lfy | > iiii , i 'i | i |i ' i|iiii 
 
 i|i » W) n il»Tox-. . -^ 
 
 m^^iWipniWna 
 
 m 
 
 sirnma 
 
 '■ "• J 
 
 r ; i^ -^i^ ^ ^h >^ ^^ 't^ ^h >l^ ^1 
 
 d^i::i . 
 
 •'"E R.CO\n)RK,M.A.,DJ 
 
 ki^Af/" ^l<' \t/ "J/ N?.' 'J/'^f/' \f/' N?/' ^| 
 
 KBIBMIffllWllfllKgl 
 
 NsL, 1 
 
■Xtih^ Mtov »«*=^ Sr^''* - 
 
TEE R. T. S. LIBRARY— ILLUSTRATED 
 
 OUTLINES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 LIFE OF CHRIST 
 
 a GuOre to tjbe Stulrg 
 
 OP THE 
 
 CHRONOLOGY, HAEMONY, AND PURPOSE 
 OF THE GOSPELS 
 
 EUSTACE E. CONDER, M.A., D.D. 
 
 AUTHOR OF * THE BASIS OF FAITH,' ETC. 
 
 "Other foundation can no man lay than" that is laid, which is 
 Jesus Christ."—! Corixthiaxs iii. II 
 
 WISEt POITB. ILLTJSTBATIONS 
 
 THE RELIGIOUS TRACT SOCIETY 
 
 56, Paternoster Row ; 65, St. Paul's Churchyard 
 
 AND 164, Piccadilly 
 
 1887 
 
LONDON : 
 PKIXTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, 
 
 BTAMFOBD STREET AND CHARING CUOSS. 
 
EDITOK'S PKEFACE. 
 
 This book is included in the K. T. S. Library in the 
 hope that a clear and scholarly outline of the Life of 
 the Saviour, by such a competent writer as Dr. Conder, 
 will prove a boon to many who cannot afford to buy 
 expensive works. Sunday School Teachers especially 
 will find here very much to help them in their study 
 of the Gospels. In a small space they get the results 
 of the latest and best scholarship on the most im- 
 portant of all subjects. 
 
 AUTHOE'S PREFACE. 
 
 The present volume does not enter into any rivalry 
 vnih those large and learned works on " the Life of 
 Christ" which have issued from the press of late 
 years in rapid succession, and whose large circulation 
 bears witness to the undying interest of this inex- 
 haustible theme. It aims at meeting a widely-felt 
 want, by presenting in the most condensed form 
 consistent with practical utility and interest, a 
 trustworthy guide to tb.e study of the chronology of 
 
 A 3 
 
( 
 
 6 AUTHOR'S PBEFACE. 
 
 the Gospel history, and of the harmony, contents, and 
 purpose of the Four Gospels. It is therefore neither 
 a compendium of the literature of the Gospels, nor a 
 manual of controversy concerning the Gospels, but 
 simply an aid to the study of the Gospels. 
 
 Those who wish to acquaint themselves with the 
 opinions of eminent scholars on controverted points in 
 the Gospel narrative (and what point has not been 
 controverted ?) will find abundant store of quotations 
 and references in the learned and popular works of 
 Dr. Farrar and Dr. Geikie; in McClellan's very 
 learned and able work. The Four Gospels ; and (in 
 the most compact and convenient form) in Andrews's 
 Bihle Student's Life of Our Lord. With reference to 
 sceptical criticism, Ebrard's Gospel History (Clark's 
 translation) may be consulted with advantage. It is 
 superfluous here to remind the student of other works 
 in which the same ground is traversed, with diverse 
 degrees of accuracy, knowledge, and clearness: — 
 commentaries, Bible dictionaries, and works on New 
 Testament Introduction. 
 
 The aim of the present Writer has been to place 
 the instructed and thoughtful English reader, as far 
 as possible, in a position to judge for himself on the 
 questions which meet us in the study of the Gospels. 
 For this purpose it is of first importance to draw a 
 sharp line between facts in evidence and conjectures ; 
 between the authority of testimony and the authority 
 of opinion; and to understand clearly, that the 
 opinions and conjectures of even the most learned 
 scholars do not constitute evidence. The placid 
 dogmatism of contented ignorance is scarcely more to 
 be dreaded than the superficial mij2?.icry of scholarship 
 
AUTHORS PBEFACE. 7 
 
 which consists in knowing tne names of a number of 
 eminent writers who support a certain view, and of a 
 number of others equally eminent who oppose it. To 
 weigh authorities against one another, you need a 
 capacious and delicate balance. But in not a few 
 even of the most important questions, it is really an 
 easier task for a well-taught, candid, clear-headed 
 reader to form his own judgment with well-grounded 
 confidence, than to decide on which side authority 
 preponderates. Even in questions of translation, 
 where the most accomplished scholar has no right to 
 give a positive verdict (as in the question whether 
 to translate, in Matt. vi. 13, " from evil,'' or " from 
 the evil one"), the English reader may be quite 
 competent to form his own opinion from the context 
 and the sense. 
 
 It is of scarcely less importance to perceive clearly 
 at what point evidence stops short, and conjecture 
 and opinion form our only light. An overstrained 
 effort after an unattainable degree of certainty and 
 accuracy is apt to beget a reaction towards doubt and 
 confusion. In the following pages, accordingly, some 
 of the most intricate problems on which harmonists 
 have exercised their ingenuity are set aside, on the 
 simple principle that the " order " which St. Luke 
 .leads us to expect in his Gospel (chap. i. 1) is by no 
 means necessarily always the order of time ; order of 
 tcpic being no less important and natural; and that 
 it is therefore a vain labour to attempt to give to 
 every incident or saying its exact chronological place. 
 
 The main order of events and dates, apart from 
 these subordinate details, will be found closely to 
 correspond with that adopted by the learned and 
 
8 AUTHOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 judicious Dr. Kobinson. As this is in no sense a 
 following of his lead, but results from careful in- 
 dependent examination of every date and authority, 
 this agreement may safely be accepted as no unim- 
 portant confirmation of the results here sought to be 
 established. 
 
 Some points, especially in the earlier portion of the 
 Gospel history, might perhaps with advantage have 
 received fuller treatment. This defect, if such it be, 
 has arisen from anxiety to keep the volume within 
 very moderate limit as to size. If the outline is 
 correctly and clearly drawn, the reader will find little 
 difficulty in filling in any omitted details. 
 
 If thoughtful and devout readers of the Gospels 
 find in these pages as much profit and interest as the 
 composition of them has afforded the Writer, they 
 will not be sent forth in vain; with which hope 
 and prayer he humbly commends them to the blessing 
 of God. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 PAET I. 
 
 
 INTEODUCTION. 
 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 r.vnc; 
 
 Date of the Nativity- 
 
 ... u 
 
 SECTION n. 
 
 
 The Fulness of Time 
 
 22 
 
 PART II. 
 
 THE THIRTY YEARS. 
 
 • SECTION I. 
 
 Infancy ... ... ... ... ... , 30 
 
 SECTION IT. 
 Life at Nazareth ... ... ... ... 35 
 
 SECTION III. 
 The Eve of the ;Ministry ... ... ... 41- 
 
 PART III. 
 
 THE MINISTRY. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 First Year, a.d. 27-28 ... ... ... 54 
 
10 TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 SECTION II. PAGE 
 
 Second Year, a.d. 28-29 ... ... ... 76 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 101 
 
 PART IV. 
 
 CONCLUSION OF THE GOSPEL 
 HISTORY. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 The Sufferings of Christ ... ... „. 130 
 
 SECTION II. 
 The Resurrection ... ... ... ... 161 
 
 SECTION III. 
 From Easter to Pentecost ... ... ... 176 
 
 Index of Texts ... ... ... ... 187 
 
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 The Sea of Galilee ... ... Frontispiece 
 
 Nazareth ... ... ... ... ... 36 
 
 The Sower ... .,. ... ... ... 90 
 
 Jerusalem ... ... „. ,,. ... 160 
 
OUTLINES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 PART I. 
 INTKODUCTION. , 
 
 SECTION I. ' 
 
 DATE OF THE NATIVITY. 
 
 THE PLACE of our Saviour's birth is by two of the 
 Evangelists (Matthew and Luke) declared to 
 have been " Bethlehem of Judasa." The time was 
 " in the days of Herod, the King of Judaea ; " and 
 from St. Matthew's account we may gather that it 
 was not long before Herod's death. Each Gospel pre- 
 sents a view of the facts accordant with its own 
 special character and purpose. St. Matthew shows us 
 the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy in the 
 birth at Bethlehem of Him who was born King of 
 the Jews. St. Luke exhibits the secret working of 
 God's world-wide providence, employing the heathen 
 power of imperial Kome in so ordering events, that 
 unto all nations should be born, *' in the city of David, 
 a Saviour who is Christ the Lord." 
 
12 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 In order to determine the date of the Nativity with 
 such accuracy as may be found possible, therefore, we 
 have first to ascertain the date of Herod's death, and 
 then to consider by what interval of time our Saviour's 
 birth probably preceded it. Neither of these points 
 is free from difficulty. Absolute certainty (let us at 
 once candidly admit) is not attainable. But when 
 the facts are clearly stated, they lead to a conclusion 
 in which we may rest with a near approach to cer- 
 tainty, which is greatly confirmed when we find how 
 the date thus determined harmonizes with all the 
 after facts of the Gospel history. 
 
 Herod the Great reigned, as Josephus informs us 
 (Ant. xvii. 8), thirty-four years from the time when 
 he took Jerusalem by storm, and put Antigonus to 
 death. This was in the month Sivan, in the summer 
 of A.u.c. 717 (B.C. 37), three years after Herod had 
 been made king by the Koman Senate (Ant. xiv. 
 chaps. 14 and 16). According to our mode of reckon- 
 ing, therefore, Herod's thirty- fourth year would be 
 from Sivan of the year 750 (b.c. 4) to Sivan of 751 
 (e.g. 3). But the Jewish custom was to reckon 
 regnal years from the beginning of the Jewish sacred 
 year, at whatever time the actual accession might 
 take place. Consequently Herod's thirty-fourth year, 
 / by Jewish reckoning, was from 1 Nisan 750 to the 
 ^ eve of 1 Nisan 751 (e.g. 4-3). Between these two 
 dates his death must have occurred. And even if he 
 died in the first week of Nisan he would be held to 
 have " reigned thirty-four years," that is, entered his 
 thirty-fourth year as king, though the actual anni- 
 versary of his accession was not till between two or 
 three months later. 
 
 Now, if the account given by Josephus be carefully 
 studied (J^n^. xvii. 6-11 ; Wars, i. 33 ; ii. 1, 2), it will 
 be found to furaish decisive proof that the death of 
 Herod occurred shortly before the Passover. Thfe 
 facts may be briefly stated thus. Herod died at 
 
DATE OF TEE NATIVITY 13 
 
 Jericho, having previously gone to the hot baths of 
 Callirhoe, beyond Jordan, in the vain hope of gaining 
 some alleviation of his intolerable sufferings. Arche- 
 laus, his son and successor, after providing a magnifi- 
 cent funeral, and observing the necessary week of 
 mourning, came to Jerusalem, sacrificed in the 
 Temple, and addressed the people in regal state. At 
 first he was well received, but in the evening a public 
 lamentation burst forth throughout the city, not for 
 King Herod, but for certain Rabbins whom he had 
 cruelly put to death. These Rabbins, when the king 
 was thought to be dying, had instigated their dis- 
 ciples to hew down a golden eagle, erected by him 
 over the great gate of the Temple. Herod had taken 
 savage vengeance, causing the Rabbins and their most 
 active followers to be burnt alive. The Passover, 
 Josephus tells us, was now approaching ( WarSy ii. 1 : 
 3; Ant. xvii. 9: 3). The multitudes who on that 
 account were arriving iu Jerusalem swelled the dis-^ 
 turbance to a formidable sedition, which Archelaus" 
 suppressed with severity worthy of his father, three 
 thousand persons being massacred by his troops. 
 After establishing order in this fashion he hastened 
 to Rome, to seek the imperial sanction to his father's 
 testament, appointing him King of Judgea. At 
 Csesarea he met the Procurator of i^yria, on his way 
 to Jerusalem, to take charge of Herod's v\ealih in the 
 name of the Roman government. No exact dates 
 are given by Josephus, but Archelaus was at Rome 
 before Pentecost ( Wars^ ii. 3 : 1) ; — manifestly in the 
 summer of the same year. 
 
 The question then arises : "Was the Passover which 
 thus followed the death of Herod that of B.C. 4, or 
 B.C. 3 ? Here we have a remarkable note of time. 
 On the night after the Rabbins were burned, an 
 eclipse of the moon took place (Ant. xvii. 6: 4). 
 Astronomers find that the only eclipse to which this 
 statement can refer occurred on March 13, B.C. 4 
 
14 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 (a.u.c. 750). The succeeding full moon, April 11, 
 was that of the Passover (Nisan 14-15) ; and Nisan 
 1 fell on March 29. Now, if we deduct the seven 
 days of mourning, including the funeral, together 
 with at least three or four days for the visit of Arche- 
 laus to Jerusalem and the influx o-f the multitude 
 before the Passover, we are thrown back to April 1 
 or March 31 (Nisan 4 or 3), as the latest day on 
 wMch we can sujDpose the death of Herod to have 
 happened. A new difficulty, therefore, here meets 
 us. Can the events related by Joseph us as having 
 happened between the burning of the Eabbins and 
 the death of Herod be supposed to have occuiTed 
 within the short space of eighteen or nineteen days ? 
 The reply is, first, that nothing is related by Josephus 
 which might not really have occurred in less than 
 three weeks ; and, secondly, that far greater difficulties 
 oppose the supposition that a year intervened between 
 the martyrdom of the Rabbins and the death of the 
 Tyrant. The violent popular lamentation, quickly 
 swelling into riot and insurrection, proves the event to 
 have been recent. It was the fact of Herod being 
 believed to be at the point of death, which encour- 
 aged the Eabbins and their adherents to that rash 
 exploit for which they paid so dear. Immediately 
 afterwards, Herod's disease (or, rather, complication 
 of diseases) became frightfully aggravated; and his 
 sufferings were so intense, and of so dreadful a nature, 
 that it is impossible to suppose a man of seventy, who 
 had lived a profligate life, lingering on such a death- 
 bed for a whole year. And if the events of the 
 closing three weeks or fortnight of his life were 
 crowded together with surprising rapidity, like the 
 rush of waters hurrying to the brink of the precipice, 
 yet the attempt to stretch them over twelve months 
 is inconsistent with the history, and would leave the 
 last year of his reign almost a blank. 
 All these considerations therefore compel us to 
 
^^Z^yr^r^-^' BATE OF THE NATIVITY.'^ " 'ib'^' ^^ 
 
 place the death of Herod in the Sirring of A.u.c. 
 750 = B.C. 4. 
 
 ""J'his conclusion is in exact harmony with the state- 
 ment of Josephus (Ant. xviii. 4: 6), that Philip, 
 Tetrarch of Trachonitis, died, "having reigned thirty- 
 seven years," i.e. in the thirty-seventh year of his 
 reign, in the tvt^entieth year of Tiberius Caesar. For, 
 adding thirty-six complete years to the Spring of 
 750, we have 786, in the Spring of which, therefore, 
 Philip's thirty-seventh year would begin; and, in 
 August of that same year 786, the twentieth year* of 
 Tiberius began. 1 
 
 In order to arrive at an approximate date for the 
 Nativity, we have now to consider the events re- 
 corded in the Gospels as happening between tnat 
 event and the death of King Herod. These are : ^1) 
 The forty days of purification appointed by the l^w 
 of Moses (Lev. xii. 1-4 ; Luke ii. 22). (2) The pre- 
 sentation in the Temple. (3) The visit of the Malgi 
 to Bethlehem. (4) The flight into Egypt and sojourn 
 there until Herod's death (Matt. ii.). We cannot 
 with any shade of probability suppose that the visit / 
 of Mary and Joseph to Jerusalem^ publicly to present \ 
 the infant Jesus in the Temple, and to offer the ap- \ 
 pointed sacrifices, took place after the visit of the / 
 Magi and their inquiry concerning the new-born King ) 
 had alarmed King Herod, and *' all Jerusalem with / 
 him." Therefore, even ijf the "Wise Men from the 
 East arrived immediately after the presentation in 
 the Temple, Jesus was at least six weeks old when 
 the star which they had seen in their own country 
 shone over His birthplace. King Herod had not yet\ 
 left Jerusalem, nor was he yet so prostrate with i 
 disease as to render the hypocrisy of his professed | 
 purpose, to " come and worship Him also," trans- J 
 parently obvious. We can, therefore, scarcely allow 
 less than four or five weeks at the very least between ! 
 the visit of the Magi and Herod's death. This, as 
 
16 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 we have seen, must have happened on or about April 
 1. Adding together these two periods of six weeks 
 and four or five weeks, and deducting them from 
 April 1, we are thrown hack to the first half of Janu- 
 ary, as' the latest possible date of our Saviour's 
 birth. And it may very easily have been a week 
 or two earlier. The festival of Christmas, therefore, 
 j although it has no historical authority, — for early 
 [ Christian «v^riters speak of the exact date of the 
 \ Nativity as unknown, and Chrysostom (in a.d. 386) 
 speaks of December 25 as a newly-instituted festival, — 
 yet corresponds generally with the season to which 
 the most careful calculation compels us to assign our 
 Saviour's birth. No proof can be adduced that 
 December 25 is the actual day. But it is no impossible 
 date, and at all events can scarcely be far from the 
 true anniversary. 
 
 No light is shed on the date of the Nativity by 
 the ingenious coujecture, started by the astronomer 
 Kepler, that the star seen by the Magi was a rare 
 p.nd splendid conjunction of the planets Jupiter and 
 Saturn. St. Matthew says, that the star " went 
 before them, till it came and stood over where the 
 
 r young Child was." As they were then journeying 
 due south, this description manifestly cannot apply to 
 any fixed star or planet, whose aj^parent motion in the 
 sky would be from east to west, and which would 
 appear as far off when the pilgrims reached Bethlehem 
 as when they left Jerusalem. It can apply only to a 
 meteor or luminous body moving comparatively near 
 the earth. 
 
 A calculation has been made' by Greswell, Wieseler, 
 and others, which has a bearing on the relative ages 
 of our Lord and of John the Baptist. The twenty- 
 four courses into which the Jewish priesthood was 
 divided officiated in turn for a week each. Jewish 
 tradition states that at the destruction of the Temple 
 (August 5, A.D. 70) the course of Joiarib had just 
 
DATE OF THE NATIVITY. 17 
 
 entered office. Pteckoning back from this date, it is 
 found that the course of Abia, to which the father of 
 John the Baptist belonged (Luke i. 5-23), was in 
 office in the year B.C. 6 from October 3 to October 9, 
 that is, from the twenty-ffi'st to the twenty-seventh 
 of Tisri {Ordo Seed. p. 35 ; Wieseler, p. 123). Thus 
 it was on " the last day, that great day of the feast," 
 that the course of Abia entered office ; and it may 
 have been on that day that Zacharias' vision occurred. 
 On October 10 Zacharias returned home. Conse- 
 quently, the " sixth month " spoken of by St. Luke 
 (i. 26) may mean the sixth month of the civil year 
 (Adar) which ended in B.C. 5 on March 10 ; five 
 calendar (Roman) months (twenty-two weeks) from 
 the vision of Zacharias and his return home. If, in 
 ver. 36, months of four weeks are meant, " the sixth 
 month " would begin February 28 (counting from 
 October 10) ; so that these two interpretations of the 
 phrase practically coincide. If, following a well- 
 known reckoning, we take " the full time " spoken of 
 in ver. 57 to mean thirty-nine or forty weeks, or 
 about nine calendar months, we get the first week 
 in July for the birth of John. And if our Saviour 
 was born about six months after His destined fore- 
 runner, mid-winter, by this independent line of 
 reckoning, is again indicated as the date of the 
 Nativity. 
 
 It is necessary to refer to some objections which 
 may be advanced against the views we have arrived 
 at, which if not satisfactorily met might seem 
 seriously to detract from their trustworthiness. Let 
 us, however, lay it down, here as always, as a primary 
 maxim, that difficulties, even though our ignorance 
 may conceal from us their true solution, cannot 
 countervail positive evidence as to facts, if such 
 evidence be in itself clear and conclusive. The 
 argument from difficulties, which is one of the most 
 favourite weapons of destructive criticism, is one of 
 
( 
 
 18 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 the most illusory and dangerous methods of reason- 
 ing; both because there is scarcely any conclusion 
 as to historical fact against which a skilful and 
 learned reasoner cannot raise formidable objections, 
 and because ignorance can never be a basis of know- 
 ledge. 
 
 The objections in question refer (1) to the fact of 
 the census recorded by St. Luke ; (2) and (3) to the 
 supposed difficulty of assigning mid-winter as the 
 season of the Nativity. 
 
 (1) St. Luke states that, " there went out a decree 
 from Csesar Augustus, that all the world should be 
 taxed," — or, rather, should be registered or enrolled. 
 By "the world," is meant that part of the world 
 which acknowledged the sway of Augustus — the 
 Empire. (Comp. Dan. iv. 1.) It is objected, 1st. That 
 we have no account in ancient historians of any such 
 census orhis, or imperial registration, under Augustus. 
 2dly. That an enrolment of persons and property did 
 / indeed take place under the government of Cyrenius 
 — that is to say, P. Sulpicius Quirinus — which led to 
 the revolt referred to by St. Luke in Acts v, 37 ; but 
 this was ten years after the death of Herod, on 
 occasion of the deposition of Archelaus (Josephus, 
 Ant. xviii. 1). 
 
 It has been attempted to meet the first difficulty 
 by understanding the word translated "the world" 
 (Greek " oikoumene " — " inhabited ") to refer only to 
 the land of Palestine. Dr. Lardner (^Works, vol. i. 
 pp. 252-272) defends this view with great learning 
 (including in his argument also Acts xi. 28; Matt, 
 xxiv. 14) ; but, though upheld by some other 
 weighty authorities, it is generally allowed to be 
 
 (untenable. The evidence, notwithstanding Lardner's 
 strictures, is very considerable, that a census of the 
 Koman empire did actually take place about a.u.c. 
 750. And it is little less than absurd to suppose that 
 a careful historian like St. Luke would make a 
 
DATE OF THE NATIVITY. 19 
 
 statement of this sort without being perfectly certain 
 of its correctness.^ 
 
 As regards the second objection, St. Luke's words 
 are capable of being rendered, " this enrolment took 
 place before Cyrenius was Governor ; " but the more 
 natural is, " This enrolment was the first " (or, this 
 was the first enrolment), "Cyrenius being Governor;" 
 thus distinguishing this from the later "taxing" 
 mentioned in Acts v. 37. A German ■, scholar, 
 Augustus Zumpt, with immense pains and sagacity, 
 has collected reasons for believing that Quirinus was, 
 in fact, Governor of Syria twice — his second term of 
 office being that referred to by Josephus, but the^rs^ 
 having commenced in the latter part of B.C. 4. The 
 difficulty is not, indeed, thus wholly removed, for it 
 is not till after the death of Herod the Great that he 
 is supposed to have taken the government ; but it is 
 an obvious and probable supposition that the census, 
 begun during Herod's reign, was completed, and the 
 official returns made, under Quirinus. St. Luke's 
 accuracy is thus amply vindicated. Wieseler 
 (writing before the publication of Zumpt's investiga- 
 tions, combines two explanations of St. Luke's words, 
 which he translates : " This registration was the first 
 [that was made] before Cyrenius was Governor of 
 Syria." (See his learned and full criticism, Eng. 
 Trans., pp. 97-105; with the translator's note on 
 the results of Zumpt's inquiries, pp. 129-135.) Deau 
 Merivale (History of the Romans, vol. iv. p. 457) 
 concludes that " the enumeration, begun or appointed 
 under Varus, and before the death of Herod, was 
 completed after that event by Quirinus." 
 
 ^ The proofs may be found in Greswell's Dissertations 
 and Browne's Oi^do Sceclorum, but are stated, I think, most 
 fully and clearly in Wieseler's Chronoloffical Synopsis, pp. 
 66-86. Wieseler likewise deals very acutely and satis- 
 factorily with the objections drawn from the silence of 
 Josephus, and from the statement that Joseph and Mary 
 had to go to Bethlehem to be enrolled (pp. 86-95). 
 
20 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 The manner in which minute and laborious inqniry 
 thus confirms the historical trustworthiness of the 
 Gospels, and even turns difficulties into evidence, is 
 the best answer to the theory, supported by reckless 
 and sweeping statements, that the four Gospels were 
 comparatively late compositions, compiled out of 
 fragmentary traditions towards the close of the 
 second century. Had such been their character, they 
 would infallibly have abounded with blunders, which 
 it would have been a hopeless task to explain away. 
 
 (2) An objection has been raised against the view 
 that our Saviour's birth took place in mid-winter, on 
 the ground that the depth of winter would have been 
 so unsuitable a season for this public registration, on 
 account of the difficulty of journeying (comp. Matt, 
 xxiv. 20), that it is very improbable that the 
 Nativity can have taken place at that season. A 
 similar objection would tell with far greater force 
 against assigning our Lord's birth (with Mr. Gres- 
 well) to the Passover. A public registration would 
 have been impracticable when people were travelling 
 in myriads to Jerusalem. But at mid-winter, people 
 would be in their homes ; and though some, like 
 Joseph and Mary, would have to travel far to their 
 ancestral cities, the majority we may suppose would 
 be registered in the dii«trict in which tiiey dwelt. 
 Moreover, neither Augustus nor Herod was likely to 
 bestow much consideration on private convenience. 
 
 (3) It is objected, again, that shepherds could not 
 have been " abiding in the field, keeping watch over 
 their flocks by night," at mid-winter. It was the 
 custom, Jewish books tell us, to drive the flocks up 
 to the hill j)astures in March, and down again in 
 November. If, therefore, St. Luke described the 
 shepherds and their flocks as out on those upland 
 pastures, it would be evident that the season could 
 not be winter. But he does not. He says, " There 
 were shepherds in the same neighbourhood, lodiiing- 
 
DATE OF THE NATIVITY. 21 
 
 in tlie field" (passing the niglit out of doors), 
 " and watching the watches of the night over their 
 flock." The fuld would need to be guarded against 
 thieves and wolves as much in winter as in summer, 
 if not more. Jacob (Gen. xxxi. 40) complains of his 
 sufferings from frost as well as heat. This difficulty, 
 therefore (wljich, I confess, formerly seemed to me 
 very serious), vanishes on close scrutiny. 
 
 The view to which Dr. Geikie (vol. i. p. 150) seems 
 half inclined, that the eclipse mentioned by Josephus 
 may have been one which happened January 10, B.C. 1 
 (a.u.c. 753), is in flat contradiction to the express 
 statement of Josephus as to the length of Herod's 
 reign, which is the starting-point of our calculations ; 
 and Dr. Geikie, in imagining that Joseph and Mary | 
 may have lived nearly three years in Egypt, seems | 
 for the moment to have forgotten that the only reason 
 for supposincr them to have gone to Egypt in B.C. 4 is | 
 the fact of Herod's death in that year. 
 
 Two eclipses of the moon, visible in Judaja, arc N v 
 recorded by astronomers to have occurred in B.C. 1. . ' 
 But the date of Herod's death (and thus of the 
 Nativity) depends not on the eclip)se, but on the 
 length of his reiiin, as carefully given by Josephus 
 from a double date: thirty-lour years from a.u.c 
 717; thirty-seven years from a.u.c 714. The eclipse 
 merely affects the question, tcJiere to place Herod's 
 death between 1 Kisan b.c 4, and 1 Nisan B.C. 3. 
 
 It is needless to refer here to writers who have 
 assigned much earlier dates for the birth of Christ, 
 because from Matt. ii. 16, understanding '^from two 
 years old and under " to mean, according to Jewish 
 usage, those who had entered the second year, it 
 could not, at the utmost, have been more than a year 
 before the visit of the Magi. Nor would an earlier 
 date harmonize with the account of the birth and 
 ministry of John the Baptist, or with the statement 
 concerning our Lord's age in Luke iii. 23. 
 
 ^^ ^ ^] xZZ^Jvr^ g^-t-: 
 
22 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 SECTION II. 
 
 THE FULNESS OF TIME. 
 
 THE true use of clironology is to synchronize 
 events, and thus to throw light on their mutual 
 bearings, so that we may be able not only to frame 
 a comprehensive picture of the world at any given 
 epoch, but to view its great lines of history as parts 
 of one divinely-ordered whole — a complicated web in 
 which every thread is employed in weaving that 
 supreme design which we daily trace, but which 
 God's eye alone takes in. St. Paul tells us, that, 
 " when the fulness of the time was come, God sent 
 forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the 
 law" (Gal. iv. 4). When the angels announced His 
 birth to the shej)herds of Bethlehem, and sang that 
 first Christmas song of " Glory to God in the highest, 
 and on earth peace, goodwill toward men," a thousand 
 years had rolled by since the building of Solomon's 
 Temple, and more than five hundred since the second 
 Temple was raised under Zerubbabel the Prince, 
 Joshua the high-priest, and Haggai and Zechariah 
 the prophets, by the Jews who had returned from 
 their captivity in Babylon and in Assyria in obedience 
 to the jDroclamation of the great conqueror Cyrus. 
 During those five centuries three mighty revolutions 
 had run their course, each having an important part 
 in preparing the world for the coming of the Saviour. 
 
 First, the rise and victorious progress of the Eoman 
 Republic, and its conversion (within the memory of 
 that generation) into an Empire, whose dominions 
 embraced Europe within the Danube and the Rhine, 
 Asia west of the Euphrates, Egypt, and the northern 
 coast of Africa. 
 
 Secondly, the rise, glory, and decline of Greek 
 philosophy, art, and literature. 
 
TEE FULNESS OF TIME. 23 
 
 Thirdly, the rise and transient splendour of 
 Alexander's empire, built on the ruins of Greek 
 liberty, with the formation out of its fragments of 
 the powerful kingdoms of Syria and Egypt, of whose 
 greatness the two great chief cities of the world after 
 Kome — Alexandria and Antioch — were the most 
 splendid and lasting monuments. 
 
 The Koman Empire supplied the outward condi- 
 tions necessary for the rapid spread of the religion 
 and kingdom of Christ among the nations : notably 
 these three — Peace, Eoads, and Government. War 
 would have rendered impossible the free and frequent 
 passage from land to land even of single missionaries 
 of the Cross, like Paul; still more, of the scattered 
 multitude of willing labourers who "went everywhere 
 preaching the word." Along the great military roads 
 which connected Eome with every corner of the 
 empire, as well as in the merchant ships which 
 carried on their peaceful commerce along all the 
 shores of the Great Sea, these messengers of the 
 kingdom of peace safely journeyed. In that age 
 nothing could have maintained this wide-spread 
 tranquillity, but the irresistible hand of a central 
 despotism. 
 
 " No war, or battle's sound 
 
 Was heard the world around : ' 
 
 The idle spear and shield were high up hung ; 
 
 The hooked chariot stood 
 
 Unstained with hostile blood ; 
 The trumpet spake not to the armed throng ; 
 
 And kings sat still with awful eye.' 
 As if they surely knew their Sovran Lord was by." 
 
 Before a generation had passed, the Imperial Govern- 
 ment was to enter upon the task of suppressing the 
 new religion, to which end, during three centuries, its 
 power was exerted to the uttermosti. But, "in the 
 beginning of the Gospel," we see Koman law extend- 
 ing its shield over the Christians, and St. Paul's 
 
24 OVT LINES OF TEE LIFE OF CERIST. 
 
 Eoman citizenship saving liim alike from the scourge 
 of the soldiers of Lysias, and from the daggers of 
 Jewish assassins. The wide, yet compact, empire of 
 Rome embraced, we may say, the central life of man- 
 kind, with whatever of knowledge and civilization 
 Christianity could best employ in entering upon the 
 work of evangelizing the world. In the distant East, 
 among the vast populations of India and China, 
 Buddhism, founded about the time of the Babylonian 
 captivity, was already five centuries old ; elaborate 
 systems of philosophy could boast of great antiquity ; 
 and the sacred books of the Brahmins and of the 
 Parsees preserved relics of the primaeval religion. 
 But all this was aloof from the main stream of human 
 life and progress, and destined no more to influence 
 its course than, twelve centuries later, the wide 
 conquests and • splendid empire of the great Tartar 
 iiionarchs. On the other hand, behind the Rhine and 
 the Danube, in the wide wildernesses of Germany and 
 Scandinavia, God was keeping in store the reserve 
 force of humanity, in the Teutonic and Scandinavian 
 nations, whose rugged freedom defied the power and 
 was a stranger to the corruption of Rome, and was 
 destined (five hundred 5''eaTs later) to pour fresh life- 
 blood into decaying Christendom, and to take the 
 lead in spreading the kingdom of Christ amongst 
 mankind. 
 
 The Jewish nation practically fell under the power 
 of the Romans sixty years before the birth of our 
 Lord, in consequence of their miserable civil wars. 
 Pompey, being appealed to, entered Jerusalem, stormed 
 the Temple, and profaned the Holy of Holies. Judsea 
 was formally reduced to a Roman province ten years 
 after the death of Herod the Great, on the deposition 
 of his son Archelaus. To the Romans also, forty 
 years after the Crucifixion, and again seventy years 
 later (a.d. 70 and 140), God committed the tremendous 
 task of accomplishing the judgments denounced by 
 
THE FULNESS OF TIME. 25 
 
 our Saviour against those who " knew not the day of 
 their visitation." 
 
 To the philosophy and culture of Greece it had heen 
 given during those five preparatory centuries to carry 
 human genius, intellect, and art to a transcendent 
 pitch, never excelled. Those keen and subtle thinkers, 
 who founded or moulded the various schools of Greek 
 philosophy, anticipated in a remarkable degree the 
 speculations of modern anti-Christian thinkers ; and 
 while they showed that "the world by wisdom knew 
 not God," they also proved by theh- failure the 
 impossibility of solving, apart from the knowledge of 
 God, the deepest and most urgent problems of human 
 nature. In these and in other ways, Greek culture 
 was helping to prepare the way for the Gospel ; but 
 most of all by develoiiing that rich, flexible, accurate, 
 and noble language, in which (shorn, in the lapse of 
 time, of much of its refinement and decoration, but 
 not of its force, clearness, or majesty) the New Testa- 
 ment Scriptures were to become the most precious 
 and imperishable heirloom of mankind. Meanwhile 
 religion and morals were everywhere decaying. The 
 devout though ignorant faith which had once lain 
 like a preserving salt at the core of ancient paganism, 
 was perishing under the double influence of sceptical 
 philosophy and social luxury and corruption. Atheism 
 was boldly professed, and, though the temples of the 
 gods were never more splendid, the belief in their 
 existence was dying out. 
 
 Alexander the Great, said to himself, that his work 
 was "to sow Greece over Asia;" and though his 
 conquests and life were cut short while his vast 
 schemes were but in the bud, and his empire was 
 speedily broken up, yet the Greek language, learning, 
 and civilization were so widely spread as to form a 
 marvellous preparation for the preaching of a universal 
 religion. To the patronage of the Greek kings of 
 Egypt the Jews were indebted for the Greek trans- 
 
26 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 lation of the Old Testament Scriptures, known as the 
 fSeptuagint or Version of the Seventy. Alexandria, 
 the first city in the world after Kome, became no less 
 busy a centre of learning, philosophy, and intellectual 
 life than of commercial activity, and was destined to 
 exert a most powerful influence on the progress of 
 Christian thought and belief. The influence of the 
 Greek kingdom of Syria upon the Jewish people, on 
 the other hand, is chiefly memorable for the intolerable 
 oppression and insult inflicted upon them by Antiochus 
 Epiphanes, whose attempt to substitute paganism for 
 the worship of Jehovah roused that splendid outburst 
 of religious patriotism, under the heroic Maccabees, 
 which restored the national worship and for a season 
 re-established national liberty and independence. 
 
 At the time of our Saviour's birth, the just and 
 devout Israelites, such as were ''Israelites indeed," 
 were waiting for "the consolation of Israel," and 
 "looked for redemption." Heathen historians bear 
 witness to the fact, that the expectation of a universal 
 monarch, who should spring from Judsea, prevailed 
 throughout the East. But the prospect^ as far as the 
 Jewish nation was concerned, was dark in the extreme. 
 The disastrous feuds of the later Maccabean chiefs 
 had issued in placing an Edomite on David's throne, 
 and riveting the Eoman yoke on the neck of Israel. 
 From the one sin which had proved the most fatal 
 temptation to their forefathers, the Jews of our 
 Saviour's day were indeed free — idolatry. It is not 
 Avonderful that the cruelties and outrages of Antiochus, 
 and the profanation and spoliation of the Temple by ' 
 Pompey and Crassus, had raised the zeal against 
 heathenism to a fever-heat of fierce fanaticism. The 
 disdain of other nations they repaid with still haughtier 
 contempt. They clung with intense fervour to the 
 hope of the coming Messiah. But, untaught by those 
 glorious prophecies of the Old Testament which told 
 how all nations were to become His inheritance and 
 
TEE FULNESS OF TIME. 27 
 
 blessed in Him, they looked for a warlike conqueror, 
 "who should trample underfoot the Eomans and all 
 their other enemies, raise the throne of David and 
 Solomon to far more than its ancient splendour, and 
 enable all true Israelites to revel in worldly wealth . 
 and carnal luxury. Meantime neither the religious \ 
 nor the moral character of the nation furnished any j 
 warrant for this conceit of their superiority to the i 
 heathen around and amongst them. The vivid pictures 
 supplied by the Gospels, of the ostentatious formalism, 
 unmeasured pride, and fierce bigotry of the Pharisees, 
 with too many of whom devotion was but a cloak for 
 covetousness and vice, and of the scepticism of the 
 Sadducees, whose religion was a cold morality, are i 
 abundantly confirmed by the Talmud. The law of 
 God, as interpreted by the Eabbins, had been overlaid 
 with endless comments, refinements, and inferences, 
 which converted it into that heaviest of burdens — a 
 mountain of trifles. The natural result, with the 
 mass of the people, who could make no pretension to 
 Pharisaic sanctity, . must have been to relax the 
 obligation of all law. They were regarded by their 
 spiritual teachers with ins dent and heartless disdain, 
 and wandered as sheej) without a shepherd. (Comp. 
 John vii. 49 ; Matt. ix. 36.) The violence with 
 which the land was filled must have had a frightfully 
 hardening influence on men's minds. In the terrible 
 language of Hosea (iv. 2), "blood touched blood." 
 Idolatry excepted, the darkest pictures painted by 
 the Old Testament prophets of ancient Israel were 
 realized. The practice of polygamy and of easy and 
 frequent divorce poisoned the fountain-head of family 
 and social life. Herod the Great, who waded through 
 a river of blood to the throne, and spared neither wife 
 nor son, if he fancied their murder would contribute 
 to his safety, wrote his own epitaph, when, a few- 
 days before his death, having got together the leading 
 men out of every village in Judaet^ he imprisoned 
 
28 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHTdST. 
 
 them in the circus at Jericho, and gave secret orders 
 that they should be massacred immediately on his 
 death; thus providing (as he imagined) that the 
 nation, instead of rejoicing at being quit of their tyrant, 
 should be plunged into universal mourning (Jos. Ant. 
 xvii. 6:5; Wars, i. 83 : 8). This monstrous order 
 was not, indeed, carried out, but Herod's crime is not 
 thereby lessened, and the very conception of such a 
 purpose seems fiendish. In the fearful words of 
 Josephus (who was not lacking in either national or 
 priestly pride), "that time was fruitful among tho 
 Jews of every kind of wickedness, leaving undone ne 
 deed of baseness; nor, if any one wished to imagine 
 some new crime, was room left to invent it. Thus, 
 in private and in public, all were corrupt, and they 
 made it their ambition to outdo one another alike in 
 impiety towards God, and in injustice towards their 
 neighbour. The rich and the great evil-treated the 
 multitude, and the multitude eagerly strove to destroy 
 the rich and great: the former thirsting for power, 
 the latter for blood and rapine." Of those who 
 perished in the siege of Jerusalem, he says, that if the 
 Komans had not destroyed those wretches, the city 
 would either have been swallowed by an earthquake, 
 or overwhelmed by a deluge, or overthrown, like 
 Sodom, by fire from heaven ; *' for it bore a generation 
 far more godless than those who so perished " ( Wars, 
 vii. 8: 1; v. 13: 6). 
 
 Thus the world waited for its Lord and Deliverer, 
 but knew not for what or for whom it waited, or what 
 was the cause and what the remedy of its measureless 
 woes. "He was in the world, and the world was 
 made by Him, and the world knew Him not. He 
 cnme unto His own, and His own received Him not. 
 But as many as received Him, to them gave He power 
 to become the sons of God^ even to them that believe 
 on His name." 
 
 For fuller information on the subjects treated in 
 
THE FULNESS OF TIME. 29 
 
 the foregoing sections, the reader may bo referred to 
 Josephus, Antiquities^ books xiii.-xvii. ; Wa7^s, books 
 i., ii. 1-8 ; Dr. N. Lardner's Works, vol. i. ; Browne's 
 Ordo Sxclorum; Wieseler's Chronological Synopsis 
 of the Four Gospels, translated by the Eev. E. 
 Venables; Conybeare and Howson's Life and Epistles 
 of St. Paul, chap. i. ; Neander's Church History, 
 Introduction ; and the learned and popular works of 
 Dr. Farrar and Dr. Geikie. 
 
 Leading Dates. b.c. a.u.c. 
 
 Rome founded 753 
 
 Edict of Cyrus 536 
 
 Temple at Jerusalem finished, under Darius 516 
 
 Republics of Rome and Athens established 510 
 
 Death of Alexander the Great 323 
 
 Era of Seleucidfe 312 
 
 Revolt of Maccabees 167 
 
 Jerusalem taken by Pompey 63 
 
 Jerusalem taken by Herod 37 
 
 Augustus Caesar Emperor, having been sole 
 
 ruler for three years previously 27 
 
 Death of Herod the Great 4 
 
 1 
 
 218 
 238 
 244 
 431 
 442 
 687 
 691 
 717 
 
 727 
 750 
 
30 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST, 
 
 PART II. 
 THE THIKTY YEAES. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 INFANCY. 
 
 IT was a rude welcome that our ungrateful world 
 offered to her Divine Lord, when, " though He 
 was rich, yet for " our " sakes He became poor." Ee- 
 fased lodging in the city of David, even in the inn, 
 cradled in a manger, receiving the homage of a few 
 simple peasants in a stable ; of two aged saints in the 
 Temple ; and of a little company of wise strangers 
 from the remote East, whose hearts God had touched, 
 in the house over which the wondrous star halted ; 
 He who was " born King of the Jews " had to seek 
 safety from the murderous rage of the usurper who 
 profaned David's throne in a sudden flight across the 
 border of the Holy Land. Egypt, as it had been of 
 yore the foster-nurse of Israel's two greatest deliverers 
 — Joseph and Moses — was now to have the honour of 
 affording an asylum to that greater Deliverer, whose 
 name was called Jesus, because " He shall save Hi^ 
 people from their sins." 
 
 *' When the fulness of the time was come," St. Paul 
 tells us, " God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, 
 made under the law." In obedience, therefore, to the 
 law of Moses, the Holy Child received, on the eighth 
 
INFANCY. 31 
 
 day from His birth, the token of God's covenant with 
 Abraham, and the Hebrew name" Joshua," for which 
 the Gospels give the Greek form " Jesus," signifying 
 " Jehovah [is] salvation." (Matt. i. 2L ; Luke ii. 21. 
 Compare Numb. xiii. 16 ; Acts vii. 45.) In obedience, 
 likewise, to the Divine law, Mary observed the pre- 
 scribed forty days of seclusion ; and then, accompanied 
 by her husbaud, went up to Jerusalem, for the two- 
 fold purpose of offering, on her own behalf, the 
 appointed sacrifices, and of presenting her first-born 
 Son before the Lord. (Lev. xii. ; Ex. xiii. 2, 13, 15 ; 
 xxxiv. 20; Numb, xviii. 16 ; Luke ii. 22-24.) The 
 redemption money required by the law, due when the 
 child was thirty days old, had probably been set 
 aside, and was now brought by Joseph and paid into 
 the Temple treasury. The full sacrifice ordained by 
 the law was "a lamb of the first year for a burnt- 
 offering " — the symbol of entire consecration — " and 
 a young pigeon or a turtle dove for a sin-offering ; " 
 but if the worshipper were too poor to afford a lamb, 
 a dove or pigeon might be substituted as a burnt- 
 offering; and with this humbler gift Mary had to 
 content herself. These sacrifices were for the mother, 
 not for the Child, who was Himself presented, as " a 
 living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God " (Rom. xii. 
 1). The presentation took place only in the case of a 
 first-born son; and the Rabbins held that it must be 
 omitted if the child had any bodily deformity or 
 blemish, such as would unfit him, if he were aLevite, 
 for the Temple service. We thus learn, incidentally, 
 that the Holy Child was in body, as well as spirit, 
 " without blemish and without spot." 
 
