever; leprosy; palsy.
2. OUTLINES OF TEACHING. ii. 13—iv. 34.
(a) Traits of the new life.
The call of the publican (ii. 13—17).
The lesson of prudence (18-—22).
The Sabbath: Example (ii. 23—28); sign (iii. 1--6).
(δ) The Kingdom of God and the world.
The apostles (iii. 13—19); the enemies (20—30); the true kin-
dred (31—35).
Parables of the Kingdom (iv. 1—3t).
(ce) Signs (iv. 35—v.).
The storm (iy. 85—41); legion (v. 1—20); the woman with issue;
Jairus’ daughter (21—43).
/d) The issue: Unbelief (vi. 1—6).

904 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

of the whole record to the characteristic treatment of sep-
arate incidents, we are at once struck by the extent and
importance of the minute peculiarities which St. Mark
presents. There is not, perhaps, one narrative which he
gives in common with St. Matthew and St. Luke to which
he does not contribute some special feature. These pecu-
liarities are so numerous that they prove his independence
beyond all doubt, unless we are prepared to admit the only
possible alternative, that they are due to the mere fancy
of the Evangelist; a supposition which is sufficiently
refuted by their character. The details point clearly to
the impression produced upon an eye-witness, and are not
such as would suggest themselves to the imagination of a

8. THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE KINGDOM. vi. 6 b—xiii.
(a) The mission of the Aposties (vi. 6 b—13):
Temporal dominion.
The feast of Herod: John (vi. 14—29).
The feast of Christ: Christ on the waters (80—652).
Hierarchical dominion.
The tradition of the Elders (vii. 1—28); blessings for the Gen-
tiles; the Syrophenician; the deaf and dumb; the multi-
tudes fed (vii. 24—viii. 9).
Lack of discernment in some (10—21).
A sign (22—26).
Revelation to others (27—83).
(δὴ) Glimpses of the Kingdom (ix.—x. 81).
The prospect of suffering (viii. 34—388); the vision of glory (ix.
1—13); the secret source of strength (14—29).
The citizens. :
Humility; charity; self-denial (ix. 33—50); marriage; chil-
dren; riches; sacrifice (x. 1—31).
(c) The sovereignty claimed (x. 32—xiii).
The journey (x. 32—52).
The triumphal entrance (xi. 1—11).
The conflict.
The sign (xi. 12—25); the first question (27—83); the portrai-
ture (xii. 1—12); the temptation (18—34); the last ques-
tion (98 —37).
* The Pharisees (88 —40): the widow (41—44).
_ The judgment (xiii).
4. THE ETERNAL KINGDOM ENTERED THROUGH THE GATE OF DEATH.
xiv.—xvi.
The end foreshown by act (xiv. 8—9) and word (12—31).
The agony; betrayal; denial; condemnation (xiv. 32—-xv. 20).
The crucifixion; burial (xv. 21—47).
The resurrection; revelation; ascension (xvi).

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 365

chronicler. At one time we find a minute touch which
places the whole scene before us;’ at an-
other time an accessory circumstance, such
as often fixes itself on the mind, without
appearing at first sight to possess any special interest ;* now
there is a phrase which reveals the feeling of those who
were witnesses of some mighty work;* now a word which
preserves some trait of the Saviour’s tenderness,’ or some
expressive turn of His language.’ Other additions are
such as might have been made for the sake of clearness,
even by one who had no immediate information as to the

Additions which
prove direct wyor-
mation.

1 In the enumeration of the chief pe-
culiarities of St. Mark given in the fol-
lowing notes, 1 have not attempted
more than a rough classification. The
erroneous views commonly held as to
the epitomatory character of his Gos-
pel invest these details with peculiar
interest, and they will repay careful
study.

iv. 87, 38, τὰ κύματα ἐπέβαλλεν
eis τὸ πλοῖον... καὶ αὐτὸς ἣν ἐν TH
πρύμνῃ ἐπὶ τὸ προσκεφάλαιον Kadev-
δων.

vi. 38.

vi. 48, Kal ἤϑελεν παρελϑεῖν αὐτούς.

ix. 8.

ix. 14—16.

x. 50, 6 δὲ ἀποβαλὼν τὸ ἱμάτιον αὐ-
τοῦ ἀναπηδήσας ἦλθεν...

xv. 44.

5.1. 20, μετὰ. τῶν μισϑωτῶν.

ivy. 86, καὶ ἄλλα δὲ πλοῖα ἦν per’
αὐτοῦ.

vi. 41, καὶ τοὺς δύο ἰχϑύας ἐμέρισεν
πᾶσιν.

xiv. 51,52. Cf. pp. 236, 323.

xiv. 3, συντρίψασα τὴν ἀλάβαστρον.

ὃ.νὶ. 52, οὐ γὰρ συνῆκαν ἐπὶ τοῖς
ἄρτοις" ἦν γὰρ αὐτῶν ἡ καρδία πεπω-
ρωμένη.

viii. 32, παῤῥησίᾳ τὸν λόγον ἐλάλει.

ix. 10.

x. 24, οἱ δὲ μαϑηταὶ ἐδαμβοῦντο ἐπὶ
τοῖς λόγοις αὐτοῦ.

x 82, ἣν προάγων αὐτοὺς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς,

καὶ ἐδαμβοῦντο, οἱ δὲ ἀκολοϑοῦντες
ἐφοβοῦντο.
. /

xi. 10, Εὐλογημένη ἡ ἐρχομένη Ba-
σιλεία τοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν Δαυείδ.

Cf. vi.8,6 TéEKTwY.

4 vi. 31, Δεῦτε ὑμεῖς αὐτοὶ κατ᾽ ἰδίαν
εἰς ἔρημον τόπον καὶ ἀναπαύσασδε ὀλί-
γον.

vi. 34, ἐσπλαγχνίσθη ἐπ’ αὐτούς
ef z c \
ὅτι ἦσαν ws πρόβατα μὴ
ἔχοντα ποιμένα.

sss) ¢ / [a >

viii. 8, καί τινες αὐτῶν ἀπὸ μακρό-
Sev εἰσίν.

ix. 21, 25, 27.

x. 3, 4.

δ1. 15, πεπλήρωται 6 καιρός... πισ-
τεύετε ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ.

- > / “ Μ

iy. 11, ἐκείνοις τοῖς ἔξω.

Vii. 8, ἀφέντες τὴν ἐντολὴν τοῦ δεοῦ
κρατεῖτε τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνδρῶπων.

viii. 88, ἐν τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ TH μοι-

/ « a
χαλίδι καὶ ἅμαρτω λῷ.

ix. 12, καὶ πῶς --- eLovdevwd7 ;

ix. 89, οὐδεὶς ydp.... δυνήσεται
ταχὺ κακολογῆσαί με.

x. 21, ἄρας τὸν σταυρὸν.

x. 30.

xi. 17, οἶκος προσευχῆς κληϑήσεται
πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔϑδνεσιν.

xi. 24, πιστεύετε ὅτι ἐλά-
βετε καὶ ἔσται ὑμῖν.

pa yok 7 ἢ

xii. 6, ἔτι ἕνα εἶχεν υἱὸν ἀγαπητόν.

xiii. 82, οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός.

xiv. 18, 6 ἐσδίων μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ.

xiv. 87, Σίμων καδεύδεις ;

ol*

366

THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

events recorded ;' but, on the other hand, there are some
which indicate yet more distinctly the apostolic source of

the peculiarities of St. Mark.

He alone describes on sev-

eral occasions the look and feeling of the Lord,? and pre-

serves the very Aramaic words which He uttered?

records minute particulars of persons, number, time, and
place,* which are unnoticed by the other Evangelists.

1 iii. 14, va ὦσιν μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἵνα
ἀποστέλλῃ αὐτοὺ κηρύσσειν...

iii. 80, O71 ἔλεγον, Πνεῦμα ἀκάϑαρ-
τον ἔχει.

ν. 26, μηδὲν ὠφεληδϑεῖσα ἀλλὰ
μᾶλλον εἰς τὸ χεῖρον ἐλ-
“οῦσα.

ve20:

vil. 2—4. !

xi. 13, 6 yap καιρὸς οὐκ ἣν σύκων.

Cf. vi. 18, ἤλειφον ἐλαίῳ πολλοὺς
ἀῤῥώστους. ν. 4, ὅ.

2 iii. 5, [καὶ περιβλεψάμενος αὐτοὺς]
μετ᾽ ὀργῆς, συλλυπούμενος ἐπὶ τῇ
πωρώσει τῆς καρδίας λέγει...

iii. 34, περιβλεψάμενος κύκλῳ τοὺς
περὶ αὐτὸν καθημένους λέγει...

ν. 82, περιεβλέπετο (not aor.) ἰδεῖν
τὴν τοῦτο ποιήσασαν.

vi. 6; ἐδαύμαζε διὰ τὴν ἀπιστίαν αὐ-
τῶν.

x. 21, 6 δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἐμβλέψας αὐτῷ
ἠγάπησεν αὐτόν...

χ. 28, καὶ περιβλεψάμενος ὃ
gous...

xi. 11, καὶ περιβλεψάμενος πάντα...

Cf. i. 41, 48; (x. 22).

3 1. 17, Boaynpyés, ὅ ἐστιν viol
βροντῆς.

v.41, Tarde κοῦμι, ὅ ἐστιν μεδερ-
μηνευόμενον, Τὸ κοράσιον, σοὶ λέγω,
ἔγειρε.

vii. 11, Κορβᾶν,
Matt. xxvii. 6).

vii. 34, Ἐφφαδϑά, 6 ἐστιν Atavoi-
XINT I.

xiv. 86, ABBa, ὁ πατήρ.

Cf. ix. 48; x. 46.

4 (a) Persons: i. 29, Kat ’Avd. μ. Ἰ1.
καὶ “I.

Ἴη-

«“

ἐστιν δῶρον. (Cf.

- /
i. 80, κατεδίωξαν αὐτὸν Σίμων καὶ οἱ
μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ.
ii. 26.
sae \ lol A
iii. 6, μετὰ τῶν Ἡρωδιανῶν.
eae € al ἘΝ €
iii. 22, of γραμματεῖς of ἀπὸ Ἵεροσο-
(a
λύμων καταβάντες...
vil. 26.
xi. 11, μετὰ τῶν δώδεκα.
xi. 21, avauvyodels ὃ Πέτρος.
eee > / EE > 5φΩ,
xiii. 8, ἐπηρώτα αὐτὸν κατ᾽ ἰδίαν
Πέτρος καὶ 1. καὶ Ἴ. καὶ ᾽Α.
xiv. 65, of ὑπηρέται.
της fic
xv. 21, τὸν πατέρα ᾽Α. καὶ Ῥ.
xvi. τ, τῷ Πέτρῳ.
εἴ ῇ
(b) Number: v.18, ὧς δισχίλιοι.
vi. 7, ἀποστέλλειν δύο δύο.
Μ ,
vi. 40, ἀνέπεσαν mpacial πρασιαΐ,
κατὰ ἑκατὸν καὶ κατὰ πεντήκοντα.
- \, > / ΄
χίν. 80, πρὶν ἢ Sls ἀλέκτορα φωνῆ-
σαι τρίς με ἀπαρνήσῃ.
. . " δ v /
(c) Time: i. 85, πρωὶ ἔννυχα λίαν.
Ο χ να: ῶ,
ss 2 ς “
ii. 1, δι ἡμερῶν.
Beis ea ln a, x Ἔα τὰν Se?
iv. 85, ἐν ἐκείνῃ TH ἡμέρᾳ ὀψίας γε-
νομένης.
Β /
vi. 2, γενομένου σαββάτου.
° > vf i 2° Ye .
xi. 11, ὀψίας ἤδη οὔσης. Cf. xi. 19.
xiv. 68.
xv. 25, ἦν δὲ Spa τρίτη.
on /
(d) Place: ii. 18, Tapa τὴν ϑάλασσαν.
ΘΕ avian ΣΙ
ν. 20. ἐν τῇ Δεκαπόλει.
ἘΞ. πὸ aN / ~ cys
vii. 31, ava μέσον τῶν ὁρίων Δεκα:
πόλεως.
(viii. 10).
oe ΄ κ. Ζ΄
xii. 41, κατέναντι τοῦ γαζοφυλακίου.
xiii. 8, κατέναντι τοῦ ἱεροῦ.
. /
xiv. 68, εἰς τὸ προαύλιον.
ς \ 3 5 /
xv. 89, 6 παρεστηκὼς ἐξ ἐναντία.
. > “ ~
xvi. 5, Kad. ἐν τοῖς δεξιοῖς.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 367

His language and style correspond with this particularity
of observation. His phrases of transition are
lively." In narration he frequently adopts
the present for the historic tenses,’ and introduces a direct
for an indirect form of expression.* He couples together
words or phrases of similar meaning to heighten or define
his meaning.* Like St. John, he repeats the subject in
place of using the relative.» And in many cases he uses
terms of singular foree which do not occur elsewhere in
the New Testament.®

The few incidents which are peculiar to St. Mark illus-
trate, as might be expected, the general char-
acter of his Gospel. The one parable* which
he alone has preserved turns our attention
to God’s presence in the slow and silent opera-
tions of nature, as typical of His constant presence among
men in their daily life. Of the two peculiar miracles,” one
lays open the gradual process of the cure wrought ;’ and
the other exhibits a trait which seems to reveal something
of the agony of the Redeemer’s work, as leading to the
last agony at Gethsemane, when He looked up to heaven
and groaned (ἐστέναξε) in contemplation of the wreck
which sin had wrought in man, who is ever dull in hearing
and slow in praising God. The connection of these three

Style.

Additional ἴπ-
cidents character-
istic.

Mark iv. 26—29.

vii. 21, ἔσωϑεν ... ἐκ τῆς καρδίας,
etc.

5 11. 19, 20, 27; iii. 1,3; iv. 15 (cf. Mt
and Le.); v. 41, 42; vi. 17, 18 (cf. Mt.);
x. 13 (cf. Mt. and Le ); xiv. 66, 67 (cf.
Mt. and Le.).

6 ἐκϑαμβεῖσϑαι, ix. 15; xiv. 33; xvi
5, 6.

ἐναγκαλίζεσϑαι, ix. 36; x. 16.

Tpomepiuvay, xiii. 11.

guvasariBeww, ν. 24, 31.

Τ viii 22-26, émidels τὰς χεῖρας...

1Thus καὶ εὐϑύς occurs, perhaps,
twenty-seven times (the reading is often
uncertain) in St. Mark, eight times in
St. Matthew, and twice in St. Luke.

21, 40. 44° 5S) ths xi. ἘΠῚ χῖν, 48,
65, ete.

3 iv. 89, Σιώπα, πεφίμωσο.

vy. 8, Ἔξελθε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἀκάϑαρ-
τον ἐκ τοῦ ἀνδρώπου.

vi. 28, 31; xii. 6, etc.

41.13, ἦν [ἐκεῖ ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ.

ii. 20, τότε... ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρα.

iii. 29, οὐκ ἄφεσιν ἔχει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα

ἀλλὰ ἔνοχός ἐστιν αἰωνίου ἁμαρτήμα-
ros.

iv. 33, 84; v. 26, etc.

vi. 25, εὐδὺς μετὰ σπουδῆς.

a See note, additional, p. 472.

εἶτα πάλιν ἐπέϑηκεν τὰς χεῖρας.

8 vii. 831—37. Cf. John xi. 85. It is
remarkable that in both these miracles
our Lord took the sufferer apart (vii. 33,

b See note, additional, p. 472.

368 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

special lessons is surely most significant. Without taking
away the attention from the outward act, they lead us to
look at the inmost processes which the outward act reveals.
Together they give hope and strength for all labor. A
Saviour sorrows over man’s sufferings and unbelief, and
meets each advance of faith; a Spirit works within us,
bringing to maturity by hidden steps the seed which God
has planted.

The smaller variations in the narrative offer several fea-
tures of interest, in addition to those which
have been already noticed. One of these
characterizes the whole Gospel. St. Mark,
more than any other Evangelist, records the effect tial
was produced on others by the Lord’s working. Just as
he follows out the details of the acts themselves, he men-
tions the immediate and wider results which they produced.
From the beginning to the end he tells us of the wonder
and amazement and fear! with which men listened to the
teaching of Christ. Everywhere multitudes crowd to hear
Him,? as well as to receive His blessings. When He

was in a house, the whole city was gathered

Additional traits
in common inci-
dents.

Mark i. 33
aa ἣν to the door, and even then the crowd could
ark τὶ. 2.

find no room. So great at times was the

Mark i. 45.
excitement that He could no longer openly
enter into the city; and it is said twice that, as many

came and went, He could not even eat, so that He seemed

ἀπολαβόμενος ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄχλου ; viii. 23,
ἐξήνεγκεν ἔξω τῆς κώμη).

One other circumstance in connec-
tion with Christ’s miracles is noticed
by St. Mark, that even those who
“touched the border of His garment
were made whole” (Mark vi. 56. Cf.
Luke vi. 19; viii. 46; Acts xix. 12).

1 j. 22 (ἐξεπλήσσοντο). 27; vi. 20; xi.
18; vii. 37 (ὑπερπερισσῶς ἐξεπλ.); x
26 (περισσῶς ἐξεπλ..).

v. 20 (ἐθαύμαζον; ix. 15 (ἐξεϑαμβή-
ήσαν); x. 24 (ἐδαμβοῦντο).

y. 42 (ἐξέστησαν ἐκστάσει μεγάλῃ);
vi. 51 (λίαν ἐκ περισσοῦ ἐξίσταντο).

iv. 41 (ἐφοβήϑησαν φόβον μέγαν): ν
15; (ix. 6);. ix. 32.

2ij. 13, mas ὁ ὄχλος ἤρχετο πρὸς
αὐτὸν καὶ ἐδίδασκεν αὐτούς (ef. ii. 14.
15); iv. 1, ὄχλος πλεῖστος; y. 21, 24,
BAS ὅς. Ἐν πῖνε

8 iii, 20, 21, ὥστε μὴ δύνασϑαι αὐτοὺς
μηδὲ ἄρτον ας: καὶ ἀκούσαντες
οἱ παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ. - ἔλεγον ὅτι ἐξέστη.
vi. 81, ἦσαν οἱ ἐρχόμενοι καὶ ot ὑπά-
γοντες πολλοί, καὶ οὐδὲ φαγεῖν εὐκαί-
ρουν.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 369
to His kindred to be beside Himself. Those who were
healed, in spite of His injunctions, proclaimed abroad the
tidings of His power.' And in His retire-
ment, men from ail the cities ran toyéther on
foot to see Him; and wherever He went, into
villages or cities or country, they placed their sick before
Him; and as many as touched Him were made whole.

In substance and style and treatment the Gospel of St.
Mark is essentially a transcript from life.
The course and the issue of facts are imaged
in it with the clearest outline. If all other
arguments against the mythic origin of the Evangelic nar-
ratives were wanting, this vivid and simple record, stamped
with the most distinct impress of independence and origi-
nality, —totally unconnected with the symbolism of the Old
Dispensation, totally independent of the deeper reasonings
of the New, — would be sufficient to refute a theory sub-
versive of all faith in history. The details which were ori-
ginally addressed to the vigorous intelligence of Roman
hearers* are still pregnant with imstruction for us. The
teaching which “met their wants” in the first age finds a
corresponding field for its action now. It would be worse
then idle to attempt any general comparison of the effects
which the several Gospels may be supposed to work upon

Mark vi. 33.
Mark vi. 55, 56.

The importance
of St. Mark as a
historical record.

11. 28, 45. ἤρξατο κηρύσσειν πολλὰ
καὶ διαφημίζειν τὸν λόγον. ν. 20; vii.
86.

2 The following passages may be
taken as examples of St. Mark’s style
in connection with the parallel ac-
counts: vi. 30—43 (The feeding the five
thousand); ix. 14—29 (The healing of
the lunatic); and vi. 14—29 (The feast
of Herod’. In each case we have, I
believe, the testimony of an eye-wit-
ness. Inthe last some friend of Jchn
may have been present.

3 Euseb. Τ᾿. £. iii. 39, Cf. pp. 191, 237.

One peculiarity of St. Mark’s lan-
guage not yet noticed seems to point to
this Roman origin, his use of several

Latin forms which do not occur in the
other Gospels: KevTupiwy, xv. 39, 44,
45 (elsewhere ἑκατόνταρχος, -apxns);
κοδράντης, xii. 42 (Matt. v. 26); σπε-
KovAdTwp (vi. 27); τὸ ἱκανὸν ποιῆσαι
(xv. 15. Cf. Acts xvii. 9. To these
may perhaps be added ξέστης (vii. 4,
8); κράββατος- (in St. John and Acts).
Other words he has in common with
one or more of the other Evangelists:
δηνάριον (all); κῆνσος (Mt.); λεγίων
(Mt. Le.); πραιτώριον (Mt. J.); ppa-
γελλοῦν (Mt.).

In all these notices of St. Mark’s lan
guage I have derived great help from
Credner (Ein/. § 49), though his large
collections require careful sifting.

370 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

the Church, but it is impossible not to see some signifi-
cance in the circumstance that the historic worth of the
Gospels was then most recklessly assailed when St. Mark
was regarded as a mee epitomator of the other Synoptists.
We cannot gain a full perception of the truth till the form
of its outward revelation is surely realized. The form is
not all, but it isan element in the whole. The picture of
the sovereign power of Christ battling with evil among
men swayed to and fro by tumultnous passions, is still
needful, though we may turn to St. Matthew and St. John
for the ancient types or deeper mysteries of Christianity,
or find in St. Luke its inmost connection with the unchang-
ing heart of man.
For “the Gospel of St. Paul”? is in its essential charac-
teristics the complementary history to that
ee ame of St. Matthew. The difference between the
two may be seen in their opening chapters.
The first words of the Hebrew Evangelist gave the clew to

1 The following outline of the Gospel will serve to explain the connection of
the several parts: —
INTRODUCTION. i. ii.
The annunciation of the birth of John and of Christ (i. 1—56).
The birth of John; the nativity; the presentation; Christ with
the doctors (i. 57—ii).
1. THE PREPARATION. iii.—iy. 18.
The work of the Baptist (iii. 1—20).
The attestation at the baptism and by descent (21—88).
The trial (iv. 1—13).
2. THE ANNOUNCEMENT. iv. 14—44.
Preaching (14, 15).
Tidings at Nazareth (16—30).
Signs: The unclean spirit (31—37); Simon’s wife’s mother (388, 39)
Many works (40, 41); wide teaching (42—44).
8. THE FuTURE CHURCH. y.—ix. 43a.
(a) Its universality.
The sign: the draught of fishes (vy. 1—11).
The leper cleansed (12—16).
The paralytic restored (17—26).
The publican called (27—39).
The law vindicated from superstition (vi. 1: —11).
(b) Its constitution.
The apostles called: the Sermon on the mount (vi. 12—49).
The spring of help.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. Bye |

his whole narrative; and so the first chapter of St. Luke,
with its declarations of the blessedness of
faith and the exaltation of the lowly, lead
at once to the point from which he contemplated the life

Luke i. 45, 52.

Faith in man: the centurion’s servant (vii. 2—10).
Love in Christ: the widow’s son (11—17).
The hearers.
John and the people (18 —35).
The Pharisee and the sinner (386—50).
The ministering women (viii. 1—3).
(c) Its development.
The sower (viii. 4—18).
Earthly ties (19—21).
Lessons of faith: the storm stilled (22—25); the legion cast
out (26-39); the woman healed (45—48); Jairus’ daugh-
ter raised (40—56).
(d) Its claims.
The commission (ix. 1—6); the earthly king (7—9).
The five thousand fed (9—17); the confession (18—28).
The transfiguration; the lunatic healed (28—48 q@).
4. THe UniversaL Cuurcu. THE REJECTION OF THE JEWS FORE-
SHOWN. ix. 43 b—xviii. 30.
(a) Preparation (ix. 43 b—xi. 13).
Coming persecution (43 b—45). Traits of the true disciple (46—62).
The mission of the seventy (x. 1—20). Thanksgiving (21—24).
One family of men: the good Samaritan (25—37).
One thing needful: Mary and Martha (38—42).
Prayer the strength of life (xi. 1—13).
(b) Lessons of warning (xi. 14—xiii. 9).
Inward: Seven worse spirits (xi. 14—28).
Sign of Jonah (29—85).
Pharisaic religion (837—54).
Outward: Persecution (xii. 1—12).
Wealth (18—31).
Life (82—53).
Signs of the times (54—59).
The fate of the Galilaans (xiii. 1—5).
The barren fig-tree (6—9).
(c) Lessons of progress (xiii. 10—xiy. 24).
The woman (the Church) set free (xiii. 10Q—17).
The growth of the Church outward and inward (18—21]).
The duty of effort (22—30).
The assurance in working (31—85).
Formalism defeated (xiv. 1—6).
The poor called (7—14).
The feast furnished with guests (15—24).
(4) Lessons of discipleship.
The completeness of the sacrifice (xiv. 25—35).
The universality of the offer (xv.).
Social duties.

1 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

of Him who was to give light to them that sit in darkness
and in the shadow of death. The perfect
manhood of the Saviour, and the consequent
mercy and universality of His covenant, is his central sub-
ject, rather than the temporal relations or eternal basis οἵ
Christianity. In the other Gospels we find our King, our
Lord, our God; but in St. Luke we see the image of our
Great High Priest, made perfect through suf-
fering, tempted in all points as we are, but
without sin, so that each trait of human feeling and natu-
ral love helps us to complete the outline and confirms its
truthfulness.

The pictures of the Infancy, to which the Temple forms
the background, typify in aremarkable manner this human

be ae and priestly aspect of the life of Christ.
the Infaney. The circumstances and the place equally
Τ λό ἐν = turn the thoughts of the reader to the real-
ities shadowed forth in the old law of sacrifice. The

Luke 1. 79.

Hebr. ti. 10; iv. 15.

The stewardship of wealth (xvi.).
Offences; faith; seryice (xvii. 1—10). ~
(e) The coming end (xvii. 11—xvili. 30).
The sign: the ten lepers (xvii. 11—19).
The unexpectedness of Christ coming (20—37).
The unjust judge (xviii. 1—8).
Obstacles to faith.
Self-righteousness; pride; selfishness (9—30).
5. THE SOVEREIGNTY CLAIMED. Xvili. 31—xxi.
(a) The journey.
Warnings; Bartimeus; Zaccheus; the talents (xviii. 31—xix. 27).
(ὃ) The entry (xix. 28—44).
The work begun (45—48).
(c) The conflict. The first question (xx.1—8); the portraiture (9—19)
the Temptation (20—40); the last question (41—44).
The Pharisees (45, 46); the widow (xxi. 1—4).
The judgment (xxi. 5—386).
The work (87, 38).
6. THE SOVEREIGNTY GAINED BY DEATH. XxXii.—xXiv.
The end foreshown (xxii. 1—23).
Divisions within (24—34); dangers without (35—38).
The agony; betrayal; denial; condemnation (389—71).
The judgment of Herod and Pilate (xxiii. 1—25).
The crucifixion; burial (26—56).
The revelation of the risen Saviour (xxiv. 1—48).
The last charge; the ascension (44—53).

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 373
Saviour Himself— the perfect victim and the perfect
Priest — received the seal of the first Covenant, and in
due time was presented in the Temple and
redeemed from its service. The offering
was the offering of the poor; and the first blessing. was
mingled with words of sorrow. Years of
silent growth then followed; and when He
had arrived at the age of legal maturity!
“the child Jesus” went up to the feast, and claimed the
Temple as His Father’s House, and spoke of other work
than that in which His life as yet was spent. But
while the future was thus mysteriously fore-
shown, for the present He was subject to His
earthly parents, and increased in wisdom and stature, and
i favor with God and men. The development of the
divine consciousness in Him who was indeed God is
described to us as it proceeded according to the laws of
human life. At each successive stage in the long prepara-
tion for His work, from first to last, we mark the gradual
and harmonious revelation of His double nature. His God-
head and Manhood — signs of triumph and suffering — are
united at the Nativity, the Presentation, the Examination
in the Temple, the Baptism, the Temptation; for all is
order and truth in the Godlike life, quickening and quick-
ened in due measure?

The main contents of St. Luke’s Gospel may be divided
into several groups which present distinctive

Luke ii. 84, 35.

Luke ti. 40,
Luke ii. 41 ff.

Luke ti. 52.

2. The announce-

> * Christ’
features, though each one passes so gradually 9 ™" % “irsts
into the next as to afford no clear line of de- Sel τὸ

mareation.
forms -an introduction to the more detailed

A general announcement of Christ’s work
narrative.

1 Chagiga (ap. Wetst. ad Lue. ii. 42):
A xii. anno filius censetur maturus.
Joma, (id.): Ab anno xii. initiabant
pueros ad jejunandum,. Tradition as-
signed this age as the crisis in the lives
of Moses, Samuel, and Solomon ( Wetst.
l.c.). Cf. [Hipp.] adv. Her. p. 156.

4 Origen, Hom. iy. in Luc. Non illo

tantum tempore preparatz sunt viz et
direct semite, sed usque hodie adven-
tum Domini Salvatoris spiritus Joannis
virtusque precedit. O magna mysteria
Domini et dispensationis ejus! Angeli
preecurrunt Jesum: angeli quotidie aut
ascendunt aut descendunt super salutem
hominum in Christo Jesu. Cf. John i. 61.

374 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

This announcement differs characteristically from that in
St. Matthew. In St. Matthew the preach-
ing of the Lord is connected with the ful-
filment of prophecy; in St. Luke it is pre-
sented in its own power. In St. Matthew the first dis-
course is the Sermon on the Mount, in which Christianity
is displayed in its relation to Judaism; in St.
Luke, the discourse at Nazareth, in which the
Gospel is freely offered to the poor, the desolate, and the
stranger. The first miracles in St. Matthew
signify the removal of legal impurity and
national distinctions; while in St. Luke the message of
mercy is confirmed by the deliverance of captives from
spiritual and bodily infirmity, from evil active
and personal! within them.

In the succeeding chapters the work thus outlined is
described under two great heads. The first
(v.—1x. 43 a) contains a view of the future
Church; the second the teaching of Christ,
leading to the call of a new people and the rejection of
The first is chiefly a record of miracles ;” the

Matt. iv. 14 ff.
Luke iv. 15.

Luke iv. 16 ff.

Matt. viri. 1, 5.

Luke iv. 31, 38.

Two great divis-
tons of the Gospel.

the Jews.

1 Luke iv. 85, 39 (ἐπετίμησεν). The terfere with religious life. In charac-

word occurs of the fever in St. Luke
only. Cf. viii. 24 and parallels.

These two miracles were wrought on
the Sabbath (iv. 16); and hence we may
see that spiritual and bodily maladies
are so far healed by Christ as they in-

ter the two miracles are complement-
ary: there was an unclean spirit in the
synagogue, and a faithful woman 8107.
fering (ἦν συνεχομένη) at home from
a great fever.

2 The spiritual teaching of the miracles in St. Luke, asa whole, will be seen

from the following table.
Italics: —

The miracles peculiar to St. Luke are marked by

1. SIGNS OF THE MISSION OF THE SAVIOUR (iv. 18) —GENERALLY TO
CHECK THE ACTION OF EVIL.

(a) Spiritual.

The unclean spirit cast out (iv. 99---87).

(6) Physical.

Peter’s wife’s mother healed (iv. 38, 39).

2. THE CHRISTIAN SOCIETY.
(a) Its universality:
Hence Christ

The miraculous draught of fishes (v. 4—11).

a. Purifies the outward life.

The leper cleansed (¥. 12—14).

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 375

second a record of parables. In the one we read the
works of the Son of God; in the other the words of the

b. Purifies the inward life.
The palsy healed (v. 18—26).
6. Quickens deadened energies.
The withered hand restored (vi. 6—11).
(b) The spring of its blessings.
α. Faith in man.
The centurion’s servant (vii. 2—10).
Ὁ. Love in Christ.
The widow's son raised (vii. 11—17).
(9) The fulness of Christ’s power to preserve it, as seen in His sover-
eignty over
a. Matter.
The storm stilled (viii, 22—25).

ὃ. Spirit. .
The Gadarene demoniacs (viii. 26—89).
c. Death. ᾿

Typical: the woman with issue (viii. 43—48).
Natural: Jairus’ daughter raised (viii. 41—56).
(d) The extent of its claims.
a. To instruct and strengthen all.
The five thousand fed (ix. 10—17).
ᾧ. To overcome by faith all evil.
The lunatic healed (ix. 37—42).
3. Signs OF CHRIST’S WORKING ON MEN.
(a) To give utterance to the spiritually dumb.
The dumb devil cast out (xi. 14—26).
(b) To remove
a. The inward checks to our progress.
The woman with a spirit of infirmity (xiii. 11—17).
Lb. The outward obstacles to it (v. 5).
The man with the dropsy (xiv. 1—6).
(c) To cleanse impurity, outward and inward (v. 19).
The ten lepers cleansed (xvii. 12—19).
(4) To restore spiritual sight.
The blind man restored (xviii. 85—48).
[The healing of Malchus: xxii. 50, 51.)

The miracles recorded by St. Mat- of notice because they symbolize the
thew and St. Mark which are omitted call of the Gentiles. But the charac-
by St. Luke are: The walking on the ter of St. Luke’s Gospel is to be sought
sea; the healing of the Syrophenician’s in its general tone. The message which
daughter; the feeding of the four thou- it conveys is universal, and not exelu-
sand; the barren fig-tree. The omis- sive in any sense.
sion of the last three is the more worthy

1 The parables in St. Luke illustrate the general course of his narrative.

1. THE FOUNDATIONS.
(a) Love: the two debtors (vii. 41—48).
(b) Productiveness: the sower (viii. 4—15).
(c) Charity: the good Samaritan (x. 30—87).
(ad) Importunity in prayer: the friend at midnight (xi. 5—8).

376 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

Son of Man. The miraculous draught of fishes, combined
ge ora with the prayer of St. Peter and the promise

Church. Inswniver- of the Lord, is a perfect introduction to the
sality. (Luke v.1

—vi. 11.) doctrine of the Church. Its first character-
Luke v. 8, 10. signers ne . . . Ξ -
istic is universality; and the idea which is
thus announced is continuously unfolded in a:series of acts
ταν tee ΠΟΙ ἸΟἸνεδι triumphs owe physical un-
—265 27-89. cleanness, moral guilt, social degradation, and
Luke vi. 1—11. ee : = ?
legal superstition.
The extent of the new Covenant having been thus set
forth, we next observe something of the
Its constitution. : 3 τ Lge .
(Lukevt. 2—viti, nature of the society in which it is embodied.
3.) e ° 3 ° >
The selection and instruction of the Apostles
marks them as men who do not take their stand on the

2. LESSONS OF WARNING.
(a) Dependence: the rich fool (xii. 16—21).
(δ) Faithfulness: the servants (xii. 35—48).
(6) Fruitfulness: the barren fig-tree (xiii. 6-9).
3. LESSONS OF PROGRESS,
(a) Outward growth: the mustard seed (xiii. 18, 19).
Inward change: the leaven (xiii. 20, 21).
(Ὁ) The humble exalted: the chief seats (xiv. 7—11).
The poor called: the great supper (xiv. 12—24).
4. LESSONS OF DISCIPLESHIP.
(a) The rational] sacrifice.
The tower-builder (xiv. 28—80).
The king going to war (xiv. 31—83).
(6) The universal offer.
The guideless wanderer from the Church: the lost sheep (xv:
3—7).
The lost slumberer in the Church: the lost drachma (xv. 8—10).
The wilful apostate from the Church: the prodigal son (xv.
11—82). :
(c) Social duties.
In the use of outward blessings.
Prudence: the unjust steward (xvi. 1—12).
Charity: the rich man and Lazarus (xvi. 19—81).
Service no ground of merit: unprofitable servants (xvii. 7—10).
5. Lessons OF JUDGMENT.
(a) The injured heard at last: the unjust judge (xviii. 1—8).
(Ὁ) Man’s judgment reversed: the Pharisee and publican (xviii. 9—14) |
(c) The Christian rewarded according to his work: the talents (xix.
11—27).
(4) The retribution of the wicked: the wicked husbandmen (xx. 9—16}

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS.

dad
(4

fulfilment of the Law, but on the wider basis of Christian
charity.’ The events which follow illustrate the source of
their power and the character of those among whom they
have to work. Faith on the part of man,

and love on the part of Christ, are shown to |, Zuhe vi 2-10;

11-- 17.
bring blessings beyond all hope. John and PaaS ae.
the people, the Pharisee and the sinner? ὅτ.
Luke viii. 1—3.

exhibit the contrasts of Jewish life. And the

notice of the ministering women aptly closes the section
which opens with the call of the Apostles. The Teacher,
who included in His Church the humble, the distressed,
and the repentant, is attended by the weak and loving
rather than by a council of elders, a band of warriors, or 2

school of prophets.’

Such being the breadth and foundation of the Christian
society, we are led to regard the process of

its development, and the nature of the claims

Its development.
(Luke viii. 4—56.)

which it makes on those who are admitted to

its privileges.

The parable of the sower is presented

under a new aspect in St. Luke; it exhibits the responsi-
bility of the hearers of the Gospel,‘ and does not, as in St.
Matthew, form an introduction to a general

view of the outward kingdom. Hence, next

Luke viii. 16—18;
19—21.

we are taught the obligation of Christian
example and the omnipotence of religious duty; and to

1 This follows from a comparison of
Luke vi. 20—49 with St. Matthew’s
record of the Sermon on the Mount.
As to the identity of the two discourses
see p. 351 n. 6.

2 The lesson of love is the first para-
ble recorded by St. Luke, as the draught
of fishes is the first miracle.

5 Evans, Scripture Biography, ii. p.
268. Exod. xviii. 25 (Moses); 2 Sam.
xxiii. 8 ff. (David); 2 Kings ii. 2, 7 ( Eli-
jah). The apostles themselves offer a
contrast scarcely less striking than the
women.

4 This difference in the scope of the

parable is indicated by vv. 8, 15, com-
pared with Matt. xiii. 8—28. St. Luke
dwells on the single idea of productive-
ness, and does not regard the different
degrees of productiveness which must
exist in the Christian church. This
idea is afterwards given in the pounds
(xix. 12 ff.); and conversely St. Mat-
thew notices only equal productiveness
in the talents (xxv. 14 ff.).

The comparison of Matt. xiii. 13 (871)
with Luke viii. 10 (ἵνα) is full of instrue-
tion: spiritual deafness is at once the
cause and the result of not listening te
God’s voice.

82"

378 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT
encourage men in the varied struggles of Christian life, a
series of miracles attests the Saviour’s power
over matter, spirit, and death. He supplies
the strength when He enjoins the task.
When He sends forth His apostles He endues
them with power. When they return, He
feeds the hungry multitude, lest they should despair from
the inadequacy of their natural powers for the conversion
of the world. The prospect of suffering is relieved by the
vision of glory; and when evil prevails
against them, He still casts out the unclean
spirit which baffles their doubting efforts.
The second great division of the record of the Lord’s
ministry, includes a remarkable series of acts
and discourses which are grouped together
in connection with the last journey to Jerusa-
lem.’ Some of the incidents occur in differ-
ent connections in the other Evangelists; and
the whole section proves, by the absence of historical data

Iuke viii. 22—25;
26—39; 40—56.

Its claims.
1—43 a.)

Luke ix.1—6; 10
lite

(ix.

Luke ix. 28—86.

Luke ix. 37—43 a.

4. The universal
Teaching.

The Great Epi-
sode.

(Luke ix. 43 6.—
aviil. 80.)

1 The connections of time in this
great episode (ix. 48 b—xviii. 14) de-
serve particular attention, especially in
reference to those sections which occur
in the other Evangelists in a different
context. These parallels for the most
part consist in short and weighty say-
ings, such as are constantly repeated,
even by writers in different works; and
there is no difficulty in supposing that
they were introduced by the Lord into
different discourses. More rarely par-
ables recur in new relations; and in
one case incidents, alike in every par-
ticular, are found to occupy a different
position in St. Luke from that which
they occupy in St. Matthew. Besides
these partial or complete parallels,
there are a large number of sections
peculiar to St. Luke. The following
table of passages, with the particles of
connection by which they are intro-
duced, will place the question oy
before the reader:

I. Sections including parallels with
the other Gospels.

(a) In short sayings or parts of dis-
courses.

X. 1—16 (μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα). Cf. Matt.
ix. 37, 88; x. 10—16; xi. 21—28; x. 40.
Luke ix. 1 ff.

xi. 1—4 (kal ἐγεν. ἐν τῷ εἶναι ad. ἐν
Τ. τ. προσ.). Cf. Matt. vi. 9---18.

xi. 5—13 (Kal εἶπεν). Cf. Matt. vii.
7-11.

xi. 29-35 (τῶν δὲ ὄχλων ἐπαδροιζο-
μένων). Cf. Matt. xii. 88-42; vy. 15;
vi. 22, 23. ‘Luke viii. 16.

xi. 87-54 (ἐν δὲ τῷ λαλῆσαι).
Matt. xxiii.

xii. 1—12 (ἐν ois).
xX. 28—83, ete.

xii. 22—40 (εἶπεν δέ...
Cf. Matt. vi.

Ck
Cf. Matt. xvi. 6;

Διὰ τοῦτο).

xii. 4153 (εἶπεν δὲ 6 Πέτρος). Cf.
Matt. xxiv. 45 ff.
xii. 54-59 (ἔλεγεν δέ. Cf. Matt.

xvi. 2, 3, etc.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 379
and the unity of its general import, that a moral and not
a temporal sequence is the law of the Gospels. For it is
possible to trace throughout this part of the narrative a
contrast between the true and the false people of God,
between the spiritual and the literal Israel. The shadow

of eclipse is seen to rest already on the old system and the

old spirit.

A new covenant and a new dis-
cipleship are ushered in by words of warning

Preparation.
Luke ix. 43 b—.

and reproof. The journey, which seemed to

be for honor, is announced to be for death.

The intolerant

zeal of St. John is checked when he would have restrained

xiii. 22—30 (εἶπεν δέ Tis). Cf. Matt.
vii. 13, etc.

xiii. 3135 (ἐν αὐτῇ TH ἡμέρᾳ). Cf.
Matt. xxiii. 87—89.

xiv. 25-85 (συνεπορεύοντο δὲ αὐτῷ
ὃ. π.). Cf. Matt. x. 81, etc.

xvii. 1—4 (εἶπεν δέ). Cf. Matt. xviii.
6, 7; 21, 22.

xvii. 22—37 (εἶπεν δέ). Probably the
same discourse as Matt. xxiv.

