* JUL 17 1922 * 
 
 GOSPEL HISTO 
 
 A SYLLABUS 
 
 . / 
 Professor C. W. Hodge's Gospel History, 
 
 PRINTED— NOT PUBLISHED — EXCLUSIVELY 
 KOR rHE USE OF STUDENTS OF THE 
 
 MIDDLE CLA.^y IN PiilNCETON SPLMINARY 
 
 [Prepared by the Class of '77. 
 
 PRINCETON: 
 
 CHARLES S. ROmXSON, PRINTER. 
 1876. 
 
Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1876, by 
 C. W. HODGE, 
 In the office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. 
 
 /i 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 riiis volume originated in tiie desire to liave in more permanent and 
 satisfactory form, than the meager pencil-scratches of any ordinary set ol 
 notes, the substance of a highly- valued course of lectures. And it is but 
 just to say that Professor Hodge is responsible for nothing here printed, 
 since his manuscript was not consulted, and no part of the work was 
 supervised by him. It may also be added that this Syllabus is not 
 intended to be well under.stood except in connection with the full Lectures 
 in the class-room, and also in connection with Robinson's Harmony and 
 the small syllabus. 
 
 The preparation of these notes has been a very laborious task, so much 
 so that the editors have no expectation that their labor and pains will be 
 adequately appreciated. But before any one indulges in wholesale criti- 
 cism, let him Jirst sit do-wn and prepare, from the various sources, the 
 nninuscript for only five of these printed pages, taking special pains to 
 look up the different authorities and hunt down the various references. 
 1 hen let him remember that all this work had to be done in addition to 
 the regular, and in some cases the extra, duties of the Seminary course. 
 'I'o any student who will comply with these two conditions, the editors 
 herewith give full permiision to cut and slash to his heart's content. 
 
 ABBREVIATION.S. 
 
 Alf 
 
 for 
 
 Alford. 
 
 Rob. 
 
 for 
 
 Robinson. 
 
 Ell. 
 
 
 Ellicotl. 
 
 San. 
 
 
 Sanhedrim. 
 
 Gal. 
 
 
 Galilee. 
 
 Syn., Syi 
 
 IS. '■ 
 
 Synoptists. 
 
 .ierus. 
 
 
 .lerusalem. 
 
 Tisch. ' 
 
 
 Tischendorf 
 
 Lich. 
 
 
 Lichtenstein. 
 
 Wies. 
 
 
 Wieseler. 
 
 The other abbreviations will be readily understood by the reader 
 Phinceton Seminauy, FfB. '25th. 187tj. 
 
SYLLABUS OF GOSPEL HISTORY. 
 
 CHROXOLOGY. 
 
 1. Rationalists attempt to overthrow date of the Gos- 
 pels, on external grounds ; they give a later date. 
 
 2. Alleged discrepancies of the gospels are exagger- 
 ated. Two kinds : general, in which a difterent character of 
 Christ is presented; special, one gospel heing supposed to 
 contradict another. If we can trace a gradual historical 
 growth from beginning to end, v/e have in this unity of 
 the gospels, most effective answer to opponents. Birth- 
 place of Christ is beyond question, but the date of birth 
 is unknown. It is assigned to 753, 751, 750 (C. W. H.) 
 749 (Rob.) 748 (Kepler) 747 (Ideler). No one is at liberty to 
 dogmatize where there is so much diversity of opinion. 
 Give gospels benefit of their own reticence. It does not 
 vitiate their historical value. The Passion is variously as- 
 signed between 781 — 790. Positive chronology is the 
 particular date. Relative chronolog}' is tiie relation of 
 events to one another, their succession. Absence of 
 chronological precision shows it was not essential to the 
 plan of "the writer. It seldom disturbs the order; 
 Matt, and Mark are less regular than Lk. and Jno. The 
 vear and the day of the nativity are to be determined. 
 'Present era was fixed in the 6th century by Dionysius, a 
 Scythian monk who flourished in Rome 553 — 556 A. D. 
 He assumed that year of Christ's birth was coincident 
 with 754. If 750 "be the correct date, our era begins 4 
 years too late. This era was 1st used in historical works 
 by Venerable Bede,' early in the 8th century, afterward 
 was introduced in public tiansactions by Frank kings, 
 Pepin and Charlemaiine. Gospels give 4 data : 
 
 (1.) Time of Herod the Great, Matt, 2: 1, Lk 1 : 5. 
 (2.) Census in Judea under Augustus, Lk 2 : 1. 
 (3.) Star of the Magi, Matt. 2. 
 
 (4.) Age of Christ when beginning public ministry, 
 Lk 3 : 23^ 
 
Josephus(Ant. 17 : 8 : 1): "Horod died, the 5th day after 
 he had caused Antipater to be slain, having reigned, since 
 he had caused Antigonus to be shiin, 34 years ; but since 
 he had been decUired king by the Romans, 87." (Ant, 
 17 : 6 : 4) : " Herod deprived Matthias of the higli-priest- 
 hood, and burnt the other Matthias, who had raised the 
 sedition, with his companions, alive. And that very 
 night there was an eclipse of the moon." Now Herod 
 was declared king in 714; therefore his death would be 
 from 1st Nisan 750 to 1st ISTisan 751, ace. to Jewisli com- 
 putation, at age of 70. Astronomical investigation places 
 this eclipse on the night of 12th and 13th of March 750. 
 He was dead before the 5th of April, because the Pass- 
 over of that year fell on 12th of April, and Josephus 
 (Ant. 17: 8: 4) states that before this feast, his son and 
 successor Archelaus, observed the usual 7 days' mourn- 
 ing for the dead. His death, therefore, must be placed 
 between 13th March and April 4th, 750, (Andrews). 
 How long before Herod's death was the Lord born ? 
 M,att. and Lk. relate events that occurred between his 
 birth and Herod's death ; circumcision, presentation in 
 temple, visit of Mfigi, flight into Egypt, murder of Inno- 
 cents. Whatever view may be taken as to order of these 
 events, they can scarcely have occupied less than two 
 months. This would bring his birth into Jan. or Feb. at 
 latest, 750. 
 
 Luke 2: 1-2; a all the world should be taxed. 
 
 h the taxing was first made when Cyre- 
 nius was governor of Syria. 
 
 OBJECTIONS URGED. 
 
 I. No such universal taxing under Augustus on record; 
 the censuses of contemporary liistory are local ; a clear 
 case of inaccuracy, say the skeptics. Ay\s. : It is known 
 from Suetonius and Ancyrian monument, that Augustus 
 three times instituted a census, in 726, 746, and 767. 
 The second only needs to be considered. It appears to 
 have been a census cwium, confined to cives Romani, and 
 not to have extended to the provinces ; cannot, therefore, 
 have been the taxing of Lk. Some restrict otxau/isvY^ 
 to Palestine or Syria. It would be improbable and un- 
 
natural for Lnke to make this restriction. A better an- 
 swer is, that if Lk. mentions the census, that is enoiiah. 
 Other answers : 1. The omission of contemporaries has its 
 analog^-; an argument from silence is never conclusive. 
 Various laws were established, of which we are informed 
 b}^ no historians, but by monuments. In year of Coesar'a 
 death, there was a geographical survey of Rome, but his- 
 toriaiisdo not tell us of it. Ancient historians omit to 
 give a complete list of governors of the provinces. On 
 this period, Suetonius and Tacitus are very brief. This 
 argument from silence, if pushed, would compel us to 
 believe that no important event took place in the long 
 reign of Augustus, of which the few historians whose 
 works remain have not made specitic mention. 2. Prob- 
 ably the censuses referred to on tlie Ancyrian marbles 
 were confined to Italy, and did not extend to the Provin- 
 ces. But beyond question, the census did at times ex- 
 tend to particular provinces. 3. A considerable gap oc- 
 curs here in Dion Cassius (Roman historian); from 747 
 to 757, the very period in which Lk. says the taxing was 
 made. 4. In Joseph us the names of several who were 
 governors of Syria al)ont time of Lord's bii-th are men- 
 tioned, but only incidentally, nor is the list complete. 
 • Being a professed Roman flatterer, be leaves out all that 
 might excite the discontent of Jewish readers. He passes 
 over as lightly as possible whatever testifies to degrada- 
 tion of his people. 
 
 A positice argument is tJiis : In time of Augustus, there 
 was strong tendency to centralization, and establishment 
 of the military power. Tioerius read in Senate an auto- 
 graph MS. letter of Augustus's, which showed resources 
 of the empire, how many soldiers could be raised and 
 how much money they could give. How did he know, 
 unless he had tried it? The citizens of Ancyra had 
 marble copies made of bronze tablets in which he re- 
 corded the chief events of his life. In these he declares 
 he made a census of Roman citizens four times ; shows 
 that he was doing this kind of work and confirms Lk. in- 
 directly. Cassiodorus says that a careful survey was 
 made in all provinces where Roman sovereignty extended, 
 that there were enrolment lists. His authority of itself 
 
would linve no o'lv at weight; but he may have read 
 many works unknown to us, on this period. Momnisen 
 doubts his statement, but Zumpt aecei)t8 it. " Being a 
 Christian, he might have drawn his information from 
 Lk." (Lange). Suidas : "Augustus sent out twenty 
 men of great probity into all jiarts of the empire, by 
 whom In" made an assessment of persons and estates;" 
 has no intrinsic improbability, but is unsupported. Sui- 
 das, like Cassiod(U'us, was a Christian. 
 
 Indirect Proofs. — 1. Under the Republic, each prov- 
 ince retained its own mode of taking census, and under 
 the Antonines, there was a regular land tax. 
 
 2. Exemption from land tax in Italy (by jus Italicum) 
 began with Augustus. The exception proves rule. The 
 land and poll tax under Pompey must have been in full 
 force, which presupposes a census. Here again is a diffi- 
 culty. When was the census made? 
 
 li. Palestine was not yet a Roman province ; a Roman 
 census was ordered during reign of Herod Great. But 
 Herod was a rex sodas, \vho had to pay tribute to the 
 Romans ; and then, this census may have been for statis- 
 tical and military purposes, as in the decennial census of 
 U. S. Jews were first compelled to pay tribute to Rome 
 in time of Pompey. From time of Julius Ctesar, certain 
 tributes were levied in Judea for Rome. 
 