 Mary, with her Child and her husband, would pro- 
 bably reach the Temple soon after sunrise. They 
 would enter the great Court of the Gentiles, either 
 from the valley of Kedron, by the "Gate Shushan; " 
 or through one of the "Huldah gates" (i.e. "weasel 
 gates "), in the great South Wall, which led up by 
 
r 
 
 32 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 subterranean steps into the Court; or by one of tbe 
 western gates (Jos., Ant. xv. 11: 5). From the 
 outer court they would enter the Temple properly so 
 called through the lofty and magnificent gate called 
 " Beautiful " (Acts iii. 2) ; and crossing the Court of 
 the Women, would ascend the fifteen steps leading to 
 " Nicanor's Gate ; " passing through which, they stood 
 in silent worship within the Altar-Court (Court of 
 Israel, and of the Priests). In front of them was 
 the great Altar of Sacrifice; and towering behind 
 that, the Porch of the Sanctuary,^ one hundred cubits 
 from side to side, and one hundred and twenty cubits 
 high, built of white marble, gorgeous with golden 
 decoration. Here stood the mothers who had come 
 to ofier sacrifice, until the priest came and sprinkled 
 them with the atoning blood. Then the service was 
 ended, and they must depart by another gate than 
 that by which they entered. 
 
 Many other mothers were probably there that 
 spring morning; but it might easily happen that 
 Mary was the only one who had a first-born son to 
 present before the Lord. As she was reverently 
 bearing her precious charge, accompanied by Joseph, 
 towards the ascent to the Altar-Court, they were met 
 (in the Court of the Women) by two venerable per- 
 sonages, the saintly Simeon and the prophetess Anna, 
 divinely commissioned to bear witness that the Child 
 now to be presented before God was none other than 
 the promised Messiah, the Anointed King and 
 Deliverer of Israel. Anna (or Hannah), being of the 
 tribe of Asher, was a representative of the ten tribes, 
 and no doubt a Galiljean. It has been conjectured that 
 Simeon (or Simon) was no other than the son of the 
 great Hillel, and father of the famous Gamaliel. But 
 the dates do not tally. For Simon ben Hillel lived 
 for more than thirty years after this, succeeding his 
 father as Nasi or President of the Sanhedrin in a.d. 10, 
 and being succeeded by Gamaliel in a.d. 30. 
 
INFANCY. 33 
 
 Tlius the voice of inspired prophecy, silent for ages, 
 awoke again in Israel at the advent of Him to whom 
 all the prophets bare witness. The infant son of 
 Zacharias and Elisabeth, by whose lips, thirty years 
 later, it was to utter a testimony and a warning that 
 would make the ears of the whole nation tingle, had 
 doubtless been presented in the Temple in like manner 
 some six months earlier. 
 
 If, as we have seen reason to conclude, the birth of 
 Jesus took place within a few days, earlier or later, 
 of New Year's Day, B.C. 4, the presentation in the 
 Temple must have been about the middle of February. 
 The visit of the Magi, we may suppose (though for 
 this we have no distinct note of time) to have 
 occurred not long — perhaps immediately — after. The 
 flight into Egypt would thus be about the end of ^ 
 February. Before the tyrant was aware that the \ 
 Magi had disobeyed his command, Joseph, warned of 
 God, had fled across the frontier, to seek a safe retreat 
 amongst his fellow-countrymen in Egypt, where the 
 Jewish settlers were numerous and wealthy. Possibly, 
 some vague reports of the prophecies uttered by 
 Simeon and Anna, or of words privately spoken by 
 them to " all them that looked fur redemption in 
 Jerusalem" (Luke ii. 38), as well as the startling 
 question of the Magi, may have contributed to the 
 excitement which led to that rash attack on the 
 golden eagle in the Temple, for which the Rabbins 
 and their adherents paid so dearly. The cruel execu- 
 tion of the Rabbins, it will be remembered, took place 
 on March 13. 
 
 The stay of the Holy Family in Egypt was pro- 
 bably brief. Joseph, we may be sure, would lose no 
 time in obeying the Divine command : " Arise, and 
 take the young Child and His mother, and go into 
 the land of Israel : for they are dead which sought 
 the young Child's life " (Matt. ii. 20). Therefore, 
 since Herod's death took place shortly before the 
 
 B 
 
31 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 Passover, it was probably at the very season at whicli 
 the children of Israel went forth from. Egypt, that the 
 ancient prophetic word received a new accomplish- 
 ment: "Out of Egypt have I called My Son." As 
 the travellers reached the frontier, they were met by 
 tidings " that Archelaus did reign in Jud£ea in the 
 room of his father Herod," — accompanied, probably, 
 with an account of the terrible massacre, by which 
 he had given a proof that he inherited his father's 
 bloodthirsty spirit, and an earnest of the kind of 
 ruler he would prove. If, as seems not improbable, 
 Joseph and Mary had entertained the notion that it 
 would be their duty to bring up the Child around 
 whose birth such marvels and such predictions had 
 clustered, either in Jerusalem or at Bethlehem, any 
 such purpose was at once dispelled. Avoiding Judasa, 
 they hastened to seek safety under the milder rule of 
 Herod Antipas, Tetrarch of Galilee, and returned to 
 their old home, Nazareth. There, unlike his illus- 
 trious kinsman and forerunner, John the son of 
 Zacharias, whose lonely childhood in the home of his 
 aged parents, and doubtless early orphanage, prepared 
 him for a solitary and severe life, and who " was in 
 the deserts till the day of his showing unto Israel ; " 
 the Child Jesus was to grow up to manhood in the 
 midst of home affection and family duties, with the 
 faces and voices of brothers and sisters around Him ; 
 no stranger to the privations and trials of lowly life, 
 nor yet unacquainted with the pure joys of childhood. 
 Among the flowery hills of Nazareth, far from the 
 splendour of courts, the tumult and corruption of great 
 cities, and the gorgeous rites of the Temple worship, 
 amid the simple surroundings of an artisan's home, 
 " the Child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled " 
 (or "becoming full" — increasingly filled) "with 
 wisdom : and the grace of Grod was upon Him " (Luke 
 ii. 40), 
 
 Great stress has been laid by critics on the dififer- 
 
LIFE AT NAZARETH. 35 
 
 ence between Luke's narrative and Matthew's regard- 
 ing the infancy of our Lord. Even the devout and 
 scholarly Alford writes quite wildly in his note on 
 Luke ii. 39. But silence is not contradiction. One 
 of the most remarkable features of Scripture history 
 (alike 0. T. and N. T.), is the absolute silence in 
 which matters are passed over which are not essential 
 to the writer's purpose. If St. Luke had seen (as l"\ 
 believe he must have seen) St. Matthew's account, \ 
 that was all the more reason for his confining his own / 
 narrative to what had been expressly communicated 7 
 to him, — no doubt on the authority of our Lord's 
 mother, and probably by St. John, with whom she 
 resided. These two chapters (excepting vers. 1-4 of \ 
 ch. i.) have every appearance of having been first J 
 composed in Hebrew. The conjecture that they were - 
 originally from the pen of the Beloved Apostle, sug- , 
 gests an interesting comment on St. Luke's statement / 
 (i. 2) concerning " eye-witnesses, and ministers of the [ 
 word ; " as well as on the omission in the opening of f 
 St. John's Gospel of all reference to our Lord's earthly 
 parentage, birthplace, or early life, coupled with the 
 indications (ch. i. 43 ; ii. 1, 12 ; iii. 43-5) that these 
 matters were familiar to his readers. 
 
 SECTIOX II. 
 
 LIFE AT NAZARETH. 
 
 ""VTAZAPiETH, often incorrectly described as a ' 
 _LN " village," but in the Gospels always spoken 
 of as a " city " — that is, a walled town, was wonder- 
 fully chosen as the retreat, obscure though not lonely,, 
 in which the Son of God was to learn and practise 
 that part of His human experience which lay in 
 private duty and patient waiting until His " hour " 
 came (John ii. 4). Had the Evangelists been inventing 
 
 B 2 
 
pill 
 
 IllillllilHii'iii^^'iii'li'i^iiiiiiii^ 
 
LIFE AT NAZARETH. 37 
 
 or embellishing a legend, in place of relating with 
 scrupulous fidelity the plain facts, they would certainly 
 not have represented the Messiah as spending His whole 
 life except the last three years in a town so utterly un- 
 known to fame that it is not once named in the Old 
 Testament, and of such evil repute that it seemed incre- 
 dible that "any good thing" could come outof Nazareth. 
 Approached from the south by a single road through 
 a steep gorge, the mountain valley on the sunny side 
 of which the town is built is completely encircled by 
 hills, shutting it in from the rest of the world; but 
 from whose tops the eye sweeps a wide and glorious 
 panorama; to the W., Carmel and the Great Sea; to 
 the S., the great Plain of Esdraelon and Mount 
 Oilboa ; to the S.E., Mount Tabor ; to the N.E. and 
 N., the hills of Upper Galilee (among which the lake 
 lies hidden); and in the far distance "the snowy 
 dome of Hermon." The air of this lofty region is 
 pure and healthful. The neighbourhood is noted for 
 the abundance and beauty of wild flowers. "Without 
 accepting the astonishing statement of Josephus that 
 the smallest village of Galilee had not fewer than 
 fifteen thousand inhabitants, we may suppose Naza- 
 reth in the time of our Lord to have had a considerable 
 population. But its inhabitants probably were but 
 little afiected by the stream of commerce and military 
 movement which flowed at no great distance to the 
 west along the Roman road from Sepphoris and the 
 coast to Jerusalem and the south. With few ideas 
 beyond the circle of their own hills, they were narrow- 
 minded, bigoted, rude, and turbulent, and, as such 
 people are, easily offended. Perhaps, on the other 
 hand, they may have been free from some of the 
 corrupting influences which haunt wealthy cities and 
 the courts of princes. 
 
 Ten years had passed since the Holy Family took 
 up their abode at Nazareth, — years, we may believe, 
 of peaceful home happiness, where religion hallowed 
 
 B 3 
 
38 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CEBIST. 
 
 duty, and duty strengthened love — when tidings reached 
 the mountain valley of a great political revolution y 
 not, ind-eed, affecting Galilee, yet in which every 
 Israelite must have taken a profound interest. Arche- 
 laus, accused to Augustus by the leading men of 
 Judsea and Samaria of intolerable misgovernment and 
 tyranny, was deposed and banished, and his domin- 
 ions annexed to the Eoman province of Syria. A 
 Koman governor, styled " Procurator," was placed 
 over Judeea and Samaria, with Cassarea as the seat of 
 government. Thus " the sceptre " visibly " departed 
 from Judah." Herod's rule had in a sense represented 
 the national dominion of the Maccabees. He was 
 ""King of the Jews;" and although the throne of 
 David was never restored after the Captivity, yet the 
 pre-eminence of the royal tribe was recognized in the 
 fact that the whole nation of Israel accepted the name 
 of " Jews," or " Judahites," But now supreme poli- 
 tical power finally passed out of Jewish hands; a 
 heathen Roman was supreme magistrate in Jerusalem 
 itself, and the Sanhedrin had to confess that they had 
 lost the power of capital punishment, and had "no 
 king but Csesar " (John xviii. 31 ; xix. 12, 15). A 
 new token was thus given that the time of Messiah 
 had arrived. 
 
 This great revolution might at first appear to be 
 easily as well as quickly accomplished. But it planted 
 germs of deep and wide-spread resentment, and sowed 
 the seed of troubles which largely contributed to the 
 final ruin of the nation. The nation, however politi- 
 cally divided, was religiously one ; and Jerusalem and 
 the Temple were the centre of that unity. Although 
 Galilee was not politically affected by the change, all 
 pious and patriotic Galilseans would feel as bitterly 
 as the inhabitants of Jerusalem the humiliation of 
 having the Temple and the Holy City placed under 
 the control of a heathen foreigner, the agent of Eoman 
 despotism. The test question propounded to Jesus 
 
LIFE AT NAZABETE. 39 
 
 twenty years later, — " Is it lawful to give tribute to 
 Ceesar or no?" — was one which He must often have 
 heard debated by excited groups of Galila3ans at 
 Nazareth. Coponius, the newly appointed Procurator, 
 was accompanied into Judaea by Cyrenius (or Qui- 
 rinus), Governor of Syria, who came to take posses- 
 sion of the effects of Archelaus, and to arrange for the 
 collection of taxes, which were thenceforth to be paid 
 into the Koman exchequer. The leading Jews were 
 inclined peaceably to submit. But Judas the Gali- 
 isean (or Gaulonite) denounced the impost as an 
 intolerable badge of servitude, boldly maintained that 
 God's chosen people could acknowledge no sovereign 
 but God, and roused a fierce spirit of revolt against 
 the yoke of Rome. It was to this movement that 
 Gamaliel referred, in the speech recorded by St. Luke 
 (Acts V. 37). Josephus reckons the followers of 
 Judas as a fourth Jewish sect, — the other three being 
 the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes (Ant. xviii. 1 ; 
 XX. 5: 2; Wars, il 8). 
 
 The veil of reverent silence drawn by the Evangel- 
 ists over the childhood, youth, and early manhood of 
 our Saviour is lifted but once, to relate His visit, when 
 twelve years of age, with His parents, to the Holy 
 City, to keep the Passover (Luke ii. 41-52). The 
 incident sheds a beautiful gleam of light on the punc- 
 tual observance, in the home of Jesus, of the Divine 
 law : " His parents went to Jerusalem every year at 
 the feast of the Passover." 
 
 We are not expressly told that this was the first 
 visit Jesus paid to the City and Temple ; but that is 
 the impression conveyed by the narrative. At twelve 
 years old a Jewish boy began to take his place as an 
 Israelite, and learn (by degrees) to fast ; and to apply 
 himself to some trade or calling (Lightfoot). At this 
 time two years had elapsed since Jud^a lost its 
 nationality, and was placed under heathen rulers. 
 
 The Evangelist briefly tells us that Jesus returned 
 
/ 
 
 40 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 with Joseph and Mary to Kazareth, " and was subject 
 unto them ;" adding that He "increased in wisdom 
 and stature, and in favour with God and man" (Luke 
 ii. 51, 52). "Without giving the rein to an over-bold 
 curiosity, there are some points regarding this period 
 of our Lord's history of which we may feel certain. 
 Nazareth must have possessed a sjmcious synagogue, 
 and a good public school. Josephus assures us, that 
 the one thing on which the Jews bestowed the most 
 \^ anxious care, was the education of their children 
 {Against Ap. i. 12). 
 
 According to the Rabbins, a boy was to be sent ta 
 school at six years of age ; but at five his father 
 was to begin instructing him in the Scriptures, — 
 teaching him, that is, not to read, but to recite pas- 
 sages by rote. At ten, he must begin to learn the 
 oral law, and at fifteen the rabbinical interpretations 
 and inferences. This we must understand to be the 
 rabbinical ideal of a complete education, rather than a^ 
 description of the actual training of the bulk of Jewish 
 boys. But we may at all events be assured that "from 
 a child " our Saviour learned and knew those *' Holy 
 Writings," which He was afterwards to quote and 
 expound as no other teacher could. Regular attend- 
 ance at the Synagogue services on the Sabbath was a 
 matter of course, probably also at the briefer services- 
 on Mondays and Thursdays. When He had reached 
 manhood, it was " His custom " (as we learn from 
 Luke iv. 16) to take His turn among the public 
 readers of the appointed lessons in the Synagogue 
 service; possibly also in leading the prayers of the 
 congregation. We may infer, however, from the 
 amazement which His address in the Synagogue at 
 Nazareth excited, on the occasion described by St. 
 Luke (iv. 16, ff.), that He refrained from public teach- 
 ing and exhortation until the time arrived for Him tO' 
 teach " with authority, and not as the Scribes." ^ 
 
 1 The reading of the La-^v on the Sabbath (Acts xiii. 15, 27; 
 
LIFE AT NAZ ARETE. 41 
 
 We have our Lord's own authority for interpreting 
 the Fifth Commandment as involving the duty of a 
 son to contribute according to his ability to the sup- 
 port and comfort of his parents (Matt. xv. 4-6). In 
 this, as in all other duties, we can have no doubt that 
 He " left us an example, that we should walk in His 
 steps." That He wrought with His own hands at 
 Joseph's handicraft is indicated by His being knowTi 
 at Nazareth not only as "the Son of the carpenter," 
 but as "Jesus the Carpenter" (Mark vi. 3; compare 
 Matt. xiii. 55; John vi. 42). From the absence of 
 any mention of Joseph in the history after the time 
 when Jesus was twelve years of age, and from the 
 manner in which the mother and brethren of Jesus 
 are spoken of in the Gospels, it appears probable' that ] 
 she was early left a widow. This accounts for the ^ 
 Nazarenes speaking of our Lord as " the Son of Mary " ] 
 (Mark vi. 3). There is, however, no ground for the 
 notion that Joseph was already an elderly man when 
 he first brought home "his espoused wife" to Nazareth, i 
 
 We cannot help wishing to know what was the 
 €xact position which Jesus occupied during those long 
 years at Nazareth. Was it that of an only son, an 
 eldest son, or a youngest son? The reply depends 
 on the answer to another question, — Who were the 
 '" brethren " of our Lord, repeatedly referred to in the 
 Gospels and in St. Paul's Epistles? This question 
 has excited eager and learned controversy, chiefly on 
 account of the value which in later times came to be 
 attached to a life of perpetual maidenhood, which 
 renders the supposition repugnant and even shocking 
 to many minds, that our Lord's mother ever had any 
 
 XV. 21) was distributed among seven readers (provided so 
 many duly qualified persons were present), the first of whom 
 was to be a Priest, the second a Levite, the rest Israelites ; 
 and the last of the seven read also the lesson from the 
 Prophets. See Dr. Ginsburg's elaborate articles, " Educa- \ 
 tion," " Synagogue," and " Haphtora," in Cycl.of Bib. Lit. J 
 
42 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 other child than " her first-born Son " (Matt. i. 25). 
 But for this sentiment, — wholly foreign to Jewish 
 ideas — perhaps no one would have ever doubted that 
 " His brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and 
 Judas, and His sisters" (Matt. xiii. 55, 56; Mark vi, 
 3), were younger brothers and sisters of our Lord, — 
 children of JosejDh and Mary. Two methods have been 
 invented of avoiding this conclusion. One hypothesis 
 (maintained by Jerome), is, that these brethren and 
 A sisters were cousins of our Lord. No doubt Hebrew 
 / usage permits such a use of the terras; but the 
 I hypothesis rests on no evidence, and appears incon- 
 \ sistent with the manner in which these brethren and 
 sisters are associated with our Lord's mother. (See 
 Mark iii. 21, 31; Acts i. 14.) Any explanation which 
 identifies any of these brethren with their namesakes 
 among the twelve, seems refuted by the express decla- 
 ration of St. John (vii. 5) — " Neither did His brethren 
 V believe in Him." The other view (expounded with 
 exhaustive learning by Bishop Lightfoot ^) has nothing 
 in it violently impr^^bable ; namely, that the brothers 
 and sisters of Jesus were children of Joseph by a 
 former wife. The objection to this view, which will 
 strike some minds as very grave, and others as unim- 
 Xportant, is, that in this case, Mary's Son must have 
 \ held the place of the youngest child in a large family, 
 I and could have no pretension to represent Joseph as 
 I the heir of Joseph's line, which is the impression 
 ^ naturally conveyed by the genealogy in Matt. i. The 
 question is one regarding which, in lieu of positive 
 evidence, our view will be very much determined 
 by personal feeling. Some will not endure to think 
 of the Virgin Mother as ever descending — as they 
 account it — to the cares of ordinary motherhood. 
 Others will delight to think of " the Child Jesus," as 
 having been for a season the only Son and sole light 
 
 ^ In a Dissertation (Diss, ii.) appended to his Comment 
 tary on Galatians. 
 
LIFE AT NAZABETH. 43 
 
 and treasure of that humble home ; but in later years, 
 as the Elder Brother, shedding the light of His sinless 
 holiness and perfect love on the first footsteps of the 
 band of brothers and sisters who, as time went on, 
 filled the home ; the mainstay of the household under 
 the burden of growing care, and the head of the 
 family after Joseph's death. 
 
 During the thirty years of our Saviour's abode at 
 Nazareth, Coponius, the first Roman Procurator of 
 Judaea, was succeeded by M. Ambivius, Annius Rufus/ 
 Valerius Gratus, and Pontius Pilate. Gratus, during 
 his eleven years of rule, deposed Annas, who had been 
 made high-priest by Cyrenius, and appointed to that 
 office (by an exercise of sheer despotism), in succes- 
 sion, Ishmael, Eleazar, Simon, and Joseph Caiaphas 
 (Jos. Ant. xviii. 2 : 2). The Emperor Augustus died, 
 and was succeeded by Tiberius (a.d. 14). Herod the 
 Tetrarch built a city " in the best part of Galilee, on 
 the Lake of Gennesareth," which, in honour of the 
 emperor, he named Tiberias. He also fortified Sep- 
 phoris, and made it his capital. Philip, Tetrarch of 
 Iturea, rebuilt Panias, by the source of Jordan, and 
 named it Cc^sarea (called C^esarea Philippi, to dis- 
 tinguish it from the more famous city on the coast, 
 built by his father). He also raised the village of 
 Bethsaida to the rank of a city, and named it Julias 
 (Jos. Ant. xviii. 2 : 1). 
 
 Imagination may strive to draw aside the veil which 
 icspiration has drawn over the life of our Saviour, 
 until He "began to be about thirty years of age" 
 (Luke iii. 23). For some minds the attempt will 
 have a strong fascination ; to others it will be repul- 
 sive and irreverent ; and perhaps neither ought to 
 judge the other. But faith and love must never lose 
 sight of the lessons taught in the very silence of 
 those years; — most marvellous in this, that nothing 
 marvellous is recorded of them. Goodness was so 
 unvarying, duty so evenly fulfilled, the lustre of 
 
44 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 holiness so mild and steady, that brothers and sisters, 
 and rude Nazarene neighbours came to take it all a& 
 matter of course, and discerned in it nothing more 
 than human. When at last the disguise was laid 
 aside, and the Prophet-King of Israel, the promised 
 Messiah, stood revealed, they could still only stupidly 
 ask — " Is not this Jesus the Carpenter ? " 
 
 Before our Redeemer entered on that path which 
 was for Him alone. He hallowed the common path, 
 and took into His heart the experience of common 
 life. Ten times as much of life as He occupied in 
 His public ministry. He spent in private life ; working 
 no miracle, preaching no sermon, initiating no public 
 movement. The Divine ideal of perfect holiness, in 
 childhood, youth, and manhood, was realized during 
 thirty years in a life of obscure privacy, mechanical 
 toil, and home affection and duty. 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 THE EVE OF THE MINISTRY. 
 
 nVTOT with public acclaim and royal pomp, nor 
 J_N yet with any dazzling outburst of miraculous 
 power, did the long-promised Son of David, who was 
 to " save His people from their sins," emerge from the 
 deep obscurity of His life at Nazareth, to assiune His 
 destined place and work before the eyes and in the 
 hearts of men ; yet not without due and solemn 
 announcement. The voice of Prophecy, silent during 
 four centuries, awoke at His approach. The Evan- 
 gelist Mark (in perfect accord with the other three 
 Gospels) thus records " the beginning of the Gospel 
 of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; as it is written in 
 the Prophets, Behold I send My Messenger before 
 Thy face, which shall prepare Thy way before Thee. 
 
TEE EVE OF THE MINISTBY. 45- 
 
 The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye 
 the way of the Lord, make His paths straight. John 
 did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism 
 of ret^ntance for the remission of sins" (Mark i. 1-4). 
 The Evangelist Luke states with unusual fulness the 
 date of this preparatory ministry: "In the fifteenth 
 year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, . . . the word 
 of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the ., 
 wilderness " (Luke iii. 1, 2). Singularly enough, this .' 
 very exactness is a source of difficulty. Augustus- 
 Csesar died, and was succeeded by Tiberius, in August 
 A.D. 14. Eeckoning from this date, the fifteenth > 
 year of Tiberius was from August, a.d. 28, to August^ / 
 A.D. 29. This would give us the spring of a.d. 29 
 for the Passover following our Lord's baptism, at 
 which He cleansed the Temple ; and (as will presently 
 be shown) the early part of that year for His baptism. 
 But this does not fit with the date which on other 
 grounds we are led to assign to the beginning of our /^ 
 Lord's ministry, — viz., a.d. 27. These grounds are 
 briefly as follows. 
 
 (1) According to Luke iii. 23, Jesus was about 
 thirty years of age at His baptism. (There is a diffi- 
 culty, concerning which scholars are not agreed, 
 regarding the meaning of the word " beginning " and 
 the exact reading of the text ; but this does not 
 affect the general sense.) If we have been correct in 
 fixing the Nativity about the beginning (a little before 
 or after) of B.C. 4, then in the spring of a.d. 29 our 
 Lord would be more than thirty-two years of age. 
 
 (2) At the Passover at which Jesus began His 
 public ministry, the rebuilding of the Temple had 
 been going on during forty-six years (John ii. 20). 
 Now the rebuilding of the Temple was begun by 
 Herod the Great in the eighteenth year of his reign. 
 (See Jos., Ant. xv. 11 : 1.) Herod's eighteenth year 
 was from 1st Nisan of a.u.c. 734, to the same time 
 A.u.c. *735. Therefore, adding forty-five complete 
 
46 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CEBIST. 
 
 years, at the Passover (i.e. Nisan ISth to 21st) in 
 A.u.c. 780 (a.d. 27), forty-six regnal years had elapsed, 
 and the forty-seventh had just begun, from the year 
 in which the rebuilding commenced. 
 
 (3) The date a.d. 27 harmonizes with the view 
 strongly established on other grounds (to be hereafter 
 set forth) that our Lord's ministry occupied three 
 years, and that the Crucifixion took place a.d. 30. 
 
 Although it is necessary thus fully to state this 
 difficulty, since it affects the entire scheme of Gospel 
 X chronology, the solution is simple and satisfactory. 
 * / The reign of Tiberius as sole emperor began at the 
 I death of Augustus; but he had been joint emperor 
 \ with Augustus — a sort of vice-emperor — for two years 
 \^ previously. The word used by St. Luke, translated 
 " reign," by no means implies sole empire, but applies 
 with i^erfect accuracy to this share in the govern- 
 ment, which had special reference to the provinces. 
 Insomuch that, had St. Luke spoken of a.d. 27 as 
 "the thirteenth year of the government of Tiberius," 
 his critics might have taxed him with ignorance of 
 this association of Tiberius with Augustus in the 
 imperial sovereignty. With this explanation, both 
 the Evangelist's chronology and his phraseology are 
 seen to be perfectly accurate. We therefore under- 
 stand "the fifteenth year" of Tiberius to have begun 
 in August A.D. 26. And we may with great proba- 
 bility suppose that " the word of the Lord came to 
 John," and he began his public ministry, about the 
 close of the summer or the beginning of autumn, 
 shortly before the time when, at the signal of "the 
 early rains," the ploughman and the sower go forth 
 to their w^ork. The ministry of John had as its 
 express and sole object to prepare the Jewish nation 
 to receive their promised Messiah. (See Luke i. 17 ; 
 Mai. iii. 1 ; iv. 5.) We cannot, therefore, suppose it to 
 have been carried on very long before the time when 
 Jesus was "made manifest to Israel" (John i. 31). 
 
THE EVE OF THE MINISTRY. 47" 
 
 The half-year from the autumn of a.d. 26 to the 
 spring of a.d. 27 seems an ample space of time. 
 Nothing like John's preaching had "been heard for 
 centuries. His pungent rebukes of public and private 
 sin, his call to immediate repentance, in view cf 
 coming judgment — " the axe at the root " — and his 
 announcement that the kingdom of God was at hand, 
 stirred the heart of the nation to its depth. " All 
 men counted John, that he was a prophet indeed " 
 (Mark xi. 32), and "mused in their hearts of John, 
 whether he were the Christ, or not " (Luke iii. 15). 
 The public agitation and expectation arose to their 
 highest pitch when, in reply to a formal inquiry from 
 the Sanhedrin whether he were the Christ, or the 
 prophet Elijah, and, if not, what his baptism and 
 mission meant, he replied that he was the " Y^Dice" 
 foretold by Isaiah (xl. 3), preparing the way of the 
 Lord ; and that the Mightier One was even already 
 among them who would baptize with the Holy Spirit, 
 and with the fire of Divine judgment. (Matt. iii. 
 1-12 ; Mark i. 5-8 ; Luke iii. 1-18 ; John i. 6-8, 
 15-28). 
 
 The " Wilderness of Judasa " (Matt. iii. 1) is the 
 name applied by geographers to that arid and barren 
 tract of country (about forty miles in length with an 
 average breadth of nine) which slopes steeply towards 
 the Dead Sea from the mountain ridge -^hich rises in 
 the Mount of Olives 2,665 feet, at Hebron 3,546 feet, 
 or on the average about 3,300 feet above the sea level. 
 The surface of the Dead Sea lies nearly 1,300 feet 
 below that level. The steep slopes and cliffs of bare 
 limestone are furrowed by deep, rugged chasms rather 
 than valleys ; and scarcely any tokens of hfe, animal 
 or vegetable, soften the frightful desolation and utter 
 solitude. In such a region, " without trees or grass, 
 or stream, or fountain," it is evident that not even 
 "locusts and wild honey" (Matt. iii. 4) could be 
 found, nor yet water. John could not have spent in 
 
•48 OUTLIXES OF THE LIFE OF CnniST. 
 
 such a region the years during which he " was iu the 
 deserts till the day of his shewing unto Israel" 
 (Luke i. 80). We mui^t seek the scene both of his 
 hermit life and of the opening of his public ministry 
 either nearer the banks of Jordan, where it enters the 
 Dead Sea, or amid the mountain glens, where shep- 
 herds wandered with their flocks (Luke xv. 4 ; 1 
 Sam. xvii. 28) ; and where, when the early or the 
 latter rains " drop upon the pastures of the wilder- 
 ness,"^" the little hills rejoice on every side." Emerg- 
 ing from these pastoral solitudes, the Preacher " came 
 into all the country about Jordan, preaching the 
 baptism of repentance for the remission of sins." In 
 the following spring we find him at " Bethabara 
 be^yond Jordan," and at *' JEuon near to Salim " 
 (Johni. 28; iii. 23). For "Bethabara" the ohlest 
 MSS., and modern editors, read ** Bethania." The 
 traditional site (the crossing-place of the children of 
 Israel under Joshua, near Jericho) appears irrecon- 
 cilable, on account of its distance from Galilee, with 
 John ii. 1, compared with i. 20, 35, 43. But 
 " Bethania " and " Bethabara " may both have been 
 in use, the former as the name of the localitj^, the 
 latter of the ford or ferry ; and recent research has 
 discovered a ford still called "Abarah," which is 
 within a day's journey of Cana, and is therefore very 
 probably the place where our Saviour was pointed out 
 by John to his disciples, possibly also the scene of 
 His baptism. 
 
 The time of our Lord's baptism may be approxi- 
 mately fixed by reckoning back from the Passover. 
 Immediately after He was baptized (Mark i. 12) Jesus 
 spent forty days in the desert. It seems to have been 
 immediately after His return from the scene of the 
 temptation that He was pointed out by John to his 
 disci] Jes, as narrated in John i. 29. For the events 
 recorded in verses 35-51 ; chap. ii. 1-13, we must 
 allow two or three weeks. We have thus not less 
 
THE EVE OF TEE MIXISTEY. 41) 
 
 thaa eight or nine weeks to deduct from the date of 
 the Passover, which in a.d. 27 fell on April 9. There- 
 fore our Lord's baptism cannot have been later, but 
 may have been earlier than the first fortnight of 
 February, soon after He had completed His thirtieth 
 year. 
 
 The hour had arrived, for the calm, patient, obscure 
 life at Nazareth, so sublime in its perfect simplicity 
 and kwliness, to end. The great crises of life often 
 arrive silently. Noiseless, unmarked, the dial-hand, 
 reaches the hour whose stroke will echo through the 
 world to the end of time. As Jesus stepped forth 
 from His mother's dwelling, and took the familiar 
 path down the pass, the snow may have been still 
 lying on the hill-tops ; but in the great plain to the 
 south, and in the warm valley of the Jordan, the olive 
 and other trees were already bursting into leaf, the 
 meadows thick with flowers, and the fields green with 
 young com. But who that saw the Sou of Mary pass 
 on His lonely way could have guessed that the spring- 
 tide of the world's regeneration was waiting on His 
 steps? Even to His prophet-herald, John, He was 
 personally unknown until the secret Divine premonition 
 and the corresponding miraculous token revealed to 
 him " the Son of God " (John i. 31-34). 
 
 Considering the meaning of John's baptism, and 
 the public confession of sin which it required, it might 
 have seemed superfluous, not to say inconsistent, for 
 one "who knew no sin" to submit to it. But Jesus 
 Himself explained the reason which made this sub- 
 mission wise and obligatory on Him; and, while 
 bearing testimony to the Divine mission of His fore- 
 runner, He was thus, even as on the cross, " numbered 
 with the transgressors." 
 
 The locality of the forty days' fast, and of the 
 temptation, cannot be determined. The awful moun- 
 tain solitudes of *' the wilderness of Judah," already 
 described, present as fitting a scene as can be imagined. 
 
50 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 But some countenance is given to the conjecture that^ 
 like Elijah, our Saviour was Divinely led into the 
 wilderness of Horeb, by the fact that on His return 
 we find Him beyond Jordan (John i. 28, 29). 
 
 During those six mysterious weeks of seclusion and 
 awful spiritual conflict, the breath and touch of spring 
 had passed over the Holy Land. As " He that should 
 come" emerges into human sight and conva'se, all 
 nature seems to welcome Him. " The field" is "joy- 
 ful, and all that is therein," and " all the tree^ of the 
 wood rejoice before the Lord : for He cometh, for He 
 cometh to judge the earth : He shall judge t^ie world 
 with righteousness, and the people with His truth"' 
 (Ps. xcvi. 12, 13). The beloved disciple has painted 
 for us in unfading colours the opening scenes of our 
 Saviour's ministry, as they lived in his own memory. 
 (John i. 29). Jesus is walking on the eastern bank 
 of Jordan, already swollen with the melting snows of 
 Hermon, for barley harvest is at hand. The great 
 preacher points out to his disciples, in that calm 
 solitary figure, "The Lamb of God, who taketh away 
 the sin of the world." Two of them, promptly acting 
 on this testimony, seek at once to place themselves 
 under the teaching of the new Prophet. One of the 
 two was Andrew, famous only for the influence exerted 
 by his example and testimony on his brother Simon, 
 for whom was destined the foremost place of service 
 and honour in the kingdom which their master John 
 had announced as at hand. The other, not expressly 
 named, was doubtless *'the disciple whom Jesus 
 loved," the Evangelist John ; probably a near kinsman 
 of our Lord, and one of the choicest spirits not merely 
 of that nation or age, but of the Church of God and 
 of the human race.^ 
 
 1 The belief that St. John was a first cousin of our Lord 
 rests on the interpretation of John xix. 25, compared with 
 Matt, xxvii. 56, and Mark xv. 40. It is very commonly 
 supposed that the words "His mother's sister" refer to 
 
TEE EVE OF TEE MINISTRY. 51 
 
 With a few simple, kindly, yet heart-searcliing 
 word^. Jesus attracts to Himself first these three, 
 then Wo more — Philip of Bethsaida, and his friend 
 Nathanael of Cana.^ All five were men of Galilee, 
 and all, we may assume, disciples of John. The 
 attractbn was strong enough to induce them to 
 accompany Jesus in recrossiug Jordan into Galilee. 
 Yet ho'v little would they imagine that the tie thus 
 gently, almost imperceptibly, knit was to bind them 
 in life-long service, and in union over which death 
 would have no power, and was the obscure germ of a 
 movement destined to subdue and regenerate the 
 world (John i. 35-51). 
 
 We find no indication that Jesus had any intention 
 of returning to the home at Nazareth. On the follow- 
 ing day we find Him at Cana, an invited guest at a 
 wedding, where His mother seems to have taken the 
 place of house-mistress or hostess. Possibly bride- 
 groom or bride may have been one of the brothers or 
 sisters of Jesus. The wedding party were probably 
 all kinsfolk or near friends; and as Andrew and 
 Simon were partners with Zebedee's sons (Luke v. 10), 
 
 " Mary the wife of Cleophas" ("the mother of James and 
 Joses"); but it is far more natural to understand /our 
 women to be spoken of, and that the sister of our Lord's 
 mother was Salome " the mother of Zebedee's children." It 
 is very unlikely that Mary, the mother of Jesus, had a 
 sister of the same name ; and it quite accords with St. John's 
 suppression of his own name that he should refer to his 
 own mother in this manner. This view throws a beautiful 
 light both on the special love of the Master for this one 
 disciple, and on John xix. 26, 27. 
 
 ^ There seems no room to doubt the received opinion that 
 Nathanael was the same with the Apostle Bartholomew, 
 who is always named in the lists of Apostles in conjunction 
 with Philip. " Bartholomew " is simplv a surname — " son 
 of Tholmai" (or Talmai— 2 Sam. iii. 3). In John xxi. 2 
 we find Nathanael in company with at least four (probably 
 six) of the twelve ; and w^e can scarcely be wrong in inferring 
 that this " Israelite indeed " was of their number. 
 
52 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 Philip a fellow-townsman, and ISTatlianael his intimate 
 friend, we may easily account for these also being 
 "called to the marriage," without supposing that 
 they were invited ex23ressly as disciples of Jesus 
 (John ii. 1-11). 
 
 Our Lord's first miracle, wrought on such an 
 occasion, in such company, upon the request of His 
 mother, may well be regarded as a gracious leave- 
 taking of the old home-life — a parting gleam shed on 
 it — attended as it w^as with a respectful but unmis- 
 takable intimation that parental authority over Him 
 was now a thing of the past. Unostentatious and 
 genial as it was, the miracle was transcendently 
 marvellous. Jesus " manifested forth His glory, and 
 His disciples believed on Him." This private begin- 
 ning of miracles was in harmony with the private 
 informal beginning of .our Lord's ministry. But 
 privacy — except such as He could snatch by night, 
 under the shelter of some cliff or tree — was soon to be 
 at an end for Him. Having gone down to Capernaum 
 in company with His mother and His brethren, and 
 sojourned there "not many days," Jesus, like all 
 devout Jews who were not disabled by some weighty 
 hindrance, went up to Jerusalem to keep the Passover 
 (John ii. 12, 13. April 9-16, a.d. 27). 
 
 During this feast Jesus publicly assumed the 
 character and authority of a prophet, or "teacher 
 come from God," by denouncing, and for the time 
 putting down the market and exchange held in the 
 great outer court surrounding the Temple, known as 
 " the Court of the Gentiles." St. John's Gospel not 
 simply narrates this incident as occurring at this time, 
 but expressly assigns the date (ii. 20). The three 
 other Gospels narrate a similar exercise of prophetic 
 authority and zeal for His Father's house, at the 
 closing Passover of our Lord's ministry. Only a 
 desire to find discrepancies will lead any one to see 
 one here. The Jewish authorities might well feei 
 
THE EVE OF THE MINISTRY. 5a 
 
 abashed as well as enraged to find themselves charged 
 with profaning that sanctuary, reverence for which . 
 was their chief pride. But their contempt for all 
 other nations rendered it impossible for them to feel 
 that a yard polluted by the presence of Gentiles could 
 be profaned by beasts and birds destined for sacrifice, 
 or by the exchange of sacred for heathen coin. An 
 abuse so profitable was sure to re-establish itself; and 
 the same reasons which made this cleansing of the 
 sanctuary the most fitting manifestation of Christ's 
 authority and character when He " suddenly came to 
 His Temple," made it also most fitting that He should 
 at the close of His ministry repeat this solemn public 
 protest against the disobedience, formalism, and un- 
 godliness of both rulers and people. (John ii. 13-22). 
 
 N.B.— This Part (Part IT.) includes Matt, i.-iv. 11: 
 Mark i. ; Luke i.-iv. 13 ; John i.-ii. 22. 
 
54 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CRRIST. 
 
 PAET III. 
 THE MINISTRY. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 FIRST YEAR. (a.d. 27, 28 = 780, 781 A.U.C.) 
 
 THAT unprecedented and startling exercise of pro- 
 phetic authority and holy zeal with which our 
 Lord announced His entrance on His public ministry 
 in Jerusalem — the cleansing of the Temple — suggests 
 some questions of deep interest. Are we to explain 
 the unresisting submission of the dealers, and the 
 tacit acquiescence of the authorities, as produced by 
 an exercise of miraculous power, or as the natural 
 result of that innate authority which characterizes 
 born leaders of men, and which we must suppose the 
 Lord Jesus to have possessed in the highest degree ? 
 The answer probably is, that Jesus was a miraculous 
 Person, whom it was impossible to approach without 
 being conscious of being in the presence of One who 
 towered above the stature of ordinary manhood ; and 
 that in regard to His actions, no sharp line between 
 the natural and the miraculous can be drawn. When 
 He taught, it was " as having; authority, and not as 
 the Scribes " (Matt. vii. 29). When He said, " Follow 
 Me," men felt as though an invisible hand were 
 irresistibly laid on them, and forsook all to obey Him. 
 
FIRST YEAR OF MINISTRY. 55 
 
 When the enraged Nazarenes seized and dragged Him 
 to the verge of the precipice, "He passing through 
 the midst of them went His way." When He stepped 
 forward to meet the armed party whicli came to arrest 
 Him in Gethsemane, " they went backward, and fell 
 to the ground" (Luke iv. 30; John xviii. 6). 
 
 No authentic description has come down to us of 
 the personal appearance of Jesus. Isaiah's well- 
 known prediction (liii. 2) has often been supposed 
 to imply that it was mean and unsightly ; and this 
 repulsive notion has been justified as appropriate 
 to our Saviour's humiliation. But the prophecy is 
 much more reasonably interpreted as pointing to the 
 absence of that royal pomp and worldly splendour 
 with which Jewish fancy and expectation arrayed the 
 Messiah, — to "His kingdom, as possessing in the eyes 
 of men no beauty, glory, or magnificence " (Calvin). 
 His stupendous public labours, and long journeys on 
 foot, coupled with the fact that, after spending the 
 day in toil, bodily and mental, which might well be 
 deemed exhausting. He often found refreshment, 
 not in sleep, but in prayer, plainly betoken a 
 vigorous frame, proof alike against noontide heat 
 and night dews, matured by wholesome labour and 
 simple living in the pure hill air of Nazareth. His 
 voice could be heard by thousands of persons in the 
 open air, and could endure the strain of public 
 speaking for hours together. A perfectly sinless life, 
 unceasing communion with God, perfect mental and 
 bodily health, and a perfect balance of all intellectual 
 and moral faculties, ruled and inspired by love such 
 as no other heart can have room for, must on all 
 ordinary physiognomic principles have produced not 
 only 
 
 "A countenance wherein did meet 
 Sweet records, promises as sweet," 
 
 but a presence absolutely imique in nobleness and 
 graciousness. When to all this we add the con- 
 
5G OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CERIST. 
 
 sideration that in Him dwelt " all the fulness of the 
 Oodhead bodily," we can scarcely err in concluding 
 that the pre-eminent characters of His countenance 
 were those which painters have most failed to 
 s'epresent, — ■ majesty and insight : an eye that 
 pierced men's souls, and looked into eternity ; and 
 a more than kingly aspect of authority, which made 
 it the natural impulse of those who approached Him 
 to fall at His feet and worship. (Matt. viii. 2; 
 ix. 18 ; xiv. 33 ; xv. 25 ; Mark v. 6 ; John ix. 38.) 
 Yet His presence attracted even more than it over- 
 uwed. Children gathered fearlessly round Him, and 
 ran at His call into His arms. Despised and miser- 
 able outcasts felt that He alone of all men would not 
 spurn them or shrink from them. Publicans and 
 sinners drew near to Him. The poor, the broken- 
 hearted, the guilty, felt drawn by the irresistible 
 oharm of love, truth, and sympathy, when He bade 
 them come unto Him, that they might find rest to 
 their souls. (Mark ix. 36 ; Matt, xviii. 2 ; Luke vii. 
 37 ; XV. 1 ; Matt. xi. 19, 28-30.) 
 