(>) In parables and longer discourses.

ix. 46 ff. (εἰσῆλϑεν δέ) = Matt. xviii.
1 ff. ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ Spa. Mark ix. 33 ff.

x. 21—24 (ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ὥρᾳ) = Matt.
xi. 25 (ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ καιρῷ).

xiii, 18--21 (ἔλεγεν οὖν). Matt. xiii.
81,82. Mark iv. 30—82.

xiv. 16-24 (ὁ δὲ εἶπεν [ἑνὶ τῶν συν-
avak.]). A variation recurs Matt. xxii
1—14.

xv. 3-7 (εἶπεν δέ). Matt. xviii. 12
—)4.

ix. 49 (δέ). Mark x. 38 (δέ).

ix. 57 (kal πορευομένων αὐτῶν ἐν
τῇ ὁδῷ). Matt. viii. 18.

xi 14 (καὶ ἦν ἐκβ. 5.). Matt. xii. 22
(τότε).

xviii. 15—17 (προσέφερον δέ). Matt.
xix. 13 (τότε): Mark x. 13 (καὶ προσ...
II. Sections peculiar to St. Luke.

ix. 51—56 (ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ συμπληρ.
τ. Nu. τ. ἀναλ. ad.),

x. 17—20 (ὑπέστρεψαν δέ).

x. 25—87 (καὶ ἰδού). Not the same as
Matt. xxii. 34 ff.; Mark xii. 28 ff.

x. 88—42 (ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ Topev-
εσδαι).

xii. 18--2] (εἶπεν δὲ τις αὐτῷ ἐκ τοῦ
ὔχλουγ.

xiii. 1--ὃ (παρῆσαν δέ τινες ἐν αὐτῷ
τῷ καιρῷ).

xiii. 6-- (ἔλεγεν δέ).

xiii. 10—17 (ἦν δὲ διδάσκων).

xiv. 1—13 (καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ ἐλδεῖν
εἰς οἶκον).

xv. 8—10; 11—82 (εἶπεν δέ).

xvi. 1-13 (ἔλεγεν δέ). Cf. Matt. vi.
24.

xvi. 14—31 (ἤκουον δέ... καὶ εἶπεν).
Cf. Matt. ν. 18.

xvii. 5—10 (καὶ εἶπαν).

xvii. 11—19 (καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ πο-
ρεύεσδϑαι αὐ. εἰς ‘I.),

xviii. 1--8 (ἔλεγεν δέ).

xviii. 9—14 (εἶπεν δέ).

Of all these passages one only is at-
tended with any serious difficulty —
Luke ix. 57, compared with Matt. viii.
18. The historical order appears to be
that given by St. Luke. In all the
other cases of parallelism we find repe-
titions which are perfectly natural, and
borne out by repetitions which occur in
the same Gospel. It does not, how-
ever, appear that the difference between
ἔλεγεν and εἶπεν as introductory words
is so clear as to admit of being urged:
xiv. 7,12; xvi. 5; yet see iii. 7; iv. 22;
vy. 36, ete.

1 This has been pointed out by Mr,
Browne, Ordo Seclorum, p. 688, n. 1.

380 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

the progress of good because it was advanced by one “ who
followed not with them.” St. James and St. John are
rebuked when they would call down fire on the enemies
of Jerusalem, though the Son of Man came to save men’s
lives and not to destroy them. For the
Christian there is no shelter, no delay, no
After this introduction the fuller development

of the new dispensation begins with the

mission of the Seventy, and not with the
mission of the Apostles. Its groundwork, from the point
of sight of St. Luke, is the symbolic evangelization of
every nation upon earth,’ and not the restoration of the
twelve tribes of Israel. The mission is closed
by thanksgiving; and as a comment upon
the tidings with which the teacher was charged, we read
that the spirit of the Law was fulfilled by
a Samaritan, that the truest devotion was
shown by the patient listener who was not cumbered with
much serving, that prayer, even if the answer
be delayed, will in the end triumph over all
difficulties. Then follow lessons of warning,
of progress, of discipleship, of judgment.
Perils from within and from without are laid

Luke ix. 57—62.

retreat.

Luke x. 1—16.

Luke x. 21—24.

Luke ic. 30—37.

Luke 2. 32—42.

Luke xi. 1—13.

Lessons of warn-
ing.

Luke xi. 14—28.

Luke xi. 29—36;

97---4.

re es τον ΜΝ perils from the lack of God’s Spirit,
5—53. ° ayes

Luke wii, 54. from wonder-seeking and Pharisaism, from

Luke xiii. 9.

Luke xii. 17.

Luke xiii. 18—30.

Lessons of prog-
ress.

Luke «iii. 831—35.

Luke xiv. 1—24.

persecution and worldly cares. The times
are shown to be pregnant with signs of ruin;
and yet, in the midst of this stern teaching,
the “multitude rejoices.” In spite of opposi-
tion the growth of the Church is assured.

If some are rejected, others from afar shall fill their places.

1 According to Jewish tradition there
were seventy (Clem. Hom. xviii. 4; ef.

and tongues in the world. In the text
of St. Luke ἑβδομήκοντα δύο is very

Gen. xlvi. 27) or seventy-two (Clem. Al.
Strom. i. § 142; Clem. Recogn. ii. 42.
Deus ...in ]xxii. partes divisit totius
terre nationes, eisque principes (Dan.
x. 18) Angelos statuit.) different nations

highly supported.

The numbers twelve and seventy are
combined, Numb. xxxiii. 9. Cf. Ori-
gen, Hom. xxvii. in Num. ὃ 11, for an
interpretation of the passage.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 381

Even death itself cannot forestall the completion of the
appointed work. Formalism is silenced; the poor are
called, and the feast, which was despised by those who
were first invited, is furnished with guests.

The character of the true guest is next de- μῶν %
scribed in a series of parables which portray = 7 tt? 5δ ῦσ,
in the liveliest images the completeness of te *—~"
the sacrifice required of him, the universality

of the invitation offered, the relative duties of disciples to
one another. The quickening power of God and the fruit-
ful struggles of penitence are pictured in the case of those
who have been lost from Christ’s fold! through careless-
ness, or have lain inactive in His Church
from darkness, or have wilfully joined them-
selves with the citizen of a far country. The obligations
of wealth and station, the duty of forbearance, and the
power of faith, are seen to guide the Christian in social
life; and when every claim is fulfilled he is
still taught to feel that he is an unprofitable
servant.

Luke xv. 15.

Luke xvii. 10.

The tokens of judgment grow clearer as we draw to the
close of the section. Among the ten lepers χεωσνο of judg-
who were healed, a Samaritan alone returned = ™"*

: : Luke xvii. 18.
to give glory to God. If the Pharisees ask
when the kingdom of heaven shall come, they are told
that it is already within them. The day of "

: 4 : Luke xvii. 24.

vengeance for the elect is promised quickly Luke xviii. 1-8.

πῇ eye . . : Luke xviii, 9-30.
(v. 8). Humility, childliness, and self-sacrifice
—the opposites of prevalent vices —are set forth as the
conditions of entrance into the kingdom; and if the words
seem hard, one sentence marks the cause of
the difficulty which men felt and the remedy
for it: That which is impossible with men is possible with

God.

Luke xviii. 27.

1 The difference between Luke χν. 4, ΜῊΝ ἢ €v...marks the different as-
Tis ἄνϑρωπος.. ἀπολέσας Ev... pects of the parable in the two Gos-
and Matt. xviii. 12, Ἐὰν... πλα- pels.

382 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

The narrative of the Journey and the Conflict follows
the same general outline as in the other Gos-
pels, but with some characteristic additions.
Zaccheus, a publican and a sinner, was
deemed worthy to entertain the Son of God and_pro-
nounced to be ὦ son of Abraham. And as
we noticed in St. Matthew that his first strain
was repeated at the close of his Gospel, so in St. Luke the
angelic hymn which was earliest sung in heaven in honor
of the Saviour’s birth, is reéchoed by the band of disciples
as He approaches Jerusalem for the last time before the
close of His work. Yet again we hear the same peculiar
tones of mercy and love on the road to Cal-
rary, and from the very cross, and once
more, when the risen Lord promises to His
disciples His Spirit from on high before they preach the
Word to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem! From first

5. The kingdom
claimed.

Luke xix. 9.

Luke xxiii. 89—45,

Luke xxiv. 49.

1 The following are the most remark-
able additions to common narratives
(besides those already noticed) which
occur in St. Luke:

ili. 1,2, the date of John’s ministry.

iii. 5, 6, (ὄψεται πᾶσα σὰρὲ τὸ
σωτήριον τοῦ Θεοῦ).

iii. 10---14. The social differences and
duties of John’s hearers.

iv. 1, πν. ay. TA.

xix. 37—40, 41—44.

xx. 16, ἀκουσ. δὲ εἶ, μὴ γένοιτο.
xx. 20, εἰς τὸ παραδ. --- τοῦ ἤγεμ.
xx. 26, καὶ οὐκ tox. — ἐν. τοῦ λαοῦ.
ς. 84, οἱ vi. — ἐκγαμ.

. 88, πάντες γὰρ αὐτῷ ζῶσιν.

Χχ. 99, 40.

Xxi. 24, 34—36, 37, 38.

xxii. 8, εἰσ. δὲ ὁ Σ. eis 71.

xxii. 15—18, 24—38, 43, 44, 45.

iv. 6,13, ἄχρι καιροῦ. 2 Luke xix. 38—40, ἐν οὐρανῷ εἰρήνη
iy ΠΡ 30. καὶ δόξα ἐν ὑψίστοις. Cf. ii.
iv. 85, μηδὲν βλάψαν αὐτόν. 14. Peace ratified in heaven is the

iv. 42, 48, καὶ of ὄχλοι --- ἀπέσταλ-
μαι.

vi. 8, αὐτὸς δέ--- αὐτῶν.
δέ --- ἀν.

vi. 12, καὶ ἦν διανυκτ. ἐν τ. προσ.
τοῦ Θεοῦ.

vii. 20, 21; 29, 80.

viii. 1—8, 47, ἐν π. τοῦ λαοῦ.

viii. 2, Κηρ. THY Bao. τοῦ Θεοῦ.

ix. 29, ἐν τῷ προσ. αὐτόν.

ix. 31, 82; 44, ϑέσϑε ὑμεῖς... τ. λ. τ.
Cf. xxi. 14.

xviii. 81, καὶ TEA. — τῷ ὑ. τ. ἀνῶρ.

XViii. 84, Kal ἦν τ. ῥ. τ. κεκρ. ---- τὰ
λεγ.

11, αὐτοὶ

pledge of peace to be realized on earth.

3 The view which has been given of
St. Luke’s Gospel as containing the
offer of the Gospel to all— not to Jews
only nor Gentiles only — is remarkably
confirmed and explained by his ‘‘ later
treatise.” For as in the one we mark
the universality of Christ’s promises, so
in the other we see their full accom-
plishment. In the outset of the Acts
(Acts ii. 9—11) we are told that Jews
and proselytes, from Arabia to Pontus
—from Parthia to Rome—heard the
tidings of salvation in their own
tongue; and the last glimpse of apos-

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS.

to last the same great subject abides.

383

The Gospel of the

Saviour begins with hymns and ends with

praises; and as the thanksgivings of the

Luke xxiv. 53.

meek are recorded in the first chapter, so in the last we
listen to the gratitude of the faithful.’

tolic history is full of encouragement
and hope, when it is recorded (Acts
XXviii. 31) that, after turning to the
Gentiles, Paul received all that came
unto him, and preached with all confi-
dence the things which concern the Lord
Jesus, no man forbidding him.

Those writers who regard the book
of the Acts as partial and incomplete,
seem to have mistaken its entire pur-
pose; for we do not require for our
spiritual guidance a history of the
Apostles, but a record of the establish-
ment of the Christian Chureh. The
title is not the Acts, but Acts of the
Apostles (πράξεις τῶν ἀποστόλωυ), ---
such acts as should be significant to
future times; and so we read in the
book of all the modes of thought which
Christianity encountered in Judea,
Asia, Greece, aud Rome; we learn from
it how far the Apostles modified the
framework of our faith to build up
the several Churches, and how far they
selected a fit foundation for their teach-
ing from the popular belief. The Gos-
pels do not give usa life of Jesus, but
a narrative of man’s redemption; the
Acts does not detail the fortunes of
men, but sets forth the establishment
of the various forms of Christian truth.

1 The language of St. Luke presents
many peculiarities, some of which are
characteristic; and a large number of
words are common to the Gospels and
the Acts, and do not occur elsewhere
in the New Testament. The following
peculiarities are the most remarkable :

(1) Χάρις (χαριτόω, i. 28) eight times.
Elsewhere in Gospels only Jolin i. 14,
16,17. Common in Acts and Epistles.

(2) σωτήρ, i. 47; 11. 11 (Sohn iy. 42).
σωτηρία, i. 69, 71,77; xix. 9 (John iv.
22). τὸ σωτήριον, ii, 30; iii. 6. Gen-

eral in Acts and Epistles. Sew fre-
quent throughout the New Testament.

(3) Εὐαγγελίζεσϑαι (Matt. xi. δ only}
ten times. Frequent in Acts and Epis-
tles. Εὐαγγέλιον (Matt.. Mark, Acts,
Epp., Apoc.) does not occur in the Gos-
pels of St. Luke and St. John, nor in
St. John’s Epistles.

(4) πλῆδϑος eight times in Gospels,
seventeen times in Acts; elsewhere in
the New Testament seven times. 7A7-
ρής with gen. (John i. 14. Cf. Mark
viii. 19)iv.1; v.12; eight timesin Acts.
πλῆσαι, metaph. (cf. ἐμπλῆσαι) six
times in Gosp., nine times in Acts; not
elsewhere. πληροῦν throughout the
New Testament.

(5) ὑπάρχειν seven times in Gosp.,
twenty-four times in Acts, fourteen
times elsewhere; not in other Gospels
(τὰ ὑπάρχοντα, Matt. xix. £1; xxiv.
47; xxv. 14. In St. Luke eight times).
προυπάρχειν in Gosp. and Acts once.

(6) παῖς (Θεοῦ) of David, Israel,
Christ, i. 54,69; Acts iii. 13, 26; iv. 25,
27, 30.

(7) ἱκανός nine times in Gosp., eigh-
teen times in Acts, three times each in
Matt. and Mark; elsewhere six times.

(8) οἶκος, metaph. (Matt. x. 6; xv.
24, oix. “Iop.) seven times in Gosp., nine
times in Acts.

(9) νομιικός (Matt. xxii. 35; Tit. iii. 13
only) six times in Gosp. ἐπιστατής
(= ‘PaBBet) six times; not elsewhere.
ἀληϑῶς with λέγω (= ἀμήν) three times
in Gosp.; not elsewhere.

(10) ὕψιστος (as an epithet of God)
five times in Gosp., in Acts twice; else-
where Mark v. 7; Hebr. vii. 1.

(11) Peculiar words (a) found only in
St. Luke’s Gospel and Acts:

διϊσχυρίζεσϑαι, διοδεύειν. Evedpevery,
ἐπιδεῖν, ἐντόνως, κατακλείειν, κατακυ-

384 THE DIFFERENCES IN ARRANGEMENT

Such appears to be, in rude outline, the general tenor of
the Synoptic Evangelists; and though it be
impossible to discuss within our present lim-
its their more minute divergences in order
and narration, yet it will be sufficiently clear that they
subserve to special uses, that they imply and explain fun-
damental differences of scope, and unfold the Christian
faith as it falls within each separate range. The events
recorded by the synoptists are not generally distinct, but
they are variously regarded, that we may be led to recog-
nize the manifold instructiveness and application of every
word and work of Christ. It may, indeed, be difficult to
trace the progress of the subject, as it is taken up in each
successive part of the histories; yet from time to time the
same familiar notes recur, and we feel sure that a deeper
knowledge and a finer discernment would lead us to recog-
nize their influence, even in those passages which are most
complicated and obscure. We have followed no arbitrary
arrangement in classifying the miracles or discourses of
our Lord, and yet in the mere simplicity of the Gospels we
have traced the great signs of a new and noble sequence,
too uniform and pregnant to be attributable to chance, too

General Sum-

mary.

unpretending and obscure to be the work of design.

λουϑεῖν, κλάσις (ἄρτου), μεγαλεῖα,
ὀχλεῖσϑαι, προβίλλειν, προσδοκία,
συμπληροῦν, συνεῖναι, τραυματίζειν
(τραῦμα, Gosp. once) (all once in Gosp.,
once in Acts); διϊστάναι, ἐπιβιβάζειν,
SduBos (twice in Gosp., once in Acts);
ἐπιχειρεῖν, ἴασις, [συναδϑροίζειν] (Gosp.
once, Acts twice); διαπορεῖν, ἐπιφω-
νεῖν, εὐλαβής, καδίεναι, συναρπάζειν
(Gosp. once, Acts three times); 7 ἑξῆς,
καϑεξῆς (twice; three times); Kaddre
(twice; four times); ὀδυνᾶσϑαι (three
times; once); ὁμιλεῖν (twice; twice);
συγκαλεῖσϑαι, Midd. (three times;
twice); συμβάλλειν (twice; four times).

(Ὁ) Found only in Gospel: πτοεῖς
σϑαι, συκοφαντεῖν, ὑποχωρεῖν, χρεο-
φειλέτης (each twice); συνιέναι, σὺυν-

And

τυχεῖν, τελεσφορεῖν, φιλονεικία, etc.
(each once).

(c) Occurring more often in Gosp.
and Acts than in the other books of
the New Testament: ἅπας, ἀτενίζειν,
ἐξαίφνης, καλούμενος, ὀνόματι, κατελ-
Je, παραχρῆμα.

(12) καὶ ἐγένετο (ἐγέν. δέ) ἐν τῷ...
In Gosp. twenty-two times, in Acts
twice (Mark iy. 4). Compare ἐγένετο
ΠΟΤΕ Ne

(13) ἦν, etc., with partic. In Gosp.
forty-seven times, in Acts thirty-seven
(Matt. ten; Mark twenty-seven; John
eighteen).

In the numbers given some differences
may arise from various readings, but
they are, I believe, generally correct.

OF THE SYNOPTIC EVANGELISTS. 385

surely the conviction of this truth, more than any other,
—incommunicable it may be, and ill-defined by language,
—must fill us with the devoutest reverence for the Gospel
histories, a reverence which is no vain “ Bibliolatry,” but
a feeling which springs from the satisfaction of our inmost
wants, and furnishes the fullest materials for patient study.
For such a scheme of the holy Gospels is at once most wor-
thy of their divine origin, and most consistent with their
outward form ; it realizes the individuality of their author-
ship, and explains the facts of their perversions; it satis-
fies, in its manifoldness, every requirement of the past and
future relations of Christian truth; it falls in with early
tradition, and opens to us a new view of the providential
government of the Church; and, finally, it sets before us,
in the clearest light, the combination of the human and
divine, which lies at the basis of all revelation. The surest
answer to all doubts, the readiest help in all difficulties,
the truest consolation in all divisions, must spring from a
real sense of the union of God and man in religion and in
Scripture, which is the perfect record of the historical
fulfilment of the union; and, if we read the words of inspi-
ration humbly and sincerely, we have a promise which
cannot fail.

1 Orig. Selecta in Num. xi. 25: & γὰρ ἐν Χριστῷ τὸ πνεῦμα, καὶ μία διὰ
πάντων ἡἣ ἐνέργεια.
99

ΟΗ AP ARE RW LL.

THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS.

Πεπαιδευμένου ἐστὶ ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον τἀκριβὲς ἐπιζητεῖν Kad ἕκαστον γένος, ep
ὕσον ἣ τοῦ πράγματος φύσις ἐπιδέχεται. — ARISTOTELES.

Ir we have in any measure succeeded in establishing the
aie idea of a distinct spiritual purpose and order
ne Coen wh. in the writings of the several Evangelists, if
rieely tneowsidere- we have shown that they rest upon the foun-
dations of the past and meet the wants of
the future, the remainder of our task will be easy. We
shall feel the presence of the Holy Spirit throughout the
whole narratives, and seek neither to limit His influence
nor to define His operation. We shall recognize the diver-
gences of the sacred writers, but still strive to discover the
law of their course and the point of their reunion. We
shall bear in mind how much is clear and evident in the
written Word, while we ponder over dark and disputed
sentences. We shall admit the obscurities which critics
have detected in our Gospels, and endeavor to explain their
origin, while we remember that, like the spots upon the
surface of the sun, they neither mar the symmetry nor
impair the glory of the great Source of our life and light
which is imaged in them. ᾿
il ee It would be a profitless task to discuss at
for meeting orice. length the objections which have been urged
Bab against distinct passages of the Gospels, for
it is always the penalty of controversy that the whole is

THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 387

neglected for details; but it may be not without use to
indicate some general grounds for receiving with patience
accounts which we cannot entirely reconcile. Such gen-
eral considerations may lead us to wait for fuller knovwwl-
edge, not with doubt and misgiving, but with a sure
confidence in God’s eternal truth.

We have already noticed the error of those who contem-
plate the lite of Christ, as recorded by the
Evangelists, only outwardly, without regard- ΟΣ ἀπε spring
ing its spiritual significance. Hence it has ἐδ ταν tte
followed, that details, historically trivial, have
been deemed unfit subjects for the exercise of inspiration ;
and it has been argued, from the omission of a wide cycle
of facts by the Evangelists, that their narratives are vague
and incomplete. The first step to a right understanding
of the Gospels must be the abandonment of this point of
sight; we must regard them as designed to set forth the
progress of a divine work embodied in the life of the Son
of Man; we must compare them with the inward experi-
ence of Christians, and not with the annals of biographers}
we must read them to learn the details of our redemption,
and not to add some new facts to the chronicles of the
world. Before we pronounce any clause or word in the
Bible insignificant or needless, let us be assured that it con-
tains no “mystery,”? that it teaches the humble student no
new lesson in the knowledge of the world, or of man, or
of God.

A second source of objections to the Gospels follows
from the general disregard of their spiritual ) Pane
character. No attempt is made to realize ted onethn g
their individual purposes, as representing nat-
ural and fundamental differences in the conception of the

1 Orig. Philoc.c. i. Πρέπει τὰ ἅγια τῶν ἀπὸ πληρώματος." Kal οὐδέν
γράμματα πιστεύειν μηδεμίαν κεραίαν ἐστιν ἐν προφητείᾳ, ἢ νόμῳ, ἢ εὐαγ-
ἔχειν κενὴν σοφίας Θεοῦ... ἐκ yap γελίῳ, ἢ ἀποστόλῳ ὃ οὔκ ἐστιν ἀπὸ
τοῦ πληρώματος αὐτοῦ λαβόντες of πληρώματος.
προφῆται λέγουσι. ‘did πάντα πνεῖ

388 THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS.

Life of Christ. If their individuality is asserted, it is as
the partial result of design, and not as the spontaneous
expression of a finite mind filled with the truth. To bor-
row an illustration from classical literature, the “ Memoirs”
of the Apostles are treated historically by a method which
no critic would apply to the “Memoirs” of Xenophon.
The scholar admits the truthfulness of the different pic-
tures of Socrates which were drawn by the philosopher,
the moralist, and the man of the world, and combines
them into one figure instinct with.a noble life, half hidden
and half revealed, as men viewed it from different points;
but he seems often to forget his art when he studies the
records of the Saviour’s work. Hence it is that superficial
differences are detached from the context which explains
them. It is urged as an objection that parallel narratives
are not identical. Variety of details is taken for discrep-
ancy. The evidence may be wanting which might har-
monize narratives apparently discordant; but experience
shows that it is as rash to deny the probability of recon-
ciliation as it is to fix the exact method by which it may
be made out. If, as a general rule, we can follow the law
which regulates the characteristic peculiarities of each
Evangelist, and see in what way they answer to different
aspects of one truth, and combine as complementary ele-
ments in the full representation of it,’ we may be well
contented to acquiesce in the existence of some difficulties
which at present admit of no exact solution, though they
may be a necessary consequence of that independence of
the Gospels which, in other cases, is the source of their
united power.

1 Orig. In Joann. Tom. x. 18. Ἐπίσ-
Tnoov δὲ ἐπιμελῶς, εἰ δυνατὸν ὡς τάς
γε ἐναλλαγὰς TOY γεγραμμένων καὶ
τὰς διαφωνίας διαλύεσϑαι παρὰ τὸν
τῆς ἀναγωγῆς τρόπον, ἑκάστου τῶν
Εὐαγγελιστῶν διαγράφοντος διαφόρους
τοῦ λόγου ἐνεργείας ἐν διαφόροις ἤδϑεσι
ψυχῶν οὐ τὰ αὐτὰ ἀλλά τινα παραπ-
λήσια ἐπιτελούσας.

The wisdom of

Origen’s principle is not shaken in any
degree by his own failure in applying
it.

2 Cf. Matt. viii. 5—10; Luke vii.
1—10.

Matt. xxvii. 5; Acts i.18. See Gaus-
sen, Theopneustia, p. 143( EH. Tr.), fora
curious parallel.

John. xix. 17; Luke xxiii. 26. See

YHE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 389

The neglect of the spiritual object of the Gospels, by
which they are deprived of their proper
character, leads necessarily to the disregard ὦ fim. neg.
of their secondary character, as true narra- en ee:
tives of facts. Many recent critics have not
only reduced our Gospels to the level of ordinary writings,
but have then denied their special and independent author-
ity. They commonly admit a fact on the testimony of
Josephus, which they question if it rest on the statement
of St. Matthew or St. Luke.’ They do not concede those
privileges to the Evangelists which they yield to other his-
torians in accordance with the received rules of evidence;
and though it be said that the assumed inspiration of the
Gospels removes them to a fresh position, it is clear that,
in the interpretation of the outward text, they must be
subject to the just arbitration of criticism ; for the body is
obedient to the laws of matter, though informed by a liv-
ing spirit. We claim for the Gospels the strictest inter-
pretation of language. Let the test be applied universally,
and the apologist will gain as much as the interpreter.
As soon as we disbelieve in the force of words, similarity
is confounded with sameness ; differences are quoted as
contradictions ;* the general is asserted to be inconsistent

p. 825, n. 6, and Orig. Comm. in Matt. Matt. xiv. 15—21; xv. 32—88. Cf.

Tom. xii. § 24. xvi. 9, 10.
1 Matt. xiy. 3. Matt. xxvi. 6—13; Luke vii. 36—60.
Matt. xxiii. 35. Luke ix. 1 sqq.; X. 1 sqq.
Matt. xxvii. 51 sqq.; 62--66; xxviii. Jobn ii. 14—17; Matt. xxi, 12, 13.
11—15 (Strauss, iii. 4, § 133). John iy. 46—54; Luke vii. 1—10.

Luke iii. 1 (Strauss, ii. 1, § 44).

Luke xxiii. 45 (Strauss, iii. 4, § 133). 3 Matt. iii. 14; Johni. 81. Cf. p. 293,
There is no mention of an Eclipse, but n. 2.
of Darkness (σκότος ἐγένετο. Matt. Matt. xx. 29—84; Mark x. 46—52;
xxvii. 45; Mark xv. 33; Luke xxiii. Luke xviii. 85—48. Cf. Davidson’s
44). The objection is as old as the time Hermeneutics, p. 558.

of Origen, who answers it rightly: Matt. xxvii. 54; Luke xxiii. 47.

Comm. Ser. in Matt. § 184. Matt. xxvii. 87; Mark xv. 26; Luke
John i. 28; iii. 238; iv.5. Cf. xviii.l. xxiii. 38; John xix. 19 ( The inscription
2 Matt. ix. 82—34; xii. 22—380. on the Cross). Cf. p. 826, n. 4.

390 THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS.

with the particular;! the connection of subject is taken for
a connection of time.”
It cannot be denied that the real origin of many, per-
haps of most of the objections to the Gos-
ee pels, lies deeper than textual criticism. The
objections to the record rest on a fundamen-
tal objection to the implied fact. An unexpressed denial
of the possibility of miracles is the foundation of detailed
assaults upon a miraculous narrative. Critical difficulties
are too often, in the first instance, the excuse for a foregone
conclusion, or at least fall in with a definite bias. A
charge of prejudice is alleged against the defenders of: the
Gospels, and it lies more truly against those who attack
them. The prevalence of a suspicion of all miraculous
history, of a willingness to accept any explanation which
may limit or modify its character, of a kind of satisfaction
in believing that we may plausibly doubt some part of it
and so question the whole, is far greater than we commonly
admit even to ourselves. No one probably is free from the
feeling; and it is well to consider how much of each difh-
culty is due to the nature of the fact, and how much to
the nature of the evidence by which it is attested; how
far it is a fair result of the text itself, and how far a nat-
ural consequence of the conception which the text contains.
Christianity is essentially miraculous. This is a postulate
of Biblical criticism; and it follows that miraculous cir-
cumstances are exactly in the same position in the Gospel
history as natural cireumstances in common history. If
the postulate be granted, the conclusion is inevitable; if
it be denied, argument is impossible. No external evi-
dence can produce faith.

1 Matt. xi. 2 sqq.; John i. 34; iii. 27. John v. 31; viii. 14.

Matt. xi. 14; Johni. 21. A suggestive instance occurs in Matt.
Matt. xxi. 88; Acts iii. 17; xiii. 27. xx. 20; Mark x. 25, when we compare
Matt. xxvi. 8; John xii. 4. Matt. xx. 22 with Mark x. 38 (οἴδατε).

Matt. xxvi. 69—75; Mark xiv. 66--72; Matt. xiv. 18; Luke ix. 10.
Luke xxii. 56—62; John xviii. 17, 18,
25—27 (The denials of St. Peter). Cf. 2 Matt. xxi. 19, 20; Mark xi. 20.
p- 801, n. Luke xxiy. 50; Acts i. 3.

THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 391

Apart from narratives which involve this antagonism of
principle, it may be observed that even in
_those passages which present the greatest
difficulties there are traces of unrecorded
facts, which, if known fully, would probably explain the
whole;! further knowledge tends to remove, instead of
increasing, objections ; and few objections are admitted to
be of force by all adverse critics. The heritage of scepti-
cism is rather the settled spirit of doubt than the accumu-
lated store of arguments. Each antagonist of Christianity
thinks that the battle fails where he is not himself engaged.
Isolated and independent efforts are opposed to the gath-
ered strength which ages of faith have transmitted to the
Church.

It is, perhaps, the more necessary to insist on these
particulars, as much of the criticism at the
present day seems to assume that there is
some resting-place between the perfect truth-
fulness of inspiration and the uncertainty of
ordinary writing. A subjective standard is erected, which,
if once admitted, will be used as much to measure the
doctrines as the facts of Scripture; and, while many spec-
ulators boldly avow this, others are contented to admit
the premises from which the conclusion necessarily follows.
But, within the Church, criticism is the interpreter and
assessor, and not the sole and final judge. The same Spirit
which gave the Revelation, for the establishment of the
outward society, will unfold its meaning, but not supersede
its use. The Spirit and the Word work together, and not
apart. To claim a distinct personal enlightenment, inde-
pendent of a written Word, is to violate the highest attri-

The gravest
objection® are un-
certain.

Importance of
feeling the literal
truthfulness a
Scripture :

1 Luke ii. 2, αὕτη ἢ ἀπογραφὴ
πρώτη ἐγένετο, kK. τ. A. The force
of the objection lies in the neglect of
the word πρώτη, which seems to refer
tosome other “ taxing,” with which we
are unacquainted (1851). Cf. p. 318, n. 2.

Mark ii. 26, ἐπὶ "ABiadap τοῦ ἀρ-

χιερέως" not ἐπὶ ᾿Αβιάϑαρ ἀρχιερέων
(Luke iii.2. Cf. Herod. i. 15, 56, 65, 94).
John xix. 14; Mark xv. 25. Cf.
Townson, Dissert. Ψ 111. 1, § 2.
We see the importance of this minute
criticism in Mark xi. 18, ἔχουσαν
φύλλα.

592 THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS.
bute of man — his social dependence. To convert the writ-
ten Word into a rigid code of formal teaching, indepen-
dent.of the abiding presence of the Spirit who draws from
it lessons for each age, is to destroy the idea of a Church
—that “Communion of Saints” which realizes in life the
historic verities of Christianity. Both feelings alike, though
in different ways, spring out of that tendency of our age
which would obliterate the name of government and the
claims of national life.

Still we must not seek, by an excess of zeal, to limit the
narratives of Scripture to any mechanical

even when we can-
not prove it.

arrangement; they are diving oracles, whose
vitality consists in their integrity. It is
enough for us to refute the conclusions of our adversaries,
without imitating their subtleties. The great marks of the
divinity of the Gospels are written on every page and
included in every word. Their perfect adaptation to our
wants is proved by the witness of our own hearts, not
because we can discover truth, but because, by God’s help,
we can recognize it; and it is equally unwise
and unchristian to mar our glorious heritage
in the pursuit of a faithless knowledge, to impair its ful-
ness, or abridge its scope, because our own reason, or that
of others, is too proud to bow before the wondrous works
and miracles consequent on the perfection
and reality of a God manifest in the flesh.
Surely here, if anywhere, it befits our weak-
ness “to be thankful, and to wait.”?!

But, while either extreme of indifferentism
and formal harmonization is alike hurtful, —
for by the one we are apt to destroy our sense
of moral beauty, and by the other our regard for moral

Acts vii. 38.

Hebr. xi. 1.

᾿. 7 χε τῆῆς 16;
(ΘΣ or ΟΣ).

The relation of
Faith to Reason
in Scripture.

1Cf. Orig. Philoc. ο. 1. ᾿Ασφαλὲς νοις αἰωνίοις σεσιγημένου, φανερωϑ έν-

οὖν τὸ περιμένειν τὴν ἑρμηνείαν τοῦ
σαφηνιστοῦ λόγου, καὶ τῆς ἐν μυστη-
ρίῳ σοφίας ἀποκεκρυμμένης, ἣν οὐδεὶς
τῶν ἀρχόντων τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου ἔγ-
νωκε κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν μυστηρίον χρό-

τος τοῖς ἀποστόλοις καὶ τοῖς ἐκείνοις
παραπλησίοις διά τε γραφῶν προφητι-
κῶν, καὶ τῆς γενομένης εἰς αὐτοὺς
ἐπιφανείας τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν λόγου
τοῦ ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν δεόν.

THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 393

truth, — we are not to decline, with some, the labors of a
searching criticism, or, with others, the veneration of the
humblest faith; for it is only by the combination of
these that the deepest meaning of Holy Scripture is laid
open. Reason and faith are not antagonistic principles,
but another form of the great antithesis which lies at the
basis of all our knowledge. By the one we discover the
human form, and by the other the spiritual basis of
revealed truth. Reason gives us the laws which limit our
human conceptions, as made in time and space, and Faith
gives us those absolute ideas of spiritual things which rea-
son embodies. The one answers to the human, and the
other to the divine, in our nature; and both alike are
addressed by the Word of God, and consecrated to the
Christian’s use,

From this view of our constitution we may see that the
very existence of difficulties in our Gospels fied *

1. Difficulties are

—which are the groundwork of our faith — — wefut Intellectu-
is a fresh incentive to vigorous and rational τα
study. There is a noble remark of Origen,! which is true
in a moral sense, and perhaps even literally, that “the
Divine Word ordered some stumbling-blocks and stones
of offence in the sacred records, that we might not be led
away by the unalloyed attractiveness of the narration, and
seek for nothing more divine.” We feel assured that the
Scriptures contain infinite depths, from our sense of the
general dealings of Providence and of the wants of the
Church; and the subtlest criticism discovers enough to
encourage us to dedicate every energy to the investigation
of their mysteries. If there were no need for rigorous
criticism, no reward for acute philology, no scope for phil-
osophical inquiry, in the study of the Bible, —if the text
were uniform, the diction simple, and the connection

1 Philoc. i. 15, ὠκονόμησέ τινα οἱονεὶ ἵνα wh πάντη ὑπὸ τῆς λέξεως ἑλκόμε-
σκάνδαλα καὶ προσκόμματα καὶ ἀδύ- νοι τὸ ἄγωγον ἄκρατον ἐχούσης...
vata, διὰ μέσου ἔγκαταταχϑῆναι τῷ μηδὲν ϑειότερον μάϑωμεν.
γόμῳ καὶ τῇ ἱστορίᾳ ὃ τοῦ Θεοῦ λόγος"

994 THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS.

obvious, — we might neglect the consecration of our entire
faculties to divine ends;! while, as it is, we find in the
human form, and the natural transmission of the sacred
volume, the noblest field for our labors. If it be said that
these subtleties are only for the scholar, the answer is
obvious, that so are the objections to which they corre-
spond. The Bible appeals to all as they are; no one occu-
pies a position of superiority. The difficulties of Scripture
are useful intellectually.’

But, again, we must remember that all revelation is
given to us as in a state of probation,’ and
that not only in reference to a part of our
nature, but to the whole. We are subjected to a mental
as well as to moral trial, or, rather, morality is extended to
reason as well as to life; and we might expect that Scrip-
ture should furnish us with a proper training for both.
“ Believe, and then thou shalt find beneath
the imaginary offence a full source of profit,”
was a saying of Origen’s, never more truly applicable than
in an age of unexampled restlessness. The outward
moral temptation is now, perhaps, less formidable than
heretofore, from the form of our civilization, while the in-
ward struggle waxes fiercer and fiercer, as men seek not so
much to live freely as to know fully, forgetting too often
that love is the source of wisdom ;‘ for “the chasms (and
discrepancies) in the divine history afford room for the
exercise of faith —a faith whose root is to be found, not in
science, not in demonstration, but in simple and self-sub-
duing submission of our spirits.”® The difficulties of
Scripture are useful morally.

Origen® will still furnish us with another remark: the

2. Morally.

Philoc. i. 23.

1 Arist. Hth. N. vi. 12. refer to Pascal’s notes, Vol. ii. pp. 205,
2 Among the notes for Pascal’s great 265.
Apology is the following: ‘‘ Plusieurs 4 ((ΤΊ faut aimer les choses divines

Evangélistes pour la confirmation de pour Jes connaitre.’? — Pascal.
la vérité. Leur dissemblance utile.” 5 Neander, Life of Christ, Introd.
(Ed. Faugé-e, ii. p. 371). 6 De Princip. iv. p. 168 (i. § 7), ὥσπερ

3 In addition to Butler, we may ov χρεωκοπεῖται 7 πρόνοια διὰ τὰ μὰ

THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS. 395

difficulties of the revelation in the Bible are strictly anal-
ogous to those of the revelation in nature.

“In both we see a self-concealing, self-reveal- ΙΝ
ing God, who makes Himself known only to

those who earnestly seek Him; in both we find stimulants
to faith, and occasions for unbelief.” There are apparent
anomalies in the phenomena of the material world, but
their general uniformity teaches us that these are only dis-
crepancies in appearance. There are difficulties in apply-
ing the great doctrine of gravitation, — as in the case of
the tides,— but we feel that they arise not from any want
of universality in the law, but from our ignorance of the
conditions of the problem. There are also difficulties in
Scripture; and shall we not rest assured, from that Divine
wisdom which we can discern, that they spring only from
our ignorance of the circumstances on which the question
turns? If the Gospels had presented no formal offences,
how soon should we have heard objections drawn from the
general course of God’s dealings! How readily should we
have been reminded of the plausibility of human forgeries,
and of the mystery of Divine Providence! It would have
been even said,’ that the advance of Christianity — which
must be folly to the Greek — was due to the
beauty of its external form, and the perfec-
tion of its superficial smoothness, and not to the power of
its inner truth: whereas, at present, the discrepancies of
Scripture lead us back to the Author of nature; and as
we do not question His eternal Presence, though many
details of His operation transcend our knowledge, so
neither need we doubt the perfect inspiration
of the Scriptures, though frequently we may
be unable to recognize the treasure of God in the earthly

1 Cor..t. 23.

2 Cor. iv. 7.

γινωσκόμενα Tapa τοῖς γ᾽ ἅπαξ mapa- παρίστασϑαι TH κεκρυμμένῃ λαμπρό.
δεξαμένοις αὐτὴν καλῶς, οὕτως οὐδὲ THTL τῶν δογμάτων ἐν εὐτελεῖ Kal
ἡ τῆς γραφῆς ϑειότης διατείνουσα εἰς εὐκαταφρονήτῳ λέξει ἀποκειμένῃ.
πᾶσαν αὐτὴν, διὰ τὸ μὴ KAY ἑκάστην 1 Neander, 2. c.

λέξιν δύνασϑαι τὴν ἀσϑένειαν ἡμῶν δ Origen, Philoc. 1v.

390 THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS.

vessels which contain it. The difficulties of Scripture are |
useful as unfolding the true analogy of God’s works.

But “not to rest in this school of nature,” we must
remember, in the midst of the doubts and _ perplexities
which so easily beset us, that at present we
know but in part the facts and the bearings
of revelation. Dim views of a wider scope and a more
perfect wisdom are ever opened before us. Faith looks
forwards as well as inwards; and even now we see enough
whereon to rest securely the firm foundations of our hope,
possessing our souls in peace, till that which is in part
shall be done away,— til the glorious buildings of the
New Jerusalem and its heavenly splendors shall be fully
disclosed, whereof at present we can but discern, amid the
mists of earth, wondrous pillars and buttresses, or through
some dim window the distant rays of that
glorious Sun—even the Lamb of God—
which shall at one time illumine the Holy City.

1 Οὐογ. αἰϊῖ. 9.

Rev. xxi. 95.

TENHOHTQ HMIN KATA THN ΠΙΟΤῚΝ HMQN KAO HN KAI
IIICTEYOMEN OTI TIACA TPA®H OE€OIINEYCTOC OYCA KAI
QbvEAIMOC ECTI, —ORIGENEs.

APPENDICES.

APPENDIX A.

ON THE QUOTATIONS IN THE GOSPELS.