 III. Cyrenius was Governor of Syria for 10 years after 
 the nativity, and made a registration of inhabitants, Acts 
 5 : 37. The trouble is, to "find room for another census 
 in Palestine under same Cyrenius and at time of Christ's 
 birth. Tholuck: "This enrolment took place before 
 {7:f)iurfj) Cyrenius was gov. of Syria ; izinoTq in compara- 
 tive sense as John 1 : 15. This solution is not impossible 
 grammatically. The taxing in question was 1st, as dis- 
 tinguished from 2d, whicii took place during h s 2d 
 administration. Neander takes /^j-s/ioysyoi/Toc i" wide 
 sense of "leader ;" is confirmed by Tacitus who says this 
 man was thus employed. Ebrard : o-oytxurq means reg- 
 istration as well as taxation, anoyixn^ri has a double sense : 
 («) transcription, (6) enrolment. If passage be read, this 
 was 1st taxing, in distinction from 2d, and took place 
 under him as governor of Syria, but in fact he was not 
 
3'et an interregnum of several weeks of dry weather gen- 
 erally occurs between middle of Dec, and of Feii., some- 
 what distinguishing the former rains of tlie season from 
 the latter. Lightfoot : " The spring coming on, they 
 drove the beasts into wildernesses, or champaign grounds, 
 where they fed them the whole summer. The winter 
 coming on, they betook themselves home again with the 
 flocks and herds." The climate of Bethlehem is not un- 
 like that of Jeriis., though milder. Shephei-ds could 
 have been pasturing their flocks in Dec. Barclay : 
 "in tliis month the earth is fully clothed with ricli ver- 
 dure, and there is generally an interval of dry weather 
 between middle of Dec. and of Feb." (Andrews, 32-35). 
 Abia's course was 8th in tiie 24. At destimction of tern- 
 jde by Titus on Aug. 5, 823, the 1st class had just en- 
 tered on its course. Its period of service was from the 
 evening of the 4th of Aug., which was the Sabbalh, to 
 the evening of following Sabbath, Aug. 11th. We can 
 now easily compute backward and ascertain at what time 
 in any given year each class was officiating. 
 
 Date of the Crucifixion. — Lk. 23 : 54 ; Mk. 15 : 42 ; 
 Mtt. 27: 62. TianafTxsoYj was common designation of 6th 
 day of the week. The Sabbath occurring on 2d day of 
 the feast, the 1st feast day became the preparation, the 
 day before the Sabbath. 1. That nanaa/.vn^ might not l)e 
 apprehended as the weekly one, referable to the Sabbath, 
 but be regarded as connected with the feast day of tlie 
 Pass., Jno. expressly adds rob Tzdaya (19 : 14). 2. -anaa- 
 xeuTj — Friday in the passover season, or paschal week, as 
 a day of preparation for the Sabbath. The true refer- 
 ence is to the paschal feast, coming in on the evening of 
 the day, of which feast the first day fell, according to 
 John, upon the Sabbath. 
 
 Day of Month. — Crucifixion was 14th or 15th Nisan. 
 Was the last meal of Christ with his disciples, tlie regu- 
 lar Passover supper or did it anticipate it ? Ans. The 
 paschal lamb was usually killed 14tli Is^isan and eaten 
 same evening. The meal, therefore, was on preparatioii 
 day, Thursday, Nisan 14th, and the crucifixion on Fri- 
 dny, Nisan 15th. (Mk 14: 12; Lk 22: 7)). According 
 to Synopts., the supper was the regular Passover. But 
 
10 
 
 •John calls it the preparation of the Passover (19: 14); 
 speaks as ifthe paschal supper was legally upon the even- 
 ing of Friday, and consequently the Lord, who ate it 
 upon the evening of Thursday, ate it hefore the time. 
 4 apparently discrepant references : 1. John nowhere 
 calls it the Passover. " Out of 9 times in which 7ida-^a 
 is used hy John, in 6 it is applied to the feast generally, 
 and not to paschal supper onl}'. The meaning in the 
 other 3 is in dispute." (Andrews). 2. Jno. 13 : 1—" Be- 
 fore the feast ot the passover." Does this refer to the 
 supper of verse 2 ? Tiibingen critics say yes. Therefore 
 it must have been a supper of a private nature, and not 
 the Passover meal which it preceded; and according to 
 John, Jesus never ate the Passover, but only a private 
 meal beforehand. Being crucified next day, it must have 
 been on Thursday, thus directly' contradicting Synopts, 
 who make it fall on Friday. But the clause does not 
 refer to the supper of verse 2 ; it refers to what immedi- 
 ately follows, " that Jesus knew that his hour was come." 
 He knew it beforehand. 
 
 3. Jno. 18 : 28 — They themselves went not in, lest they 
 should be defiled ; that they miglit eat the passover. 
 Held : that on day of crucifixion, Passover was not yet 
 eaten. As it was not eaten before 6 o'clock, i. e. at be- 
 ginning of next day (the Jews' day commenced at even- 
 ing) the defilement incurred in the morning would have 
 ceased before the regular Passover. Probably " eat the 
 Passover " is used here in more general sense of keeping 
 the paschal feast, and is not confined to eating of the 
 lamb. Their scruple could have had reference only to 
 the paschal sacrifices ofiered during the same day before 
 evening. 
 
 4. Jno. (19: 14, 16) calls crucifixion day tlie prepara- 
 tion of the Passover. The point at issue decides the gen- 
 uineness of John's gospel. 
 
 4 methods of meeting the difliculty : 
 
 1. Some follow John, as most accurate, and allow that 
 the others made a mistake. Reasoning : Jno. was an 
 apostle, an eye-witness, and his gospel written last ; there- 
 fore he would cori'cct their mistakes. Bleek holds that 
 Christ anticipated regular time of Passover ; he trans- 
 lates Jno. 13: 1 — "Before tlie feast, when Jesus knew 
 
11 
 
 tliut his hour was come to depart out of this world unto 
 the Father, having loved His own who were in the world 
 (Ho did love thorn unto the end), when a repast was spread 
 (or during supper)," &c. The sentence thus formed is 
 intricate, unlike John's usual manner, and without ne- 
 cessity. 
 
 2. Some endeavor to reconcile Synopts. and John hy ex- 
 plaining away the Synoptical forms. JSTo success. The 
 Synoptics are explicit. 
 
 3. Kationalists.(Bretschneider, Baur, Davidson), uphold 
 the sj^noptical account vs. John, maintain the former is 
 true history and John not genuine, think John wrote with 
 dogmatic intent, not historicallj-, and that the error shows 
 lie could not have been an eye-witness as he claims. 
 
 4. Ilengst., Wiesel., Rob., (215-222) and a majority of 
 harmonists hold that synoptical accounts can be made to 
 harmonize with John. John nowhere calls the meal a 
 Passover, and this has negative weight. But omits Lord's 
 Supper, and that does not warrant the conclusion that no 
 such rite was instituted. He omits other things design- 
 edly-, because he possessed theSynoptists. The omission 
 is a tacit reference to what they had written, and what 
 needed no repetition. Tlius answer 1st objection. 
 
 The 2d, by making -[ib r-^c eoprr^^ qualify ecd(6^, or ec^ 
 zeAoz ijd-Tjatv. If £«o<:«;c, the sense is : "Jesus, knowing 
 before the festi\alof the Passover, that his hour was 
 come," &c. In this way the passage has no bearing upon 
 the present question. If e^V tsIoz iffajz-qazv^ it is equiva- 
 lent to festival-eve, and here marks the evening immedi- 
 ately before the kooz-q or festival proper, on which eve, 
 during supper, our Lord manifested his love to his dis- 
 ciples" by washing their feet. The 3d (18 : 28), by extend- 
 ing meaning ot TLaaya. to paschal festival, and remember- 
 ing that "eating the passover " meant not merely the 
 paschal lamb of the evening before, but sacrifices and 
 unleavened bread of the whole Passover week. The 4th 
 (19 : 14), by interpreting Traoo.axvjYj as referringto the Jew- 
 ish Sabbath, which actually occurred next day. It was 
 Friday in the passover season or paschal week. 
 
 Bleek's Argumbnt.— 1. According to John's account 
 (19 : 81) 15th Nisan, the great- day of the feast coincided 
 that year \\\t\i i\\Q weekly Sabbath, (our Saturday); and 
 
12 
 
 the day before (i. e. the Friday) wonhl he tlie preparation 
 day both for the weekly Sabbath and for tlie 2:reat feast 
 day. He argues (a) that the Sanhedrim would not have 
 sent an armed band vs. Jesus on the holy night after the 
 eating of the Passover, because it was expressly forbid- 
 den to carry arms on the Sabbath ; (6) that on such a night 
 the Sanhedrim would not have sat in council to judge- 
 Jesus, for to hold a court of judgment on the Sabbath 
 was expressly forbidden ; that crucitixion could not take 
 place Nisan 'l5th, for it must have been, a glaring viola- 
 tion of the Sabbatical rest of the day, according to Jew- 
 isl) notions still in vogue. Yet Bleek admits that crimi- 
 nals were often arrested on the Sabbath, and of course, if 
 necessary, by men bearing arms. In oi»position to Bleek: 
 tlie strict Sabbatical law was not applicable to the feast 
 Sabbath. Besides fanatics would have caused them to kill 
 Christ, whenever they had opportunity. (Lk. 23: 2, 18). 
 If the law did govern feast Sabbath, the hatred of tlie 
 Jews made them break the law. (Andrews, 457). 
 