 Unlike the ancient prophets, Jesus, from the very 
 outset of His mission, entered into no relations with 
 the priesthood, the Sanhedrin, or the national 
 authorities in any form, any more than with Herod, 
 the ruler of Galilee, or with the imperial government. 
 In this respect the contrast, even with John the 
 Baptist's attitude, is remarkable and instructive. 
 John's faithful rebuke of Herod's wickedness, which 
 in the end cost him his life, was only the sequel of 
 many warnings and counsels addressed by him to the 
 Tetrarch of Galilee ; " for Herod feared John, know- 
 ing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed 
 him; and when he heard him, he did many things, 
 and heard him gladly " (Mark vi. 20). Contrast with 
 this our Saviour's deliberate avoidance of Herod, 
 indicated by such passages as Luke ix. 7-9 ; xiii. 31, 
 32 J xxiii. 8. The ministry of Jesus was addressed 
 
FIRST YEAR OF MINISTRY. 57 
 
 to individuals (" every man," John vi. 44, 45 ; Mark 
 vii. 14) and to the people — " the lost sheep of the 
 house of Israel" (Matt. xv. 24). In the death of 
 Christ, compared with that of His forerunner, we see 
 this contrast reversed. The murder of John was 
 a simple act of personal tyranny, to gratify private 
 revenge ; the death of Jesus was the public act of the 
 Jewish authorities, to which they strove to give the 
 colour of law and justice, as w^ell as of public 
 expediency (John xi. 47-50 ; xix. 7-12) ; sanctioned 
 by the voice of th© nation, as represented by the 
 multitude assembled in Jerusalem at the Passover 
 (Matt, xxvii. 20-25). 
 
 On His disciples Jesus enforced the duty of loyal 
 submission to the nation rulers, as appointed to ad- 
 minister the Divine law (Matt, xxiii. 1-3). At the 
 same time He unsparingly denounced the corruption 
 and perversion (under the guise of interpretation) of 
 the written law by the oral law, and warned His 
 disciples that the time was at hand w^hen they would 
 have to choose between submission to earthly rulers, 
 Jewish or heathen, and allegiance to Himself: or, iii 
 other words, between obedience to men and obedience 
 to God. (See Matt. xv. 3-9, 14 ; xvi. 12 ; xxiii. 16- 
 34 ; John xvi. 2 ; comp. Acts iv. 19 ; v. 29.) As 
 they were not Rabbis, we do not find that He gave 
 them any commission to teach in the synagogues, as 
 He was Himself accustomed to do. St Paul's case \ 
 was different, as he was a Piabbi (Cp. e.g. Acts xiii. 5, ) 
 14, 15). Jesus always appealed to the written law 
 (including the Psalms and Prophets) as a final 
 authority (" the Scripture cannot be broken " — Jolia 
 X. 35); and fulfilled "all righteousness," as became 
 one " made under the law " (Matt. iii. 15 ; Gal. iv. 4). 
 But He quoted Scripture as having only a co-ordinate \ 
 authority with his own word. His '• Verily I say j 
 unto you" took the place of the old prophetic,. / 
 "Thus saith the Lord." The position He assumed. 
 
58 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 was that of supreme authority, immediately repre- 
 senting the sovereignty of God. He came, not like 
 John the Baptist, to announce the kingdom of 
 Heaven, but to found it, and to lay down its eternal 
 laws. 
 
 From this "brief view of the general character of 
 our Lord's ministry, in relation to the Jewish rulers 
 and to the mass of the nation, we can understand 
 that Jerusalem would not be a suitable place for its 
 exercise, except at the great yearly festivals. It is, 
 therefore, likely that, having signalized the public 
 opening of His ministry by the cleansing of the 
 Temple, He did not prolong His stay in Jerusalem 
 beyond the Passover Week. Daring this time He 
 wrought some miracles, particulars of which are not 
 recorded, but which led many to believe in Him, 
 though the faith founded only on this external 
 evidence was neither deep nor lasting (John ii. 23-25). 
 In consequence of these miracles. He was visited by 
 night by the distinguished Rabbi Nicodemus, whose 
 faith, timidly concealed during the lifetime of Jesus, 
 was nobly avowed after His death (John iii. 1-21 ; 
 vii. 50; xix. 39). Shortly afterwards Jesus with- 
 drew from tljc city, and began to preach and baptize 
 in *' the land of Judaja," in what locality we are not 
 told; probably, like John, on the banks of Jordan 
 (John iii. 22-36). 
 
 In attempting to determine the duration of this 
 first ministry of our Lord in Judeea, we come on 
 another controverted point. The question turns 
 partly, though by no means wholly, on the in- 
 terpretation of the words in John iv. 35 : " Say not 
 ye, There are yet four months, and then cometh 
 harvest V^ Some (as Lightfoot, Robinson, Wieseler) 
 take these words as supplying a literal note of time; 
 and infer that our Lord's journey through Samaria 
 took place about the beginning of December. Others 
 (as Greswell, Alford) hold that the phrase, " Say not 
 
FIRST YEAR OF MINISTRY. 59 
 
 2/e," implies a proverbial expression — "Four montlis, 
 and then harvest ; " that is, " You cannot have harvest 
 in seed-time." Our Saviom-'s meaning, on this 
 interpretation, is not that it was winter when He 
 spoke, but that the proverbial four months had 
 expired, and the fields were "white already to 
 harvest." The literal harvest was the type of the 
 spiritual harvest, of which the disciples themselves 
 were the first-fruits, and which soon they were to 
 toil in gathering in. According to the first view, 
 Jesus spent eight months or more in Judaea. 
 According to the second view, the time so spent, 
 including the week at Jerusalem, was but about six 
 weeks; and Pentecost (May 30) was at hand when 
 Jesus left Juda?a for Galilee. 
 
 It appears on the face of it in the highest degree 
 improbable that our Lord should have spent three- 
 fourths of the first year of His public ministry in 
 Judjea without any record being preserved in any 
 Gospel, beyond the brief statements that He tarried 
 with His disciples in the land of JudcTa, baptizing 
 (by their ministry), and that the Pharisees heard that 
 He was making more numerous disciples than John 
 (John iii. 22; iv. 1-3). The "hill country" of 
 Judgea, where the towns and villages were perched on 
 the hill-tops, separated by steep, narrow valleys, was 
 eminently unsuited to be the scene of such a ministry. 
 And if, as seems likely, we are to understand that 
 during this time our Lord was preaching, and 
 gathering disciples in the valley of Jordan, even if 
 He wrought no miracle, it is inconceivable that His 
 fame should not in so long a time as eight months 
 have filled all Palestine, attracting multitudes from 
 Gahlee and other regions. Instead of this, we find 
 St. Matthew connecting the beginning of our Lord's 
 public ministry and the rapid spread of His fame 
 with His return to Galilee. This is intelligible, if 
 He had been teaching publicly for some six weeks; 
 
BO OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 but not if He had been making more disciples tlian 
 John during eight months. The narratives of St. 
 Mark and St. Luke convey the same impression 
 (Mark i. 14, 28 ; Luke iv. 14 ; comp. with Matt. iv. 
 17, 24). This impression is strongly confirmed by 
 St. John's statement that " When He was come into 
 Galilee, the Galilseans received Him, having seen all 
 the things that He did at Jerusalem at the feast : for 
 they also went unto the feast" (John iv. 45). By 
 "' the feast " is plainly meant the Passover spoken of 
 in chap. ii. The reference is clear, if only a few 
 -weeks had elapsed, and no other feast had intervened. 
 But if during eight months or more, including the 
 feasts of Pentecost and Tabernacles, Jesus had been 
 preaching and making disciples on the banks of 
 Jordan, the statement would be inappropriate and 
 inexplicable. 
 
 It is a further confirmation of this view, that 
 Simon Peter, his brother, and their partners, James 
 and John, on returning to Galilee, resumed their 
 employment as fishermen. This was natural, if their 
 absence had been but of a few weeks' duration ; but 
 the narratives in Matt. iv. 18-22, and Luke v. 1-11, 
 would be scarcely intelligible, if during eight or nine 
 months they had practically " left all " to follow 
 Jesus. 
 
 The foregoing facts afi'ord solid grounds for the 
 conclusion that our Lord's early Jud^an ministry 
 was limited to a few weeks, and that the summer 
 was not yet far advanced when (perhaps in the last 
 week of May) He journeyed with His little band of 
 disciples through Samaria and Galilee (John iv. 
 3, 4). 
 
 While Jesus tarried in Judeea, " John also was 
 iDaptizing in iEnon near to Salim. . . . For John was 
 not yet cast into prison" (John iii. 23, 24). It seems 
 now placed beyond doubt that >3l]non and Salim were 
 in the north of Samaria, and not far from the southern 
 
FIRST' YEAR OF MINISTRY. Ci 
 
 Toorder of Galilee. AYe have already seen that John's 
 ministry was by no means confined to the place 
 where he at first baptized (John x. 40). Bethabara 
 -(or Bethania) appears to have been a ford between 
 Peraa and Galilee considerably further north. That 
 Herod " did many things " in compliance with John's 
 exhortations " and heard him gladly " (Mark vi. 20), 
 implies that John visited the com-t of the Tetrarch. 
 And he must have been within Herod's territory, 
 either in Galilee or in Persea (and must, therefore, 
 have left -^non), when the tyrant seized and im- 
 prisoned him in his impregnable castle of Machaerus, 
 near the Dead Sea (Matt. xiv. 3 ; Mark vi. 17. See 
 Jos., Ant. xviii. 5 : 2). 
 
 Our Lord's return to Galilee, and the beginning of 
 His public ministry there, are connected in the first 
 two Gospels with the imprisonment of John (Matt, 
 iv. 12 ; Mark i. 14). The omission by St. Luke of 
 any corresponding note of time (iv. 14) may be ex- 
 plained from the fact that he has previously referred 
 to John's imprisonment (iii. 19, 20). St. John, after 
 noting that the Baptist was still teaching and baptiz- 
 ing (at ^non), while Jesus taught and baptizid in 
 Judsea, makes the remarkable statement (iv. 1-3), 
 " When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees 
 liad heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples 
 than John, ... He left Judasa, and departed again 
 into Galilee." What are we to understand by this, or 
 to infer from it? Very commonly it has been under- 
 stood to imply, that our Lord's transference of His 
 ministry from Judeea to Galilee, was in the nature of 
 a retreat, or withdrawal for safety's sake from the 
 hostility of the Pharisees. This view (how weighty or 
 numerous soever the authorities which may be cited 
 in its favour) appears to me a most serious and mis- 
 leading misapprehension ; and for these reasons : — 
 
 First. Because as yet there was no open breasli 
 between our Lord and the Pharisees. The firct 
 
62 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF C HEIST. 
 
 occasion of open hostility occurred at His next visit 
 to Jerusalem, as recorded in John v. 1, 16, 18. 
 
 Secondly. It is dishonourable to Christ to ascribe 
 to Him a timid care for personal safety, which even 
 an apostle would have despised (comp. Luke xiii. 31- 
 33 ; Acts xxi. 13). When the hostility of the 
 Pharisees in league with the Sadducees had reached 
 its height, two years and a half later, Jesus " stead- 
 fastly set His face to o;o to Jerusalem " (Luke ix. 51. 
 Comp. John vii. 14, 25, 26 ; xi. 8, 9).i 
 
 Thirdly. If our Lord had wished to avoid danger, 
 the only rational course would have been to refrain 
 from public teaching altogether. 
 
 Fourthly. If our Lord's object was (as Lightfoot 
 suggests) " that He might be more remote from that 
 kind of thunderbolt that St. John had been struck 
 with," He certainly would not have gone straight into 
 the territory of Herod; not to seek " safe retirement" 
 among the hills of Galilee, but to enter on a life of 
 incessant public labour among the populous cities and 
 thick-planted villages which bordered the Lake of 
 Tiberias. 
 
 Galilee, with its swarming population, its green and 
 wooded hills (so unlike the rugged and desolate 
 mountains of the Judjean wilderness), and its lake, 
 not, as now, a lonely waste of waters, but alive with 
 sails and oars of fishing-craft and market-boats, pre- 
 sented incomparably the most suitable scene for the 
 public ministry of Jesus. The Galilgeans, hardy, 
 brave, industrious, unpolished in speech, despised by 
 the Jews of Jerusalem as rude and ignorant of the 
 law, troubled themselves little, we may well suppose, 
 in their turn, with the inane refinements and intoler- 
 
 1 The brief suspension of public ministry noticed in John 
 xi. 54 was of a totally different character : an interval of 
 quiet private converse with His disciples ; perhaps also of 
 needful rest, bodily and mental, as well as solemn prepara- 
 tion for the tremendous closing conflict then near at hand. 
 
FIRST YEAR OF MINISTRY. 63 
 
 able littleness of Rabbinical tradition. And, in spite 
 of that spiritual dulness which Christ bewailed and 
 rebuked (John iv. 48 ; Matt. xiii. 13-15 ; xi. 20), the 
 hearts of these "lost sheep of the house of Israel" 
 warmed towards the Teacher whose own loving heart 
 yearned over them, who cared for their bodily as well 
 as for their spiritual misery, who clothed Divine 
 truth in homely guise, that it might " enter in at 
 lowly doors," and bade the weary-hearted come to 
 Him and find rest to their souls. The peoi:)le of 
 whom such " unlearned and ignorant men " as Peter 
 and JoTin were specimens, could have been no de- 
 spicable people. Nor are we warranted in assuming 
 that the associations of thirty years, and the ties of 
 home and kindred, were treated by Christ with in- 
 difference, and allowed no share in determining the 
 scene of His first public labours. 
 
 Instead, therefore, of explaining the return from 
 Judaja to Galilee as a defeat or a retreat, we must 
 rather regard it as an advance, and as the most 
 natural and appropriate course for Jesus to adopt. If 
 anything needs explaining, it is rather that He should 
 have delayed His return to Galilee even for those few 
 weeks during which He " tarried with His disciples " 
 in the land of Judasa. This explanation, if I mistake 
 not, is to be found in the fact, that John was still at 
 this time carrying on his ministry close to the Galilean 
 border. Until his commission to "make ready a 
 people prepared for the Lord " (Luke i. 17) had run 
 out, the Lord Jesus wisely as well as generously 
 refrained from appearing to supersede or rival him. 
 He therefore confined Himself to the region which 
 John had at first occupied, and had now quitted. We 
 have thus the key to John iv. 1-3, which on this 
 view refers not to any timid fear of the Pharisees, but 
 to the fact (explained and illustrated by John iii. 
 25-30) that since by this time the fame of Jesus was 
 known in Jerusalem to be ecUpsing" that of John, no 
 
C4 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 practical end would have been served by any longer 
 refraining from exercising His ministry in Galilee. 
 John's noble words concerning the Bridegroom and 
 the friend of the Bridegroom showed, that in the 
 fading of his own light before the rising splendour of 
 this greater Light, he recognized no failure or dis- 
 appointment, but the fulfilment of his own witness,, 
 and the proof of the success of bis mission. 
 
 That the imprisonment of John should have exactly 
 coincided in time with the beginning of the Galilean 
 ministry of Christ, was an indication that his great 
 work of preparing the way of the Lord was now 
 accomplished. As its commencement and course 
 were Divinely commissioned, so its close was Divinely 
 ordered. St. Matthew tells us (iv. 12) that " Jesus 
 had heard that John was cast into prison." Jesus, 
 tberelbre, without further delay, "returned in the 
 power of the Spirit into Galilee" (Luke iv. 14). 
 " And He must needs go througb Samakia " (Jobn 
 iv. 4 ; that is to say, the province of Samaria, not tbe 
 city), unless He preferred the circuitous route, beyond 
 Jordan. It is asserted that Jews often took tbat 
 route, to avoid Samaria ; but Josepbus tells us that, 
 "it was customary for those Galilseans who went up 
 to the Holy City at the festivals, to journey through 
 the country of Samaria " {Ant. xx. 6:1); and be 
 reckons it a three days' journey by this route from 
 Galilee to Jerusalem {Life^ § 52). Our Lord's two 
 days' sojourn at Sycbar, bowever, was not only a 
 startling departure from Jewish customs, but a 
 gracious exception to the rule which He laid down 
 for Himself as well as for His disciples, to confine His. 
 ministry to Israel (Matt. xv. 24 ; x. 5, 6). The faith 
 of these despised Samaritans was in .striking contrast 
 with the imbelief of Israel, especially as our Lord 
 does not appear to have wrought any miracle^ among 
 them. The field was "white to the harvest," and 
 needed but to thrust in the sickle. It is interesting 
 
FIRST YEAR OF MINISTRY. 65 
 
 to connect with the welcome given to Christ by these 
 strangers the ministry of Philip recorded in Acts viii. 
 5-8. (John iv. 1-44.) 
 
 The Galilaeans, St. John tells us (iv. 45), readily 
 welcomed Jesus, on account of the miracles which 
 they had witnessed during the Passover Week at 
 Jerusalem. Cana, where His first miracle had been 
 wrought, was now the scene of a yet more wonderful 
 display of Divine power, the healing of a nobleman's 
 son, who was lying sick many miles away, at Caper- 
 naum (John iv. 46-54). Cana was not far from 
 Nazaketh, and it is possible that Jesus may have 
 j3aid private visits to His mother in the old home, 
 which it did not belong to the Gospel history to 
 record. But that He visited Capernaum, and wrought 
 miracles there previous to the visit described by St. 
 Luke (iv. 16-31), is clear from that very narrative 
 (verse 23 ; " Whatsoever we have heard done in 
 Capernaum," etc. ; comp. verses 14, 15). At the same 
 tima the impression naturally conveyed is, that this 
 visit belongs to an early period in the Galilean 
 ministry. Every consideration points to this as pro- 
 l)able ; and no solid reason can be advanced for the 
 view maintained by many excellent writers, that in 
 ■consequence of the murderous violence of the Naza- 
 renes, our Lord never revisited Nazareth ; and that 
 this occasion must, therefore, be identified with that 
 visit to " His own country " recorded in the first and 
 second Gospels, when " He could there do no mighty 
 work," and "marvelled because of their unbelief" 
 <Matt. xiii. 53-58 ; Mark vi. 1-6). It is true that, 
 had our Lord refrained from revisiting K azareth. His 
 townsmen would have been justly punished. Except 
 that fatal death-shout of the Jewish people, " Crucify 
 Him ! His blood be on us and on our children ! " no 
 more astounding or melancholy words are on record 
 than those which tell us how the men among whom 
 the Son of Mary had lived for thirty years "were 
 
 c 
 
GG OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 filled with wrath, and rose up, and thrust Him out o? 
 the city, and led Him unto the brow of the hill 
 whereon their city was built, that they might cast 
 Him down headlong." But surely He who was meek 
 and lowly in heart, and who said even of blood-guilty 
 Jerusalem, "How often would I have gathered thy 
 children ! " would not be deterred even by this out- 
 burst of insane pride and blind unbelief from revisit- 
 ing, at least once more, the synagogue in which He 
 had been wont in years past to take His turn among 
 the Scripture readers, and according to His old neigh- 
 bours one more proffer of grace. Their •imbelief was 
 none the less to be " marvelled at " because of its 
 stubborn impenitence. 
 
 It has been sometimes said that Jesus did not 
 " assume the title of Messiah." The statement is, 
 perhaps, not very intelligible. He came not to fill an 
 office and accept a title already in existence, but to 
 do the work and be the Person foreshadowed by that 
 prophetic title of " the Anointed One." When men 
 saw and heard Him they asked, "Is not this the 
 Christ?" or exclaimed, " Thou art the Christ, the Son 
 of the living God ! " But, though no formal assump- 
 tion of Messiahship was either requisite or possible, 
 Jesus explicitly avowed at the very outset of His 
 ministry that He was the predicted Messiah; as for 
 example, to the Samaritan woman in wayside talk. 
 (John iv. 26), and in public teaching at Nazareth, 
 when He declared the prediction in Isaiah Ixi. 1 to be 
 fulfilled in Himself. 
 
 " From that time Jesus began to preach, and to 
 say, Eepent : for the kingdom of heaven is at hand " 
 (Matt. iv. 17).^ To let all men understand that, great 
 and vital as was the difference soon to be unfolded 
 
 1 The 'expression in 'verse 13, "leaving Xazareth," need 
 not be understood, in so terse a writer, to imply any renewed 
 residence there, but may simply refer to the preceding thirty 
 years. 
 
FIRST YEAR OF MINISTRY. 67 
 
 "between the ministry of the forerunner of Christ and 
 that of Christ Himself, they were not discordant, but 
 in truest harmony, the keynote of the early preaching 
 of Jesus was an exact echo of that of the Baptist 
 (comp. Mark. i. 14, 15). He took up the preaching of 
 the Glad Tidings at the precise point where John had 
 laid it down. But though the keynote was the same, 
 that was but the prelude to a strain such as human 
 «ars never heard before. *' Never man spake like this 
 Man." Instead of a "voice crying in the wilderness," 
 it was a voice in men's homes and hearts. Instead of 
 a stern Elijah laying the axe to the root of the tree, it 
 was the Good Shepherd seeking the lost sheep ; the 
 Sower going forth to sow ; the Friend of sinners, who 
 while He spoke of the living water and bread of life, 
 •fed the hunger of men's bodies, lifted off their burdens 
 of sickness and infirmity, and wiped the tears of 
 bereavement from their eyes. John's word had ad- 
 dressed the conscience, backing up its appeal with the 
 terrors of judgment, yet also pointing to the Lamb 
 of God who should bear away the sin of the world. 
 •Christ's word addressed the heart, the intellect, the 
 whole spiritual nature. It joined with the call to 
 Tepentance the assurance of full forgiveness, and the 
 p)romise of the gift of God's Spirit to inspire within 
 the soul a new life and fill the heart with comfort, 
 peace, and rest. Those who had rejected John's 
 ministry — the oflBcial lights and leaders of Israel — 
 likewise rejected Christ; though on precisely contrary 
 pretexts (Luke vii. 29-35). But the " publicans and 
 sinners," as they had accepted John's baptism and 
 •confessed the justice of his scathing rebukes, crowded 
 to the ministry of Jesus, as though they would take 
 the kingdom of heaven by violence. (Matt. iv. 12-17; 
 •ef. xi. 12-14; Mark i. 14, 15 ; Luke iv. 14, 15.) _ 
 
 The first recorded occurrence in the Galileean ministry 
 Ts commonly spoken of as " the call " of the four 
 DISCIPLES, Simon and Andrew, James and John, by 
 
 c 2 
 
68 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 the Lake of Galilee (Matt. iv. 18-22 ; Mark i. 16-20). 
 / This occasion is by many writers (including Calviii, 
 Lightfoot, and Robinson) identified with that described 
 in Luke v. 1-11. Bat all the ciixumstances are irre- 
 concilably different. If the two accounts refer to the 
 same occasion, a very large margin must be allowed 
 for inaccuracy in the Evangelists. It is not a question 
 of inspired infallibility, bat of the accuracy without 
 which no witness is trustworthy. In the narrative of 
 Matthew and Mark, Jesus is walking by the lake ; in 
 that of Luke He has been sitting for a considerable- 
 time in Simon's boat, preaching to the crowd on the- 
 shore. In the former account both boats are afloat ; 
 Simon and Andrew are in the act of fishing ; James 
 and John are mending their dry i\ets,pieparatory to- 
 fishing. In the latter account, both boats are drawn 
 ashore ; the fishermen have left them, and are washing 
 their wet, soiled nets, after fishing all night.^ In the 
 one case, the four simply obey the call of Jesus,, 
 addressed to them from the shore, and leave their 
 boats in charge of Zebedee and the hired helpers. Id 
 the other, after Simon's net (let down at Christ's com- 
 mand) has brought in a draught of fishes v/ith which 
 both boats are laden to the water's edge, they bring- 
 the boats to shore and follow Jesus, leaving their 
 newly-gotten and surprising wealth to their com- 
 panions as a comjDcnsation (we may suppose) for the 
 withdrawal of their services. It seems scarcely pos- 
 sible that two narratives, so discrepant, should have 
 been sujDposed to represent the same occurrence, but. 
 for a certain stiff, preconceived notion that there must 
 have been an occasion, and but one, on which each 
 disciple received a formal "call" to forsake secular life- 
 and attach himself to the person of Jesus. Such ai 
 
 ' If they were mending them they could not want wash- 
 ing, and if they Avere -washing them they could not be 
 mending them. Greswell has forcibly pointed out the dif- 
 ference of the accounts {Dissertations, voh ii. Diss, ix.}. 
 
FIRST YEAR OF MINISTRY. 69 
 
 notion is quite inconsistent with the fact that at least 
 three of the four here named had become disciples, 
 before Jesus returned to Galilee (John i. 35-42) ; and 
 with the further fact that, w^hen Jesus selected twelve 
 out of the multitude of His disciples to be His constant 
 attendants except when sent out as missionaries, their 
 appoiutuient or ordination was formally made with 
 great solemnity, and is expressly recorded (Mark iii. 
 13-15). The multitude of His disciples received no 
 personal call (John iv. 1, 2), and some, at least, who 
 had received such a call disobeyed it (Luke ix. 59 ; 
 Mark x. 21, 22). Not by a momentary word of com- 
 mand, or by a miraculous constraint, but gradually, 
 by the irresistible spell of growing knowledge and 
 affection, were the disciples of Jesus won to leave all 
 and follow Him. 
 
 Capernaum henceforth became, we cannot say the 
 home of Him who "had not w^here to lay His head," 
 but the head-quarters whence He started on His mis- 
 sionary tours, and to which He returned. (See Matt, 
 iv. 13; Luke iv. 31, ix. 58.) We find no indication 
 that His mother and brethren ceased to reside at 
 Nazareth, though it might be imagined that, after the- 
 outrage recorded by St. Luke (iv. 28, 29), they would 
 feel disposed to quit it. It is, at all events, evident 
 from Mark iii. 21, 31, that His movements were so 
 entirely independent of theirs as to be known to them 
 only by public report. " For neither did His brethren 
 believe on Him" (John vii. 5). "Peter's house" ("the 
 house of Simon and Andrew ") is spoken of as being 
 in Capernaum (Matt. viii. 5, 14; Mark i. 21, 29), 
 though Andrew and Peter are stated to have belonged. 
 to Bethsaida (John i. 44). We may infer that the A 
 brothers had removed to Capernaum, or else that the 
 house thus spoken of was in reality the house of 
 the parents of Peter's wife. And it would seem tO' 
 have been this house which afforded Jesus a lodging 
 in Capernaum — a hospitality munificently rewarded 
 
 c 3 
 
70 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 hj the HEALING OF PeTER's MOTHER-IN-LAW. (Comp. 
 
 Matt. xvii. 24, 25.) 
 
 The Sabbath on which this miracle was wrought, 
 impressed thus ineffaceably on the mind of the Apostle 
 Peter, is selected in the three synoptic Gospels as a 
 specimen of our Lord's work at this stage of His 
 ministry. 
 
 At the morning service in the Synagogue the Lord 
 "" healed one possessed with a demon " (Mark i. 21- 
 28 ; Luke iv. 31-37). At sunset, when the Sabbath 
 ended, and it was lawful to carry the sick, " all the 
 •city was gathered together at the door " of the house 
 where Jesus was ; i.e., at the outer gate of the court 
 or yard. None departed unblessed. " He cast out the 
 spirits with His word, and healed all that were sick ; " 
 thus affording, by His compassionate sympathy, as 
 well as healing power, a glorious fulfilment of the 
 prophetic word — " Himself took our infirmities, and 
 bare our sicknesses.'* (Isa. liii. 4 ; Matt. viii. 14-17 ; 
 Mark i. 29-34; Luke iv. 38-41.) 
 
 In St. Matthew's narrative two miracles are related, 
 previous to the account of this Sabbath, which belong 
 to a later period; but his object (in chaps, viii., ix.) is 
 not to narrate events in order of time, but to place 
 alongside of the specimen of Christ's teaching fur- 
 nished ia the "Sermon on the Mount" a series of 
 miracles illustrating the brief summary of our Lord's 
 labours at this period of His ministry given in chap. 
 ix. 35, and chap. iv. 23-25. 
 
 Next morning (the first day of the week), " rising 
 up a great while before day," Jesus sought the prepa- 
 ration of solitary prayer before setting forth on a 
 mission tour in Galilee. Peter and some other of His 
 disciples attended Him. (Mark i. 35-39 ; Luke iv. 
 42-4i.) Teaching in the Synagogue is mentioned as 
 a special feature at this time of His ministry. Every- 
 where the position of a prophet was conceded to Him, 
 and the " authority" with which He taught, present- 
 
FIRST YEAR OF MINISTRY. 71 
 
 ing a strong contrast witli the perpetual appeal of tlie 
 rabbinical teachers to oral tradition and the decisions 
 of "the sages," impressed the multitude not less than 
 His miracles. (Matt. vii. 28, 29. Compare, in refer- 
 ence to the closing months of His ministry, John vii. 
 40-46.) 
 
 Attempts have been made, with much care and 
 study, to discriminate our Lord's missionary journeys 
 as the " first circuit of Galilee," *' second circuit," and 
 the like ; but such attempts appear to have no solid 
 foundation in the Gospel narrative, and serve no useful 
 purpose. The divinely-drawn picture is all the more 
 impressive from the details not being over-sharply 
 defined. The patient, loving labour of many weeks, 
 or perhaps months, is summed up in the brief record 
 that Jesus "preached in their Synagogues through- 
 out ALL Galilee, and cast out devils " (Mark i. 39 ; 
 Luke iv. 44). During these missionary tours Jesus 
 may, probably, have repeatedly returned to Caper- 
 naum, and sojourned in "the house of Simon and 
 Andrew." There is no reason to think that the future 
 apostles were, as yet. His constant attendants. The 
 narrative in Luke v. 1-11 seems to prove the con- 
 trary. The first efi"ect of the amazing miracle there 
 recorded was to arouse in Simon's mind a poignant 
 sense of his sinfulness and unworthiness to be ac- 
 counted a friend of Jesus. The gracious words of 
 Jesus banished his fears ; and as no miracle could 
 have been so fitted to impress the minds of fishermen, 
 so none could have supplied stronger encouragement 
 to trust Jesus absolutely (the chief lesson of disciple- 
 ?hip), and to forsake all at His bidding and for His 
 
 To some time during the summer or early autumn 
 of this year (a.d. 27), either between harvest and 
 vintage, or between vintage and seed-time, when con- 
 gregations could most easily be gathered in the open 
 air, we may assign the " Seemon on the Mount." Is 
 
I 
 
 72 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 it really a sermon — a discourse delivered at one time 
 to one company of hearers ? Or is it a compilation of 
 sayings uttered on various occasions ? It is quite in 
 accordance with the general plan and aim of St. 
 Matthew's Gospel, that he should give a comprehen- 
 sive specimen of our Lord's teaching at this stage of 
 His ministry. Kevertheless, the impression which 
 the reader naturally receives from chapters v.-vii. of 
 St. Matthew's Gospel is, that they contain a report of 
 a single discourse. The report may be condensed, 
 possibly even supplemented from other discourses; 
 but it is no mere compilation of fragments, but a con- 
 nected and majestic whole. In the tone of unlimited 
 authority, the Master depicts the character of His 
 true disciples, and their mission as the " salt " and 
 ^' light " of human society ; exemplifies (in strong con- 
 trast with the notions of the " Scribes and Pharisees ") 
 the "righteousness" — that is, both morality and 
 religion — required of them; and warns His hearers 
 that to reject Him, or be rejected by Him, implies 
 exclusion from God's kingdom, and that to hear His 
 word without obeying it is to build on the sand. 
 
 The HEALING OF A LEPER, placed in the first Gospel 
 immediately after the Sermon on the Mount (Matt, 
 viii. 2-4:), and more fully narrated in the second and 
 third Gospels (Mark i. 40-45 ; Luke v. 12-15), marks 
 a, stage of our Lord's ministry when He found it 
 needful to lay restraint on the publication of His 
 miraculous cures. This has been attributed (like 
 His removal from Judeea to Galilee) to caution and 
 timidity. The objections to all such views have been 
 already set forth. In some instances, privacy was 
 important for the sake of the persons themselves who 
 were healed (Jairus' daughter, for example, Mark v. 
 43) ; but, in general, we need seek no further expla- 
 nation than that furnished by the Evangelist, to wit, 
 that our Lord's movements were impeded, and His 
 ^reat work of teaching hindered, by the multitude 
 
FIBST YEAB OF MINISTRY. 73 
 
 ■u-lio cro-wded to be healed. (Mark i. 45 ; iii. 20 f 
 Luke V. 15. Cf. p. 88.) 
 
 The last recorded events which we can assign to 
 these first twelve months of Christ's ministry, are 
 the miracle of healing " one sick of the palsy," at 
 Capernaum, and the call of Matthew, or Levi 
 (Matt. ix. 2-8, 9 ; Mark ii. 1-12, 13, 14 ; Luke v. 
 17-26, 27, 28). On the first of these occasions we 
 are told that "there were Pharisees and doctors of 
 the law sitting by, who were come out of every town 
 of Galilee, and Judeea, and Jerusalem." The crowd 
 was so great, that the bearers of the sick man, 
 unable to force an entrance into the courtyard of the 
 house where Jesus was preaching, entered that of a 
 neighbouring house, made their way up the outside 
 staircase to the flat roof, and lowered their burden to 
 the feet of Jesus " through the tiling." We are pro- 
 bably to understand that our Lord was seated in a 
 gallery or balcony, into which the principal room of 
 the house opened, so that He could be heard both by 
 those around and behind Him, and by the crowd in 
 the courtyard ; and that it was the roof of this- 
 gallery which was broken up — a matter of no great 
 labour or serious damage. 
 
 It is reasonable to suppose that Matthew was no 
 stranger to Jesus, when at those startling but heart- 
 stirring words, " Follow wie," " he left all, rose up, 
 and followed Him." If we are right in our date for 
 the Sermon on the Mount, we must suppose that 
 Matthew had already been an attentive hearer of the 
 Master's word, and a disciple in heart, though he had 
 not till now seen it his duty to give up his worldly, 
 calling. The notion that our Saviour would have 
 suddenly addressed such a command to one in whom 
 He discerned no inward preparation to obey it, is 
 inconsistent with His solemn warnings against hasty, 
 thoughtless discipleship (Luke xiv. 25-33 ^ ix. 57,58). 
 
 The call of Matthew (or Levi) is in all these 
 
7i OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHBIST. 
 
 Gospyels connected with the feast at his house, when, 
 to the amazement and indignation of the Pharisees, 
 Jesus did not scruple to sit at tahle " with publicans 
 and sinners." The connection is natural, almost 
 necessary, hut it is the connection of events, not of 
 time. This is clear, if we compare the three Gospels. 
 For the application of Jairus, which followed close 
 upon the feast (Matt. ix. 10-18), was subsequent to 
 the visit to Gadara, or Gerasa (Mark v. 21, 22 ; Luke 
 viii. 40, 41) ; and that visit is clearly shown, by the 
 second and third Gospels, to have been subsequent to 
 the choice of the Twelve, and to the walk through 
 the cornfields; in other words, to belong to the 
 second summer of Christ's ministry (a.d. 28). An 
 interval of time, therefore, more or less considerable, 
 separated the call of Matthew from the farewell feast 
 (as we may suppose it to have been) ^to which he 
 invited his brother publicans. 
 
 This first twelvemonth of our Lord's ministry was 
 its most peaceful, and, to human judgment, prosperous 
 and hopeful period. The unbelief and murderous 
 rage of the Nazarenes stands out in harsh, threaten- 
 ing contrast with its general tenor. The fame of the 
 new Prophet " went throughout all Syria," casting 
 into the shade the ministry of His great forerunner; 
 for " John did no miracle, but all things that John 
 spake of this man were true " (John x. 41). Multi- 
 tudes believed. Eabbis from Jerusalem sat among 
 Christ's hearers and witnessed His miracles ; though 
 some of them were indignant at His claims, and jus- 
 tified their scepticism by ascribing His miracles to 
 the power of Satan (Mark ii. 6, 7; iii. 22). But 
 their hostility had not openly burst forth. The 
 times seem bright with promise. Perhaps to no eye 
 but His were the gathering clouds visible which, in 
 that peaceful morning of His ministry, among the 
 green hills of Galilee, were already brewing the 
 tempest amidst which that ministry was to close. 
 
FIRST YEAR OF ^IINISTRY. 75 
 
 The Miracles of our Saviour are classified by Dr. West- 
 cott (in his excellent little book, Characteristics of the Gospel 
 Miracles) as follows : 
 
 I. Miracles on Nature. 
 
 i. Miracles of Power. 1. "Water made "wine. 2. BreacJ 
 multiplied (twice). 3. Walking on the sea. 
 
 ii. Miracles of Providence. 1. Draught of fishes (twice). 
 2. Tempest stilled. 3. Money in fish's mouth. 4. Fig tree 
 withered. 
 
 II. BIiRACLEs OX Man. 
 
 i. Miracles of Personal Faith. 1. Two blind men (Matt, 
 ix.). 2. Bartimseus. 3. The leper. 4. Ten lepers. 5. Woman 
 in crowd. 
 
 ii. Miracles of Intercession. 1. Blind man (Mark viii.). 
 2. Deaf and dumb man (Mark vii.). 3. Nobleman's son. 
 
 4. Centurion's servant. 5. Paralytic. 
 
 iii. Miracles of Love. 1. Man bom blind. 2. Peter's 
 mother-in-law. 3. Man with dropsy. 4. Withered arm. 
 
 5. Impotent man. 6. Woman with spirit of infirmity. 7. 
 Dead raised : (a) from the sick bed ; (6) from the bier ; (c) 
 from the grave. [Add 8, Malchus' ear healed,] 
 
 III. Miracles on the Spirit-world. 
 
 i. Miracles of Intercession. 1. Dumb demoniac (Matt, 
 ix.). 2. Blind and dumb demoniac (Matt. xii.). 3. Syro- 
 Phoenician's daughter. 4. Boy brought by his father. 
 
 ii. Miracles of Antagonism. 1. The demoniac in syna- 
 gogue. 2. Legion of demons. 
 
 To this list we may add, under Class I., Obscure Miracles: 
 (1) The vanishing of our Saviour's person (thrice, Luke iv. 
 30 ; xxiv. 61 ; John viii. 59) ; (2) His appearance in the 
 midst of the disciples when the doors were shut (twice, 
 John XX. 19, 26). With Class II. we may connect the exer- 
 cise of superhuman control over men : (1) in the cleansing 
 of the Temple (twice) ; (2) in the Garden of Gethsemane 
 (John xviii. 6). In John vi. 21, it is open to question 
 whether a miracle is intended. The two greatest miracles, 
 the Resurrection and the Ascension, stand alone, and 
 are not included in the foregoing classification. 
 
 On the unreasonable modern prejudice against miracles, 
 see Dr. H. R. Reynolds's John the Baptist,)[)p. 18-16: The 
 Basis of Faith, Lee. vi., sec. 4, pp. 254-272 (2nd Ed.). 
 
76 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 SECTION II. 
 
 SECOND TEAR OF MINISTRY. 
 
 From Passover a.d. 28 to Passover a.d. 29. 
 (a.u.c. 781, 782.) 
 
 IF we would trace a clear outline of our Saviour's 
 life and ministry, we must be content with an 
 outline, and must resist the temptation to labour 
 after a fuh:iess and exactitude for which the Gospels 
 do not supply the materials. We must free ourselves 
 from the notion that the object of the Gospels bound 
 the writers to strict chronological order, so that in 
 relating events in a different sequence they are guilty 
 of misplacing them, or, if they pass them by in 
 silence, are mutilating history. The object of the 
 Gospels is neither historical nor biographical, but 
 religious. " These are written," says St. John, " that 
 ye might believe, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of 
 God, and that, believing, ye might have life through 
 His name." The systematic unity and simplicity of 
 plan (almost resembling the unity of an epic poem) 
 which distinguish the fourth Gospel from the others, 
 render it natural — almost necessary — for St. John to 
 adhere to chronological order in what be narrates ; 
 but he passes by in absolute silence the largest portion 
 of our Saviour's life, including nearly all, except the 
 closing scenes, which the former Gospels had recorded. 
 With the Evangelist, as with the preacher, the object 
 is to furnish, not a manual of facts and dates, but a 
 picture which shall live in the memory and heart. 
 It is, therefore, a pedantic and inappreciative, not to 
 say ignorant, criticism which censures or slights the 
 Gospels as "fragmentary." That they leave un- 
 noticed large spaces of our Saviour's ministry, as well 
 
SECOND YEAR OF MINISTBY. 77 
 
 as nearly thirty years of His life, is in perfect har- 
 mony with their practical object, and with the purpose 
 of the inspiring Spirit, who was preparing (unknown 
 to the writers) not a text-book of scientific history, 
 hut a practical guide to faith, to he studied in all 
 languages to the end of time. 
 
 "After this there was a feast of the Jews; and 
 Jesus went up to Jerusalem " (John v. 1). What 
 feast this was is a much-debated and important 
 -question, the answer to which has been regarded as 
 furnishing the key to the chronology of the Gospel 
 narrative. To some extent it does so, for, if this 
 feast was a Passover, then we have four Passovers 
 ■distinctly noted in St. John's Gospel (ii. 13 ; v. 1 ; 
 vi. 4; xi. 55), necessarily implying a duration of three 
 years for our Lord's ministry. The converse, how- 
 ever, is not true. If it was vot a Passover, it does not 
 follow that that ministry lasted less than three years. 
 If it was not the Passover, it does not in fact greatly 
 matter to the Gospel chronology w^hat feast it was. 
 For, in addition to the separate evidence on which we 
 assign the cleansing of the Temple to a.d. 27, and the 
 Crucifixion to a.d. 30, we have independent proof 
 from the synoptic Gospels of the occurrence of a Pass- 
 over between that which preceded the Galilean 
 ministry and that which was approaching (John vi. 
 4), when our Lord fed the five thousand in the wilder- 
 3iess. This proof consists in the narrative of the walk 
 through the cornfields on the Sabbath, when the dis- 
 ciples offended the Pharisees by plucking the ripe ears 
 of corn and rubbing them out in their hands. This 
 could not have happened before a Passover, not only 
 hecause the corn would not be ripe, but because the 
 •disciples would not have dared to gather it until after 
 the sacred sheaf of firstfruits had been offered in the 
 Temple. Moreover, the difficult phrase in Luke vi. 1 
 (literally, " the second-first Sabbath "), whatever be 
 its precise meaning, points, it can hardly be doubted, 
 
78 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 to a Passover.^ But we are forbidden by Matt. xii. 1 
 to identify the Passover thus indicated with that at 
 the beginning of our Lord's ministry (John ii. 13). 
 And unless we surrender the task of framing any con- 
 nected view of the Gospel history, we are equally for- 
 bidden by the three synoptic narratives to identify it 
 with that Passover (John vi. 4) which followed the 
 death of John the Baptist, the return of the Twelve,, 
 and the feeding of the five thousand. 
 
 It is of course conceivable that the feast mentioned 
 in John v. 1 may have been the Feast of Tabernacles 
 (a.d. 27). But no reason can be given for such a 
 supposition. In the absence of contrary evidence, we 
 may assume that our Lord would adhere to the custom 
 in which He had been trained from childhood of going 
 up " to Jerusalem every year at the Feast of the Pass- 
 over" (Luke ii. 41). The events which happened at 
 the feast amply account for His absenting Himself from 
 Jerusalem for a period of eighteen months, until the 
 Feast of Tabernacles (a.d. 29), six months before His 
 death. 
 
 This SECOND VISIT TO JERUSALEM, whicli ou the 
 foregoing grounds we assign to the Passover of a.d. 28,. 
 was a memorable crisis in the life and ministry of our 
 Lord, a fatal turning-point in the history of the 
 Jewish nation. The bigotry, jealousy, and wounded 
 pride of the Jewish rulers now broke out into operii 
 hostility, and the purpose was formed, and even (it 
 would seem) avowed, to put Jesus to death. The 
 immediate occasion of this open breach was the heal- 
 ing ON THE Sabbath day of an infirm man, in- 
 curably diseased for thirty-eight years, who was- 
 
 / ^ The simplest explanation seems to be, that it means 
 "the first Sabbath of the second month" — namely, Zif — 
 when Avheat was ripe. Wieseler's explanation, that it 
 means the first Sabbath of the second year after a Sabbatic 
 year is untenable, because the Sabbatic year began in 
 autumn. 
 