Οὐδέποτε οὕτως ἐλάλησεν ἄνϑρωπο. ---- JoUN VII. 46

Tue quotations made from the Old Testament by our Lord and His
disciples, give us, perhaps, the truest and most decisive Tid: eapitaon
view of the inspiration of the Bible; for no one, Isup- of the Old Testa-
pose, will refuse that authority to the Gospels and Epis- eT a τος
tles which is assured to the Law and the Prophets. The
Christian Councils must have had the same authority and guidance in
deciding on the Canon of the new Scriptures as was enjoyed by the Jewish
Church, nor can we believe that less grace was given to those who por-
trayed the substance of the Gospel than to those who saw its shadow ; for
the only alternative is to deny the need of an outward society and a divine
Word for the fulfilment of the second dispensation. It will be seen from
the following passages, taken from the books of Moses, the Psalms, and
the Prophets, that a spiritual significance lies beneath the Bible as a whole ;
that its power and usefulness is not confined to striking predictions or defi-
nite precepts, but spread over simple historic details, and involved in the
records of individual life. We may conclude this, —

I. From the mode in which our Lord appeals to Scripture as decisive :
(a) In direct precepts : And thatis proved
Matt. iv. 4, 7,10; Cf. Luke iv. 4,8,12 1. Bythe quotations
(γέγραπται" εἴρηται" Deut. vi. 13, 16 ; i fas εν δον
viii. 3). Matt. ix. 13; xii. 7 (Hos. vi. 11).
Matt. xv. 4 (6 Θεὸς εἶπεν) Mark vii. 10 (Μωῦσῆς εἶπεν, Ex.
xx. 12). Cf. Matt. xxii. 36, 38; Matt. xviii. 16.
Cf. Deut. xix. 15.
(Ὁ) In distinct prophecies :
Matt. xi. 10 (οὗτός ἐστιν περὶ οὗ γέγραπται, Mal. iii. 1).
Matt. xxiv.15. Mark xiii. 14 (τὸ ῥηδϑὲν ὑπὸ Δανιὴλ τοῦ
ap. Dan. ix. 27; xii. 11).
Matt. xxvi. 54 (πῶς οὖν πληρωθῶσιν αἱ γραφαί, ὅτι οὕτω dei
γενέσδϑαι; Cf. ν. 56).
Luke vii. 27. Matt. xi. 10 (περὶ οὗ γέγραπται. Mal. iii. 2).
Luke xxii. 37 (τὸ γεγραμμένον δεῖ TEAC TARY at ἐν ἐμοί"
Isa. lili. 12).

400 ON THE QUOTATIONS IN THE GOSPELS.

And significant :
(c) In its secondary application :

Matt. x. 35 (Mic. vii.6). Matt. xii. 5 (οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε" Num.
xxvii. 9ὴ-

Matt. xiii. 14, 15 (ἀναπληροῦται αὐτοῖς ἢ προφητεία'
Isa. vi. 9, 11).

Matt. xv. 8, 9 (προεφήτευσεν ‘Ho. Isa. xxix. 13).

Matt. xxi. 15. Mark xi.17. Luke xix, 46 {γέγραπται"
Isa. lvi. 7).

Matt. xxi. 16 (οὐδέποτε ἀνέγνωτε ; Ps. viii. 2).

Matt. xxi. 42 (οὐδέποτε ἀνέγνωτε ἐν ταῖς γραφαῖς) ; Mark

xi. 10 (ἡ γραφὴ αὕτη) ; Luke xx. 17 (τὸ γεγραμμέ-

νον τοῦτο" Ps. cxviii. 22, 23).

Matt. xxvi. 31 (γέγραπται: Zech. xiii. 7).

John vi. 45 (yeyp. ἐν τοῖς προφήταις᾽ Isa. liv. 13).

John xiii. 18 (7 γραφή: Ps. xli. 9).

John xv. 25 (ὃ λόγος 6 γεγραμμένος ἐν τῷ νόμῳ αὐτῶν’ Ps.
sox Vel 9):

(d) In its spiritual depth:

Matt. xii. 40 (John ii. 1). Matt. xix. 4, 5 (οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε) ;
Mark x. 6. Gen. i. 27; ii. 24.

Matt. xxii. 32 (τὸ ῥδηϑδὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ); Mark xii. 26
(οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε ws εἶπεν ὁ Θεός) ; Luke xx. 37 (Ma@i-
σ ἢ ἐμήνυσεν Ex, ill. 6, 16).

Matt. xxii. 43, 44 (Δανεὶδ ἐν πνεύματι); Mark xii. 36
(A. ἐν my. ἁγίῳ); Luke xx. 41 (Aaveld λέγει’ Ps.
Cx):

Matt. xxvii. 46; Mark xv. 34. Cf. Ps. xxii. 2.

Mark ix. 49.'

John x. 34 (yeyp. ἐν τῷ νόμῳ ὑμῶν. Ps. 1xxxii. 6).?

From these passages it will be seen that we must either accept the doc-
érine of a plenary inspiration, as we have already explained the phrase, or
deny the veracity of the Evangelists. If our Lord’s words are accurately
recorded, or even if their general tenor is expressed in one of the Gospels,
the Bible is indeed the “‘ Word of God,” in the fullest spiritual sense ; for
no scheme of accommodation cai be accepted where it tends to lead men
astray as to the sources of divine help.

II. The doctrine which we have seen to be implied in the language of

ti By ea. Oe Lord is yet more fully unfolded by the Apostles and
tions of the Evan- Evangelists. It will be enough for our present purpose
ΠΩΣ to give a general table of the citations in the Gospels :

1 Cf. Olshausen, Comm. S. 555 if. (Origen, Philoc. 1. § 10); xvi. 29, 31;
2Cf. Matt xxvii. 46; Luke xi. 52 John v. 39, 46; vii. 38.

ON THE QUOTATIONS IN THE GOSPELS. 401

(a) Distinct prophecies :
Matt. ii. 6 (γέγραπται: Mic. v. 2).
Matt. iv. 15, 16 (ἵνα πληρωδϑῇ τὸ ῥηϑὲν διὰ τοῦ wp. Isa.
i, 4, 2).
Matt. xii. 17-21 (ὅπως πληρωδῇ τὸ ῥηϑέν" Isa. vi. 1-4).
Matt. xxi. 5 (ἵνα πληρωδῇ τὸ ῥηδέν" Zech.ix. 9); John xii
15 (καϑώς ἐστιν γεγραμμένον).

(Ὁ) Typical acts and words fulfilled in the Gospel history :

Matt. i. 22 (ὅλον γέγονεν ἵνα πληρωδῇ τὸ ῥηϑὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ
Κυρίου διὰ τοῦ mp. Isa. vii. 14).

Matt. ii. 15 (a πληρωδῇ τὸ ῥηδὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ Κυρίου διὰ τοῦ
mp. Hos. xi. 1).

Matt. ii. 18 (τότε ἐπληρώϑη τὸ ῥ. διὰ τοῦ mp. Jer. XxXi.
15).

Matt. ii. 23 (ὅπως πληρωδνῇ τὸ ῥ. διὰ τῶν προφητῶν).

[ Matt. iii. 3. Mark 1. 8. Luke iii. 4. John i. 23.]

Matt. viii. 17 (ὅπως mAnpwd7. Isa. liii. 4).

Matt. xili, 35 (ὅπως TA. τὸ ῥηδὲν διὰ τοῦ mp. Ps. |xxviii. 2).

Matt. xxvii. 9, 10 (τότε ἐπληρώϑη τὸ ῥ. [Zech.] xi. 12, 13).

John ii. 17 (yeyp. ἐστίν" Ps. xix. 9).

John xii. 38-41 (οὐκ ἠδύναντο πιστεύειν ὅτι εἶπεν Ἧσ......
ἵνα πληρωδῇ 6 λόγος Ἣσ...ταῦτα εἶπεν ‘Ho. ὅτε εἶδεν τὴν
δόξαν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐλάλησε περὶ αὐτοῦ; Isa. liii. 1; vi.
9, 10).

John xix. 24 (ἵνα ἣ γραφὴ πλερωϑῇ ἣ Aey. Ps. xxii. 18.
Cf. Matt. xxvii. 35).

John xix. 36 (iva ἣ yp. TA. Ex. xxii. 46; γραφὴ λέγει'
Zech. xii. 10).

It may be worth while to enumerate some general conclusions to which
this enumeration leads :

1. There appears to be a distinct meaning in the dif- Piggies ati
ferent modes of quotation. Surenhusius' has made a
valuable collection of the formulz in use among the Rabbins, which may
be compared with the Greek phrases ; but the discussion of this question
would necessarily lead us beyond the Gospels.

2. The usage of the Evangelists shows that they did not introduce the
quotations into the speeches of Jesus. For while St. Mark and St. Luke
do not quote the prophets in their own narratives, they agree exactly with
St Matthew in their records of our Lord’s teaching.

3. The authority of Christ himself and of his Apostles encourages us
to search for a deep and spiritual meaning under the ordinary words of
Scripture, which, however, cannot be gained by any arbitrary allegorizing,
but only by following out patiently the course of God’s dealings with

1 In his Βίβλος καταλλαγῆς. Cf supr. p. 58, n.
34*

402 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

man.! ‘There are traces even in the Old Testament of the recognition of
this fulness of the written Word.? Such a belicf ties at the basis of the
arguments of St. Paul? and of the Epistle to the Hebrews ;+ and we shall
find that it was ratified for at least three centuries by the common consent
of the Church.

AP PE PP TX sb.
ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

70 Τιμόϑεε, Thy παραϑδήκην φύλαξον, ἐκτρεπόμενος τὰς βεβήλους κενσφω-
vias, καὶ ἂντιϑέσεις THS ψευδωνύμου γνώσεως" Hv τινες ἐπαγγελλόμενοι, περὶ
τὴν πίστιν ἠστόχησαν. --- 1 TIM. VI. 20.

In the present Appendix I shall endeavor to collect, as far as possible,
all the chief opinions of the Fathers of the first three centuries on the
nature of Inspiration. We may be inclined to judge some of their state-
ments fanciful or unsound, but still it cannot be a profitless task to learn
what they thought of our Bible, who found in its teaching a support in
martyrdom; it cannot be unworthy of the most advanced Christian to
treasure up the sayings of those who lived while an apostolic tradition
still lingered among the disciples of St. John, St. Peter, and St. Mark.

In the course of our inquiry we shall meet with men who regarded our
religion from the most opposite points of view. We shall hear the testi-
monies of the converted Jew, the awakened heathen, and the hereditary
Christian — of those who found in the faith of Christ the fulfilment of
ancient promises or early hopes, and of others who were driven to embrace
it by the pressure of their own wants, after they had gone through the
circle of philosophy. Yet more, we shall be obliged to recognize the
various influences of Eastern and Western life. Palestine and Assyria,
Antioch and Alexandria, — the seats of divergent systems of criticism and
theology, —contributed to fill the ranks of Christian writers, and furnished
words to express their new ideas. The voice of Christianity comes to us
from Athens and Carthage, from Rome and Lyons. All these points

1 Those who wish to pursue this ques-
tion further in, relation to modern
opinions, will do well to study Olshau-
sen’s beautiful tract, Lin Wort wber
tiefern Schriftsinn.

2 Olshausen, § 7; the passages in the
Apocrypha are given in § 8.

ΘΟΕ Core ΞΘ 18: 2 ΘΌΥ 11]. 7:
8 (Cf. Orig. in Joan. Tom. xxx1t. § 17);

Gal. iv. 21-81; Eph. v. 29-32 (Gen. ii.
24); Col. ii. 17.

4 The whole argument of the Epistle
depends on the reality of the spiritual
meaning of the Old Testament. Cf.
Heb. iv. 5,7; v. 5-12; vii.-x.; xii. 1,

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 403

must be carefully remembered if we wish to form an adequate idea of the
real purport and true unity of the teaching of the Church. For in pro-
portion as their differences of country, education, and temperament are
greater, so much the more striking is the essential agreement of the early
Fathers in points of faith and feeling ; and if we can trace, under various
forms, one great idea of inspiration in the scattered societies of ancient
Christendom — if we can find it incorporated into distinct systems and
acknowledged by the most incongruous minds —if the universal consent
of antiquity lead us to Scripture for the groundwork of our creed — we
shall surely acknowledge that tradition has done for us a noble and neces-
sary work, by maintaining an inspired Bible, a definite canon, and a
general method of interpretation.

For the sake of simplicity"it will be best to follow the common arrange-
ment of Church histories, and examine in succession the subapostolic
Fathers (ὁ 1); the Apologists (§ 2) ; the Fathers of Asia Minor (§3); North
Africa (ἢ 4); Rome (ᾧ 5); Alexandria (δ 6); and the Clementines (§ 7).

SECT. I.— THE SUBAPOSTOLIC FATHERS.

Οὔτε yap ἐγὼ οὔτε ἄλλος ὅμοιος ἐμοὶ δύναται κατακολουϑῆσαι τῇ σοφίᾳ
τοῦ μακαρίου καὶ ἐνδόξου Παύλου. --- ΡΟΙΥΘΑΠΡ.

1. From the nature of the subapostolic writings all allusions to Inspi-
ration are incidental. ‘The first literature of a Church is
rather practical than doctrinal, and we must endeavor to
discover the teaching which it involves, rather than merely that which it
expresses. Thus Barnabas uses such phrases as the
following, when quoting Scripture: “The Lord saith
in the prophet” (Ps. xvii. 45); “The Spirit of the Lord prophesieth”
(Ps. xxxiii. 13). Again, he tells us that “the prophets § 5.
received their gift from Christ and spake of Him,” and § 10.
that “Moses spake in the Spirit.’ Consistently with See
this view, he asserts the presence of a spiritual meaning in the Law and
History of the Jews,! and discovers types of the Cross in the ancient
Scriptures (Exod. xvii. 18, sqq.; Isai. Ixv. 2; Num.

Ξ : 4 § 14.
xxi. 9). The number of those circumcised by Abra- § 9.
ham (318, in Greek ti7) represents, he says, at once the
name of Jesus (IH) and the figure of the Cross (T). Than this there is
no truer (yvnoiwrepos) word. But such knowledge was
hidden in old time: “we have gained the right sense of ee
the commandments, and speak as the Lord wished.”
We are, as it were, a new creation. The first tables of the Covenant

1. BARNABAS.

Ep. § 9.

1 Rosenmiiller (Hist. Interpr. 1. 65 tween the interpretations of Barnabas
sqq-) has drawn a striking parallel be- and Philo.

404 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

which Moses brake because of the unworthiness of the people have been
given to us by the Lord. ‘In us God truly dwells, that
is, the Word of His faith (6 λόγος αὐτοῦ τῆς πίστεως),
the calling of His promise, the wisdom of His ordinances, the command-
ments of His teaching, Himself prophesying in us, Himself dwelling in us ;
by opening for us who were enslaved by death the doors of the temple, —
even our mouth, —and by giving us repentance, He brought us into the
incorruptible temple |7. e., made us true temples of God]. He, then, that
longeth to be saved, looketh not to man, but to Him
that dwelleth in him and speaketh in him. .. . And
one rule of those who walk on ‘the way of light’ is:

‘Thou shalt guard what thou hast received, neither adding nor taking
2.2)

§ 16.

819. Cf. Rev.
eee 18, τῶν

away from it
2. Clement of Rome quotes many passages from Scripture with the
words: ‘‘for the Scripture saith;” “by the testimony

9 NS fi 5 . ea .
gee Sot Scripture ;” “the Holy Spirit saith.” He exhorts

Ep. i. 23, 84.

i. 18, 16. his readers to ‘‘look carefully (ἐγ[κύπτετε εἰς) into the
os ad Γ Scriptures, which are the true [utterances] of the Holy
i. 45. Spirit.’ Again, he says: ‘‘ Ye-know, beloved, ye know
7. 55.

well the sacred Scriptures, and have looked carefully into
the oracles (τὰ λόγια) of [God] ;” and “ the spirit of low-
liness and awe (τὸ ὑποδεὲς) through obedience, not only improveth us, but
also improved the generations before us, even those (unless we probably
read καταδεξομένους with Davis) who received His oracles in fear and
truth.” In another place he speaks of “the ministers of
the grace of God [the prophets of the Old Testament],
who by the Holy Ghost spake of repentance.” But the greatest effusion of
the Spirit was reserved for the Christian Church, when our Lord sent forth
his Apostles, even as He was sent by the Father, to preach the kingdom
of God “with the full assurance and measure of the
Holy Spirit (μετὰ πληροφορίας πνεύματος ἁγίου), when
they had received the promises, and been fully convinced (πληροφο-
ensevtes) by the Resurrection, and confirmed in the word of God”
(πιστωϑέντες ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ Ocod); of whose number
“the blessed Paul, at the beginning of the Gospel, in very
truth wrote by inspiration ”’ (πνευματικῶς, divinitus inspiratus. Vet. Int.)
to the Corinthians.
Again, the epistle of Clement abounds in Old Testament illustrations.
He traces in the men of old time the results of envy, and

Polos

ἢ, Ὁ: 8,

ἃ. 42.

i. 47.

i. 4,917. ae ς
the blessings of faith, obedience, and humility. He
. Ἷ recognizes, moreover, the lasting import of the recorded

history, and the significance of the most minute details.
The scarlet thread which Rahab hung out of the window was “to show
that a redemption (λύτρωσις) should be made by the blood of the Lord

1 Compare the remarkable passage, Ephes. ii. 12.

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINI 405

“~

OF INSPIRATION,

for all who believe and hope upon God.” The use as well as the lan-
guage of Clement proye in what account he held “ the aaa
Word of God.” pi

3. The short and affecting epistle of Polycarp contains little which
illustrates our subject, though he tells us, with touching
humility, that ‘neither he nor any like him is able to
attain perfectly (κατακολουσῆσαι) to the wisdom of the
blessed and glorious Paul” (contrast 2 Pet. iii. 15, 16), and seems for
once to burn with the zeal of his master when he declares that ‘he is the
first-born of Satan whoever perverts the oracles of the
Lord to suit his own passions, and says that there is
neither resurrection nor judgment.” The last quotation is valuable, for,
when compared with the passages of Clement cited before, it proves that
the same term (τὰ λόγια) was used in quoting the old and new Scriptures.
Again, Polycarp writes ‘‘that he trusts his hearers are well versed in the

8. POLYCARP.

C. ὁ.

ἃ.

sacred writings (in sacris litteris),”’ alleging at the same

time Psalm iv. 4; Ephes. iv. 26.

Indeed, the words and

ΣΤΟΝ

spirit of the New Testament seem to be inwrought into his mind; for
though he only once mentions the name of the sacred

writer whom he quotes, there appear to be in his short

ce. 11 (Paul).

epistle more than twenty distinct references to the Apostolic books.'
4. The transition from Polycarp to Ignatius is very striking, whichever

recension of the Ignatian letters we may be inclined to
We read in one passage that the writer “ trusts
to attain to that lot to which he has been mercifully

adopt.’

4. IGNATIUS.
Lp. ad
Philad. 5.

called, having fled to the Gospel? as to the flesh of Jesus, and to the

Apostles as to the Presbytery of the Church ;” and “ yet
more,” he adds, ‘‘let us love the prophets, because they

ad Magn. 8.

were the heralds of the Gospel (κατηγγελκέναι eis...) ... and by belief

1 Fevardentius, in his notes on Ire-
nzus (111. 8, p. 118, App. Ed. Benedic.),
quotes some questionable fragments
from a MS. Catena on the Gospels, pur-
porting to be the versions of some
chapters of the Responsions of Poly-
carp, Bishop of Smyrna, made by Vic-
tor of Capua (c. 480). Their character
will be seen from the following quo-
tations: Matt. xix.5, ‘* Deus vero qui
per inspirationem divinam in corde
Adam ἰδία verba formavit ipse Pater a
Domino recte locutus fuisse refertur;
nam et Adam hane prophetiam protulit,
et Vater qui eum inspiravit recte dicitur
protulisse.” ‘‘* Rationabiliter Evan-
geliste principiis diversis utuntur

quamvis una ecademque Evangelizandi
eorum probatur ratio; . cure
fuit eo uti proemio quod unusquisque
judicabat auditoribus expetere.”’ Surely
this is not the language of the apostolic
age.

2 There are, apparently, only half as
many references to Scripture in the
shorter recensions of the Epistles as in
the remains of Polycarp, though in
bulk the former are, perhaps, ten times
as great as the latter.

3 In opposition to Hefeie and Nie-
meyer, I can only understand these
words of written histories and epistles
according to the context and the gener-
al usage of the words. Cf. Ussher, 1. ὁ.

406 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

in it were saved ;” “for the divinest (ϑειότατοι) Prophets lived according
to Jesus Christ..... being inspired (ἐμπνεόμενοι) by
His grace;”.... “He was the subject of their preach-
ing, and the Gospel is the perfection of immortality
(ἀπάρτισμα apdapoias).”

In one place Ignatius seems to claim for himself a direct communication
from heaven: “TI call you to witness that 1 knew tunis
not from man (σαρκὸς avSpwrivys), but the Spirit pro-
claimed, saying, Do nothing without your bishop; keep your flesh as a

be renee temple of God;.... be ye imitators of Jesus even as

(So Syr.) He was of His Father ;” yet again he disclaims the per-

a5 ibs : sonal possession of this higher knowledge, which was

τὰ reserved for the time ‘‘ when he received the pure light”
by death, and so became “ἃ man of God.” ‘Ido not give you injunc-
tions (Siatdocoua),”’ he says, “as Peter and Paul: they
were Apostles, I a condemned man.”. ... The Christian
“who possesses the Word of Jesus is truly able to hear even His silence,
that he may be perfect; that in what he speaks he may
act, and in what he is silent his character may be known; ”
“the bishops” “too are in the mind (ἐν τῇ γνώμῃ εἰσιν) of Jesus, as
Jesus is the mind of His Father.” 1

5. Papias, who was a contemporary of Polycarp, is the first writer who

et Relies distinctly recognizes the synoptic Gospels. In illustra-

Euseb. H. E. tion of them, as it appears, he composed “‘ An exposition

Pike of the Oracles of the Lord” (Λογίων Κυριακῶν ἐξήγησις),
including in his book traditions still current, whieh might seem to throw
light upon the apostolic narrative. Like Clement and
the Alexandrine school, he is said to have given a spirit-
ual interpretation to the history of the Creation (eés
Χριστὸν καὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν πᾶσαν τὴν ἑξαήμερον vonoas);
and he is quoted by Andreas as a witness to the authority of the Apoc-
alypse.

6. The Shepherd of Hermas evinces by its form and reception? the
belief of the primitive age in the nature and_ possibility
of Inspiration. We have not to discuss here the apos-
tolic claims of the book, but its existence is a distinct proof of the early
recognition of a prophetic power somewhere existent in the Church.
What was the character of this influence we may learn from the com-
mencement of one of the visions : “And again the Spirit
carried me away to the same place, .. . and when I had
risen from prayer, I saw a Matron walking and reading a book, and she

ad. Philad. 9.
Cf. ad Smyrn. 7.

ad Philad. 7.

ad Eph. 15.

ad Eph. 3.

Sr. tx. (Routh),

Prol.in Apoc.

6. HERMAS.

Vis. τὶ. 1.

1 In one passage Ignatius seems to the Syriac version, at least in a perfect
express a sense of the deeper meaning form.
of Scripture: ad Ephes. x1x. (in Syr.). 2 It is quoted with marked respect by
It will be seen that, with one exception, Irenzus, Clement of Alexandria, and
the passages quoted are not found in Origen. Cf. Euseb. H. EZ. v. 7; 11. 25.

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 407

said to me: ‘Can you report this to the elect of God?’ I said to her:
‘Lady, I cannot retain so great things in my memory; but give me the
book, and I will write them down.’ —‘ Take it,’ she said, ‘and restore
it to me.’ Now, when I had taken the book, I retired and wrote down
everything letter by letter, for I did not discover the [divisions the]
syllables (non enim inveniebam syllabas ; cf. Clem. Alex.
Str. v1. § 181). The Lady, he afterwards tells us, is
the Church of God, and the revelation is to be sent to foreign cities, and
delivered to the widows and orphans of the Church.!

7. One more passage I will add, from an uncertain but very early
writer,” who, addressing an inquiring heathen, describes

Vis. di. 4.

7. Ee. ad
the blessings of believers, among whom ‘the fearful DioGNeTuM.
811.

strains of the Law are repeated, the grace of the Proph-
ets recognized, the faith of the Gospe!s established, the tradition of the
Apostles kept, and the grace of the Church triumphant (σκιρτᾷ). And
if thou grievest not this grace thou shalt know what the Word speaks to
men, by whom He pleases, when He will” (ἃ Adyos ὁμιλεῖ, δ ὧν βούλεται,
ὅτε ϑέλει). In this noble sentence we see the first intimation of the co-
ordinate authorities of the Bible and the Church, of a written record and
a living voice; and it may well serve as a summary of the principles
which we have traced in the earliest Fathers of the Christian faith.

SECT. II.— THE APOLOGISTS.

/ a > /
οὔπω μέχρις αἵματος ἀντικατέστητε. --- HEB. XII. 4.

1. The writings of the earliest Apologists, Quadratus and Aristides,
have perished ; but Eusebius has preserved a tradition
that the former, like the daughters of Philip (Acts xxi.
9), was distinguished for his prophetic power — another
intimation of the belief of the early Church in the real
existence of a gift of Inspiration. Thus it is that the
works of Justin, who, as we are told, still retained the mantle of the
philosopher after he had adopted the doctrines of the Gospel, first pre-
sent to us Christianity in relation with the ancient faith ; and by their
whole form and language they clearly show the necessary change whick

1. The early Apol-
oyists.

H. E. tii. 36; v.
17 (on the authority
of Miltiades).

1 The whole section is very interest-
ing. Origen (Philoc. τ. 11) gives a sin-
gular allegorical interpretation of the
two copies which Hermas is ordered
tomake. He represents Grapte as the
letter, for she teaches widows and or-
phans —those who are not yet united
with the Spouse of the Church, though
divorced from their old connection,

nor yet adopted children of the Father;
while Clement typifies the spirit, ex-
tending its influence far and wide with-
out corporeal restraints.

2 Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 95 ff.
I do not remember to have read any-
where more eloquent outbursts of
Christian feeling than are found in
several chapters; 6. g., ch. Vv.

408 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

had taken place since the time of the Apostles in the hearers and teachers
of the new religion.!
2. The Scriptural quotations introduced by Justin into all his works

2. Justin Man. Ἀγ. numerous, and his mode of citation is singularly

TYR. expressive. He tells us of the “history which Moses
The Law. wrote by Divine Inspiration (ἐκ Selas ἐπιπνοίας)," while
Chap re “the Holy Spirit of prophecy taught through him.”
ΠΣ Again, he quotes the language of David, “who spake
on et) thus (Ps. xix. 2-5) through the spirit of prophecy ;”’

pol, τ. 00.

and of Isaiah, who was moved (ϑεοφορεῖσϑαι) by the
same Spirit (Isa. xv. 2; Iviii. 2).

Yet more, he tells us that “‘as Abraham believed on the voice of God,
and it was reckoned to him for righteousness, so do the
Christians too believe on the voice of God, which has
been addressed again to them by the Apostles of Christ,
and proclaimed by the prophets,...whose writings — the memoirs of the
Apostles,” or the books of the Prophets (τὰ ἀπομνημο-
νεύματα τῶν ἀποστόλων ἢ TA συγγράμματα τῶν προφητῶν)
— were read each Sunday (τῇ τοῦ ἡλίου λεγομένῃ ἡμέρᾳ) in the public
assembly ;” for ‘we have been commanded by Christ
Himself to obey not the teaching of men (ἀνϑρωπείοις
διδάγμασι, but that which hath been proclaimed by the blessed prophets
and taught by Him.”

How glorious was the prophet’s office in Justin’s opinion we may ima,
gine when he says, “ that we must not suppose that the
language (λέξεις) proceeds from the men who are inspired,
but from the divine Word which moves them (μὴ a
αὐτῶν τῶν ἐμπεπνευσμένων, GAN ἀπὸ τοῦ κινοῦντος aUTOUS
ϑείου λόγου). ‘Their work is to announce that which the
Holy Spirit, descending upon them, purposes, through them, to teach those
who wish to learn the true religion” (τὴν ἀληδϑῆ Inowe-
Bey). ‘For neither by nature nor human thought
(ἐννοίᾳ) can men recognize such great and divine truths, but by the gift
which came down from above upon the boly men [under the Jewish
dispensation], who needed no art of words, nor skill in captious and con-
tentious speaking, but only to offer themselves in purity (καϑαροὺς mapa-

The Prophets.

Dial. ο. 119.
The New Testa-
ment.

Apol. 7. 67.

Dial. 48,

The
Office.
Apol. i. 50. (ef. ec.
38, and Apol. ti. 10.
Cohort. 35).

Prophet's

Cohort. c. 8.

1 The elders quoted by Ireneus make
use of the writings of the New Testa-
ment as well as of those of the Old ( Hist.
of N. T. Canon, pp. 87, 88); and Euse-
bius (H. #. 111. 87) speaks of Evangel-
ists in the reign of Trajan as ‘‘striving
to deliver to others the Scripture of the
divine Gospels (τὴν τῶν Selwy εὐαγ-
γελίων ypaphy).”

27. e., our Gospels (Hist. of N. T.
Canon, pp. 115 ff.). It is very imyortant

to observe that the two classes of writ-
ings — the apostolic and the prophetic —
are placed in the same rank through-
out; for the Apostles, ‘‘ by the power of
God, announced to every race of men
the Word of God, as they were sent by
Christ (Matt. xxviii. 20) to teach all’
(Apol. τ. 89). Justin refers to ‘‘ John,
one of the Apostles,”’ as having prophe
sied (Dial. ο. 81).

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 409

σχεῖν) to the operation of the Divine Spirit, in order that the divine power
of itself might reveal to us the knowledge of divine and heavenly things,
acting on just men as a plectrum on a harp or lyre” (iva αὐτὸ τὸ ϑεῖον ἐὲ
οὐρανοῦ κατιὸν πλῆκτρον, ὥσπερ ὀργάνῳ κιϑάρας τινὸς ἢ λύρας τοῖς δικαίοις
ἄνδρασι χρώμενον, τὴν "τῶν ϑείων ἡμῖν καὶ οὐρανίων ἀποκαλύψῃ γνῶσιν).
However strictly we may be inclined to interpret Justin’s metaphor, we
must remember (as has been well observed) that the tone and quality of
the note depend as much upon the instrument as upon the hand which
plays it.! And how can we listen to the full and deep harmonies of the
Bible without feeling that more than half their power and beauty lies in
the divine union of the different human instruments through which the
Spirit speaks, ‘“ perfecting one full message of salvation
for those who will discern it, stopping and staying every
inworking of the evil spirit, even as the strain of David stayed the evil
spirit which oppressed the soul of Saul ”’ 2

Justin’s view of the Interpretation of Scripture is perfectly consistent
with his doctrine of Inspiration. ‘ There are,” he tells
us, “many revelations veiled in parables and mysteries,
or expressed in symbolic actions, which prophets ex-
plained who arose after those who spoke and acted;” and “ there is no
profit in quoting the words or facts of Scripture unless
we are able to render an account of them, a gift which
cometh [to Christians] by the great grace of God ;” for “the Scriptures
belong to the Christian, and not to the Jew, who when he

Orig. in Matt. ii.

Interpretation.
Dial. § 68.

Dial. § 92.

: : "Ξ Dial. § 29. Of
reads does not understand their meaning (νοῦν). Thus 9/7" a
he says, in his dialogue with Trypho, that “he can prove The Ceremonial

᾿ rat) ἢ « Ἢ ἢ σρς Law.
by a careful enumeration that all the ordinances of Moses Dio, $42 CF.

were types and symbols and indications (xarayyeAlas) Of — Apol. 1. 92; Dial. §
those things which were to be realized in the Messiah” 5.
(τῷ Χριστῷ γενέσϑαι). The twelve bells which hung
round the robe of the high-priest prefigured the twelve Apostles who were
united “with our eternal Priest, by whose voice the
whole earth was filled with the glory and grace of God
and Christ.” The Paschal Lamb was a type of the death of Christ, even
as the two goats at the great Fast set forth His two
Advents, and the offering of fine flour in the case of
leprosy, ‘‘ the remembrance of His Passion” in the Eucharist.

Justin finds an equally deep significance in the facts recorded in the
Old Testament. He sees symbols of the Cross in the ete
tree of Life —in the brazen serpent —in Moses, as he Mi pga i,
stood victorious over Amalek —in the ensign of Judah, Dial. §§ 86; 131;
“whose horns are as the horns of a unicorn” (Deut. is pase slo
xxxili. 17)— and in the very form of man. So, also, ἡ reins
the events of patriarchal history are pregnant with meaning. The mar-

Dial. § 42.

Dial. § 40.

Dial. § 41.

1 See the passage of Hippolytus quoted below, § 1v. 4, p. 410.
35

410 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

riages of Jacob with Leah and Rebecca prefigured the union of Jesus

with the Synagogue and the Christian Church:
spiritual sight of the Jews was weak, and Rachel con-

Dial. § 134.

cealed the gross gods of her fathers.

the

These examples of the method of Interpretation which Justin followed

will suffice.!
Dial. § 134.

Dial. § 131 f.

We may add, however, that he does not
seem ever to deny the fecal truth of the narratives
which furnish him with these divine analogies ;

on the

contrary, in some cases he insists on the bare interpretation of the text

with unnecessary strictness.

3. The apologetic discourse of Tatian, Justin’s

3 TATIAN.

disciple, affords hiin

little scope for speaking of inspiration; yet he draws a

striking contrast between the positions of the heathen

and of the Christian.

“The Spirit of God,” he says, ‘is not with all

men, but abiding with some whose conversation is just (παρά τισι τοῖς

δικαίως πολιτευομένοις καταγόμενον),

and being united with their soui

(συμπλεκόμενον τῇ ψυχῇ) it proclaimed to all other souls,

§ 13.

by prophetic teaching, that which had been hidden; and

those which obeyed wisdom attracted (ἐφείλκοντο) to themselves a kindred
spirit, while those who did not obey....were found to fight

§ 29.

great antiquity of Scripture,

against their God.”
and says that its prophetic power (τὸ προγ-

In another place he notices the

νωστικὸν τῶν μελλόντων) Was one of the grounds on which he was led to

believe in its doctrine.”

4, ATHENAGO-
RAS.
Leg. pro Christ.
§ 9.

the Prophets,

of Montanism.

4. The language of Athenagoras, when speaking of
is perhaps withaqut parallel, and it has been
regarded, with good reason, as expressing the doctrine
He says that, “while entranced and

deprived of their natural powers of reason (κατ᾽ ἔκστασιν τῶν ἐν αὐτοῖς λο-

1 Justin’s principles in this respect
may have been modified by his resi-
dence at Alexandria. He speaks with
admiration of Philo and Josephus (Co-
hort. c. 10), and argues that the old
philosophers ‘‘ were compelled, by the
Divine Providence acting in behalf of
men, to say many things in support of
Christianity” (Cohort. ¢. 14, πολλὰ
καὶ αὐτοὶ ὑπὸ τῆς Selas τῶν ἀνϑρώ-
νῶν προνοίας καὶ ἄκοντες ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν
εἰπεῖν ἠναγκάσϑησαν).

2 tie quotes John i. 5, with the words,
“This is that which was said (τὸ εἰρη-
μένον)"

The accounts of his Diatessaron are
too vague to enable us to form any
clear idea of its purpose. Eusebius

(H. E. Iv. 29) describes it ‘‘ as a strange
harmony and combination of the [four]
Gospels;” nor does there seem any
reason to suppose, with Neander (Ch.
Hist. 11. 167, n. Eng. Tr.), that apoery-
phal traditions were wrought into it.
We find it used by many who followed
the apostolic teaching (ἀποστολικοῖς
ἑπόμενοι δόγμασι. Theodor. Fab.
Her. τ. 20). and it commenced with the
words, ‘In the beginning was the
Word.” Its similarity to the ‘“ Gospel
of the Hebrews” probably arose from
the omission of the history of the In-
fancy, which would militate against
Tatian’s Gnosticism (Epiphan. xtvi 1;
Theodor. 1. 6. Cf. Olshausen, Ueber die
Echtheit wu. 8, w. 8. 335 ff.; Hist. of N.
T. Canon, pp. 358 ff.).

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 411

γισμῶν) by the influence of the divine Spirit, they uttered that which was
wrought in them (ἃ éynpyodvro), the Spirit using them as its instruments,
as a flute-player might blow a flute.” And again, under another image,
he describes “‘the Holy Spirit, which works in those
who speak prophetically, as an emanation issuing from
God, and carried back to Him, like a ray from the sun” (ἀπόῤῥοιαν τοῦ
Seod ἀπόῤῥεον καὶ ἐπαναφερόμενον ws ἀκτῖνα ἡλίου). Thus the Christian
“ives no heed to the doctrines of men, but those
uttered (ϑεοφάτοις) and taught by God;” for “he has
prophets as witnesses of his creed (ὧν νοοῦμεν καὶ πεπιστεύκαμεν), who,
inspired (read ἔνϑεοι for évdéw) by the Spirit, have spoken of God and
the things of God.” !

5. Far different is the language of Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, —
sixth in succession from the Apostles, — who addressed 5 ny optus.
an admirable defence of Christianity, still extant, to a — Euseb. H. Ε. iv.
heathen, Autolycus. According to him, the inspired “Ὁ
writers were not mere mechanical organs, but men who, coincidently with
the divine influence, displayed a personal and moral fitness for their
work. “The men of God being filled with the Holy
Spirit (πνευματοφόροι Πνεύματος ‘Aytov) and gifted with
prophecy, having inspiration and wisdom from God, were taught of Him,
and became holy and just. Wherefore, also, they were deemed worthy to
obtain this recompense, to be made the instruments of God (ὄργανα Sod
γενόμενοι) and receive (χωρήσαντες) the wisdom which cometh from Him,
by which wisdom they spake of the creation of the world and all other
things... which happened before their birth, and during their own time,
and which are now being accomplished in our days; and
so we are convinced that in things to come the event
will be as they say.” Again, he adds, that ‘the Christians alone have
received the truth, inasmuch as they are taught by the Holy Spirit, who
spake by the holy prophets, and [still] announces all things to them
beforehand (τοῦ λαλήσαντος ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις προφήταις καὶ τὰ πάντα προκατ-
ayyéAAovtos):”” who is “the Beginning and Wisdom ii. § 10.
and the Power of the Most High,” so that “the words ti. § 84.
of the prophets are the words of God.” Moreover, ‘the se
contents of the Prophets and of the Gospels are found to be consistent (ἀκό-
AovSa), because all the writers spake by the inspiration of the one Spirit
of God? (διὰ τὸ τοὺς πάντας πν.υματοφόρους ἑνὶ πνεύματι ϑεοῦ λελαληκέναι).

§ 10.

ou, et,

ad Aut. vi. 9.

ii. § 33.

1 It is singular that there is scarcely compingens). Cf. ad Autol. ii, 22:
any trace of Allegorical Interpretation ...‘‘all the holy Scriptures teach us
in Athenagoras. See Guericke, Hist. and all who were inspired by the Holy
Schole Catech. Alex. ii. p. 50. Spirit (πνευματοφόροι), of whom was

2 We learn from Jerome that Theoph- John (Evan.i.3).” Rosenmiiller (Hist.
ilus composed a Commentary on the Jnterp. i. 1, p. 200) quotes this passage
Gospels (in Evangelium, i. 6.. τὸ evay- to prove that Theophilus “ distinguishes
‘yeAtov); or perhaps a harmony (JV. between the sacred ‘ Scriptures’ and the
Evangelistarum in unum opus dicta writings of the Apostles.’ Surely the

412. ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

SECT. III. — THE FATHERS OF THE CHURCH OF ASIA MINOR.
Ὁ ἔχων οὖς ἀκουσάτω τί τὸ πνεῦμα λέγει ταῖς ἐκκλησίαι“. --- APOC. ii. 7, 11,13.

1. We have just seen that the early apologies for Christianity proceeded
from heathen converts ; in like manner, the first endeavor
after an ecclesiastical history was made by a Hebraizing
Christian, with whom the historical side of his faith had naturally the
fullest significance. The fragments of Hegesippus contain little or noth-
ing which bears on our inquiry; yet in one sentence,
preserved in Eusebius, he seems to recognize authorita-
tive Christian documents when he says that ‘“‘in each city all is ordered
according to the preaching (κηρύσσει) of the Law, of the Prophets, and of
the Lord.” ἢ

2 Melito, Bishop of Sardis, helps us by the titles of some of his trea-
tises, and by his own personal reputation. We learn
from Tertullian that he was accounted a prophet by
very many, and Polycrates describes him as ‘‘having
transacted everything by the Holy Spirit” (6 ἐν “Ay. Πν.
Among his works we find discourses ‘‘ On [Chris-

1. HEGESIPPUS.

Η. E. iv. 22.

2. MELITO.

ap. Hieron. de
Vir, Ill. ec. xxiv. ap.
Euseb. H. E. v. 24

/ /
πάντα TOALTEVTAMEVOS ).

tian] Conversation (πολιτείας) and Prophets,” —‘“‘ On

Euseb. H. E.w. Prophecy,” — “On the Revelation of St. John,” —and
26. (43 1 7 2) aa = ΄ aaaqrd

Rouih ἘΠῚ: *Sa- The Key.” The last-mentioned book necessarily sug-

gests to us an anticipation of the Alexandrian school ;
and some examples of Melito’s exegesis, probably bor-
rowed from it, sufficiently indicate the extent to which he carried the

cre, i. pp. 116 sgq.

typical significance of each word and detail of Scripture.?
3. A fragment of Claudius Apollinaris® furnishes us with another

distinction can be of little use to lower
the authority of St. John. Elsewhere
(ad Autol. 111. 14) Theophilus quotes an
injunction of St. Paul (1 Tim. ii.) as an
utterance of ‘*the Divine Word.”

In one passage (ad Autol. 11. 14), The-
ophilus draws a mystical meaning
from the Mosaic account of the crea-
tion, but he also accepts all the details
literally.

1In another fragment, given by
Routh (fell. Sacer. 1. p. 209, Ed. 1), he is
represented as saying that ‘those who
maintain the doctrine of 1 Cor. ii. 9, lie
against the holy Scriptures and the
Lord. Matt. xiii. 16.” If there be no
error in this quotation, it is a strange
example of the literal style of interpre-

tation which Origen had to meet. Cf.
Hist. of N. T. Canon, p. 288, n.