 2. Luke 23 : 26, 27, we read tliat Galilean women, 
 when they returned from the sepulchre, prepared spices, 
 and rested the Sabbath day according to the command- 
 ment, and returned again to the sepulchre when Sabbath 
 was past. Now it would have been illegal for them to 
 have prepared the spices on the day preceding the 
 Sabbath, if that day was Nisan 15th. (Ex. 12: 16; 
 Lev. 28: 7). The same argument applies to the 
 burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea on the day of 
 crucitixion, and still more strongly to Lk. 23: 26; Mk. 
 15:21. Simon would not have been in the tields at 
 work, ITisan 15th. Opposed : Here all depends on the 
 strictness with which the Jews observed the feast Sab- 
 baths. Maimonides mentions bathing and anointing, as 
 things tliat might be done on the feast days; and of 
 course then everything necessary to prepare the dead for 
 burial would be permitted. Multiplication of instances 
 tnay show tliat the law does not apply. 
 
 3. The Synopts. had, as the basis of their narrative 
 an account which represented the 14th Nisan, and not the 
 15th, as the date of Christ's death. By a misunder- 
 standing, however, there came to be incorporated with 
 this the'notion that Jesus ate the last supper with his 
 
so gov. until 760, we must construe ■jysfxoveuovTo:: as appli- 
 cable to any one who rules. Thus Cyrenius may have 
 been a joint or assistant ruler, as Josephus speaks of 
 Saturninus and Volumnius as P.-esidents of Sj'ria ; or an 
 extraordinary commissioner sent from Rome especially 
 for this purpose. In all this, is nothing- improbable ; it 
 agrees with the fact that about that time he was in East 
 and engaged in political affairs. Wieseler : "this taxing 
 was before Cyrenius was gov. of S." Zumpt, in his list 
 of Syrian governors, B. C. 30 to A. D. 66, thus fills the 
 interval from 748 to 758 : 
 
 748—750 P. Q. Varus or 6—4 B. C. 
 
 750—753 Qnirimis or 4 — 1 B. C. 
 
 753—757 M. Lollius or 1 B. C. to 3 A. D. 
 
 757—758 C. M. Cousorinus or 3—4 A. D. 
 
 758 — 760 L. V. Saturninus or 4—6 A. D. 
 
 760 — 765 " '• is succeeded by Quirinus 
 
 (Cyrenius.) 
 
 If he be right, Quirinus was twice gov. of Syria. His 
 fact is that because Cilicia, when separated from Cyprus, 
 was united to Syria, Cyrenius or Quirinus, as gov. of the 
 first mentioned province, was also really gov. of the last 
 mentioned, whether in any kind of association with 
 Saturninus, or otherwise, can hardly be ascertained, and 
 that liis sulisequent more special connection with Syria 
 led his earlier, and apparently brief, connection to be thus 
 accurately noticed. Varus was in office at least till 
 the summer of 750. But that he did not continue as gov. 
 until 759 is probable from the fact that Augustus ruledl:hat 
 no one should govern a province more than five years. 
 A coin of Antioch proves that in 758 L. V. Saturninus 
 was gov. of Syria. Zumpt's list shows who filled this 
 office 750—758, Varus till B. C. 4 or 750. No names 
 are given till Quirinus A. D. 6, by Josephus. During 
 interval he was on military duty near Syria. The tri- 
 umphal insignia granted him prove him legate and in 
 Syria. This taxing began a little before he became 
 actual legate. As he had been proconsul in Africa, and 
 as it was a rule that the same person should not be ruler 
 over more than one of the consular or prtetorian prov- 
 inces under care of Senate, he could not have been gov. 
 
8 
 
 of any of the provinces adjacent, Asia, Pontus, Bitli^Miia, 
 Galatia ; be must then have been acting as gov. of Syria 
 and legate of emperor. If he succeeded Varus, be may 
 have completed taxing begun before, ace. to Lk. Ter- 
 tullian says the census at the birth of Christ was taken 
 by Lentius Saturninus. When then was he gov. of Syr- 
 ia ? Most say 746—748 ; consequently the birth must be 
 placed as early as 747. Mommsen adduces a marble 
 recording honors to man who had been twice legate in 
 Syria. Only two had been, L. Saterninus and Quirinus. 
 Concerning importance of this investigation, we are not 
 bound to establish any one of these views any more than 
 Luke. 
 
 Star of the Magi. — Kepler lias shown that in year 
 747 a three-fold conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in the 
 sign Pisces occurred, and that in spring of followingyear 
 pTanet Mars likewise appeared in this constellation. He 
 regarded it as probable that an extraordinary star was 
 (onjoined with these .three planets, as in 1603. He 
 thought this conjunction formed star of Magi. Ideler 
 rejects the new star of Kepler, and looking only to con- 
 junction, puts birth 747— tliinks Christ was two yrs. old 
 when the command of Herod was given. If this be true, 
 the year would be 748, and agree with Kepler's conjunc- 
 tion. Hence the star had been seen by Magi two years 
 before their arrival at Jerusalem. Wieseler argues cor- 
 rectly that we have no certain ground for believing that 
 star of Matt, was this conjunction of planets. He men- 
 tions that the Chinese astronomical tables record appear- 
 ance of a new star at a time which coincides with tlie 4th 
 year B. C. Precise conclusions are not to be drawn, but 
 confirmation of approximate date is secured. 
 
 Day of the Nativity. — Up to 4th century, 6th of Jan. 
 liad been observed as day of Lord's baptism, and had 
 been regarded as day of his birth, from Lk. 8 : 28, the 
 supposition being that he was just 30 wlien baptized. In 
 4th century, under influence of western church, this was 
 changed, and botli churches observed Dec. 25th. This 
 is good date, because it gives time enough for the records 
 in Matt, to transpire. During Dec, Jan., Feb. and Mar. 
 there is no entire cessation of rain for any long interval, 
 
u 
 
 disciples at the hour les^ally instituted for the Jewish 
 passover ; and as we have the Synopts., both representa- 
 tions, though non-coincident, yet, unconsciously to the 
 evangelists, ntnv lie side by side. 
 
 4, The feast (Easter, pasclial cont. of 2d cent.) about 
 which the dispute was, \yas held in Asia 14th Nisan, at 
 the hour in which the Jews celebrated their passover 
 (i. e., on the night wdiich, according to Jewish reckoning, 
 began Nisan 15th); and hence Christians of Asia Minor 
 who followed this practice were called Quarto-decimani. 
 They were chietly Jewish converts, and pleaded the 
 authority of John and Philip. The western church, 
 composed of Gentile converts, discarded the pass., and 
 celebrated annually the resurrection on a Sunday, and 
 observed the previous Friday as a day of penitence and 
 fasting; pleaded authority of Peter and Paul. The Tii- 
 hingen school (Hilgenfeld's Paschastreit, pp. 6-118) make 
 inference vs. Jolm and say that that Gospel was not 
 ascribed to him by the East, church. Neander (Hist. I., 
 513) thinks that Christians of Asia Minor celebrated 
 Nisan 14th as day of Christ's death, but he says that they 
 kept the Jewish passover and included in it the com- 
 memoration of Christ's death. Bleek : " John's know- 
 ledge that Jesus had eaten the last supper with his disci- 
 ples not on the day legally fixed, but a day earlier, could 
 not have obliged him to refuse to keep the yearly pass., 
 as he had been wont to do at Jerus'm, among Christians 
 at Ephesus, who also were wont to celebrate it, for Jesus 
 himself had kept the pass, in the earlier years of his 
 ministry. It is likely too that the Christians of Asia 
 Minor subsequently retained the custom simply because 
 it had become a custom, and because of the opposition 
 raised vs. it." Hengst., Thol. and Wieseler urge that, 
 according to John, Jesus celebrated last supper with 
 disciples, not on the day of the pass, (evening of Nisan 
 14th or beginning of Nisan 15th), but a day earlier, and 
 therefore that John's account does not differ from that of 
 Synopts. The harmonists find clear proof that eastern 
 and western churches had all four gospels, proving they 
 knew all the circumstances and saw no difficulty in the 
 statements. 
 
14 
 
 Wieseler : Nisan 15th fell on Friday, 788 or A. D. 30. 
 The darkness at crueitixion could not have been caused 
 by an eclipse, for it was then full moon, Phlegon, of 
 Tralles, tries to show that it was caused by an eclipse 
 which took place between July 785 and 786. But the 
 astronomer Wurm, that the eclipse referred to took 
 place 782. 
 
 Date of the Baptism.— Six data are given in Lk. 3 : 
 1-2: "Now in the 15th year (780) of re\i?n of Tiberius 
 Csesar, Pontius Pilate being Governor of Judea (779 — 
 789), and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee (750— 792) and 
 his brother Philip being of Iturea and of the region of 
 Trachonitis (750— 787)^ and Lysanias the tetrarch of 
 
 Abilene ( ), Annas (759--767) and Caiaphas (778— 
 
 789) being the liigh-priosts." Luke's least carelessness 
 or ignorance of the history would lead to a mistake. 
 Yet his credibility remains unimpeachable. An anach- 
 ronism is charged. Josephns mentions one Lysanias 
 killed sixty years before. Therefore, it is said, that Lk. 
 is sixty years too late. Lysanias was probably a fair.ily 
 name. We can see clearly why Luke, writing after Abi- 
 lene had been made a part of tlie Jewish kingdom, sliould 
 have mentioned the fact, having api)arently so little con- 
 nection with gospel history, that at the time when the 
 Baptist appeared, this tetrarchy was under the rule of 
 Lysanias. It was an allusion to a foriuer well-known 
 political division that had now cease-l to exist, and was 
 to his readers as distinct a mark of time as his mention 
 of the tetrarchy of Antipas, or Philip. This statement 
 respecting Lysanias shov>^s the accuracy of Luke's know- 
 ledge of the political history of his times, and should 
 teach us to rely upon it even when unconfirmed by con- 
 tempoi-aneous writers. Annas had been high-priest, yet 
 Cvaiaphas actually was such when the Baptist appeared. 
 The sovereign pontificate had fallen to a degraded con- 
 dition. The office had become subject to removal. Dis- 
 missal from it happened almost every year (Jos. Ant., 
 15 : 3 : 1 ; 18 : 2 : 2 ; 18 : 5 : 3 ; 20 : 9 : 1, 4). Caiaphas 
 maintained himself longer than tlie rest (25 — 36); his 
 three predecessors ordy about one year each. As a Sad- 
 ducee and a priest he was animated with double hatred 
 to the Saviour. (Andrews 131 — 138). Lightfoot sup- 
 
15 
 
 poses that Annas was the sagan, or vicarius of the high- 
 priest, the next in order to him, in his absence to oversee, 
 or in his presence to assist in tlie oversight of the affairs 
 of the temple, and the service of the priests (C. W. II.). 
 Wieseler: The common explanation, adopted by Farrar, 
 is that Annas was N^asi or President of the Sanhedrim. 
 