SECOND TEAR OF MINISTRY 79 
 
 seeking relief from the medicinal virtue of the Pool 
 of Bethesda.i Even had he been aware of the power 
 of Jesus, he might not have dared to ask a cure on 
 the Sabbath. Our Lord's ordinary rule was to put 
 forth His healing power in answer to the prayer of 
 faith ; but on this occasion He uttered unsolicited the 
 command, " Eise, take up thy bed and walk." Con- 
 scious (perhaps for the first time) of the strange sensa- 
 tion of bodily vigour, the man sprang to his feet, and 
 did not hesitate to obey the command by rolling up his 
 mat-bed and carrying it away. So manifest a breach 
 of the received interpretation of the law of the Sabbath 
 (comp. Jer. xvii. 21 ; Neh. xiii. 15, 19), brought on him 
 instant notice and rebuke. The man sheltered him- 
 vself under the authority of his unknown Healer. On 
 learning subsequently that it was Jesus who had thus 
 *' broken the Sabbath," the wrath of the Jewish rulers 
 was turned full upon Him. It is supposed (by Light- 
 foot and others) that Jesus was summoned before the 
 Sanhedrin ; but St. John's narrative leaves it uncer- 
 tain whether they ventured to call Him before them, 
 or merely sent a deputation to remonstrate with Him. 
 Jesus, instead of bowing to the storm, assumed ground 
 which in their eyes added crime to crime. He placed 
 His own works of mercy on a moral level with the 
 beneficent activity of the Creator, whereby the 
 Sabbath is not profaned, but blest; at the Si^me time 
 claiming to be in some special sense the Son of God. 
 "My Father," He said, " worketh hitherto, and I 
 work." This reply aggravated the fury of the rulers, 
 who now resolved on the death of Jesus. The dis- 
 course in which Christ then unfolded His claims 
 (John V. 19-17) was one of the sublimest which ever 
 fell even from His lips. He spoke with startling 
 plainness, as One subject to the authority of no earthly 
 tribunal, but Himself the Divinely-appointed Judge 
 of men. 
 
 ■ ^ See Conder's Handbook to the Bible, p. 357. 
 
£0 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST, 
 
 The awe inspired by the majesty of this discourse, 
 and the heart-searching keenness of its rebukes and 
 warnings, paralyzed for the time the murderous pur- 
 pose of the Sanhedrin. Jesus left the Holy City, ta 
 return no more until that time (six months before His 
 death) when " He steadfastly set His face to go to Jeru- 
 salem " (Luke ix. 5 1). But the determination to put 
 Him to death was cherished with undying animosity, 
 " because He not only had broken the Sabbath, but 
 said also that God was His Father, making Himself 
 equal with God " (John v. 18). A year and a half 
 afterwards, the first of these charges was still fresh 
 ill men's memories. In John vii. 23 (where the- 
 translation should read, " because I made a man every 
 whit whole on the Sabbath day") the reference is 
 <'vidently to this miracle. On the second charge 
 Jesus was twice on the point of being stoned in the 
 Temple (John viii. 59 ; x. 31-33) ; and this was the 
 main accusation brought against Him before Pilate, 
 although, in order to induce the Roman Governor to 
 sentence Him to death, a further charge was preferred 
 of sedition against the Imperial Government. 
 
 This question of the Sabbath (the importance of 
 which, in Jewish eyes, it is impossible to exaggerate) 
 was soon again raised under different circumstances. 
 Some disciples of Jesus, walking with their Master- 
 through the cornfields on the Sabbath, pluckei> 
 EAKS OF CORN, which they rubbed out and ate. The 
 law expressly permitted passengers through cornfields 
 to do this (Deut. xxiii. 25). But, according to the 
 rabbinical rules, plucking the ears was reaping, and 
 rubbing them out was threshing, involving a double 
 breach of the Sabbath. The Lord defended "the 
 guiltless" on two grounds. 1st, As warranted by- 
 Scripture examples and by the very intention of the 
 Sabbath, in satisfying their hunger. 2nd, Because 
 they were in the service of One " greater than the 
 Temple," and " Lord even of the Sabbath day." 
 
SECOND YEAR OF MINISTRY. 8 J 
 
 (Matt. xii. 1-8 ; Mark ii. 23-28 ; Luke xi. 1-5.) If 
 the ripe corn was barley, the time indicated was 
 April ; if wheat, May or the close of April. In either 
 case we must suppose the incident to have occurred after 
 our Lord's return from Jerusalem to Galilee ; which 
 return is implied, though not expressly mentioned, by 
 St. John (vi. 1). 
 
 Another Sabbath miracle seems to belong to this 
 period, the healing of a withered hand in the 
 Synagogue, probably at Capernaum. On this occasion 
 our Lord, calling the sufferer to stand forth in the 
 midst, appealed to the practice and conscience of the 
 Pharisees themselves, in proof of the lawfulness of 
 doing good on the Sabbath. Then amid their sullen 
 silence, He simply bade the man stretch out his 
 hand, " and it was restored whole like as the other."" 
 The Pharisees, the more enraged because here was 
 undeniably no overt act of Sabbath-breaking, called 
 to their aid " the Herodians " (comp. Matt. xxii. 16)^ 
 and " took counsel " how they might destroy Him. 
 These proud and bigoted pretenders to religious per- 
 fection — " the separated ones " — were willing to ally 
 themselves not only with the worldly and time-serving- 
 adherents of the detested house of Herod, but with 
 their hated opponents, the Sadducees (Matt. xvi. 1), 
 to compass the destruction of Jesus, whom they wer& 
 beginning to dread as much as to hate. (Matt. xii. 
 9-14 ; Mark iii. 1-6 ; Luke iv. G-11.) 
 
 Jesus, aware of these plots, withdrew with His 
 DISCIPLES to a quiet spot on the shores of the lake, far 
 from towns and synagogues, and from the company 
 of all save those who were drawn to Hirh by their 
 desire to hear His word, or their need of His healing 
 mercy. During the rainless months of summer, when 
 harvest and the harvest feast (Pentecost) were past, 
 and field-labour in great measure suspended, His- 
 growing fame attracted crowds from great distances.. 
 " A great multitude from Galilee followed Him, and 
 
82 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 from Judsea, and from Jerusalem, and from Idumsea, 
 and from beyond Jordan (Persea) ; and they about Tyre 
 and Sidon, a great multitude, when they had heard 
 •what great things He did, came unto Him." (Matt. xii. 
 15-21; Mark iii, 7-12.) He repulsed no appeal to 
 His pity, the promptness and human tenderness of 
 which was the true image of Divine compassion. But 
 His chief aim was to heal men's souls ; and this crowd 
 of applicants for mere bodily relief was a serious 
 hindrance to His work as a teacher. Smaller gather- 
 ings of earnest hearers, giving opportunity for personal 
 converse, were far more favourable to His main object 
 of bringing the "lost sheep" home to God, than the 
 excitement of worldly-minded crowds bent only on 
 being spectators or subjects of miracles. Jesus there- 
 fore enjoined silence on those whom He healed. His 
 glorious simplicity of aim and contempt for mere 
 popularity and fame admirably fulfilled the ancient 
 prophecy, Isaiah xlii. 1-4. 
 
 The Lord now took a step pregnant with the most 
 important meaning and results. After a night spent 
 in prayer among those mountain solitudes to which 
 He loved to retreat for this purpose, He called around 
 Him a large number of His professed disciples, from 
 amongst whom *' He chose twelve, whom also He 
 named apostles ; that they should be with Him, and 
 that He might send them forth to preach, and to 
 have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils." 
 (Mark iii. 13-19; Luke vi. 12-16; comp. Matt. x. 
 2-4.) Descending with the Twelve and the rest of 
 His disciples to some open level spot, where a vast 
 concourse from all parts speedily gathered round Him, 
 "to hear Him, and to be healed of their diseases" 
 (Luke vi. 17-19), He pronounced a discourse, of which 
 St. Luke gives a brief report, and which by many 
 critics is identified with the Sermon on the Mount 
 (Luke vi. 20-49). The choice and ordination of the 
 twelve apostles, whose number evidently had reference 
 
SECOND YEAR OF MINISTRY. 83 
 
 to that of the tribes of Israel, clearly indicated that 
 Jesus designed His own preaching to be but the com- 
 mencement of a systematic and permanent mission 
 addressed in the first instance to the Jewish nation, 
 but eventually to the w4iole human race.^ This- 
 double purpose was clearly expressed in the solemn.' 
 charge which He addressed to the Twelve when, 
 some months later, He sent them forth on their first 
 missionary tour. (Comp. Luke xxiv. 47 ; Acts i. 8.) 
 
 With this solemn public avowal, at once to tho 
 disciples and to the world, of plans and claims im- 
 measurably transcending those of any former prophet, 
 teacher, or lawgiver ; and with those indefatigable 
 labours which left neither leisure no privacy for a 
 quiet meal, St. Mark's narrative connects the attempt 
 
 OF THE UNBELIEVING KINDRED of JcSUS tO put Him 
 
 under restraint; "for they said, He is beside Him- 
 self" (Mark iii. 21). It is important to notice that 
 the latter part of verse 19 — " And they went into a 
 house" — ought properly to be printed, not merely as. 
 a separate verse, but (as in Scrivener's and Dean 
 Alford's texts, and in Mr. Darby's valuable New- 
 Translation) as the beginning of a fresh paragraph. 
 St. Mark appears closely to connect with this attempt 
 
 ^ The Greek word Apostolos is used once in the LXX. 
 Translation of the Old Testament for one "sent" with a 
 message (1 Kings xiv 6). It appears, however, that "with 
 the Jews of the Christian era the word was in common use. 
 It was the title borne by those who were despatched from 
 the mother city by the rulers of the race on any foreign 
 mission, especially such as were charged with collecting the 
 tribute paid for the Temple service. After the destruction 
 of Jerusalem the ' Apostles ' formed a sort of council about 
 the Jewish Patriarch, assisting him in his deliberations at 
 home, and executing his orders abroad." Thus, in selecting^ 
 this title for His ambassadors (2 Cor. v. 20), " our Lord was- 
 not introducing a new term, but adopting one which from 
 its current usage would suggest to His hearers the idea of a 
 highly responsible mission" (Bishop Llghtfoot on GalafianSf 
 pp. 93, 94, Third Ed.). 
 
S4 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHBIST. 
 
 the request of the mother and brethren of Jesus to see 
 Him, when engaged in teaching (ver, 31-35). But 
 St. Matthew (xiii. 1) places that incident on the same 
 ■day with the teaching in parables, on the evening of 
 which day (Mark iv. 35) our Lord crossed the lake. 
 Some interval is necessarily implied in the words, 
 '* When Eis friends heardy The connection is no 
 <loubt close and real ; but it is that of the events 
 themselves, not of mere time. 
 
 Upon our Lord's return to Capernaum — probably 
 to Peter's house (Mark iii. 19; Luke vii. 1)— an 
 urgent petition was presented to Him by the Jewish 
 ■elders on behalf of a Eoman centurion, whose servant, 
 " who was dear unto him," v;as sick and ready to die. 
 This remarkable intercession was due to the fact that 
 this Gentile soldier had shown his zeal for true 
 religion, and love for God's people, by building a 
 synagogue. St. Luke describes with literal accuracy 
 the form of the application by means first of the elders, 
 then of a second deputation of friends. St. Matthew, 
 in his brief, condensed style, says that the centurion 
 " came unto Him : " not only on the familiar principle 
 that "what one does by another one does one's self" 
 (quifacitper alium facit per se ; comp. Matt, xxvii. 
 26), but because this was the spiritual reality of the 
 petition. The centurion came to Christ in the same 
 sense as we come to Him in prayer. The name is 
 left unrecorded of this pious Gentile, whose faith and 
 humility won from the Lord one of the most emphatic 
 eulogies He is ever recorded to have uttered. (Matt, 
 viii. 5-13 ; Luke vii. 1-10.) 
 
 At Jerusalem, at the feast which we have seen 
 reason to believe was the Passover (from which we 
 reckon the second year of His public ministry), our 
 Lord had declared that the Father would show Him 
 ** greater works " than the miracles of healing He had 
 already performed, empowering Him even to raise the 
 dead to life. The first recorded example of this is 
 
SECOND YEAB OF 31INISTRY. 85 
 
 narrated by St. Luke ohlj — the raising of a dead 
 MAN, the only son of a widow, as the corpse was being 
 carried to burial. Nain, the scene of this miracle 
 (where tombs cut in the rock are at this day the only 
 remains of the ancient "city") is an hour's ride from 
 the foot of Mount Tabor, and nearly twenty miles as 
 the crow flies (of course much further on foot) from 
 •even the most southerly site assigned to Capernaum. 
 It has been questioned, therefore, whether it was 
 practicable for Jesus to make this long journey in a 
 single day. It is not quite certain that "the day 
 after" is the true reading: some manuscripts read 
 -"afterwards." But if it be, our Lord, rising early 
 according to His custom, may have performed part of 
 the journey by water (sailing down, as Dr. Farrar 
 suggests, to the south end of the lake ; or, as I would 
 rather suggest, to Magdala). Possibly St. Luke's 
 phrase may simply mean that the next day He set 
 forth on His way to the town of Nain. The fame of 
 this great miracle, proving that God had visited His 
 people and raised up a great prophet, spread through- 
 out the land. (Luke vii. 11-17.) 
 
 Here follows in St. Luke's orderly narrative one of 
 the most touching and impressive incidents in the 
 whole course of our Saviour's ministry, — the message 
 SENT BY John the Baptist from his prison. Different 
 minds will probably always come to different con- 
 clusions on the much-debated question whether John 
 sent this message for his own satisfaction, or merely 
 for the sake of his disciples, that their faith might he 
 confirmed in the Messiah to whom he had borne wit- 
 ness. Calvin scouts the supposition that John's own 
 faith could have wavered or needed reinforcement as 
 ''valde ahsurdum." Stier and Alford argue forcibly 
 on the same side. It seems to me, however, that 
 their view is not merely inconsistent with the natural 
 impression vividly conveyed in both Gospels, but 
 leaves out of account the weakness of human nature 
 
86 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHBIST. 
 
 even in the strongest, as well as the peculiar severity 
 of John's trial, and the probable effect both on body 
 and mind of his prolonged incarceration in the dungeons 
 of Machserus. Trained in the wild freedom of the 
 desert, in the prime of manhood, accustomed since he 
 received his Divine commission to the excitement of 
 open-air preaching, and the sympathy of enthusiastic 
 crowds, he was perhaps the one man of all men to 
 whom the horrors of solitary imprisonment would be 
 most intolerable. What more natural than that it 
 should appear an inscrutable mystery, that Jesus, the 
 Prophet whom even death obeyed, the Christ to whom 
 he had borne witness, was leaving His faithful herald 
 to languish, forgotten and unpitied in his cell? What 
 wonder if he began to question whether even Jesus 
 Himself were more than the forerunner of a yet greater 
 Deliverer ? The faith which trusts in the dark is far 
 harder than the faith which believes when favoured 
 with he full light of .nspiration. 
 
 Christ replied by making John's disciples eye- 
 witnesses to miracles such as those the fame of which 
 had penetrated his dungeon, and by a gracious word 
 of encouragement tenderly conveying a no less gracious 
 admonition — not to say reproof — to His sorely tried 
 servant. When the messengers were departed Jesus 
 pronounced a splendid eulogy on the imprisoned 
 prophet. (Luke vii. 18-35 ; Matt. xi. 2-19.) 
 
 St. Matthew's narrative seems to place this incident 
 after the sending forth of the Twelve; but this dis- 
 crepancy is apparent only, not real. A new section 
 of his Gospel begins with ch. xi. 2, including ch. 
 xii. 1-8 ; and the chronological clue given in ch. xii. 1, 
 if rigidly interpreted, v/ould give even an earlier date 
 than St. Luke's narrative. We may take it in a 
 somewhat wide sense. Comp. ch. xi. 25. 
 
 Here St. Matthew's Gospel introduces Christ's severe 
 
 DENUNCIATION OF THE IMPENITENT CITIES, in which SO 
 
 many of His miracles had been wrought ; and that 
 
SECOND YEAR OF MINISTRY. 87 
 
 solemn thanksgiving to His Father, which St. Luke 
 introduces in connection with the mission and return 
 of the seventy (Matt. xi. 20-27 ; Luke x. 13-15, 
 21, 22). If we were shut up to the behef that words 
 like these could only have been uttered once, we could 
 hardly hesitate to consider the place assigned to them 
 by St. Luke as the true one ; both because the sayings 
 themselves appear appropriate to a late period of our 
 Lord's ministry, and because St. Luke so circum- 
 stantially connects them with the sending forth and 
 return of the seventy preachers. Calvin takes this 
 view. If, on the other hand (with Greswell, Eobinson, 
 Stier, Alford), we consider St. Matthew's phraseology 
 {verses 20, 25) too definite to permit the supposition 
 that he here disregards the order of time, we must 
 remember that no reason can be shown why our Lord 
 should not have repeated such memorable sayings, if 
 occasion demanded. Indeed, we have ample proof 
 that such was His habit. St. Matthew alone records 
 the gracious invitation which through so many ages 
 has comforted innumerable labouring and heavy-laden | 
 hearts : " Come unto Me, all ye that labour and j 
 
 ARE heavy laden, AND I WILL GIVE YOU REST." ' 
 
 St. Luke alone relates how our Lord at the table 
 OF A Pharisee, who entertained Him with scant 
 courtesy, received the worship of *' a woman in the 
 city who was a sinner " and pronounced her sins for-^ 
 given (Luke vii. 36-50). The legend which identifies 
 this unnamed penitent with Mary of Magdala rests on , 
 no shadow of foundation, and appear^ inconsistent with ; 
 the mention of Mary as one of those who accompanied 1 
 Jesus, and " ministered unto Him of their substance " ^ 
 (Luke viii. 1-3). Even recent writers have clung to 
 it for the sake of the romance of poetry and painting 
 which has gathered like a halo around it. But it is 
 in the last degree improbable that our Lord would 
 have admitted among His attendants one whose 
 penitence, sincere as He knew it to be, had yet to be 
 
88 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST 
 
 proved; or that matrons of rank and wealtli would 
 have accepted such an associate. Our Saviour's words 
 of forgiveness were also words of farewell : not " Come, 
 FOLLOW," but " Go IN PEACE." The legend perhaps, 
 arose from confounding this occurrence with the 
 anointing at Bethany (John xii. 3). 
 
 A mass of unrecorded labour and benefaction is 
 summed up in the brief statement that " He went 
 throughout every city and village, preaching and 
 shewing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God ; and 
 the Twelve were with Him " (Luke viii. 1). From 
 this multitude of miracles, one is selected for record, 
 
 — THE HEALIKG OF A BLIND AND DUMB DEMONIAC 
 
 not only on its own account, but as having given 
 occasion to the blasphemies of the Scribes who came 
 down from Jerusalem. Unable to deny the miracles- 
 of Jesus, they ascribed them to Satanic power. St. 
 Mark omits this miracle, but agrees with St. Matthew 
 in connecting with the discourse spoken on this occa- 
 sion (apparently in the house in which the aflSicted 
 man had been brought to Jesus) the application of 
 " His Mother and His brethren," who, " standing 
 without, sent nnto Him, calling Him," and our 
 Saviour's memorable reply. (Matt. xii. 22-50; Mark 
 iii. 22-35 ; Luke xi. 14-26 ; viii. 19-21.) 
 
 It was on this same day that Jesus went forth from 
 the house to the lake side, and taking His seat, 
 according to His custom (Luke v. 3 ; Mark iii. 9), in 
 a fishing-boat, jDreached to the multitudes assembled 
 on the sand. The season was not yet far enough 
 advanced for these great open-air gatherings to be 
 hindered by the autumn rains or by the toils of the 
 field; but the time was at hand when the ploughman, 
 must yoke his oxen, and the sower go forth to sow. 
 Neither the hostility of the Jewish rulers, nor the 
 blasphemies of " the Scribes from Jerusalem," backed 
 up by the perverse fancy of His kindred that Jesus 
 had lost His reason, availed to check the popular 
 
SECOND YEAR OF MINISTRY. 89 
 
 enthusiasm. But in most it was enthusiasm only, 
 not faith and penitence. The Son of Man had come 
 not to draw crowds, but to save the lost. The cities 
 poured forth their eager thousands, but "they repented 
 not." Every village sent forth curious listeners and 
 spectators, together with sick and suffering petitioners, 
 but " hearing they heard, and did not understand, and 
 seeing they saw, and did not perceive." The great 
 Teacher therefore betook Himself to teaching in 
 PARABLES. If His "word" (as He called His doctrine) 
 •could not penetrate their dull minds, He would at least 
 fix His ivords in their memory, to yield up in after 
 days their hidden treasure of meaning. Partly to the 
 multitude, partly to His disciples. He spoke the 
 5EVEN PARABLES of the kingdom recorded by St. Mat- 
 thew (xiii. 3-52), and one preserved in St. Mark's 
 Oospel only (iv. 26-34) ; " but without a parable 
 spake He not unto them." We are not to understand 
 that our Lord had previously never used similitudes ; 
 for not only is it inconceivable that among Orientals 
 a preacher should instruct his congregation, or a 
 teacher his scholars, without making use of similes 
 and allegories, but in the Sermon on the Mount we 
 have the parable of the Two Builders, and the simili- 
 tudes of the Salt, the Light, and the City (Matt. v. 
 13-16 ; vii. 21-27). But what seems to have sur- 
 prised the disciples on this occasion was the Master's 
 almost exclusive use of this form of teaching, and 
 His keeping back the interpretation to be communi- 
 •cated to His disciples in private. St. Mark (iv. 33) 
 alludes to " many such parables," which may have 
 been spoken partly on this, partly on other occasions. 
 (Matt. xiii. 1-52 ; Mark iv. 1-34 ; Luke viii. 4-18 ; 
 xiii. 18-21.) 
 
 No day of human history, no words uttered in 
 human ears, have impressed themselves more inde- 
 libly on human memory that the events and sayings 
 "Of this one day in the life of Jesus. As evening drew 
 
THE SOWEK. 
 
SECOND YEAR OF MINISTBY. 91 
 
 on He dismissed the multitude and returned to the 
 house — presumably for the evening meal. He then 
 *' gave commandment " to cross the lake, and Himself 
 led the way to the ship.^ 
 
 A WOULD-BE FOLLOWER was checkcd by being told 
 that although even the wild creatures had their dens 
 and roosting-places, the Son of Man — the anointed 
 King of mankind — was a houseless wanderer. May 
 we gather from our Lord's words that the tenants of 
 the house in which He had been entertained during 
 the day were unable or unwilling to afford Him and 
 His disciples a night's lodging, so that He was con- 
 strained to make the boat which had been His pulpit 
 serve for His bed ? Or did He hear in His spirit the 
 cries of those wretched maniacs among the tombs on 
 the farther shore, and hasten through the night and 
 the storm to deliver them? Spent with the strain 
 which such a day inflicted on both body and mind, 
 Jesus found " where to lay His liead " on the steers- 
 man's cushion, and slept calmly. One of those 
 sudden squalls to which, like other mountain-girded 
 lakes, the Sea of Galilee is subject, threatened to sink 
 the boat ; but still the Lord slept until the crie*s of 
 the disciples awoke Him. Then with that authority 
 which is Nature's supreme law. He quelled the 
 TEMPEST, rebuking His disciples for their lack of faith. 
 (Matt. viii. 18-27; Mark iv. 35-41; Luke viii. 22-25). 
 
 Soon after daybreak, we may suppose, of that calm 
 summer morning, was wrought the great act of mercy 
 for which that strange night voyage had been under- 
 
 1 St. Mark's phrase (iv. 36), " They took Him even as He 
 was in the ship," must not be so pressed as to contradict 
 St. Matthew's statement that the explanation of the parables 
 ■was given in the house (xiii. 36). It must mean just as Be 
 had been sitting in the boat — the same boat, and with no 
 preparation or provision. Regardless as our Lord might be 
 of His own comfort, He would not, after a day spent in 
 attendance upon Himself, have required His disciples to set 
 forth supperless on their stormy night voyage. 
 
92 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CRBIST. 
 
 taken — the healing of a fierce and dangerous maniac, 
 possessed not with one, but with a legion of demons. 
 (St. Matthew notes that he had a companion.) The 
 various names by which the scene of this miracle is 
 called in different manuscripts and versions — "the 
 country of the Gadarenes," " Gergesenes," " Gera- 
 senes," "■ Gazarenes," — may be due, in part at least, 
 to errors in copying. Gadara was far away ; but it is 
 conceivable that the term "land of Gadara" may have 
 extended to the border of the lake. The simplest 
 view, however, is that " Gerasa '* and " Gergesa " are 
 two forms of the same name (probably derived from 
 the ancient Girgashites) ; and that Origen was well 
 informed in stating that the site of the city — Ger- 
 gesa — and the scene of the miracle were shown in his 
 day. Dr. W. M. Thomson's identification wdth the 
 modern Khersa or Gersa is at present doubtful.^ The 
 destruction of an enormous herd of swine, by permis- 
 sion (not command) of Jesus, was perhaps intended to 
 attest the reality of the demoniac possession ; perhaps 
 also to punish the insult oflered to the Mosaic law by 
 the presence of these unclean animals in the Holy 
 Land. Terrified at this portent, the inhabitants of 
 the city offered perhaps the most foolish prayer on 
 record, in compliance with which Jesus re-embarked 
 and returned to " His own city." (Matt. viii. 18 — 
 ix. 1; Mark iv. 35— v. 21 ; Luke viii. 22-40.) 
 
 From the accounts in the second and third Gospels 
 we might imagine that the application of the syna- 
 gogue ruler jAiRUSwas made as soon as Jesus reached 
 the shore, where the people " were all waiting for 
 Him." But St. Matthew expressly states (ix. 18) that 
 
 ^ See The Land and the Booh, pp. 375-378. Dean Stanley 
 thinks the site was farther north, at Wady Fik {Sin.and Fal., 
 
 (p. 380). This city must not be confounded with Gerasa 
 (Jerash, not named in the Bible), a city of Decapolis, the 
 ruins of which have been judged superior to those of Pal- 
 myra. See Cijclopadia Bib. Lit., vol. ii. p. 111. 
 
SECOND TEAR OF MINISTEY. d^ 
 
 Jairus presented his request whilst Jesus was uttering- 
 that discourse concerning the difference between John's 
 disciples and His own, which arose out of the offence 
 taken by the Pharisees at seeing Jesus and His dis- 
 ciples sitting at table with " many publicans and 
 sinners." Here, therefore, we must place the feast 
 IN Matthew's house, w4nch in all three Gospels i* 
 narrated in immediate connection with the call of 
 Matthew or Levi : a striking and instructive instance 
 of the manner in which the order of time is subordi- 
 nated to that of subject. (Matt. ix. 10-17 ; Mark ii. 
 15-22 ; Luke v. 29-39.) 
 
 As the feast in Matthew's house was " a great 
 reception" (such is the exact sense of the word used^ 
 Luke V. 29 ; xiv. 13), it must have been an evening 
 meal. The discourse in reply to the objection and 
 question of the Pharisees may have been spoken on 
 the day following. It appears to have been inter- 
 rupted by the urgent petition of Jairus. As the Lord 
 was on His way to the ruler's house, the woman who- 
 TOUCHED His GARMENT was healed. Before He reached 
 the house the maiden w^as already dead. Jesus, having 
 soothed the father's anguish and stayed his fainting 
 faith with the command, ''Fear not, only helieve^" 
 excluded from the chamber of death all witnesses, 
 save the parents and His own most intimate friends. 
 Then, with two simple words in the familiar mother 
 tongue — " Talitha cumi ! " (" Damsel, arise ") — He 
 forced death to relax its hold. As if this awe- 
 inspiring miracle had been simply the most natural 
 thing to do in the circumstances (as indeed to Him it 
 was), He cut short all loud wonder and rapturous- 
 thanks by ordering food to be immediately adminis- 
 tered, and enjoining silence. (Matt. ix. 18-26 ; Mark 
 V. 22-43 ; Luke viii. 41-56.) 
 
 Our Saviour's careful discrimination of the conduct 
 suited to each case should here be noted. The man 
 who had been possessed with the legion was bidden to 
 
94 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 puTolisli God's gi-eat mercy in a region as yet unvisited 
 by Christ (Mark v. 20). The sufferer who (from 
 perfectly mnocent and praiseworthy motives) sought 
 to steal a cure secretly, was made to confess it " before 
 ^11 the people," and received in pubUc Christ's em- 
 phatic and gracious ajDproval of her faith.^ But the 
 maiden of twelve years was tenderly shielded from 
 the unwholesome glare of publicity, and her parents 
 were bidden to treat as a sacred family secret the 
 mighty work wrought in their home. 
 
 The healing of two blind men, and of a dumb 
 MAN possessed with a demon, the occasion of fresh 
 blasphemies from the Pharisees, are here narrated by 
 St. Matthew (ix. 27-34). 
 
 Jesus now determined to give one more opportunity 
 for repentance and faith to those among whom the 
 first thirty years of His life had been spent. Naza- 
 EETH is not expressly named, but it is evidently in- 
 tended by " His own country." ^ This visit is con- 
 nected in St. Matthew's account (xiii. 53, 54) with 
 the Day of Parables ; in St. Mark's (v. 43 ; vi. 1) 
 with the raising of Jairus's daughter: the two Gospels 
 together thus indicate the order of events. We may 
 well believe that over none of the lost sheep of the 
 bouse of Israel did the heart of the Good Shepherd 
 yearn more tenderly than over these old neighbours 
 and acquaintances among whom His mother seems 
 still to have been residing, as well as " His brethren 
 and His sisters," He taught as He was wont in their 
 synagogue on the Sabbath. Their obstinate unbelief 
 — type of all those who so stumble at difficulties that 
 they are blind to evidence — limited His exercise of 
 miraculous power to the healing of a " few sick folk," 
 and called forth His wonder ; not the wonder of igno- 
 
 * The three Gospels all record this instance, and no other, 
 of CUV Lord addressing any one by the term " daughter." 
 
 '^ We have no English equivalent for the Greek word, 
 which might be freelv rendered, "///s old home." 
 
SECOND YEAR OF MINISTRY. 95 
 
 ranee, excited only by novelty, but of deepest wisdom, 
 which sees that man's power to resist God's truth and 
 grace is none the less marvellous because unhappily 
 so familiar. (Matt. xiii. 53-58 ; Mark vi. 1-6.) 
 
 Jesus now resumed His mission tours among " all 
 THE CITIES AND VILLAGES, teaching in their syna- 
 gogues and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and 
 healing every sickness and every disease among the 
 people." The reason of this resumption of town and 
 village work is naturally found in the advance of the 
 season. The long summer drought was over, and the 
 early rains had recalled the husbandman to his toil. 
 Ploughing begins in Palestine after the " first rains '* 
 of September have softened the hard soil ; sowing, 
 after the fuller " second rains " of October. Both 
 ploughing and sowing are continued far into the 
 winter.i Between these " first " and " second " rains — 
 speaking roughly, subject to the movable nature of 
 the Jewish year and the variableness of seasons — 
 fell the new year's day of the civil year (Feast of 
 Trumpets), the great yearly fast of the Day of Atone- 
 ment (Tisri 10th), and the most joyous of the great 
 festivals, the Feast of Tabernacles. The same reason 
 which caused Jesus to absent Himself from the follow- 
 ing Passover (J"ohn vi. 4 ; vii. 1), would this autumn 
 forbid His going up to the Feast of Tabernacles. 
 Twelve months later, when the time drew near "that 
 He should be received up, He stedfastly set His face 
 to go to Jerusalem " (Luke ix. 51) ; and at the Feasts 
 of Tabernacles, of Dedication, and of Passover, He 
 accepted, with full foreknowledge of the issue, that 
 conflict with the Jewish rulers which He avoided 
 until His mission as Prophet and Teacher to the lost 
 
 1 Cyc. Bib. Lit., art. " Agriculture." Kitto's Phys. Bisf. of 
 Pal., under the months of Sep. and Oct. These first and 
 second autumnal rains are of course both included in the 
 "early rain," as distinguished from the " latter," or spring 
 rain. 
 
96 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHBIST. 
 
 sheep of Israel was accomplislied. His movements 
 {we may be well assured) were governed not by any 
 unworthy timidity, but by the necessities of His 
 work. Inattention to the important difference be- 
 tween the SUMMER AKD WINTER MINISTRY of OUF 
 
 Lord, seems to have led to confused and inadequate 
 views of His labours. 
 
 If, in accordance with their name Apostles, and the 
 purpose of their ordination (Mark iii. 14), the Twelve 
 were to receive some practical training for their future 
 work ; as the proper scene of their mission would be 
 not the beach, the open plain, or the mountain glens, 
 T}ut the towns and villages, so the proper season 
 would be the winter months. Accordingly we find 
 that the Master, after a remarkable exhortation to 
 prayer (Matt. x. 36-38), having called His chosen 
 twelve around Him, endowed them with " power and 
 authority" to work miracles, and sent them forth 
 IN PAIRS (Mark vi. 7) " to preach the kingdom of 
 Ood." St. Matthew (x. 5-42) records the solemn 
 prophetic charge delivered on this occasion. This 
 discourse (as l3r. Stier^ has pointed out) is divided 
 into three sections. The yij^st refers to their trial 
 mission, then commencing, which was strictly con- 
 fined to Israel (verses 5-15); the second, to their 
 future mission to all nations (verses 16-23) ; the 
 third, to their position and that of Christians in after 
 times as disciples of Christ, in a world which rejects 
 Him (verses '24-42 ; compare Mark vi. 7-11 ; Luke 
 ix. 1-5). 
 
 The Twelve set forth, and '' went through the 
 towns, preaching the Gospel, and healing everywhere " 
 (Luke ix. 6; Mark vi. 12, 13). Meanwhile the 
 Master continued His work of preaching and teaching 
 
 ^ See his forcible remarks on "that strange and wilful 
 opinion whicli imputes to the Evangelist an elaboration into 
 one discourse of many saj'ings uttered at many various 
 times." — Words of the Lord Jesus, vol. ii, pp. 1-5. 
 
SECOND YEAR OF MINISTBY. 97 
 
 an the cities (Matt. xi. 1) ; accompanie*^, we may con- 
 jecture, by some, of those whom He afterwards sent 
 out as preachers (Luke x. 1). No indication is given 
 of the time when the Twelve were sent forth on their 
 honourable and arduous mission. Their return took 
 place shortly before a Passover (Mark vi. 30 ; John 
 vi. 4). The passages just quoted, as well as the 
 .nature of the case, indicate a considerable interval of 
 time between their departure and return. Perhaps we 
 may conjecture that they set forth soon after the 
 J'east of Tabernacles, when the people had returned 
 to their homes. 
 
 This prolonged absence of the Apostles naturally 
 -coincides with and accounts for a blank in the Gospel 
 narrative. To this interval we may conjecturally 
 assign some occurrences and sayings either peculiar 
 TO St. Luke's Gospel, or appearing as duplicates of 
 .similar passages in St. Matthew. These we may sup- 
 pose to have been supplied by eye and ear witnesses 
 •other than Apostles. 
 
 Such are — the request of a disciple, not stated to 
 be an apostle to be taught to pray, with Christ's 
 answer (Luke xi. 1-13); the discourse concerning 
 the prophet Jonah (xi. 29-36) ; the incident of Jesus 
 -dining at a Pharisee's table without washing, and the 
 discourse thereon (xi. 37-54); the warning to the 
 multitude against hypocrisy (xii. 1-12); Christ's 
 refusal to act as a magistrate, with the discourse 
 .against covetousness (xii. 13-21). The discourse 
 beginning Luke xii. 22 appears to have been addressed 
 ±0 the Apostles, since Peter's words are quoted in 
 verse 41. But there is no objection to the supposition 
 that here, as elsewhere, St. Luke is connecting various 
 •detached sayings by a thread of subject, not of out- 
 ward circumstance (xii. 22-59). 
 
 We now come upon a group of connected events, 
 including the one miracle recorded hy all the Evange- 
 iists: viz., (1) the Death of John the Baptist; 
 
 D 
 
98 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 (2) the Eeturn of the Twelve ; (3) the Feed- 
 ing OF THE Five Thousand ; (4) the Walk on the 
 Water ; and (5) the Discourse at Capernaum, in 
 consequence of which many of Christ's disciples for- 
 sook Him. The chronology of these events is indi- 
 cated by St. John's brief statement (vi. 4) — -"And 
 the Passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh." This- 
 agrees with St. Mark's reference to " the green grass '*■ 
 (Mark vi. 39 ; comp. Jolm vi. 10). 
 
 The duration of John the Baptist's imprisonment 
 is nowhere recorded. If the interpretations and calcu- 
 lations adopted in the foregoing pages are correct, it. 
 must have lasted the greater part of two years, from 
 May A.D. 27, to the spring of a.d. 29, when he was- 
 put to death by the Tetrarch of Galilee, Herod 
 Antipas. For, assuming that we have satisfactorily 
 proved the Passover named in John vi. 4 to be that of 
 A.D. 29 (and the third in our Lord's ministry), we^ 
 infer the date of John's death from the following 
 facts. The account of the imprisonment and murder 
 of John is given in Matthew xiv. 1-11 ; Mark vi. 
 14-29 ; introduced in both cases with the statement 
 that Herod, hearing the fame of Jesus, concluded that 
 John was risen from the dead (comp. Luke ix. 7-9). 
 Matthew relates that John's disciples, having buried 
 his corpse, brought the tidings of his death to Jesus ; 
 and that after hearing of it, " Jesus departed thence- 
 by ship into a desert place apart " (xiv. 12, 13). Mark 
 and Luke state this retreat to the desert to have been 
 in company with the Twelve, immediately on their 
 return from their mission (Mark vi. 30-32 ; Luke ix.. 
 10). They had doubtless received instructions when, 
 first sent out, as to the time and place of their return.. 
 There is no improbability or difficulty in supposing: 
 that our Lord had a double object, and that while He- 
 saw that His Apostles, wearied with their work and 
 excited with their success, needed rest and quiet. He 
 had also in view the danger of a popular rising in con- 
 
SECOND YEAR OF MINIS TBY. 99 
 
 sequence of the murder of John. The supposition 
 that He was influenced by personal fear, we may 
 silently dismiss ; but nothing could have been more 
 •disastrous to His cause than that His name should 
 have been made the rallying cry for a seditious out- 
 break. That this was no imaginary danger is proved 
 by the fact, that the multitude w^ho followed Jesus 
 and His Apostles into their retirement, actually pro- 
 posed to seize His person and proclaim Him king, 
 whether He would or no (John vi. 15). 
 
 Here only, except in the history of our Lord's 
 sufferings and resurrection, we find the fourth Gospel 
 traversing ground already trodden by the first three. 
 All four Evangelists narrate the miracle of feeding 
 the multitude, and mention the number — " about five 
 thousand." All mention the previous crossing of the 
 lake. Luke fixes the scene of the miracle in the 
 neighbourhood of " a city called Bethsaida." Luke's 
 narrative stops short with the miracle. Matthew, 
 Mark, and John all mention the retirement of Christ 
 to the mountain for solitary prayer after He had sent 
 away His disciples and dismissed the multitude. 
 John alone records the intention of the people to 
 proclaim Jesus king. All three relate the miracle 
 of walking on the sea in the storm, but Matthew; 
 only mentions the rash faith and humiliating failure 
 of Peter. (Matt. xiv. 13-34 ; Mark vi. 32-53 ; John 
 vi. 1-12.) 
 
 This attempt of the excited Galileeans to compel 
 Jesus to put Himself at their head as king was 
 a repetition in a rough and humble fashion of the 
 offer made to Him by the Tempter (Matt. iv. 8, 9; 
 Luke iv. 6-8). In the preceding and following 
 miracles we may recognize a no less striking corre- 
 spondence and contrast with the two other temptations. 
 He who in the wilderness had been vainly tempted 
 to satisfy His own hunger by a miracle, is here seen 
 in the wilderness satisfying by miracle the hunger of 
 
100 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHEIST. 
 
 thousands. He who had been challenged to show 
 Himself the Son of God by flinging Himself down 
 through the air, is here seen walking on the waters^ 
 and controlling the raging winds and waves. 
 
 The narrative of the first two Gospels briefly 
 summarizes the continuakce of our Lord's mission' 
 WORK in the district known as the land of Gennesaret 
 (Matt. xiv. 34-36 ; Mark vi. 54-56). St. John tells 
 how some who had partaken the wondrous meal, 
 crossed the lake to the western shore next day, in 
 quest of Jesus. They found Him, to their amaze- 
 ment, at Capernaum (John vi. 22-24). We may 
 probably suppose the discourse in the synagogue at 
 Capernaum (John vi. 59) to have been delivered on 
 the following Sabbath, and may infer that our Lord 
 and the Twelve came to Capernaum for the purpose 
 of spending the Sabbath there. In this discourse (for 
 the sake of which St. John appears to have recorded 
 the foregoing miracles) Jesus asserted His claim on 
 the absolute faith of His hearers, as sealed and sent 
 by the Father to bestow resurrection and eternal life ; 
 and taught (though enigmatically) the mystery of 
 His atoning death. He thus laid the axe to the root 
 of those carnal expectations which had inspired the 
 attempt to proclaim Him king ; and consequently 
 " many of His disciples," strangers to spiritual faith^^ 
 took offence at this "hard saying," and renounced 
 their discipleship (John vi. 25-66). This defection 
 was the occasion of a remarkable confession of faith 
 by Peter, and a terrible warning from the lips of 
 Christ (John vi. 67-71). 
 
 "We may regard this Sabbath at Capernaum as 
 marking the close of the second year of our 
 Lord's Ministry. It was a year of intense and 
 marvellous activity. The open breach with the 
 rulers at Jerusalem, which marked its commence- 
 ment, rendered it useless for Jesus to revisit Jeru- 
 salem, but did not cripple His ministry in Galilee. 
 
TEIBD YEAR OF MINISTMY. 101 
 
 Among the most memorable and characteristic events 
 of these twelve months were the ordination of the 
 Twelve Apostles, and their subsequent mission; the 
 message from John, and his death ; " the day of 
 parables ; " and some of our Lord's greatest miracles, 
 including two instances of raising the dead, the 
 stilling of the storm, the walk on the water, and 
 the feeding of the five thousand. The double shadow 
 which fell on the close of this year of ministry, in the- 
 misguided attempt of the Galila^ans to make Jesus- 
 king, and the defection of many of His disciples^ 
 indicated that the time was drawing near for the 
 close of Christ's Galila^an ministry. For a season, 
 however, it might still be said to those so long and 
 abundantly favoured with His presence (as He said 
 afterwards to the people of Jerusalem), " Yet a little 
 while is the light with you. Walk while ye have tha 
 liglit " (John xii. 35). 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 third year. a.d. 29-30. 
 
 (a.u.c. 782-3.) 
 
 " A FTEK these things Jesus walked in Galilee : 
 r\ . for He would not walk in Juda3a because 
 the Jews sought to kill Him " (John vii. 1). Probably 
 for the first time since He was twelve years old, He 
 abstained from attending the Passover in the Holy 
 City. He appears to have continued His ministry in 
 Galilee with unabated energy. The account in the 
 first two Gospels of His ministry in the land of 
 Gennesaret may cover some weeks of April and May 
 (Matt. xiv. 35, 36 ; Mark vi. 54-56). As yet we find 
 no token of diminished labour or declining popularity; 
 or of any attempt on the part of the rulers to carry 
 
 D 3 
 
102 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHBIST. 
 
 out in Galilee that murderous purpose ^Tllicll was 
 cherished with growing malignity at Jerusalem. But 
 the two signs indicated at the close of the last section 
 — the tendency to insurrection, and the apostasy of 
 professed disciples — could not be misread by Him 
 " who knew what was in man." A marked change is 
 soon perceptible in the narrative. 
 
 The closing year of our Lord's earthly life is 
 divided into two halves by the Feast of Tabernacles, 
 at which, after an interval (according to our reckoning) 
 of eighteen months, He again visited Jerusalem. 
 These two periods present some features of strong 
 contrast. But one character common to both is, the 
 extension of our Saviour's labours to the borders of 
 heathendom. His own words define the limits of 
 His personal ministry : He was " not sent but unto 
 the lost sheep of the house of Israel " (Matt. xv. 24). 
 But " other sheep " He had, not of that fold (John x. 
 16), over whom His heart yearned ; and though the 
 time was not yet for the glad tidings to be preached 
 to all nations, we see Him stretching the bounds of 
 His ministry as wide as was consistent with their 
 maintenance. During this summer He visited the 
 frontiers of Phoenicia and the neighbourhood of 
 Cassarea Philippi. During the winter and early 
 spring, having closed His ministry in Galilee, He 
 carried it on, apparently for a considerable period, 
 in Peraea. During the whole of this year the Twelve 
 were vdth their Master ; and the indications of time 
 and place are more numerous than in previous years. 
 
 We may dismiss from oar minds as wholly imagi- 
 nary the unkingly and distressing picture sometimes 
 drawn of this period of our Saviour's life, depicting 
 Him as a harassed and anxious fugitive, retreating 
 from His persecutors as David from Saul, and seeking 
 safety in obscurity. St. John's statement (vii. 1) 
 shows that the Galiltean ministry continued for some 
 considerable time after the feeding of the five 
 
THIBD TEAR OF MIXISTRY. 103 
 
 thousand and the Sabbath at Capernaum. This 
 perfectly accords with the first two Gospels (Matt, 
 xiv. 34-36; Mark vi. 53-56). Certain occasions are 
 mentioned when Jesus sought privacy, but with no 
 indication that the motive was care for His own 
 safety (Mark vii. 24; ix. 30). If He took a brief 
 interval of rest, it was a preparation for renewed 
 activity. When He finally quitted Galilee, it was to 
 visit that very part of Herod's dominion in which 
 John the Baptist had been imprisoned and slain ; and 
 by the preparatory mission of the seventy, He invested 
 His ministry in Pera-a with a kind of regal state. 
 When urged by zealous disciples or officious strangers 
 to take thought for His own safety, our Lord's replies 
 showed how little room there was in His plans for any 
 such considerations (Matt. xvi. 22, 23 ; Luke xiii. 
 31-33; John xi. 8-10). When the time came to 
 meet not only danger, but the certainty of death, 
 long foreseen and foretold, His calm determination 
 filled His disciples with astonishment and dread 
 (Mark X. 32). The truth is that personal safety lay 
 for Jesus in publicity, not retirement. To the last, 
 in Jerusalem the one difficulty which embarrassed 
 the rulers in their murderous purpose was the fear of 
 a popular rising on His behalf (Matt. xxvi. 5 ; Luke 
 xxii. 2 ; John xi. 48 ; xii. 11, 19). 
 