2 Eusebius (H. Z. 1v. 26) has preserved
an important letter of Melito, in which
he relates what he has done to satisfy
a friend’s wish to become acquainted
with the ‘*‘ Scriptures of the Old Testa-
ment” (τὰ τῆς παλαίας διαϑήκης βιβ-
λία). The phrase seems to imply New
Testament Scriptures also.

3 In connection with this name we
may quote the remarkable words of
Serapion (Bp. of Antioch in the reign
of Commodus) in reference to the false
Gospel of St. Peter: ‘‘ We receive Peter
and the other Apostles as Christ; but
those writings falsely ascribed to him
we decline to receive through our ex-
perience” (Euseb. H. £. v1. 12).

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 413

instance of the typical interpretation of Scripture; but without dwelling
any longer on these minute details, we must proceed (4)
to the great work of Irenzus, which unfortunately has
come down to us chiefly through the uncertain medium
of a Latin version,! for no Greek MS. is known to
exist. Reared under the teaching of Polycarp,? — whose
words, he tells us, he remembered better than the events
of his later life, —and succeeding ἃ martyr in the bishopric of Lyons, Ire-
nus is a noble representative of the faith and zeal of the early Church.
‘Then only does he seem to.forget his master’s lessons of peace and love,
when he contends against those who deny the continual manifestation of
God’s Spirit in His Church, or of His providence in the
world. So full and comprehensive is his treatment of
inspiration, though he only discusses it incidentally, that
it is difficult to convey a notion of its general bearing by isolated quota-

8. CLAUDIUS
APOLLINARIS.

Routh, i. p. 150.

4. JREN2&US,

Euseb. H. E. v.20.

General view of
Inspiration.

tions. According to him; the successive dispensations of God wrought
. a "Oc γ 2 i Ἷ ) ray

together to one great end by the operation of One lower, ἘΠ ecu

as ‘‘ men were accustomed to bear (portare) God’s Spirit 14,2.

and hold communion with Him.” Thus “the prophet = 7+

spake of the advent of the Word in the flesh, as acted on by His influence
(charisma) ;” and ‘all who foretold the coming of
Christ received their inspiration from the Son;” for
“how could Scripture testify, as it does, of Him alone,
unless all things had been revealed by one and the same God, through
the Word, to believers?” Yet till His advent ‘ Christ was, as it were, the
hidden treasure in the field of Scripture, since He was
[only] indicated by types and parables ;...for all proph-
ecy, till its accomplishment, is full of riddles and ambiguities to men.”
To us, however, ‘ the Apostles. by the will of God, have
consigned (tradiderunt) the Gospel in the Scriptures to
be the ground and pillar of our faith,...and by them we
have learnt the truth, that is, the doctrine of the Son of God......For after
that our Lord rose from the dead, and they were clothed
with the power of the Spirit from on high, they were
filled with a perfect knowledge in all things” (de omnibus adimpleti sunt, et
habuerunt perfectam agnitionem).® Consequently “ they
are beyond all falsehood” (extra omne mendacium),
though they speak “according to the capacity of their hearers, talking

wv. 26, 1.

ἘΠῚ. a
iii. pref.

wi. 1, 1.

tit. 5.

1 Massuet’s remarks on Jrenzus’ view
of Scripture are so essentially polemical
as to be almost valueless ( Disserf. 111.
1, 2).

2In connection with this name we
may again refer to the letter of Poly-
crates (Bp. of Smyrna in the reign of
Severus), in which he tells us ‘that
having examined the whole of holy

Scripture (on the question of Easter),
he is not afraid of his opposers; for
those greater than himself have said,
It is right to obey God rather than
man” (Kuseb. H. E. v. 24).

3 So again (111. 12, 5): αὗται φωναὶ
τῶν μαδϑητῶν τοῦ κυρίου τῶν ἀληδῶς
τελείων μετὰ τὴν ἀνάλεψιν τοῦ κυρίου
διὰ πνεύματος τελειωϑέντων. . ..

30*

414 ON TIE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

blindly with the blind” (c@cis cceca confabulantes). Each, too, preserves
lis own individuality ; thus, ‘St. Paul frequently uses’
hyperbata on account of the rapidity of his utterance
and the vehemence of the Spirit which is in him (propter velocitatem ser-
monum suorum et propter impetum qui in ipso est spirités) ; as, for instanee,
in Gal. iii. 19 we must suppose a man asking the question and the Spirit
answering it; and so, again, in2 Thess. ii. 8. But we must not imagine
that the truth was thus impaired by the human agent, or the significance
of words destroyed. ‘‘ Matthew might have said, ‘ The
generation of Jesus was on .this wise,’ but the Holy
Spirit, foreseeing the corruptions of the truth, and fortifying us against
their deception, says, by Matthew, ‘ The generation of Christ was on this
wise.’”’

Moreover, Irenzeus sees a mystical fulness and meaning in the four
Evangelists: ‘‘ As God made all things in fair order and
connection, so was it needful that the [outward] form of
the Gospel should be well framed and fitted together ;”’
and “as there are four! regions of the world in which
we are, and four general winds, —as the Church is scattered over the
whole earth, and the Gospel is the pillar and support (στήριγμα) of the
Church, — we might expect it should have four pillars [and four winds as
it were], breathing on all sides immortality, and kindling [the divine
spark] in men,” Again: as in the ancient Church the visible form of God
rested on the four-faced cherubim, “50 Christ, when mani-
fested to men, gave us his Gospel under a fourfold form,
though held together by one spirit,” and on these Gospels he rests (τὰ
εὐαγγέλια ἐν οἷς ἔγκαδέζεται 6 Χριστός).

In many of his general views of Scripture, Ireneus anticipates the

Deeper meaning thoughts and language of Origen. He tells us that “the
of Scripture. Scriptures are perfect, inasmuch as they were uttered

τι: 28,2 (dictce) by the Word of God and His Spirit, though we
want the knowledge of their mysteries ;’’ and how much, he adds, is unex-
plained to us in the operations of nature — the rising of the Nile, the
migration of birds, the ebb and flow of the tide; ‘“‘is it, then, a hard
case that —as in the outward world some truths are, as it were, sacred to
God (ἀνάκειται τῷ Θεῷ), while some have come under our knowledge —
some of the difficulties in the Scriptures, which are all full of spiritual
meaning (πνευματικῶν), should be explicable by the grace of God, while
the solution of others must rest with Him, aud that not only in this world
(αἰών), but also in the world to come ; that God may still teach, and man
still ever learn from God?” The revelations of the Bible may seem too
meagre to satisfy our curiosity ; yet “no small punishment (ἐπιτιμία) will
be his who adds to or takes from the Scripture.” The details may seem

ti. 7.

ai. 16, 2.

The Gospels.
iit. 11, 9.
qi. 11, 3.

iii. 11, 8.

1 Compare a very striking passage in Routh, Rell. Sacre, 111. 456; Crosnier,
the symbolism of the number four ina Jconogr. Christ. pp. 50, 51; Philo, de
fragment of Victorinus, de Fabr. Cali; M. §§ 15, 16.

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 415

insignificant ; yet ‘nothing is empty or without meaning in the dealings
of God.’ The connection of its parts may seem _per-
plexing; yet “all Scripture, as it has been given to a. ΎΣΣ: wii. 8;
us by God, will be found to be harmonious.” The © awii. 18,19.
interpretation of its teaching may be difficult; yet — 'Jh%
“we guard our faith, which has been admitted (per- τος
ceptam) by the Church, and which, like a precious gift
stored up in a fair vessel, is ever renewed (rejuvenescens) by the Spirit of
God, and gives new life (rejuvenescere facit) to the vessel in which it is.
For this gift of God is entrusted to the Church, to give life to the world
(ad inspirationem plasmation?) as the soul to the body, and in it [the gifts
of faith entrusted to the Church] lies the enjoyment of the Holy Spirit
sent by Christ, which is the earnest of our immortality, the confirmation
of our faith, the ladder by which we ascend to God. For where the
Church is, there is also the Spirit of God; and where the Spirit of God is,
there is the Church and all grace; but the Spirit is Truth ;” and Truth is
one; for we acknowledge as one the God of Creation and the God of
Redemption, the author of the old dispensation and
the author of the new; “we follow Him alone as our
Teacher, and regard His words as the rule of Truth” (regulam veritatis
habentes ejus sermones).

The doctrine of Irenzeus on the Millennium illustrates his view of the
literal truth of Scripture, while it also shows the influ-
ence of his Asiatic master. On other occasions, also, he pandietiatey τρῶς
adheres so strictly to the text as to draw arguments from megs
isolated details of parables, and the natural coloring of language ; more-
over, he strongly opposes the system of the Gnostics, who
based the truth of their opinions on numerical analogies
and verbal symbols, though he himself admits the propriety of such subtle
inquiries when pursued for the illustration of that which 5, oy) κω).
is admitted on other grounds. There can be no doubt & Stieren le.
that he recognizes an under sense (ὑπόνοια) in Seripture, ὠ 7” Law.
and allows the symbolic meaning of the gifts and sacri- ak
fices of the Mosaic law, since heavenly truths can only be conveyed under
earthly forms. Again, he sees figures of national and
individual application in the records of the chosen
people, —as when he acknowledges a type of the Gentile church in the
marriage of Moses with the /Ethiopian, and explains at
some length the history of the birth of Phares and Zara,
as foreshadowing the fortunes of the two covenants.}
In another place he contrasts the mother of the human race with the
mother of the Saviour: “ What the Virgin Eve bound by her want of
faith, that the Virgin Mary loosed by her faith.” He finds types of Christ

iv. 83; 7. 34, 1.

History.

iv. 20, 12.
iv. 25, 2.

1 This method of typical interpreta- dition (presbyter dicebat) in the case of
tion he justifies by the authority of tra- the spoiling of the Egyptiams. iy. 30, 1.

‘416 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

in the rod of Moses, “‘ which, assuming a body (incarnata), confuted and
destroyed all the opposition of the Egyptians ! to the dis-
pensation of God ”’— in the brazen serpent —in Joseph
and in Joshua, who completed what Moses had com-
menced, and for manna gave the people corn, which is
‘“‘the first-fruits of life.”

In many cases the explanations of Irenzeus seem arbitrary and inco-
herent, from the want of any such general principle as
guided the speculations of Origen. Thus he finds a
type of the Church in Lot’s wife, who became a pillar of sa/t, and, accord-

ii, 22, 4.

i. 21, 8.

iv. 2,73 fr. p. 346,
ed. Bened.; fr. p.
845.

Indefinite.

iv. 31, 8. ing to tradition, unchanging and incorruptible. Again,
fr. ». 346. he likens the boy who led Samson to John the Baptist,
Sr. p. 8545.

and the two pillars of the building which he destroyed, to
the two Covenants by which the world is supported. We are told, more-
over, that he interpreted the Fall spiritually, and not historically, and
maintained his view by very weighty arguments.

The instances already quoted clearly show the general principles which
Ireneus applied to Holy Scripture, acknowledging at
once the mysteries of its letter? and of its spirit. To
this inner sense of the Word of God he tells us that the
Christian will ever strive to penetrate, by the help of
daily experience and the use of appointed ordinances ;* he will gather all
the analogies of the outer world which may serve to direct his judgment,
and scrutinize all the records of revelation which may enlighten his
mind and extend his knowledge. The works of nature and the words of
God combine to train and perfect the race of man, “in
which are accomplished those mysteries into which
angels desire to look, that they may trace the workings of that Wisdom
by which Creation is made conformable and united to the Son.”

Scripture to be
combined with na-
twre.

υ. 36 f.

SECT. IV.— THE FATHERS OF THE ROMAN CHURCH.
“Ὅσα προεγράφη, εἰς τὴν ἡμετέραν διδασκαλίαν προεγράφη. --- Rom. xv. 4.

There is something mournful in the silent, shadowy line of Roman
bishops during the first three centuries; their voices seem only to be

1 The relations of the Jews to the
Ezyptians are perpetuated in those of
the Christian Church to the unbelieving
world in all ages. IV. 80.

2 In his explanation of the history of
Lot (Gen. xxx. 30-8), he evidently
maintains its real truth, while he justi-
fies the relation as properly typical.

8 Cf. 11. 4, 1; Iv. 38, 8; for further

illustration of Irenzus’ views on the
Chureh. He speaks in a very remark-
able passage (11. 3, 4, cf. Euseb. H. £.
v.7) of the continuance of the powers
of exorcism, prophecy, and healing in
the Church at his own time. Compare,
also, for a strong assertion of the same
belief, the author quoted by Eusebius,
HE Vidic

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 417

heard when they claim the powers which their successors gained. The
only famous Roman writers of the period were Caius and Novatian, who
were presbyters, and Hippolytus, Bishop of Portus, whose education was
wholly Eastern. Yet we must remember here the prac- Hen! Diels
tical tendencies of the national character, which were alike fused. HE. te
displayed in the absence of theological studies, and in 353.
that zealous liberality which was regarded as the traditional glory of the
Roman Church.

1. In afragment preserved in Eusebius, Caius seems to regard “ reve-
lations ” as a mark of an apostle,! and in the same place
uses the striking phrase, “the Scriptures of God.” In
another fragment, which is attributed by some to Caius, the writer speaks
of the followers of Artemon, “ who fearlessly laid their
hands on the divine Scriptures, saying that they cor-
rected them...How great is the daring of their error,” he
adds, “cannot be unknown even to themselves; for either they do not
believe that the divine Scriptures were spoken by the Holy Spirit (‘Aye
Πνεύματι λελέχϑαι), and are unbelievers; or they hold themselves wiser
than the Holy Spirit, and we must say they rave” (δαιμονῶσιν).

2. The famous fragment on the Canon had been falsely attributed to
Caius, but it is certainly of the same date.?- We find in
this, probably, the first distinct recognition of the Inspi-
ration of the Gospels, which are regarded as formally
divergent, yet one in their great end. “ Though various elements are
inculeated (/icet varia principia doceantur) in each, still
the faith of believers differs not, since everything con- ce ee
cerning the Nativity and Passion and Life [of our Lord]
is declared in all of them by one and the self-same guiding Spirit”’ (uno
et principali® Spiritu).

3. The writings of Novatian are full of quotations from the Old and
New Testaments, and his view of their authority is clear
and wide. He regards the whole Law as spiritual, “‘ for
divine ordinances must be received in a divine sense ;”
and traces the symbolic meaning of the Mosaic restrictions on food.
The books of the prophets furnish him with a clear proof
of God’s providence, “which not only extends at all
times over individuals, but also over cities and states,
whose issues God declared by the words of His servants (voetbus prophe-
tarum cecinit), yea, even over the whole world.” And the forms of the
prophetic language prove the certainty of their predic-
tions ; for they use the past tense in speaking of the fu-
ture, since “divine Scripture regards as accomplished that which will,

1. Carus.

Euseb. v. %; cf.
Routh, v. p. 18 sqq.

2. Fragm. de
Canone.

8. NOVATIAN,
de cid. Jud. c. 2.

de Trin. c. 8.
(ed. Rig.).

de Trin. c. 28.

1 Κήρινϑος ὁ δ ἀποκαλύψεων ὡς Spds ὑπάρχων ταῖς γραφαῖς τοῦ Θεοῦ
ὑπὸ ἀποστόλου μεγάλου γεγραμμένων. Euseb. H. Ε. 111. 28.
τερατολογίας .... ἐπεισάγει ... ἐχ- 2 Cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 285 ff

3 i. €., ἡγεμονικῷ, cf. Routh, 1. c.

418 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

beyond all doubt, come to pass.” Yet more grace was given to the writers

of the New Covenant, for though “the prophets and
Apostles were inspired by one and the self-same Spirit,
still on the former He came but for atime (ad momentum), while He
abode with the latter always. ΤῸ the one some degree of His influence
was vouchsafed ; on the other His whole energy was poured. In the one
case it was a scanty gift, in the other a bounteous loan (large commodatus),
not set forth before the resurrection, but conferred by it according to
Christ’s promise (John xiv. 26) of a Comforter, ..... .who strengthened
the hearts and minds of the Apostles, who made clear to them the
mysteries of the Gospel (distinxit evangelica sacramenta), who dwelt
within them and enlightened their minds on divine things.”

4. There appears to be no reason for doubting the tradition which
represents Hippolytus of Portus as the disciple of Ive-
neus. In him we find a real link between the Asiatic
and Alexandrian schools, for Jerome tells us that he preached before
Origen. His writings exhibit the same deep sense of the spiritual mean-
ing of Scripture! as we have already traced in his immediate teacher and
in earlier writers. He regards that which has once been revealed by

God to man as still full of instruction and wisdom after
A Noetum, 88 11, the primary application is gone. ‘The Law and the

Prophets were from God, who in giving them compelled
His messenger to speak by the Holy Spirit, that receiving the inspiration
of the Father’s power (τῆς πατρῴας δυνάμεως τὴν ἀπόπνοιαν λαβόντες)
they may announce the Father’s counsel and will. In
these men therefore the Wort found a fitting abode
(πολιτευόμενος) and spoke of Himself; for even then
He came as His own herald, showing the Word who was about to
appear in the world.”..... -

“These blessed men....spake not only of the past, but also of the
present and of the future, that they might be shown not to be for a time
merely (πρόσκαιροι), but heralds of the things to come to all generations.
SEH: For these Fathers, having been perfected by the Spirit of prophecy,
and worthily honored by the Word Himself, were brought to an inner
harmony (ἑαυτοῖς ἡνωμένοι), like instruments, and having the Word within
them, as it were, to strike the notes (ὡς πλῆκτρον) by Him they were
moved, and announced that which God wished. For they did not speak
of their own power (be well assured),? nor proclaim that which they

id. c. 29.

4, HiPPOLYTUS.

de Antichristo,

§ 2.

1 See de Antichr. §§ 14, 15, 28. He Lauter’ as one ‘‘ who could not escape
quotes Rev. xiii. 10, and suggests the the name of Antichrist,” but inclines to
words TEITAN,, EYAN@AC, and adopt ‘‘ Maometis” as the true solution
AATEINOC, as satisfying the number of the number. Fora comparison of the
which ‘‘the Holy Spirit mystically ‘allegories” of Hippolytus with those
showed forth” (de Antichr. 50). The of Origen, see Bunsen, 1. 802 (ed. 1).
same names are given by Irenzeus (v. 2 Μὴ πλανῶ: this parenthetical
30). See others in Fevardentius’s note; phrase occurs also in [Hipp.] adv. Her.
the zealous Franciscan quotes ‘‘ Martin x. 33 (Bunsen, 1. p. 272).

ὅσω

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 419

wished themselves, but first they were rightly endowed with wisdom by
the Word, and afterwards well foretaught of the future by visions, and
then, when thus assured (πεπεισμένοι), they spake that which was
[revealed] to them alone by God.”

It will be readily seen how widely this view is removed from that of
Athenagoras, though conveyed under a similar metaphor, differing from
it, indeed, just as the analogous description of Justin. ‘The instrument
here is first tuned to express the Divine strain; the moving power dwells
within as a vivifying principle, and does not act from without on an invol-
untary subject. The reason is cleared and not clouded; the melodies
of heaven are fitted to the words of men, not by an arbitrary power, but
by an inward affinity. “The blessed prophets,” to use another image,
“are eyes of Christ.” “ They ministered the oracles of God for all gen-
erations.’ So, then, it is our duty to listen to the faintest voice of the
Bible, to trace its relation to ourselves and its source
from above us: “ As the divine Scriptures proclaimed
the truth, so let us view it; all they teach let us acknowledge by the
growth of Faith (ἐπιγνῶμεν) ; as the Father pleaseth to be believed, let
us believe Him; as the Son pleaseth to be glorified, let us glorify Him;
as the Holy Spirit pleaseth to be given, let us reccive Him; not according
to our own choice, or our own mind (νοῦν), forcing to our own tastes
that which has been given by God, but as He chose to show the truth
through the Holy Scriptures, so let us view it.”

c. Noet. § 1.

SECT. V.— THE FATHERS OF THE NORTH-AFRICAN CHURCH.
τῷ πνεύματι (éovres. — Rom. xu. 11.

We have now traced the history of the doctrine of Inspiration as
unfolded in the Greek and Roman Churches; we have tis Scat
seen the same great principles enunciated by those who the North African
claimed to draw their doctrine frem St. John, and by pI other
those who sought to base their authority on St. Peter. ‘
Whether it were viewed as part of the heritage of that wide Christian
family which Irenzus loved to contemplate, or as the bond of that great
power which silently grew at Rome, Holy Scripture was still held to
supply the believer with the divine elements of his life and faith. We have
yet to consider our subject in relation to two other Churches, and two
other forms of mental development — those of North Africa and Egypt.
In the writers of North Africa, whether at Carthage or Hippo, we find an
intensity of zeal, a depth of feeling, a power of intuition, but little modified
by cautious criticism or severe logic. The aspirations of Tertullian after
a stricter life led him into Montanism; and the craving for a clearer
knowledge at first united Augustine with the Manichees. We shall thus
see how the doctrine of Inspiration was regarded by men of a warmer

420 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

temperament and a more restless faith, who sought out the truth with
earnestness, and embraced whatever conclusion they obtained without
reserve. Indeed, the whole character of the African Church is emotional,
if we would distinguish it from the doctrinal and practical types of Asia
and Rome. But while the Churches of North Africa, Asia, and Rome,
combined to look at Christianity as a great historic fact, rather than as
the final satisfaction of the ill-expressed wants of man, the Alexandrians
sought to follow out this latter view, by bringing all that was grand and
beautiful in human systems into a spiritual harmony with Divine Truth.
1. On one point, it has been well observed;' Tertullian never doubted ;
whether Catholic or Montanist, he still maintained alike
the Inspiration of the Old and New Testament Scrip-
tures. Whether he be writing to the heathen, the heretics, or the ortho-
dox, he expresses the same belief in the same unwavering language. He
tells as in his noble Apology that ‘‘ God sent forth, from
the first, men who, by their justice and innocency, were
worthy to know God and to make Him known, and filled them to over-

flowing (inundatos) with the Divine Spirit;”....and so “gave us a

written Testament? (cnstrumentum litterature), that we

might more fully and more deeply learn of Him, and of

His counsels, πα οἵ His will.’ Nor does he scruple to

call these books the “writings” (Jitteras Dei) and the ‘words of God”

(voces Dei), which the Christian studies for warning or

remembrance, and to which he looks ‘as the food of his

faith, the spring of his hope, and the bulwark of his trust.”
Like all the other Fathers whom we have examined, Tertullian sees a
profound unity in the dispensations of God. ‘‘ The same

The unity of all ΟΝ τ es :

Saou. divine power (divinitas) was preached in the Gospel
adv. Mare.x.2. which had ever been known in the Law, though the dis-
signe cipline was not the same.” ‘ The Law, indeed, is the

root (radix) of the Gospels;”? and ‘in succession all
the Prophets utter the words of the same God (os prophetarum ejusdem Dez
vocibus sonat), enforcing the same law by an iteration of the same pre-
cepts.” He even goes farther back than Moses for the first elements of
the ancient Covenant. He traces the development of this dispensation in

Paradise and among the Patriarchs, apart from the ceremonial observan-

ces of the Jewish ritual. Abel, Enoch, Melchisedec, and

Lot, were accepted by that God, “ who, according to the

circumstances of the times, reshapes (reformantem) the precepts of His

Law for the salvation of men” (1. salutem). .

1. TERTULLIAN.

Apol. 18.

de Anima, 2.
Apol. 51.

Apol. 39.

adv. Jud. ce. 2.

1 By Maréchal, Concordantia Patrum, um” in its ordinary acceptation, though
I. p. 162; a work which is admirably it seems to have been current before his
executed, and is well worthy of the time. [Marcion] duos deos dividens pro-
Benedictine fame. inde diversos, alterum alterius Jnstru-

2 Tertullian is the first writer, 1 be- menti vel (quod magis usui est dicere)
lieve, who uses the word ‘*Testament- Testamenti ... adv. Mare. Iv. 1.

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

421

Thus Prophets, Evangelists, and Apostles, are placed by Tertullian in

one rank as God’s ministering servants. Christ spoke by
Moses, ‘‘ for He was the Spirit, of the Creator;”’...and
“‘the prophecies are the voice of the Lord.” The madness
(dementia) of those who deny that the Apostles knew all
things,’ or who admit that they knew all, but maintained

Inspiration under
the New Covenant.

adv. Mare, tii. 10.
Cf. de Orat. 9. de
Cor. 9.

that they did not reveal all things to all men, is equally reprehensible. The

four Gospels, he tells us, are reared on the certain basis
of Apostolical authority, and so are inspired in a far
different sense from the writings of the spiritual Chris-
tian. ‘“ All the faithful, it is true, have the Spirit of God,?
but all are not Apostles”.....“ The Apostles have the
Holy Spirit in a peculiar sense; they have it in the works
of prophecy, and in the operation of mighty powers (effi-
cacia virtutum), and in the gift of tongues,’ not as pos-
sessing the influence in part as the rest.”’. ... . The revela-
tion of the Apostles is the revelation of Christ; and
“happy is that Church’’— he is speaking of the Roman

adv. Mare. iii, 6;
te. 13.

de Resurr. Carn.
22.

de Preescr. Her.
25.
adv. Marc. w. 2.
dc exh. Castit. 4.
id,

de Preescr.
ret. 21.
id. 36.

He-

Church as it then was — “which combines the Law and the Prophets
with the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles, and draws her faith

from them.”’.,...

This being the case, we might expect that Tertullian would reject that

which is not proved by Scripture,* and bid such as tam-
pered with the Sacred Volume, fear the woe destined for
those who add to or take from it;”? while he himself
“adores its fulness which reveals the Worker and the
works ;”” which admits of wide application, and univer-
sal reference; for ‘‘all Scripture is fit for edification,
being inspired by God.” Nay, more, he even thinks that
“the Scriptures were so arranged by the will of God

The peculiar au-
thority of
ture.

adv. Hermog. 22.

id.

de hab. Mia. 3.

Serip-

de Preescr.
Her. 39.

that they might afford materials for heretics, since it is written that here-

sies must be, which could not be without the Scriptures.”

In his Principles of Interpretation Tertullian exhibits an equal sense

of the truthfulness and depth of the Bible. ‘ The lan-
guage of the Prophets,” he says, when arguing from their
language on the Resurrection, “is generally allegoric
and figurative, but not always; ... many of their words

The Interpreta-
tion of Scripture.
de Resurr. Cara.

ων

can be maintained in a naked and simple sense.® But, nevertheless, in

1JIn reference to Gal. ii. 11, he re-
marks rightly: Conversationis fuit vi-
tium non predicationis. De Prescr.
Her. 22.

2 This doctrine was part of the
** Regula Fidei” (de Preser. Her. 138):
{Profiteamur Jesum Christum] misisse
vicariam vim Spiritus Sancti qui cre-
dentes agat.

3 Documento linguarum, as a friend
suggests to me for documentorum lin-
guam.

4 Cf. de Monog.4. Negat Scriptura
quod non notat; and de Cor. Mil, 2.
Prohibetur quod non ultro est permis-
sum.

5 In all such cases Tertullian seems
inclined to destroy the primary histor-

422 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

other places! he admits the mystical import even of numbers, and
traces a symbolism of the Apostolic twelve in the
twelve fountains of Elim, the twelve gems of the high-
priest’s robe, and the twelve stones selected by Joshua
from the Jordan. He finds a figure of Holy Baptism
in the pool of Bethesda,— though this was effective only once a
year, but that is so always; and though that wrought (operabutur)
temporal health, while this renews (reformat) eternal vigor. ‘The
same Sacrament was still more clearly ane in
the passage of the Red Sea; and as “after the flood,
—the Baptism of the World, so to speak, —by which
the ancient sins of man were cleared away, the dove first brought the
olive-branch of peace, so, when we rise from the Baptismal font, the
Dove, —the Holy Spirit, — flies to us, sent forth from heaven, where the
Church is the antitype of the ark.”

At the same time Tertullian urges us to employ “the rudder of inter-

adv. Mare. iv. 13.

de Bapt. 5.

de Bapt. 9.
de Bapt. 8.

pretation, ...
Swyject to the
Church.

de Prescr. Her.

ae no divine utterance is so unconnected,
that the words only can be maintained, and not their
general bearing (ratio) ;” for we must adhere “te the

47. rule of the Church (regula Ecclesice), which she received

de Preescr. Her.

from the Apostles, and the Apostles from Christ, and
19. Christ from God ;”

. while we may be assured, that

“where there is seen to be truth of discipline and Chris-
tian faith, there will there be the truth of the Scriptures, and of interpre-

tation, and of all traditions.” ?

2. Cyprian’s doctrine of Inspiration is scarcely less exact, though less

2. CYPRIAN. express.

Lestim. i. Pref.
ad.

He more frequently shows his sense of the
value of the “divine Scriptures ” by quoting their testi-
monies,’ than by fixing their authority. The books of

the Old and New Testaments are to him “ the fountains of divine fulness

ical fulfilment of the prophecy, regard-
ing the employment of the tenses as
arbitrary, since ‘‘ with the Deity there
is no difference of time, for with Him
eternity itself brings all time to the
same uniform relation” (dirigit wni-
formem statum temporum) (adv. Mare.
111. 5). ‘* Kternity hath no divisions of
time” (non habet tempus ceternitas)
(adv. Mare. τ. 8). Pantenus, Nova-
tian, and Irenzus, seem to have held
the same doctrine.

1 Compare his explanation of Isa. vii.
Non solum sonum nominis spectes sed
et sensum... nobiscum Deus; .
spolia autem Samariz ipsos magos;
regem autem Assyriorum Herodem in-

tellige ... (adv. Mare. 11. 12). Cf.
Just. M. Dial. § 77

See other examples adv. Marc. 111. 18.

2 Cf. Bp. Kaye’s Essay on Tertullian,
pp. 290-3804; and especially p. 297, n
(ed. 2), for the idea of primitive ‘ Tra-
dition” in relation to the doctrine of
the English Church. This tradition
was merely hermeneutic, and not an
independent source of doctrine.

3 Cyprian composed three books of
‘** Testimonies,” containing a selection
of texts from Scripture, arranged for
doctrinal purposes, at the request of a
friend.

The quotations from Cyprian’s corre:
spondents are given in brackets.

—

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 423

from which the Christian must draw strength and wisdom ;” the source
of those “divine commands (magisteria) by which God has vouchsafed
to train and instruct us, that, enlightened by his pure and
bright radiance, we may hold the way of life through
their saving mysteries” (sacramenta). They are “the foundation of our
hope, the bulwark of our faith, the support of our hearts, the guide of
our path, the safeguard of our salvation.” In the Scrip- ;

Betta . = (Ep. xaxi.
tures the Christian must find “the torch which shall — 5)
kindle his faith” in the hour of danger; ‘the arms with
which he shall face the terrors of persecution and the

de Orat. Dom. i.

(ἢ

Ep. 1υῖϊὶ. (56) 7
cf. Ep. vi. (81) 2.

coming of Antichrist;”’ and “the trumpet which shall [Ep. xaxi. (26)
rouse him to the battle.” When writing to future mar- *!

tyrs, Cyprian says, “that his poor skill, aided by divine yg le Δίατί.
inspiration,' shall bring forth armor for them from the ρὲ ; :

precepts of the Lord.” .. . “1 know,” he adds, “that the
intricacies of human speech must be removed, and only those things set
down, which God says, and by which Christ exhorts His servants to mar-
tyrdom.” We read in his writings, again and again, that the Holy Spirit
spake in the Law and in the Gospel,—by Prophets,
Apostles, and Evangelists. ‘By Him the Prophets
were quickened to a knowledge of the future.” By Him
the Apostles teach us, “ what they learnt from the pre-
cepts of the Lord and heavenly revelations” (calestibus
mandatis), being “full of the grace of the inspiration ‘of their Master”
(dominice inspirationis). By Him, too, according to the promise, the
Christian answers his accusers in the hour of death;
“for we do not speak, but the Spirit of the Father,
who departeth, not from His confessors, and Himself speaketh in us,
and shareth our crown.” And thus it is that the Power of God lives
in the Church, “ which, like Paradise, includes within
her walls all fruit-bearing trees, which she waters with
four rivers, even the four Gospels, and on which she pours, with a
heavenly stream, the grace of a saving baptism.” 2

Yet more; the teaching of Scripture — whether by History or Proph-
ecy, by Laws or Psalms —is full of deep meaning, and
its spiritual import is perfect, — “the Gospel cannot
stand in part and fall in part,’ — nor is it limited in its
application like the doctrine of men; so that Cyprian describes a selection

de Lapsis, 7.

Ep. Wiii. (56) 5, 6.
Ep. lWwiii. 3.

de Op. et Eleem. ὃ.

Ep. Wwiii. (56) 5.

Ep. laxiii. 10.

Cf. Ep. trix. (76).
de Lapsis, 20.

11 am not sure that Maréchal is
right in referring these words to the
Holy Seriptures. Cf. Ep. Lxxim. 8. f.
Libellum ‘‘de bono patientiz” guan-
tum valuit nostra mediocritas permit-
tente Domino et inspirante conscripsi-
mus.

2 In one place Cyprian seems to draw

a distinction between the writings of
the Bible: ‘‘ Much hath God chosen to
be spoken and heard through His
Prophets; yet how much greater are
those words which the Son of God
speaketh— which the Word of God,
who was in the Prophets, testifieth by
Lis own yoice.’? — De Orat. Dom. § 1.

424 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

of texts which he made under a remarkable similitude: “they are,” he
says, “as the very wool and purple from the Lamb by

de Exhort. Mart.
Pref. 3.

whom we are redeemed and quickened, of which each
may make for himself a robe, . .

εν that, having covered

their former nakedness, all may wear the dress of Christ, arrayed in the

sanctification of heavenly grace.”

Among the types which Cyprian

quotes, we find the Church prefigured by “the robe

de Unt. Eccles.7.
Ep.lxix. (76) 2,4.
Ep. laiv. (59) 3.
Ep. lxiti. 4, 6.

without seam,” by the ark, and by Rahab. He sees a
spiritual meaning in the account of the raising of the
Shunammite’s son, from which he deduces the propriety
of Infant Baptism; and discovers a symbol of the Eu-

- charist in the “ bread and wine,” which Melchisedec
offered to Abraham, and, again, in the blessing of Judah. He recognizes
alike the authority and the mystery of Scripture; and declares the peculiar
and lasting functions of the Spirit in the Church and in the Christian.

3. Lastly, the sentiments of Cyprian were shared by the other bishops

of the African Church of his time.
the Council of Carthage, on the rebaptization of heretics,

ConciL. CAk-

THAG.

In the account of

we find that many of those present based their judg-
ments expressly on the authority of Scripture, using such language? as
shows most clearly the feelings with which they regarded it 3

SECT. VI.— THE FATHERS

OF ALEXANDRIA.

᾿Αλεξανδρεὺς τῷ γένει, ἀνὴρ λόγιος, δυνατὸς Sv ἐν ταῖς ypabais. — ACTS
XVIH. 24.

The designs of the Macedonian conquerer in founding Alexandria

were more than fulfilled.

He wished to unite in that city the East

and West by the bonds of commerce and the intercourse of daily business ;

1 In connection with Cyprian we may
quote the following passage from Fir-
milan (Bp. of Cxserea in Cappadocia):
“The Divine Word surpasses the nature
of man, nor can the soul form a perfect
and entire conception of it, and there-
fore there is so great a number of
Prophets, that the manifoldness of Di-
vine wisdom may be distributed among
many. Whence also [at a later time]
the first is ordered ‘to keep silence in
prophesying, if a revelation shall have
been made to a second” ({[Cypr.] Ep.
LXxv. 4). It would be impossible to
find a more distinct recognition of the
separate purposes of the sacred writers.

21. g., “Seripture Sancte” (5, 6,
74); “ Seripturee deitice ” (8); ‘* Hzre-
ticos — decerpentes sancta et admira-
bilia Secripturarum verba execrandos
censeo” ... (81); ** Divine Scripture ”
(33).

3 The very remarkable poem of Com-
modian — one of the most interesting
specimens of rude Latin now remain-
ing — offers the same kind of mystical
interpretations as Tertullian and Cyp-
rian. For instance, addressing a Jew,
he says (ὁ 39): * Inspice Liam typum
Synagoge,” etc. So again he says:
‘In te Apostolus clamat, immo Deus
per illum * (§ 58).

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 425

and it proved the point of their religious contact, and the centre of a
new spiritual life. The faith of Palestine and the reason
of Greece existed there side by side, till they were pre-
pared to received the principle of a combined vitality in
the preaching of Christianity. The colony of Jews at Alexandria, —
“the glory of Israel,” as they were called,—adopted the language, and
learnt the doctrines of Greek Philosophy; they recognized the element of
good which it contained,! and, doubtless, if they did not teach, at least in
turn suggested fresh thoughts to its masters. The Jew-
ish Rabbi became an instructor of the zyptian king,
and ‘“‘the entire interpretation of all the books of the Law (τῶν διὰ τοῦ
νόμου πάντων) was completed under the prince surnamed Philadelphus.”
We may believe that the later writers of this school lost sight of the stern
realities of Jewish history, and, in anticipation of a wider future, forgot
the meaning of the past; yet, even Philo professed only

to follow the principles and patterns of men of old time, Bi hee eee:
who interpreted allegorically the philosophy of their

fathers (τὴν πάτριον φιλοσοφίαν ἀλληγοροῦντες); and the writings of the
Apocrypha exhibit unequivocal marks of the same view
of Scripture. However this may be, it cannot be denied
that the views of the allegoric school were first accepted and then syste-
matized by the Christian fathers, and we shall endeavor to show in what
way the unscientific criticism of Clement, which was based on the mere
feeling of the depth of the sacred writings, was reduced to symmetry and
order by Origen, whose views of inspiration, with all the faults of his
Eastern ardor, are perhaps the noblest and worthiest which have ever
beeen set forth.

1. Clement’s doctrine of the plenary Inspiration of Scripture is at once
rigid in its primary form and wide in its general applica- Ge vews Arex.
tion. He recognizes the working of Providence in the Str. vi. 8, § 64.
moral teaching of Greeks and Barbarians, and traces “τ δ 512.
the origin of Pagan philosophy to the same God (6 tis Ἑλληνικῆς
φιλοσοφίας δοτὴρ τοῖς “EAAnot) who was the Author of the Mosaic and
Christian covenants, and compares the Jewish prophets with those among
the heathen ‘whom He raised up as prophets in their own dialect, and
separated from common (xvdaiwy) men, as they were

The Alexcand vine
School.

2 Macc. i. 10.

Sirac. xxiv. 28-9.

able to receive the Divine favor ;”’ while in another place Str. vi. 8, § 67.
he does not hesitate to call philosophy “a peculiar cove- “ὅν 8%
nant (οἷον διαϑήκην οἰκείαν) given to the Greeks on Peed. i. ri. § 96.
which might be built the philosophy of Christ.”’* But it Protr, i. § 5,

was by “the masters of Israel” that God led men prop-
erly to the Messiah, speaking to them in the Law,® the Psalms,* and the

1 Olshausen, Ein Wort u. s. w. δὲ 18, § 128), as well as that of the Shepherd
19. of Hermas (§ 121).
2 In illustration Clement quotes the
" 3 Hon Oe ᾿
Κήρυγμα Πέτρου. He asserts explicitly Str. 11. 28, § 148
the inspiration of this work (Str. v1.15, 4 Ped. 11.10,§ 110, Ὁ λόγος τοῦτε

36*

426 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

Prophets ;1 for, “disregarding the lifeless instruments, —lyre and harp,
—the Word of God reduced to harmony by the Holy Spirit not only this |
world, but man the microcosm, both body and soul, and so makes melody
to God through that many-voiced instrument, and says to man: Thou
art my harp, my flute, my temple: my harp, from the harmony [of many
notes], —my flute, from the Spirit that breatheth through thee, —my
temple, from the Word that dwelleth in thee.”. . .“ Truly
of man the Lord wrought a glorious living instrument
after the fashion of His own image; one which might give every harmony
of God tuneful and holy” (&pyavov Θεοῦ παναρμόνιον, ἐμμελὲς καὶ ἅγιον,
σοφία ὑπερκόσμιος, οὐράνιος Adyos). ‘Thus the foundations of our faith
rest on no insecure basis, ‘‘for we have received them
from God through the Scriptures,” ... “of which (ὧν
γραφῶν) not one tittle shall pass away without being
accomplished ; for the mouth of the Lord, the Holy Spirit, spoke it’
(ἐλάλησε ταῦτα); “and we have believed on Him
through His voice; and he that believeth on the Word,
knoweth that the thing is true, for the Word is truth; but he that believ-
eth not on him that speaketh, disbelieveth God :” for
he disbelieveth “that which hath been spoken by the
Holy Spirit for our salvation” (τὰ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος σωτηρίως
εἰρημένα).
The Gospel dispensation is still more glorious than the Law: ‘the
Prophets were perfect in prophecy, the just perfect in

Protr.t. § 5.

Str. ii. 4, § 12.
Protr. ix. § 82.

Str. ii. 4, § 12.

Str. vi. 15, § 126.

ac News Testes. wiehteousness t=. but the Apostles were fulfilled
Str. iv. 21, 8185. (πεπληρωμένοι) in all things.” | Yet ‘there is no discord
Str. ti. 23, § 146. between the Law and the Gospel, but harmony, for they

both proceed from the same Author” (ἑνὸς ὄντος ἀμφοῖν
χορηγοῦ τοῦ Κυρίου), “differing in name and time to
suit the age and culture of their hearers (kad ἡλικίαν καὶ προκοπὴν οἰκονο-
μικῶς δεδομέναι), by a wise economy, but one potentially (δυνάμει),᾽ since
“ the faith in Christ and the knowledge (γνῶσις) of the
Gospel is the explanation (ἐξήγησις) and fulfilment of
the Law.”2 In all the Scriptures, — “in the Law, in the Prophets, and
in the blessed Gospel,’”— ‘which are ratified by the
authority of Almighty power,’ — “ κυρίας οὔσας ἐξ
αὐϑεντείας παντοκρατορικῆς) we “have the Lord as the
spring of our teaching, who, by the various ministrations of His servants,
in sundry times and in divers manners from beginning to end guides the
course of knowledge.”

Clement is not inclined to undervalue human learning, yet he adds that

Str. ii. 6, § 29.

Str. iv. 21, § 136.