 Fifteenth Year of Titberius Cj5Sar. — Luke 3 : 1, 23- 
 Augustus died Aug. 767. The 15th year of Tiberius 
 began Aug. 781. Christ's 1st Passover then would be in 
 782. But^LukeS: 23, "he was about 30 years of age 
 when he began his ministry." Asali'eady seen, he could 
 not have been born later than 750. He must have begun 
 his ministry, tlierefore, 780, and been baptized in tliat 
 year. Terlullian, however, gives the 15th year of Tibe- 
 rius as the year of Christ's passion : " Christ suftered 
 under Tiberius Csesar, R. Geminus, and P. Geminus, be- 
 ing consuls, on the 8th day before the Calends of April," 
 (25th March). He was followed by Lactantius, Augus- 
 tine, and others, especially of the Latin Fathers. San 
 Clemente so explains Luke from chronological necessity. 
 He attempts to show that the loth year of Tiberius is 
 " not to be referred to the beginning of th€ ministry of 
 John, nor to the baptism suffered hy Christ in Jordan, 
 but to the time of his passion and crucifixion, the evan- 
 gelist himself being our leader and interpreter." This 
 makes the whole ministry last but few months; Christ 
 would be 32 years old at baptism, and John's account re- 
 quires him to begin his ministry 3 years before, and be- 
 fore Luke makes Baptist's ministry to begin. Browii 
 thinks that the heading of St. Luke's 3d chapter contains 
 the date, not of the mission of John the Baptist, but 
 of the year of our Lord's ministry, especially in reference 
 to the great events with which it closed. Wieseler refers 
 Luke's words to the imprisonment of John, not to the 
 baptism of Christ; holds that Christ was baptized 780, 
 John was imprisoned 782, and Luke 3: 1 is anticipatory, 
 and chapter following goes back to period prior to John's 
 imprisonment. The exegesis is violent. The usual so- 
 lution (started by Zumpt) is that 15th Tiberius dates from 
 the time he was made associate emperor (765) by the Sen- 
 ate, 2 years before the death of Augustus (767). This 
 would bring 780 for the year of baptism and solve the 
 
16 
 
 difficulties. Tliere are various dates for computing the 
 reign Augustus, according as he increased in jiower. Tlie 
 same is true of Tiberius, '^Miis increases the difficulty. 
 Certain Egyptian coins date from tlie connection of Tibe- 
 rius with Augustus. Tiberius obtained full control in 
 the Provinces in 767. His 15th year then, 779, or first 
 passover 780. Luke 3 : 23 — (a) began to be or (/>) was 
 about 30 wlien he began, i. e. his pu()lic ministry. 
 
 The solution is coutirrned by Jno. 2: 20. llerod begaii 
 the temple in 734 ; to this add 46 (time of building) and 
 the result is 780, the proper date. 
 RESULTS. 
 
 ROBINSON. 
 
 
 WIESELER. 
 
 ZUMPT. 
 
 
 
 Born 
 
 749 
 
 or 750 
 
 . . 750 . . 
 
 747 
 
 
 . Pilate. 
 
 779-789 
 
 Bap. 
 
 779 
 
 " 780 
 
 . . 780 . . 
 
 779A. D. 
 
 , 20 . 
 
 . Herod. 
 
 750-792 
 
 1st Pass. 
 
 
 780 
 
 . . 781 . . 
 
 780 " 
 
 27 . 
 
 . Philip, 
 
 750-786 
 
 2d •' 
 
 
 781 , 
 
 . . 782 . . 
 
 781 " 
 
 28 . 
 
 . Lysaiiias, 
 
 
 3d " 
 
 
 782 
 
 
 782 " 
 
 29 . 
 
 . Annas, 
 
 759-7fi7 
 
 Cruc. 
 
 
 783 
 
 '. '. 783 '. '. 
 
 
 30 . 
 
 . Caiaplias, 
 
 778-789 
 
 . . 111). 765 or 767-782 
 
 Duration of the Public Mimstky. — 3 views are held: 
 1. That it was 3^ years ; 2. 2| years; 3. 1 year or less. 
 The Fathers, from Is. 61 : 2^ "held that it was 1 year. 
 But the word year is to be understood as the poetical 
 parallel of day, or hour. The opinion of Fathers is also 
 based on tradition of crucifi.xion 15th Tib., 782, com- 
 bined with Luke's putting baptism same year. (Lk. 3 : 1). 
 Brown holds that the ministry was 1 year, doubts the 
 text (of John) even though it says the feasts were pass- 
 overs. The Synopts. seem to give an entirely different 
 account from John ; they say Christ went to Galilee and 
 only after a considerable time went to Jeinisalem and tlie 
 Temple. Jolm says he went to Jerusalem and the Tem- 
 ple immediately, cleansed the latter, &c. The Synopts. 
 make no feast till crucifixion; inference, that ministry 
 was 1 year or less in lengtli. John makes scene Judea, 
 and mentions 3 or 4 Passovers. The Synopts. were 
 aware of Judean ministry: Mtt. 4: 25; 27: 57. When 
 Saviour wept over Jerusalem, thej' mention it. There is 
 no explanation except that lie had worked in Jerusalem. 
 Attempts to overthrow this' argument do not succeed. 
 Baur : that Jesus wept over the Jews in particular. B. 
 had to give this up. Strauss: that the words are per- 
 
17 
 
 sonified wisdom and are quoted from lost writings. 
 Sclienkel : that Jiio.'s mention of Passovers all refer to 
 one. Lk. 10: 38, another reference to Judean work. It 
 is impossihle that a pseudo-John sliould represent the 
 course of the Life of Christ so differently from the 
 Sjnopts., when the latter w.ere duly accredited. He wrote 
 with a doijmatic purpose, and would not expect to be be- 
 lieved. On otlier hand John was aware of the Galilean 
 work. (7 : 6-9.) He implies that Galilee had been the chief 
 scene of our Saviour's visitations. He allows all the time 
 necessary for it and on several occasions leaves it to be 
 inferred. Jno. 6 : 2, multitudes went with Jesus because 
 of His miracles, but tiie miracles are not related. Jno. 
 6 : 66, many of his discijjles went back from him, but 
 Jno. had not told us of the formation of a band of disci- 
 ples. Jno. 6 : 70, the 12 are mentioned, but there has 
 been no account of their calliuij^. Between chaptei-s 6 
 and 7, there is an interval of 7 months. To reconcile 
 Sj-nopts. and Jno., all that can be required is to give a 
 good reason for their differences. The Synopts.' plan in- 
 cludes active life in Galilee. Matt, seeks proof in mii-a- 
 cles for Christ's Messiahship. Luke gives biography of 
 Christ in his active work. Jno. came later, when doc- 
 trinal points were discussed, particularly the person of 
 Christ. Jno's [uirpose is to give His own discourses so 
 that they may know what He claimed concerning Him- 
 self. It was not in Galilee, in parable, that these pro- 
 found Christological statements were made. It was 
 among the educated, cultivated Pharisees of Jerusalem. 
 Renan : " I dare defy any person to compose a consis- 
 tent life of Jesus, if he makes account of the discourses 
 which John attributes to. Jesus." 
 
 John's feasts : 1. " the Jews' passover," (781) (Jno. 2 : 
 13) ; 2. " a feast of the Jews, (782) (5 : 1) ;" 3. " the Pass, 
 nigh," (6: 4); 4. "Before Pass.," (12 : 1); 5. "feast of 
 Tabernacles," (7 : 2) ; 6. " feast of dedication," (10: 22); 
 (Bible Diet, for Pass., Pentec, Tabern., Dedic, and Pu- 
 rim.) Of these feasts 4 were Passovers, if Jno. 5 : 1 be 
 so interpreted. We gain or lose a ^-ear here. Pentecost 
 occurred this year (782) on the 19th of May. No special 
 argument in its favor; was not so generally attended as 
 Passover or Tabernacles, and no reason appears why 
 
18 
 
 Jesus should have oTYutted Passover and c^one up to 
 Pente. Tahernacles followed, Sept. 23d. Chief argu- 
 ment in its lavor : it brings feast of 5 : 1 into close con- 
 nection with that of 7 : 2, and tluis best explains 7 : 21-23. 
 But some months more or less are not under tlie circum- 
 stances important, for tlie miracle Avith its results must 
 have been fresh in their minds even after a much longer 
 interval. If lie had not in the interval between these 
 feasts been at Jerusalem, as is most i^robable, His reap- 
 pearance would naturally carry their minds back to the 
 time when they last saw him, and recall both his work 
 and theii" own machinations vs. Him. The great objec- 
 tion to identifying the ieast before us with that of Taber- 
 nacles is that it puts betv.een the end of ch. 4, and be- 
 ginning of ch. 5, a period of 8 or 9 months, which the 
 Evangelists pass over in silence. 
 
 Four Objections vs. i'ASSOVER. — 1. Jno, 6: 4,"passover 
 nigh." Christ did not attend. If not, then he wns not 
 at any feast till Tabernacles (7 : 2), a period of 18 mos. ; 
 was absent from Jerusalem for that time. Argued : as a 
 strict Jew he could not have been so long away. Ans. : 
 that Jesus should liave absented himself for so long a 
 time from the feasts is explained by the hostility of the 
 Jews, and their purpose to slay Him (Jno, 5 : 16-18 ; 
 7 : 1). We know He would not needlessly expose Him- 
 self to peril. To the laws of God respecting the feasts 
 He would render all obedience, but with the liberty of a 
 son, not the scrupulosity of a Pharisee. He was Lord 
 of Sabbath ; so He was of the feasts. He attended them 
 or not as seemed best to Him. Chief argument in favor 
 of Purim is, that it is brought into such close connection 
 with the Passover (only 7 mos. absent). Ellicott : "If 
 the note of time derived from Jno, 4 : 35 be correct, then 
 the festival here mentioned clearly falls between the end 
 of 1 year and the Passover of the one following (6: 4) 
 and therefore can be no other than the feast of P'urim." 
 That Jesus should have absented himself a long time 
 from the feasts, is explained by the hostility of the Jews. 
 