 To prevent any such outburst (so disastrous to His 
 true influence and work) while carrying on His 
 ministry of teaching and healing, may have been far 
 more difficult than we are apt to suppose ; for the 
 most ignorant could not but be impressed and excited 
 by His miracles, while thoughtful minds must have 
 seen in His doctrine the germs of a mighty social and 
 religious revolution. The frightful incident of the 
 MASSACRE OF THOSE GALILEANS " whose blood Pilate 
 had mingled with their sacrifices" (Luke xiii. 1), 
 suggests that Jesus may have had other motives for 
 refraining from visiting Jerusalem beside the hostility 
 
101 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CEBIST. 
 
 of the Jewish rulers. For it seems probable that it 
 was at this Passover that this atrocious massacre took 
 place. The mention of " sacrifices " proves it to have 
 been at Jerusalem ; and it is unlikely that Galilseans 
 would have been at Jerusalem, or would have pro- 
 voked the savage vengeance of the Koman governor, 
 except at one of the great festivals. 
 
 To this summer we may assign the healing of an 
 INFIRM WOMAN IN THE SYNAGOGUE, related by St. 
 Luke without any note of time or place (xiii. 10-17). 
 Likewise the remonstrance of the *' Scribes and 
 Pharisees who came from Jerusalem " against the 
 disciples for violating the traditions of the elders by 
 
 " EATING BREAD WITH UNWASHEN HANDS." JeSUS not 
 
 only defended His disciples (as He had done in re- 
 ference to Sabbath observance), but exasperated the 
 Pharisees by declaring that their human traditions 
 made void the Divine law (Matt. xv. 1-20 ; Mark vii. 
 1-23). 
 
 The Galilsean ministry of Christ may be regarded 
 as now virtually at an end, though He had not yet 
 finally quitted Galilee. Leaving those familiar scenes 
 in which His ministry — though so bitterly opposed 
 by the Jewish rulers, so fruitlessly attended by 
 ignorant and thoughtless crowds, so imperfectly 
 understood even by His disciples — had nevertheless 
 reaped no scanty harvest, while sowing the living 
 seed of a richer harvest to be reaped by His Apostles, 
 Jesus turned His steps northward. He first visited 
 the frontiers of Phoenicia. Eest and privacy seem to 
 have been the immediate object of this excursion, and 
 He neither taught nor wrought miracles in public. 
 But the importunate prayer of a heathen mother — "a 
 WOMAN OF Canaan," " a Syro-Phoeoician by nation," 
 on behalf of her afflicted daughter, won from Christ 
 not only the blessing she implored, but a warm eulogy 
 on her faith (Matt. xv. 21-28; Mark vii. 24-30). 
 When we consider the spiritual significance of this 
 
THIRD YEAR OF MINISTRY. 105 
 
 miracle, and the value of the lessons treasured up for 
 all ages in the story of it, we seem justified in sup- 
 posing, that it was for the sake of this one work of 
 mercy that our Saviour trod so far out of His ordinary 
 path. \\e have no reason to suppose that He departed 
 from the rule He had laid down for His Apostles, by 
 entering into any city of the Gentiles. If (on the 
 critical maxim that the more puzzling and improbable 
 a reading is, the more likely it is to be true), we 
 accept the reading adopted by modern editors (Mark 
 vii. 31), " He went through Sidon to the Sea of 
 Galilee," we must understand the territory, not the 
 city. If so, our Lord now reached the northern limit 
 of Palestine. We can only conjecture the object of so- 
 remarkable a journey to have been rest, privacy, and 
 the relief of entire change of scene for the disciples as 
 well as for Himself, not so much on account of past 
 labours, exhausting though they had been, as in view 
 of the tremendous strain of the approaching autumn, 
 winter, and spring. 
 
 We next find our Saviour resuming His labours 
 near the eastern or south-eastern shore of the Lake of 
 Galilee,, having journeyed " through the midst of the 
 coasts 1 of Decapolis" (Mark vii. 31). Of the 
 numerous and varied miracles summarily indicated 
 by Matthew xv. 30, Mark particularizes one, — the- 
 
 HEALING OF A DEAF AND DUMB MAN, accompanied 
 
 with an injunction to keep silence, which, however, 
 he disobeyed (Matt. xv. 29-31; Mark vii. 31-37). 
 In the same region apparently, and about the same 
 time, Jesus finding Himself again surrounded by a 
 hungry multitude, fed 4,000 with seven loaves and 
 A FEW FISHES. TMs miraclo is discriminated from 
 the former one by Christ Himself, as though to fore- 
 
 ^ I.e. "Borders," including the sense of "district" or 
 " region." The word " coast " is never used in A.V. for the 
 sea-shore, except in Luke vi. 17. In Acts xxvii. 2, the 
 Greek word simply means places or regions. 
 
106 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST, 
 
 stall the attempts of modern critics to confound them 
 (Mark viii, 19, 20). Having dismissed the multitude, 
 He recrossed the lake with His disciples, to the neigh- 
 bourhood, of Magdala and Dalmanutha (Matt. xv. 
 32-39 ; Mark viii. 1-10). 
 
 After refusing the request, at once presumptuous 
 and imbelieving, for a sign from heaven, in which 
 the Pharisees joined with their bitter foes the Saddu- 
 cees, Jesus left these blind rulers of the blind to 
 themselves, and recrossod to the eastern shore. On 
 the voyage the Apostles showed themselves still but 
 dull learners, by supposing that the Master's warning 
 against the leaven of the Pharisees was occa- 
 sioned by their having forgotten to take bread. 
 Slight as this incident is, it throws no faint light on 
 both the need and the reality of the inspiration which 
 qualified them for their labours from and after the 
 Day of Pentecost. (Matt. xvi. 5-12 ; Mark viii. 14- 
 21.) 
 
 At Bethsaida, Jesus healed a blind man who 
 was brought to Him. A village -suburb of the city 
 Julias seems to be meant, as St. Mark says, " He took 
 the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the 
 village." 1 (Mark viii. 22-26.) 
 
 Continuing His journey northward, Jesus visited 
 the neighbourhood of Philip's newly built city of 
 C^SAREA Philippi. Here (St. Luke says, when He 
 had been " alone praying,") He received a remarkable 
 confession of faith, in which the ever-ardent Peter 
 stood forward as spokesman for his brother Apostles, 
 and was answered by Christ in those memorable 
 words, remarkable not only as containing the first 
 occurrence in the New Testament of the word " Ec- 
 
 1 In A.y. " town ; " so in verse 27. Our translators 
 render this word (kome), sometimes "villap;e," sometimes 
 *'town;" e.g., Matt. ix. 35; x. 11. They never use 
 "town" for "city." In Mark i. 38, the Greek word 
 literally means "village-city," q.d., unwalled town. 
 
THIRD YEAH OF MINISTRY. 137 
 
 CLESIA," but on account of the sense put upon them 
 by the Eomish Church — "Thou art Peter, and 
 
 UPON THIS EOCK I WILL BUILD My ChURCH." This 
 
 declaration must have profoundly impressed the 
 minds of the disciples, since the word " Ecclesia " (or 
 its Hebrew equivalent, if Christ was speaking Hebrew) 
 was already a sacred term, as applied to the assembly 
 of Israel. Vague but sublime visions of authority and 
 dominion would present themselves to their imagina- 
 tion. The Master therefore followed this splendid 
 prediction by a strict injunction to silence (Matt. xvi. 
 20; Mark viii. 30; Luke ix. 21). 
 
 *' From that time forth began Jesus " to impart 
 to the Twelve the terrible secret of His approaching 
 rejection by the rulers at Jerusalem, His sufferings 
 and death ; foretelling, at. the same time, His resurrec- 
 tion on the third day. Peter's remonstrance at 
 what seemed so irreconcilable with the promise lately 
 made to him, drew on him a severe rebuke. This 
 took place in private ; but shortly afterwards Jesus 
 publicly warned His assembled hearers that the cost 
 of discipleship was daily self-denial, even to the 
 taking up of the cross. (Matt. xvi. 21-28 ; Mark viii. 
 31-38 ; ix. 1 ; Luke ix. 22-27.) 
 
 A week elapsed, and the Three who were admitted 
 to closer fellowship with their Master than their 
 brother Apostles were called to witness a spectacle, 
 which seems to have impressed their minds more 
 deeply than any other miracle, save the crowning, 
 miracle of the Resurrection. The Transfiguration 
 OF Christ is referred to by the Apostle Peter with 
 solemn emphasis in his Second Epistle (i. 16-18). 
 St. John, though the plan of his narrative allowed no 
 place for relating this manifestation of Christ's glory, 
 alludes to it in the introduction to his Gospel (i. 14). 
 The mediaeval tradition which assigned Mount Tabor 
 as the scene of the Transfiguration, is now generally 
 considered erroneous. Less than 1,900 feet high, 
 
( 
 
 108 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CEBIST. 
 
 Tahor has no claim to be called "a high mountain," and 
 is deficient in those circumstances of lonely grandeur 
 suited to this sublime transaction, which are abun- 
 dantly furnished by Mount Hermon.i The connec- 
 tion of the narrative agrees with the view that the 
 holy mount was Hermon. The return from Philip's 
 tetrarchy to Galilee seems indicated in Mark ix. 30 
 <Matt. xvii. 1-8 ; Mark ix. 2-8 ; Luke ix. 28-36). 
 
 Descending next day from the mountain, Jesus 
 found the nine Apostles whom He had left below sur- 
 rounded by an excited multitude, assailed with 
 questions by the Scribes, and in perplexity and 
 •distress. In their Master's absence, they had tried 
 to exercise the power, formerly given to them (Luke 
 ix. 1), but had failed. The contrast between the 
 calm, sublime communion with Heaven on the mount, 
 and this scene of misery, confusion, and weakness, 
 forced from our Saviour's lips a rare expression of the 
 anguish and burden which He endured from, the daily 
 presence of sin and suffering. He revived the faith 
 of the afflicted father, cast out the evil spirit, and 
 privately told His Apostles that their failure had 
 been through lack of faith ; at the same time warning 
 them, that the faith needed for such works was itself 
 no easy attainment, but to be sought " by prayer and 
 fasting " (Matt. xvii. 14-21 ; Mark ix. 14-29 ; Luke 
 ix. 37-43). 
 
 This narrative affords another indication that in 
 this northern journey our Lord was not withdrawing 
 from public labour. But on returning "through 
 Galilee " to Capernaum, " He would not that any man 
 should know it." Again He forewarned His disciples 
 of His approaching sufferings, and foretold His resur- 
 rection. They were unable to believe that He really 
 
 - Dr. "W. M. Thomson, however, thinks something may 
 he said in favour of Mount Tabor ( The Land and the Book, 
 p. 433). For a description of Mount Hermon see Tent 
 Work, vol. i., pp. 261, fe. 
 
THIRD YEAR OF MINISTRY. 109 
 
 meant what His words seemed to mean, and (with 
 natural inconsistency) " feared to ask Him." St. 
 Matthew's phrase, " while they were sojourning in 
 Galilee," seems to point to some continuance — possibly 
 several weeks — of this quiet private life. (]\Iatt. xvii. 
 22, 23 ; Mark ix. 30-32 ; Luke ix. 43-45.) This accords 
 with the' remonstrance of the unbelieving brethren of 
 Jesus (John vii. 2-9) who urged Him to go up to the 
 Feast of Tabernacles and "show Himself to the world." 
 The Feast fell in that year in the middle of October. 
 The narrative has therefore brought us again to the 
 season when the " early rains " summoned the plough- 
 man and the sower to their labour, and the time for 
 great open-air gatherings was past. Jesus had no 
 intention of continuing His ministry in Galilee into 
 another winter. His work there was virtually 
 ^nded. 
 
 To this period belongs the mieacle of the tribute 
 ■MONEY (Matt. xvii. 24-27), and the discourse occasioned 
 by the strife for pre-eminence among the Twelve 
 (Matt, xviii. 1-35; Mark ix. 33-50; Luke ix. 46-50). 
 
 Jesus went up to the Feast " not openly, but as it 
 were in secret," so as not even in appearance to ally 
 Himself with the excitable, worldly-minded Galilseans, 
 who would have *' taken Him by force to make Him a 
 king." Probably it needed the exercise of the greatest 
 wisdom and self-restraint to guard against the danger 
 of a popular uprising. The people were anxiously 
 expecting Him at Jerusalem, but restrained from any 
 open expression of opinion through fear of the rulers. 
 Not until the last day of the Feast did Jesus 
 appear in the Temple and resume His public teaching. 
 His calm authority and courage struck the people with, 
 awe, and filled the rulers with alarm and rage. A 
 year and a half had elapsed since His last visit ; but 
 His reference to the healing of the infirm man on the 
 >Sabbath shows how fresh the events of that time were 
 in His hearers' memory as well as His own. Many 
 
110 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CEBIST. 
 
 believed on Him as the Christ, in the face of fierce 
 opposition. The officers of the Sanhedrin sent to- 
 arrest Him felt the spell of His majestic presence and 
 heart-searching words, and dared not execute their 
 warrant. Nicodemus raised an honest though feeble 
 protest in His behalf, and the council broke up in 
 confusion. (John vii. 10-53.) 
 
 Great critical difficulties, as is well known, beset 
 the narrative of the woman brought to Christ for 
 JUDGMENT (John viii. 2-11); greater, indeed, thaa 
 affect any other passage in the New Testament. But 
 these by no means constitute a reason for rejecting it 
 as an authentic portion of the Gospel narrative, even 
 if we suppose that it is inserted out of the chronological 
 order,! qj. -^^s added by another hand. It has been 
 commonly taken for granted that St. John's narrative 
 of this visit to Jerusalem extends to the close of 
 chap, viii., if not farther. But in chap. x. 22, we 
 read, " Jif was at Jerusalem, the Feast of the Dedication.'^ 
 A difficulty thus arises where to draw the line in the 
 narrative between the two Feasts, and to which of 
 them to assign the cure of the blind man. This 
 difficulty vanishes if we suppose that the account of 
 
 1 The difficulties attending this passage (including chap.. 
 
 vii. 53) arise not merely from the fact that it is wanting in 
 
 a large number of MSS., including the oldest existing copies,. 
 
 while in some MSS. it is inserted at the end of the GospeL, 
 
 or even at the close of Luke xxi. ; but that the diction 
 
 throughout is unlike St. John's, and that the variations in 
 
 different copies are numerous and important. (See the 
 
 statement of the whole question in Alford's Greek Testa- 
 
 /^ ment.) Alford appears in error in appealing to the case of 
 
 / Stephen, in proof that the Romans by connivance permitted 
 
 I the Sanhedrin to inflict capital punishment. The Talmud 
 
 I states that "forty years before the destruction of the Temple,. 
 
 I the power of inflicting capital punishment was taken away 
 
 y from Israel." Lightft. {Horb. Heb. vol. ii. p. Gil) on John 
 
 I xviii. 31. "The stoning of Stephen was the illegal act of 
 
 *v an enraged multitude." Cyc. Bib. Lit., Art. " Saniiedrin." 
 
 Cf. Conybeare and Howson, vol. i. p. 5. 
 
THIRD YEAR OF MINISTRY. Ill 
 
 the Feast of Tabernacles closes with cliap. vil. ; and 
 that our Lord's words (viii. 12) contain an allusion to 
 the Feast of Lights. On this view the whole of chaps. 
 Tiii., ix., X. form one continuous section, belonging 
 "to the season of mid- winter. 
 
 At this point, therefore (viz., the close of John vii.), 
 ^e return to the narrative of Matthew and Mark : for 
 here Luke's Gospel parts company with theirs (ix. 51), 
 Tejoining them in the account of the final journey to 
 Jerusalem (xviii. 15). Several important questions 
 jDresent themselves regarding the order of the history ; 
 to which the most discordant answers have been 
 returned by harmonists and critics of equal eminence. 
 Our only course therefore is carefully to examine and 
 compare the Gospel narratives. Questions of this 
 sort are not to be decided by authority, because where 
 there is no consensus, but a conflict of authorities, it 
 is really a more difficult task to apportion the relative 
 weight of the authorities than to form a judgment on 
 the original facts. 
 
 The first question is, did our Lord return to Galilee 
 after the Feast of Tabernacles ? Naturally He would 
 do so, and we know of no reason why He should not. 
 The first two Gospels state that Jesus "departed 
 T-ROM Galilee, and came into the coasts of Judsea 
 "beyond Jordan" (Matt. xix. 1 ; Mark x. 1). That is. 
 He crossed the Jordan into Persea, which was included 
 in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas, and was separated 
 by the river from Galilee, Samaria, and Judsea. If 
 He crossed into Persea from Galilee, He must first 
 have returned to Galilee from Jerusalem. Persea was 
 all but untrodden ground ; and our Lord's purpose in 
 visiting it was not to seek retirement, but to resume 
 His public ministry. Crowds again gathered, and He 
 
 both TAUGHT AND WEOUGHT MIRACLES (Matt. xix. 2 ; 
 
 Mark x. 1). St. John's statement (x. 40) that Jesus 
 *' went away again beyond Jordan," after the Feast 
 of Dedication, implies that He was carrying on His 
 
112 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 ministry there previous to that feast, and thus con- 
 firms the account of the first two Evangelists. 
 
 St. Luke's Gospel contains four important state- 
 ments peculiar to itself, bearing on this period of our 
 Lord's ministry : (1) chap. ix. 51, 52; (2) chap. x. 1 ,- 
 comp. ver. 17; (3) chap. xiii. 22; (4) chap. xvii. 11. 
 The first (somewhat too freely rendered in our A.V.) 
 tells us that, " when the days were being fulfilled of 
 His taking up " [i.e. into heaven], " He firmly fixed 
 His face to journey to Jerusalem." The statement is 
 not that the days were expired, but that they were 
 in course of fulfilment ; the appointed time had not 
 arrived, but was drawing near. This statement may- 
 well be understood as covering the whole time from 
 the Feast of Tabernacles to the Passover — the last 
 half of the sacred year, the first half of the civil year. 
 It seems best interpreted not of a single occasion, but 
 of the high purpose and stedfast courage displayed in 
 our Lord's repeated visits to Jerusalem during these- 
 months, accompanied by repeated warnings to His 
 disciples that He was on His way to crucifixion. Great 
 confusion and perplexity accrue when these words are- 
 supposed to form an introductory note of time to the 
 whole following section of St. Luke's Gospel, as if 
 chaps, x.-xviii. constituted a consecutive chronological 
 whole. The difficulty vanishes if we take them as 
 referring generally to the closing months of our Lord's 
 ministry, but immediately to the incident which 
 followed, ix. 52-56; and which is introduced in natural 
 connection (not of time, but topic) with ver. 49, 50. 
 On this view, no difficulty arises from the introduction 
 in the chapters which follow of matter belonging to 
 various dates. When the incident occurred, it is 
 impossible to determine : possibly when our Lord was 
 going up to the Feast of Dedication. We have no 
 means of deciding whether the "messengers" were 
 from among the Apostles or the Seventy, or other 
 disciples. 
 
THIRD YEAR OF MINISTRY. 113 
 
 The second passage (x. 1, ff.) relates to the appoint- 
 ment of SEVENTY PREACHERS, whom the Lord sent 
 *'two and two before His face into every city and 
 and place, whither He Himself would come." This- 
 step, totally distinct in its bearings and motives from 
 the appointment of the Twelve, was scarcely less- 
 important or significant. We gather from it, first,, 
 that our Lord's withdrawal from Gralilee was of the 
 nature not of a retreat, but of an advance. Feeling 
 that His work there was accomplished, He would 
 employ the brief remaining months of His earthly life- 
 in labours among towns and districts as yet unvisited. 
 Secondly, that, having in view His final visit to 
 Jerusalem, and the end which there awaited Him^ 
 Jesus deliberately invested the closing portion of His 
 ministry with somewhat of the state and publicity of 
 a royal progress, fitly closed in the appointed season 
 by His triumphant entry into Jerusalem. Thirdly, 
 that the number of towns and villages visited must 
 have been very considerable, and, consequently, though 
 the Seventy may have accomplished their work in 
 two or three weeks, many weeks must have been 
 occupied in the labours of which such solemn announce- 
 ment was made. (Comp. xiii. 22.) 
 
 These inferences harmonize perfectly with the 
 account in the first and second Gospels of the ministry 
 in Persea (Matt. xix. 1 ; Mark x. 1), which presents a 
 strong contrast with the private journey to the Feast 
 of Tabernacles (John vii. 10). Our previous conclusion 
 is thus confirmed, that Jesus returned from Jerusalem 
 to Galilee after that Feast, before making this new 
 departure. It is conceivable that the Seventy may 
 have been sent forth before the Feast ; but it seems 
 every way more probable that their mission was after 
 the return of the people from the Feast. Reckoning 
 the Feast to have closed on October 19th, and the 
 Feast of Dedication to have fallen on December 19th, 
 a clear month or six weeks misrht intervene between 
 
lU OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CEBIST. 
 
 the return of tlie Seventy and the visit of Jesus to 
 -Jerusalem at the latter Feast (John x. 22). When 
 our Lord returned after that Feast to Persea (John 
 X. 40), three months yet remained before the Pass- 
 over, which was already approaching when He finally 
 returned to Judsea, and for a brief season suspended 
 His ministry and sought privacy and rest (John xi. 7, 
 54, 55). 
 
 When "the seventy eeturned again with joy," 
 iheir mission was accomplished. With this temporary 
 <!haracter of their work correspond both the similarity 
 and the contrast between the instructions given to 
 them and the charge to the Twelve (comp. Luke 
 X. 2-12, 16, with Matt. x. 5-42). 
 
 The third passage (Luke xiii. 22), which tells us 
 liow Jesus "went through the cities and villages, teach- 
 ing and journeying towards Jerusalem," is sufficiently 
 illustrated by the foregoing remarks. The special 
 incidents with which it is connected (ver. 23, 31) 
 may have occurred either before or after the Feast of 
 Dedication. 
 
 The fourth passage (Luke xvii. 11 ; in which 
 
 ^^ THEOUGH the MIDST OF SaMAEIA AND GaLILEE " 
 
 may be translated " between Samaeia and Gali- 
 liEE," i.e., on the borders of the two districts) may 
 possibly refer, not to our Lord's public ministry after 
 the Feast of Tabernacles, but to His private journey 
 to Jerusalem on occasion of that Feast (John vii. 
 ■9, 10). 
 
 Setting aside, then, as wholly untenable the notion 
 that these passing references to time and place 
 indicate the Evangelist's purpose to adhere to 
 chronological order in the incidents and sayings 
 collected in this part of his Gospel ; and relinquishing 
 as alike hopeless and useless the attempt to fit them, 
 like bits of tesselated pavement, each into its exact 
 place, we are warranted by the foregoing considera- 
 tions in assigning to the closing six months of our 
 
THIRD YEAR OF MINISTRY. 115 
 
 Lord's earthly life, tlie following matters recorded in 
 the third Gospel : 
 
 The KEFUSAL OF CERTAIN SaMAEITAN VILLAGERS 
 
 TO ENTERTAIN Jesus (chap. ix. 51-56); the eeproofs- 
 addressed to two wavering disciples (vers. 59-62) ; the 
 sending forth of the seventy Evangelists (x. 1-16)^ 
 and their return (vers. 17-24) ; the lawyer's 
 question, answered by the parablo of the Good 
 Samaritan (vers. 25-37) ; the visit to the home of 
 Martha and Mary (vers. 38-42) ; Christ's reply 
 to the question as to the fewness op [the saved, 
 and His answer (on the same day) when warned of 
 Herod's threats, together with His lament over 
 Jerusalem (xiii. 23-35); the healing on the 
 Sabbath at the house of a Pharisee of a man who- 
 had dropsy ; and the parable of the great supper 
 (xiv. 1-24) ; the warning concerning rash disciple- 
 ship given to the multitude (vers. 25-35) ; the three 
 parables (in reply to the Pharisees' murmuring) of 
 LOST AND FOUND (xv.) ; the parables of the unjust- 
 steward, and of THE RICH man and Lazarus (xvi.) ; 
 the parable of master and servant, preceded by 
 sayings concerning " offences " and " faith " (xvii. 
 
 1-10) ; the HEALING OF TEN LEPERS (vcrS. 11-19) ^ 
 
 the question and reply concerning the kingdom of 
 God, followed by a brief discourse resembling part 
 of Matt. xxiv. (vers. 20-37); and (lastly) the parable^^ 
 of the IMPORTUNATE WIDOW and the two w^orshippers 
 (xviii. 1-14). The labour which harmonists have 
 bestowed in assigning to each of these sections its 
 chronological place appears to be labour lost. 
 
 At this point Luke's narrative rejoins that of the 
 earlier Gospels. The three Evangelists relate the 
 incident — which has touched so deeply, and till 
 the end of time will not cease to touch, the hearts of 
 both parents and children — of the children brought 
 to Jesus; repulsed by His disciples, but invited, 
 embraced, and blessed by the Master. Mark notices. 
 
11 G OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CEBIST. 
 
 the displeasure of Jesus at this ungracious interference 
 of the disciples. Their annoyance may be better 
 understood if we suppose that the mothers brought 
 their children into the house to which Christ and His 
 Apostles had retired for food and rest, which seems 
 indicated by the phrase with which Mark (x. 17) 
 introduces the following incident, — "when He was 
 gone forth into the way." (Matt. xix. 13-15 ; Mark 
 :s;. 13-16 ; Luke xviii. 15-17.) 
 
 All three Evangelists likewise narrate the applica- 
 tion of THE YOUNG RULER (who as a rulcr of a 
 synagogue could not have been a mere youth), and 
 the conversation with the Apostles which followed. 
 {Matt. xix. 16-30 ; Mark x. 17-31 ; Luke xviii. 18- 
 SO.) Matthew adds the parable of the labourers in 
 THE VINEYARD (xx. 1-16). This portiou of the 
 synoptic narrative is doubtless to be assigned to 
 the ministry in Pera?a. But it seems impossible 
 to decide whether its place is before or after the visit 
 to Jerusalem in mid-winter recorded in the fourth 
 Oospel. To that Gospel we now turn. 
 
 The Feast of Dedication (John x. 22), or Feast 
 -of Lights, though not of Divine institution, yet 
 possessed great national importance. It was insti- 
 tuted by Judas Maccabasus B.C. 164, in commemora- 
 tion of the purification of the Temple after its 
 desecration by Antiochus Epiphanes. It was cele- 
 brated eight days, commencing on the 25th of the 
 ■9th month (Chisleu). See 1 Mac. iv. 52-59 ; 2 Mac. 
 s. 5-8. Fasting and mourning were forbidden. 
 Palm-leaves and branches were borne by the wor- 
 shippers in the Temple and synagogues. The houses 
 in Jerusalem were illuminated as well as the Temple, 
 whence the name "Feast of Lights." ^ This joyful 
 national Festival, therefore, our Saviour recognized 
 and honoured with His presence ; and His reception 
 
 » Cyc. Bib. Lit, Art. "Dedication" and "Festivals,' 
 where authorities are fully given. 
 
THIRD YEAR OF MINISTRY. 117 
 
 in Jerusalem was again sucbi as compelled Him to 
 f^eek more willing ears and obedient hearts elsewhere. 
 It has been already suggested that the illumination 
 of the Temple and city may have furDished the 
 occasion of Christ's description of Himself as the 
 Light of the World, and that consequently, chap, 
 viii. 12 — X. 40 of St. John's Gospel constitute a 
 continuous narrative. This includes, first, a dis- 
 course, or rather discussion with the Phariseees, in 
 THE Temple (viii. 12-20) ; followed by a second and 
 more lengthened discussion also in the Temple, during 
 which MANY BELIEVED ON HiM (vcr. 30), but at the 
 close of which His opponents tore up stones and 
 WOULD HAVE STONED HiM to death ; " but Jesus hid 
 Himself, and went out of the Temple, going through 
 the midst of them, and so passed by." (John viii. 
 22-59.) 
 
 The healing of one boen blind (John ix.) was a 
 glorious commentary on the claim of Jesus to be the 
 "Light of the World," the spiritual significance of 
 which is indicated by Christ Himself (ver. 5, 39-41). 
 The rage of the Pharisees and rulers was intensified 
 not only by the undeniable greatness of the miracle 
 and the impression it produced, but by the fact that, 
 like the cure of the impotent man (chap, v.), it was 
 wrought on the Sabbath. St. John incidentally 
 mentions that it had been already decreed by " the 
 Jews" — g.d. the Sanhedrin — that any one who 
 professed faith in Jesus as the Messiah should suffer 
 excommunication. The closing verses (39-41) of ch. 
 'xX. belong more properly to the following chapter. 
 The discourse of the Good Shepherd (ch. x. 1-18) 
 was probably spoken in the Temple, though this is 
 not expressly stated. It produced a powerful im- 
 2:)ression even on some of the rulers (vers. 19-21 ; 
 €omp. vii. 50-52). The exact scene (the eastern 
 colonnade or portico of the Temple-yard, or Court of 
 the Gentiles, known as " Solomon's") as well as the 
 
 ^ 
 
118 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 season (ver. 22) is particularized by the Evangelist in 
 recording the direct challenge given to Jesus by tho 
 Jewish authorities to say whether He was or was not 
 THE Christ. Jesus in reply appealed to His former 
 teaching and to His miracles, and declared His unity 
 WITH THE Father. He was again threatened with 
 stoning, and an attempt made to arrest Him ; " but 
 He escaped out of their hand." (Vers. 22-39.) 
 
 For a season our Lord resumed His ministry in 
 Per^a, at the very spot where Jolin the Baptist had 
 borne witness to Him. Crowds again gathered to 
 hear Him, and " many believed on Him there.'" 
 (Yer. 40-42.) The narrative thus brings us to the 
 early weeks of a.d. 30. Three months yet remained 
 before the Passover. It is therefore not improbable 
 (as before pointed out) that to this period (January, 
 February, or the early part of March) we should 
 assign some of the events and sayings of the Pera^an 
 ministry recorded in the first three Gospels; speci- 
 mens, few and brief, of those labours for which the 
 mission of the Seventy had been the preparation. 
 St. John's statement, concise as it is, shows that our 
 Lord's withdrawal from Jerusalem involved no sus- 
 pension or relaxation of His public labours. 
 
 From Persea our Saviour was recalled to the neigh- 
 bourhood of Jerusalem (against the remonstrances of 
 His terrified disciples) by the illness and death of 
 His beloved friend Lazarus. After the great miracle 
 of the raising of Lazarus, He did not recross 
 Jordan, but withdrew with His disciples " into a city 
 called Ephraim," bordering on the wilderness of 
 Judaea ; identified by geographers with Ophrah of 
 Benjamin, situate on a lofty hill-summit, five or six 
 miles N.E. of Bethel ; and represented by the modern 
 village of Taiyebeh. 
 
 The Passover was now so near at hand, that, 
 according to custom (comp. Jos. An t. xvii. 9 : 3 ; 
 Wars, ii. 1 : 3), multitudes were already resorting to 
 
THIBD YEAR OF MINISTRY. 119 
 
 Jerusalem in preparation for the Feast. Meantime 
 the Sanhedrin, led by the counsel of the High Priest 
 Caiaphas, were maturing their plans for the destruc- 
 tion of Jesus. He, attended by His chosen Twelve 
 in the quiet retirement of Ephraim, allowed Himself 
 a short breathing space, in preparation for the conflict 
 which He knew awaited Him. This withdrawal 
 TO Ephraim, therefore, marks the close of our 
 Saviour's public ministry, save those last days 
 during which it behoved Him at Jurusalem to show 
 Himself publicly as Messiah, to deliver His final 
 prophetic warnings in the Temple and farewell words 
 to His disciples, and to fulfil the unconscious prophecy 
 of Caiaphas by dying, " not for that nation only, but 
 that also He should gather together in one the 
 •children of God that were scattered abroad." (John 
 xi. 47-57.) 
 
 From Ephraim, then, our Lord made that final 
 JOURNEY TO Jerusalem by way of Jericho, which is 
 recorded by the first three Evangelists. St. Mark, in 
 his graphic way, depicts the calm courage of the 
 Master and the terror and perplexity of His followers : 
 "" Jesus went before them : and they were amazed ; 
 and as they followed, they were afraid " (x. 32). On 
 this journey, Christ again foretold to His disciples in 
 the plainest terms His aj^proaching sufferings and 
 resurrection ; but " they understood none of these 
 things." It remained to them such an incompre- 
 hensible mystery, on the one hand, that Jesus should 
 go to Jerusalem at all, if He foresaw that He would 
 be seized and crucified ; or, on the other hand, that 
 He who had quelled the storm, controlled demons, 
 conquered death itself, could possibly fall a victim to 
 so horrible a fat-e, that they persuaded themselves 
 His words must conceal some other meaning than that 
 ghastly and incredible one they literally expressed. 
 (Matt. XX. 17-19 ; Mark x. 32-34 ; Luke xviii. 31- 
 34.) 
 
120 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 The ambitious bequest of Zebedee's soxs, and of 
 their mother on their behalf, is more easily intelli- 
 gible, if we take John xix. 25 (as compared with 
 Matt, xxvii. 56, and Mark xv. 40) to imply that 
 Salome, wife of Zebedee, was sister to our Lord's 
 mother. As first cousins, and as having always been, 
 with Peter, the special chosen companions of Jesus, 
 they might suppose they had a claim to which even 
 Peter's must yield. (Matt. xx. 20-28; Mark x. 
 35-45.) 
 
 All three Gospels relate the visit of Jesus to 
 Jericho, and the healing of a blind man, whom 
 Mark calls Bartimfeus. Matthew says there were two 
 blind men, which occasions no difficulty ; but there is 
 a perplexing though slight discrepancy in Luke's 
 account. Mark expressly describes the miracle as 
 having been wrought as our Lord, with His disciples 
 and a great crowd, came out of Jericho. Luke says 
 the blind man was sitting by the wayside as Jesus 
 drew near to Jericho, and gives the impression that 
 the cure was wrought before He entered the city. 
 The ancient and obvious solution is, that the " two " 
 mentioned by Matthew were healed, one as Jesus 
 entered the town, the other as He left it. The diffi- 
 culty in the way of this explanation is the close- 
 identity of the words used in each case, and the unlike- 
 lihood that in both cases the multitude should have 
 rebuked the blind man for his loud cries for help. 
 Yet it must be confessed that there is nothing but 
 what might have naturally happened m any case;- 
 and it would not have been surprising had there been 
 half a dozen blind beggars at each gate, at a time 
 when such multitudes were going up to Jerusalem. 
 It does not seem possible to maintain the explanation 
 (favoured by Dr. Robinson) that instead of " As He 
 was come nigh,''^ we may translate, *' As He was still 
 Qiigh" — i.e. after quitting Jericho. Some simple cir- 
 cumstance which the wonted brevity of the Gospel 
 
TEJBD TEAM OF MINISTRY. 121 
 
 narrative suppresses, might perhaps clear up the 
 wliole difficulty : as, e.g.^ if the first beggar followed 
 Jesus througli Jericho, and was healed, with the second^ 
 as He came out ; or if the application of the second 
 "was occasioned by his hearing of the cure of the 
 first. (Matt. XX. 29-34 ; Mark x. 46-52 ; Luke xviii. 
 35— xix. 1.) 
 
 St. Luke alone relates the story of Zacchjsus, 
 *' chief among the publicans " (i.e. chief collector of 
 taxes), at whose house our Saviour, to the amazement 
 and indignation of many probably beside the Phari- 
 sees, took up His abode for the night (Luke xix. 2-10). 
 •On this occasion He spoke the parable of the pounds, 
 closely resembling that of the Talents, delivered the 
 following week at Jerusalem. "While these tre- 
 mendous words, foreshadowing the kingly " wrath " 
 prophesied of in Ps. ii., were yet ringing in the ears of 
 the trembling disciples, " He went before, ascending 
 up to Jerusalem." (Ver. 11-28.) To His eye, 
 though to no other, the end to which He was moving 
 was full in view as they climbed that steep and deso- 
 late pass, — the *' baptism " of suffering of which a 
 few days before He had spoken. (Matt. xx. 22. 
 Compare Luke xii. 50.) 
 
 At this solemn crisis in the history all four Gospels 
 converge. The triumphal entry into the Holy 
 City which they all narrate, with the subsequent 
 ■exercise of "authority" in the Temple, angrily but 
 vainly challenged by the rulers (Matt. xxi. 23), con- 
 stituted a public unmistakable assertion of the claim 
 of Jesus to be what the multitude proclaimed Him — 
 ■*' the Son of David," " the King of Israel coming in 
 the name of the Lord." Every circumstance of this '' 
 entry was deliberately arranged so as to indicate its ; 
 importance and significance. The disciples who were 
 sent, not to ask as a favour, but to claim as a royal 
 right, the use of the colt " whereon never man sat," ^ 
 were directed to say, " 1 he Lord hath need of him." 
 
122 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 Notice of the intention of Jesus was conveyed to the 
 city, so that " much people " went forth to meet Him, 
 hearing palms, as at the Feast of Dedication and on 
 other joyful occasions. When api)ealed to by some 
 of the Pharisees to rebuke the enthusiasm of His dis- 
 ciples, who mingled their hosannas of welcome with 
 a solemn chant of praise to God, Christ in the most 
 emphatic manner sanctioned their conduct. The 
 deliberate fulfilment of prophecy (Zech. ix. 9) noticed 
 both by Matthew and John, must lose both meaning 
 and majesty to the English reader if he fails to bear 
 in mind that in the sentiment, history, and sacred 
 literature of Israel, the horse was regarded as a war- 
 like beast (whose use was therefore discountenanced 
 by the law, Deut. xvii. 16), and that the ass, instead 
 of being, as with ns, the despised drudge of the poor^ 
 was treated with high regard, as suited to the peaceful 
 use of chieftains and judges. (Comp. Gen. xxii. 3 ; 
 Judges V. 10; X. 3, 4; xii. 14; 2 Sam. xvii. 23.) 
 The purpose alike of the prophecy and of its volun- 
 tary fulfilment, was to present the promised King of 
 Israel as no warlike despot, but a peaceful and just 
 ruler. (Comp. Heb. vii. 2; Ps. Ixxii. 2, 4, 7.) 
 
 St. John fixes the time of our Lord's arrival at 
 Bethany : " six days before the Passover " (xii. 1)» 
 The Passover being the 14th Islsan (Lev. xxiii. b\ 
 the sixth day before it was Nisan 8. If, therefore, the 
 Passover was on Thursday (the proof of which we 
 shall presently consider), our Lord reached Bethany 
 on Friday, probably at least three hours before sunset 
 (Jos., Ant. xvi. 6 : 2), so as to spend the Sabbath with 
 His friends. This Sabbath was Nisan 9th ; Saturday^ 
 April 1st, of our calendar. St. John's phrase "They 
 made Him a supper," indicates something beyond the 
 common evening meal : an entertainment in His 
 honour, to which other guests as well as His dis- 
 ciples were bidden. This would naturally fall in 
 with the custom of making the evening meal after 
 
THIRD YEAR OF MINISTRY. 123 
 
 the Sabbath a fuller and more generous meal than 
 ordinary. Consequently the statement (John xii. 12) 
 that the triumphal entry into Jerusalem took place 
 •" the next day,^' must mean the next day, not after 
 the arrival at Bethany, but after the Sabbath. It 
 has, however, been inferred by many critics from 
 jVIatt. xxvi. 2-6 ; Mark xiv. 1-3, that the supper at 
 Bethany was only two days before the Passover. 
 This view, which makes the fourth Gospel contradict 
 the other two, is totally unnecessary, inasmuch as in 
 both Matthew and Mark the general statement that 
 the Feast took place while Jesus was in Bethany, is 
 unconnected with the reference to the two days, and 
 may with perfect propriety be retrospective, referring 
 to what had taken place three days earlier. 
 
 St, Luke, having recorded the earlier anointing by 
 that unnamed penitent whom tradition has confounded 
 with Mary Magdalene (omitted in the other Gospels), 
 abstains from any reference to the anointing at 
 Bethany, and consequently to the supper. The 
 other three Gospels as naturally omit the earlier 
 occurrence. John alone gives the name of her to 
 whom Christ promised immortal remembrance; just 
 as he alone gives the name of the high-priest's servant 
 whose ear was cut off, and tells who it was that 
 struck the blow. The reason in each case may have 
 been, that the persons named were no longer living. 
 
 On the first day of the week, therefore, Sunday, 
 Nisan 10th, our Lord made His entry into Jerusalem. 
 He saw reason to defer it until afternoon, so that by 
 the time He reached the Temple, sunset was already 
 approaching (Mark xi. 11 : comp. i. 32), and the 
 market, which He found in full activity the following 
 morning, was over, or nearly so, for the day. He 
 therefore merely " looked round about upon all things," 
 and returned with the Twelve to Bethany. The inci- 
 dents mentioned by St. Matthew, to wit, the miracles 
 wrought in the Temple on the bli:>d and the lame, 
 
124 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 and THE HOSANXAS OF THE CHILDREN, which off ended 
 the priests, may j)erhaps belong to this (Sunday), 
 afternoon. 
 
 On the morrow, Monday, Nisan 11th, Jesus re- 
 turned to the City, and entered the Temple about 
 sunrise. The market which profaned the great outer 
 court, by suppressing whicli Jesus had signalized His 
 entrance on the prophetic office, three years before, 
 was again in full activity ; and the near approach of 
 the festival would naturally cause the number both 
 of sellers and buyers to be specially numerous. The 
 same motives which prompted the first, prompted 
 even more urgently the second cleansing of the 
 Temple (Matt. xxi. 12, 13; Mark xi. 15-19 ; Luke 
 xix. 45-48). The three Evangelists who narrate this 
 jire silent concerning the first cleansing, which lay 
 entirely out of the scope of their narrative. On the 
 other hand, St. John, whose plan required bim to 
 record the first cleansing, had no occasion to mention 
 the second. This solemn vindication of the honour 
 of even that portion of His Father's bouse which 
 was open as a place of prayer to "all nations," 
 was appropriate alike to the commencement and to- 
 the close of our Saviour's ministry. Its repetition 
 gave a double edge to the rebuke thus inflicted on 
 the spiritual deadness which underlay the elaborate 
 ritualism and hair-splitting scruples of the Rabbins. 
 
 An apparent discrepancy between the accounts of 
 Matthew and Mark requires notice. Matthew's ac- 
 count, taken alone, would convey the impression that 
 our Lord cleansed the Temple on the same day on 
 which He entered Jerusalem (xxi. 12) ; and that it 
 was on the following morning (ver. 18) that He pro- 
 nounced the curse on the barren fig-tree. Mark, 
 on the other hand, explicitly states, that as it was 
 evening (xi. 11) when Jesus reached the Temple, He 
 merely "looked round upon all things," and returned 
 to Bethany; that the fig-tree was cursed the next 
 
THIRD YEAR OF MINISTRY. 125 
 
 morning ; and that on that day (^Monday') the Temple 
 was cleansed. On the third morning {Tuesday) the 
 fig-tree was seen withered. (Ver. 12, 15, 19, 20.) 
 The explanation of this seeming discrepancy is simple. 
 Mark's phrase (ver. 12), " on the morrow" is a defi- 
 nite and careful note of time. Matthew's phrase, " ^;^ 
 the morning" (xxi. 18), is indefinite, simply meaning, 
 •' early," *' towards sunrise." Matthew records, in 
 his condensed way, the facts, without regard to the 
 several days; but he in no wise contradicts the 
 orderly and explicit narrative of Mark. (Matt. xxi. 
 12-22 ; Mark xi. 12-26.) 
 