Str. iv. 1, § 2.
Str. viis 16, § 95.

ψάλλει διὰ Δαβὶδ περὶ τοῦ κυρίου προφήτης ... μᾶλλονε δὲ ἐν Ἵερ. τὸ
λέγων (Ps. χ]ν. 8 sq.). ἅγιον πνεῦμα ἐπιδείκνυσι τὸν δεόν.

ὶ 2ΟΥ Str. vir. 16, § 108; Adwmbr. in

1 Protrept. viii. § 78. Ἱερεμίας δὲ ὃ Petri Ep. 1m.1. 12; Pedag. 11. 12, § 94

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 427

“the reading of the Scriptures of the Lord is necessary for the demon-
stration of what the Christian teacher brings forward ;”

and as they are the basis of our spiritual knowledge so as sie Τα’

Seripture to Man.

are they also the means of quickening our spiritual vision. Str. vi. 11, § 91.
“The Christian training exercises our mind and awak- © 15 8 138,

. 5 ᾿ 5 : ΡΣ Str. t. 5, 32.
eus our intelligence, begetting in us an inquiring and

sagacious spirit (ἀγχίνοιαν ζητητικήν), through that true philosophy which
we liave found, or rather received from Him who is the Truth (f#v.....
Tap αὐτῆς τῆς ἀληδείας ἔχουσιν oi μύσται). We may have fallen from
our original glory, yet Clement bids those “ whose men-
tal eye has been dulled by evil rearing and instruction
to come to their proper light, seeking the truth which sets forth that
which is unwritten in writing” (ἐπὶ τὴν ἀλήϑειαν τὴν ἐγγράφως τὰ ἄγραφα
δηλοῦσαν) ; and to come with humility, for “some patch
together divers fabrications and falsehoods that they may
seem to reject the Scriptures, — that is, the Holy Spirit, — with a show of
reason ;’’— with patience, for some “have refused to
admit them after a superficial perusal, having lacked the
zeal to penetrate the depth of their meaning ;”” — and with obedience,
“for he ceases to be a man (ϑήριον γένοιτο), 80 to speak,
who spurns the tradition of the Church, and lightly
turns aside (ἀποσκιρτήσας,ἴο the opinions of human heresies.” And then
he says, quoting the words of St. Paul (2 Tim. iii. 15), “the Scriptures
are truly holy, for they are writings which make us holy
and make us godlike (τὰ ἱεροποιοῦντα καὶ ϑεοποιοῦντα
γράμματα) ; and of these holy writings and words the Bible is composed,
which the same Apostle calls inspired by God, being useful for doctrine, for
reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.”

The method of Interpretation adopted by the Alexandrine Fathers
serves to place their view of Inspiration in the clearest
light; for it was not to them, as it might seem now, a
mere exercise of ingenuity, but an earnest search after a wider and more
certain knowledge (γνῶσι5). Clement maintains the existence of an
allegoric meaning throughout the whole of the Bible,
whose deeper mysteries are only seen ‘‘by the light
which dawns on those who are truly initiated in knowl-

° The Law.
edge, and seck the truth in love. ‘ Moses,” he tells us, Str. i. 26, § 167;
“was a living law guided by the gracious Word” (νύμος φ'. 10.
ἔμψυχος τῷ χρηστῷ Ady κυβερνώμενος), so that his writ- hea riatien 3 fis
ings are still full of instruction, though their literal ac-
ceptation has passed away.'! The details of patriarchal history,? and the

St. i.1, § 10.

Str. vii. 16, § 99.

Str. vii. 16, § 98.

Str. vii. 16, § 95.

Protr. ix. § 87.

Interpretation.

Str. vt. 15, § 129.

1 Cf. Str. 1 15, § 67. The Ten Com- 2 For instance, he explains the his-
mandments have a philosophic as well tory of Abraham in the following way,
as a natural sense;—‘* Even the two apparently after Philo: Divine Wis-
tables may be a prophecy of the two dom (Sarah) brings no fruit at first to
Covenants.” Str. vi. 16, §§ 183 sqq. the believer (Abraham), and so, while

428 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

proportions of the Jewish Tabernacle,’ are significant to the Christian
philosopher (γνωστικός). Even the admission of Psalms into the Sacred
Canon suggests the idea “‘of the harmony of the Law
and the Prophets, of the Gospel and the Apostles, in
the Church, and of that under-current of melody which flows on through
all the changes of persons” (τήν τε ὑποβεβηκυῖαν τὴν καϑ᾽ ἔκαστον προ-
φήτην κατὰ τὰς μεταπηδήσεις τῶν προσώπων συνῳδίαν). But “it would
be a long task to go through all the details of the Law and
the Prophets which are expressed in riddles, for almost
the whole of Scripture speaks to us in this oracular language,” yet most
deeply and fully in the books of the new Covenant.

“The Saviour teaches His disciples nothing after a merely human
fashion, but all things bya Divine and mystic wisdom ;...
for even those things which seem to have been expressed
simply, still are found to require as much attention, nay,
even more than what was spoken enigmatically, on account of the exceed-
ing excess of meaning in them.” His works? and words? alike convey
ever-new lessons to those who search for them: hence it is necessary in
reading Scripture to regard the general scope and the particular phrase,
for “the careful distinction of words and facts produces
great light in our souls, and we must needs listen atten-
tively to those single expressions which convey many significations, and to
the single signification of many words together.” Thus, by the continual
advances of Faith, we gain the mystical sense* of the Bible, while “the

Str. vi. ll, 88.

Str. v. 6, § 32.

The Gospel.
de div. Salv. § 5.

Str. vi. 10, § 82.

unwritten tradition of the written Word,® given by the

Str. vi. 15, § 131;
cf. 8 13.

Saviour Himself to the Apostles, is handed down even

toe us, being inscribed on new hearts according to the
renewing of the Book by the power of God” (κατὰ τὴν ἀνακαίνωσι. τοῦ

βιβλίου).

he is still vigorous, he is induced to
apply himself to worldly learning (the
Egyptian Hagar), but afterwards she
gives birth toa spontaneous truth (τὸ
avrouadés, Isaac). Str. τ. δ, §§ 80, 81.

1 He gives a detailed explanation of
the symbolism of the Tabernacle: Str.
ν. 6,382 sqq. Thus the hangings which
covered it indicated that its mysteries
were veiled; the curtain over the jive
pillars (the five senses) represented the
separation between the worlds of sense
and reason; while the jour pillars
which divided the Holy of Holies from
the Sanctuary, signified the four Cove-
nants and the sacred Name of God.

2 Cf. Str. νι. 11, § 94.

8 Cf, Str. Iv. 4, § 15.

4 Cf. fr.66. 6 σωτὴρ τοὺς ἀποστό-
λους ἐδίδασκεν τὰ μὲν πρῶτα τυπικῶς
καὶ μυστικῶς, τὰ δὲ ὕστερα παραβολι’
κῶς κἀὶ ἠνιγμένως, τὰ δὲ τρίτα σαφῶς
καὶ γυμνῶς καταμόνας. Generally (Cf.
Str. νι. 15, § 182) Clement only notices
two senses of Scripture: in Str. 1. 28,
§ 179, he appears to consider three.

It is a natural tradition which repre-
sents James and John and Peter as im-
mediately instructed by our Lord after
his Resurrection, and the _ others
through them. Clem. Alex. ap. Euseb.
H. E.11.1, 3; cf. Str. να. 8,5 68.

5 Cf. Str. vir. 17, ὁ 105. This was the
key (κλείς) of the true believer, while
the misbeliever has a false key (ἀντι-
κλείς),

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 429

_ This inner teaching Clement regards as useful for our moral training,
and necessary from the nature and aim of Revelation. δ deca We
“The Scriptures conceal their meaning (ἐπικρύπτονται — jidden meaning of
τὸν νοῦν) that we may be led to inquire from the com- = Serpture.
mencement of our course, and be ever vigilant in the Perinee ot
investigation of the words of salvation;’’... “ their character is figurative
(παραβολικός), because the Lord, though He was not of the world (κοσμι-
xés), came to men as if He were of the world, endued with every [human]
virtue, and purposed to lead man — the foster-brother of the world — by
the way of knowledge to pursue the intelligible and absolute, rising from
a lower to a higher sphere” (ἔμελλεν τὸν σύντροφον τοῦ
κόσμου avSpwrov ἐπὶ τὰ νοητὰ καὶ κύρια Sia τῆς γνώσεως
ἀνάγειν ἐκ κόσμου εἰς κόσμον). Consequently ‘there are difficulties in the
Bible, yet all things, we read (Prov. viii. 9), are plain to those who under-
stand, that is, to all who receive and ever preserve the interpretation of the
Scriptures, which has been made clear by Christ, according to the rule of
the Church (ἐκκλεσιαστικὸς κανών), which consists in the perfect combina-
tion of all the notes and harmonies (συνῳδία καὶ συμφονία) of the Law and
the Prophets with the Testament! delivered at the presence of the Lord.”
2. Hitherto we have collected the scattered hints and implied assump-
tions of the plenary Inspiration of the Scriptures which
are found in the works of the early Fathers of the Church ;
we have still a more difficult task before us in the examination of the
direct arguments and definite conclusions of the great teacher of Alexan-
dria — of him whose proper name is said to mean the “Son of Light,”
and whose labors earned for him the title of ‘‘ Adamantine.” The for-
tunes of Origen during his lifetime aptly prefigured the fate of his writ-
ings. His zeal was accounted infatuation, and his learning turned to a
reproach. Though he was known to have reclaimed the wandering, and
to have refuted the malicious, yet he was driven from the service of the
Church in the very city where he had preached Christ on the steps of the
Temple of Serapis, and strengthened his father to endure the terrors of
martyrdom. Though ‘countless doctors, priests, and confessors” pro-
ceeded from his school, he was himself arraigned as a heretic and con-
victed ; though he was the friend and teacher of saints,” his salvation was
questioned and denied. For many centuries he was condemned almost
universally by the Western Church, in consequence of the adverse judg-
ment of Jerome. In later times Picus of Mirandola® ventured to main-
tain the cause of the great Father; the thesis was suppressed, but the

Str. vi. § 125.

2. ORIGEN.

1 Διαϑήκη. Cf. de Div. Serv. § 8; passages from Origen’s writings on
Greg. Nyss. ap. Suicer. 8. Vv. ἢ Sed- Holy Scripture, etc., which bears the
πνευστος διαϑήκη. title of Philocalia. Huet, Origeniana,

1. 4, 10, gives a list of the pupdls of

2 Gregory Thaumaturgus and Basil Origen.

compiled the edmirable selection of ὃ Huet, Origeniana, τι. 4, 3, 19.

430 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

author remained uncensured ; indeed, a pious lady was said to have re-
ceived a revelation not long before, which seemed to assure her of the
forgiveness of Samson, Solomon, and Origen. This hope, however, in
the case of the last, was admitted apparently by few: and Baronius | ex-:
presses his surprise that any doubt of his condemnation could be raised
after the sentence of Anastasius.

It is not our object now to enter at all into the general opinions and
character of Origen: it will be enough for us to listen to his own words
about Holy Scripture, and if we find in them a deep and solid foundation
of truth constructed with earnestness and wisdom, — unaptly crowned, it
may be, with the fantastic structures of a warm and hasty imagination, —
it is possible that we may be led to regard his other labors with charity, if
not with gratitude, and to remember that his errors refer to questions
which had not in his time been decided by the authority of the Church.

The work “on Principles” (περὶ ἀρχῶν) which supplied the enemies of
Origen with the richest store of objections, contains also
the most complete view of his Theory of Inspiration.
At the commencement of the first book he assumes the
doctrine as acknowledged by all Christians, and in the last he supports it
by a profound and independent proof, which in later times suggested the
“Analogy ” of Butler. “ Truly,” he says, “it is most
evidently preached in the Churches that the Holy Spirit
inspired each of the Saints, Prophets, and Apostles, and
that the same Spirit was present in those of old time as in those who were
inspired at the coming of Christ;” for ‘“ Christ, the Word of God, was
in Moses and the Prophets,...and by His Spirit they
spake and did all things.” By the help of this illumi-
nating Power the ministers of truth explained the hidden mysteries in
the life and actions of man; unfolded the workings of God’s Providence
in Creation and Redemption ; and, at the same time, edified the simple
‘and unlearned by instructive narratives. The true God acted on the
prophets to enlighten and strengthen them, and not to
cloud or confuse their natural powers, like the Pythian.
Deity, who was akin to those demons which Christians are wont to drive
out by prayers and adjurations ; for the divine messengers ‘by the con-
tact of the Holy Spirit with their soul (διὰ τῆς πρὸς τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτῶν ἁφῆς
τοῦ καλουμένου ἁγίον πνεύματος), 80 to speak, gained a keener and a
clearer intuition of spiritual truth” (διορατικώτεροι τὸν νοῦν [Eth. Nic.
VI. 6] καὶ τὴν ψυχὴν λαμπρότεροι) ; and they thus became more perfect
men as well as wiser seers.

The details of the Cosmogony and the records of the chosen people

were, in Origen’s judgment, as truly written by the in-
Oy ae ες spiration of Divine Wisdom as the works of the Proph-
Ho ets. He assuines that “the records cf the Gospels are
oracles of the Lord, pure oracles as silver purified seven
times in the fire” (Ps. xii. 6), and that there is a meaning in their minutest

General view of
Inspiration.

de Prine. i.
Pref. 4.

τῶν 1. wd. iv. 15.

e. Cels. vii. 4.

1 Huet, Origeniana, 11. 4, 3, 21.

‘gardless of the full and perfect meaning of such pas-

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 421

details ; while they are without error, inasmuch as we believe “that they
were accurately written by the cooperation of the Holy

Spirit”. ... The opening words of St. Luke's Gospel

seem to him to prove and illustrate this doctrine of Inspira- Py prem

tion: they ‘‘ attempted ” (ἐπεχείρησαν) to write histories αὐ. 8.

who did so without the gift of God’s grace (χωρὶς χαρίσς | Matte Tom.

ματος); our Evangelists did not “ attempt” that which Si & te

they did by the motion of the Holy Spirit (ἔγραψαν ἐξ ἁγίου

κινούμενοι Tvevuatos), and their books only we receive on the authority of
the Church of God. Yet more, Origen does not hesitate
to say that the Christian receives the words of Paul as the
words of God,! for he was made fit (ἱκανωθ εἰς) to be a minister of the
new Covenant, not of the letter, but of the spirit. They
only, he elsewhere tells us, will find contradictions in the
Apostle’s writings ‘‘who sever the one doctrine of the
Faith into the diverse opinions of sects, and examine only those testimo-
nies of Scripture which support their. peculiar view, re-

de Princ. iv. 14.

In the Epistles.

Comm. in Joan,
τι °
om. ὃ. ὁ.

Comm. in Rom,

Lib. iti. 7.

sages as exhibit the opposite side of the truth”. (e divers

veniunt). But, again, he notices that St. Paul speaks some things in his
own person which do not possess the same authority ;* and he seems to
consider that the inspiration of the Epistles generally is
derived from the Gospels, for they are a Gospel in an-
other form. Yet still they are not less pregnant in mean-
ing than the other parts of Scripture, though to some
they may seem more plain than the /istoric and prophetic books, but are
full of the elements of the mightiest and most manifold thoughts. Such
is the variety which we find in the Bible, yet all parts combine into one
harmonious whole. “There are many sacred writings,

Comm. in Joan.
Tom. i. v.

de Princ. iv. 10.

Ω - 5 ; Ss
yet there is but one Book: there are four Evangelisis, pan ape
yet their histories form but one Gospel:” they all con- ii. γ. 90.
spire to one end, and move by one way. All the sacred = (Het)

ie a Hom. in Jerem,
volumes “ breathe the Spirit of fulness, and there is noth- καὶ, 9,

ing, whether in the Law or in the Prophets, in the Evan-
gelists or in the Apostles (sive in Evangelio sive in Apostolo), which does
not descend from the fulness of the Divine Majesty. Even at the present

1 Cf. Hom. vit. in Levit. § 4. Mihi
autem sicut Deo et Domino nostro Jesu
Christo ita et Apostolis ejus adhzxrere
bonum est, et ex divinis seripturis se-
cundum ipsorum traditionem intelli-
gentiam capere.

2 lis language at times seems incon-
sistent, unless we observe this distinc-
tion between the personal and general

contents of the Epistles. For instance,
he says of the * Epistle to Romans”
(Pref. in Ep. ad Rom.): Videtur Apos-
tolus in hac epistola perfectior fuisse
quam in ceteris, quoting 1 Cor. ix. 27;
Phil. iii. 10, 18. Again: Scribunt Thes-
salonicensibus in verbo Dei Paulus et
Silvanus et Timotheus (Lib. 111. fr.).
Cf. Hom. τι. in Ezech. 1.; Hom. Xxx,
in Luc.; de Orat. 1. § 2

432 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

time the words of fulness speak in Holy Scripture to those who have eyes
to see the mysteries of heaven, and ears to hear the voice of God.”
We may call the Gospel “the first-fruits of the Scriptures,” 1 or “ the

elements of the Faith of the Church; ” we may believe
All Scripture %

RE Katelin: that ‘‘ the divinity of the prophetic revelations, and the
Comm. in Joan. spiritual meaning of the Law, shone forth by the dwell-
Tom. 1. 6.

ing of Jesus on earth,” and that there were no clear
proofs of the inspiration (ϑεοπνεύστους) of the writings
of the old Covenant before that time; yet the Christian —who has
recognized in his own Faith the fulfilment of Prophecy, and received the
substance which the Law shadowed — will prize equally
Bsa Num. all “the words of God.” ‘We cannot say of the wri-
tings of the Holy Spirit (Spiritus Sancte litter) that
anything in them is otiose or superfluous, even if they seem to some ob-
scure.”’ We cannot believe that there’is “one jot or
Hom. xxxix.in tittle written in the Scriptures which does not work its
peas a own work, when men know how to employ it.” The
fault is our own if “the rock of stumbling” remain,
for we shall indeed “ find connection (οὐδὲν παρέλκει) and use in all that
has been written, if we give heed to our reading, and pass over no letter
without examination and inquiry.” As in the natural world the skill of
the Creator is not only seen in the stars of heaven, but in the organiza-
tion and life of the meanest insect, and in the structure
of the smallest plant, ‘‘so too we conceive of all that has
been recorded by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost
(τὰ ἐξ ἐπιπνοίας Tod ἁγίου πνεύματος ἀναγεγραμμένα), believing that the
divine (ἱερᾶς) foreknowledge, which supplies superhuman wisdom to the
race of man by the Scriptures (διὰ τῶν γραμμάτων), has placed, so to
speak, the seeds of saving truths in each letter as far as possible; . . . at
least whoever has once received these Scriptures as inspired by the Crea-
tor of the world, must expect to find in them all the difficulties which
meet those who investigate the system of the universe.”’
Origen rests his proof of Inspiration on the influence of the Sacred
The proof of n- 00k, and the fulfilment of prophecy. Other legislators
spiration. besides Moses, and other teachers besides Christ, he tells
dePrinc.wv.1. ys, framed laws and systems which they would gladly
have propagated through the world, but the Jewish 2 and Christian Creeds
alone have spread successfully, in spite of national prejudices and religi-
ous persecution. Moreover, he adds, the rapidity with which Christian-

de Prine. iv. 6.

Comm. in Ps. ἃ. 4.
(Philoc. 2.)

1 Comm. in Joan.1.4. χρὴν δ᾽ ἡμᾶς Ads καὶ βάρβαρος ἡ κατὰ Thy οἰκου-
“ys / > ca > a
εἰδέναι ov ταὐτὸν εἶναι ἀπαρχὴν καὶ μένην ἡμῶν ζηλωτὰς ἔχει μυρίους,

/ ΄
πρωτογέννημα. Μετὰ γὰρ τοὺς καταλιπόντας τοὺς πατρῴους νόμρυς
ig “
πάντας καρποὺς ἀναφέρεται ἣ ἀπαρχή, καὶ νομιζομένους Seovs, THs THPH-
3, ΙΑ A
πρὸ δὲ πάντων τὸ πρωτογέννημα. σεως τῶν Μωσέως νόμως,

καὶ τῆς μαϑητείας τῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ
2 De Princip. τν.11. Πᾶσα δὲ Ἑλ- λόγων. ..

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 433

ity was promulgated proves the divine nature of the Christian word,!
“which is preached in the whole world so that Greeks
and Barbarians, wise and foolish, profess the doctrines of — “6 Prine. tv. 2
our Faith.’ Again: the Law, the Psalms, and the Proph-
ets, abound with predictions of the Advent and Reign of
Christ, and foreshadow the desolation of Judah, and the assumption of
the Gentile Church.? The fulfilment of these by the life of Jesus and the
course of Christianity “has placed the Inspiration of the Scriptures beyond
a doubt, and raised the veil from the face of Moses.” Such are the out-
ward proofs for the unbeliever; the Christian, however, will rest his faith
on the teaching of the Church. The Bible is the bulwark
of the Church, and the Church is its guardian. That eae
alone is to be believed as truth which accords with the }
apostolic ‘‘ tradition ® handed down in the preaching of the Church, by
order of succession from the Apostles, and even now abiding in the
Churches.”

The objections which are urged against the doctrine of a plenary Inspi-
ration Origen answers by analogies from Life, from
Nature, and from Providence, as Irenzus,? in a more pear ae oie
general way, had done before him. The anthropomor-
phic language of Scripture he compares with our own mode of addressing
children, suitably to their understanding, to secure their
benefit, and not to exhibit our own capacity (Deut. i. 31) ;
though still for the spiritual it has also a spiritual meaning contained in the
simple words, if we know how to hearken to them. Again: we have
already seen that outward insignificance is no ground for disparaging the
marvellous beauty of the least being in the natural crea-
tion ; and the same holds true in the Bible. And thirdly,
there are difficulties in the doctrine of Providence which
we cannot yet solve, as, for instance, the existence of venomous animals,
still we do not for this reason speak against the Author of nature, but
wait, if haply we may be deemed worthy to kuow that about which we
now reverently withhold our judgment; and so too in the divine Scriptures
are many things which we cannot explain, and yet dare not condemn; but
“as the doctrine of God’s Providence is not destroyed
(χρεωκοπεῖται) by our ignorance on particular points when
we have once rightly admitted it, so likewise the divinity of the Scriptures,
which extends through them all, remains undisturbed, though our weak-
ness cannot in each special phrase master the hidden glory of the truths
concealed under simple and contemptible language.” ®

de Princ. iv. 5-6.

c. Cels. iv. 71.

Comm. in Ps. i. 4.
(Philoe. 2.)

de Prine. tv. 7.

1 It is worth while remarking how 1,2; Ps. )xxii. (Ixxi.) 7, 8; Isai. vii. 14;
absolutely Origen identifies the Chris- viii. 9; Mic. v. 2; Dan. ix. 24.

tian Books and the Christian Doctrine. 3 Cf. p. 422, n. 2.
2 The following are the prophecies 4 Cf. p. 414.
which he quotes: Gen. xlix. 10; Hos. 5 When defending the rude style of

iii. 4; Deut. xxxii 21; Ps. xlv. (xliv.) the Scriptures upon the ground of their
or
ΤΙ

484 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

We have already seen that Origen represents the doctrine of the Inspt.
ration of the Bible as taught by the universal Church;
in like manner he tells us that her principles of Inter-
pretation were fixed, though there were variations in
private judgment from the earliest times. “It is a point
in her teaching that the Scriptures were written by the Spirit of God, and
admit not only of the obvious meaning, but of another unperceived by
many ;! for those details which are written are the forms of certain mys-
teries and the images of divine things, and in this the
opinion of the whole Church is one, that every, part of
the Law is spiritual.’’...“‘ The simplest acknowledge the presence of
these mystic dispensations,? and the most sagacious (of εὐγνώμονες καὶ

Interpretation.
c. Cels. iti. 11.
de Prine. i.
Pref. § 8.

de Prince. iw. 9.

ἄτυφοι) confess that they do not understand them.”
The peculiar feature of Origen’s system of Interpretation is the main-

A triple sense.

tenance of a threefold sense in Scripture generally ; he
finds indications of this principle in several passages of

the Old Testament,? and maintains that as “‘ man consists of body, soul,

de Princ. iv. 14.
Hom. v. in Lev. 5.
Hom. v. in Lev. 1.

popularity, Origen adds (c. Cels. VI. 2):
ἐστὶ γοῦν ἰδεῖν τὸν μὲν Πλάτωνα ἐν
χερσὶ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναι φιλολόγων
μόνον. τὸν δὲ Ἐπίκτητον καὶ ὑπὸ
τῶν τυχόντων καὶ ῥοπὴν πρὸς τὸ ὠφε-
λεῖσϑαι ἐχόντων ϑαυμαζόμενον, αἰσῶο-
μένων τῆς ἀπὸ τῶν λόγων αὐτοῦ βελ-
τιώσεωΞ. Any national literature
would furnish a parallel.

1 This spiritual sense is granted by
the Spirit to the Church. Hom. in Lev.
Vv. 8.

2 The instances he quotes will best
explain his meaning: Gen. xix. 30-388;
Gen. xvi.; Gen. xxix.; Gen. xxx.

3 For instance, from the Mosaic his-
tory he refers to the construction of
the Ark (the Church) “ with lower,
second, and third stories” (Hom. 11. in
Gen. § 6); from the Law, to Levit. vii.
9: Clibanus secundum sui formam pro-
fundiora ... significat . . . Sartago

ea quee si frequenter versentur ... ex-
plicari possunt. Craticula autem ea
que palam sunt. . . (Hom. v. in Lev.

5), from the Proverbs, to Prov. xxii. 20,
21(LXX.); and, again, from the Gos-

and spirit, so too does Holy Scripture, which has been
granted by God for the salvation of man;”* and thus
the simple may be edified by the body (σῶμα), the more
advanced by the soul (ψυχή), and the perfect by the spirit (πνεῦμα).

Cor-

pel, to the three loaves in the parable,
Luke xi. 5, 6 (Hom. v. in Levit. § 5).

4'The threefold character of man’s
being, and its entire (ὁλόκληρος) con-
secration to God’s service by Christian-
ity, is clearly expressed in 1 Thess. v.
23. It is important to distinguish ac-
curately between the principle of nat-
ural —intellectual—life (ψυχή), and
that of spiritual — religious life (wvev-
μα). Divine revelation (6 λόγος τοῦ
Θεοῦ) sometimes by its mysteries leaves
the one unsupported by the other (με-
ρισμὸς ψυχῆς τε καὶ πνεύματος. Heb.
ἵν. 19). \CfialsCor save τς ἘΠῚ Ζὴν;
Luke i. 47. Hence it is that ψυχή and
σάρξ are never contrasted.

Those who gladly trace the earlier
anticipations of truth will recognize
this triple division in Plato, Resp. 1v. pp.
441 sqq., where he distinguishes the ap-
petitive (τὸ ἐπιϑυμητικόν ---- σάρξ), the
emotional (τὸ ϑυμοειδές ---- ψυχή), and
the rational (τὸ λογιστικόν --- πνεῦ-
μα) elements in ἃ man and astate; and
also in Aristotle’s definition of a triple
“essence (οὐσία) --- material (Am),

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 435

responding to these three parts are three methods of Interpretation — the
historical, the moral, and the mystical; and properly “the body” was
for those who were before us, “the soul” for us, and “ the spirit” for those
“who shall receive the inheritance of eternal life, by which indeed they
may reach the heavenly kingdoms.”

The utility of the literal sense of Scripture “is proved by the multitudes
of those who believe sincerely and simply ;”' and the

reality of the moral meaning is shown by the example |, 7”¢ Fiteral, de

ε : Prince. tv. 12, the
Ofte aol 1 Corsix..9 = Dent. xxv. 5), from which Moral de Princ.
we may gather that Origen intends to include under this 1Ὁ, and the

head the adaptation of the particulars of Scripture to pines! i "
the earthly life of man. “ The spiritual explanation is

that which shows the archetypes and substances imaged and shadowed
in the Law;” and is found, by the teaching of the Apostles, to
exist both in the ritual and in the historical books (1 Cor. x. 11;
Gal. iv. 21—24; Heb. viii.5; Rom. xi. 4). The “spiritual world,” in
which this interpretation is realized, may be regarded as heavenly, or as
Christian and earthly:? when we contemplate the former, we explain
“ anagogically,” and “allegories” properly are applied only to the latter.

Thus, the prophecies which describe the character and

fate of various nations under the Jewish dispensation

de Princ. iv. 22.

may be referred, according to the one system (ἀναγωγή), to the inhabitants
of the celestial regions correlative to the kingdoms on earth.’ or by the
other (aAAeyopia), to spiritual characters unfolded by Christianity.

We have now to inquire how far Origen refuses to acknowledge the

literal sense in all cases: ‘‘ Some Scripiures,’’ he says,
“have not the corporeal* (τὸ σωματικόν, ἱ 6., consequen-
tiam historialis intelligentiv, as Rufinus renders it), so
that in such cases we must seek alone the soul and the spirit.”

formal (εἶδος), and the combination of
these (τὸ ἐξ ἀμφοῖν), De Anima, 11. 2;
and in his separation of the appetitive
(ὀρεκτικόν), sensational (αἰσϑητικόν),
and rational (διανοητικόν), in human
life: De Anima, 11.3 (the other species of
life— the nutritive (ϑρεπτικόν), and the
translative {κινητικὸν κατὰ τόπον), —
do not belong to this view). These sys-
tems are naturally distinguished from
the scriptural teaching by their less
distinet exhibition of the ‘spiritual ”
principle, which is absorbed in “ rea-
son.”

1Cf. De Prin. 1v. 14. Προέκειτο
γὰρ καὶ τὸ ἔνδυμα τῶν πνευματικῶν,
λέγω δὲ τὸ σωματικὸν τῶν γραφῶν,
ἐν πολλοῖς ποιῆσαι οὐκ ἀνωφελές,

Ts the literal sense
always true?
de Princ. iv. 12.

By this

δυνάμενόν τε τοὺς πολλούς, ὡς χω-
povot, βελτιοῦν.

2 ο Guericke (Hist. Schole Catech.
11. p. 60) rightly maintains against
Mosheim and Rosenmiiller.

3 In relation to this singular opinion
compare Huet, Origeniana, τι. 2, 11,
11: whatever Origen’s error may be, it
is clear that it arises from an extreme
regard to the /etter of Scripture.

4 Hom. ττ. in Gen. § 6. Non semper
in Scripturis divinis historialis conse-
quentia stare potest, sed nonnunquam
verbi causa deficit, ut Proy. xxvi. 9; 1
Regg. vi. 7; Ley. xiii.

Ovigen finds a symbol} of the “ὁ two or
three”? meanings in Jolin ii. 6 (de Prine
Iv. 12).

436 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

he evidently means that certain passages, taken literally, do not instruct
us, for no one can deny that they have a meaning. They may then be
either untrue morally, or untrue historically ; they may contain, in the
letter, hurtful patterns, or symbolic narratives ; let us examine Origen’s
opinion in relation to these two possible cases.

With regard to the first class of instances, no one would maintain that
the moral failings of the patriarchs- (Gen. ix., Xx.,
xxxviii., which Origen quotes)! are objects for our
direct imitation, and he himself asserts most strongly
that the records are profitable in other ways. Again, we may include
under this division those precepts of the Mosaic Law which are no longer
needful for our moral training. These the Christian is to receive not lit-
erally, but spiritually ; but though he does not value their outward sense,
he is not therefore to cast them aside as worthless and worn out, but to
seek for their inner significance.? Origen does not deny that the details
of the Law were actuallly observed, but he maintains also that they are

Morally 2
Stom. fr.
Hom. wm Gen. vi.

useful now.?

But in some places, it will be said, Origen denies the literal truth of

; facts.
Historically ? '

We have, indeed, already seen that he did not,
as fanatics in those times as well as in our own, attribute

passions to the Deity according to the letter of Scripture, but rather
received its statements as true only in idea; and he carries out the same

de Prine. iv. 16.

principle somewhat further ; he denies that we ought to

understand literally the account given of God ‘‘ planting
the garden of Paradise,” and “ walking in it in the cool of the evening.”

_1Cf. Hom. vi. in Gen. § 1. Si quis
hee (Gen. xx.) secundum litteram so-
lum audire vult et intelligere, magis
cum Judeis quam cum Christianis debet
habere auditorium. Origen does not
deny the literal truth of the fact, but
its moral fitness.

2 Cf. Hom. x1.in Num. ὃ 1 τ. Osten-
dimus, ut opinor, auctoritate Scripture
divine ex iis que in lege scripta sunt
aliqua penitus refugienda esse et ca-
venda, ne secundum litteram ab Evan-
gelii discipulis observentur; quedam
vero Omnimode, ut scripta sunt, obti-
nenda, alia autem habere quidem se-
cundum litteram veritatem sui, recipere
tamen utiliter et necessario etiam alle-
goricum sensum. Cf. Hom. x1. in Ex.
§ 6; Hom. 1x. in Num. § 4.

3 In some places he speaks of partic-
ular details of the Law as unreasonable
(ἄλογα. De Princ. τν. 17) and impossi-

ble, if taken merely in their obvious
sense: e.g , Gen. xvii. 14; Exod. xvi.
29; Jer. xvii. 21,22. We may also un-
derstand from this point of view his
real meaning when he says that the
law outwardly is ‘Jess elegant and
reasonable than many human systems,”’
and that ‘‘it may prove a stumbling-
block without the Gospel; ”’ but in that
all its discords are resolved, or, in Ori-
gen’s own beautiful words: When the
people murmured in the wilderness
Moses Jed them to the rock to drink,
and even now he leadeth them to
Christ (Hom. x1. in Ex. § 2).

The literal sense of some passages in
the Gospels Origen holds to be similarly
untenable: e. g., Luke x. 4; Matt. x.
10; v. 89. Such examples show most
distinctly the kind of error which he
had to meet, and from which, indeed,
he had himself suffered.

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 457

Yet more, he rejects that material theory of the Temptation which sup-
poses that “all the kingdoms of the world were placed before the bodily
eyes of Jesus, as contiguous to one mountain; ”’ and adds that “ whoever
avefully examines the question will find countless similar incidents in the
jiospels, not literally true [but true in idea], inwrought into those narra-
fives which are. to be received according to the letter.” ! If Origen had
rested here it would have been an easy task to defend him, but in other
places he speaks still more boldly. When discussing the
apparent discrepancies of the Evangelists, he says that
“if one were to set them all forth, then would he turn
dizzy, and either desist from trying to establish all the Gospels in very
truth, and attach himself to one,...or, admitting the four, grant that their
truth does not lie in their corporeal forms” (ἐν τοῖς σωματικοῖς χαρακ-
tipo). But, at the same time, he only abandons the literal sense when he
considers that it is self-contradictory, useless, or unworthy of God; he
accepts all the Bible, and feels bound to give an intelligible reason for
his faith :* he faces difficulties which many do not choose to see, and pro-
poses a solution which only exhibits his veneration for Holy Scripture.

Comm. in Joan.
Tom, x, 2.

‘Otherwise he admits the naked truth of the Patriarchal

and Jewish history,’ for ‘‘those things which are true

de Prince. iv. 19.

historically are many more than those which contain merely a spiritual

1 The Greek text stands as follows in
Lommatzsch’s edition: παραπλησίως
δὲ τούτοις Kal ἄλλα μυρία ἀπὸ τῶν
εὐαγγελίων ἔνεστι τὸν ἀκριβοῦντα
τηρῆσαι, ὑπὲρ τοῦ συγκαταδϑέσϑαι
συνυφαίνεσϑαι ταῖς κατὰ τὸ ῥητὸν
γεγενημέναις ἱστορίαις, ἕτερα μὴ συμ-
βεβηκότα. One MS. omits συνυφαίνεσ-
Yat, and it seems likely that the word
is merely a gloss to explain συγκατα-
Segal, which is generally used in a
different sense: the comma after ioTo-
plats should be removed.

2 Comm. Ser. in Matt. § 184. Judicavi
igitur bonum, ut accipiens bonum pro-
" positum eorum, qui in fide constantes
esse desiderant, solutiones crimination-
um eorum, in quantum mihiex Deo est
virtus, inveniam pro evangelica veii-
tate: ut fideles non solum fide simplici,
sed etiam ratione fidei muniantur in
fide.

Strauss (Introd. ξ 4) has endeavored
to find a mythical tendency in the fol-
lowing beautiful passage: καὶ τοῦτο
προλαβόντες δι᾽ ὅλην Thy φερομένην
ἐν τοῖς εὐαγγελίοις περὶ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ

ἢ

ἱστορίαν εἰρήκαμεν, οὐκ ἐπὶ ψιλὴν πίσ-
τιν καὶ ἄλογον τοὺς ἐντρεχεστέρους
ἐκκαλούμενοι, ἀλλὰ βουλόμενοι παρα-
στῆσαι, OTL εὐγνωμοσύνης χρεία τοῖς
ἐντευξομένοις, καὶ πολλῆς ἐξετάσεως,
/ ay “ > ‘ > >
καί, tv οὕτως ὀνομάσω, εἰσόδου εἰς Td
/ “~ / a> c ~
βούλημα τῶν γραψάντων, ἵν᾽ εὑρεδῇ,
/ YY “ /
ποίᾳ διανοίᾳ ἕκαστον γέγραπται. c.,
Cels. 1. § 42.

3 The Tenth Homily on Genesis is a
good example of his method of dealing
with such subjects. The passage re-
ferred to is quite sufficient to show that
he admits the reality of Rebecca’s his-
tory, though he maintains that the
Holy Spirit had a deeper object in dic-
tating the record: hee fabulas putatis
esse, et historias narrare in Scripturis
Spiritum Sanctum (§ 2) for neither
fabula nor μῦϑος involve the falsity of
the narrative which they convey. Cf.
Hom. τι. in Ex.§ 1. Nos omnia que
scripta sunt non pro narrationibus an-
tiquitatum, sed pro disciplina et utili-
tate nostra didicimus scripta.. Hom.
1.in Ex.§ 5. Non nobis hee ad hie
-

458 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATIUN.

sense ;” he is unshaken in his belief in the most remarkable miracles,' and
paints with force and feeling? the details of ancient events (res geste),
that they may minister to our instruction ; it is true that
oat” Ep αὐ Christ ever opens the eyes of those who are mentally
blind, but while on earth He restored to men their bodily
sight: it is true that He ever raises the dead, but then He raised Lazarus
from the grave; it is true that He ever stills the tempests in which the
Church is tossed, when His disciples call upon Him, but then we know
that He wrought the special work recorded in the Gospel history. Origen
ae accepts the record — “for we know that all things which
Flom. xvii. in Lue. : Σ = :
Piha ΕΝ, are written are true” — but he looks for something
Hom. xxavit. iw deeper; the question we have always to ask is, ‘“ What
nt is the meaning of this relation” (quo hee tendit historia)?
for we cannot believe that it is “ mere history, and does not pertain to us.”
The answer to this inquiry must be sought by careful and laborious criti-
cism. In Origen’s judgment, we must insist on the strict interpretation of
tenses and persons,’ and find a meaning in phrases which are commonly
held to be vague conventionalities ;* we must not omit an article,5 nor
neglect an antithesis ;° for the fulness of our spiritual insight will be pro-
portioned to the distinctness of our historical conception — the inward and
the outward are so combined that we must proceed to the one by the
other.

From the passages which we have quoted it will appear that Origen’s
errors lie rather in the application of his theory than in
the theory itself; many of our greatest expositors un-
consciously adopt his separate principles, but all, probably, would shrink
back from imitating the haste and boldness of his deductions. Yet it

Errors in detail.

toriam scripta sunt, neque putandum
est libros divinos Mgyptiorum gesta
narrare, sed que scripta sunt ad nos-
tram doctrinam et commonitionem
scripta sunt... . Hom. 1x. in Jos. § 7,
Hee quidem veterum historie referunt
gesta: sed quomodo nos hanc historic
narrationem ad mysticam intelligenti-
am referemus? .. .

1 For instance, in the history of Ba-
laam. Hom. x11. in Num. § 8.

2 Cf. Hom. 1x. in Num. § 5.

3 Cf. Comm. Ser. in Matt. § 25; where
he accepts the remarkable tradition
which identifies ‘Zacharias the son
of Barachias’”* with the father of John
the Baptist, from the form ‘‘ye slew”
(Matt. xxiii. 30). Cf. Thilo, Cod. Apoer.
Prol. 64. See also Hom. x. in Lue.
(Luke i. 76). Comm. in Matt. Tom.
Xu. f. Matt. xvi. 19 (οἱ οὐρανοί),

compared with Matt. xviii. 18 (6 ovpa-
vés).

4 Hom. xv.in Gen. § 1. Si diligentius
consideremus, inveniemus quia nun-
quam fere in sanctum quis locum dici-
tur descendisse, neque ad vituperabilem
conscendisse memoratur. Cf. Hom.
xx. in Luc. Crebro descendit Jesus
cum discipulis nec absque fine
sublimia tenet. Hom. in Josh. 11. 3.

So again (Hom. 111. in Luc.) in Luke
i. 11, he finds in the word “ appeared ”
a law of spiritual phenomena: [eorum]
quee sunt divina et superna in voluntate
est videri et non videri. Cf. Hom. 1x.
in Luc. (Luke i. 57). Ubicunque justus
nascitur ibi complentur dies.

5 Hom. xxxv. in Luc. (Luke xii. 58).

6 Hom. vitt. in Luc. (Luke i. 46: ψυ-
χή --- μεγαλύνει, πνεῦμα --- ἀγαλλιά:

εται). κῶς

δ δ».