 2. Jolin does not here name the festival, whereas he 
 seems always to specify it (2 : 13, 23 ; 6 : 4 ; 7 : 2 ; 10 : 23 ; 
 11: 55; 12:1). 
 
19 
 
 3. That if 5 : 1 and G : 4 are Passovers, tliere is a whole 
 \-ear of wliich Jiio. ijives no aceonnt. Ans. : tliis is in 
 accordance witJi analogy of J no. 's gospel. The Synopts. 
 fill in tliis and Jno. confines himself to feasts. Andrews: 
 "this is not the only instance in which Jno. narrates 
 events widely separated in time, withont noting the in- 
 terval. Thns, ch. 6 relates what took place before a 
 Passover, and ch. 7 what took place at feast of Taber- 
 nacles, 6 months after. In 10: 22 is a siuhlen transition 
 from Tabernacles to Dedication." 
 
 4. Accounts for Synopts. not nientioning feasts. His 
 work in Galilee has reference to national salvacion thro' 
 tlie faith of tho9<i who should believe on him there. 
 This may explain their silence in respect to the feasts 
 wliich Jesus attended while in Galilee. Any transient 
 work at Jerusalem, addi-essins^ itself esi)ecially to the 
 hierarchy, had no important beai'ing upon tjie gre;it 
 result. 
 
 For Passover. — 1. Common text wrongly omits arti- 
 cle, which would naturally refer to chief feast. Modern 
 critics and best MSS., including Sinaitic, agree as to this. 
 (Winer, p. 119 or 126). Lange : " The article is not ab- 
 solutely conclusive, for in Heb. a noun before the gen. 
 is made definite by prefixing article, not to noun itself, 
 but to the gen., and the same is the case in the Sept." 
 Ellicott : " The true reading appears certainly to l)e kofivr^. 
 It has in addition to secondary authorities, the support 
 of three out of the four leading uncial MSS., and is 
 adapted by Lachm., Tisch., and others." Tholuck: 
 " Were the article genuine, we would be compelled to 
 regard the Passover as meant. If it is not genuine, the 
 Passover may be meant,, but so also may some other 
 feast." (Andrews, 172). 
 
 2. Phrase"feastof the Jews"is not applicable to Purim. 
 P. was •' not a Mosaic feast, nor of divine appointment, 
 but estaljlished l)y the Jews wliile in captivity, in com- 
 memoration oftlieir deliverance from the murderous plans 
 of llamau. (Ksther, 3 and 9). It was national and i)o- 
 litical, rather than religious. Why then should Jews go 
 up ii vim Jerusalem to this feast? Ellicott: " The view 
 of the best recent harmonists aitd commentators is that 
 feast was the feast of Purim." Lange: "Fanaticism in 
 
20 
 
 the people luitiirally sou2:ht to make it a festival of tri- 
 umph over the Gentiles (suhseqnently over the Christians 
 also.) On this account, the particular feast was preemi- 
 nentl}' the feast of the Jews (with the art.) and the art. in 
 C. Sinaiticus cannot be made to speak exclusively for 
 pass." 
 
 3. Jesus went and found a crowd. P. was observed all 
 over the land : had no reference to Jerus. No special 
 services were appointed for its observance at the temple, 
 nor does it appear that it was their custom. Each Jew 
 onserved it wherever he chanced to be. Lange : " Christ 
 may have attended tliis f. as he attended other festivals, 
 (7 : 2 ; 10 : 22) without legal obligation., merely for pur- 
 pose of doino; good." 
 
 4. No adequate motive is assigned for Christ's going to 
 Jerusalem: lie was not required to do so l)y the law. El- 
 licott : " In the year under consideration, Passover would 
 occui"- only a month afterward, and our Lord might well 
 have thought it was advisable to iix his abode at Jerusa- 
 lem ;ind to conmience his preaching before the liurried 
 influx of tlie multitudes that came up to the great yearly 
 festival." 
 
 5. Healing of inflrm man was on a Sabbath. The fes- 
 tival of Purim h.sted 2 days, and was regularly observed 
 on 14th and 15th Adar (March); but if 14th happened to 
 fall on Sabbath, or on 2d or 4th day of the week, the 
 commencement of the fest. was deferred until the next 
 day. Purim was never celebrated as a Sabb. Lange : 
 "The Sabb. spoken of 5 : 9 may have preceded or suc- 
 ceeded the feast." 
 
 6. Lk. 13 : 6-7. " These 3 years." Ilengst. says the 
 reference is to Jewish people, among whom Christ had 
 wrought for 3 years. But we cannot draw argument from 
 parable; not conclusive enough. Andrews : " It is doubt- 
 ful whether the expression has any chronological value." 
 Lange : " If one insists on having a def time for God's 
 work of grace on Isr., we may reckon the time from the 
 public appearance of Jno. B., one-half year befoi-e the 
 entrance of Jesus upon his offlce, up to the present mo- 
 ment, which altogether does not make \\\) much less than 
 three years." 
 
21 
 
 7. Time needed for events. Otherwise we must com- 
 press into one month, what according to the other sclierae 
 took a wholf^ year. It can hardly he conceived that he 
 should have done so mucli in such narrow limits. The 
 harmony will make Christ's ministry 3| years (Rob.) or 2^ 
 ( Wiese. and Zumpt). 
 
 PREPARATORY PERIOD. 
 
 §1. Limits: froni beginning of gospel narrative until 
 entrance upon public ministry'. Subdivision : {a) all pre- 
 ceding nativity; {b} all succeeding it until entrance upon 
 public ministry. Mtt. and Lk. are authorities for nativity, 
 and are supplementary to one another, in no case paral- 
 lel. Matt, gives histor. proof that Jesus was the Messh. of 
 O. T. Therefore he records his birth, genealogy, and 
 other events connected therewith. Lk. gives events in 
 order, and therefore goes back to annunciation and to his. 
 predecessor. Mk. portrays active life of Christ. John's 
 design is to represent him as a historic person in his own 
 words. The history difters from every other h. The 
 facts have no parallel ; natundly it should have none. 
 The miraculous element predominates here as nowhere 
 else. This is history written for a purpose!^ Charged : 
 that it was written afterward. Bu* we have, intermingled, 
 the divine, aiigelic, and human. When the Son of God 
 was to come, there must be peculiar circumstances. Un- 
 believers stumble here, and believers lind proof for gen- 
 uineness. Some believers, however, find their strongest 
 difficulty here. 
 
 Classification of characteristics : [a) Events were 
 to be so adapted as to form basis of our faith. 
 If it be true that Son of God became S. of man, 
 it is more than probab'le it was done in this way. We 
 must have practical evidence of birth at the time of its 
 occurrence. It would not do to attest it afterward, else 
 it would be charged that it was an invention, or dream of 
 an enthusiast. Ebionites and Socinians say he became 
 Son of God first at baptism. Miraculous element, there- 
 fore, is inseparable from the hist. It grows out of it 
 from the very nature of the case. Incarnation itself the 
 greatest miracle. (6) Publicity must be secured ; atten- 
 tion attracted. Chain of evidence was so good, as here 
 
22 
 
 written, that it was never doubted by enemies fprimi- 
 tively). (e) The child must be secured, so as not to ap- 
 pear a rival of civil ruloi's, and to prevent premature 
 action by them. Yet witnesses must be numerous enough 
 to identify Clirist from birth; to show that babeofBeth- 
 leliem and Jesus of I^az. were one and same person. 
 ((/) Wliile humility of Son of God was to be shown, yet_ 
 from iirst moment, he must be attended with all dignity 
 and lionor due to divin.ity. He must bring heaven with 
 him, angelic choir, homage of good men (Sheph'ds and 
 Magi). As, at cross, so at manger, humility is relieved 
 by heavenly dignities, [e) Ant^-typical ; as life and death 
 of Christ are the final facts of O, T., it must be shown 
 he cjime to fulfill it. Unity of divine plan must be vin- 
 dicated ; liis relation to the law be made clear. These 
 things belong to this period as preparatoi-y. If men had 
 been left in doubt, they would have rejected Christ at 
 beginning of his ministry. Hence we read re[ieatedly, 
 "all this, that the Scriptures" &c. ; we see express re- 
 cognition of faithful few, in wlioni spirit of old economy 
 was manifested. Gospel hist, is last ch. of old dispens'n. 
 N". T. begins with Pentecost, where 0. T. scenery, poe- 
 try, etc., find their fultillnient. (/) Typical; his life is 
 type of every Chn. and of Church as whole. Old 
 economy is typical bee. it points to the future, as it em- 
 bodies v^■hat has been already realized. That very life 
 in which the old is fullilled is still a type of Chn. spirit- 
 ual life. Impossible to interpret Gospels and Acts, without 
 violating meaning, unless we believe facts are arranged 
 purposely to embody the doct., the spiritual truth. Such 
 were miracles, the fact that he carried his dealings be- 
 yond borders of Palestine (gospel for world). Why did 
 he attend temple? why submit to circum. ? to teach the 
 evil of sin. 
 
 §2. OtHcial character of John Baptist was necessary at 
 outset. Ritualists claim Clirist was disciple of John, tiiat 
 his work grew out of John's. Annunc'n of Bapt's birth 
 prepared people and Ids parents to understand his nds- 
 aion, and liow to treat him. Honor is done to O. T. in 
 choosing priest of temple (1 Chron., 24), prophecy is 
 fulfilled^ type is given, in declaration that John was to be 
 a. Nazarite from the womb (as Samuel and Samson). 
 