 On the third day of the week Jesus was ques- 
 tioned by the representatives of the Sanhedrin as to 
 His authority ; and in reply asked them a question 
 concerning the authority of John the Baptist which 
 they declined to answer. (Matt. xxi. 23-27 ; Mark 
 xi. 27-33 ; Luke xx. 1-8.) With this incident Mat- 
 thew connects the parable of the two sons (ver. 28— 
 32) ; that of the wicked husbandmex, related also by 
 Mark and Luke ; that of the maeriage feast and 
 avedding garment, given by him only. Matt. xxi. 
 33— xxii. 14 ; Mark xii. 1-12 ; Luke xx. 9-19.) Let 
 the reader not fail to mark the repeated indications 
 that, up to this period, the regard in which Jesus was 
 held by the people, was so great as to form the one 
 dangerous hindrance to the plots of the authorities 
 against Him, See Matt. xxi. 46 ; xxvi. 5 ; Mark xi. 
 18 ; xii. 12 ; xiv. 2 ; Luke xix. 47, 48 ; xx. 26 ; xxii. 
 2 ; John xii. 19. The fear of rescue may have been, 
 the leading motive which prompted them (contrary to 
 their own prudent resolution), when Jesus was in 
 their hands, to hurry forward with profane indecency 
 His condemnation and execution on the feast day. 
 Our Lord's own words, John x. 18, were literally 
 true, even apart from any exercise of miraculous 
 jiower. It needed but a word from Him to have 
 tilled Jerusalem with insurrection and bloodshed. 
 
i26 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 The following events and sayings belong to these 
 closing days of Christ's public ministry. (1) The 
 attempt first of the Pharisees and then of the Sad- 
 ducees to entangle Jesus by questions concerning the 
 
 PAYMENT OF TEIBUTE, and the EESUKRECTIOX. (Matt. 
 
 xxii. 15-33; Mark xii. 13-27; Luke xx. 20-40.) 
 
 {2) The scribe's question and Christ's memorable 
 
 answer, defining the foundation of Christian ethics. 
 
 (Matt. xxii. 34-40 ; Mark xii. 28-34.) Compare the 
 
 somewhat similar incident (Luke x. 25-28). (3) 
 
 Christ's question concerning Messiah being the Son 
 
 AND YET Lord of David. (Matt. xxii. 41-46 ; Mark 
 
 xii. 35-37 ; Luke xx. 41-44.) (4) The discourse 
 
 against THE SCRIBES AND PHARISEES, addressed to 
 
 the " multitude and to His disciples," of which Mark 
 
 and Luke give only a brief epitome. (Matt, xxiii. ; 
 
 Mark xii. 38-40; Luke xx. 45-47.) Matthew's 
 
 report of this tremendous discourse winds up with a 
 
 lament over Jerusalem, resembling that which Luke 
 
 records as uttered at an earlier period (xiii. 34, 35). 
 
 The approval of the widow's offering. (Mark xii. 
 
 jT 41-44; Luke xxi. 1-4.) Mark incidentally notices 
 
 / that Jesus was sitting " over against the treasury ; -" 
 
 [ q.d.j in that part of the court known as the women's 
 
 1 court, in which the collecting boxes stood to receive 
 
 \ offerings. The Pvabbins tell us that none might sit in 
 
 1^ the Temple but a Prince of the House of David. 
 
 To these incidents St. John adds the request of 
 certain Greeks to see Jesus ; the witness rendered 
 to Jesus (for the third time) by A voice from heaven; 
 the closing words of Christ ; and His departure 
 FROM the Temple (xii. 20-36). The Temple, indeed, 
 is not expressly named here by St. John, but we can 
 scarcely err in understanding it to be referred to. 
 The Evangelist adds a kind of summary of the whole 
 history up to this point ; and the words of Christ which 
 he quotes (ver. 44-50) may have been uttered at any 
 time, though probably on one of these closing days. 
 
THIRD YEAR OF MINISTRY. 127 
 
 "Jesus went out, and departed from the Temple''" 
 (Matt. xxiv. 1 ; Mark xiii. 1). He left Tbehind Him 
 the Past, with its gorgeous ritual intact, but with the- 
 doom of death invisibly written upon Temple, Priest- 
 hood, and Commonwealth. He carried with Him 
 the light and life, the promise and living seed, of th& 
 Future. He appears to have left the Temple by the- ^ 
 eastern gate, and crossed the bridge which spanned / 
 the valley of Kedron ; for immediately afterwards we 
 find Him seated with His disciples on the Mount of , 
 Olives in full view of the Temple (llatt. xxiv. 3 ;. / 
 Mark xiii. 3). No touch of decay had as yet stained 
 its unrivalled magnificence. As the sun went down, 
 behind it, causing the glorious pile to stand out a 
 dark mass against the sky, One only knew that the- 
 sound of His departing footsteps had been the knell of 
 its glory ; One only, looking across the gulf of forty 
 years, could behold it vanishing in blood and fire. 
 Questioned by His disciples as to the meaniag of the 
 terrible words spoken as He quitted it (Matt. xxiv. 2;. 
 Mark xiii. 2; Luke xxi. 5, 6), Jesus delivered His 
 
 PROPHECY OF THE DESTRUCTION OP JeRUS-ALEM and of 
 
 " the end of the world " (Matt. xxiv. 4-41 ; Mark xiii.. 
 4-33 ; Luke xxi. 9-33). This was followed by warn- 
 ings to maintain watchfulness, enforced by a brief 
 parable given by Mark only (xiii. 34), and by the 
 parables of the ten virgins and the talents, and the- 
 description of the final judgment commonly though 
 inaccurately referred to as " the parable of the Sheep 
 and Goats." (Matt. xxiv. 42 — xxv. 46; Mark xiii. 
 33-37 ; Luke xxi. 34-36.) 
 
 It has been commonly assumed that our Lord 
 finished His public ministry on the third day of the 
 week, and that the Wednesday, of which on that 
 supposition we have no account, was spent in retire- 
 ment at Bethany. This, however, is open to question. 
 St. Luke's statement (chap. xxi. 37, 38) naturally 
 suggests a longer period than two days. It is diffi- 
 
128 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 €ult to believe that our Lord would have closed His 
 ministry a day earlier than necessary. St. Matthew 
 tells us that "When Jesus had finished all these 
 sayings, He said unto His disciples, Ye know that 
 .after two days is the Passover." St. Mark gives 
 .a corresponding statement (Matt. xxvi. 3, 2; Mark 
 jiiv. 1). In both passages our translators have inter- 
 posed the words " the feast of^'' which if they were in 
 the Greek text would decide what at present seems 
 doubtful. For although the Passover lamb was slain 
 on Nisan 14th the festival did not begin till sunset, 
 when the 15th Nisan began. The Passover supper 
 was eaten in the night following the 14th, namely, 
 after sunset (Ex. xii. 6-8). Although, therefore, our 
 Lord does not expressly use the word " feast," yet the 
 most natural interpretation of His words is, that He 
 is speaking not of the 14th, on which the leaven was 
 put away and the paschal lamb sacrificed, but of the 
 15th Nisan, the first day of the festival. Assuming 
 (see Part IV., sec. 1) that He kept the true Passover 
 with His disciples, and that the Friday on which He 
 was crucified was Nisan 15th, it is evident that the 
 ■words "after two days" (?'.e., "the day after to- 
 morrow") must have been spoken not on Tuesday, 
 the 12th, but on "Wednesday, the 13th, which is there- 
 fore indicated as the closing day of our Saviour's 
 ministry. 
 
 That the day was reckoned from sunset in the time of 
 Moses, is evident from Ex. xii. 18, 19, thoup^h a question 
 lias been raised on this point. (See Cyc. Bib. Lit., Art. 
 "Day.") The lamb ^vas to be slain "between the two 
 evenings" (Ex. xii. 6; Levit. xxiii. 5). The meaning of 
 this phrase appears to be " at sunset " — the fast evening 
 being when the sun begins to set, the second the twilight 
 after sunset. So Deut. xvi. 6, " a^ even, at the going down of 
 the sun " (compare ver. 4). In Lev. xxiii. 5, the Passover is 
 stated to be " in the lAth of the first month, between the two 
 evenings " (where our A.Y. has omitted to give the literal 
 rendering in the margin) ; but this must be interpreted in 
 
THIRD YEAR OF MINISTRY. 12'd 
 
 accordance with ver. 32, which, in like manner, describe:^ 
 the Day of Atonement (lOf A Tisn) as "m the 9th of the 
 month, at even, from even to even^ (See Wieseler, p. 315 ; 
 McClellan, p. 475, 476.) The Karaites and other later Jewish 
 authorities (quoted by Rosenmiiller on Ex. xii. 6) seem 
 therefore to have been more correct in their interpretation x^ 
 of the original law than the Pharisees. But, in point of \ 
 fact, in our Saviour's time the paschal lambs were killed ) 
 and sacrificed in the Temple " between the ninth and / 
 eleventh hours " (3 to 5 p.m.). (Jos. TFars, vi, 9 : 3.) The / 
 Mishna states that the daily evening sacrifice Avas slain half 
 an hour after the 8th hour, «>., at Paschal tide about 2.30 
 p.m., and sacrificed half an hour after the 9th hour, »>., 
 about 3.30 p.m.; but on the day before the Passover {i.e., on 
 Nisan 14th) it was slain and sacrificed an hour earlier, to 
 give time for slaying and sacrificing the paschal lambs. The\ 
 worshipper slew the lamb, and a priest received the blood in ' 
 a bowl, and handed it on to the priest whose office it was to \ 
 pour it out before the altar. This, with the burning of the ^ 
 appointed parts on the altar, constituted the sacrifice / 
 (Pesachim, ch. v. 6, 10). The supper, which was the feast 
 on the sacrifice, was the beginning of the "Feast" or 
 " Festival " of unleavened bread (Ex. xiii. 6, 7 ; Lev. xxiii. 
 5-8 ; 2 Chron. xxx. 13-22), to the whole seven days of 
 which the name " Passover " is given la modern Jewish 
 almanacks, 
 
130 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CEBIST. 
 
 PAET lY. 
 
 CONCLUSION OF THE GOSPEL 
 HISTOEY. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST. 
 
 jSTisAn 14 AND 15; April 6 and 7, a.d. 30 (a.u.c. 783). 
 
 nvo 
 
 T 
 
 occurred the Passover and the days of un- 
 leavened bread. So the first two Gospels tell us 
 (Matt. xxvi. 1,2; Mark xiv. 1). The third Gospel 
 simply says, " The festival drew near of the Passover 
 and of the days of unleavened bread " (xxii. 1). The 
 Sanhedrin, assembled in the palace of the high-priest 
 Caiaphas, agreed that the risk of a pojoular outbreak 
 was too great to admit of their arresting Jesus during 
 the festival ; but their plans were destined to be over- 
 ruled through the treachery of Judas and the force of 
 circumstances. (Matt. xxvi. 3-5, 14-16; Mark xiv. 
 1, 2, 10, 11 ; Luke xxii. 2, 6.) 
 
 " The day of unleavened bread, on which the Pass- 
 over must be sacrificed," arrived (Luke xxii. 7). " On 
 the first day of unleavened bread, when they were 
 wont to sacrifice " (or " were sacrificing ") " the Pass- 
 over, His disciples say to Him, Where wilt Thou that 
 
TEE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST. 131 
 
 we go and make ready that Thou mayest eat the 
 Passover?" (Mark xiv. 12; Matt. xxvi. 17.) In 
 reply to this question Jesus commanded two of His 
 disciples, Peter and John, to go into the city, and to 
 say to the master of the house to which He directed 
 them, " The Master saith, My time is at hand ; I 
 will keep the Passover at thy house, with My dis- 
 ciples." " Where is the guest-chamber where I shall 
 eat the Passover with My disciples?" "And the 
 disciples did as Jesus had appointed them ; and they 
 MADE EEADY THE Passover." (Matt. xxvi. 17-19; 
 Mark xiv. 12-16 ; Luke xxii. 8-13. N.B.— The last 
 words are common to the three Gospels.) "And 
 WHEN THE HOUR WAS COME, He sat down " (lit., 
 " lay down," or " recHned "), " and the twelve Apostles 
 with Him. And He said unto them, "With desire I \ 
 have desired to eat this Passover with you before ) 
 I suffer." (Luke xxii. 14, 15 ; comp. Matt. xxvi. 20 ; / 
 Mark xiv. 17.) All the circumstances described in i 
 the Gospels correspond with the traditional accounts 
 of the paschal supper. 
 
 It is undeniable that, had it been the intention of 
 the three Evangelists to state in a manner that should 
 preclude all doubt or controversy, that our Saviour 
 kept the legal passover at the appointed time, they 
 could not (in so brief compass) have used more plain, 
 exact, or positive language. To suppose that the real, 
 fact which they meant to relate was, that Jesus, 
 having by some means procoi'ed-a^lamb on the evening 
 of the day preceding that on which the paschal lamb 
 was killed, celebrated a sort of imitation paschal meal 
 (which neither His disciples nor any one else would 
 regard as a real and lawful Passover), is to suppose 
 either that they were all three guilty of obscurity 
 beyond example, if not of wilful misrepresentation, 
 or else that they w^ere mistaken. But this is a matter 
 in which it was simply impossible, even after a lapse 
 of years, for eye-witnesses to be mistaken. To sup- 
 
 E 2 
 
/ 
 
 132 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST, 
 
 pose the three Evangelists mistaken, therefore, neces- 
 sarily implies that the first Gospel was not written 
 by an Apostle, and that the writers of the second and 
 third did not derive their accounts from eye-witnesses. 
 
 Yet this is the alternative which a formidable array 
 of Biblical critics and commentators, many of them 
 as distinguished for piety as for scholarship, have 
 striven to force on the belief of the Christian Church, 
 on the ground of a supposed irreconcilable discrepancy 
 between the three " synoptic *' Gospels and the fourth 
 Gospel. St. John's Gospel, it is maintained, shows 
 that the day of the Crucifixion was the 14tli Nisan, 
 the day on which the paschal lambs were sacrificed ; 
 and that the Last Supper therefore took place on the 
 evening of Nisan 13th. It has even been suggested 
 that St. John wrote his account to correct the error 
 into which his predecessors had fallen. 
 
 We have therefore now to examine the account in 
 the fourth Gospel. (1) St. John tells us (xiii. 1), 
 "Before the festival of the Passover, Jesus, knowing 
 that His hour was come that He should depart out of 
 the world unto the Father, having loved His own who 
 were in the world, He loved them unto the end." 
 Two things are here affirmed : 1st, that Jesus knew 
 before the Passover festival that the time of His 
 departure was come ; 2Qd, that this foresight did not 
 hinder the warm, full flow of His love to His own ; 
 it glowed unquenched to the last. (Comp. chap. xv. 
 9-13.) There is nothing here to imply that the 
 supper which St. John goes on to describe was other 
 than the paschal meal. On the contrary, the opening 
 of the next verse, "And supper being come," ^ naturally 
 looks back to the word " Passover," and implies that 
 the paschal supper is meant. In a sense, however, 
 the Passover supper might be said to be before the 
 
 ' Not '^ being ended. ^^ The reading of modem editors is, 
 " during supper." The received reading has the same force 
 as in Mark xiv. 17, " evening having corns." 
 
TEE SUFFEBINGS OF CHRIST. 133 
 
 festival. The Enr^lish reader must bear in mind that 
 the word "feast" means not a meal, hut a festive 
 season^ including in this case a whole -week. The law 
 of Moses, though reckoning the day to begin at sunset, 
 yet connects (apparently in popular language) the 
 night with the day preceding. The 15th iS'isan, 
 therefore, and with it the festival of the Passover, or 
 of unleavened bread, might be popularly regarded as 
 beginning at sunrise rather than sunset. 
 
 (2) St. John tells us that those who brought Jesus 
 from Caiaphas to Pilate "went not into the judgment 
 hall" (or Governor's palace), "lest they should be 
 defiled, but that they might eat the Passover." 
 Hence it is argued that the time of eating the Pass- 
 over had not yet arrived. But the defilement con- 
 tracted by entering a heathen's house would not have 
 lasted beyond sunset. (Levit. xxii. 6-9; Lightfoot, 
 Eor. Eeb.; and Wieseler, p. 351.) There would 
 therefore have been no hindrance to their eating the 
 paschal meal, if it was not due till the following 
 -evening. On the same daj^, in the afternoon, Joseph 
 of Arimathea " went in boldly to Pilate." (Mark xv. 
 43.) But (as was long ago pointed out by Lightfoot) 
 tbe term " Passover " included not only the lamb, but 
 the peace-otlering called " chagigah," i.e. " festivity " 
 or " festive offering." To this the Kabbins apply the 
 reference in Deut. xvi. 2, to " the herd '* as well as 
 ** the flock." The Mishna (Pesachim, chap. vi. p. 
 112 ; De Sola's Trans.) gives rules as to when the 
 festive offering might be sacrificed on the 14th, and 
 -eaten with the paschal supper. But the regular time 
 was the morning of the 15th. Legal defilement there- 
 fore would have debarred from this important part of 
 the Passover festivity. Another explanation, given 
 by Chrysostom (McClellan, p. 487), and maintained 
 with much force and clearness by Dr. Milligan {Con- 
 temporary Bevieiu, August, 1868), is that the priests 
 had actually not eaten tbe paschal supper, owing to 
 
 E 3 
 
 ) 
 
134 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 their having spent the night in planning and carrying 
 out the arrest of Jesus, and in the proceedings which 
 followed. But they could not eat it before sunrise, 
 now near at hand ; and if they meant to eat it in the 
 evening, the remarks already made as to defilement 
 would apply. The former explanation therefore 
 
 r appears decidedly preferable. 
 (3) Pilate's offer to release Jesus, according to the 
 custom that he should release a prisoner " iu the 
 Passover " (John xviii. 39), implies that the Passover 
 feast had begun. This seems decisive as to St. John's 
 view of the day. 
 
 (4) '^ It was the 'preparation of the Passover ^ 
 (Ch. xix. 14.) It is urged that this phrase can mean 
 nothing but " the eve of the Passover " — that is, 
 Nisan 14th — and that therefore, according to St. John, 
 the Crucifixion took place on that day. But (a) this 
 statement is unsustained by any evidence beyond the 
 dogmatic (sometimes vehement) assertion of certain 
 eminent scholars. " Not one single example can be 
 brought to prove this usage." (Wieseler, p. 310.) (6) 
 If the phrase had this meaning, it could be only in 
 reference to the afternoon of the 14th ; but St. John 
 
 Cis here speaking of the morning, (c) " Preparation " 
 (Paraskeue) was the regular name for the 5th day of 
 the week — Friday. This is proved with abundant 
 learning by Dr. Milligan. St. Mark thus explains 
 the word (ch. xv. 42; comp. Matt, xxvii. 62; 
 Luke xxiii. 54) ; and so St. John himself uses it in 
 ver. 31, 42. 
 
 (5) A difficulty has been found in the statement 
 (ver. 31) respecting the day following the Crucifixion 
 — " That Sabbath day ivas a high dayT But it might 
 well be so regarded ; for it was the day (16th Nisan) 
 on which the sheaf of first-fruits, cut with great 
 solemnity after sunset of the 15th, was offered with 
 rejoicing in the Temple. 
 
 (6) Another objection has been raised with reference 
 
THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST. 135 
 
 to the statement (ch. xiii. 29) that when Judas left 
 the guest-chamber, some of the apostles supposed that 
 he was gone to buy provisions for the feast. This, 
 it is urged, he could not have done on the 15th Nisan. 
 But the Divine law (Ex. xii. 16) makes an express 
 distinction in regard to the preparation of food between 
 the feast-day and the weekly Sabbath, The oral law 
 recognizes this distinction. The Mishna ingeniously 
 provides, that though food may not be bought on the 
 feast day, a butcher may divide his meat among his 
 customers ; and a person may go to a shop at ivhich 
 he is accustomed to deal and ask for lohat he requires. 
 (Yom. Tob, ch. iii.) But, in fact, in reading the 
 minute subtleties and solemn trifling of the Mishnaic 
 doctors, and their incessant disputes, it is difScult to 
 imagine that much attention was paid to these regu- 
 lations except by rigid Pharisees. This, indeed, is 
 implied in John vii. 49. 
 
 The testimony of the fourth Gospel is 'thus found 
 (notwithstanding the vehement stress laid by many 
 distinguished scholars on the objections we have 
 examined) to agree with that of the other three in 
 fixing Friday, Nisan 15th, as the day of the Cruci- 
 fixion. The so-called discrepancies admit of solutions 
 so easy and satisfactory that it is little less than 
 marvellous that on so narrow a foundation so vast 
 a superstructure of learned criticism has been raised. 
 
 A difficulty which deserves serious consideration, 
 hearing not upon one Gospel only, but upon all, pre- 
 sents itself in the fact that, according to the traditions 
 preserved in the Talmud, it was contrary to Jewish 
 law to try a capital cause during the night, to pass 
 capital sentence on the same day on which the criminal 
 was tried, or to hold a court on a feast day. (See 
 Lightfoot, Eor. Eeb. on Matt, xxvii., and on John xix.; 
 Wieseler, pp. 331-334.) But it would show great 
 ignorance of human nature and history to suppose 
 that the priests and their coadjutors, when they had 
 
136 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CETJST. 
 
 in their power the hated JSTazarene, whose death ha*3 
 long ago been decreed, would be withheld from their 
 purpose by punctilios of legal etiquette, especially in 
 days when the high-priesthood itself passed from hand 
 to hand, in utter contempt of all legality, as the prize 
 of ambition and crime. It was characteristic of the 
 Pharisees that " they said, and did not." (Matt, xxiii. 
 2.) It is, moreover, important to bear in mind that 
 the party in power, by whom the death of Jesus was 
 actually planned and effected, was that of the Saddu- 
 cees, though the Pharisees were acting in concert with 
 them. (John xi. 49-53, and 57 ; Acts iv. 1 ; v. 17.) 
 The Sadducees rejected the oral tradition on which 
 the Pharisees built their religious system, though in 
 their interpretation of the written law they were 
 sometimes more strict than the Pharisees themselves^ 
 and also more severe in their treatment of offenders. 
 
 The day of the week on which the Crucifixion took 
 place being fixed — Friday, the day before the Jewish 
 Sabbath — astronomical calculations prove that Friday, 
 April 7th, in a.d. 30, was not Nisan 14th, but Nisan 
 15th. The day of this greatest of events appears 
 therefore to be ascertained beyond reasonable doubt. 
 It was Friday, 15th Nisan, and 7th April, a.d. 30. 
 
 The ritual of the paschal supper was as follows : 
 When all were arranged at ease around the table, the 
 first cup of wine was poured out, mingled with water, 
 both for refreshment and wholesomeness, and to guard 
 against any danger of intoxication, since each person 
 was expected to drink four cups during the evening. 
 The father of the family, or president of the company, 
 pronounced a blessing (i.e. thanksgiving) for the 
 
 rwine and for the festival. Hands were washed with 
 an appropriate blessing. At this point we may 
 suppose our Lord rose from the table, and astonished 
 His discij)les by washing their feet. (John xiii. 3-17.) 
 Bitter herbs, such as lettuces, were brought and eaten, 
 dipped in sour sauce. Then cakes of unleavened 
 
THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST. 137 
 
 "bread, the roasted paschal lamb, with the cJiagigaJi, 
 if there were one, and the thick sauce (made of dates, 
 raisins, almonds, etc., with vinegar) called " cha- 
 foseth." A second cup of wine was mingled ; and in 
 answer to the appointed question (Ex. xii. 26), the 
 father or president explained the meaning of the 
 paschal sacrifice, the unleavened bread, and the bitter 
 herbs, quoting also Deut. xxvi. 5-11. Part of the 
 Eallel, or hymn of praise, was then sung, viz. Ps. 
 cxiii., cxiv. Then the president, having again washed 
 his hands, placed one cake of bread on another, broke 
 it, and pronounced a blessing. It was eaten, dipped \ 
 in charoseth, with bitter herbs. This explains " the 1 
 sop " given to Judas. A blessing was in like manner 
 pronounced over the lamb. Each one ate at his 
 pleasure, but a mouthful of lamb must be the last 
 thing eaten. The third cup was then mingled, over 
 which the blessing or thanksgiving for the meal was 
 pronounced, and which was therefore called " the cup 
 of blessing." (Comp. 1 Cor. x. 16 ; xi. 25.) The \ 
 remainder of the Eallel, viz. Ps. cxv.-cxviii., was 
 sung over the fourth cup. This is " the hymn " i 
 referred to in Matt. xxvi. 30. (Pesachim,ch. x.) 
 
 " The cup " referred to in Luke xxii. 17 is doubtless 
 the " first cup," which introduced the meal. Our 
 Lord's words have been understood as implying that 
 He did not Himself partake of it. This appears 
 extremely improbable, and at variance with ver. 15, 
 16 ; and the Greek word, as Dean Alford points out, 
 favours the belief that He drank first, according to 
 custom. " The cup after supper " (Luke xxii. 20 ; 
 comp. 1 Cor. xi. 25) was evidently the third cup of 
 the prescribed ritual — " the cup of blessing." Of this 
 cup, which He constituted the symbol of His own 
 sacrifice, we cannot suppose our Lord to have partaken. 
 (See Matt. xxvi. 29 ; Mark xiv. 25.) Of the fourth 
 cup, as well as of the second, the brief Gospel narrative 
 takes no notice ; nor can we bs certain that our Lord 
 
138 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 observed every minute detail of the traditional 
 ritual. 
 
 It is thus evident that the institution of the Lord's 
 SUPPER (1 Cor. xi. 20) — the consecration of " the bread 
 which we break," and " the cup of blessing which we 
 bless" (1 Cor. x. 16), as the perishing yet imperish- 
 
 Cable memorials of " the body and blood of the Lord " 
 (xi. 27) — was not a separate observance, a sort of 
 after-meal following the paschal supper, but an 
 integral part of that supper. It was " as they did 
 eat" — while the meal was in progress — that the Lord 
 gave thanks and broke the bread (Matt. xxvi. 21 ; 
 Mark xiv. 22). This act must not be confounded 
 with the customary "bread-breaking," already noticed, 
 when the blessing foUoived the breaking. It would 
 at once arrest the disciples' attention as something 
 special and unprecedented, but still an integral part 
 y of the paschal meal. In like manner, it was " the 
 / cup after supper" — the customary third cup, one of 
 \ the most important parts of the whole observance — 
 \ of which Jesus said, " This cup is the new covenant 
 ^ in My blood, . . . shed for many for the remission of 
 sins." (Luke xxii. 20 ; Matt. xxvi. 28.) Any notion 
 of sacerdotal consecration was utterly foreign to the 
 whole transaction, and could never have occurred to 
 the mind of a single disciple. The Lord was acting 
 not as a priest, but as the father of the family, or 
 president of the company. The Apostles could but 
 dimly understand the meaning of their Master's words 
 at the time, because His body was not yet " broken " 
 nor His blood " shed." But what we may be abso- 
 
 (lutely certain of is, that neither then nor subsequently 
 could the insane imagination enter their minds, that 
 as He broke the bread and took the cup, He was 
 literally holding in His hands His own crucified and 
 glorified body, "and His own blood about to be shed 
 on the cross, but every drop of which was as yet in 
 His veins. Yet unless this was so, the words of 
 
THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST. 139 
 
 institution afford no shadow of foundation for the 
 dogma of Transubstantiation. It is urged that this 
 is the literal sense of the words. But if by " literal 
 sense " be intended a meaning — or absence of meaning 
 — which they could not possibly convey to those who 
 heard them, then it is evident that all talk about 
 " literal meaning " is beside the mark. What we 
 are always first concerned with, is the real meaning 
 of a speaker's words ; whether literal or figurative is 
 a secondary matter. 
 
 The traitor had gone out on his hideous errand into 
 the lonely streets, fully possessed now by that spirit 
 of evil which was to hurry him before sunrise from 
 crime to despair, and from despair to self-murder. 
 As yet, perhaps, the hush lay unbroken over the 
 Holy City, the air of which would soon be filled with 
 the voice of the psalmody from the hundreds of 
 thousands crowded within its walls. Eelieved of that 
 hateful presence, the Saviour began to unburden His 
 heart, and to draw closer to Himself than ever before 
 the hearts of the chosen few, whose weakness He 
 knew so much better than they themselves, yet whom 
 He knew to be true, though weak. It is scarcely too 
 much to say, that the farewell discourse recorded 
 in the 14th, 15th, and 16th chapters of St. John, and 
 THE PRAYER in the 17th, are to the rest of the New 
 Testament what the Holy of Holies was to the rest of 
 the Temple, so deeply do they lead us into communion 
 with Him in whom "dwelleth the fulness of the 
 Godhead bodily." 
 
 The words (xiv. 31) " Arise^ let us go hence" seem 
 to indicate the going forth from the " guest-chamber," 
 after the singing of the Hallel. The rest of the dis- 
 course (chap. XV., xvi.) was therefore probably spoken 
 and the prayer (chap, xvii.) offered in the open air, in 
 the court-yard of the house. The similitude of the 
 Vine and its branches may have been suggested from 
 a vine trained, according to custom, by the house on 
 
c 
 
 140 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHBIST. 
 
 a trellis. The dead wood having been cut away at an 
 earlier pruning, the luxuriant young shoots require at 
 this season a second pruning. 
 
 It can scarcely have been less than three hours after 
 sunset when "Jesus went forth with His disciples 
 over the brook Kedron." (John xviii. 1, 2; Matt, 
 xxvi. 30-36 ; Mark xiv. 26-32 ; Luke xxii. 39.) The 
 full moon was more than three hours high, pouring- 
 her light (unless the sky was clouded, which at full 
 moon is rare) on the stupendous eastern and southern 
 walls and cloisters of the Temple enclosures, and on 
 the path down into the valley ; but the lower slopes 
 of Olivet lay in shadow. Possibly the mention of 
 " lanterns and torches " (John xviii. 3) intimates that 
 the night was dark and stormy, as well as cold (ver. 
 18), though it is not inconsistent with moonlight, 
 since the trees would cast dark shadows, and lights 
 might be needed for dark passages and gateways. 
 Stormy weather is not infrequent at Jerusalem about 
 this season, which is included in the time of the 
 " latter rains." 
 
 The Agony in Gethsemane is one of those passages 
 in our Saviour's life — the Temptation being the other 
 — which could be known only in one of two ways — 
 from His own lips, or by direct supernatural revela- 
 tion. The distance to which for privacy He withdrew 
 (Luke xxii. 41) might possibly allow the sound of 
 His voice to be heard in the still night air, but cer- 
 tainly not His words. Moreover, the three disciples 
 were asleep. We have no reason to suppose that the 
 "Angel from heaven" (ver. 43) was visible to any 
 one but Jesus. No human eye witnessed those 
 " great drops of blood falling down to the ground '* 
 (ver. 44) which His intense agony forced out, — the 
 portent, but for the miraculous succour, of sudden 
 death. After this awful season had passed we see our 
 Lord exhibiting the most perfect calmness, majestic 
 self-restraint, and unshaken fortitude, to the time of 
 
THE SUFFERINGS OF CUEIST. 141 
 
 His death. (Mcatt. xxvi. 36-4G ; Mark xiv. 33-42 ; 
 Luke xxii. 40-46. Comp. Heb. v. 7.) 
 
 The Betrayal and Arrest of Jesus are related 
 by all four Evangelists. We may suppose that at 
 least another hour of the night was spent, and that it 
 wanted less than two hours to midnight, when the 
 stillness was broken by the tramp of footsteps and 
 the confused noise of an approaching multitude, led, 
 as it soon appeared, by the traitor. The first two 
 Gospels speak of " a great multitude with swords and 
 staves, from the chief priests and elders.'* The 
 peculiar words used by St. John, rendered "band" 
 and " captain " (" speira,"" a " cohort ; " comp. Matt, 
 xxvii. 27; ''^ chiliarclwsP more properly "colonel"), 
 have been understood to imply that the priests had 
 obtained a Koman guard from Pilate. Perhaps this is 
 one of the over-refinements of minute criticism. The 
 Levites who formed the Temple guard were trained 
 soldiers (2 Chron. xxiii. 7, 9, 10, 14) ; and it is on the 
 face of it extremely improbable that such an application 
 would be made, as well as difficult to reconcile with 
 the subsequent account. St. John's narrative supplies 
 several particulars omitted in the three earlier Gospels, 
 and is strongly stamped with the tokens of having 
 been written by an eye-witness. He alone mentions 
 that it was Peter who drew his sword in defence of 
 his Master, and gives the name of the high-priest's 
 servant on whom Jesus wrought His last miracle 
 of healing. (Matt. xxvi. 47-56; Mark xiv. 43-52; 
 Luke xxii. 47-53 ; John xviii. 3-12.) 
 
 The first three Gospels agree in recording that 
 Jesus was taken to the palace of Caiaphas, the 
 HIGH-PRIEST. Matthew alone names him ; Luke says, 
 "Into the high-priest's house." Here the members 
 of the Sanhedrin had previously met (Matt. xxvi. 3), 
 and here they speedily assembled (the Greek word 
 does not require to be rendered " ivere assembled" as 
 in A. Y.), not, indeed, fur a legal meeting, which 
 
c 
 
 C^ 
 
 142 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 neither the time nor the place allowed, but to enjoy 
 their triumph in having their dreaded enemy helpless, 
 as it seemed, and friendless in their grasp, and to 
 prepare, by questioning Him and gathering hostile 
 testimony, for His formal condemnation. St. John 
 alone, in his fuller account, informs us that Jesus was 
 conducted " to Annas first, for he was father-in-law 
 to Caiaphas" (xviii. 13); and that Annas sent Him 
 to Caiaphas (ver. 24). Annas, or Hanan (Josephus 
 calls him Ananus), was very possibly a more influential 
 person than Caiaphas himself. He had been high- 
 priest for a considerable number of years, until deposed 
 by the fourth Eoman Governor, Pilate's predecessor. 
 He lived to see five of his sons hold the office, besides 
 his son-in-law, Joseph Caiaphas (Jos. Ant. xviii. 2 : 
 2 ; XX. 9 : 1). The title of high-priest is given him 
 by St. Luke (iii. 2 ; Acts iv. 6). It is most probable 
 that he was Sagan, or chief ruler of the priests. 
 Some writers assume that he was Nasi, or president 
 of the Sanhedrin. This is an error, for the president 
 of the Sanhedrin was the famous Gamaliel, son of the 
 great Hillel, in whose family the office of Nasi con- 
 tinued for many generations. But it is not improbable 
 he may have been vice-president (" Ab Beth-din^'* 
 *' father of the court"). As we find no mention of 
 Gamaliel, we may infer that he and other leading 
 Pharisees, like Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus 
 (Luke xxiii. 50, 51; John xix. 38, 39), held aloof 
 from these violent and lawless proceedings, leaving 
 the whole management in the hands of Annas, 
 Caiaphas, and their fellow Saddncees. 
 
 St. John expressly calls Caiaphas the high-priest in 
 verses 13, 24. It is therefore natural to suppose that 
 it is Caiaphas, and no one else, who is referred to in 
 the intervening verses (15, 16, 19, 22), and, indeed, 
 very unnatural to suppose anything else. The sup- 
 position that these intervening verses describe a pre- 
 liminary trial before Annas, not only introduces 
 
THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST. H3 
 
 confusion and even contradiction into St. John's 
 narrative, but involves hopeless discrepancy in the 
 accounts of Peter's denial. The only reason for this 
 confushag supposition lies in the fact, that verse 24 
 stands where it does instead of immediately following; 
 verse 14 ; together with the view that, in grammatical 
 strictness, instead of '■^ Now Annas had sent,^' we 
 ought to translate "Annas therefore sejit^ But there 
 is really no difficulty in understanding that St. John, 
 having been led by the mention of Caiaphas to refer >.^ 
 back to what he has formerly told us (xi. 49-52), \ 
 emits to state that Annas sent Jesus on to the high- ' 
 priest, and therefore adds this explanation at verse 24. 
 And with reference to the tense, there is amjDle 
 evidence of the very free use of the Greek aorist or 
 indefinite tense; and a minute grammatical refiue- 
 luent of this sort cannot withstand the plain sense of 
 a whole passage. We are therefore fully justified in 
 taking John xviii. 19-23 as parallel with the accounts 
 of the midnight trial before Caiaphas and the members 
 of the Sanhedrin, recorded in the first two Gosj)els. 
 (Matt. xxvi. 57-66 ; Mark xiv. 55-64.) 
 
 Simon Peter is represented throughout the Gospels 
 as confessedly the foremost man among the band of 
 apostles ; he appears in the Acts — the second part of 
 Luke's Gospel — as the first great preacher of the 
 Christian Church, and he was the close friend of the 
 Evangelist John. It is, therefore, a most striking 
 example of the faithfulness of the writers, that all 
 four Gospels fully record the aff"ecting and humili- 
 ating story of what is commonly and expressively 
 spoken of as "Peter's fall." The variations are 
 such as we expect from different narrators relating 
 truly what they witnessed or learned from eye- 
 Avitnesses. Bearing in miud the structure of a large 
 Eastern house, we can easily follow the narrative. 
 The door and passage from the street admit to a court 
 or quadrangle, on the opposite side of which is the 
 
144 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHEIST. 
 
 principal hall or reception room, open in front to the 
 court. Behind is an inner court, and in a large 
 mansion a tliird, into which the private rooms open, 
 where no stranger may intrude. Peter, being admitted 
 to the palace through the intervention of " another 
 disciple," who was known to the high-priest (John 
 xviii. 16) — doubtless John — found himself in the 
 quadrangle crowded with servants and officers, 
 gathered round a fire in the centre of the court. 
 Peter was able at first to sit down unnoticed, waiting 
 " to see the end ; " his grief, terror, and perplexity 
 perhaps not unmixed with feelings of indignation and 
 resentment that his brave attempt to defend his 
 Master single-handed had drawn on him only severe 
 rebuke. John describes him and the rest as standing, 
 which creates no diflQculty : if there w^ere a few 
 benches, they would stand and sit by turns. As the 
 ruddy glow fell on his face, the portress who had 
 admitted him at John's request, chancing to come 
 near the fire, pointed him out as a disciple of Jesus. 
 Peter " denied before them all," protesting that he 
 did not know what she meant. He withdrew into 
 the shelter of the passage leading into the street (" the 
 porch "). The crowing of a cock smote on his ear 
 and heart ; but he had now committed himself too 
 far to retract, or possibly he was too much absorbed 
 in the tumult of feeling to remember his Lord's warn- 
 ing. (Mark only notices this first cock-crowing.) 
 We are not expressly told that he returned from the 
 porch, but Mark, .in speaking of "them that stood 
 by " (xiv. 69), distinctly implies this, while Matthew's 
 brief account in no way contradicts it. The second 
 accusation was urged by many voices ("another 
 [maid]," Matt. ; ^'' the maid," Mark ; " another 
 [man]," Luke ; " they," John). Peter's second denial 
 was correspondingly vehement. "About an hour" 
 elapsed, and Peter perhaps thought himself safe from 
 further notice, when he found himself confronted with 
 
THE SUFFEBINGS OF CHRIST. 145 
 
 a kinsman of Malchus, who had actually seen him, 
 sword in hand, in the garden. A chorus of by- 
 standers appealed to Peter's north-country brogue as 
 clear evidence that he was a follower of the Prophet 
 of Galilee. The unhapi:^ disciple lost all self-con- 
 trd, and emphasized with curses his repeated denials. 
 The third hour after midnight Was now wearing 
 awa,y. " The second time the cock crew." At the 
 sane moment "the Lord turned and looked upon 
 Pecer." St. Mark's statement (ver. 66), that Peter 
 W8S " beneath " in the palace court, implying that the 
 principal room, though open to the court, was raised 
 above it, forbids the supposition that Peter w^as a 
 spectator of what was going on before Caiaphas, or 
 that our Lord could have looked upon Peter while yet 
 standing before that infamous tribunal. We may 
 therefore infer that by this time the council had 
 adjourned until daybreak, and that Jesus had been 
 brought down to endure the scoffs and outrages of 
 the servants and soldiers in the courtyard. As He 
 was rudely led near the spot where His faithless dis- 
 ciple was standing, that look was suddenly turned on 
 Peter, the mingled majesty, tenderness, sorrow, and 
 loving yet awful .rebuke of which we may venture 
 silently to imagine. The warning, so incredible when 
 uttered, but which had been fulfilled to the letter, 
 rushed back into Peter's mind, and with it how much 
 beside ! Overwhelmed with grief and shame, he 
 hurried out bitterly weeping. The special message 
 to Peter after the resurrection (Mark xvi. 7), and 
 separate appearance of the risen Lord to him (Luke 
 xxiv. 34; 1 Cor. xv. 5) we may well believe to have 
 been needful, in order to assure him that he was no 
 ■outcast, but still loved and freely forgiven. (Matt, 
 xxvi. 58, 69-75 ; Mark xiv. 54, 66-72 ; Luke xxii. 
 54-62 ; John xviii. 15-18.) 
 
 The meeting of the Sanhedrin in the house of 
 Caiaphas was irregular and informal : first, because it 
 
146 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 was against their rule to try a capital cause by night ; 
 second, because their proper place of meeting was in 
 the Temple. It was also contrary to rule to pass 
 judgment on a feast day ; but this rule seems to hare 
 been set aside by the emergency of the occasion. The 
 Talmud states that forty years before the destruction 
 of the Temj^le the Sanhedrin removed its sessions 
 from the hall Gazith, its proper meeting-place, to 
 certain outbuildings of the Temple (called "the 
 sheds " or " shops "), and afterwards away from the 
 Temple altogether; and that at the same date "juig- 
 ment of capital crimes was taken from Israel." 
 Whether this was before or after the time of Dur 
 Lord's death is uncertain. Lightfoot (on John x^iii. 
 31) elaborately argues from various Eabbinical stite- 
 ments that the Jewish rulers were not deprived of 
 the power of life and death by any formal act of the 
 Koman Government, but that in consequence of the 
 frightful multiplication of murders and other crimes, 
 the Sanhedrin, not daring to execute justice, alan- 
 doned its claim to try capital cases. The lesser San- 
 hedrins lost their power at the same time. The hall 
 Gazith opened by one entrance into the Chel, or con- 
 secrated space between the wall of the Temple courts 
 and the court of the Gentiles, and by another entrance 
 into the court of the priests. We have, I think, an 
 indication that the morning sitting of the council 
 was in the hall Gazith, in what is recorded of the 
 traitor Judas, who when Jesus was condemned flung 
 down the price of his treachery "in the Temple'* 
 (Matt, xxvii. 3-10). The word here used for Temple 
 (naos, as in xxiii. 16 ; xxvi. 61 ; xxvii. 40-51) is ajD- 
 plicable only to the innermost building, ^.e., the Holy 
 Place and the Holy of Holies, a difterent word (Jiieron) 
 t being used in such passages as Matt. xxvi. 55 ; Luke 
 / ii. 37, etc. Into the Holy Place none but a priest 
 / dared enter. The obvious inference is, that Juda? 
 was a priest. Entering, as I conjecture, the hall 
 
TEE SUFFEBINGS OF CERIST. 147 
 
 Oazitti by the outer door, and being treated with cold 
 scorn by " the chief priests and elders," the unhappy 
 wretch, in the fury of his despair, passed by the 
 inner door into the priests' court, mounted the steps 
 of the sanctuary, and flung down " the price of blood " 
 upon the sacred floor. 
 
 At break of day a meeting of the Sanhedein 
 was convened, which might bear some semblance of 
 legal authority. Jesus was arraigned, and failing all 
 consistent witness on which to found a demand to the 
 Eoman Governor for His death. His foes (in defiance 
 of their own rules) endeavoured to force from Him 
 some confession on which to found their sentence. 
 If we are to believe the Talmud, the one fatal weak- 
 ness of the Sanhedrin was its excessive mildness 
 towards criminals, and its abhorrence of condemning 
 an Israelite to death. If these traditions deserve any 
 credence, the men who would have acted in the spirit 
 they describe — the Gamaliels, Josephs, Kicodemuses — 
 were absent. The stem, politic, worldly-minded 
 Sadducees scorned alike tradition and clemency. Jesus 
 declined to repeat the declaration which, when adjured 
 by Caiaphas, He had made the night before, that He 
 w\as " THE Christ, the Son of God," which of course 
 involved His claim to be King of Israel. But when 
 asked if He was the Son of God, He repHed in the 
 well-understood form of assent—" Ye say that lam.'' 
 Immediately He was condemned by acclamation, 
 " and the whole multitude of thorn arose, and led Hoi 
 TO Pilate." (Luke xxii. G6-71; xxiii. 1; Matt. 
 xxvii. 1, 2 ; Mark xv. 1 ; John xviii. 28.) 
 
 The PR^TOEin\r, as the residence for the time being 
 of the Roman Governor was called,^ was in all proba- 
 
 » The proper title of the Governor of Jud?ea (which was 
 included in the province of Syria) was "Procurator"— 
 *• Steward " or " Commissioner " ; but he had the power of 
 " Imperial Lieutenant," involving praetorian rank. (See 
 Smith's Diet, of Rom. and Greek Ant., Art. "Provincia"; 
 
148 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 bility the Citadel or Castle called Antonia, situate at 
 the north-west corner of the Temple area, and com- 
 manding the Temple by means of a passage to the 
 cloisters. Combining the strength of a fortress with 
 the magnificence of a palace, and forming the key to 
 the possession of Jerusalem, it would be the natural 
 residence of the Roman Governor when at Jerusalem. 
 This view is confirmed by St. Mark's statement (xv, 
 16) that the soldiers called " the whole band " together 
 — implying that the whole garrison was within call. 
 