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 439

must be remembered that when he first investigated the question of
Scripture Interpretation, it was governed by no laws, and limited rather
by custom than by reason. The Alexandrine school of Philo had long
endeavored to rescue the Law, by any means, from the contempt of
Philosophy; the teachers of the Christian Church had received certain
models of exposition in the New Testament, and sought to reproduce
their form without determining the basis of their construction. But Origen
went further: he was dissatisfied with the inheritance of Jewish allegories
and Christian imitations, and sought to determine afresh the true system
of Biblical Criticism; he did not indeed decline the arduous labors of a
scholar for the more pleasing speculations of a commentator ; but while
he laid down deep and striking laws of Interpretation, he revised the
text of Scripture with singular ingenuity and zeal. He felt that there
was something more than a mere outward form in the Bible; he felt that
the “words of God” must have an eternal significance,!
for all that comes into relation with God is eternal; he
felt that there is a true development and a real growth in the elements of
Divine Revelation ; 2 he felt the power and glory of the Spirit of Scripture
bursting forth from every part; and can we wonder that he sometimes
failed to notice the fair symmetry and perfect proportions of its frame-
work? Can we condemn him for gazing too earnestly where we are
unwilling to turn our eyes? Can we reject his entire system because it
has been misapplied by others or by himself? It is not our purpose now
to estimate the intrinsic merits of his scheme, or the extent to which he
failed in using it, yet we may call to mind that the founder of modern
Philosophy not only laid down the principles of knowledge, but alse
endeavored to employ them; and it may be as unfair to disparage the sym-
bolic interpretation of Scripture by Origen’s errors in detail, as to judge
of the capabilities of Inductive Science from Bacon’s ‘‘ Theory of Heat.”

It only remains for us now to refer to Origen’s view of the personal
use of the Scriptures, which is too noble not to claim
some slight notice. We must read them, he tells us,
“with attention, yea, with great attention, for it is needed
in reading the divine writings, that we may not speak or form notions
about them rashly.”” We must read them with reverence :
“for if we use great care in handling the Sacred Ele-
ments, and rightly so, is ita less offence (piaculum) to
disregard the Word of God than His Body?” We must read them with

Matt. xii. 32.

The Study of
Scripture.
Ep. ad Greg. § 3.

Tiom. xiii, in Ex.

Ὁ
O-

1 Hom. 1x.in Num. § 7. Reconditum similis esse alicui seminum, cujus na-

in iis (ss. Scripturis) invenies et secre-
tum mysteriorum sapientie et scientix
Dei sensum, quo nutriantur et pascan-
tur anime sanctorum non so'um in
presenti vita sed etiam in futura.

2 Hom. 1. in Ex, § 1. Videtur mihi
Unusquisque éeermo divine Scripture

tura hee est, ut cum jactum fuerit in
terram regeneratum in spicam vel in
quamcunque aliam sui generis speciem,
multipliciter diffundatur, et tanto cu-
mulatius quanto vel peritus agricola
plus seminibus laboris impenderit vel
beneficium terra foecundius indulserit..

440 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

pure hearts: for “no one can listen to the Word of God....... unless
he be holy in body and spirit; .....no one can enter
into this feast with soiled garments.” Yet “the mere
language of the Bible is not enough to reach the soul of
man, unless power be given from God to the reader, and shed its influence
(€mavSeiv) over the lesson;! for, if there are oracles of
God in the Law and the Prophets, in the Gospels and
Apostles, he who is a student (“aSntevduevos) of God’s oracles must place
himself under the teaching of God” (defoea......
διδάσκαλον ἐπιγράφεσϑαι ϑεόν) ; such a one must “seek
their meaning by inquiry, discussion, examination, and, which is greatest,
by prayer; ? ‘“he must not be content to ‘knock’ and to ‘seek,’ for prayer
is the most necessary qualification for the understanding of divine things,

...and the Saviour urged us to this when he said, not only ‘knock,
and it shall be opened,’ ‘seek, and ye shall find,’ but also, ‘ask, and it
shall be given you.’” If, then, we read the Bible with patience, prayer,
and faith ; if we ever strive after a more perfect knowl-
edge, and yet remain content in some things to know
only in part, even as Prophets and Apostles, Saints and Angels, attain
not to an understanding of all things, —our patience will be rewarded,
our prayer answered, and our faith increased.2 So “let
us not weary in reading the Scriptures which we do not
understand, but let it be unto us according to our faith, by which we believe
that all Scripture, being inspired by God (ϑεόπνευστος οὖσα), is profitable.”
“Oftentimes we derive good without perceiving it, for thus our life is
supported ;..... 80, too, our spiritual life is frequently profited by the
mere reading of Scripture, when our reason does not receive the fruit: a
charm, as it were, acts upon our nature; its better elements are strength-
ened and matured, the worse weakened and brought to nought.”

TIom. xt. τὴ Ex.

§7.

6. Cels. v2. § 2.

Hom. in Jer. α. 81.

Flom. in Gen. αὐ. 3.

de Princ. tv. 26.

Hom. xx. in Jos.

SECT. VII.——- THE CLEMENTINES.

There is yet one group of writings, stamped in common with the
name and authority of Clement of Rome, which requires
some notice. Of this the Clementine Homilies and Rec-
ognitions are the most important representatives, which
do not, I believe, yield in intellectual interest to any production of the

THE
TINES.

CLEMEN-

1 Cf. de Prine. tv. 10. Kav ἐπὶ τὰ
εὐαγγέλια δὲ φϑάσωμεν, κἀκείνων ὃ
ἀκριβὴς νούς, ἅτε “νοῦς ὧν Χριστοῦ,
δεῖται χάριτος τῆς δοϑείσης τῷ εἰρη-
κότι' ἡμεῖς δὲ νοῦν Χριστοῦ ἔχομεν
(1 Cor. ii. 12).

2 Hom. xi. in Ex. § 4. Non solum
studium adhibendum est ad discendas
litteras sacras, verum et supplicandum

Domino, et diebus et noctibus obse-
crandum, ut veniat Agnus ex tribu Ju-
da, et ipse accipiens librum signatum
dignetur aperire,

3 Hom. vi. in Lue. Utinam mihi
eveniat ut ab infidelibus stultus dioar
qui talibus eredidij, Such are Origen’s
words when contemplating the great
tmaystery of Christianfty.

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE QF INSPIRATION. 441

first three centuries.'- Both works present the same great outlines. Both
give a history of the conflict between ‘the chief of the Apostles,” St.
Peter, and the great enemy of the first age, Simon Magus. But under
this general likeness they offer considerable differences in detail and theo-
logical tendency. The Homilies are distinetly Ebionite and anti-Pauline,
while the Recognitions present a view of the Person of our Lord inter-
mediate between the opinions of Artemon and Arius.2 The value of the
Clementines does not, however, lie in the system of doctrine which they
contain, for in this respect they are often confused and contradictory, but
in a singular richness of thought and speculation. In reading them we
seem to stand face to face with some old speculator who tries at one time
to bring Christianity within the measure of his philosophy, and then again
to sulve former difficulties by Christian truth. Questions which we regard
commonly as the growth of a later age are debated with subtle ingenuity.
The ‘‘ scepticism” of the first century is found to have been scarcely less
powerful or less pregnant than that of our own.

The existence of this speculative element in the early Church, hidden
too often under the name of Gnosticism, is of the great- wo

= : : - Ξ Their importance
est importance for estimating rightly the growth of Chris- ὡς, ;ecognizing a
tianity in the face of an able and thoughtful opposition ; — sceptical element in
and the form of teaching to which it led is scarcely less. ¢/”"* %9**
interesting as a phase of mental culture. But without entering on these
wider relations of the Clementines, we must confine ourselves to the light
which they throw on the primitive idea of Inspiration. On this subject
the Homilies and the Recognitions present points of difference which cor-
respond with the fundamental differences of the two books, and both alike
offer a striking contrast to the broad comprehensiveness of the Catholic
doctrine which has been already traced in the fathers of the Church.

The Homilies—and in this they only present a common error in a
bolder form —regard Inspiration only in relation to the
Prophet, and not to the Church. The individual over-
powers the society : he at once conveys the message and interprets it. In
this partial view the Homilies support the opposite extreme to Montan-
ism. The Montanists regarded an ecstasy —a suspension of man’s natu-
ral facilities — as the necessary mark of a divine teacher,
but in the Homilies we read that “the Spirit must be
innate and perpetual ”’ (ἔμφυτον καὶ ἀένναον), and that the revelation must
be distinctly conceived in the Prophet’s consciousness, for partial knowl-
edge and temporary possession “belong to those who are maddened by

i. The Homilies,

Hom, iii. 12.

1 For the general history of the give all that can be required. Of the
Clementines, the works of Schliemann Homilies, Dressel’s edition (Gétt. 1853) is
(Die Clementinen. . . Hamb. 1844) and the best; of the Recognitions, the small
Uhlhorn (Die Homilien und Recognitio- text of Gersdorf (Lips. 1888) the most
nem αἱ. Klem. Rom. . . Gottingen, 1854) accessible.

2 Schliemann, 638 ff. ; 330 ff.

442 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

the spirits of disorder, and intoxicated by the reeking of altars.” The true
Prophet, with boundless spiritual intuition (ἀπείρῳ ψυχῆς
ὀφϑαλμῷ), sees and knows all things, mental and material
(πάντα πάντοτε... πάϑη, τόπους, ὅρους), by an imme-
diate and perfect knowledge, Without the agency of dreams and visions ;
for those influences are uncertain and no mark of piety,
while the Prophet must be sure and sinless, —they are
independent of the exercise of reason, while his power
works through his soul. Such prophets were Adam,
Moses, and Christ, who appear in clear preéminence above all other men,
and next to them stand Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.! ‘Till
the coming of Christ the Pentateuch — in its pure form —
was the depository of Truth, for the later Prophets were
inspired by the secondary power, typified by Eve, through which the divine
element was involved in human corruptions.

In one remarkable passage Peter is represented as declaring the nature
of Revelation from his own experience, at the time when he received the
blessing of the Lord. “ ‘The answer rose in my heart :
I know not howI said, ‘Thou art the Son of the liv-
ing God;’... and from that time I Jearnt that to learn
without teaching, or vision, or dream, is Revelation. And truly it is so;
for in that [truth] which is placed in us of God all truth is contained sem-
inally (σπερματικῷῶς ), and is covered and revealed by the hand of God,
who worketh in us according to the merit (ἀξίαν) of each; but that any-
thing should be manifested from without, by visions or dreams, is clearly
not an instance of Revelation, but of wrath.” Though in this case the
Apostle is made to claim the privilege cf a direct communication with
God, in other places he declines the title of Prophet: “I
am a servant of God, the Creator of all things,” he says ;
“a disciple of His right (δεξίου) Prophet ; wherefore be-
ing His Apostle I speak the truth;” and again, ‘Iam a disciple of the
true Prophet, and not a Prophet.”

With these subjective views of the prophetic office the writer of the
Homilies does not hesitate to maintain the unauthenticity of the Mosaic

Flom. iti. 13.

id.

Flom. xvii. 15-17.
Hom. v1. 6.
Hom. xvii. 14.

Hom. tit. 23, 25.

Matt. xvi. 16, 17.
Hom. xvii. 18.

Hom. vii. 11.

Flom. xviii. 7.

writings. According to him, the Law was first given
See orally by the Prophet to the seventy elders and after-

wards reduced to writing, when the devil was permitted
. to introduce errors? into its form, that the hearts of its readers might be

1 The seven Old Testament Prophets
are called by the author of the Homi-
lies the ‘‘seven pillars of the world”
(Hom. xviii. 18, 14). Cf. Schliemann,
194 ff.; Uhlhorn, 164 ff.

2 The errors which are eumerated in
the Clementines are partly the anthro-

pomorphic descriptions of God’s anger,
jealousy, repentance, ete. (Hom τι. 43);
and partly the moral failings of the
Patriarchs. It is worth while to recall
the method by which Origen removed
these difficulties. See above, p. 490.
Schliemann (197, anm.) scarcely docs
justice to the great Christian Father.

ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION. 443

tried ; yet this doctrine of the corruption of the Pentateuch is only for the
advanced Christians, and not for the simple and unlearned. The fitness
of the Bible to prove the faith of man is beautifully
described : ‘There are many representations of the De-
ity in the Scriptures, . ..and each finds in them that idea of God which
he wishes. Moreover, our soul within is arrayed for immortality in His
image; if, then, I leave Him who gave it the likeness, the likeness justly
will leave me.” . . Thus the right discrimination of the truth of the Scrip-
tures must rest in the internal witness of the believer's
heart, who should be, after his Lord’s command, ‘a
good money-changer,”! skilful to discern the true image of the Divine
and the current counterfeit.

“The Recognitions ”’ differs in its whole doctrinal tendency from the
Homilies, though it was undoubtedly based upon them.
In this book Christianity is no longer regarded as identi-
eal with pure Judaism, nor are the Prophets degraded
into the ministers of a corrupt power; and though the full majesty of the
Saviour is still unrecognized, He is raised above the ancient Lawgiver.
Consistently with this view of the two economies, the author of the Re-
cognitions declares the harmony of the Law, the Histo- Fee Το
ries, and the Prophets ;? and, at the same time, he Recoy. ti. 48; i.
places the source and the proof of their Inspiration in ὅδ
Jesus. The difficulties which beset the understanding of the Scriptures
are not attributed to the outward corruptions of an evil
spirit, but to the “sin which has grown up with (coado*
levit) men;”’ so that the truth is not referred to the judg-
ment of the personal consciousness, but drawn from the tradition of the
appointed teachers in the Church.

Yet more, The Recognitions differs from the Homilies in the view
which it gives of the mode, the extent, and the instruments of Divine
Revelation. In the Homilies we read that dreams and
visions are marks of God’s wrath, but in the Recogni-
tions it is said that He has condescended to address men by such outward
agencies ; and the objective glories of the Mosaic Law — “ the heavenly
voices and visions of Sinai” — are distinctly acknowledged. The impor-
tance of this difference will be more apparent when we remember that the
call of St. Paul? to his Christian mission was made by a glorious appear-
ance of the Lord, who further instructed the future Apostle of the Gentiles
by visions in Arabia, Jerusalem, and Paradise. In another place the

Hom. xvi. 10.

Hom. ivi. 50.

ii. The Recogni-
tions.

Recog. t. 21.
Recoy. vi. 45, 55.

Recog. iv. 21.

1 Hom. 11. 51: εὐλόγως 6 διδάσκαλος guttis misericordia ejus irrorati ex-
ἡμῶν ἔλεγεν" γίνεσϑε τραπεζῖται δό- clamabant (Πόρου. 11. 44).
κιμοι. Cf. Cotelerius, ]. c.; Inf. p. 425. In another place we read: Imagines
2 Thus quotations from the Psalms gestorum Moysi et ante ipsum patri-
are introduced with the following arch Jacob, ipsius (veri prophetx) per
words: Sancti Spiritu Dei repleti, et omnia typum ferebant (Recog. v.10).
8 For this remark I am indebted to Schliemann, 312.

444 ON THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.

whole circle of natural acquirements is included by the author of the Recog-
nitions in the gifts of the Apostolate: Peter is described
‘‘os a man of God, full of all knowledge (plenus totius
scientie), acquainted even with Greek learning, because he is filled with
the Spirit of God;” though, indeed, such empty eloquence .(/oquacitus)
was unsuited to the dignity of one who rightly spake of heavenly things.!
For the Christian has another and an abiding source of wisdom in the
presence of “the true Prophet,’ who teaches him accord-
en a ing to his needs. ‘This “true Prophet,” even Christ, is
Recog. i. 21. the one illuminator of the soul. He is the sole author of
ae Sg all perception of the divine and the eternal. He alone
knows all the past, the present, and the future. The
whole existence of the world is but as the course through which He
hastens to rest. He taught the patriarchs, and in each generation was
present to the good, though under a veil, especially to those who looked
for Him. The progress of history was in some sense a preparation for
His Incarnation, which was the most powerful charm to
win the love of men. And when He died “all the
world suffered with Him: for the sun was darkened, and
the mountains were rent asunder, and the graves were opened, and the veil
of the temple was torn, as if in sorrow for the destruction which was com-
ing upon the place.’ ?

GEecog. vi. 5.

Recog. i. 60.
Recog. t. 54.

The general effect of the inquiry into the early doctrine of “ Inspiration
of Scripture,” which is now completed, is to confirm in the fullest degree
the results which were obtained independently from a consideration of the
idea of a written record of a Divine revelation. The unanimity of the early
Fathers in their views on Holy Scripture is the more remarkable when it is
taken in connection with the great differences of character, and training,
and circumstances by which they were distinguished. In the midst of
errors of judgment and errors of detail, they maintain firmly, with one
consent, the great principles which invest the Bible with an interest most
special and most universal, with the characteristics of the most vivid indi-
viduality and of the most varied application. They teach us that inspi-
ration is an operation of the Holy Spirit acting through men, according to
the laws of their constitution, which is not neutralized by His influence,
but adopted as a vehicle for the full expression of the Divine Message.
They teach us that it is generally combined with the moral progress and
purification of the teacher, so that there is on the whole a moral fitness in
the relation of the prophet to the doctrine. They teach us that Christ —
the Word of God — speaks from first to last; that all Scripture is per-
manently fitted for our instruction ; that a true spiritual meaning, eternal
and absolute, lies beneath historical and ceremonial and moral details.
They teach us that this view was in their time no late invention, but a

1 Schliemann, 311. 2 Cf. Uhlhorn, 284.

ON THE APOCRYPHAL TRADITIONS. 445

tradition which they received and transmitted, each according to his skill
endeavoring to carry out the principles which he had learnt. It is possi-
ble that objections, more or less serious, may be urged against various
parts of the doctrine, but it cannot, I think, be denied that as a whole it
lays open a view of the Bible which vindicates with the greatest clearness
and consistency the claims which it makes to be considered as one harmo-
nious message of God, spoken “in many parts and many manners ”’ ly
men and fo men —the distinct lessons of individuai ages reaching from
one time to all time. If it be false, we shall then be bound to inquire
earnestly what are the grounds, the proofs, the limits of our own belief ;
if it be true, we shall certainly be led to prize the Scriptures more highly
and more personally, as inexhaustible wells of living water, ever spring-
ing up unto eternal life.

Verum hee per excessum quendam, ret tamen ipsius consequentia commonitos
breviter dixisse sufficiat ad ostendendum id quod sunt
quedam quorum significatio proprie nullis omnino, potest
humane lingue sermonibus explicari, sed simpliciore magis
intellectu, quam ullis verborum proprietatibus declarantur. Ad quam regulam
etiam divinarum Seripturarum intelligentia retinenda est, quo scilicet ea que
dicuntur non pro vilitate sermonis sed pro divinitate Sancti Spiritus qui cas
conscribi inspiravit, censeantur.

Orig. de Prine.

Seals

Abt oN et XC.

ON THE APOCRYPHAL TRADITIONS OF THE LORD’S WORDS
AND WORKS.

Συναγάγετε τὰ περισσεύσαντα κλάσματα ἵνα μή τι ἀπόληται. --- 81.
JOHN, VI. 12.

Ir is a fact of great significance, that traditional accounts of words or
works of the Lord which are not noticed in the Gospels
are extremely rare. The Gospels are the full measure Pri arg
of what was known in the Apostolic age, and (may we
not add?) of what was designed by Providence for the instruction of
after-ages. There are, however, some fragments which appear to contain
true and original traits of the Lord’s teaching, and as such are invested
with the greatest interest. Some traditional sayings, again, are evidently
duplicate recensions of passages contained in the Gospels. Others are so
distorted by the admixture of explanation or comment as to present only
a very narrow point of connection with the Evangelic history. The follow-
ing collection of these various kinds of traditional sayings is as complete

446 ON THE APOCRYPHAL TRADITIONS
as I have been able to make it, but may probably still admit of additions.
The first saying is stamped with the authority of St. Paul, and cannot,
therefore, be called apocryphal, but it is too important a supplement to
the records of the Gospel to be passed over in an account ef “ unwritten
words.” 1

1. ... Remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how
He said, /¢ ts more blessed to give than to receive (Acts
Xx. 35).2 Compare Luke vi. 30. The saying does
not appear, so far as I know, elsewhere.

2. On the same day, having seen one working on the Sabbath, He said
to him, O man, if indeed thou knowest what thou doest, thou art blessed ; but

1. Traditional
words.

(a) Original tra-
ditions.

if thou knowest not thou art cursed, and art atransgressor of the law.?
3. But ye seek to increase from little, and from greater to be less.4 Cf. John

v. 44.

4. The Son of God says, Let us resist all iniquity, and hold it in hatred.6
5. Thus He [Christ] saith, They who wish to see me and to lay hold on my

kingdom must receive me by affliction and suffering.®

Acts xiv. 22.

11 have been unable to obtain Koer-
ner, De dictis Christi ἀγράφοις,
1776. The collection by Bunsen, Anal.
Ante-Nic. τ. 29 ff. is very imperfect. On
the other hand, that of Anger (Synops.
Evang. quoted before) is, as far as he
goes, very complete.

2... μνημονεύειν τῶν λόγων τοῦ Κυ-
ρίου Ἰησοῦ ὅτι αὐτὸς εἶπεν, Μακά-
ριόν ἐστιν μᾶλλον διδόναι
ἢ λαμβάνειν.

3 This very remarkable narrative oc-
curs in Cod. D, after Luke vi. 4: τῇ
αὐτῇ ἡμέρᾳ ϑδεασάμενός τινα ἐργαζόμ-
ενον τῷ σαββάτῳ εἶπεν αὐτῷ *Ar-
ὥρωπε, εἰ μὲν οἶδας τί ποι-
εἰς pardptos εἰ ci BE wh
οἶδας ἐπικατάρατος Kal Tapa-
βάτης- εἶ Tov νόμου. The form
of address (ἄνϑρ.) occurs Luke xii. 14;
ἐπικατάρατος occurs John vii. 47; Tapa-
Barns νόμου is a phrase of St. Paul.
It is evident that the saying rests on
some real incident; but it does nor re-
cur elsewhere.

Other additions: which occur in D
seem to be only new versions of passa-
ges in the Gospels. The most remarka-
ble are:

After § 3, Matt. xx. 28, εἰσερχόμενοι
δὲ Kat παρακληϑέντες δειπνῆσαι μὴ

Cf. Matt. xvi. 24;

ἀνακλίνεσϑαι (ἀνακλίνεσϑε) εἰς τοὺς
ἐξέχοντας τόπους. μήποτε ἐνδοξότερός
σου ἐπέλθῃ, καὶ προσελϑὼν ὃ δειπνο-
κλήτωρ εἴπῃ σοι. Ἔτι κάτω χώρει, καὶ
καταισχυνϑήσῃ" ἐὰν δὲ avaméons εἰς
τὸν ἥττονα τόπον καὶ ἐπέλθῃ σου ἥτ.
των, ἐρεῖ σοι 6 δειπνοκλήτωρ Σύναγε
ἔτι ἄνω, καὶ ἔσται σοι τοῦτο χρῆσι-
μον.

John vi. 56: καϑὼς ἐν ἐμοὶ 6 πατὴρ
κἀγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί. ἀμήν, ἀμὴν λέγω
ὑμῖν, ἐὰν μὴ λάβητε τὸ σῶμα τοῦ υἱοῦ
τοῦ ἀνδρώπου ws τὸν ἄρτον τῆς ζωῆς
οὐκ ἔχετε ζωὴν ἐν αὐτῷ. The same
passage occurs in some Latin authori,
ties.

4 Cod. D, and it. pler. after Matt
xx.28: ὑμεῖς δὲ (ζητεῖτε ἐκ μικροΐ.
αὐξῆσαι καὶ ἐκ μείζονος ἔλαττον εἶναι.
This striking sentence is variously ren-
dered by the Latin MSS. It seems to
be a genuine fragment. The phrase ἔλ-
αττον εἶναι is very remarkable.

5 Barn. Ep. 4... dicit filius Dei: Re-
sistamus omni iniquitati et odio habea-
mus cam.

The passage quoted by Barnabas, c. 6,
Dov, ποιήσω τὰ ἔσχατα ws τὰ πρῶτα,
seems to be a mixture of Ezek. xxxvi.
11 and Matt. xix. 30.

6 Barn. Ep. 7: οὕτως, φησίν, ot

OF THE LORD’S WORDS AND WORKS.

6. Show yourselves tried money-changers.1
7. He that wonders shall reign; and he that reigns shall rest.*

wonder at that which is before you.®

447

Cf. 1 Thess. v. 21.
Look with

8. I came to put an end to sacrifices, and unless ye cease from sacrificing

| God's] anger will not cease from you.*

Cf Matt ix 1s:

9. Jesus said to His disciples, Ask great things, and the small shall be
added unto you; and ask heavenly things, and the earthly shall be added unto

you.® Cf. Matt. vi. 33.

10. Our Lord Jesus Christ said,

will 1 also judge you.®
Lord.

In whatsoever I may find you, in this

Such as I may find thee, I will judge thee, saith the

11. The Saviour Himself says, He who is near me is near the fire; he

who is far from me is far from the kingdom?

SéAovrés pe ἰδεῖν καὶ ἅψ-
ασϑαί μουν THs βασιλείας-
ὀφείλουσι ὥλιβόντες καὶ

παδόντες λαβεῖν με.

1 Τίνεσϑε τραπεζῖται δόκιμοι. Apel-
les ap. ELpiph. 44, 2; Orig. in Joann.
ΧΙΧ. ete.; cf. Anger, p. 274. This is the
most commonly quoted of all apocry-
phal sayings, and seems to be genuine.
The thought is explained in an addition
to the parable of the Talents which oc-
curs in the Clementine Homilies, = 0 U
yap, φησὶν [ὁ Κύριος], avd pwre,
τοὺς λόγους pov ws apyt-
ριον ἐπὶ τραπεζιτῶν kal
ὡς χρήματα δοκιμάσαι (Clem.
Hom. ut. 61).

2Ex Ev. Hebr. ap. Clem. Al. Strom.
1.9,645: Ὁ ϑαυμάσας βασι-
λεύσει καὶ 6 βασιλεύσας
ἀναπαυϑήσεται.

3 Trad. Matt. ap. Clem. Al. Strom.
u. 9, § 45: ϑαύμασον. Ta Ta-
ρόντα βαϑμὸν τοῦτον πρῶτον τῆς
ἐπέκεινα γνώσεως ὑποδέμενος.

4 Ev. Ebion.ap. Epiph. Her. xxx. 16,
p. 140: Ἦλϑον καταλῦσαι τὰς ϑυσίας,
καὶ ἐὰν μὴ παύσησϑε τοῦ ϑύειν οὐ
παύσεται ap ὑμῶν ἡἣ ὀργή.

5 Orig. de Orat. § 2: εἶπε γὰρ ὁ Ἴη-
gous τοῖς μαϑηταῖς αὐτοῦ Αἰτεῖτε
τὰ μεγάλα καὶ τὰ μικρὰ
ὑμῖν προστεδήσεται, καὶ
αἰτεῖτε τὰ ἐπουράνια καὶ
τὰ ἐπίγεια προστεϑήσεται
ὑμῖν. Cf. Clem. Str. 1. 24,§ 158: at

Cf. Luke xii. 49.

τεῖσϑε γάρ, φησί, Ta μεγάλα
καὶ πὰ “μικρὰ μὲν προστπ ε-
δήσεται. Id. Strom. iv. 6, ὁ 84.

6 Just. M. Dial. 41: ὁ ἡμέτερος Κύ-
ptos ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστὸς εἶπεν: “Ev ois
ἂν ὑμᾶς καταλάβω, ἐν τού-
τοις καὶ κρινῶ. Clem. Al. Quis
dives,§40: "Eq ois γὰρ ἂν εὕρω
ὑμᾶς, φησίν, ἐπὶ τούτοις καὶ
κρινῶ.

7 Nilus ap. Anast. Sin. Queest. 4 (An-
ger, p 207): οἷον yap [ἂν] εὕρω
σε, τοιοῦτόν σε κρινῶ, φησὶν
ὁ Κύριος.

8 Orig. Hom. in Jerem. Ul. p. Τῖϑ:
Legi alicubi quasi Salvatore dicente, et
quero sive quis personam figurarit Sal-
yatoris, sive in memoriam edduxerit,
ac yerum sit hoc quod dictum est. Ait
autem ipse Salvator: Qui juxta me est,
jucta ignem est ; quilonge a me longe
est a regno.

Didymus, in Ps. 88,8: διὸ φησὶν ὁ
Sornp Ὁ ἐγγύς μου ἐγγὺ- τοῦ
πυρός: ὁ δὲ μακρὰν aw ἐμοῦ
μακρὰν ard τῆς- βασιλείας.

For the knowledge of this remarka-
ble saying I am indebted to the Rey.
F. J. A. Hort.

A very similar phrase occurs in Igna-
tius (ad Smyrn. 4): ἐγγὺς μαχαίρας
ἐγγὺς ϑεοῦ: μεταξὺ μαχαίρας μεταξὺ
ϑεοῦ; and both phrases offer some
resemblance to one quoted from the
Doctrine of Veter by Gregory Naz,
(Ep. τ. ad. Ces. ap. Credn. Beitr.

448 ON THE APOCRYPITAL TRADITIONS

12. The Lord says in the Gospel, 17 ye kept not that which is small, who
will give you that which is great? For I say unto you, that he that is faithful
in very little is faithful also in much.! Cf. Luke xvi. 11, 12, 10 (the last
clause coincides verbally).

13. [The Lord] says, Keep the flesh pure and the seal unspotted, that we
may receive eternal life (perhaps that ye may receive eternal life.) ”

14. The Lord Himself having been asked by some one, When His
kingdom will come? said, When the two shall be one, and that which is
without as that which is within, and the male with the female neither male nor
female? Cf. Gal. iii. 28.

15. Jesus says, For those that are sick Iwas sick, and for those that hunger
7 suffered hunger, and for those that thirst 1 suffered thizst.4 Cf. Matt. xxv.
35, 36 (ἐπείνασα, ἐδίψησα, hasevnoa).

16. ... In the Hebrew Gospel we find the Lord saying to His disciples,
Never be joyful except when ye shall look on your brother in love.®

1. 353): κάμνουσα ψυχὴ ἐγγύς ἐστι
δεοῦ.

1 (Clem. Rom.] Ep. 11.8: λέγει γὰρ
6 Κύριος ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ Ei τὸ
μικρὸν οὐκ ἐτηρήσατε, τὸ
μέγα τίς ὑμῖν δώσει; λέγω
γὰρ ὑμῖν, ὅτι ὁ πιστὸς κ.τ.λ.

This form of the thought occurs again
in Irenzus (11. 34, 3): Si in modico fi-
deles non fuistis, quod magnum est
quis dabit vobis?

2[Clem. Rom.] Ep. 11.8: ἄρα οὖν
λέγει, Tnphoate τὴν σάρκα
ἁγνὴν καὶ τὴν σφραγῖδα ἄσ-
πιλον, ἵνα τὴν αἰώνιον ζωὴν ἀπολά-
βωμεν (-ητε 1).

8 (Clem. Rom.] Ep. τι. 12: ἐπερωτη-
Seis... αὐτὸς 6 Κύριος ὑπό τινος πότε
ἤξει αὐτοῦ ἡ βασιλεία, εἶπεν Ὅταν
ἔσται τὰ δύο εν καὶ τὸ εξῶ
ὡς τὸ ἔσω καὶ τὺ ἄρσεν μετὰ
τῆς ϑηλείας οὔτε ἄρσεν
οὔτε δῆλυ. This mystical saying,
which seems very different in form
from tke character of our Lord’s
words, is found in Clement of Alex-
andria in several shapes. Strom 111.9,
§§ 63 ff.: φασὶ yap ὅτι αὐτὸς εἶπεν 6
Σωτήρ Ἦλϑον καταλῦσαι τὰ
ἔργα τῆς ϑηλείας.. ἣ Σαλώμη
φησί Μέχρι τίνος of ἄνϑρωποι ἀποϑαν-
οῦνται; . .. ὃ Κύριος ἀποκρίνεται
Méxpis ἂν τίκτωσιν αἱ γυ-
ναῖκες.. Καλῶς οὖν ἐποίησα μὴ τε-
κοῦσα... ἀμείβεται 6 Κύριος Πᾶσαν

φάγε βοτάνην τὴν δὲ πικ-
ρίαν ἔχουσαν μὴ payns.. ld.
18, § 92: πυνϑανομένης τῆς Σαλώμης
πότε γνωσδήσεται τὰ περὶ ὧν ἤρετο,
ἔφη 6 Κύριος Ὅταν τὸ τῆς- αἰσ-
χύνης ἔνδυμα πατήσητε, καὶ
ὅταν γένηται τὰ δύο ἕν καὶ
τὸ ἄῤῥεν μετὰ τῆς δηλείας
οὔτε ἄῤῥεν οὔτε ϑῆλυ. Clem-
ent believes, he says, that the narrative
was contained in the Gospel according
to the Egyptians.

A passage of Pseudo-Linus (De Pas-
sione Petri), for which I am indebted
to Baron Bunsen (Anal. Ante-Nic. 1. p.
31), appears to contain another version
of this saying: Dominus in mysterio
dixerat, Si non feceritis dextram sicut
sinistram et sinistram sicut dextram et
que sursum sicut deorsum et que ante
sicut retro non cognoscitis regnum Dei.

A good instance of the mixture of a
mystic explanation with a simple text
occurs in a passage of the Πίστις Σοφία,
quoted by Tischendorf, on Matt. xxiv.
22.

4 Orig In Matt. Tom. x11r.2: Ἰησοῦς
γοῦν φησί Διὰ τοὺς ἀσδϑενοῦν-
τας ἠἡσδένουν, καὶ διὰ τοὺ
πεινῶντας ἐπείνων, καὶ διὰ
τοὺς διψῶντας ἐδίψων. The
words appear to be only an adaptation
of the passage in St. Matthew.

5 Hieron. in Eph. ν. 8: in Hebraico.
-.. Evangelio legimus Dominum ad

—— 9

OF THE LORD’S WORDS AND WORKS.

449

17. ... When the Lord came to Peter and the Apostles [after His
resurrection], He said to them, Zuke hold, handle me, and see that 7 am not

fn incorporeal spirit.

And straightway they touched Him and believed,

being convinced by His flesh and by His Spirit.1
18. Christ said: Good must needs come, but blessed is he through whom

at comes.2

19. It was not through unwillingness to impart His blessings that the
Lord announced in some Gospel or other: My mystery is for me and for

the sons of my house.

We remember our Lord and Master, how he said to

us: Keep my mysteries for me and for the sons of my house.
20. The cause, therefore, of the divisions of soul that came to pass in
houses [Christ] Himself taught, as we have found in a place in the Gospel

discipulos loguentem: Zt nunguam, in-
quit, /eti sitis, nisi quum fratrem ves-
trum videritis in caritate.

In another place (adv. Pelag. 111. 2)
Jerome has preserved from the same
source aversion of Matt. xviii. 22...
(Luke xvii. 4), differing from the canon-
ical text: Si peccaverit, inquit, frater
twus in verbo ct satis tibi fecerit, septies
in die suscipe eum. Dixit illi Simon
discipulus ejus: Septies in die? Re-
spondit Dominus et dixit ei: Ltiam ego
dico tibi, usque septuagies septies. Et-
enim in prophetis quoque, postquam
uncti sunt Spiritu Sancto, inventus est
sermo peccati. The Greek text of this
passage has been given by Tischendorf
from the margin of one of his new
MSS. ( Noftitia, ete., p.58),as taken from
τὸ ᾿Ιουδαϊκόν. But the Greek does not
remove the obscurity of the last clause.
Td Ἰουδαϊκὸν ἑξῆς, ἔχει μετὰ τὸ ἐβ-
δομηκοντάκις ἑπτά: καὶ γὰρ ἐν τοῖς
προφήταις μετὰ τὸ χρισϑῆναι, αὐτὸς
ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ, εὑρίσκεται ἐν αὐτοῖς
λόγος ἁμαρτίας (ad Matt. xviii. 22).
The MS. contains other varieties of
reading. from the same source, on Matt.
iv. 5; xvi. 17; xxvi. 74, which all tend
to show the close connection of the
apocryphal and canonical texts.

Jerome again refers to the saying
given in the text in Comm. in Ezech.
VI., XVII. 7,... in Evangelio quod
juxta Ilebraos Nazarewi legere consuey-
erunt, inter maxima ponitur crimina,
qui fratris sui spiritum contristaverit.

1 Ignat.ad Smyrn.8:... ὅτε mpds
τοὺς περὶ Πέτρον ἦλϑεν, ἔφη αὐτοῖς.
Λάβετε, ψηλαφήσατέ με καὶ
ἴδετε ὅτι οὐκ εἰμὶ δαιμό-
νιον ἀσώματον. Καὶ εὐϑδὺς αὐ-
τοῦ ἥψαντο καὶ ἐπίστευσαν, κρατη-
ϑέντες τῇ σαρκὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ τῷ πνεύ-
ματι.

The same words are quoted by Jerome
from the Nazarene Gospel, De. Vir.
Illustr. 16: Ecce palpate me et videte
quia non sum demonium incorporeum.
Cf. Hieron. Jn Isai. Lib. xvii. Prol.
The chief clause occurred also in the
Doctrine of Peter: Non swum demonium
incorporeum (Orig. de Princ. Pref. 8).
Cf. Euseb. H. £. 111. 35.

2 Clem. Hom. x11.29: ἔφη Τὰ ay-
asa ἐλϑεῖν δεῖ μακάριος
δέ, φησίν, δι’ οὗ ἔρχεται. The
other sayings which occur in the Hom-
ilies (111.55): 6 πονηρός ἐστιν
ὁ πειράζων. x1x.2: Μὴ δότε
πρόφασιν τῷ πονηρῷ, ete.,
seem less likely to be genuine.

3 Clem Alex. Strom. v.10, § 64: οὐ
yap φϑονῶν, φησί, παρήγγειλεν ὃ
Κύριος ἔν τινι εὐαγγελίῳ, Muar ή-
ριον ἐμὸν ἐμοὶ καὶ τοῖς
υἱοῖς τοῦ οἴκου μου. Clem.
Hom. χιχ. 0: Μεμνήμεϑα τοῦ Κυρίου
ἡμῶν καὶ διδασκάλου ὡς ἐντελλόμενος
εἶπεν ἡμῖν Τὰ μυστήρια ἐμοὶ
καὶ. trois viots τοῦ οἴκου
μου φυλάξατε.

38*

450 ON THE APOCRYPHAL TRADITIONS

existing among the Jews in the Hebrew language, in which it is said: 1

(2)
will select to myself these things (τ ὸΞ G1) : very very excellent are those whom

my Father who is in heaven has given to me.

PT nat oo The Lord taught of those days [of His future kingdom on
earth] and said: The days will come in which vines shall spring up, each
having ten thousand stocks, and on each stock ten thousand branches, and on
each branch ten thousand shoots, and on each shoot ten thousand bunches, and
on each bunch ten thousand grapes, and each grape when pressed shall give
Jive and twenty measures of wine. And when any saint shall have seized one
bunch, another shall cry: I am a better bunch ; take ine; through me bless the
Lord. Likewise also [He said], that a grain of wheat shall produce ten
thousand ears of corn, and each grain ten pounds of fine pure flour; and
so all other fruits and seeds and each herb according to its proper nature.
And that all animals, using for food what is received from the earth, shall
live in peace and concord with one another, subject to men with all sub-
jection...... And he [Papias] added, saying: Now these things are
credible to them which believe. And when Judas the traitor believed not
and asked: How then shall such productions proceed from the Lord ?
the Lord said, They shall see who shall come to these times. Of this then
(Irenzeus adds) Isaiah prophesied, Isai. xi. 6 ff. ....

In addition to these passages, which seem to contain in a more or less

altered form traces of words of our Lord, there are
ee ga εν other fragments which are either variations of known

sayings, or (as it appears) sentences framed to suit the
character of the apocryphal work in which they were found. Of these
fragments the following are the most remarkable :

1. The Lord said: Should you be with me gathered in my bosom, and not
do my commandments, I will cast you off, and say to you, Go from me, I know
you not whence. you are, workers of iniquity? Cf. Matt. vii. 21-23.

2. The Lord saith: Ye shall be lambs in the midst of wolves. But Peter
answers Him, and saith: What, then, should the wolves tear in pieces the
lambs? Jesus said to Peter: Let not the lambs fear the wolves after they
are dead ; and do you fear not those who kill you and can do nothing to you ;

1 Eusebius, Theophania, 1v. 18 (p. it on the authority of those who had
234, Prof. Lee’s Translation). This heard St. John speak of teaching of the
quotation seems to have been un- Lord to such effect. The history of the
noticed. tradition is a sufficient explanation of

2 Papias, cf. Iren. v. 88, 8. It isevi- the corruption which it has suffered.
dent that this famous passage gives 8 (Clem. Rom.] τι. 4:... εἶπεν 6 Κύ-
only a very imperfect representation of ρος Ἐὰν ἦτε μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ συν-
the discourse of the Lord to which it nymévot ἐν τῷ κόλπῳ μου,
refers, for I think that it is certainly kal μὴ ποιῆτε τὰς ἐντο-
bused on areal discourse. It must be Ads pov, ἀποβαλῶ ὑμᾶς.
observed that the narrative isnow only καὶ ἐρῶ ὑμῖν Ὑπάγετε ἀπ᾽
preserved in a Latin translationofa ἐμοῦ, οὐκ οἷδα ὑμᾶς ποϑὲεν
free quotation from Papias, who gave ἔστε, ἐργάται avoptas.

OF THE LORD’S WORDS AND WORKS 451

but fear Him who after you are dead hath power over soul and body, to cast
them into hell-fire+ Cf. Matt. x. 16, 28; Luke xii. 4, 5.

3. In the Preaching of Peter the Lord says to the disciples after the
Resurrection: 7 chose out you twelve disciples, having judged you worthy of
me.” Cf. John vi. 70; xv. 16.

4. Peter says that the Lord said to the Apostles : Should then any one
of Israel be willing to repent, so as to believe upon God through my name, his
sins shall be forgiven him. After twelve years go out into the world, lest any
one say, “We did not hear.” 3

5, . . . According to some who alter the Gospels [Christ says]: Blessed
are they who have been persecuted through righteousness, for they shall be per-
fect ; and blessed are they who have been persecuted jor my sake, for they shall
have a place where they shall not be persecuted.* Cf. Matt. v. 10.