23 
 
 Spiritual meaning of incense is seen (prayer) ; Lk. 1 : 10. 
 Emphasis is laid on character of parents (Lk. 1 : 6), they 
 were observers of rites and exercised a lively faith. Cer- 
 emonial righteousness was their possession. Mass of the 
 Jews corrupt. But some were willing to introduce new 
 economy. Meaning of both names was explained and 
 fulfilled by what happened to those who bore them : 
 Zach. (the Lord remeujbers), Eliz. (God's oath). Hope 
 of giving birth to tlie deliverer was common among Jew- 
 ish women. 400. yrs. angelic visitation had been discon- 
 tinued, now it is renewed. John asNazarite (Numb. 6 : 
 1-21) was to be a reformer. Mai. 4 : 6, the Jewish con- 
 ception of this p'cy was -that E. was to be the forerunner 
 and hence had not died. This impression was to be cor- 
 rected. Z's fiiith not strong enough at first ; asks a sign, 
 and is given one (dumbness, a punishment for his unbe- 
 lief). "As faith is to be the chief condition of the new 
 covenant, it wns needful that the first manifestation of 
 unbelief should be emphatically punished ; but the wound 
 inflicted becomes a healing medicine for the soul." 
 (Lange^ 
 
 Objections answered : 1. Z's treatment was not 
 only punitive but was to confirm his faith, and to be 
 a lesson to the people. 2. Strauss objects, that a name is 
 given to an individual angel, wh. we do not find in O. T. 
 until after the captivity in Danl. Obj'n is therefore that 
 Jews had no doct. of angels before captivity, that they 
 borrowed their ideas from Persians. If so, how came 
 they to have Hebrew names ? Furthermore (a) the O. T. 
 is full of the doct. ; and (b) we have no proof that Jews 
 borrowed from Persians ; (c) Tho' names are given to none 
 until Dan.'s time, yet it, is characteristic of O. T. to be 
 progressive. Xames of angels might be expected in an 
 Apocalyptic book like Dan. ((/) Doct. of angels was re- 
 ceived and confirmed by Christ and Apostles. 3. Doubt- 
 ed, whether such definite names are borne in heaven. 
 Gab'l represents ministries of angels toward man ; Mich, 
 is type and leader of their strife, in God's name and His 
 strength vs. the power of Satan. In O. T;, therefore, he 
 is guardian of Jewish people in their antagonism to god- 
 less poW'Cr and heathenism. Many Reformers embraced 
 idea that Mich, is Christ. If true,'some would represent 
 
24 
 
 name of Gab'l (man of God) in same way. Interpretation 
 is inadmissible. Whenever angel Jeliovah appears, it is 
 always as God. We are never left in donbt. 
 
 Mjith. theory holds that this was a myth'l age, that dis- 
 ciples believed Christ was raised from dead, owing to the 
 entlmsiastic statements of the women. Myth is a story or 
 narrative, involving moral or relig. trnth, in wh. narrative 
 form and idea involved are blended. There is no conscious 
 invention to give birth to a popular idea. This theory 
 saves moral character of early disciples; holds that John 
 became imp. after he began his public ministry, and these 
 stories grew up in connection witli both. Only question 
 is, how much is mythical and how much historical ? Prac- 
 tical application of the theory necessitates in many cases 
 the charge of conscious deceit. NaUiraUstic cxp. maintains 
 that Christ worked great cures, but by nat. causes. He 
 seemed to raise from dead, but the man was not dead. 
 So here, Z. was paralyzed owing to excitement. Tendency 
 hiipoth. holds that there was a conscious falsiiication of 
 histor}' in accommodation to certain cui'rent ideas; hist, 
 is rewritten to give currency to certain doctrines. Strauss 
 (2d Life) came over to this theory ; sliifted his ground. 
 Legmdary theory (Renan) holds there is u basis of fact, 
 but altered by blending of natural enthusiasm and pious 
 fraud; very much like legends of saints in Rom. church. 
 Renan adopts more of Gospels than others, because his 
 romancing is not bound by so doing; his method is not 
 so destructive as Strauss's, 
 
 §3. Six mos. aiter conception of Elizabeth, an angel 
 (Gab.) appears to Mary and announces that she was to 
 give birth to Messiah. Points of analogy and contrast 
 with annunc'n and birth of John (Alexander) : 
 
 1. Analogy : 
 
 {a) Both were announced by angel of God. 
 (6) " to be extraordinary. 
 
 {(t) " named by the angel, 
 
 (f/) " connected with prophecy. 
 
 W) Offices of both were described. 
 
 (/) In both, a sign was given to strengthen faith of the 
 parents. 
 
 2. Contrast: 
 
 (a) John's was communicated to priest in the temple; 
 Christ's to humble virgin in small town of Galilee. 
 
25 
 
 {b) Jolin's aiinounceineut was more honorable than 
 Christ's birth. 
 
 (c) Our Lord surrounded his messenger with pomp 
 which he denied to himself. 
 
 The announcement must be made previously to his 
 birth, that the woman mav know what was happenino- to 
 her. Is. 7 : 14 fulUlIed in'Mt. 1 : 23. A virgin betrothed 
 should be chosen, partly that she might be protected by 
 a good man in circumstances into which she was brought, 
 partly that the heirship to the throne might be conform- 
 ed to. Two points : 1. Whether both (J. and M.) were of 
 liouse of David. 2. Whether Lk. 1 : 27 is to be confined 
 TO Jos. Angel tells M. that the child must be of h. of D. 
 What meaning would tiiis have to her before her concep- 
 tion, unless she knew that she was of h. of D. ? Lange 
 " The words relate solely to J. They by no means deny 
 descent of M. from D." Annnnc'n was private to avoid 
 notice of civil authorities and the jealousj' of Herod. Lk. 
 1 : 32, Dan. 7 : 14, his kingship over Israel is promised. 
 For M., intimate with O. T., this p'cy wd. contain essence 
 of most remarkable promises (2 Sam. 7, Ps. 45, Is. 9, 
 Mic. 5). Lk. 1 : 42, 44, the extraordinary conception of 
 her kinswoman was a sign of more ext. c. of her own. 
 
 Objections : 1. That doct. of immac. conception is 
 inadequate to account for sinlessness of Jesus. But Ije 
 who was light and life of men must surely see lio^ht of 
 day, not by carnal procreation, but by immediate exer- 
 cise of divine power. How could he be free from every 
 taint of original sin, and redeem us from power of sin, if 
 he had been born by fleshly intercourse of sinful parents ? 
 The strong and healthy graft which was to bring new life 
 into the diseased stock, must not originate from this stock, 
 but be grafted into it from without. Miraculous concep. 
 is a (Txai^oa/Mu to those alone who will see in our Lord 
 nothing but pure humanity, and who put his sinlessness 
 in place of the real incarnation of God in him. Ration- 
 alistic explanation : that he was of ordinary birth, and 
 that this view existed among the Jews, and contined un- 
 til the 5th cent. By that time, gospels were embellished 
 to give expression to current views, and the conclusion 
 is the immaculate concep. Ansvv'd : (a) The relation in 
 wh. Clirist stands to his mother is emphasized, as com- 
 
26 
 
 pared witli Jos. The latter is never mentioned except as 
 protector of Christ's infancy. From the monient of the 
 conception, the Holy Spirit continued to intinence and 
 penetrate mind and spirit of AI., to suppress power of sin 
 and make her body his consecrated temple, {b) Titles, 
 " born of a woman," " made flesh," " son of man," the 
 constant reference to mode of his oriij^in, as well as the 
 nature of his constitution show his rehition to the wo- 
 man was more important than to the man. (c) The doc- 
 trine is based on pronhecy. 2. That in gospels he is son 
 of Jos. (John 1 : 45 ; Lk. 4 : 22 and 2 : 48). Mary, in pub- 
 licly speaking to her son of Jos., must say "• thy fa- 
 ther," Pressense : " This assertion son of Jos. is always 
 put into mouth of Jews as sign of unbelief or contempt. 
 It is even so in the case of Nathaniel." 3. That the 
 doctrine is not found elsewhere in N. T. Then we have 
 no Savioui-. 
 
 Naturalists and others indulge in different forms of 
 blasphemous interpretation. They deprive Jos.'s bride 
 of chastity and purity, her richest dowry. The notion 
 was first conceived iii brain of heathen (Oelsus) who de- 
 rides mother of Jesus as victim of seduction. Jewish 
 version of this fable {rationalismu.s L'ulf/ari.s) names one 
 Panthera or Pandira as her seducer. Mijth. theory : that 
 this conce|)tion in cont. to hist, probability, that Jews 
 did not sympathize with expression "sons of God," bee. 
 polytheistic. It was a story invented to support church 
 claims, referring to the religious feeling of ancients, who 
 revered their great men so much as to make them sons 
 of God (numerous in mythology.) So also, it is said, 
 tlie Evangelists did with Christ. 
 
 §4. Visit of Mary to Eliz. Ebrard and others: that 
 Jos. had taken his betrothed wife to his home, after a 
 public solemnization of their nuptials, before this jour- 
 ney. Alford : " that as a betrothed virgin she could not 
 travel alone." But that no unmarried female could 
 journey to visit her friends is incredible. M. may have 
 journeyed with friends, or under spec'l protection of a ser- 
 vant, or with neighbors going to Pass. Lange : '• She told 
 Jos. of visit of angel." But Jo's knowledge of her con- 
 dition was subsequent to her return. M. leaves it to God 
 to enlighten him as He had her. 3-fold design of visit : 
 
27 
 
 1. To give occasion for exercise of the spirit of inspi- 
 ration, to confirm claims of the 2 children, 
 
 2. To connect these extraordinary events in minds of 
 people, before these persons were born. The children 
 wei-e brought together in the bosoms of tlieir mothers. 
 