 Along that very passage then, most probably, through 
 which His servant Paul was led nearly thirty years 
 afterwards (Acts xxi. 31-35 ; xxiii. 10), the rejected 
 King of Israel was hurried by the infuriated priests, 
 thirsting for His blood, yet not daring themselves to 
 shed it. They demanded an immediate audience of 
 the governor; and Pontius Pilate, knowing that 
 their customs forbade their entering the citadel, came 
 out to meet them. " It was early." The Greek word 
 here and elsewhere used may signify, according to- 
 circumstances, either before sunrise or between sunrise 
 and noon. Sunrise at Jenisalem on the 6th April is 
 between ten minutes and a quarter before six. The 
 Sanhedrin would have ])een able to meet soon after 
 five. The condemnation of Jesus was a foregone con- 
 clusion, and we may be certain that they lost no time 
 in seeking to make Pilate the executioner of their 
 murderous purpose. They seem at first to have 
 imagined that the fear of popular tumult would induce 
 the Roman Governor to order the execution of Jesus 
 on their bare assertion that He was "a malefactor." 
 Pilate, however, was not without some sense both of 
 
 Con. and Howson, vol. i. pp. 27, 155.) Concerning the 
 Castle Antonia or Baris (supposed to be referred to Nehe- 
 miah ii. 8), and the two palaces — one built by Herod the 
 Great, the other by the Maccabees — see Handbook to Bible, 
 pp. 347, 354, 355, 385 ; Jos. Ant., xviii. 4:3; Wars, i. 21 : 
 1 : V. 5 : 8 ; 4:4; Ant., xx. 8:11; Wars, ii. 16 : 3. 
 
THE SUFFEIilNGS OF CHBIST. 149 
 
 dignity and of justice, and replied that if they wanted 
 a prisoner put to death without trial, they must both 
 pass sentence and execute it. Their reply (the exact 
 meaning of which is disputed ; see p. 146) was to the 
 effect that they could not lawfully inflict capital punish- 
 ment. (John xviii. 29-32 ; Luke xxiii. 2.) They 
 added that Jesus had pubhcly taught sedition, " for- 
 bidding to give tribute to Ceesar, saying that He 
 Himself is Christ a King." (Luke xxiii. 2. N.B. — 
 This accusation, though not expressly noticed by St, 
 John, is implied in xviii. 33-35.) 
 
 Pilate, who could scarcely be without some previous 
 knowledge of Jesus, saw that he had a case of no 
 ordinary difficulty to deal with. Jesus, alike before 
 the Sanhedrin, before Herod, and before Pilate, main- 
 tamed absolute Bilence when His replying to a question 
 or an accusation would have put Him in the position 
 of standing on His defence, and thus recognizing the 
 right of any tribunal to arraign Him. But as He had 
 answered the high-priest's question whether He was- 
 the Son of God, so now He repHed to Pilate's question 
 whether He was the King of the Jews. The character 
 of His answer increased Pilate's perplexity, and con- 
 vinced him that the enemies of Jesus were seeking,, 
 not justice, but vengeance. He therefore went out to 
 the accusers, and declared that he found no reason 
 to comply with their demand.* (John xviii. 33-38; 
 Luke xxiii. 3, 4; Matt, xxvii. 11 ; Mark xv. 2.) 
 
 The priests were stirred to increased violence b}^ 
 the fear that the victim might after all escape. Their 
 reference to Galilee as the birthplace of the seditious 
 teaching of which they accused Jesus, suggested to 
 Pilate a way out of the difficulty by throwing the 
 responsibihty on Herod Antipas, who had come to* 
 Jerusalem for the festival, and who may have been 
 occupying either his father's splendid palace or the 
 palace built by the Maccabees. To Plerod accordingly 
 Jesus was forthwith sent. The Tetrarch, whose 
 
150 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST, 
 
 coarse and cruel mind was not without gleams of 
 right impulse (Mark vi. 20), seems to have regarded 
 Jesus, whom he had formerly conjectured to he John 
 the Baptist risen from the dead, as a religious enthusiast 
 whose regal claims were best extinguished by ridicule. 
 Irritated at the silence of Jesus, and disappointed in 
 his hope of seeing Him perform a miracle, he delivered 
 Him to his guards to be made sport of, and sent Him 
 back to Pilate clothed in mockery with a brilliant robe. 
 (Luke xxiii. 6-12.) ^ This appears to be the mocking 
 referred to by St. John (xix. 2, 3), though he may 
 also refer to that subsequently inflicted by Pilate's 
 soldiers. 
 
 Meantime a murmur was rising among the crowd 
 that the Roman Governor, according to a singular 
 custom noticed in all the Gospels, should release a 
 prisoner in honour of the feast. (Mark xv. 8.) Pilate 
 flattered himself that he saw a fresh way of escape. 
 Again he declared Jesus guiltless, and appealed to 
 Herod's judgment in confirmation of his own. He 
 
 1 The word means " shining," " splendid," and may there- 
 fore be appHed to white raiment (Rev. xv. 6), but it does not 
 mean " white." In James ii. 2, 3, it is translated "goodly," 
 " gay." There is therefore no reason why we should not 
 understand it of the same robe which Matthew calls " scarlet," 
 and Mark and John " purple." Dean Alford (on Luke xxiii. 
 12) writes as if St. John was ignorant of the sending of 
 Jesus by Pilate to Herod, — which, of course, must imply 
 that it never happened. "Obviously," he says, "nothing 
 was further from the mind of the Evangelist." We might as 
 justly infer from Ex. ii. 1, 2, that nothing was further from 
 the mind of Moses than that he had a brother and sister 
 older than himself. The absolute way in which the inspired 
 writers omit what they do not see fit distinctly to narrate, 
 is one great secret of the terseness, force, and brilliancy of 
 Scripture narratives ; and if not a proof of inspiration, is at 
 least a very remarkable feature of the historical Scriptures. 
 It is worth noting that Luke alone records the fact that our 
 Lord was sent to^Herod, but for which record the reference 
 in Acts iv. 27 would be unintelligible. 
 
TEE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST. 151 
 
 offered, as a concession to the malice of the priests, 
 to scourge Jesus, and then to release Him, proposing 
 as an alternative name that of a notorious criminal, 
 whom he evidently hoped they would reject. The 
 relentless answer was, " Not this man, but Barabbas." 
 (Matt, xxvii. 15-18 ; Mark xv. 6-11 ; Luke xxiii. 
 13-19 ; John xviii. 39, 40.) 
 
 That the scourging inflicted by Pilate's order was not 
 the flogging with rods which St. Paul thrice sufiered 
 (2 Cor. xi. 25 ; Acts xvi. 22 ; and Alf.'s Note), but the 
 severer and more degrading torture of the lash, is clear 
 from the Greek words employed by the Evangelists. 
 This appears to have been the customary prehminary 
 to cnicitixion. (Jos., Wars, ii. 14 : 9.) There is no 
 sufiicient evidence, however, that that most horrible 
 form of scourge was employed, under the torture of 
 which slaves and criminals sometimes died. {Diet, of 
 Ant., Art. " Flagellum ; " Farrar, vol. ii. pp. 379, 380 ; 
 Geikie, vol. ii. p. 547.) The scourging was probably 
 the courtyard of the Castle. St. John distinctly places 
 it before Pilate's renewed refusal to crucify Je«us 
 (xix. 1, ff.). It has therefore been inferred from 
 Matt, xxvii. 26 ; Mark xv. 15, that Jesus was a second 
 time scourged, after Pilate's final sentence. But this 
 is almost incredible, and is by no means necessarily 
 implied, the phrase (strictly translated) ^^ having 
 scourged Him'''' simply asserting that this customary 
 infliction was not omitted. 
 
 Pilate, cherishing a lingering hope that this punish- 
 ment (confessedly unmerited) might appease the rage 
 and hatred of the accusers of Jesus, brought Him forth 
 (perhaps on the steps of the Castle, Acts xxi. 40), 
 " wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe." 
 "Behold the M.vx!" he said; as much as to ask, 
 " Is it not enough? " The reply was the remorseless 
 shout, " Crucify ! Crucify ! " Stern and cruel as he 
 could show himself under provocation (comp. Jos., 
 Ant. xviii. 3: 2; 4: 1, 2), the Eoman shrank from 
 
( 
 
 152 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CUEIST. 
 
 becoming an accomplice in cold blood in a judicial 
 murder. He again bitterly told the Jewish rulers that 
 if nothing but the blood of Jesus would satisfy them, 
 they might crucify Him themselves. Their reply 
 added to the awe which from the first the person of 
 Jesus had inspired in Pilate, and which was doubtless 
 increased by the sii'igular message he had received 
 from his wife. (Matt, xxvii. 19.) Once more he retired 
 within the Castle, and called Jesus before him. Bleed- 
 ing from the scourge, after some eight hours of mental 
 and bodily anguish almost inconceivable, Jesus replied 
 to Pilate with as calm majesty as though He had been 
 seated on the judgment seat, and Pilate the prisoner 
 upon his trial. In real truth — so different from out- 
 ward seeming — it was so. (John xix. 1-11.) 
 
 For the last time Pilate renewed his attempt to 
 turn the Jewish rulers from their purpose. He was 
 met by an argument before which his courage quailed. 
 If he spared one who claimed the throne of Israel, his 
 own loyalty to Ctesar would be called in question. 
 Pilate was vanquished. He had fought for justice and 
 mercy as strenuously as perhaps any man could do 
 with whom conscience is motive only, not law. He 
 was not prepared to save the life of Jesus at tlie cost 
 of his own. He took his seat upon the " curule chair " 
 (or rather "stool"), as the seat of magistrates exer- 
 cising the power of life and death was called (in Greek 
 " lema ; " Acts xviii. 12 ; xxv. 10 ; Rom. xiv. 10).i For 
 
 * St. John says, "/n a place called the Pavement, hut in 
 Hebrew Gabbatha," The latter word (essentialh'- the same 
 with " Gibbethon" 1 Kings xv. 27) is not given as an exact 
 translation of the Greek word rendered '* Pavement," but as 
 the name by which the Jews called the place where Pilate 
 sat in judgment. It was probably a raised terrace, perhaps 
 of marble, in front of the Castle. Since the place, not the 
 pavement, is intended, the accounts quoted by various 
 writers of the movable pavement which Julius Caesar carried 
 with him on his journeys have no application ; nor can there 
 be any reference here to the pavement of the Temple. 
 
TEE SUFFERINGS OF GEBIST. 153 
 
 the last time the Man of Sorrows was led forth by the 
 Roman guards in view of the dense and excited multi- 
 tude, which by this time probably filled tl'te whole area 
 between the Castle and the Temple. Pilate's final 
 appeal seems rather to have been made to the people 
 than to the priests alone. " Behold your Kixg ! . . ,. 
 Shall I crucify your Kinri ? " The reply of the 
 chief priests was the death-knell of Israel's national 
 life : " We have no king hut Cxsar ! " (John xix. 12-15.) 
 Priests and people joined in the cry that Pilate should 
 release Barabbas and crucify Jesus. (Matt, xxvii. 20-23; 
 Mark XV. 12-14 ; Luke xxiii. 16-23.) St. Matthew 
 relates the solemn symbolic act by which Pilate sought 
 to divest himself of responsibility for the crime from 
 which he vainly sought to deter the Jews. Washing 
 his hands before all the people, he pronounced the 
 most extraordinary preface to a death sentence ever 
 heard from a judgment-seat — " I am innocent of the 
 Mood of this just person ; see ye to it^ The chorus 
 of the popular voice ratified the demand of their 
 priestly leaders. " Then answered all the people, and 
 said, His blood be on us, and on our children." (Matt> 
 xxvii. 24, 25.) 
 
 " And so Pilate, willing to content the people, 
 released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus^ 
 when he had scourged Him, to be crucified." (Mark 
 XV. 15-20 ; Matt, xxvii. 26-31 ; Luke xxiii. 24, 25 : 
 John xix. 16.) 
 
 The soldiers led Jesus within the courtyard of the 
 Castle, and "the whole cohort" joined in repeating 
 the coarse and cruel mockery of which Herod's soldiers 
 had set the example. (Matt, xxvii. 27-31 ; Mark xv. 
 16-20.) At length the second act of this great tragedy 
 was over. "And they took Jesus, and led Him away; 
 and He bearing His cross went forth." (John xix. 16, 
 17). It was customary for one condemned to cruci- 
 fixion to carry his cross, or a part of it ; but the first 
 three Gospels record the name of Simon of Cyrene as 
 
154 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 having been compelled to bear the cross after Jesus. 
 The traditional explanation is reasonable, that after 
 the strain and exhaustion of so many hours of Omental 
 and bodily anguish our Lord's bodily strength was no 
 longer equal to the burden, and He sank under it. 
 (Matt, xxviii. 32 ; Mark xv. 21 ; Luke xxiii. 26.) 
 
 As we " consider Him that endured such contra- 
 diction of sinners against Himself," we must not leave 
 out of sight the amazing self-control with which He 
 restrained that jDower before which His foes would 
 have been as chaff before the tempest. (Psa. i. 4 ; ii. 
 12.) The voice which had stilled the wind and waves 
 could have loosed the lightning and earthquake, blinded 
 every hostile eye and withered every arm lifted against 
 Him. But He was led " as a lamb to the slaughter." 
 (Isa. liii. 7 ; Phil. ii. 8.) As we review the accumu- 
 lated blasphemy, injustice, ingratitude, outrage, cruelty, 
 of those long hours, we are ready to think that — so far 
 as the sufferings men could inflict were concerned — 
 the cross itself could have nothing worse in store. 
 
 St. John says, " It was about the sixth hour" when 
 Pilate made his last appeal to the Jews, and sentenced 
 Jesus to the cross. St. Mark, describing the execution 
 of the sentence, says, "7^ teas the third how\ and 
 they crucified Him.'" This discrepancy was attempted 
 to be solved as early as the time of Eusebius, by sup- 
 posing ^^ sixth" to be a mere error of copyists for 
 *' third.'" This supposition, in the face of the actual 
 state of the text, has not found favour with modern 
 editors. The explanation adopted by Townson, Gres- 
 well, and Wieseler has been defended with great 
 learning and earnestness by McClellan (Four Gospels^ 
 pp. 737-743), viz., that as the Eomans, although 
 employing the ordinary reckoning of the day from 
 sunrise to sunset, had also a civil day from midnight 
 to midnight, they divided this day into twenty-four 
 hours, as we do; and that the Evangelist uses this 
 reckoning. Thus by "the sixth hour" would be 
 
THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST. 155 
 
 meant, not noon, but six a.m. The fatal objection to 
 this explanation is not the doubtfulness of the argu- 
 ments in its favour, but the impossibility of making 
 it fit with the facts. The Sanhedrin met at daybreak, 
 soon after five a.m. Orientals are not accustomed to 
 the rapid dispatch of business familiar to ourselves. 
 Twenty minutes is a short time to allow from their 
 assembling to their rising. Another ten or fifteen 
 minutes would elapse in conveying their Prisoner to 
 the front of the Castle and demanding an audience of 
 the Governor. By the time Pilate came out to them 
 the sun had probably already risen. By the time he 
 had privately conversed with Jesus, held his second 
 interview with the priests, and come to the resolution 
 to send Jesus to Herod, the sixth hour from midnight 
 must have been passed. We cannot reckon less than 
 twenty minutes for the descent into the Tyropoean 
 valley and ascent to Herod's palace on Mount Zion, 
 and the same for returning. The interview with 
 Herod, and the mockery by his soldiers, cannot be 
 supposed to have occupied less than half an hour. It 
 would thus, at the earliest, be between seven and 
 eight a.m. when Jesus again stood before Pilate. 
 Then followed Pilate's offer to release Jesus; then the 
 scourging, after which He was brought out to the 
 people, wearing the crown of thorns; another private 
 interview within the Prsetorium ; and a final attempt 
 to turn the Jews from their purpose, before Pilate 
 took his seat to pass sentence. AH this implies a 
 considerable interval of time, and agrees well with 
 Mark's statement that "it was the third hour," or 
 about nine a.m., when the place of crucifixion was 
 reached. It would not be extravagant even to allow 
 a couple of hours longer for these transactions ; and 
 in that case the phrase " about the sixth hour " might 
 be taken as merely meaning "it was now drawing 
 near mid-day." We must then suppose a copyist's 
 error in the second Gospel, not the fourth. But that 
 
156 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 all these events could have been transacted in the 
 interval of less than one hour, between daybreak and 
 six a.m., is an impossibility, which no amount of 
 erudition can make possible. We seem, therefore, 
 shut up to Deau Alford's conclusion, that " we must 
 certainly suppose, as did Eusebius, Theophylact, and 
 8everus, that there has been some very early erratum 
 in our copies." 
 
 Combining, therefore, the facts narrated by the four 
 Evangelists with the express statement of St. Mark, 
 we gather that four hours or more had elapsed since 
 the meeting of the Sanhedrin at daybreak, and that 
 it wanted some three hours of noon when the rejected 
 Iving of Israel reached " Golgotha " — doubtless the 
 accustomed place of public executions.^ St. Luke 
 (xxiii. 27-32) records the remarkable prophecy uttered 
 by our Lord, showing that His self-possession and 
 majestic bearing were unabated by His sufferings ; he 
 also mentions that the two criminals, whom all the 
 Gospels state to have been crucified at His side, were 
 ^'led with Him." On arriving at the spot, as the 
 first two Gospels tell us (Matt, xxvii. 34; Mark xv. 
 23), a stupefying cup was oft'ered to Him, containing 
 myrrh dissolved in wine — a customary gift from 
 some wealthy and compassionate women of Jerusalem 
 to criminals condemned to the cross (Lightfoot). 
 Matthew employs tlie terms ^^ vinegar''^ and "gall" 
 (which might be used for any bitter herb ; see Eobin- 
 son's Lex.), to indicate the fulfilment of prophecy 
 {Psa. Ixix. 21). Tlie Sufferer having been stripped 
 and nailed to the cross, a writing was by Pilate's 
 
 * Matthew, Mark, and John give the Hebrew name, which 
 1hey explain " the place of a skull." Luke simply uses the 
 <jreek word for "s/m//," latinized in our translation into 
 '• Calvary." The place has been, with high probability if 
 not certainty, identified with the spot known as " the place 
 of stoning," north of Jerusalem, to which the name " Mount" 
 (though not applied in Scripture) is not wholly inapplicable. 
 See Tent Work, vol. i. pp. o71-o76. 
 
THE SUFFERINGS OF CUBIST. 157 
 
 order fixed above His head, in three languages, that 
 it might he read by the native Jews, the foreign Jews, 
 of whom great numbers attended the feast, and the 
 Roman soldiers. In each language He was declared 
 to be "The King of the Jews." St. John (xix. 
 20-22) records Pilate's stern refusal to alter this 
 inscription. 
 
 The fiendish spirit of mockery which burst forth 
 ■with new fury at the foot of the cross, as before in the 
 high-priest's palace, the palace of Herod, and the Prse- 
 torium, while it reveals in hateful colours the character 
 of the people and of the times, is vividly suggestive of 
 more than human malice, recalling our Lord's refer- 
 ences to " the Isomer of darkness.''' (Luke xxii. 53 ; 
 John xiv. 30.) If we are to take the "words of the 
 first two Gospels as strictly literal (which perhaps is 
 unnecessary), both the malefactors at first joined in 
 these taunts. St. Luke, who alone relates the prayer 
 of Jesus for His murderers (xxiii. 34), also tells how 
 the conscience of one of these guilty men, as he 
 watched the patient majesty of the Divine Sufferer, 
 was pierced, and his heart inspired \\dth a faith alike 
 unique and marvellous ; and how to him was granted 
 the transcendent honour of being the Saviour's com- 
 forter during those dark hours, and the trophy, when 
 He seemed unable to save Himself, of His pow-er to 
 save (ver. 39-43). Besides these two utterances on 
 THE Cross, five others are recorded in the Gospels, 
 seven in all ; namely, the words in which Jesus com- 
 mended His mother to the care of His beloved disciple 
 (John xix. 25-27) ; the prayer from Psalm xxii. 1 
 (Matt, xxvii. 46 ; Mark xv. 34) ; the cry of thirst 
 {John ver. 21-30; implied in Matt. ver. 48; Mark 
 ver. 36) ; the cry " It is finished " (John ver. 30 ; 
 comp. Matt. ver. 50 ; Mark ver. 37) ; and the dying 
 prayer (Luke ver. 46). The first three Gospels agree 
 in recording the darkness which prevailed from noon 
 till the ninth hour ''the hour of prayer" in the 
 
c 
 
 158 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 Temple (Acts iii. 1) — between the slaying of the sacri- 
 fice, half an hour after the eighth hour, and the offer- 
 ing of it, half an hour after the ninth (Mishna, Pes, 
 V. 1). They also agree in mentioning the awful por- 
 tent of the rending of the veil in the Temple, ap- 
 parently at the moment of our Lord's death, Matthew 
 adds the earthquake, the opening of the graves, and 
 the appearance after Christ's resurrection of saints 
 buried therein. All three record the testimony of the 
 centurion. (Matt, xxvii. 34-56 ; Mark xv. 22-41 ; 
 Luke xxiii. 27-49; John xix. 17-24.) 
 
 The fourth Gospel relates the method by which the 
 death of the two malefactors was hastened, in order 
 that the bodies might be removed before sunset ; and 
 the piercing of the side of Jesus, already dead, when 
 the '' blood and ivater " — coagulated blood — which 
 gushed forth furnished proof that His death, which 
 could not naturally have resulted from crucifixion, 
 was not caused by any miraculous intervention, but 
 by His heart having literally burst under the strain of 
 that inconceivable agony .^ No more affecting and 
 convincing proof can be imagined than this silent 
 testimony, of the reality and intensity of those inward 
 sufferings of which the agony in Gethsemane was the 
 foretaste. "We may not presumptuously seek to ana- 
 lyze those sufferings or to separate them from the out- 
 ward sufferings — the " body broken for ?/s,"and " blood 
 shed for many " — which He Himself has bidden us to 
 keep in memory. Still we cannot but feel, from our 
 Saviour's own words, both before the cross and upon 
 
 ^ The evidence, clear and ample, that the immediate 
 cause of our Saviour's death was a broken heart, -will be 
 found in Dr. Stroud's Treatise on the Physical Cause of the 
 Death of Christ (Hamilton and Adams, 1849). His view is 
 of great value as a practical refutation of some unworthy 
 and harmful views. For the details of the punishment of 
 crucifixion the reader may be referred to the Diet, of Ant., 
 and the works of Farrar, Geikie, and Andrews. Terrible as 
 it was, it was incapable of producing so speedy a death. 
 
THE SUFFEBINGS OF CHRIST. 159 
 
 it, that when He " gave His life a ransom for many, 
 '■' was wounded for our transgressions," and " His own 
 self bare our sins in His own body on the tree," and 
 when God " made His soul an offering for sin," there 
 was an inconceivably darker and more awful element 
 in His suffering, in relation to Divine law and the 
 Divine will, than they who looked upon the crucifixion 
 could perceive, or than we can fathom. And to this 
 transcendent element is to be added the immense 
 strain of that unswerving purpose and mighty self- 
 restraint by which the Son of God became " obedient 
 unto death," fulfilling His own declaration — " There- 
 fore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my 
 life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it 
 from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power 
 to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. 
 This commandment have I received of my Father." 
 (John X. 17, 18.) 
 
 The Disci^Dles themselves were as ignorant as the 
 myriads of bystanders, Jewish or Heathen, of the 
 true character of that astounding and heartrending 
 spectacle. Only by degrees did the Spirit of truth 
 lead them (John xvi. 13, 14) into the full understand- 
 ing of the death of Christ for sin. This is clear from 
 comparing the book of Acts with the Epistles. From 
 the outset, the Apostles preached justification by faith 
 in the crucified, riseo, glorified Jesus. (See Acts iv. 
 10-12 ; xiii. 38, 39.) But the first reference in Acts 
 to the atoning virtue of the death of Christ is in xx. 
 28. In the two earliest of St. Paul's Epistles occurs 
 but one brief reference — 1 Thes. v. 9, 10. But Gala- 
 tions is full of it throughout. (Compare 1 Cor. i. 17, 
 18, 23 ; ii. 2 ; 1 Pet. i. 18, 19 ; 1 John i. 7 ; Rev. v. 
 6, 9.) The " advanced theology " of the New Testa- 
 ment is the doctrine of the cross of Christ, 
 
 ) 
 

 Mf^ 
 
 the kesurrection. 
 Sd>s'day, April 9th, a.d. 30 ; Xisan 17th. 
 
 THE Shepherd was smitten, and the sheep were \ 
 scattered. Great crises often bring to light 
 unlooked-for strength, as well as unsuspected weak- 
 ness. It was not an Apostle or avowed follower of 
 Christ, but a member of the Sanhedrin who had been 
 " a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews," 
 who " took courage and went to Pilate," startling the 
 Governor with the news that Jesus was already dead, 
 and craving permission to take down the body, and 
 give it honourable burial. His name — Joseph of 
 Arimatha^a — is given in all the Gospels. Pilate's 
 feeling concerning Jesus led him at once to grant 
 tliis request. St. John tells us that another member N. 
 of the Sanhedrin, Nicodemus, whose secret visit to ) 
 Jesus, and feeble though well-meant interposition on / 
 His behalf, he alone relates (iii. 1 ; vii. 50), joined \ 
 with Joseph in providing s]3ices, '■^ about a hundred j 
 pounds weiglit,^^ in which the corpse was wrapped. 
 The entombment was hasty, on account of the ap- 
 proach of sunset. Fuller rites were designed when 
 the Sabbath should have passed, by those devoted 
 Galila:;an women who had stood by the cross to the 
 last, and watched the burial. The tomb was a rock- \ 
 hewn one, of that kind used in the later times of / 
 Jewish history, in which the corpse was laid in a niche ^, 
 in the side of the tomb, and the entrance to which ,' 
 was closed with a rolling stone. (Matt. xxvi. 57-61 ; 
 Mark xv. 42-47 ; Luke xxiii. 50-56 ; John xix. 38- 
 42.) As to the site of the sepulchre, we are told that ^ 
 it was in a garden, close to the p!ace of crucifixion. / 
 
r 
 
 162 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 CCJohn xix. 41, 42.) Eecent explorations seem to leave 
 no doubt that it was north of the city, where a ceme- 
 tery exists to this day. {Te7it Work, vol. i. pp. 361-376; 
 Eandhook to Bihle, pp. 204, 350.) 
 
 St. Matthew alone records the precaution taken by 
 the chief priests, together with the Pharisees (whom 
 he has not previously named in connection with the 
 proceedings against Jesus ; comp. John xi. 47, 57), to 
 guard against a false report that Jesus was risen from 
 the dead (xxvii. 62-66). His peculiar phrase — " The 
 next day that followed the day of the jpreparation" I 
 take to mean Saturday evening after sunset, when the 
 Sabbath was over. Pilate's answer should be trans- 
 lated imperatively — not *' Ye have a guard,''^ but " Take 
 a guard." This compliance with thei» request was of 
 course accompanied with the requisite military orders ; 
 and Eoman authority and discipline were thus in God's 
 all-watchful providence enlisted as witnesses to the 
 reality of our Lord's resurrection. Matthew also re- 
 lates the subsequent conduct of the guards, and of the 
 priests, whose words confirm the view that the guards 
 were Eoman soldiers (xxviii. 4, 11-15). 
 
 " That Sabbath Day was a high day." (John xix. 
 31.) It was the 16th Nisan, Saturday, April 8th. 
 On it the sheaf of first-fruits, cut with quaint cere- 
 mony after sunset of Nisan 15th, was presented with 
 rejoicing in the Temple. (Jos., Ant., in. 10: 5; Cyc. 
 Bib. Lit., Art. "Passover.") To Caiaphas and his 
 priestly colleagues it was a day of triumph beyond all 
 they could have hoped. Their fears of a popular 
 ^_ tumult had proved groundless. Their hated and 
 y dreaded enemy was dead and buried, without a hand 
 I or voice lifted on His behalf, and they had succeeded 
 A in fixing the odium of His death upon the Eoman 
 ^ Governor. His followers might linger for awhile as 
 an obscure despised sect, but all fear of their making 
 'icadway among the people seemed at an end. Ko less 
 to the disoiples themselves it seemed their cause waa 
 
THE RESURRECTION. 1 63 
 
 lost. The Christian Church has seen dark days since, 
 but none so dark as that. No ray of hope cheered 
 their minds "as they mourned and wept." Their 
 Master's repeated predictions of His resurrection re- 
 mained keyless riddles. When the most devoted of 
 them visited the tomb, it was with no thought but of 
 completing His embalmment. Their reports of the 
 empty sepulchre and of the risen Lord met at first 
 only the incredulity of despair. 
 
 The accounts in the four Gospels of the resurrection 
 of Jesus vary, as we expect reports of truthful wit- 
 nesses to vary. The extreme terseness and brevity of 
 the sacred writers must be borne in mind, together 
 with their habit, already noted, of throwing into strong 
 relief the facts recorded, by absolute silence respecting 
 a multitude of unrecorded details. To infer from this 
 silence either ignorance, or that in any strict sense the 
 different Gospels contain " independent reports," is to 
 forget that they were not written until the facts had 
 been for a dozen or a score of years the constant theme 
 of public teaching and of private converse; and tha^ 
 all the first witnesses were connected by ties of th^ 
 most intimate companionship and sympathy. Th 
 "discrepancies" have been raised into importance 
 partly by the objections of sceptical critics, partly by 
 the ingenuity of harmonists, and partly by the eager- 
 ness of some able writers to disparage all attempts at 
 harmony. It is therefore desirable clearly to state the 
 facts which the Evangelists agree in bearing witness 
 to. Manifestly it was not their purpose to furnish a 
 narrative complete in all its details ; or even fragmente 
 which, like the pieces of a puzzle, may be fitted to- 
 gether into one whole. Each writer gives a distinct 
 and vivid picture, designed to produce a definite im- 
 pression, omitting details and qualifications which 
 would destroy the effect of the picture by fixing 
 attention, not on what it contains, but on what it 
 does not contain. To suppose any of the Evangelists 
 
 F 2 
 
164 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CRBIST. 
 
 ignorant or forgetful of any of the leading facts is to 
 charge him with incompetency or unfaithfulness. 
 
 Concerning the following facts, all the narkatives 
 agree, (a) The sepulchre was visited early in the 
 morning of the first day of the week by some of 
 the women who had attended Jesus from Galilee, 
 including Mary Magdalene. (&) They found the stone 
 rolled away and the tomb empty, (c) They saw an 
 angel, or angels, who told them that Jesus was risen. 
 (d) The women hastened to carry the tidings to the 
 Apostles, who received them with incredulity, (e) 
 Peter and John visited the tomb, but did not see 
 either the Saviour or the angels. (The third and 
 fourth Gospels relate Peter's visit ; the fourth st-ates 
 that John was with him.) (/) The risen Lord ap- 
 peared to some of the women, (g) He appeared to 
 the Eleven the same evening. (Not referred to by 
 Matthew.) (h) Luke adds a separate appearance to 
 Simon Peter (xxiv. 34 ; comp. 1 Cor. xv. 5), and an 
 appearance to Cleopas and another disciple, to which 
 Mark also refers. (^) John alone records an appear- 
 ance to the Eleven on that day week ; likewise a 
 subsequent appearance by the Lake of Galilee, (j) 
 Matthew relates a public appearance by solemn 
 appointment in Galilee, to which Mark also alludes 
 (xvi. 7) ; and which is probably the appearance ** to 
 above five hundred brethren," mentioned by St. Paul 
 (1 Cor. XV. 6). (k) St. Paul also mentions (ver. 7) 
 an appearance to James, not elsewhere recorded. 
 (I) Lastly, Luke (Acts i. 3) intimates that there were 
 repeated and prolonged interviews during the six 
 we^ks from the Eesurrection to the Ascension, and 
 gives (in his Gospel and in Acts) a double account of 
 the Ascension. 
 
 These main facts compose the body of the apostolic 
 "witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus" 
 (Acts iv. 33), which constituted an essential and prin- 
 cipal part of their public teaching, and no less of that 
 
THE BESURBECTION. 1G5 
 
 of the Apostle Paul. (1 Cor. xv. 4-14.) The worth of 
 this accordant testimony is no whit diminished by 
 those variations in minute detail to which so great 
 importance has been attached. They are such as 
 would be deemed beneath notice in any ordinary 
 history. Their only claim to regard arises from the 
 value, in records so brief and so precious, of faultless 
 accuracy, and from the bearing which our view of the 
 presence or absence of such accuracy must have on our 
 view of the inspiration under which the Evangelists 
 wrote. 
 
 Some of the variations on which sceptical criticism 
 has been expended seem hardly worthy of serious 
 notice : e.g., one Evangelist states that the women 
 prepared spices before sunset on Friday evening 
 (Luke xxiii. 56); another, that they bought spices 
 after sunset on Saturday. (Mark xvi. 1.) But (not to 
 insist that the translation "//acZ houghV^ is defensible) 
 why should they not be both? Again, a difficulty 
 is found in the varying accounts of the angels, as two 
 or one, sitting or standing, within the sepulchre or 
 outside. It seems to be forgotten that angels are 
 invisible to our natural eyesight, and might therefore 
 appear differently to different perso>.s even at the 
 same time; much more to different persons coming 
 to the spot successively. Again, the variations in the 
 words of the angel or angels — resembling the varia- 
 tions throughout the Gospels in the reports of our 
 Lord's teaching — present no real difficulty. The 
 angel doubtless spoke in Hebrew ; and it was no more 
 necessary for the Evangelist to give an exact transla- 
 tion of every word than to record the Hebrew words 
 themselves. 
 
 Eationally regarded, the difSculties in harmonizing 
 the four narratives seem to reduce themselves to two 
 questions, (a) What relation does John's account of 
 our Lord's appearance to Mary Magdalene bear to the 
 account of His appearance to " the women" in Matt. 
 
166 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 xxviii. 9 ? (b) Do the first three Gospels record one 
 vision, or more than one, of ancrels ? In regard to the 
 first question, Mark's statement must be kept in view 
 that *' He appeared first to Mary Magdalene." 
 
 Without entering on the discussion of the various 
 attempts of commentators and critics either to solve 
 these difficulties or to prove them insoluble, let us 
 follow the record step by step. (1) Of the resurrec- 
 tion itself no account is given. All four Gospels 
 agree that when thewomen visited the tomb early on 
 Sunday morning they found the stone rolled away 
 and the tomb empty. 
 
 (2) As Matthew alone relates the setting of the 
 guard and sealing of the stone, so he alone relates the 
 descent from heaven of an angel who rolled away 
 the stone and sat upon it, the accompanying earth- 
 quake, and the terror of the Eoman guards. It seems 
 clearly indicated that this took place in preparation 
 for the Lord's resurrection, which no human eye was 
 permitted to behold. The women do not appear to 
 have known anything about the guards, who may be 
 supposed to have recovered from their swoon and 
 departed before any of the women reached the 
 sepulchre. The emphasis in the angel's words, " Fear 
 not YE," was natural from the angel's lips, and equally 
 natural from St. Matthew's pen ; but it does not 
 follow that the women understood its allusion to the 
 terror of the soldiers. 
 
 (3) Mark tells us that Mary Magdalene, Mary 
 the mother of James the Less and of Joses (xv. 40), 
 and Salome came to the sepulchre " very early in the 
 morning .... the sun having risen." (Such is the 
 literal translation. It might be the very minute after 
 sunrise, but the sun had appeared above the horizon.) 
 Matthew mentions the two Marys only. Luke speaks 
 of " the women " who had come from Galilee (xxiii. 
 49, 55, 56 ; xxiv. 1) ; but afterward specifies Mary 
 Magdalene Mary the mother of James and Joanna, 
 
THE BE8URBECTI0N. 167 
 
 and others with them, as having hrought the tidings ^^^ 
 to the apostles (ver. 9-11). He uses a stronger term ^ 
 to denote the time — *'at deep daiun,^'' — i.e., at the 1 
 earliest daybreak (which on April 9th would be soon j 
 after 5 a.m.). With this corresponds ver. 22, where 
 the word rendered " early " means " at daybreak ; " 
 and with John's account of Mary Magdalene coming 
 " when it was yet dark." But (as McClellan points 
 out, pp. 521, 526, giving examples : e.g.,oi the present 
 tense, John vi. 19 ; xi. 20 ; of the aorist, Luke xix. 5 ; 
 Acts viii. 36) whereas the phrase employed by St. 
 John — ^'■Cometh to'' or '•^towards'" — admits the ex- 
 planation that Mary was on her way in the twilight, 
 yet may not have arrived at the tomb before sunrise ; 
 St. Luke's phrase — ^'- came upon'^ or ^^up to'' — ex- 
 presses actual arrival. The fact, therefore, seems to \ 
 have been that some of the women, with the spices / 
 they had "prepared," reached the tomb before sunrise, -r 
 whereas Mary Magdalene with her companions, Mary j 
 and Salome, bringing the spices they had " bought," j 
 arrived when the first sunbeams were already casting j 
 long shadows from the trees of the garden. Here is 
 neither improbability nor inconsistency. The impro- 
 bability would lie in supposing that all' these wealthy 
 matrons were lodging together, either in Jerusalem or 
 in Bethany, or that they could all have reached the 
 spot at once or all before sunrise, having perhaps some 
 of them a distance to travel which over such uneven 
 ground would take not less than half or three-quarters 
 of an hour. 
 
 (4) A hasty reader of St. John's account (xx. 1-18) 
 might infer that Mary Magdalene was alone, but her 
 own words — " We know not where they have laid Him" 
 — show that she had companions. Her state of mind 
 exactly corresponds with that described by Luke 
 (xxiv. 4) — " They were much perplexed." There would 
 be ample time, while Peter and John hurried to the 
 tomb^ an'3 M/^y sadly followed, for those who remained 
 
168 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 on the spot to see the vision of aii,g;els, and to disperse in 
 different directions to carry the tidings. When Peter 
 AND JoHX reached the tomb, they do not appear to 
 have found the women there, or to have seen anything 
 of the angels. 
 
 (5) In Luke xxiv. 12, mention is made of Peter 
 only, as though he had gone alone, but ver. 24 speaks 
 of " certain" in the plural. It is touching to see that 
 Peter's deep sin had not estranged from him his 
 
 y^old and close friend. We may suppose they were 
 f lodging together in the house to which the beloved 
 \ disciple led the mother of our Lord from the foot of 
 
 \ the cross (John xix. 27). The entire silence of all the 
 narratives regarding our Lord's mother is remarkable, 
 I and would be almost painful but for the final reference 
 I to her in Acts i. 14. It furnishes a caution against 
 V. drawing inferences from silence. 
 
 (6) It seems evident from the prominence given in 
 all the four Gospels to Maky Magdalene that she 
 was the first to bring tidings of the empty sepulchre 
 to any of the ap)Ostles, as well as the first to see the 
 
 •-. risen Saviour. The most natural place, therefore, 
 to assign to the vision of angels recorded by Luke 
 (xxiv. 4-9) is that already suggested, viz., between 
 the departure of Mary from the tomb and the arrival 
 
 Cof Peter and John. But two questions arise here. 
 , (a) Is the vision of two angels in Luke identical 
 with the vision of one angel in Matthew and Mark ? 
 (b) Are we to suppose that Mary Magdalene had 
 ah-eady seen the angels before she went to tell Peter 
 and John? It is strongly contended by McClellan 
 (pp. 527-530), against the long list of commentators 
 whom he quotes, that we are bound to infer this from 
 the account of Matthew (xxviii. 1, 5-8) and Mark 
 (xvi. 1, 5-8). But it seems impossible except by an 
 extreme strain of ingenuity to reconcile this supposi- 
 tion with St. John's narrative. Having regard to the 
 marvellously condensed brevity of the records, it 
 
THE RE8URBECTI0K 169 
 
 seems far simpler and more natural to suppose that 
 " the women '' to whom the vision appeared were 
 Mary Magdalene's companions, who remained by the 
 tomlD when she left them. Both Matthew and Mark 
 have referred, only a few verses previously, to "many 
 other women " (Matt, xxvii. 55, 56 ; Mark xv. 40, 41).^ 
 The angel is described by Matthew as rolling away 
 the stone and sitting upon it ; but that he appeared 
 inside the sepulchre to the women (as in Mark's 
 account) may be inferred from his words, ^' He is not \ 
 HERE .... Come, see the 'place where the Lord lay.'''' J 
 It is surely an exaggerated and fanciful precision to , 
 lay any stress on the fact that while Mark d( scribes j 
 the angel as a young man, Luke uses a word express- / 
 ing mature manhood. A mechanical coincidence in 
 the narratives would ill represent the excitement, 
 agitation, and awe of the real scene, and the tumul- 
 tuous conflict of feeling with which the women " went 
 out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre," trembling 
 and bewildered, impatient to carry the astounding 
 news, yet speaking no word to any whom th(y met. 
 The total number of those who visited the tomb may 
 have been consideiable ; but not more than iwo or 
 three could enter the tomb at once, and probably they^ 
 were never all assembled at the same time. We may 
 pieture them arriving along different routes by tAvos 
 and threes, as the twilight brightened into day and 
 the sunbeams shot up behind the mountains of Moab ; 
 and hastily departing in various directions to carry 
 tidings "to the eleven and to all the rest." 
 
 (7) The narrative of St. John, taken by itself, 
 needs no explanation, while its inimitable beauty 
 almost rebukes comment. It may be useful, how- 
 ever, to note that the phrase " Touch me noV (xx. 
 17, — lit. "-5e not touching me;" the present, not the 
 aorist) does not imply that Mary was forbidden at all 
 to touch the risen Lord, but rather that she was already 
 touching Hira, — probably clasping His feet. The ; 
 
170 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 Lord graciously assures her that she need not seek to 
 detain Him or fear to go on her errand, for the time 
 of His departure, though nigh, is not yet. 
 
 Not a few judicious writers may be cited in support 
 of the view that the appearance of our Lord to the 
 Avomen related in Matt, xxviii. 9, 10, simply refers, in 
 the Evangelist's terse, generalizing manner, to the 
 appearance to Mary Magdalene. Failing this explana- 
 tion, which I confess does not seem to me satisfactory, 
 this passage may include the appearance to Mary, 
 with a separate appearance to one or more of her 
 companions, possibly to Salome, who seems to have 
 been the wife of Zebedee, mother of the beloved 
 apostle, and sister to our Lord's mother.^ The words 
 ( ver. 9), " as they luent to tell His disciples,"" are con- 
 sidered b}' most modern critics to be a gloss, not a 
 part of the original text. The time of this appearance 
 is therefore unfixed, though the supposition of GreswoU 
 (vol, iii. Diss. 6, 1st ed.) that it was not on that day, 
 but subsequently, seems quite indefensible. 
 
 (8) The account of the appearance of our Lord in 
 the ; afternoon of the day to Cleopas and a brother 
 disciple on tbeir way from Jerusalem to Emmaus 
 (about eight miles south-west of Jerusalem, Bible 
 Handbook, p. 326), is given by Luke alone (xxiv. 
 13-35), but briefly recorded by Mark (xvi. 12, 13), 
 whose remarkable expression, "m another form,^' 
 seems to imply that the means by which their eyes 
 were holden that they should not know Him, was not 
 simply an insensible Divine control over their percep- 
 tion, but also some change in our Saviour's personal 
 /^appearance. This may have been partly in His 
 / , apparel (a matter on which the silence of Scripture 
 \ rebukes vain curiosity) ; but to any one who considers 
 the marvellous change which a few hours of intense 
 experience of joy, peril, or pain can sometimes pro- 
 
 ^ "We infer this from Mark xv, 40, compared with Matt, 
 xxvii. ^6, and John xix. 25. See above, p. 120. 
 
THE MESUBRECTIOK 171 
 
 duce, it will seem probable that tbe agony of the 
 cross, with all the suffering that preceded it, the 
 mysterious experience of death and of the world of 
 spirits, and the infinite joy of the victorious accom- 
 pHshment of His great task, produced a transformation 
 in our Lord's countenance, voice, and bearing, which 
 rendered it difficult for even those who knew Him 
 best at once to recognize Him. Yet some miraculous 
 control over the senses of the disciples seems implied 
 in the fact that as the Saviour blessed and broke the 
 bread and gave it to them, " their eyes were opened, 
 and they knew Him/' His vanishing out of their 
 sight seems parallel with John viii. 59, and perhaps 
 Luke iv. 30. 
 