6. ... The Word says to us : Should any one for this reason kiss [a woman]
a second time because she pleased him [he sins]; and adds, Men must there-
fore act thus with extreme caution in the kiss [of peace] (or rather the salu-
tation), as knowing that, if perchance it should be sullied by thought, it would
place them out of the pale of eternal life.®

7... . [In the Gospel according to the Hebrews] the Saviour Himself
says: Just now my Mother, the Holy Spirit, took me by one of my hairs, and
bore me away to the great mountain, Thabor.®

1 Clem. Rom. 11. 5: Δέγει yap 6
Kipios Ἔσεσδε ὡς ἀρνία ἐν
μέσῳ λύκων. ᾿Αποκριϑεὶς δὲ 6
Πέτρος αὐτῷ λέγει Ἐὰν οὖν δια-
σπαράξωσιν οἱ λύκοι τὰ ἀρνία; Eimwey ὁ
Ἰησοῦς τῷ Πέτρῳ Μὴ φοβείσδω-
σαν τὰ ἀρνία τοὺς λύκους
μετὰ τὸ ἀποδϑδανεῖν αὐτά; καὶ
ὑμεῖς μὴ φοβεῖσδε τοὺς ἀπ-
οκτείνοντας ὑμᾶς καὶ μηδὲν
δυναμένους ποιεῖν: ἀλλὰ φο-
Betode τὸν μετὰ τὸ ἀποϑα-
νεῖν ὑμᾶς ἔχοντα ἐξουσίαν
ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος, τοῦ βα-
λεῖν εἰς γέενναν πυρός.

2Clem. Al. Strom. νι. § 48: ἐν τῷ
Πέτρου Κηρύγματι ὁ Κύριός φησι πρὸς
τοὺς μαϑητὰς μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν
᾿Ἐξελεξάμην tuas δώδεκα
μαδητάς, κρίνας ἀξίους ἐμοῦ.

3. Clem. Al. Strom. v1. § 43: διὰ τοῦτο
φησὶν ὁ Πέτρος εἰρηκέναι τὸν Κύριον
τοῖς ἀποστόλοις Ἐὴὰν μὲν οὖν
τις ϑελήσῃ τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ μετ-
ανοῆσαι διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματός
μου [τοῦ] πιστεύειν ἐπὶ τὸν
Sedv, ἀφεϑήσονται αὐτῷ αἱ

ἁμαρτίαι: μετὰ δώδεκα [8]
ἔτη ἐξέλδετε εἰς τὸν κόσ-
μον μή τις εἴπῃ οὐκ ἢκού-
σαμεν.

4 Clem. Al. Strom. 1v. § 41: ὥς τινες
τῶν μετατιδϑέντων τὰ εὐαγγέλια
Μακάριοι, φησίν, οἱ δεδιωγμ έ-

νοι ὑπὸ τῆς" δικαιοσύνης
ὅτι αὐτοὶ ἔσονται τέλειοι.

καὶ μακάριοι οἱ δεδιωγμένοι
ἕνεκα ἐμοῦ ὅτι ἕξουσι τόπον
ὅπου οὐ διωχϑήσονται.

5 Athenag. Legat. 88: . ἡμῖν λέγ-
οντος τοῦ λόγου Ἐάν τις διὰ
τοῦτο ἐκ δευτέρου καταφι-
Anon ὅτι ἢρεσεν αὐ τῷ — καὶ
ἐπιφέροντος Οὕτως οὖν ἀκριβώ-
σασϑαι τὸ φίλημα (μᾶλλον δὲ
τὸ προσκύνημα) δεῖ, ὡς εἴπου
μικρὸν τῇ διανοίᾳ mrapaso-
Awdeln, ἔξω ἡμᾶς τῆς αἰω-
νίου τιδϑέντος ζωῇς-.

6 This very singular saying, which is
evidently of Hebrew origin, from the
gender of Spirit (Ruach), is quoted sev-
eral times. Orig. Jn Joann. Tom. 11.
§6f.: Ἐὰν δὲ προσίεταί tis τὸ καϑ᾽

452

8. [Christ] said: Many shall come in my name.
And, Take heed to false prophets.' .. .

be schisms and heresies.

ON THE APOCRYPHAL TRADITIONS

... And, There shall

9, [It is said] in Scripture: The just shall fall seven times, and shall rise

again.” Cf. Luke xvii. 4.

10. It is said in the Gospel according to Luke: He to whom more is for-

given loves more; and he to whom less ts forgiven loves litile.*

vii. 47. ς

Cf. Luke

11. [Christ said] Z often desired to hear one of these words, and had not

one to tell me.*

The traditional facts relative to the Gospel history, which present the
slightest semblance of truth, are even fewer than the

2. Traditional

traditional words.
facts.

Justin Martyr gives some details

which appear to be mere deductions from the received
history, or translations of prophecy into history. Such are the notices
that the mother of the Lord was of the family of David, that the Lord

‘EBpaiovs εὐαγγέλιον, ἔνϑα αὐτὸς ὃ
Σωτήρ φησιν ἄρτι ἔλαβέ με ἡ
μήτηρ μοῦ, τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα,
ἐν μιᾷ τὼν τριχῶν μου, καὶ
ἀπήνεγκέ με εἰς τὸ ὄρος τὸ
μέγα Θαβ ὦρ. Id. Hom. in Jerem.
xv. 4: εἰ δέ τις παραδέχεται τὸ
ἄρτι ἔλαβε με, κιτ.λ. Hieron.
In Mich. vit. θ:. .. qui... crediderit
Evangelio quod secundum MHebrzos
editum nuper transtulimus, in quo ex
persona Salvatoris dicitur Modo tulit
me mater mea, Sanctus Spiritus, in
uno capillorum meorum... Id. In Isai.
xv. Il: ...in Evangelio quod juxta
Hebrzos scriptum Nazarzi lectitant,
Dominus loquitur Afodo me tulit, ete.
Id. In Ezech. xvi. 18: In Evangelio
Hebreorum quod lectitant Nazarai,
Salvator inducitur loquens Jodo me
arripuit mater mea, Spiritus Sanctus.
Cf. Fabricius, Cod. Apocr. N. T. 361, n.;
Bp. Pearson, On the Creed, p. 166.

1 Just. M. Dial, § 35, p. 253 B: εἶπε
ydp.... Eoovtat sxlouata
καὶ αἱρέσεις. This sentence seems
to have been formed from the sense of
our Lord’s words and the form of 1 Cor.
xi. 18,19. It occurs in a transitional
shape in Clem. Hom. xvi. 21. Justin,
however, quotes it as an independent
saying.

The passage quoted by Hegesippus
(Phot. Cod. 232, p. 472; Fragm. ap.

Routh, I. p. 219) seems to be only a
citation from memory of Matt. xiii. 16.
See also Tischdf. ad Matt. vii. 22.

The words quoted by Origen from
Celsus (c. Cels. vitt. 15, 16) do not
seem to make any pretensions to being
words of the Lord (Anger, p. xxvii. n).
The whole passage is extremely ob-
scure.

2[Hipp.] adv. Her. (Naass.) v. 7, p.
ex 3 i 5 / ͵

102: τοῦτο ἐστὶ τὸ εἰρημένον, φησίν,

ἐν τῇ γραφῇ Ἑπτάκις πεσεῖται

6 δίκαιος καὶ ἀναστήσεται.

5 Cypr.. Test. 111. 116: In Evangelio
cata Lucam Cui plus dimittitur, plus
diligit; et cui minus [pusillum] dimit-
tiur, modicum diligit. Cf. Iren. m1.
20, 2.

To these passages may be added the
clause appended by D, and numerous
Latin authorities, to Mark xiii. 2: καὶ
διὰ τριῶν ἡμερῶν ἄλλος ἀναστήσεται
ἄνευ χειρῶν. Compare also p. 424,
n. 3.

4‘Mareos, ap. Iren. 1. 20; 25. - - ἘΡ
τῷ εἰρηκέναι Πολλάκις ἐπεὺὼ ὑ-
Mnoa ἀκοῦσαι ἕνα τῶν λύ-
γων τούτων καὶ οὐκ ἔσχον
τὸν ἐροῦντα. I think that ἐπε-
ύμησα was an early corruption for
ἐπεϑύμησαν, and that the reference is
to Matt. xiii. 17. Ἐπεϑύμησα seems to
be inconsistent with the context.

OF TIE LORD’S WORDS AND WORKS.

was born in a cave, that the wise men came from Arabia, that the Lord's
miracles were attributed to magic, that the ass which the
disciples brought for Him was found tied toa vine. Of
a similar kind are the statements made by Celsus, that the person of the
Lord was “little and ill-favored (δυσειδές) and ignoble,” and that His
mother wrought with her own hands ;* and those which occur in the
Clementines, that John the Baptist (like the Moon) had thirty diset-
ples, as our Lord (the Sun) had twelve,® and that the ministry of Christ
began at the spring solstice* Some traditions had a wider currency,
though they may have had a like origin, as that the Baptism was ac-
companied by the appearance of a bright fire or light, and the words,
“Thou art my Son: This day have I begotten Thee.’*® One, which appears
in many different forms, represents our Lord as commanding His disci-
ples to remain for twelve years at Jerusalem;® another relates that
He remained with them eighteen months after the Resurrection,? and
gave fresh revelations which were preserved in esoteric books. ‘The ten-
dency to exaggeration appears in the story of the death of Judas given
on the authority of Papias ; and, since it is as natural to define as to ex-
aggerate, names were affixed to many of the chief persons who are name-
less in the Gospel history. Of the domestic life of the Lord one trait
only, except such as are obviously fabulous,? has been preserved, which
from its simplicity may be true, where Justin says that “ ploughs and
yokes were preserved, which Christ wrought while among men.” 19 Some
details are added to narratives of the Gospels, as in the notice that “ the
man with a withered hand” was a mason, and that a ‘ vast lintel of the
Temple” was shattered by the earthquake at the Cru-
cifixion; but the history of the appearance of the Lord
to St. James is the only independent record of a fact known to have
taken place which is not mentioned in the Gospels.¥

Yet cf. Luc. i. 27.

t. Cor. xv. 7.

1 Just. M. Dial. 48, 78, 69.

2 Cels. ap. Orig. c. Cels. νι. 75; 1. 28.

8 Clem. Hom. τι. 28.

4 Clem. Hom. τ. 6 f.

5 Cf. p. 435, n. 2; p. 488.

6 Clem. Al. Strom. vi. § 48:... μετὰ
δώδεκα ἔτη ἐξέλϑετε εἰς τὸν κόσμον
μὴ τὶς εἴπῃ Οὐκ ἠκούσαμεν. Cf. Apol-
Jon. ap. Euseb. H. Ε.ν. 18 (ὡς ἐκ παρα-
δόσεωΞ5). The Πίστις Σοφία (Anger, p.
xliii.) gives eleven (7) years.

7 Valentiniani ap. Iren. 1. 3, 2.

8 Examples of this appear in the Ver-
sions of the Gospels. Thus the two
thieves are called in Matt. xxvii. 38,
89, Zoatham and Camma,; in Mark xv.
27, Zoathan and Chammatha, by Colb.
Par.; and in Luke xxiii. 32, Joathas
and Maggatras, by Rhedig. In Luke

xxiv 13, the name Emmaus by a va-
riety of changes is made to serve as the
name of one of the disciples.

Compare also Hom. Clem. 11. 19,
Ἰούστα τις ἐν ἡμῖν ἐστὶν Συροφοινίκισ-
oa, Κ΄ T. A. (Matt. xv. 22). Even the
Rich man in Luke (xvi. 19) receives a
name: Nineve (Sahid. and Schol. Gr.).

9 The famous story of the Alphabet
may deserve notice from the early date
at which it was current: Iren. 1. 20, 1.
Cf. Thilo, Cod. Apocr. p. 290 ff. Other
early legends occur in Justin, Gnost.
ap. [Hippol.] Philos. v.*p. 146.

10 Just. M. Dial. c. 88.

11 All these examples are taken from
the Gospel according to the Hebrews,
Cf. pp. 435 f.

One of the early additions to the last

454 ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS.

AUP LP Naat oC

ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS.
Καπηλεύοντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ. ---- 2 Cor. 11. 17.

Tue acts and sayings attributed to the Lord, which have been preserved
elsewhere than by the Evangelists, have been already noticed : it still re-
mains for us to collect the materials which illustrate the general character
and contents of those early writings which for a time partially occupied
the place or disputed the claims of the canonical Gospels. As might have
been anticipated, these “ apocryphal Gospels ” present two great types, one
Judaizing, the other Pauline. The former type is preserved in several spe-
cific forms which correspond to differences in the Judaizing sects — The
Gospel according to the Hebrews (i), The Ebionite Gospel (ii), The Clemen-
tine Gospel (iii) : the latter in The Gospel of Marcion (iv). It would carry
us away from our immediate subject to discuss how far the first three
Gospels are to be regarded as having a distinct existence as written rec-
ords, but I cannot but believe that too little weight is allowed ordinarily to
the power of oral tradition to mould and propagate modified forms of
isolated passages. ‘The fragments themselves will show on what a narrow
basis many ingenious theories have been built. One point, however, seems
beyond all reasonable doubt, that the synoptic Gospels give a simpler and
therefore an earlier form of the common narratives. This follows at once
from. a general view of the fragments ; and argurient of detail would be
of little avail against a critic who could maintain that the Gospel according
to the Hebrews or the Gospel of Marcion are respectively the originals of
St. Matthew and St. Luke.

I. THe GosPpEL ACCORDING TO THE HEBREWS (τὸ kad’ ‘EBpatous
εὐαγγέλιον. Clem. Alex.; Orig. Evangelium secundum (juxta) Hebrzos.
Hieron. ).

Several passages of this Gospel have been already quoted, for which a
simple reference is sufficient: the remaining fragments are given at length.

1. Cf. p. 449, num. 17.
3. Cf. p. 451, num i.
5. Cf. p. 448, num. 16.

chapter of St. Mark deserves notice
from its singularity. It is preserved
by Jerome: In quibusdam exemplari-
bus et maxifne in Grecis codicibus
juxta Marcum in fine ejus Evangelii
scribitur: Postea cum occubuissent un-
decim, apparuit eis Jesus et exprobravit
incredulitatem et duritiam cordis eo-
rum, quia his qui viderant eum resur-

2. Cf. p. 447, num. 7.
4, Cf. p. 448, n. 5.
6. Cf. p. 449, num. 20.

gentem non crediderunt (Mare. xvi. 14).
Et illi satisfaciebant dicentes: Seculum
istud iniquitatis et incredulitatis sub-
stantia est (one MS. sub Satana est),
quz non sinit per immundos spiritus
veram Dei apprehendi virtutem: id-
circo jam nunc revela justitiam tuam
(Adv. Pelag. τι. § 15).

ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 455

7. The Gospel contained a history of “a woman who was accused of
many sins before the Lord,” which was related also by Papias.'

8. It is written in a Gospel, which is styled “ according to the He-
brews,” if any pleases to receive it, not as an authority, but as an illustra-
tion of the subject before us. Another rich man said to Him, Master, what
good thing shall I do to tive? He said to him, Fulfil the law and the prophets.
He answered Him, I have fulfilled them. He said to him, Go, sell all that thou
possessest, and distribute to the poor, and come, follow me. But the rich man be-
gan to scratch his head, and it did not please him. And the Lord said to him,
How sayest thou, I have fulfilled the law and the prophets, since it is written
in the law, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself ; and lo! many of thy breth-
ren, sons of Abraham, are clothed in filth, dying of hunger ; and thy house is
full of many goods, and nothing at all goes out of it tothem? And He turned
and said to Simon His disciple, who was sitting by Him, Simon, son of Jonas.
it is easier for a camel to enter the eye of a needle than for a rich man {to enter|
into the kingdom of heaven.”

9. The Gospel entitled “according to the Hebrews,” which I lately
translated into Greek and Latin, and which Origen often quotes, contains
the following narrative after the Resurrection. Now the Lord, when He
had given the cloth to the servant of the priest, went to James and appeared to
him. For James had taken an oath that he would not eat bread from that
hour on which he had drunk the cup of the Lord, till he saw Him risen from
the dead. Again, a little afterwards, the Lord says, Bring a table and
bread. Immediately, it is added, He took bread, and blessed, and brake, and
gave it to James the Just, and said to him, My brother, eat thy bread, for the
Son of Man has risen from the dead.*

10. In the Gospel according to the Hebrews . . . there is the following
passage : So, the mother of the Lord and His brethren said to Him: John the
Baptist is baptizing for the remission of sins; let us go and be baptized by

1 Euseb. HW. FE. 111. 89: ἐκτέϑειται δὲ 5 Hieron. de Vir. Illustr. 11.: Evan-

[ὁ Παπίας] καὶ ἄλλην ἱστορίαν περὶ
γυναικὸς ἐπὶ πολλαῖς ἁμαρτίαις διαβ-
ληϑείσης (de muliere adultera, Ruf.)
ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου, ἣν τὸ Ka ‘EBpalous
εὐαγγέλιον περιέχει. There is no
reason to suppose that Papias derived
the history from the Hebrew Gospel,
and not from tradition. The narrative
may (as Rufinus implies) be the same as
the pericope, John viii. 1-11. Cf. Fa-
bricius, Cod. Apocr. N. T. p. 356 n.

2 This passage is given in the Latin
version (not by Rufinus. Cf. Huet, Ovi-
geniana, 111. 8, 12) of Origen’s commen-
tary on St. Matthew (Tom. xvr. § 14).
The passage is not found in any Greek
MS. The text is printed by Tischen-
tlorf on Matt. xix. 15.

gelium quoque quod appellatur secun-
dum Hebreos, et ame nuper in Grecum
Latinumque sermonem translatum est,
quo et Origenes Sape utitur, post resur-
rectionem Salvatoris refert: Dominus
autem cum dedisset sindonem servo sa-
cerdotis, ivit ad Jacobum et apparuit
ei. Juraverat enim Jacobus se non
comesturum panem ab illa hora qua
biberat calicem Domini, donec videret
eum resurgentem a dormientibus (Gr.
ἀναστάντα ἐκ νεκρῶν) Rursusque
post paullulum: Afferte, ait Dominus,
mensam et panem. Statimque additur’
Tulit panem et benedixit ac fregit et
dedit Jacobo justo, et dixit ei: Frater
mi, comede panem tuum, quia resur-
revit Filius hominis a dormientibus.

456 ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS.

him. But He saidto them: What sin have I committed that I should go and.
be baptized by him? unless perchance this very word which I have spoken is
[a sin of | ignorance.'

11. According to the Gospel written im Hebrew which the Nazarenes
used (it is said): The Holy Spirit with full stream shall come down upon
Him (the branch of Jesse) . . . . Moreover, in the Gospel of which I made
mention above, we find this written: Now it came to pass when the Lord
had come up out of the water, the Holy Spirit with full stream came down and
rested upon Him, and said to Him: My Son, in all the prophets I was wait-
ing for Thee, that thou shouldest come. and I might rest in Thee. For Thou

art my rest; Thou art my Firstborn Son, who reignest forever.?
12. Bethlehem of Judea... this is an error of the copyist: for I think
that the word given originally by the Evangelist, as we read in the He-

brew, was Judah, not Judea?

13. In the Gospel entitled accordiny to the Hebrews for panis supersub-
stantialis (of the Latin version, Matt. vi. 11), I found mahar, which

means for the morrow.*

14. In the Gospel which the Nazarenes and Ebionites use, which I

1 Hieron. adv. Pelag. 111. 2: In Evan-
gelio juxta Hebreos, quod Chaldaico
quidem Syroque sermone sed Hebraicis
litteris scriptum est, quo utuntur usque
hodie Nazareni secundum Apostolos,
sive, ut plerique autumant, juxta Mat-
theum,quod et in Cesariensi habetur
bibliotheca, narrat historia: Ecce Ma-
ter Domini et fratres ejus dicebant ei:
Joannes Baptista baptizat in remissi-
onem peccatorum ; eamus εἴ baptizemur
abeo. Dixit autem eis; Quid pecexvi
ut vadam et baptizer ab e0? nisi forte
hoc ipsum quod αἰαὶ ignorantia est. Et
in eodem volumine: Si peccaverit, in-
quit, frater tuus in verbo, ete. (cf. p.
427 n.).

This narrative was found also in the
Preaching of Paul (or of Peter, or of
Peter and Paul): . in quo libro
contra omnes scripturas et de peccato
proprio confitentem invenies Christum,
qui solus omnino nihil deliquit, et ad
accipiendum Joannis baptisma pene
invitum a matre sua Maria esse com-
pulsum. Item cum baptizaretur ignem
super aquam esse visum, quod in Evan-
gelio nullo est scriptum . . . (Auct. De
Rebaptismate, ¢. XV11.).

I have not noticed any passage in
which the mention of a light at the

Baptism is referred to the Gospel ae-
cording to the Hebrews, though the cir-
cumstance was described in the Ebion-
ite Gospel.

2 Hieron. Comm. in Isai. IV. ΧΙ. 2:
... Juxta Evangelium quod Hebreo
sermone conscriptum legunt Nazarzi:
Descendit super eum omnis fons Spirit-
us Sancti . Porro in Evangelio,
cujus supra fecimus mentionem, hee
scripta reperimus: Factum est autem
cum ascendisset Dominus de aqua,
descendit fons omnis Spiritus Sancti
et requievit super eum et dixit illi: Filt
mi, in omnibus prophetis expectabam
te, ut venires et requiescerem in fe. Tu
es enim requies mea; tues filius meus
primogenitus qui regnas in sempi-
ternum.

3 Hieron. ad Matt. 11. 5: Bethlehem
Judee ... Librariorum hic error est.
Putamus enim ab Evangelista primum
editum, sicut in ipso Hebraico legimus,
Jude non Judee.

4 Hieron. ad Matt. v1.11: In Evan.
gelio quod appellatur secundum He-
breos pro supersubstantiali pane re
peri Mahar, quod dicitur crastinum;
ut sit sensus: Panem nostrum crasté
num (id est futurum) da nobis hodie.

ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 457

lately translated from the Hebrew into Greek, and which is called by very
many the original Gospel of Matthew, the man with the withered hand is
described as a mason, who sought the help (of Christ) with words to this
effect : Z was a mason, seeking a livelihood by the lubor of my hands. [ pray
Thee, Jesus, to restore to me my health, that I may not beg my bread in dis-
grace}

15. In the Gospel used by the Nazarenes I find the son of Jehoida for
the son of Barachias.”

16. The name Barabbas is interpreted in the Gospel styled according to
the Hebrews as Son of their master®...

17. In the Gospel of which I have often made mention, we read that
a lintel of the Temple of vast size was broken asunder.*

Il. Tur Gosret OF THE EBIONITEs.

Epiphanius speaks of the Nazarenes as “having the Gospel according
to Matthew in a most complete form, in Hebrew,” though he immediately
adds that he does not know whether “ they removed the genealogies from
Abraham to Christ.”® In contrast with this statement he says that the
Ebionites had a Gospel “ called the Gospel according to Matthew, not
entire and perfectly complete, but falsified and mutilated, which they call

1 Hieron. ad Matt. x11. 13: In Evan-
gelio quo utuutur Nazareni et Ebion-
itz, quod nuper in Grecum de Hebreo
sermone transtulimus, et quod yocatur
a plerisque Matthzi authenticum, homo
iste qui aridam habet manum, ca#men-
tarius scribitur, istiusmodi vocibus
auxilium precans: Cementarius eram,
manibus victum queritans. Precor te,
Jesu, ut mihi restituas sanitatem ne
turpitur mendicem cibos.

2 Hieron. ad Matt. xxii. 35: In
Evangelio quo utuntur Nazareni pro
jilio Barachie, filum Joiade reperimus
scriptum.

3 Hieron. ad Matt. xxvit. 16: Iste
(Barabbas) in Evangelio quod scribitur
jucta Hebreos, filius magistri eorum
interpretatur. .

4 Hieron. ad Matt. xxvii. 51: In
Evangelio cujus sepe facimus menti-
onem, superliminare templi infinite
magnitudinis fractum esse atque divi-
sum legimus. Cf. Lp. ad Hedib. vin.
1: In Evangelio autem quod Hebraicis
litteris scriptum est, legimus, non velum
templi scissum sed superliminare tem-
pli mire magnitudinis corruisse. 1 see

He then gives several passages professedly taken

no reason for referring the quotation
given from Hegesippus (cf. p. 450, 7 ) to
the Gospel according to the Hebrews,
though he used it: Euseb. H. 2. Iv.
22 (cf. Hist. of N. T. Canon, pp. 283,
234).

So again Jerome refers to his He-
brew friends and not to a Hebrew Gos-
pel in Comm. in Hab. 11. 3 (audivi He-
breum .. . disserere}; Comm. in Isai.
ΧΙ. 1 (eruditi Hebreorum), and no con-
elusion can be drawn from those pas-
sages as tothe contents of the Gospel
according to the Hebrews.

5 Epiph. Her. xx1x. 9, p.124: ἔχουσι
δὲ τὸ κατὰ Ματϑαῖον εὐαγγέλιον πλη-
ρέστατον Ἑ βραϊστί. παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς γὰρ
σαφῶς τοῦτο, Kadws ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἐγράφη
Ἑ βραϊκοῖς γράμμασιν ἔτι σώζεται.
οὐκ οἶδα δὲ εἰ καὶ τὰς γενεαλογίας τὰς
ἀπὸ τοῦ ᾿Αβραὰμ ἄχρι Χριστοῦ περι-
εἴλον.

γοῦν παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς εὐαγγελίῳ κατὰ Ματ-
ϑαῖον ὀνομαζομένῳ, οὐχ ὅλῳ δὲ πλη-
ρεστάτῳ, ἀλλὰ νενοϑευμένῳ καὶ
ἠκρωτηριασμένῳ, Ἑ βραϊκὸν δὲ τοῦτο
καλοῦσιν, ἐμφέρεται, κ. τ. A.

458 ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS.

from this Gospel, but they present so many inconsistencies that it is evi-
dent that they cannot have belonged originally to the same book. One
fragment contains a narrative of the Baptism, with the addition of apoc-
ryphal details, which gained a wide currency at a very early time. An-
other gives a saying of the Lord which may have been included in the
original Ebionite Gospel. Of the remaining pieces one belongs to a writ-
ing like the Clementines, in which the simple form of history was ex-
changed for a didactic form. It is possible that this incongruous element
had been incorporated in the Gospel in the time of Epiphanius; or he
may have derived his information from different sources. It is only neces-
sary to notice that the fragments were not of the same origin.

1..[In the Ebionite Gospel] the following passage occurs: There
came a man by name Jesus, and He was about thirty years old, who
chose us. And when He came to Capernaum He entered into the house
of Simon, who was surnamed Peter, and opened -his mouth and said:
As I passed along the lake of Tiberias, I chose John and James, sons of
Zebedee, and Simon and Andrew, and Thaddeus, and Simon Zelotes,
and Judas Iscariot; and thee, Matthew, I called as thou wert sitting at
the receipt of custom, and thou followedst me. You, then, I wish to be
twelve apostles, for a testimony to Israel.

2. And John came baptizing, and Pharisees went out to him and were
baptized, and all Jerusalem. And John had raiment of camels’ hair, and
a girdle of skin about his loins; and his food (the Gospel says) “‘ was
wild honey, the taste of which was the taste of manna, like a honey-cake
steeped in oil,” —that they may convert the word of truth into a lie, and
put “ honey-cakes” (ἐγκρίδας) for “locusts ” (ἀκρίδας) 2

3. The beginning of their Gospel is this: It came to pass in the days
of Herod, king of Judwa, that John came baptizing, with a baptism of
repentance, in the river Jordan, who was said to be of the race of Aaron
the priest, a son of Zachariah and Elizabeth, and all went out to him.

1 Epiph. Her. 13, p.137: ἐν τῷ παρ᾽
αὐτοῖς εὐαγγελίῳ... ἐμφέρεται ὅτι
ἐγένετό τις ἀνὴρ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦς, καὶ
αὐτὸς ὡς ἐτῶν τριάκοντα, ὃς ἐξελέξατο
ἡμᾶς. καὶ ἐλδὼν εἰς Καφαρναοὺμ. εἰσ-
ἤλδεν εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν Σίμωνος τοῦ ἐπικ-
ληϑέντος Πέτρου, καὶ ἀνοίξας τὸ στόμα
αὐτοῦ εἶπε Παρερχόμενος παρὰ τὴν
λίμνην Τιβηριάδος ἐξελεξάμην ᾿Ιωάν-
νὴν καὶ ᾿Ιάκωβον υἱοὺς Ζεβεδαίου καὶ
Σίμωνα τὸν Ζηλωτήν καὶ ᾿Ιούδαν τὸν
Ἰσκαριώτην' καί σε τὸν Ματϑαῖον
καδεζόμενον ἐπὶ τοῦ τελωνίου ἐκά-
λεσα καὶ NKoAovsnods por ὑμᾶς οὖν
βούλομαι εἶναι δεκαδύο ἀποστόλους εἰς

3 Epiph. JZ. 6.

μαρτύριον τοῦ Ἰσραήλ. καὶ ἐγένετο
Ἰωάννης, K. τ. A.

2 Epiph. . ς.: καὶ ἐγένετο ᾿Ιωάννης
βαπτίζων καὶ ἐξῆλϑον πρὸς αὐτὸν Φαρ-
toaior καὶ ἐβαπτίσϑησαν καὶ πᾶσα ‘lep-
οσόλυμα. καὶ εἶχεν ὃ ᾿Ιωάννης ἔνδυμα
ἀπὸ τριχῶν καμήλου καὶ ζώνην δερ-
ματίνην περὶ τὴν ὀσφὺν αὐτοῦ, καὶ τὸ
βρῶμα αὐτοῦ, φησί, μέλι ἄγριον, οὗ H
γεῦσις ἦν τοῦ μάννα, ws ἐγκρὶς ἐν
ἐλαίῳ, ἵνα δῆϑεν μεταστρέψωσι τὸν
τῆς ἀληϑείας λόγον εἰς ψεῦδος καὶ
ἀντὶ ἀκρίδων ποιήσωσιν ἐἔγκρίδας ἐν
μέλιτι. The variation shows that the
Gospel was in Greek.

This passage has apparently been interpolated from St. Luke

(Zacharias, Elizabeth). In the following chapter Epiphanius again quotes the

ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 459

4. And after a long interval it adds, that “when the people were bap-
tized, Jesus also came and was baptized by John. And when He came
up from the water, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Holy Spirit
of God in the form of a dove, which came down and came upon him.!
And a voice came from heaven, saying: Thou art my beloved Son; in
Thee I am well pleased. And again: To-day have I begotten Thee.*
And immediately a great light shone round about the place ;* and John,
when he saw it (the narrative continues), says to Jesus: Who art thou,
Lord? And again a voice came from heaven to him [John]; This is my
beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And then (it continues) John
fell down before Him, and said: I beseech thee, Lord, do thou baptize
me. But he forbade him, saying, Suffer it: for thus it is becoming that

all things be fulfiled.” +

beginning of the Gospel. A comparison of the two quotations illustrates the
carelessness of Epiphanius and the manner in which the text was altered.

13: ἐγένετο ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις Ἡρώδου c.14: ἐγένετο ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις Ἡρώδου

τοῦ βασιλέως τῆς ᾿Ιουδαίας
|

ἦλϑεν Ἰωάννης

βαπτίζων βάπτισμα μετονοίας

ἐν τῷ ᾿Ιορδάνῃ ποταμῷ,

ὃς ἐλέγετο εἶναι ex γένους ᾿Ααρὼν

τοῦ ἀρχιερέως καὶ ἐξήρχοντο πρὸς
αὐτὸν πάντες.

βασιλέως τῆς Ιουδαίας

ἐπὶ ἀρχιερέως Καϊάφα

HAE τις Ἰωάννης ὀνόματι
βαπτίζων βάπτισμα μετανοίας
ἐν τῷ ποταμῷ ᾿Ιορδάνῃ,

καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς.

The insertion of ποταμῷ is worthy of notice. The word is doubtful in Matt.

iii. 6, but certain in Mark i. 5.

1 The difference of this clause from
the cofresponding clause in the Canon-
ical Gospel is full of meaning. There
the Spirit descends (καταβαῖνον) as a
Dove; here it is as a Dove which came
down (KateASovons).

2 These words are also quoted as used
at the Baptism by Justin and Hilary;
and are actually given as part of the
text in Luke iii. 22, in the Codex Berne
(D),and some Latin copies.

8 This detail is added in two Latin
MSS. ( Vercell. a. Sengerm, gi): Et cum
baptizaretur (Jesus gi) lumen ingens
(magnum g') circumfulsit (fulgebat gi)
de aqua, ita ut timerent omnes qui ad-
venerant (qui congregatierant gi). Cf.
Just. M. Dial. 88; Sibyll. Orac. vit.
82—84.

It is worthy of remark that in an
addition which occurs in another Latin
MS. (Bobb. k), a miraculous (7) light is

connected with the resurrection: Mark
xvi. 4, Subito autem ad horam tertiam
tenebre diei (3 d. ten.) facte sunt per
totum orbem terra, et descenderunt de
celis angeli, et surgentes] in claritate
visi Dei simul ascenderunt cum eo, et
continuo lux facta est.

4 Epiph. Her. xxx. 13, p. 188: καὶ
μετὰ τὸ εἰπεῖν πολλὰ ἐπιφέρει ὅτι TOD
λαοῦ βαπτισϑέντος ἦλϑε καὶ Ἰησοῦς
καὶ ἐβαπτίσϑη ὑπὸ τοῦ Ἰωάννου. καὶ
ὡς ἀνῆλϑεν ἀπὸ τοῦ ὕδατος ἠνοίγησαν
οἱ οὐρανοὶ καὶ εἶδε τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ ϑεοῦ
τὸ ἅγιον ἐν εἴδει περιστερᾶς κατελ-
δούσης καὶ εἰσελϑούσης εἰς αὐτόν" καὶ
φωνὴ ἐγένετο ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ λέγουσα,
Σύ μου εἶ ὃ υἱὸς ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν σοὶ ηὐδό-
κησα' καὶ πάλιν Ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγέννη-
κά σε. Καὶ εὐθὺς περιέλαμψε τὸν τόπον
φῶς μέγα. ὃν (1. ὃ) ἰδών, φησίν, ὁ ᾿Ιωάν-
yns λέγει αὐτῷ Sv, τίς εἶ Κύριε; καὶ πά-
λιν φωνὴ ἔξ οὐρανοῦ πρὸς αὐτόν, Ob-

460 ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS.

5. Cf. p. 447, No. 8.

6. [In the account of the Last Supper they add the interrogative and
the word flesh], saying: Have I earnestly desired to eat this flesh, the
Passover, with you 7} ;

7. They say, according to their absurd argument: Jt 15 sufficient for
the disciple to be us his Master.”

11. THe Gosret oF THE CLEMENTINE HOMILIES.

The numerous quotations which occur in the Clementine Homilies are
generally allowed to furnish another form of the Ebionite Gospel. It
may, however, be very fairly questioned whether the peculiarities which
these quotations exhibit may not be more properly referred to oral tradi-
tion or to errors of memory than to any one written source. With one or
two exceptions, the Homilies contain no sayings of the Lord which are
not either mere duplicates of passages in the Gospels or deductions which
follow directly from them. ‘The subjoined list contains, I believe, a
complete list of the passages quoted in the Homilies. The quotations
marked by Italics are verbal in the main; the remainder generally give
the sense of the corresponding passage of the canonical Gospel in other
words.’

Matt. ν. 8. . . Cf. Hom. xv. 10: 6 διδάσκαλος ἡμῶν πιστοὺς πένητας

ἐμακάρισεν.

δ. ταν . Cf. Hom. xvii. 7: ἵνα of καθαροὶ τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτὸν ἰδεῖν
δυνηνῶσιν.

νει Ἐὰν . Hom. iii. 51: οὐκ ἦλϑον κ. τ. ν.

XIV, Bae ev LS:
VASANB DA ON es κα

Hom. iti. 51: 6 οὐ ρ. ----παρελ. ἰῶτα Ev —T. νόμου.

Hom. iii. 56: μὴ ὑμόσητε τὸν odp. — ὑποπόδ. τ. 7.
Qu. ἐ.

Hom. iii. 55; xix. 2: ἔστω bu. τὸ val vat, (καὶ) τὸ od
οὔ: τὸ yap 7. — πον. ἐ. Cf. 2 Cor. i. 17.

ν sO=4 i oe ce (ΠΟ τ ν: 5.

ν 44, Pee ek ΉΡΙΠΙΣ ik 9:

Vic esilinde tote comers Aleks

τός ἐστιν ὃ vids μου 6 ἀγαπητός, ἐφ᾽
ὃν ηὐδόκησα. Καὶ τότε, φησίν, 6
3 / \ 3 ~ αν, /

Iwavyns προσπεσὼν αὐτῷ ἔλεγε Δεο-

, » if € \
pat σου Κύριε, σύ με βάπτισον: ὃ δὲ
ἐκῷλυεν αὐτῷ λέγων “Apes, ὅτι οὕτως
ἐστὶ πρέπον πληρωϑῆναι πάντα.

1 Epiph. Her. xxx. 22, p. 146: ἐποίη-
gay... αὐτὸν λέγοντα Μὴ ἐπιϑυ-
μίᾳ ἐπεδύμησα κρέας τοῦτο
τὸ Πάσχα᾽ φαγεῖν wed ὑμῶν.
Immediately below Epiphanius quotes

\ 2 / > /
the passage: Μὴ ἐπιῶυμίᾳ emeduunoa
τοῦτο τὸ Πάσχα κρέας φαγεῖν med
ὑμῶν. The true reading was probably
κρέας τοῦτο, or τοῦτο τὸ κρέας.

2 Epiph. Her. xxx. 26, p. 151; φασὶ,
yap κατὰ Toy ἐκείνων ληρώδη λόγον
᾿Αρκετὸν τῷ μαϑητῇ εἶναι ὡς ὁ διδάσ-
καλος. If it were not that Epiphanius
quotes the passage again in the same
form (§ 80, p. 160), it would seem that
the change (εἶναι for ἵνα γένηται) was
simply an error of his.

3 The Clementine quotations are
printed in a convenient form by Cred-
ner, Beitrage, 1. pp. 284 ff.

Ihave discussed the quotations of
Justin M. elsewhere: J/ist. of N. 17.
Canon, pp. 188 ff.

‘ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS.

Matt. v. 45.

vi. 6.
Vi, o2t 8:

vi. 13.
Vil. 2.
Vil. 7.
vii. 9-11.

alae pees

vik 13, 14.
vii. 15, 16.

i.)

viii. 11.

viii. 5-11. .

Vili. 24.
Vili. 31.
> ee ee

>: el (4 eee
So 71.1--15;
x. 28.
x. 29, 30
x. 34, 35
ἘΠ: Li.
Ki, 25.
ἘΠῚ Pe
xi. 28

xil. 26.

Xii. 34.
ΧΙ 41.
xii. 42.

ΧΙ. 17.
xili. 39.
Xili. 52.
xv. 13.

xvi. 13 ff. .

. Hom. ili. 57.

401

Ch si, 56: πΥΠ Ὁ,

. Hom. iii. 55.
. Hom. iii. 55; οἷδεν γάρ ----Ὡἃπ. πρὶν αὐτὸν ἀξιώ:

σητε.

. Hom. xix. 2: ῥ. -ττ τ. πον.

“ΟἿ Hom. xviii. 16.

. Hom, iii. 52: (yr. καὶ εὑρίσκετε.
. Hom. iii. 56: τίνα αἰτήσει vi. ἄρτον --- ἢ καὶ ixs.—

6 π. b. ὃ ovpdvios —Tois αἰτουμένοις αὐτὸν καὶ

τοῖς ποιοῦσιν τὸ ϑέλημα αὐτοῦ.

. Cf. Hom. xii. 839 ; ὃ ϑέλει ἑαυτῷ ϑέλει καὶ τῷ πλησίον.

Cf. vii. 4.

. Hom. xviii. 17.
. Hom. vii. 15, 16.
ΓΕ Hom: wis Δ:

, / , / >
τί με λέγεις,κ ύριε, κύριε, Kal οὐ
ποιεῖς ἃ λέγω.

. Hom. viii. 4.

Ὁ Porn. ne 21.

. Cf Hom: six. 14:
. Cf Hom. xix. 14.

. Hom iii. 7: ἀξ. ἐ. ὃ épy. τοῦ μισδοῦ αὐτοῦ.

. Hom. iii. 56: 6 Θεὸς ἔλεος ϑέλει καὶ οὐ ϑυσίαν, ἐπιγνω-

σιν αὐτοῦ καὶ οὐχ ὁλοκαυτώματα (Hos. vi. 6).

Cf. Luke
ἘΠ 2 Dim: ve ts.

Cf. Hom. iii. 30, 31.

, HOM vil. 5:

> Cf. Hom. xii::31.
. CY, Home ἘΠ. Ὁ,
, Ch Hout. τι, 17.

. Hom. viii. 6: fou. σ. πάτερ τοῦ οὐρ. καὶ τ. γ. ὅτι ἐκ.

. Hom. iii.

. Hom. xix.2: εἰ 6 Σ.--- π. οὖν

* Hom. xix. 7:

τ. ἃ. σ. πρεσβυτέρων καὶ --- νηπ.
Cf. Hom. xvii. 5; xviii. 15.

SnAd Covey.

. Hom. xvii. 4; xviii. 4: οὐδεὶς ἔγνω τὸν πατέρα εἰ μὴ

6 υἱὸς ὡς οὐδὲ Toy υἱόν τις Oldev εἰ μὴ ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ois
ἂν βούληται 6 vids ἀποκαλύψαι.

52: δεῦτε --- κοπιῶντεϑ.

αὐτοῦ στήκῃ ἣ
βασιλεία;

ἐπ π. K. OT. A.

TRELOME. Mie.

Hom. xi 33: Bac. v. ἐγερϑ. μ. τ. γ. --- ἀπὸ τ. π. --΄

Σολ. ὧδε καὶ οὐ πιστεύετε.

. Hom. iii. 53.

~ CL Hom. xix. 9.

. Cf. Hom. viii. 7.

. Hom. iii. 52: πᾶσα φ. --- ὃ π. ὁ οὐρ. exp.
. Hom. xvii. 18 f.

39*

462 ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS.

Matt. xvii. 5... Hom. xvii. 53: οὗτος ἐστίν μου ὃ vids ὁ ἀγαπητὸς εἰς
ὃν εὐδόκησα: τούτου ἀκούετε. :

xvii. 20. . . . Cf. Hom. xi. 16: διὰ πίστεως... . τὰ ὄρεσιν ἐοικότα.
eee μεϑίστησι πάϑη.

WH TOS os TAO VE ἣν

xviii. 17. . + . Hom. xii. 29. Cf. p. 449. num. 18. .