 3. To make known their relative dignity ; Jesns over 
 Jol n. 
 
 Mary's hymn is modeled on Hannali's. (1st Sam. 2). 
 It may be divided into 3 or 4 strophes, forming an ani- 
 mated doxology. The grace of God (Lk. 1 : 48), his om- 
 nipotence (49-51), his holiness (49, 51, 54,) liis justice 
 (52 — 3), and especially liis taithfulness (54-5), are cele- 
 brated. It sounds like an echo of Miriam's and Debor- 
 ali's harps ; has characteristics of Ileb. poetr^^ intone 
 and language, and can be rendered almost word for word. 
 Historically, it is important as showing the Messianic 
 hope, and the form of Messianic expectation. Lk.'s pre- 
 face is classical Greek; yet this liymn is in best Hebrew. 
 This fact confirms hist, proof of text. Obj'us : Rational- 
 alists reject the supernatural and account for it on nat. 
 grounds. Meyer rejects it on purely subjective grounds 
 (M. could not go alone and Eliz. would not receive her). 
 Strauss consistently rejects all, even the relationship bet. 
 Jesus and John. Home of Zach.: "Tlie supposition is 
 tiiat '/o!J^a (Lk. 1:39) has been substituted for ' louza, 
 and it is credible." (Lange. j Most common idea: that 
 Hebron was the place, bee. in "the hill country."' It was 
 17 miles S. of Jerusalem. (20 Rom. miles.) 
 
 §5. Birth of John. Efl:ect was shown by the concourse 
 at his circumcision. It was customary to name child on 
 same day, as circumcision (Gen. 21:3, 4). Eliz. insisted 
 on his being called John. Some say that Zach. had not 
 told Eliz. of the name given in teniple. Therefore this 
 was new revelation. Most likely he had told her. From 
 making signs to Zach., some have inferred that he was 
 deaf as well as dumb. Otliers : it was to spare the feel- 
 ings of mother. Zach. wrote on tablet that his name was 
 John (already given and not open to change). The first 
 N". T. writing opens with grace. Prophetic cycles accom- 
 panied great hist, epochs; there is an equal advance of 
 proph. with hist. It comes at revolutionary periods : 
 Moses, Joshua and Judges, the completed kingdom un- 
 
28 
 
 der David and Solomon; Isaiah, Hosea, &c., during As- 
 syrian period; Jere., Ilab'k, Zeph., during period of exile. 
 
 Zaeliariah's song was to Jewish witnesses a renewal of 
 inspiration, the highest eircnmstanee of the occurrence. 
 For 400 years it had ceased. By its renewal, they regard- 
 ed a new national change iis intended. Like Mary's, it 
 refers to fultilltnent of O. T. [)rophecies, but is not based 
 on any O. T. song, and is more national than individual. 
 In Mai-y's there is a relative want of originality, and it is 
 full of reminiscences. Lange : "The royal spirit is more 
 expressed in her song; the priestly character in Zach.'s 
 In his the O. T. type, in hers the I*^ew prevails." Mary's 
 expectations of the Messiah (Lk. 1 : 5) were not of a 
 particular and exclusive, but of an universal jiat. Zach's 
 song (Lk. 1 : 76, 78) is a striking proof of the prevalence 
 of theocratic over paternal feeling, as the Mssh. is al- 
 wa^'s placed in a more prominent position than his fore- 
 runner. Dayspring, Mai. 4 : 2. Both songs breathe 
 theocratic spirit of 0. T. ; show the expectation of Him 
 who was to have spiritual rule. John dwelt by himself 
 in wild and thinly peopled region S. W. of Dead Sea 
 near his home, perhaps to show by his seclusion that he 
 was nninstructed in ordinary way but by Holy Ghost. 
 Kenan : •' the masses had become accustomed to look 
 upon 'the man of God ' as a hermit. They imagined 
 that all the holy personages had their days of penitence, 
 of severe life, and of austerities. It was readily con- 
 ceived that the leaders of sects must be recluses, having 
 their peculiar rules and their institutes, like the found- 
 ers of rel. orders." Strauss and Meyer see in his seclu- 
 sion, influence of theEssenes(myst. ascetics and devotees). 
 But there is no analogy. N. T. does not mention th'em, 
 Jose})hus does largely. 
 
 §6. Annunciation to Joseph nee, bee. a direct wit- 
 ness was needed to the person most interested, to show 
 that her acct. was not a mistake nor a matter of mere 
 enthusiasm. Her explanations were not believed and her 
 faith was tested. Jos. determ'd to divorce her (privately). 
 Milman : '• Bill of divorce was nee. even when the par- 
 ties were only betrothed, and where the mari-iage had 
 not actually been solemnized. It is probable tliat the 
 Mosaic law wh. in such cases adjudged a female to death 
 
29 « 
 
 (Dt. 20 : 23-5) was not at this time executed in its origi- 
 nal vigor." Joseph was dr/aio^ (Mtt. 1 : 19), not kind, 
 but legally just, merciful. A public divorce would be 
 in writing from the |)riest, with the causes of it stated, 
 else the woman could not marry again. Annunciation 
 was at Naz. God appears 4 times to him in a dream (Mtt. 
 1: 20; 2: 13; 2: 19; 2: 22). Prophecy of Mtt. 1: 22 
 is uttered by the angel, from Is. 7 : 14. Strauss : it is 
 not at all applicable to Christ ; the Evgst. l)y mistake 
 thought it was. Alexander: " tlie application of it 
 to Christ is not a mei-e accommodation, meaning that the 
 words originally used in one sense, and in reference to 
 one object, might now be repeated in anc^ther sense, and 
 of another subject ; for this does not satisfy the strong 
 sense of the passage (that it might be fulfilled), nor would 
 such a fanciful coincidence have been alleged witli so 
 much emphasis by Mtt., still less by the angel. The 
 only sense that can be reasonably put upon the words is, 
 that the miraculous conception of Mssh. was predicted 
 by Is. in the words here quoted. This essential meaning- 
 is not affected by the question whether the prediction 
 was lirst fullilled in the nat. birth of a child soon after it 
 was uttered, and tlie subsequent deliverance of Judah 
 from invasion, but again fultilled in a higher sense, in 
 the nativity of Christ ; or whether it related only to the , 
 latter, and presented it to Ahaz as a pledge that the 
 chosen people could not be destroyed until Mssh. came." 
 Best resort is (Hengst.) that the prophecy applies to 
 Christ, and is presented to Ahaz as tlie sign of deliver- 
 ance. 
 
 Matt, gives an nunc, to Jos. only ; Lk. to Mary only. 
 Objected: 1. That these ai;cts. exclude each other. 2. 
 That the cliild's name was given to Jos., after it had been 
 given to Mary ; therefore not nee. second time. The 
 two accounts harmonize and confirm each other. Each 
 supposes the same basis of fact, {a) Silence in one hist, 
 does not contradict a statement in another. (6) Selection 
 of incidents is ace. to their respective plans. Matt, giv- 
 ing Jos's genealogy, must show how Jos. took Mary as 
 his wife. He is theocratic. Jesus is presented as ful- 
 fillment of the theocracy. Lk. supplements Matt, and 
 gives what belongs to Christ's human relations; depicts 
 
» 30 
 
 the Son of Man appearing in Israel, but for benefit of 
 whole race of num. 
 
 §7. Birtli of Jesus was at Beth. In consequence of an 
 edict that all the world should be taxed, Jos. and Mary 
 leave Naz. to go to Beth, the city of Dav. to be ta.xed 
 there. Pressense : "The Jewish law laid no obligation on 
 a woman to undertake such a journey, for the writing of 
 her name was enougli. But who can wonder at the young 
 wife, situated like Mary, accompanying her protector ? 
 Besides, slie was not ignorant of the propliecy which 
 pointed out Beth, as the city of Messiah." Lk. dates from 
 decree of Augustus, bee. it was the occasion that brought 
 Jos. and Mary to Bethlehem. It suggests 1. That the 
 Saviour was born during the reign of Augustus (the 
 golden age of Roman history). 2. That the theocracy 
 had sunk to its lowest possible level. 3. That the pa- 
 rents enrolled their names in the registration of the whole 
 world. 
 
 Jewish law required the enrolment of women and 
 hence this law took them to Beth. (See preceding quot. 
 from Pressense). Farrar : " Women wei'e liable to a 
 capitation tax, if this enrolment {dTioyocuf/j) also involved 
 taxation (drroTlfir^ae::)." The Roman law cared not where; 
 it required, however, enrolment of whole world, and 
 hence Mary is included. Lange : " The enrolment would 
 naturally take place in Judea, in consideration of the 
 claims of nationality. The policy of Rome, as well as 
 the relig. scruples of the Jews, demanded it. For this 
 reason, every one went to his ancestral city to be regis- 
 tered, tiiough in other cases the Roman census might be 
 taken, either ace. to place of residence ov forum originis." 
 Place of birth a manger ; evidently so ordered to signify 
 the voluntary self-denial of Jesus. Calvin : " descend- 
 ants of the royal race were designedly, harshly, ami in- 
 hospitably treated by Rom. officials." Lange: -'that 
 Jos. and Mary were poor." But we are not to under- 
 stand that they were poor or oppressed by Rom. authori- 
 ties. It was simply bee. there was no room for them in 
 the inn. Justin Martyr places the birth in a cave. The 
 khan wld. probably, remain for long time in the East. 
 " Land and Book " 1,533; (Thomson quoted, Andrews 
 81 ; Farrar I, 3-6; W. Hepworth Dixon's Holy Land, I, 
 
31 
 
 cli. 13). Matt, makes no reference to the home, but speaks 
 as if they came to it for iir.st time. Lk, represents them 
 as livintr there beforehand. Rationalists ileuy that lie 
 was born in Beth., sa\' that he was born in Naz. Strauss 
 rejects both acc'ts. Kenan : " It is only by an awkward 
 detour that the legetid succeeds in fixing his birth at 
 Beth." R. says that the royal line from D. had become 
 extinct, but that Christ's birth must be fixed at Beth., 
 bee. of prophecy. Ans. : (a) The acc'ts are not contra- 
 dictory but coniplemental. (h) Matt, calls attention to 
 both places, sim]ily to speak of the fultillraent of proph- 
 ecy. Lk. gives the sequence of events. 
 