 (9) We have three accounts of the first appearance 
 of the Saviour to the assembled apostles: Mark 
 xvi. 14 ; Luke xxiv. 36-49 ; John xx. 19-23. In the 
 former two accounts they are spoken of as "the 
 eleven," although, as the last account informs us, 
 Thomas was absent ; just as St. Paul (1 Cor. xv. 5) 
 speaks of *' the twelve," though of course perfectly 
 aware that they had lost Judas from their number. 
 Mark tells us that they were sitting at table, probably 
 talking together after supper ; Jotm, that " the doors 
 were shut for fear of the Jews^ " Luke, that the two 
 from Emmaus had ^arrived, and that when Jesus 
 Himself appeared the disciples were terror-stricken, 
 thinking they saw a spirit. This is at first sight 
 inconsistent with what they had just before said — ■ 
 " The Lord hath risen indeedy and hath appeared to 
 Simon." But this is only an inconsistency such a-s 
 we constantly meet with in real life. It may have 
 chiefly arisen from the suddenness with which Jesus 
 appeared in their midst. Luke records fully what 
 John briefly alludes to, — the physical proof which the 
 Saviour gave them of the reality of His risen body, 
 by the sense of touch, by the scars in His hands, 
 feet, and side (comp. John xx. 25, 27), and by eating 
 
L 
 
 \Tl OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF UEHIST. 
 
 in their presence. He adds tlie instruction given by 
 our Lord concerning the fulfihuent of .prophecy, 
 similar to that given on the way to Emmaus, and 
 a brief statement of the apostolic commission, more 
 fully related by John. Mark xvi. 15-18 seems in- 
 tended as a summary of our Lord's words on this and 
 on subsequent occasions. The question of the nature 
 of our Lord's risen body will come before us in the 
 next section. 
 
 To sum up. We infer, not positively, but with 
 rational probability, the following order of events. 
 
 (a) Soon after daybreak an angel rolls away the 
 sealed stone ; the guards swoon in terror ; the Lord 
 rises, reverently ministered to by angels (comp. John 
 XX. 6, 7), but unseen by any human eye. 
 
 (b) The guards — recovering from their swoon — flee, 
 and make their report to the priests. 
 
 (c) Some of the women reach the tomb before sun- 
 rise ; others, including Mary Magdalene, shortly after. 
 
 {d) They find the tomb open and empty. Mary 
 Magdalene (whether alone or with a companion is not 
 clear) goes to tell Peter and John, who forthwith 
 hasten to the spot. 
 
 (e) Meanwhile, to the women remaining in grief 
 and perplexity by the sepulchre, or arriving later, an 
 angel and afterwards two angels become visible, 
 assuring them that the Lord is risen, and bidding 
 them carry the glad news to their fellow-disciples. 
 The nature of the case renders it probable, if not 
 absolutely certain, that successive parties of women 
 would arrive and depart at different times. The 
 variations in the accounts are thus naturally 
 explained. It was the object of each Evangelist to 
 describe the main facts, not to multiply details ; yet 
 if his account was based on the reports of eye- 
 witnesses he must describe what those wutnesses 
 actually saw and heard, though summarizing and 
 combining their testimony. 
 
"THE RESURRECTION. 173 
 
 (/) Peter aud John, on Mary Magdalene's report, 
 visit the tomb. The impression we gather from St. 
 John's narrative is that they find the sepulchre 
 deserted, and that on their departure Mary Magdalene, \ 
 who has followed them, is left alone in her grief. Y 
 
 (g) Mar}^, looking into the sepulchre, sees the two 
 angels, and immediately afterwards the risen Lord 
 stands by her and talks with her. She goes to tell 
 the AposUes and other disciples. (By this time it was 
 probably an hour past sunrise ; possibly a couple of 
 hours, if, as some conjecture, Mary's journeys were to 
 and from Bethany. It is likely enough that some of 
 the disciples were at Bethany; and there is no reason 
 to suppose that as yet the Apostles were assembled, as 
 we find them in the evening.) 
 
 (]i) Subsequently to the appearance to Mary Mag- 
 dalene the Lord manifests Himself to one or more of 
 her companions. (Matt, xxviii. 9, 10.) x 
 
 (/) Some time during the day the Lord appears to ^ 
 Peter, first of all the Apostles. We may suppose a 
 double reason for this : (1) to assure the penitent dis- 
 ciple of forgiveness ; (2) to indicate that he was not to 
 lose the leading position he had hitherto held am®ng 
 the Twelve, but to be the foremost preacher of the 
 glad tidings of which the resurrection of Christ 
 formed so vital a part. 
 
 {j) In the afternoon Jesus appears to two disciples 
 journeying to Eramaus. They had left Jerusalem 
 before any certain account had reached them that the 
 Lord had been seen; though perhaps their words, 
 "■ But Him they saiv not,'^ indirectly refer to a rumour 
 that some of the women had seem Him. Even if 
 Cleopas and his companion were aware of Mary 
 Magdalene's report, they may have supposed that she 
 had seen a vision. On their return to Jerusalem they 
 find the eleven assembled, rejoicing in the fact that 
 the Lord is risen, and has been seen by Simon. Yet 
 their terror immediately afterwards shows them by no 
 
174 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHBIST. 
 
 means yet convinced that Jesus has actually returnea 
 to bodily life. In such a case no appearance to a 
 single witness would produce full conviction in the 
 minds of others. 
 
 (k) The apostles being gathered at their evening 
 meal, with closed doors (but Thomas absent), Jesus 
 appears to them soon after the return of the two from 
 Emmaus, and convinces them by touch and by eating 
 with them that He is not a bodiless apparition but is 
 verily risen in His crucified body from the grave. He 
 unfolds to them the Old Testament witness to Him- 
 self, opening their understanding to receive, breathes 
 on them in token of the bestowment of the Holy 
 Spirit, and gives them an assurance of their apostolic 
 authority, resembling, yet distinct from, that recorded 
 in Matt. xvi. 19 ; xviii. 18.^ 
 
 So closed that Day of Wonders, which had changed 
 the relations of the seen and unseen world, lifted the 
 Church from the starless gloom of despair into the 
 morning sunshine of hope and joy ; shifted the ques- 
 tion of the life beyond the grave from the airy region 
 of opinion, nay, even from that of mere faith, to the 
 solid ground of experience and practical demonstra- 
 tion ; " abolished death, .... brought life and im- 
 mortality to light," and enriched us with " a living 
 hope by the eesurrection of Jesus Christ from 
 THE DEAD." (2 Tim. i. 10 ; 1 Pet. i. 3.) 
 
 A very learned and exhaustive discussion of the " parti- 
 cular alleged discrepancies" in the accounts of the resur- 
 , rection Avill be found in McClellan's Four Gospels, pp. 508- 
 636. Its real value may not improbably be concealed from 
 Bome readers by the positive, not to say arrogant, tone 
 with which the writer lays down his conclusions, and the 
 contemptuous manner in which he rejects the views he 
 
 1 It may be noted that the phrase (John xx. 23) ^^ whose 
 soever,^' which an English reader might suppose to be in the 
 singular, is in the Greek in the plural. 
 
THE BESUBRECTION. 175 
 
 disapproves, as well as by the excessive stress laid on minor 
 and disputable points. But he writes as one who has 
 honestly looked every difficulty in the face, and has not 
 spared labour in getting at the truth. One point on which 
 Mr. McClellan (following Chrysostom) strongly insists is 
 that Matt, xxviii. 1 records a visit to the tomb on Friday 
 evening. But though it is true (as Lightfoot shows on 
 Luke xxiii. 54) that the phrase rendered "as it began to 
 daw7i" might be used of the evening twilight, which in 
 Jewish reckoning was the beginning of the day ; yet 
 Robinson (Lex., s. v. npoyi) has given proof that the pre- 
 ceding phrase, rendered "m the end of the Sabbath'' — lit,, 
 ^^ late of the Sabbath" — may correctly be translated "after 
 the Sabbath was past ; " thus corresponding with Mark 
 xvi. 1. So also De Wette. Mr. McClellan has fallen into 
 a curious oversight on p. 532, in taking the time of sunrise 
 on April 9th as 5.20 a.m., which is the time in England. 
 In Palestine the sun rises at 5 a.m. on the longest day, and 
 therefore must rise at 5.20 a.m about the 21st May. 
 
 In Andrews' Bible Student's Life of Our Lord will be 
 found a careful digest of the different views of Lightfoot, 
 Lardner, West, Townson, Newcome, Da Costa, Greswell, 
 Strauss, Langc, Robinson (pp. 506-509). The writer's own 
 view very nearly coincides with that which I have given. 
 But he takes Matt, xxviii. 9, 10, to refer to the appearance 
 of the Lord to Mary Magdalene. On this view see Wieseler, 
 pp. 390-393 (Eng. Tr.) ; also Conder's Lit. Hist, of New ^ 
 Testament, p. 130. The elaborate argument of Wieseler : 
 (based on the various reading " Joseph " in Mark xv. 47), to 
 prove that "the other Mary" was the wife of Joseph of 
 Arimathasa, will not be likely to convince many readers. 
 
 Regarding the site of the sepulchre (of the controversy 
 concerning which a clear summary is also given in Mr. 
 Andrews' book, but of course not including the evidence 
 furnished by more recent exploration), the considerations 
 advanced by Lieut. Conder in TentWork (vol. i. pp. 361-376) 
 appear to furnish decisive proof that the " second wall " in- 
 cluded the spot now occupied by the " Church of the Holy 
 Sepulchre," which therefore cannot be the genuine site ; and 
 further, to furnish strong evidence as to the true site of^ 
 Calvary. Mr. Fergusson's marvellous theory, that the true ' 
 site of the tomb is marked by the mosque known as the 
 " Dome of the Rock," of course requires no other disproof 
 than the establishment of the fact that this identical spot 
 T.'r.s occupied by the " Holy of Holies ; " on which point the 
 
 J 
 
J 76 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 evidence of the rock-levels, compared with the statements 
 of Josephus and the measurements in the Mishna, seems 
 absolutelv decisive. (See also Col. Warren's The Temple or 
 the Tomb.) 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 feom easter to pentecost. 
 
 Sunday, April 9th, to Saturday, May 27th 
 (a.d. 30). 
 
 THE Idngdom of God came not with observation. 
 The change in the Divine method towards 
 mankind, i^i the religions condition of the human race, 
 and in the relation ot the present life to the unseen 
 world, wrought by the life, death, resurrection, and 
 exaltation of Him who loved to call Himself the Son 
 of Man, but whom the voice from heaven declared to 
 be the Son of God, was the greatest revolution in 
 human history. Yet no strongly marked line separ- 
 ated the old world from the new. The passing away 
 of the one and the incoming of the other were like the 
 melting of winter into spring. The Birth, the 
 Ministry, the Death, the Eesurrection, the Ascension 
 of our Saviour, furnish each an epoch from which to 
 reckon the new era ; yet the significance of none of 
 them was perceived until they formed one complete 
 picture in the past, one undivided power in the 
 thoughts and hearts of men, interpreted and applied 
 by " the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven." 
 (1 Peter i. 12.) Although the birth of Christ (in- 
 accurately cakulated, as it happened) is the received 
 starting-point of the Christian Era, yet the Day of 
 Pentecost has been justly regarded — if any single date 
 is to be selected — as the true startiog-pointof the new 
 spiritual dispensation, the birthday of the Christian 
 
FPiOM EASTER TO PENTECOST. 177 
 
 Churcb. And as the whole sojourn of the Son of 
 God among men may be regarded as a border-land or 
 isthmus between that form of God's kingdom on earth 
 which He brought to its appointed close, and that 
 new and more perfect form which He instituted, so 
 the seven weeks from the Eesurrection to Pentecost 
 constitute a border-land between the work of which 
 the Saviour said, '' I have finished the work that 
 Thou gavest Me to do/' and that of which He said, 
 " It is expedient for you that I go away ; for if I go 
 not away, the Comforter will not come unto you ; 
 but if I depart, I will send Him unto you." " As ^My 
 Father hath sent Me, even so send I you." (John 
 xvii. 4 ; xvi. 7 ; xx. 21.) It remains briefly to survey 
 the' records of this peiiod. 
 
 The SECOND APPEARANCE of the risen Lord to His 
 assembled apostles is recorded in the fourth Gospel 
 only. It was on the evening of Sunday, April 16th. 
 Thomas, "the Twin," who had been absent from the 
 meeting that day week, was now present, and his 
 temporary unbelief was exchanged for faith, which 
 expressed itself in the most remarkable recorded utter- 
 ance addressed to Christ by any of the disciples — 
 " My Lord and my God ! " (John xx. 24-29.) The 
 two verses which follow (30, 31) have been regarded 
 as "the formal close of the Gospel," and chap. xxi. 
 " as evidently an appendix to the Gospel, which latter 
 was already concluded by a formal review of its con- 
 tents and object " (Dean Alford). But it is very ques- 
 tionable whether this be more than a fancy of com- 
 mentators. The connection of these two verses v^ath 
 our Lord's words to Thomas is so natural, and the 
 interpolation of such a summary so much in the 
 Evangelist's manner (comp. e.g. chap. ii. 23-25 ; xii. 
 37-41), that there is very slight ground for regarding 
 them as intended to form the conclusion of his Gospel. 
 
 St. Luke tells us that Jesus " showed Himself alive 
 after His passion " to His chosen apostles " by many 
 
178 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and 
 speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of 
 God" (Acts i. 3). This statement suggests repeated 
 and prolonged interviews. Three only are expressly 
 recorded in the Gospels in addition to those already 
 considered. An appearance to James is mentioned 
 by St. Paul only (1 Cor. xv. 7). It seems probable, 
 since no reason can be imagined for a distinct appear- 
 ance to any of the apostles (Peter's case standing 
 alone), that the James here named was neither the 
 son of Zebedee nor the son of Alphseus, but " James 
 the Lord's brother " (Gal. i. 19). Accepting the view 
 that he was one of the unbelieving brethren referred 
 to in John vii. 3-5, 10, that these were sons of Joseph 
 and Mary, and that this was the James afterwards 
 famous as " the Just," president of the mother Church 
 at Jerusalem, we may well imagine the importance of 
 this appearance of the risen Lord, and are naturally 
 led to connect it with the presence of " His brethren " 
 with the assembled believers at Jerusalem. (Acts 
 i. 14.) 
 
 The THREE REMAINING APPEARANCES recorded in 
 the Gospels are (A), one to seven of the apostles by 
 the Lake of Galilee (John xxi. 1-22) ; (B), to an 
 assembly of disciples, solemnly appointed, in a moun- 
 tain in Galilee (Matt, xxviii. 16-20) ; and (C), the 
 final meeting with the disciples at Jerusalem and 
 Bethany (Luke xxiv. 49-51; Acts i. 4-12). The 
 appearance to James was between the second and 
 third of these (1 Cor. xv. 6, 7) — probably in Galilee. 
 
 (A) The return of the disciples from Jerusalem to 
 Galilee was not simply a return to their homes after 
 the Passover, but an act of obedience to the express 
 command of Christ. (See Matt. xxvi. 32 ; xxviii. 7, 
 16.) Since the intercourse of the disciples ^vith their 
 risen Lord was not continuous and familiar as of old, 
 but occasional, there was nothing blameworthy, but 
 the reverse, in the proposal of the ever-active Simon 
 
FROM EASTER TO PENTECOST. 179 
 
 that in the interval of unemployed time they should 
 betake themselves to their old occupation on the Lake. 
 The five who are named as being present on this 
 occasion vrere apostles, and it seems a natural infer- 
 ence that the two unnamed were apostles likewise. 
 All night tliey toiled, and as once before, three years 
 ago, they took nothing. The unlooked-for visit of the 
 Lord Jesns, as the morning twilight brightened into 
 day, taught, not for them only, but for us, the blessed 
 lesson that His presence may be looked for in the 
 midst of common scenes and honest toil no less than 
 in Church gatherings or solitary prayer. The miracu- 
 lous draught, the unbroken net, and the meal pro\-ided 
 on the shore, were sjTiibols full of cheer, of the success 
 of their ministry, and of their Lord's power to provide 
 for their need. The lessons of this closing scene of 
 St. John's Gospel are treated ■uith great beauty as 
 well as learning — perhaps ^^dth exuberance of mystical 
 fancy — by Archbishop Trench (On Miracles, pp. 462- A 
 485). He seems to go beyond the record, and even A 
 to contradict our Saviour's words, " Bring of the fish 
 which ye have now caught,'''' when he says, "The 
 character of the meal was sacramental, and it had 
 nothing to do with the stilling of their present hunger." 
 
 If the thrice-repeated question to Peter, with evi- 
 dent allusion to his thrice-repeated denial, humbled 
 him before the eyes of his brethren, the thrice-repeated 
 charge to act as under-shepherd of Christ's flock 
 honoured him as being fully restored to his office and 
 work. (Comp. 1 Peter v. 1-4.) The statement in 
 John xxi. 23 is deeply interesting, as showing the pos- 
 sibility of the early currency of a false tradition even 
 among the apostles ; and thus strongly illustrating the 
 indispensable necessity of the promised guidance of 
 " the Spirit of truth " (chap. x^^. 13). 
 
 This seems the fitting place to refer to an opinion to 
 which great importance has been attached, and which 
 is thus stated by Archbishop Trench, who quotes 
 
180 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 Ambrose and Chrysostom to the same eflect : " Doubt- 
 ^ less there is a significance in the words ' showed Eim- 
 f self* or ' manifested Himself ^^ wliich many long ago 
 I obsei'ved, — no other than this — that His body after 
 y the resurrection was only visible by a distinct act of 
 " His will. From that time the disciples did not as 
 before see Jesus, but Jesus appeared unto them, or 
 luas seen hy then " (page 463). Dean Alford and Dr. 
 Westcott may be cited as entertaining similar views. 
 The latter speaks of our Lord's risen body as " glori- 
 fied." *' The body which was recognized as essentially 
 the same body had yet undergone some marvellous 
 change, of which we gain a faint idea by what is 
 directly recorded of its manifestations. Under a 
 physical image, that change is presented to us by our 
 Lord Himself in the absence of blood, the symbol and 
 seat of corruptible life. Luke xxiv. 39 ; Eph. v. 30 " 
 
 r{The Oospel of the Besurrection, p. 139). In these 
 two passages, our Saviour's body is spoken of as 
 liaving " flesh and bones," not flesh and blood. Hence 
 Dr. Westcott infers that it was bloodless, the whole of 
 the blood having been shed on the cross. But a body 
 of bloodless flesh and bone would no more be a 
 ''glorified body" than a body of flesh and blood; it 
 would be a corpse, with no heart beating in its bosom, 
 breathing no breath of life ; a ghastly apparition, which 
 might well have filled the Apostles with more terror 
 than if they had " seen a spirit." When the Lord 
 bade them " handle " Him, to see that it was His veiy 
 self, and showed the scars in His hands and feet and 
 side, did the eager touch (to which St. John alludes in 
 his First Epistle, i. 1) rest on the marble rigidity of a 
 ^/" bloodless corpse, or on warm livmg flesh? Did our 
 Saviour when He ate and drank in their presence mean 
 to cheat them into a false belief, or was not their belief 
 as true as it was natural, that His risen body was the 
 same, and of the same nature, as the body which 
 suffered on the cross ? 
 
FROM 'EASTER TO PENTECOST. 181 
 
 It is urged tliat our Saviour's body, after His resur- 
 rection, could not have been subject to ordinary laws, 
 since He vanished at will and entered a room with 
 closed doors. This argument proves too much, since 
 a real body of flesh and hone could no more vanish, or 
 jmss through a door, without a miracle, than a body 
 of flesh and hlood. As to the first, the parallel in- 
 stances in John viii. 69 ; x. 39 ; Luke iv. 30, have 
 already been referred to. As to the second, it ma}^ be 
 that the door opened of "its own accord," like that of 
 Peter's prison (Acts xii. 10) ; but if not, the miracle is 
 not a greater reversal of ordinary phenomena than 
 that of walking on the water. It seems to furnish a 
 special stumbling-block to minds which mistake our 
 total ignorance of the inmost constitution of matter 
 for knowledge. But if there be anything more than 
 an antiquated assumption in "the impenetrability of •' 
 matter," about which so much has been said, it per- 
 tains only to the invisible atoms ; and to One possess- 
 ing perfect knowledge and unbounded control of all 
 material objects, it would be probably as easy to pass 
 bodily through an oaken plank or a sheet of metal as 
 for us it would be easy to pass a hot knife through / 
 a bar of wax. If we believe in the reality of the 
 Gospel miracles, it is inconsistent and fanciful to 
 find a difficulty in one physical mhacle more than 
 another. 
 
 We conclude, therefore, that during the six weeks 
 from His Resurrection to His Ascension, although for 
 wise but unknown reasons the Scripture is silent re- 
 garding the greater part of that interval, the Lord 
 Jesus breathed and moved as a living man among men ; 
 and that not until He quitted this earth did His body 
 undergo that glorious change of which the Transfigu- 
 ration was a silent prophecy, and which shall pass on 
 the bodies of all His saints, when He " shall transform 
 our body of humiliation into the likeness of His body 
 of glory, according to the energy of His power, even 
 
182 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHBIST. 
 
 to subdue all things unto Himself." (Phil. iii. 21 ; comp. 
 1 Cor. XV. 35-38, 44, 49-53.) 
 
 (B) The appearance to the assembled disciples in a 
 MOUNTAIN IN Galilee, recorded by St. Matthew, is 
 commonly supposed to be the same with the appear- 
 ance to " more than five hundred brethren at once," 
 referred to by St. Paul. This identification has been 
 called in question, but no reason has been shown for 
 
 X doubtmg it. It is incredible that our Lord would have 
 / convened a meeting of five hundred disciples in Jeru- 
 I salem ; and if in Galilee it could hardly be other than 
 V that recorded by St. Matthew. The repeated references 
 to the meeting beforehand, and the stress laid on its 
 express appointment, show that it was an occasion of 
 great importance. The angel's words, " He goeth 
 before you into Galilee; there shall ye see Him," 
 imply that others as well as the Eleven were to be 
 present. Our Lord's most numerous and devoted 
 disciples were in Galilee ; and the benefit and even 
 necessity of holding at least one general gathering are 
 obvious, both for the furtherance of their faith and 
 joy, and for the confirmation of the apostolic witness. 
 St. Matthew's remark that "some doubted" seems 
 plainly to refer not to the Eleven, but to others assem- 
 bled with them ; and he leaves us to infer that these 
 doubts vanished when " Jesus came and spake unto 
 them." What is often spoken of as " The Apostolic- 
 Commission" was therefore delivered, not to the 
 Eleven alone, but to the whole Christian Church as 
 there represented. So we find it afterwards under- 
 stood and acted on, when, while the Apostles remained 
 in Jerusalem, "they that were scattered abroad went 
 everywhere preaching the word." Mark xvi. 15-18 
 may probably be regarded as a concise reference to 
 the same great occasion. 
 
 (C) It is a striking example of the marvellous'iy 
 condensed brevity of the Gospel narratives, to which 
 modern critics are fond of applying the term " frag- 
 
FBOM EASTER TO PENTECOST. 183 
 
 mentary," that while the Fourth Gospel confirms the 
 First as to the fact that the disciples returned to Galilee, 
 and that the Lord there manifested Himself to them, 
 the Second and Third Gospels give no hint of their v 
 quitting Jerusalem ; and but for the fuller account in 
 Acts we might understand St. Luke to narrate the 
 Ascension as having taken place on the evening of the 
 same day as the Resurrection. To suppose that this 
 and similar silent omissions, which everywhere charac- 
 terize the Gospel, indicate " imperfect information," or 
 are correctly characterized as "fragmentary," is, I 
 beUeve, to misconceive the character and purpose of 
 the Gospels. It is like charging the painter of a set ' 
 of historical pictures with ignorance of all the events 
 he has not painted, and censuring him for avoiding 
 cross-lights and overcrowding of his canvas. 
 
 The fact that Bethany is mentioned as the spot from 
 which our Lord ascended suggests the conjecture — it 
 can be nothing more — that others of the disciples be- 
 sides the Eleven witnessed that glorious farewell ; 
 Lazarus, perhaps, and his sisters, and possibly the 
 mother and brethren of Jesus. 
 
 There is no reason to suppose that "the cloud" 
 which " received Him out of their sight " was like the 
 " bright cloud " on the Mount of Transfiguration ; 
 rather, it was a majestic veil, screening this great 
 event from common eyes, and checking the too curious 
 gaze of the disciples themselves. As they vainly tried 
 to penetrate the veil, unable to believe the reahty of 
 what their eyes had witnessed, two angels from the 
 legions which (we cannot doubt) attended the Lord on 
 His homeward way, bade tliem connect in their faith 
 and hope this wondrous parting ^^^th the literal per- 
 sonal return in the appointed season of the glorified 
 Jesus. 
 
 " So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, He 
 
 WAS RECEIVED UP INTO HEAVEN, AND SAT ON THE 
 
 EIGHT HAND OF GoD." (Mark xvi. 19.) 
 
V 
 
 184 OUTLINES OF TEE LIFE OF CHRIST. 
 
 The " FORTY DAYS " mentioned by St. Luke, reck- 
 oned from Sunday, April 9th inclusively, give Thursday, 
 May 18th, as the day of the Ascension. Nine days — 
 or ten inclusive — remained to Pentecost. Pentecost 
 was the Greek name of the " Feast of Weeks," " Feast 
 of Harvest," or " Day of First-fruits." (Ex. xxxiv. 
 22; xxiii. 16; Num. xxviii. 26.) This was the sixth 
 of the month Sivan, seven full weeks, or fifty days 
 inclusive, from the day on which the sheaf was offered 
 in the Temple. It consequently always fell on the 
 same week-day with the second day of Passover 
 (Nisan 16). The hypothesis which places the Cru- 
 cifixion on the 14th Nisan therefore makes the Day of 
 Pentecost fall on a Sunday; but since, as we have 
 seen, the day of the Crucifixion was in. reality Friday, 
 Nisan 15, Nisan 16 was Sabbath, and Pentecost con- 
 sequently fell on a Sabbath, viz. Saturday, May 27th. 
 Since this Feast was the anniversary of the giving of 
 the law on Mount Sinai, there was a special and 
 solemn appropriateness in its being chosen as the 
 public starting-point of the new dispensation ; the first 
 proclamation to Israel and to the world of that Gospel 
 which bids us come not "to the mount that could be 
 touched and that burned with fire," but "unto Mount, 
 Sion, and unto th'e city of the living God, the heavenly 
 Jerusalem, and to Jlisus, the Mediator of the New 
 Covenant." (Heb. xii. 18-24.) 
 
 The rapture of Elijah to heaven has been compared 
 to the soaring of a bird which none can follow ; the 
 ascension of Jesus, to the building of a bridge between 
 earth and heaven. As the Death of Christ, revealing 
 God's love in His justice, and God's justice in His 
 love, changed the moral relation of mankind to the law 
 of God (Rom. iii. 25, 26 ; v. 8 ; 2 Cor. v. 19-21 ; 1 John 
 i. 9), and the Resurrection of Christ, bringing the 
 life beyond death within the circle of facts proved by 
 experience, changed the intellectual relation of the life 
 here to the Hfe hereafter (1 Cor. xv. 20; 2 Tim. i. 10; 
 
Prom faster to pentecost. iss 
 
 1 Peter i. 3), so the Ascension of Christ has changed 
 the relation of the seen to the unseen world in regard 
 to emotion and affection, hope and love ; rendering it 
 for the first time possible to fix the supreme warmth 
 and purest passion of human affection and to con- 
 centrate the st^eady purpose of daily life upon the 
 unseen Saviour and the home above. (John xiv. 1-4 ; 
 Xvii. 24 ; Col. iii. 1-4 ; 1 Peter, i. 7, 8 ; 1 John iii. 3.) 
 The Day of Pentecost in like manner revolutionized 
 the relation of the Church to the World, i It sub- 
 stituted as the ground of religious fellowship in place 
 of the outward unity of national descent, rites, and 
 laws, the spiritual unity of personal faith in Christ, 
 knowledge of His truth, obedience to His commands, 
 love to His disciples, and the posjession of His Spirit. 
 (John XV. 9, 10, 12 ; xvii. 20-23 ; Acts ii. 41-47 ; Eph. 
 iv. 4-13 ; Heb. viii. 6, 10-13; xii. 18-24.) 
 
 The ten days which intervened between the parting 
 on Mount Olivet and the outpouring of the Holy 
 Spirit were spent by the assembled disoiples in earnest 
 united prayer. (Acts i. 13, 14.) We may perhaps be 
 permitted to conjecture that this interval was occupied 
 in the triumphal progress of the glorified Piedeemer to 
 that central scene of His sovereignty, figuratively 
 spoken of as " the right hand of God." On that day 
 He began to fulfil His promise, " If I depart I will 
 send Him unto you ; " and in so doing. His earlier 
 promise, " On this rock I will build My Church." 
 
 The Gospel History, therefore, is not to be re- 
 garded as closing even the Day of Pentecost. The 
 book which Church tradition has not very accurately 
 named " The Acts of the Apostles," is in very deed 
 the second book of Luke's Gbspel. As the first treats 
 in brief outline of " all things that Jesus began both to 
 do and to teach until the day in which He was taken 
 up," so this contains the story of all that He pro- 
 ceeded " to do and to teach," through the ministry 
 of His servants, "being by the right Land of God 
 
186 OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHBI8T. 
 
 exalted, and having received of the Father the promise 
 of the Holy Ghost," As a rule (with exceptions, as 
 chap. iv. 24, 26, 29), when " the Lord " is spoken of 
 in this book, the Lord Jesus personally is intended. 
 In the first twelve chapters, viii. 1-13, 26-40; ix. 
 1-30 excepted. He is seen carrying on the work of 
 building His Church by the ministry of that Apostle 
 to whom He had promised the keys ; whose it was to 
 open the Kingdom first (chap, ii.) to Israel, and then 
 (chap. X.) to the Gentiles. In chap. ix. the Lord is 
 seen personally calling the future Apostle of the 
 Gentiles ; and from chap. xiii. onwards the extension 
 of the Kingdom by the multiplication of Christian 
 Churches, during more than thirty years from the 
 Ascension, is exhibited as wrought principally, though 
 by no means exclusively, by that greatest of Christian 
 teachers ; until in the Metropolis of the world we see 
 " Paul the prisoner of Christ " in chains, yet " preach- 
 ing the Kingdom of God, and teaching those things 
 which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all con- 
 fidence, UNIII^^DEIiED." 
 
INDEX OF TEXTS. 
 
 MATTHEW. 
 
 CH. AND VER. PAGE 
 i 30,31 
 
 ii 34,35 
 
 „ 23 37 
 
 iii. l-lii 5-49 
 
 „ 13-17 49, 50 
 
 iv. 1-11 ib. 
 
 „ 12-17 67 
 
 „ 12 61, 64 
 
 „13 69 
 
 „17 60,66 
 
 ,,18-22 68 
 
 „ 23-25 60 
 
 v.-vii.. 72 
 
 vii. 28 71 
 
 viii. 2 56 
 
 „2-4 72 
 
 „ 5 69 
 
 „ 5-13 84 
 
 „ 14-17 69 
 
 „ 18-27 91 
 
 „ 28-34 92 
 
 IX. 1-28 ib. 
 
 „2-9 73 
 
 „ 10-17 .... 74, 93 
 
 „18 56 
 
 ,,18-26 93 
 
 „ 27-34 94 
 
 „35 70 
 
 „ 35-38 95, 96 
 
 CH. AXD VER. PAGE 
 
 X. 2-4 82 
 
 „ 1-42 96, 97 
 
 xi. 1 ib. 
 
 „ 2-19 86 
 
 ,,12-14 67 
 
 „ 20-30 87 
 
 ,,28-30 56 
 
 xii. 1-8 81 
 
 ,, 9-14 ib. 
 
 ,,15-21 82 
 
 ,,22-50 88 
 
 xiii. 1 84 
 
 „ 1-52 90 
 
 ,, 53-5S 65, 95 
 
 xiv. 1-13 98 
 
 „ 14-34 99 
 
 „ 33 56 
 
 „ 34-36 100 
 
 „ 35 101 
 
 XV. 1-28 104 
 
 „24 57 
 
 „ 25 56 
 
 „ 29-39 .... 105, 106 
 
 xvi. 5-12 106 
 
 „ 21-28 107 
 
 „ 22 103 
 
 xvii. 1-21 106 
 
 ,, 22-27 109 
 
 „ 24 70 
 
 CH. AND VER. PAGE 
 
 xvili 109 
 
 xix. 1-12.... Ill, 112 
 „ 13-30 116 
 
 XX. 1-16 ib. 
 
 „ 17-28 119, 120 
 
 ,,29-34 ....120,121 
 
 xxi. 1-17 . . 121, 122 
 
 „ 12 124 
 
 „ 18-46 .... 124, 125 
 
 xxii. 1-14 125 
 
 „ 15-46 126 
 
 xxiii. 1 57 
 
 ,,1-39 126 
 
 xxiv. 1-51 127 
 
 XXV. 1-46 ib. 
 
 xxvi. 1-5 . . 128, 130 
 
 ,,6-16 123 
 
 „ 17-35 130,140 
 
 ,, 36-46 141 
 
 ,, 47-56 ib. 
 
 „ 57-75 ....141,146 
 
 xxvii. 1-10 146, 147 
 „ 11-25.... 149-152 
 
 „ 26 151 
 
 „ 27-56 153-159 
 
 „ 57-66 161, 162 
 
 xxviii. 1-15 163-174 
 ,,16-20.... 178,182 
 
188 
 
 INDEX OF TEXTS. 
 
 MAEK. 
 
 CH. AND VEIt. PAGE 
 
 i. 1-4 45 
 
 „ 5-8 47, 48 
 
 ,,9-11 48 
 
 ,,12,13 48,49 
 
 „ 14 .... 60, 61, 67 
 
 ,.15 67 
 
 „ 16-20 68 
 
 „ 21-28 69, 70 
 
 „ 35-39 70 
 
 ,,40-45 72 
 
 ii .1-12 73 
 
 „ 6 74 
 
 „14 73 
 
 ,,15-32.... 74,93 
 ,,23-28 81 
 
 iii. 1-6 ib. 
 
 ,,7-19 82 
 
 „19 84 
 
 „21 83 
 
 „ 22-35 88 
 
 „31 42 
 
 iv. 1-35 90 
 
 „35. 84 
 
 „ 35-41 91 
 
 CH. AKD VER. PAGE 
 
 V. 1-21 92 
 
 „6 56 
 
 „21 74 
 
 „ 22-43 93 
 
 vi. 1 94 
 
 „ 16 65 
 
 „3 42 
 
 ,,7-13 96 
 
 ,,14-29 98 
 
 „ 20 56 
 
 „ 30-53 99 
 
 „ 39 98 
 
 ,, 54-56 100 
 
 „ 55 101 
 
 vii. 1-23 104 
 
 „14 57 
 
 ,,24-30 104 
 
 „ 31-37 105 
 
 viii. 1-10 106 
 
 „19 ib. 
 
 „ 22-30 .... 106, 107 
 „ 31-38 107 
 
 ix. 1 ib. 
 
 ,,2-29 108 
 
 CH. AKD VER. PAGE 
 
 ix. 30-50 109 
 
 X. 1-12 Ill 
 
 „ 13-31 116 
 
 „ 32-45.... 119,120 
 
 „ 46 120,121 
 
 xi. 1-11 .... 121, 122 
 
 ,,12-19 125 
 
 „ 20-26 ib. 
 
 „ 27-33 ib. 
 
 xii. 1-12 ib. 
 
 ,, 13-44 126 
 
 xiii. 1-37 127 
 
 xiv. 1-2 .... 128, 130 
 
 ,, 3-11 130 
 
 „ 12-31 .... 130-140 
 
 „ 32-42 141 
 
 „ 43-52 ib. 
 
 „ 53-72 .... 142-147 
 XV. 1-21 .... 147-154 
 
 „ 25 154-159 
 
 „ 22-41 .... 156-159 
 
 „ 42-47 161 
 
 xvi. 1-18.... 163-174 
 „ 19, 20 183 
 
 LUKE. 
 
 1., 11 30-33 
 
 ii. 1-3 18, 19 
 
 „ 4-20 11-21 
 
 „ 40 34 
 
 „ 41-52 39 
 
 iii. 1, 2 45 
 
 ,,3-18 47 
 
 „ 19, 20 61 
 
 „ 21-23 49 
 
 „ 23 45 
 
 Iv. 1-13 49, 50 
 
 „14 60,64 
 
 ,,14,15 67 
 
 ,,16-30 65 
 
 „ 30 55 
 
 „ 31 69 
 
 „ 31-37 70 
 
 „ 38-41 ib. 
 
 iv. 42-44 70, 71 
 
 V. 1-11 60, 71 
 
 „11 68 
 
 ,,12-26 72 
 
 „ 27-39 73,93 
 
 vi. 1 77 
 
 „l-5 81 
 
 „ 6-11 ib. 
 
 ,,12-19 82 
 
 „ 20-49 .... 72, 82 
 
 vii. 1-10 84 
 
 „ 11-17 85 
 
 „ 18-35 86 
 
 „ 36-50 87 
 
 „37 56 
 
 viii. 1-3 88 
 
 ,,4-18 90 
 
 „ 19-21 88 
 
 viii. 22-25 91 
 
 ,,26-39 92 
 
 „ 40 74 
 
 ,,41-56 93 
 
 ix. 1-6 96 
 
 „7 57 
 
 „10 98 
 
 ,,11-17 99 
 
 ,,18-27 107 
 
 ,,28-45 108 
 
 „ 46-50 109 
 
 „ 51-56 .... 111-115 
 ,, 57-62 115 
 
 X. 1-20 .... 112-115 
 
 ,,13-15 87 
 
 ,,21-24 ib. 
 
 „ 25-42 115 
 
 xi. 1-13 97 
 
INDEX OF TEXTS. 
 
 189 
 
 CH. AND VER. PAGE 
 
 xi. 14-26 88 
 
 „ 29-36 97 
 
 „ 37-54 ib. 
 
 xii. 1-59 ib. 
 
 xiii. 1-9, 31, 32 1U3, 
 104 
 
 ,,10-21 104 
 
 ,,22-35 115 
 
 xiv. 1-24 ib. 
 
 „ 25-35 ib. 
 
 XV ib. 
 
 xvi ib. 
 
 xvii ib. 
 
 CH. AND VER. PAGE 
 
 xviii. 1-30 115 
 
 ,, 31-34 119 
 
 ,,35-43 120, 121 
 
 xix. 1-28 121 
 
 ,, 29-44 121-123 
 
 „ 45, 46 124 
 
 „47, 48 125, 126 
 
 XX 126 
 
 xxi. 1-4 ib. 
 
 „ 5-36 127 
 
 ,,37,3^ ib. 
 
 xxii. 1-6 130 
 
 „ 7-16 130, 131 
 
 CH. AND VER. PAGE 
 
 xxii. 17-39 . . 130-140 
 
 ,, 40-46 141 
 
 „ 47-65 141-146 
 
 ,,66-71 147 
 
 xxiii ib. 
 
 „ 2-26 149-154 
 
 ,, 27-32 156 
 
 „ 33-49 157,158 
 
 „ 50-56 161 
 
 xxiv. 1-49 .. 164-174 
 
 ,, 36-43 180,181 
 
 ,, 50-53 183,184 
 
 JOHN. 
 
 i. 6-28 46-48 
 
 ,,29-51 48-51 
 
 „ 1-12 51, 52 
 
 „ 13-17 52, 53 
 
 ,,18-22 45 
 
 ,,23-25 58 
 
 ill 58-61 
 
 Iv. 1-3 59-63 
 
 „ 35 58 
 
 ,,4-54 65 
 
 v.l 77 
 
 ,,1-47 78-80 
 
 Vi. 1 81 
 
 ,,1-12 99 
 
 „ 4 77, 98 
 
 „ 22-71 100 
 
 Pii. 1 101 
 
 vii. 2-53 109, 110 
 
 „5 42 
 
 ,,40-46 71 
 
 viii. 1-11 110 
 
 „12 Ill 
 
 „ 12-59 117 
 
 ix., X 117 
 
 ix. 38 56 
 
 X. 22 110, 116 
 
 ,,40 Ill 
 
 xi. 1-54 118 
 
 „ 8 103 
 
 ,,47-50 57 
 
 „ 55 77 
 
 Xii. 1-11 123 
 
 ,,12-19 121 
 
 xii. 20-50 126 
 
 xiii.-xvii. . . 130-139 
 
 xviii. 1-12 140 
 
 „ 6 55 
 
 ,,13-27 .... 141-140 
 
 ,,28 147 
 
 „ 29-32 149 
 
 ,,33-40 .... 149-151 
 xix. 1-18 . . 151-l.j:5 
 
 „ 14 154,1.00 
 
 „ 19-37 .... 156-159 
 
 ,,38-42 lf;i 
 
 ,,31 162 
 
 XX. 1-23 163-174 
 
 ,,24-31 177 
 
 xxi 178-161 
 
PKINTED BY TVIIXIA:*! CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, 
 
 STAMFORD STKEET AND CHARING CB088. 
 
The R. T. S. Library— Illustrated. 
 
 Edited by RICHARD LOVETT, M.A., 
 
 Author of "Norwegian Pictures," etc. 
 
 /^NE great aim kept in view by the Keligious Tract 
 ^-^ Society, from its foundation, has been to provide 
 useful, entertaining and cheap literature for the people. 
 The success which has attended the Society's efforts in 
 this direction for the last eiglity-six years is well known. 
 
 Over thirty years ago a series of books called " The 
 Monthly Volume," was published, each consisting of 
 192 pages, imperial 32mo., in paper covers, sixpence 
 each; in cloth boards, tenpence. 
 
 During the last four years the Society has published, 
 under the name of " Cheap Keprints," well-known tales, 
 like " Jessica's First Prayer," "APeep Behind the Scenes," 
 etc., at prices ranging from a penny to threepence. 
 
 The Committee have recently been considering how 
 to meet the increasing demands of these days for cheap 
 books, and have come to the conclusion that it can be 
 done by issuing a series of Volumes, very nearly uniform 
 in size and shape with the old "Monthly Volume." 
 Each book will contain 192 pages; the size of the page 
 will be slightly increased, and most of the volumes will 
 be illustrated. In paper covers the price will be Three- 
 pence ; in cloth, Sixpence. 
 
 The scope of the series will be made as wide as 
 possible. It will contain popular stories, biogi*aphies, 
 narratives of adventure in the mission field, papers on 
 natural and social science, reprints of some of the great 
 Christian classics, collections of fables and anecdotes, 
 popular treatises on recent discoveries that throw light 
 on the Bible, together with books specially suitable for 
 Sunday and |devotional reading. 
 
 Tlie following works are now ready: — 
 
 1. Canada. With Hints to intending Emigrants 
 and' Settlers. By the Marquis of Lome, K.T. 
 With six Illustrations. 
 
2. Pilgrim Street. By Hesba Stretton, author of 
 
 "Jessica's Fii-st Prayer," etc. "VVith three 
 Illustrations. 
 
 3. The Life of Oberlin. By Mrs. Josephine Butler. 
 
 With a Portrait aud two Illustrations. 
 
 4. Adventures in New Guinea. By James Chal* 
 
 mers, of Port Moresby. With six Illustrations. 
 
 5. Olive's Story. TjJ Mrs. Walton, author of 
 
 " Christie's Old Organ," *' Shadows," etc. 
 With five Illustrations. 
 G. Adventures in Mongolia. By James Gilmour, 
 M.A., of Peking. With five Illustrations. 
 
 7. The Wit and Wisdom of Thomas Fuller. With 
 
 Portrait. 
 
 8. The Life of Latimer. By K. Demaus, author of 
 
 "Willifim Tyndale: a Biography," etc. With 
 Portrait. 
 
 9. Outlines of the Life of Christ. A Guide to the 
 
 Study of the Chronology, Harmony, and 
 Purpose of the Gospels. By Eustace P. Conder, 
 M.A., D.D. Map. 
 
 10. The Crooked Sixpence. By George E. Sargent, 
 
 author of "The Story of a Pocket Bible," etc. 
 With four Illustrations. 
 
 1 1 . Madagascar of To-day. An Account of the 
 
 Island, its People, Kesources and Development. 
 
 By George A. Shaw, F.Z.S., London Mission, 
 
 Tamatave. With five Illustrations. 
 11. The Jerusalem Sinner Saved, and the Heavenly 
 
 Footman. By John Bunyan. 
 I'J. Paradise Kegained ; Samson Agonistes ; and the 
 
 Minor English Poems. By John Milton. With 
 
 two Illustrations. 
 1 i. Practical Social Science. By Harry Jones, M.A., 
 
 author of "Past aud Present in the East," etc. 
 
 With two Illustrations. 
 15. Natural History Notes and Anecdotes. First 
 
 Series. With six Illustrations. 
 
 Other volumes are in preparation. 
 TuE RtLiGiotJS Tkact SociEir, 56, Paternostek Ro'W, Loxdok. 
 
 b 
 
BS2420 .C745 
 
 Outlines of the life of Christ : a guide 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library 
 
 III 
 1 1012 00073 7660