Six 8) 4.6.02 Comrie |

1x. 16=18. (vos ΠῸῈ Homnxvail.3: :

xx. 16; xxil, 14. Hom. vill. 4: πολλ. KA. OA. δὲ ἐκλ.

xxi ἘΞῚ4. Cr, Home vin 99.

ἘΣ BS. sa. Ch. om) Am 54.

xxil.382. . . . Hom. iii. 55: οὐκ ἔστιν &. v. ἀλλὰ ¢

AKI. 2 τος 3° 5) OM. Mt. 18. ᾿

$l WS. ΟΣ Hom xv ΤΟ] |

XXill. 25, 26. . Hom. xi. 29: οὐαὶ 6. yp. καὶ φ. 6.6. kK. τ. ποτ. ---- τὸ
ἐξ. ἐσ. δὲ γέμει ῥύπους.

Χχιν, 2. 54.. κα OM. 15:

xxiv. 45-51. . . Hom iii 60; 64.

xxv. 21. . . . Hom iii. 65: εὖ $.— more.

ΧΧν. θ΄. ἢν 3 Home ΠΟΙ.

ΧΧΥ ee ae Homes ΙΧ x23:

ἘΧΎΘΗ evi

In addition to these passages there are others which present parallels
with the remaining canonical Gospels.

Mark iv. 34. . . Hom. xix. 20: διὸ καὶ τοῖς αὑτοῦ μαϑηταῖς κατ᾽ ἰδίαν
éméAve τῆς τῶν οὐρανῶν βασιλείας τὰ μυστήρια.

vii. 26. . . . Hom. ii 19: Συροφοινίκισσα.

xii. 29. » »« -« Poni. m..57. (Deut.cvi. 4):

Luke viii. 18, =. Cf. Hom, xviii. 16 (κἂν δοκῇ ἔχειν).

ΧΙ ΒΤ το rhe ROMINA Ψ:

es τς ars ΚΟΥ ἜΠΟΤΗΙ: IK Ὁ

xvi 1Ξ8. τ᾿ ΠΟΤ: ΧΥΠ 6:

xix. 1-10. . . ΑΕ Hom. ii. ‘63.

RRINCSS, a ον ΕΙΘΤ; ΧΙ ἢ;

John 11. ὅ, . - Hom. xi. 20.

is LAL 5+ ΠΟΙ ΧΙ ee:

x.9. . . . . Hom. iii. 52: ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ πύλη τῆς ζωῆς.

x.27. . . . . Hom. iii. 52: τὰ ἐμὰ πρόβατα ἀκούει THs ἐμῆς φωνῆς.

IV. Tre Gosre, or Marcron:

Tertullian and Epiphanius! supply us with materials for reconstructing
the Gospel which Marcion published as ‘“ the Gospel of the Lord,” or “ of

le. Heres. XuiI. pp. 309 seqq. It eral variations which occur in Epiph-
will be sufficient for our purpose to anius appear to be later errors of
refer only to Tertullian, who examines transcription, or errors of Epiphanius
the Gospel of Marcion in the fourth himself.
book of his treatise against him. Sev-

ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 453

Christ.” It does not appear that he made any additions to the Pauline
narrative of St. Luke, which he adopted as the basis of his history ; and
the following table! will show how much of it he recognized. In most
cases the reasons for the changes and omissions will be evident, when we

bear in mind the peculiar features of the Marcionite heresy.

St. LUKE.

The first, second, and third chapters of St, Luke were

wanting in Marcion’s Gospel, which began with the

ee Same

Give athe ὃ Ὁ

. words: ‘In the fifteenth year of the
reign of Tiberius Cxsar [God 5]
.came down to Capernaum, a city

Tertull. adv.
Barc. iv. 7.

of Galilee, and was teaching on the Sabbath-day.”

iv. 832-87. . , υ. 84-- Ναζαρηνέ

iv. 38,39. . . Doubtful.
iv. 16-30. Omitting all reference to the Old Tes- td. tv. 8.
tament, and in v. 16=06 ἣν TeSpap-
μένος and κατὰ Td ciwdds αὐτῷ.
iv. 40-44. Entire.
v. 1-39. . Entire? Inv. 14, ἵνα eis μαρτύριον ὦ ἴα. iv. 9-11.
: Ἕ pee id. iv. 12-17,
vi. 1-49. , Entire.* In v. 17, κατέβη ἐν αὐτοῖς. pee

vii. 1-28 ; 36-50.

vv. 29—35 are opposed to Marcion’s

view of the relation of John the Baptist to Jesus,
and to his idea of the true Christian life.

viii. 1-18 ; 20-56 ; Entire.®
ix. 1-62. .

In v. 30 Marcion seems to lave read
συνέστησαν αὐτῷ (or rather ἔστησαν

adv. Mare.
iv. 19, 20.

id. τυ. 21—25.

μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ) ; and in place of v. 31,
only ὀφϑέντες ἐν τῃ δόξῃ αὐτοῦ.

1 In the construction of this table I
have chiefly followed Hahn’s edition of
Marcion’s Gospel, published in Thilo,
Codex Apocryphus, pp. 403-408; and I
have throughout compared my own
table with that given by De Wette
( Einl. § 71 b), who quotes the results of
Ritschl’s investigations into the sub-
ject. All the passages of St. Luke
which were contained in Marcion’s
Gospel are placed in the first column,
and any significant variations are noted
in the second.

2 The Marcionites maintained the no-
tion of a sudden and unexpected (subi-
tum ex inopinato, Tertull. /. c.) ap-
pearance of the good Deity to frustrate
the designs of the God of the Jews.
Cf. Neander, Church History, 1. pp.
182, sqa.

3 Tertullian (adv. Mare. tv. 11)
acutely criticizes the impropriety of
the sudden introduction of John the
Baptist after the removal of the open-
ing chapters of St. Luke’s Gospel.
Marcion’s explanation of vy. 14, 86-39,
may be seen in Tertullian, adv Mare.
IV. 9, 11 (pp. 210, 222).

4 Marcion explained v. 23, and the
“woe” in v. 24,so as to accord with
his own views: Tértull. adv. Mare. iv.
15.

5 Marcion represented the announce-
ment of “the mother and brethren of
Jesus” as made “ftentandi gratia:
adv. Marc. αν. 19, p. 260. According to
Epiphanius, 7 μήτηρ ---ἀδ. avd. were
wanting.

6 The explanation which Marcion
gave of the Transfiguration is interest-

464 ON

adv. Marc. iv. 24,

x. 1-11; 16-42.

25.
Bett 90, δὲ«
52-54.
id. iv. 28, 29. xi. 1-5; 8-59;

id. iv. 30. RTO Ree bee

id. tv. 51.

xiv. 1-6 ; 12-35.

id. iv. 83. xv. 1-10.
id. tv. 33, 34. xvi. 1-31.
id. tv. 35. xvii. 1-6 ; 11-37.

id. iv. 80.

id. Ww. 37.

id. iv. 88. xx. 1-8; 19-36;
39-47.

id. iv. 89.

23-38.

“τα. iv. 40, 41.

52-71.

id. iv. 42.

v.21 --- πάτερ and καὶ τῆς. γῆς.

In v.

xxi. 5-17; 19,20; v. 27=Kal δύξης."

SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS.

The
order in v. 22 was reversed by Mar-
cion ; Ὁ. 24 he probably read only
ὅτι mp. οὐκ εἶδον ἃ ὑμεῖς βλέπετε. υ.
25= ai@vov.!

xi. 1-29; 33-48; Cf. Varr. Lectt. in v. 2; v. 29=ei μὴ

τὸ on. "Iw.2 Inv. 42 he read
κλῆσιν for κρίσιν, and = ταῦτα ---

ἀφιέναι.

In vv. 8, 9, ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ.
In v. 28, for ᾿Αβραάμ --- προφήτας, Mar-

cion read πάντας τοὺς δικαίους, and.

added ἐκβ. καὶ κρατουμένους
ΕΒ
ἔξω.

Inv. 26, Marcion read καταλείπει for

μισεῖ.
In v. 10, ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ. Cf. xii.

8, 9.
12, τὸ ἐμόν: Inv. 17, for the

last clause Marcion read : μοῦ ἢ τῶν

λόγων μίαν Kep. 7.4

Marcion added inv. 2, εἰ οὐκ ἐγεν-

νήϑη ἢ le] At. μ; and inserted
Luke iv. 27 after v. 14.

Xvill. 1-30; 35-43. v. 857 = ὃ Ναζωραῖος. ν 915
xix. 1-28; 47, 48. ν. 9 = καϑότι--- ἐστίν.
Entire.

In 0-32, foray
γενέα αὕτη, Marcion read 6 οὐρανὸς
kal ἢ γῆ. v. 36 = καὶ --- ἀνθρώπου.

Xxli. 1-15; (17,18) υ. 8 = εἰσῆλϑε δὲ σατανᾶς.
19-29 :31-34;
39-41 ; 45-48;

XX. 1-42; 44-46; v. 8 = τῶν Ἰουδαίων.

50-56. v. 84 = διαμερίζόμενοι ---- κλῆρον.

ing: adv. Marc. τν. 22. He justifies
the apparent harshness of vv. 57 seqq.

1 Cf. Tertull. adv. Marc. τν. 25, p. 298.

2 Marcion supposed that ‘‘ the strong
man armed” (ν. 21) meant the Creator
—the God of tle Jews, and ‘the
stronger man,” the good Deity. Ter-
tull. 1v. 26, p. 299.

8Iny. 5, the ‘*‘ fearful God” is the
Creator, who is also signified by ‘‘ the

thief” (v. 39). Tertull. 7. 6. pp. 304,
911.

4 For Marcion’s explanation of the
parable (19-31) see Tertull. 7. ec. pp. 828
seqq. The words sicut et lex et proph-
ete (Tertull. rv. 83) seem to be a ccom-
ment of Tertullian.

5 Marcion probably applied the pas-
sage to the Jewish Messiah (Hahn).

6 Epiphanius represents Marcion as

ON SOME OF THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS. 465

xxiv. 1-26 ; 28-47. v. 25, οἷς ἐλάλησεν ὑμῖν. v. 32 = ὡς id. tv. 48,
Sinv. Hu. τ. γραφάς. v. 37 ,pavTracua
for πνεῦμα. v. 39 = ψηλαφήσατε, σάρκα. v.44 =
ὅτι -- ἐμοῦ. v. 45 = τότε --- αὐτοῖς. v. 46 = ὅτι ---
γέγραπται."

No one of the remaining Apocryphal Gospels claims any special notice.
The fragments quoted from the Gospel according to the Egyptians? have
been already given ; and of the Gospels of Basilides, Cerinthus, Apelles,
Matthias, we know little more than the names. But there is another class
of writings alse called Apocryphal Gospels, to which the Gospels of the
Infancy and the Gospel of Nicodemus belong, which cannot be left wholly
unnoticed. ‘The narratives which we have hitherto examined were either
based on the same oral traditions as the canonical Gospels, or revisions of
the canonical texts ; but these enter on a new field, and illustrate the writ-
ings of the New Testament more by the complete contrast which they
offer to the spirit and style of the whole, than by minute yet significant
divergences from particular books. The completeness of the antithesis
which these spurious stories offer to the divine record appears at once — it
we may be allowed fora moment to compare light with darkness — in
relation to the treatment of the three great elements of the Gospel history,
miracles, parables, and prophecy, the lessons of power, of nature, and of
providence. In the Apocryphal miracles we find no
worthy conception of the laws of providential interfer-
ence; they are wrought to supply personal wants, er to gratify private
feelings, and often are positively immoral. Nor, again, is there any spir-
itual element in their working; they are arbitrary displays of power, and
without any spontaneity on our Lord’s part or on that of the recipient.
The Apocryphal Gospels? are also entirely without par-
ables ; they exhibit no sense of those deeper relations
between nature and man— between corruption and sin — which are so
frequently declared in the Synoptic Gospels. And, at the same time,
they do not rise to the purely spiritual theology of St. John, which in its
very essence rises above the mixed earthly existence of man.

Yet more, they do not recognize the office of prophecy; they make no
reference to the struggles of the Church, with the old
forms of sin and evil reproduced from age to age, till
the final regeneration of all things. History in them becomes a mere col-
lection of traditions, and is regarded neither as the fulfilment of the past
nor as the type of the future.

As to miracles :

Parables:

Prophecy.

introducing various changes into v. 2, 8 Compare the following passages im
of which traces appear elsewhere. Cf. the Apocryphal Gospels:

Tischdf. ad loc. (a) Gosp. Inf. 14-20, 38 (ed. Thilo).
1 It appears that the end of Marcion’s Gosp. Thom. ὃ.

Gospel was as abrupt as the commence- Gosp. Inf. 29, 47, 49.

ment. Compare Hahn, /. c. p. 486. (δ) Gosp. Inf. 28, 36-7, 40.

2 Cf. p. 448, n. 3. Gosp. Inf. 14, 17 sqq.

466 A CLASSIFICATION OF TUE GOSPEL MIRACLES.

The differences in style are not less than these differences in spirit. For
the depth of a spiritual sequence we have affected explanations and irrele-
yant details.' And the divine wisdom of our Gospels stands in clear con-
trast to mere dreams of fancy, if we compare some Scriptare story with
obvious parallels in the most esteemed of the Apocryphal histories. Thus,
we might refer ta the cure of the demoniac (Gosp. Inf. 14), and the reci-
tal in St. Luke (viii. 26—32); to the discourse from the Mount of Beati-
tudes (Matt. v.—vii.), and the address from Mount Olivet ( Gosp. Joseph.
1. 544.) ; to the inspired records of the Crucifixion, and the Gospel of Nie-
odemus. For even these wild legends have their use. If the corruptions
ef the Gospels lead us back to ἃ common source preserved in our Canon,
the fables of early times teach us how far the characteristics of the Gos-
pels were above the natural taste of the first Christians.

APPENDIX E.
A CLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL MIRACLES.

ἄιστευετέ μοι OTL ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρὶ καὶ ὃ πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί: εἰ δὲ μή, διὰ τὰ
ἔργα αὐτὰ πιστεύετε. ---- Sv. Joun xiv. 11.

I HAVE examined elsewhere ὁ the general relations of the Gospel Mira-
eles as a Revelation——a whole in themselves of singular harmony and
completeness : at present it will be sufficient to give an outline of the
results obtained, by presenting a classification of the Miracles, which will
exhibit their mutual connections.®

I. MIRACLES ON NATURE.
1. MIRACLES OF CREATIVE POWER.

(a) The Water made Wine: John ii. t—I12.
Character changed. Christ the Source of Joy.
(0) The Bread multiplied.
a. Matt. xiv. 15—21; Mark vi. 35—44; Luke ix. 12—
17; John vi. 5—14. ν
b. Matt. xv. 32—39; Mark viii. I—10.
Substance increased, Christ the Source of Subsist-

ence.
1 Cf. Gosp. Inf. 50-2. 2 Characteristics of the Gospel Mira-
47-8. cles, Cambr. 1859.
Protey. S. Jac. 111. 3 The arrangement proposed is not

Gosp. Joseph. 16, 17. offered as absolute or final. It offers,

A OLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL MIRACLES. 467

(c) The walking on the Water: Matt. xiv. 22—26; Mark vi. 48,
49; Jolin vi. 16—21.
Force controlled. Christ the Source of strength.

2. MrRACLES OF PROVIDENCE.
(a) Miracles of Blessing.
a. The first Miraculous Draught of Fishes : Luke v. 1—11.
The foundation of the outward Church.
b. The Storm Stilled: Matt. viii. 23—27; Mark iv.
35—41; Luke viii. 22—25.
The defence of the Church from without.
c. The Stater in the Fish’s Mouth: Matt. xvii. 24—27.
The support of the Church from within.
d. Thesecond Miraculous Draught of Fishes: John xxi.
1—23.
_ The Church of the future.
(b) Miracle of Judgment.
The fiy-tree cursed : Matt. xxi. 19 ff.; Mark xi. 20 ff.

II. MIRACLES ON MAN.

i. Mrracites Or PersonaL Faitn.
(a) Organic Defects (the Blind).
a. Faith special.
The two blind men in the house: Matt. ix. 29—31.
b. Faith absolute.
Bartimeus restored: Matt. xx. 29—34; Mark x.
46—52; Luke xviii. 35—43.
(b) Chronic Impurity.
a. Open. Leprosy.
Faith special.
The one Leper: Matt. viii. 1—4; Mark i. 40—45;
Luke v. 12—16.
Faith special and absolute contrasted.
The Ten Lepers: Luke xvii. 11—19.
b. Secret.
The Woman with the Issue: Matt. ix. 20—22; Mark
ν. 25—34; Luke viii. 43—48.
2. MrracLes OF INTERCESSION.
(a) Organic Defects. (Simple Intercession. j
a. The blind: Mark viii. 22—26.
b. The deaf and dumb: Mark vii. 31—37.
(b) Mortal sicknesses. (Intercession based on natural ties.)
a. Fever.
The nobleman’s son healed : John iv. 46—54.

unless I am mistaken, one very natura] exists. Deeper study may lay open
and instructive view of relations which more subtle and profound points of
are many-sided; and at least itis suf- union between the different incidents.
ficient to show that some connection

468 A CLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL MIRACLES.

b. Paralysis.
The centurion’s servant healed: Matt. viii. 5—13;
Luke vii. 1—10.
The man borne of four healed: Matt. ix. 1—8 ; Mark
li. 1—12; Luke νυ. 17—26.

3, MrracLes OF Love.
(a) Organic Defect.
The blind man healed: John ix.
(b) Disease.
a. The fever healed: Matt. viii. 14, 15; Mark i. 29—34:
Luke iv. 38—41.
b. The dropsy healed: Luke xiv. 1—6.
c. The withered hand restored: Matt. xii. 9—18 ; Mark i ili.
1—5; Luke vi. 6—11.
d. The argolend man restored: John v. 1—17.
e. The woman with a spirit of infirmity set free: Luke xiii.
10—17.
(c) Death.
a. The Death-chamber.
A girl raised: Matt. ix. 18 ff.; Mark v. 22 ff. ; ἘΠῚ
Vili. 41 ff.
b. The bier.
A young man raised; Luke vii. 11—18.
c. The tomb.
A tried friend raised: John xi.}

III. MIRACLES ON THE SPIRIT-WORLD.

1. Mrracres OF INTERCESSION.

(a) Simple Intercession.
a. A dumb man possessed by a devil: Matt. ix. 32—34.
b. A blind anda dumb man: Matt. xii. 22 ff. Cf. Luke
xi. 14 ff.
(Ὁ) Intercession based on natural ties.
a. The Syrophenician’s daughter healed: Matt. xv. 21—28 .
Mark vii. 24—30.
b. The lunatic boy healed: Matt. xvii. 14 ff.; Mark ix. 14
ff.; Luke ix. 37 ff.

2. MIRACLES OF ANTAGONISM.

(a) In the Synagogue.
The unclean spirit cast out: Mark i, 21—28; Luke iv.
ais.

1 The healing of Malchus (Luke xxii. how the Divine Power represses and
51) seems not to fall within the true remedies the evils caused by inconsid
cycle of the Gospel Miracles either in erate zeal.
character or import. We may see in it

A CLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL PARABLES. 469

(δ) In the Tombs.
The Legion cast out: Matt. viii. 28—34; Mark ν. 1—17;
Luke viii. 26—37.

It will be seen that in the fundamental and crowning miracle of the
Gospel — the Resurrection — all these forms of miracu-
lous working are included. ‘The course of nature was
controlled, for there was a great earthquake ; the laws
of material existence were overruled, for when the doors were shut Jesus
came into the midst of His disciples, and when their eyes
were opened He vanished out of their sight. The reign
of death was overthrown, for many of the saints came
out of their graves and went into the Holy City. The ὀ Afatt. xxvii. 2.
powers of the spiritual world were called forth, for an- a
gels watched at the sepulchre and ministered to believ-
ers. Thus full and harmonious is the whole strain of
Scripture: All things are double, one against another, and God hath made
nothing imperfect.

Matt. xaviii. 2.
John xx. 6.

Luke xxiv. 81.
Matt. xxvii. 53.

Wisd. xl. 25.

ae PEN DEX. ¥.

A CLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL PARABLES.

/ ot .
Πάντα δισσά, ἐν κατέναντι τοῦ ἑνός

καὶ οὐκ ἐποίησεν οὐδὲν ἐλλεῖπον. ---- ECCLUS. XLII. 24.

We have already endeavored to discover in the combination of the
Gospel miracles the laws of Divine interference for the aap eee
Redemption of man, and the proofs of the universality Parables to Mira-
of the Saviour’s power; it will be our object now to point ¢!**
out the converse truths from a consideration of the Parables: in them we
shall seek to mark the lessons which we may learn from the Natural
World on the progress and scope of Revelation, and the testimony which
man’s own heart renders to the Christian Morality. Thus it is that the
Miracles and Parables are exactly correlative to each other; in the one
we see the personality and power of the Worker, and in the other the
generality and constancy of the Work; in the one we are led to refer the
ordinary events of life to God, and in the other to consider their relation
to man: in the one we are led to regard the manifoldness of Providence,
and in the other to recognize the instructiveness of the Universe.

The Parables in the Gospels may be presented in the following classifi-
cation, if we consider the sources from which they are drawn.

470 A CLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL PARABLES.

I. PARABLES DRAWN FROM THE MATERIAL WORLD.

1. Tor SOURCES OF THE ELEMENTS OF NATURAL OR SPIRITUAL
LIFE:
(a) The Power of Good. The Sower: Matt. xiii. 3—8; Mark
iv. 4—8; Luke viii. 5—8.
(Ὁ) The Power of Evil. The Tares: Matt. xiii. 24—30.

2. THE MODE OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT SILENT AND MYSTERIOUS.
The Seed growing secretly: Mark iv. 26—29.
3. THE FULNESS OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT:
(a) An outward Growth. The Mustard-seed: Matt. xiii. 31, 32;
Mark iv. 30—32 ; Luke xiii. 18, 19.
(Ὁ) An inward Change. The Leaven: Matt. xiii. 33; Luke
xiii. 20, 21.

II. PARABLES DRAWN FROM THE RELATIONS OF MAN.

1. To THE LowER WORLD, as explaining his Connection also with
higher Beings,' while he
(a) Destroys the worthless (campa). The Draw-net : Matt. xiii.
47—50.
(0) Labors with the unfruitful. The barren Fig-tree: Luke xiii.
6—9.
(c) Seeks to reclaim the lost, whether it has been lost
a. By its own Wandering. The lost sheep: Matt. xviii. 12
—14; Luke xv. 3—7.
ὃ. By his Carelessness. The lost Drachma: Luke xv. 8
—10.

2. To n1s FELLOW-MEN:

(a) In the Family, from the higher to the lower, as explaining
his personal relations to God :
a. Merey. The unmerciful Servant : Matt. xviii. 23—35.
Correlative: Gratitude. The two Debtors: Luke vii. 41
—43.
ὃ. Forgiveness. The prodigal Son: Luke xy. 11—32.
Correlative: Obedience. The two Sons: Matt. xxi. 28
—32.
(δ) In socrat LiFe, as explaining his Relations to the Church :
a. Zeal in the Petition for Blessings :
i. For others. The Friend at Midnight: Luke xi. 5—8.
ii. For ourselves. Zhe unjust Judge: Luke xviii. 1—8.

1Cf. Matt. xiii. 49,50: Luke xvy.7 careless within the existing Church
(χαρὰ ἔσται ev τῷ οὐρανῷ" when were awakened). It is easy to see why
the Redemption ‘was accomplished): there is no corresponding clause in
Luke xv. 10 (χαρὰ γίνεται ἐνώ- “the Prodigal Son.”
πιον τῶν ἀγγέλων τοῦ Jeov' when the

A CLASSIFICATION OF THE GOSPEL PARABLES. 471

ὁ. Patience in the course of Life:
i. For others, Endurance. The ten Virgins: Matt. xxv.

1—13.
ii. In ourselves, Self-denial. The lower Seats: Luke xiv.
7—l1.

ce. Regard for outward Ordinances :
i. As a feeling from within. The great Supper: Luke
xiv. 15—24.
ii. As required by their Dignity. Zhe King’s Marriage-
feast: Matt. xxii. 1—14.
{c) IN REGARD TO HIS MEANS, as explaining the Devotion of
our Endowments to God’s Service :
a. Thoughtfulness in planning his Works, as to
i. His own power:
Absolutely. The Tower-builder : Luke xiv. 28—30.
Relatively. The King making War: Luke xiv. 31

ode
ii. Their effects on others. The unjust Steward: Luke
xvi. 1—9.

5. In his Works.
i. As to himself, Fruitfulness 1
Absolutely. The Talents: Matt. xxv. 14—30.
Relatively. The Pounds: Luke xix. 11—27.
ii. As to others, Unselfishness. The wicked Husbana-
men: Matt. xxi. 33-44; Mark xii. 1—12; Luke
xx. 9—18.
e. After the completion of his Works :
i. As to himself, Humility. The unprofitable Servants :
Luke xvii. 7—10.
ii. As to others, Dependence. The Laborers in the
Vineyard: Matt. xx. 1—16.
3. To PRovIDENCE, as teaching that spiritually as well as tempo-
rally Advantages imply Duties, whether we obtain them
(a) Unexpectedly. The hid Treasure: Matt. xiii. 44.
(b) After a zealous Search. The Man seeking Pearls: Matt.
xiii. 45, 46.
(c) By natural Inheritance. The rich Fool: Luke xii. 16—21.

There are still remaining three symbolic narratives which are usually
ranked as Parables :— “The Publican and Pharisee,” ‘The Good Sa-
maritan,”’ and “The Rich Man and Lazarus.” These, however, in their
plimary reference give direct patterns for action, and in their secondary
meaning apply to classes, and not to individuals. It seems as if we may
read in them the opposition of Christianity to Judaism, in its essential
Spirituality, in its universal Love, and in its outward Lowliness.

ADDITIONS FOR PAGE 367,

RECEIVED TOO LATE FOR INSERTION THERE. SEE INTRODUCTION
TO AMERICAN EDITION, p- X.

* The following parables are recorded by St. Mark. That which is peculiar to
him is marked by Italics.

1. The sower (iv. 4—8).

2. The seed growing secretly (iv. 26—29).

3. The mustard seed (iv. 90--- 82).

The unity and completeness of the lesson which these convey must be obvious
without comment.

b The miracles recorded by St. Mark are both numerous and characteristic of
his Gospel. Peculiar narratives are (as before) marked by Italics.

1. The unclean spirit cast out (i. 21—28).

2. The fever healed (i. 29—84).

8. The leper cleansed (i. 40—45).

4. The palsy healed (ii. 1—12).

5. The withered hand restored (iii. 1—5) [iii. 10, 11, Many healed: unclean
spirits cast out].

6. The tempest stilled (iv. 85—41).

7. The legion cast out (v. 1—17).

8. The woman with issue healed (vy. 25—84).

9. Jairus’ daughter raised (v. 22 ff.).

10. The five thousand fed (vi. 85—44).

11. The walking on the water (vi. 48, 49) ἵν]. 54 ff., all that touched Christ
made whole].

12. The Syropheenician’s daughter healed (vii. 24—80).

13. The deaf and dumb healed (vii. 31—87).

14. The four thousand fed (viii. 1—10).

15. The blind man healed (viii. 22—26).

16. The deaf and dumb spirit cast out (ix. 14 ff.).

17. Bartimezus healed (x. 26—52).

18. The fig-tree cursed (xi. 20 ff.).

ee IN) ἃ Fe: OS

ADVENT, attempts to fix the date of, | CLEMENTINE RECOGNITIONS ON IN-

142.

SPIRATION, 448.

ALEXANDRIA, the meeting-point of | ComPLETENESS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE,

Judaism and Greece, 83.

ANTIGONUS OF SOcCHO, 86.

ANTIOCHUS, effects of his persecution,
85.

\POCALYPSE, usage of term in New
Testament, 34 n.

\POCALYPSE AND PROPHECY CON-
TRASTED, 93 1.
APOCRYPHAL JEWISH BOOKS, 93;

silent as to a personal Messiah, 112;
Gospels (see Gospel), 454; sayings of
our Lord, 445; works of our Lord,
452.
APOLOGISTS, on Inspiration, 412.
_POSTLES, their relation to Christian-
ity, 174.
\rosrirs, their
Christianity, 222.
ASSEMBLY, the great, 81
ATHENAGORAS ON INSPIRATION, 410.
AUGUSTINE, his essay on the Gospels,
251.

different views of

BAPTISM OF OUR LORD, accounts of
the, 314.

BARNABAS ON INSPIRATION, 403. ω

CAIUS ON INSPIRATION, 417.

CALVINISTIC VIEW OF INSPIRATION,
91.

CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT, 77 1ὺ

CLAUDIUS APOLLINARIS ON INSPI-
RATION, 413.

CLEMENS (Rom.) On INSPIRATION, 404.

CLEMENS (Alex.) ON INSPIRATION,
425.

CLEMENTINE HOMILIES ON INSPIRA-
TION, 441.

40}

53-59.

CONCORDANCES between the Gospels,
200.

CONNECTING PHRASES used by the
Evangelists, 345 n.; (last journey to
Jerusalem); 378 n.

CRUCIFIXION, Synoptic narratives of
the, 321; day of the, 289 n.; 338.

CYPRIAN ON INSPIRATION, 422.

DIFFICULTIES OF THE GOSPELS, their
origin, 387; their usefulness, 393.

DI0GNETUM (Zp. ad.) ON INSPIRATION,
407.

Doctors, sayings of the later, 91.

ECCLESIASTICUs, 91.

EspraAs 2, its character, 126; its doc-
trine of Messiah, 129.

EssEeneEs of Palentinian origin, 89 n.

EVANGELISTS not conspicuous in his-
tory, 229.

EVANGELISTS, their emblems, 250.

FAITH AND REASON in relation with
Scripture, 392.
FLIGHT INTO EGyyT, 318 n.

GEMARA, singular reference to Messiah,
153.

GENEALOGIES OF OUR LORD, 310 n.

“GosrEL,” use of term, 180; oral in
origin, 198, 212; facts mentioned in
Acts of the Apostles, 188; the Epis-
tles, 185; its first preaching historic,
182, 191.

GosPELs, the four, their general char-
acter, 46, 178, 212, 286, 387; inspired

414

history, 218; embody Apostolic
preaching, 178, 229; order of their
composition, 214 n.; their distinctive
character, 221, 229, 387; their real
unity, 252; their difficulties, 386;
their historical authority, 389.

GOSPEL according to the Hebrews,
454; according to the Egyptians, 448 7.

GOSPEL of the Ebionites, 457; of the
Clementine Homilies, 460; of Mar-
cion, 462; of the Infancy, 465; of
Nicodemus, 465.

GRAMMATICAL INTERPRETATION OF
Horny SCRIPTURE ESSENTIAL, 60, 389.

GREEK LANGUAGE, omen of universal
religion, 103.

GREEK THOUGHT IN CONTACT WITH
JUDAISM (Alexandria), 83.

HAGIOGRAPHA, their character due to
captivity, 80.

HEATHEN ALLUSIONS TO AN EXPECTED
Messrau, 151.

“ HEAVEN” SYNONYMOUS
‘‘ Gop,” when first used, 86 7.

HEBREWS, Epistle to the, its testimony
to the Gospel, 189.

HEGESIPPUS ON INSPIRATION, 412.

HeEnocu, Book of, clearness of Messi-
anic doctrine, 117.

HERETICS, their adoption of the sev-
eral Gospels, 244.

HERMAS ON INSPIRATION, 406.

HIPPOLYTUS ON INSPIRATION, 418.

HisToRY OF HUMAN RACE CENTRES

- IN THE GOSPEL, 69.

History OF JEWISH PEOPLE, its im-
portance, 71.

WITH

IGNATIUS ON INSPIRATION, 405.
INSPIRATION, different theories of, 30;
defined, 34,39; combines the divine
and human, 218; various forms of,
_ 87; proofs of, 48; claimed in the New
Testament, 43 n.; opinions of the
fathers of the first three centuries on,
402, 445.
INTERPRETATION,
spiritual, 59, 389.
JRENZUS ON INSPIRATION, 418.

grammatical and

JAMES, St., his testimony to the Gos-
pel, 186.

INDEX.

“‘ JESUS CHRIST,” use of title in the
Gospels, 296 n.

JEWISH THOUGHT, development of,
71; later doctrine of the Messiah,
155; people, affected by the captivity,
75; contrast between Galilee and
Judea, 287; literature, outline of,
108.

JOHN, St. (Baptist), how mentioned by
St. Matthew and St. Luke, 351 n.

JOHN, St. (Evang.), his character, 302;
his life, 242, 255; analysis of Gos-
pel, 280; its poetical conception, 274;
language, 264 n., 268 n.; style, 268;
contrasts to the Synoptists, 254, 284;
coincidences with the Synoptists, 291,
295 n.; coincidences with St. Paul,
306 m.; quotations from the Old Tes-
tament, 283 n.; adapted by the Valen-
tinians, 249; rejected by the Alogi,
263; his account of the resurrection,
882; his Epistles, their testimony to
the Gospel, 189.

JOSEPHUS, rejection of Messianic hope,
150.

JUBILEES, Book of, no reference to the
Messiah, 182.

JUDE, St., his testimony to the Gospel,
186.
JusTIN MARTYR ON INSPIRATION,
408. -
KABBALA, its doctrine of Messiah,

156.

Kosmos, mundus, zon, 50 7.; (6 κόσ-
fos), how used by St. John, 266 n.
(See World). ‘

Law, the, statedly read after the cap-
tivity, 79 7.

“ Lire” (7 (wh), how used by St. John,
265 n.

“ Light” (τὸ φῶς), 266 n.

Locos (see Word), use of term in
LXX. and New Testament, 264 n.

Lorp, our, identity of character in
Gospels, 296.

Lost TRIBES, Jewish tradition on, 1381,
155.

LUKE, St., analysis of Gospel, 370 n.;
language of Gospel, 383 2.; connected
with St. Paul, 195, 239; adapted by
the Marcionites, 248; preface, 196,

INDEX.

241 ».; his account of the crucifixion,
825; his account of the resurrection,
831.

MANETHO, contemporary with LXX.,
96 n.
Mark, St., analysis of Gospel, 363

n.; language of Gospel, 365; con-
nected with St. Peter, 191, 235;

adapted by the Docetz, 247; his ac-
count of the crucifixion, 328; his
account of the resurrection, 331.

Mary, V., not mentioned by name in
St. John, 292 n.

MATTHEW, St., analysis of Gospel, 348
n.; language of Gospel, 360 .; his-
tory of Gospel, 194 n.; Aramaic origi-
nal of Gospel, 281; quotations from
Old Testament, 232 n.; adapted by
the Ebionites, 245; his account of
the crucifixion, 322; his account of
the resurrection, 330.

MELITO ON INSPIRATION, 412.

MeEssIAH, earlier doctrine developed
in Old Testament, 110; later doctrine
developed in New Testament, 141;
distinguished from the ‘** Word,” 162
n.; distinguished from Shekinah,
Metatron, etc., 159 ».; preéxistent,
155 n.; suffering, 156 n.; dying, 181;
character not openly claimed by our

Lord, 147 n.; usage of Word in New |

Testament, 147 n.

MESSIANIC PROPHECIES, Jewish in-
terpretation of, 168.

MINISTRY OF OUR LORD, its length
uncertain, 289 7.

MIRACLES, their character, 50; record-
ed by St. Matthew, 353 n.; recorded
by St. Mark, 362 n., 367, 472; recorded
by St. Luke, 374; recorded by St.
John, 283 n.; of the Gospels classified,
466.

Misuna, reference to Messiah, 152.

MYSTICISM OF THE ESSENES, 89; of

the Therapeute, 100; of the Kab

balists, 156.
NOVATIAN ON INSPIRATION, 417.
OBJECTIONS TO THE GOSPELS, their

origin, 387; their uncertainty, 391.
OLD TESTAMENT’, history of Canon

475

obscure, 77 n.; how quoted in the
Gospels, 232, 283 n., 399; its suf-
ficiency in primitive times, 181, 190.

OMISSIONS IN THE GOSPELS, 286.

ORIGEN ON INSPIRATION OF SoRIP-
TURE, 429; on interpretation of
Scripture, 439.

ORPHIC AND SIBYLLINE WRITINGS,
98.

PAGANISM, essentially local, 103.

PARABLES, their character, 51; to
whom addressed, 288; recorded by
St. Matthew, 356 n.; recorded by St.
Mark, 362 n., 867, 472; recorded by
St. Luke, 3875; their analogies in St.
John, 290; classified, 469.

PARALLELISM a poetic feature in St.
John, 274.

Passion, our Lord’s, Synoptic narra-
tives of, 321,

PASSOVER, last, uncertainty of date,
289 2.

PAUL, St., his teaching compared with
St. John’s, 306 ».; his Epistles, their
testimony to the Gospel, 187.

PECULIARITIES OF THE GOSPELS,
their amount and value, 201.

PETER, St., his name, 202 n., 299 n.; his
character, 299; his denial, 801 2.; his
Epistles, their testimony to the Gos-
pel, 186. :

| PuIo, scope of his teaching, 99; scope
of his doctrine of Messiah, 148; scope
of his doctrine of the Word, 163.

PHILOSOPHY, its work in preparing for
Christianity, 104.

PRAYER developed during the captiy-
ity, 78.

PREACHING the first form of Christian
doctrine, 177, 179.

PROPHECIES OF MeEssrAn, how ex-
plained by the Jews, 168; of Old
Testament, how quoted in New Testa-
ment, 52, 53 2.

“PSALMS OF SOLOMON,” clear refer-
ence to Messiah, 140.

QuoTATIONS of our Lord, 399; of the
Evangelists, 538 n., 400; confirm the
Hebrew Matthew, 282 ».; referred to
Messiah, explained by Jews, 168; in

St. John’s Gospel, 283 n,

476

RESURRECTION predicted in Book of
Henoch, 128; of body confined to
the righteous in Book of Henoch, 123
n.; our Lord’s, four narratives of, 327.

Roman Empire identical with civil-
ized world, 106; suggestive of a
universal religion, 104.

SAMARITAN DOCTRINE OF MESSIAH,
111.

SANHEDRIM, its origin, 79 n.

SAYINGS OF OUR LORD, apocryphal,
446.

SrEcTS, their rise among the Jews, 86;
at Corinth, 245 n.

SEPTUAGINT VERSION, its history, 96;
reference to Messiah doubtful, 134.
SERMON ON THE Mount, outline of,

352 1. i

SHECHINAH, whether applied to Mes-
siah, 159 2., 162 7.

SIBYLLINE BOOKS conceive a univer-
sal theocracy, 98; their testimony to
Messiah, 114.

Simon Magus, the Antichrist of first
age, 238.

SIMON THE JUST, his great maxim, 82.

‘*Son OF GOD,” usage of phrase, 145 7.

SPIRITUAL INTERPRETATION OF HOLY
SCRIPTURE, 63.

SYNAGOGUE AND SCHOOLS, their rise,
12, 79.

SYNOPTIC GOSPELS, their agreements,

INDEX.

200; their differences, 205; order o
composition, 214 .; contrasted wit |
St. John, 220; unchronological, 348.

TARGUMS, their date, 136 n.; their cleare
reference to Messiah, 135; their clear
reference to the Word, 162.

TATIAN ON INSPIRATION, 410.

TEMPTATION OF OUR LorD, accounts —
of, 316.

TERTULLIAN ON INSPIRATION, 420.

THEOPHILUS ON INSPIRATION, 411.

THERAPEUTA, 100.

TITLES OF THE GOSPELS, 218 7.; on the
Cross, 236 7.

‘““TRADITION OF THE ELDERS,’’ Mish-
na, Talmud, 88.

TRANSFIGURATION, narratives of, 318.

“TrutTa” (ἢ ἀλήϑεια), how used by
St. John, 266 n.

VERBAL COINCIDENCES BETWEEN THE
SYNOPTISTS, 203.

‘‘Wispom OF SoLomoy,”’ 101.

‘* WORD,” doctrine of the, in Palestine,
161; in Egypt, 163; in St. John, 264
n., 267; not applied to Messiah by
Henoch, 126 ».; by Targums, 159 2.,
162 n.; by Philo, 149 n., 166.

WORLD, state of the; at the Advent,
105; 6 κόσμος, how used by St. John,
266 n.

For the Index I am indebted to the kindness of my friend the Rey. J. Frederi¢
Wickenden, M. A., of Trinity College, Cambridge.

Che Guo.

LAs A

Rie P ἡ; ΠΝ ᾿͵
ΑΙ ‘
ree fi Ν
ΠῚ Me
. my) eee if
I ; i} ui { ΠΗ
Ι i 5 ᾿ }
1 Wer? kul ΠΝ
ἥν owe
᾿ Ὕ ,
Ν ΤᾺ ck}
\ J i ‘ ‘at
7 i τὴ Dey
ἤν ϊ i ἐϊ
[᾿ ; ‘ y
᾿ } ᾿ Vie
hh a 4 ¥,
wh ͵ A
ν᾿ et 7
! |
4 "» 7
i
᾿ ΙΝ i
τ ΤΙΝ
᾿ Wi
ἵ ‘
’ :
ee ear y f
i TY ey
‘ ἵ ἱ ΤΥ
hat ey)
pray ᾿
ΔΗ Μὴ Ἢ
PRD Mas} ; ἢ
i ee ide!
- Eee Ἷ ᾿ Wh
᾽ [ "Ὁ We τ ee ΣΝ ἜΝΙ H
P Ἢ re hai rj
ot ) 1) 4 ᾿ Ἷ f ‘ Ot i
iq ‘Ve [ Τὸ yok ee wil
o Vd a ( ) ὲ Ἢ ᾿ ἣν
i 4 ; ms Mags ᾿ ΠῚ , wary Y an
I ay Wied fe ΡᾺ {
j ὶ i wit Jae nF
ΩΝ Pe ! ὶ \ ΤΣ Αι
᾿ ’ Ἂν fi " 4
SAM ΨΩ ha \ ae. Ἑ igs
i ee ee | ν ᾿ re bi
δ ait ἡ j \ -
ὶ 4 » rt
j 1 "
Pe }

>. te

ihe
ue

t er

aha ey

eee

DATE DUE

Hf )
1
4
Ξ

τε

PRINTEDINU.S.A |

GAYLORD

δὰ νύν δ} ὅν}

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Introduction to the study of the Gospels with historical and explanatory notes .."

See other formats