 §8. Design of annunciation to Shepherds, Lk. 2: 17. 
 Why announce his birth to them ? 1. That attention 
 might be called to this birth, iH-44 he-press- of business. 
 2. That witnesses, simple, competent, sufficiently numer- 
 and disinterested, might sec him, 3. This testimony 
 must not be accomplished in too public a manner, in or- 
 der not to foster the designs of Herod. 4. The attesta- 
 tion is miraculous, by angels. 5. New connection is 
 made with 0. T. hist, and types. These shepherds were 
 feeding their flocks on the same hills where D., their 
 father, had fed his. Christ, the new-born king, is typi- 
 tied, who should feed his flocks like a shepherd. 
 
 Lange finely heads this as " The first Gospel n])on 
 Earth." The' sign (Lk. 2: 12) is not supernatural, but 
 sufficiently accurate, for among the children born that 
 night in Beth., probably not more than one would have 
 l)een in a manger. 3 ways of reading the doxology : 
 (a) Glory to God in the highest, and on earth iiea(;e, good- 
 will toward men. 
 ib) " " " in (among) the highest, and on earth 
 
 'peace, good-will toward men. 
 (c) " " " in the highest and on Earth, peace 
 
 among men of His good-will. 
 
 Here we meet with one of the most imp. readings 
 which materially affect the sense. The altered reading, 
 amonr/ the men of His r/ood-wiU is equivalent to the elect peo- 
 ple. Valcknaer : " men with whom God is pleased." Thus 
 we have the truth that zlor^vq was given to Jews that 
 through them it might be a joy Tzavxi riv h).iu. Some con- 
 trast dyyelo: and d)^dj)to-oc. Th'e latter come in, after the 
 
32 
 
 former had completed their mission. Argued: that the 
 publicity of this event ought to have prevented subse- 
 quent unbelief. Ans. Lk. 16 : 31. Natarcdlslic theorists, 
 to get rid of the supernatural, say that the Shepherds 
 were aware of the condition of Mary ; they saw a bright 
 light in the heavens, and mistook it for the glory of God. 
 Mythical theorists (more naturally^ : All this was looked 
 for bee. of prophecy, which required the scene at Beth. 
 Wherefore, subsequent writers embellish it with honor 
 given to Christ. The Shepherds were related to Da- id, 
 and therefore they were made use of more than other 
 men. Strauss rejects the whole thing. 
 
 §0. Circimicision and Presentation in the Temple. The 
 chronolojrical order of events here is called in questi.:-'n. 
 By law, circumcision was on the eighth day, and presen- 
 tation on the fortieth day. Now, where and when can 
 be inserted " the adoration of the Magi" and " Flight to 
 Egypt?'' 1. Tradition and ecclesiastical observance 
 have placed them before the presentation. Obj. : Tra- 
 dition not old enough. 2 Matt. 2: 1 seems to imply 
 that the adoration soon fi)llowed the birth. But if the 
 arii'ument proves anything, it proves that it was on niglit 
 of birth. 3. Herod was ignorant of the birth until the 
 arrival of the Magi ; but if presentation had occurred, 
 he would have heard of it. This is merely gratuitous. 
 He might have heard and paid no attention to it. The 
 visit of the Magi awakened his suspicions, as they came 
 from distant realms. 
 
 Obj. : (1). Time inadequate. Forty days required be- 
 tween birth and purification. This could not compre- 
 hend the coming of the Magi and flight to Egypt. (2). 
 Presentation could not have occurred subsequent to the 
 slaughter of the Innocents. Even after Herod's death, 
 when Joseph heard that Archelaus was in power, he was 
 afraid to return. Matt. 2: 22-23. (rt)Hengstenburg gets 
 over this by translating " he went there with fear." 
 {b) Ritual view puts presentation between Magi's visit 
 and flight. But 1, it is expressly stated that the visit of 
 Magi caused alarm in Jerusalem, and excited Herod's 
 fears. 2. It separates between Magi's visit and flight, 
 which Matthew connects as cause and efl:ect. Hence, 
 both prove fatal to the Ritualistic theory. 3. Robinson, 
 
33 
 
 SchafF, &c., put presentation first. Obj.: Lnke gives no 
 return to Bethleliein, and implies the return to Nazareth 
 to be immediately after presentation. 
 
 Ans. : It is not a part ot'Lnke's plan. He only main- 
 tains the consistency of his own narrative. Fi-om Beth- 
 lehem to Jerusalem only two hours journey, and there- 
 fore unimportant to mention. Negative critics hold these 
 two lines are contradictions, but harmonists that eacli 
 narrative Hows on in its course, yet consistent, and form- 
 ing one l)eautiful whole. 
 
 Presentation in the Temple. — The design is four-fold. 1. 
 Showed obedience to the law by puritication of the Vir- 
 gin and redemption of first born. Obj. : Jesus was a 
 priest, and therefore it was illegal. Argument of no 
 force, as Jesus was not a Levite to wliom tlie law was 
 prescriiied. Hence Jesus rendered no formal service as 
 redemption of first-born was necessary. 2. A new op- 
 portunity' for testimonj' to inspiration, given by Simeon 
 and Anna. 3. It spread the report of his birth. 4. Re- 
 cognition of the spiritual Israel. It is worthy of notice 
 here, that these examples and testimonies are scattered 
 the country over. Zachariah and Elizabeth in the south, 
 Joseph and Mary in the north, Simeon and Anna at the 
 metropolis. It is objected on the ground of discrepancy 
 that ver. 24 gives the sacrifice as due from tlie mother, 
 while ver. 27 does not mention the redemption-money 
 for the child. Every woman at purification presented a 
 lamb and a dove for sacrifice, but in case of poverty, an 
 additional dove was substituted for the lamb. The latter 
 having been made bv Marj', betrays indigence. Ver. 22 
 makes autoju refer to mhoni ? I^ot Joseph. But there is 
 no difficulty in applying /a^aortr/ioi) to Jesus, because He 
 represented His people. It is not positively stated that 
 Simeon was far advanced in j-ears. Some suppose he 
 was Rabbin Simeon. Some interesting points just here. 
 
 1. The fact of inspiration shown in the promise that 
 he should see the Messiah. 2. The clear recognition in 
 Simeon's words of the fact announced in the angelic do.K- 
 ologyofthe universal application of our Lord's work. 
 3. Prophecy verified. 4. His sufierings foretold. These 
 four points teach three things:, (1). Rejection by the 
 Jews. (2). Calling of the Gentiles. (3). His sacrificial 
 
34 
 
 character. We also infer that tribal relations wore not 
 all lost, as Anna is mentioned as belongino- to tlie tribe 
 of Aser. Fasting and |)rayer to l)e understood literally 
 and not of an ascetic order, as the}- simply mean Anna 
 led a religions life. The sceptical objections here are lame. 
 The Mythists assert that the motive for miracles in the 
 narrative was a desire to exalt Ciirist on the part of later 
 writers. This alone they say was the cause for the multi- 
 jdicity of miracles. 
 
 §10. Adoration of the Magi. Matt. 2 : 1-12. According 
 to the most approved plan, this belongsj^w^verses 33-39 
 ofLk. 2. Its sigiiiHcation is the counterpart of the last. 
 The time after presentation was brief, as Herod's death 
 soon followed. The adoration of the Magi represents 
 His acknowledgment by the Gentiles. They could not 
 have been Jews. Their question was, where is He who 
 is born King of the Jews? The salient change in the 
 church at this time was the calling of the Gentiles. N. T. 
 dispensation is of grace, lience universal, and not an ac- 
 cident of its condition, but an inward change in the 
 essential character of the dispensation. O. T. prepara- 
 tory and honored in its being superseded. Care was 
 taken that He did honor to tiie law — the O. T. Like- 
 wise in the fullillment of prophecy and calling of the 
 Gentiles. Christ was apprehended by the Magi as the 
 king, and they tendered Ilim royal gifts. This custom 
 common to the East. Divinely guided, hence it is nat- 
 ural to infer that they cherished a real faith in the Son 
 of God, but not so clear as was possible after the resur- 
 rection. By some it is thought the gifts were significant. 
 
 1. Gold significant of royalty, authority, sovereignty. 
 
 2. Frankincense of prayer and intercession, thus recog- 
 nizing him as the hearer and answerer of supplication. 
 
 3. Myrrh, being a favorite anodyne and antiseptic, had 
 reference to his sufferings and resurrection ; hence the 
 incorruptibility of his nature, and the promise that his 
 body should not see corruption. The mother accepted 
 the gifts as His due. Tradition has greatly embellished 
 this event. The three. donors represent three different 
 races, viz : Shem, Ham, and Japheth. In pictures, one 
 is represented as a negro. But more important than these 
 traditionary views we shall observe 1. The Magi, called 
 
35 
 
 lidyoe rlTzb d.vaTo)x7)v. On'ginallv, a tribe of Medes set apart 
 fur priests, same as the Levites among tiie Jews. Thev 
 embodied tlie leariiiiioj of the people. Tlieir kiiowled^'e 
 consisted principally of astroloii^y. 2. The country "of 
 their abode the text leaves uncertain. Three liave been 
 ,o^iven, Arabia, Mesopotamia, Persia. The last best. 
 Notice the chanofefrom avr/.-(>y?uwv to aydrolrj. Both forms 
 are used as definite geographical expressions. A\>rj-olujv 
 is tlie far-east Persia. Avaxokq, east Babylonia. Observe 
 the representatives of tlie race are chosen from the cradle 
 of tlie race. The Greeks and Romans were too impure 
 and familiar with the Jews, and treited them with con- 
 teujiit. Barorrians were too ignorant. The east chosen 
 because the cradle of science. The writings of Zoroaster 
 come nearer to the Holy Scriptures than any others. 3. 
 What brought the Magi ? Phenomena natural or super- 
 natural? I'revailing belief, natural. To its being mi- 
 raculous it is objected : (r/j Nowhere taught in the'text. 
 [h) Magi saw the star in the East, If seen in the Ea-t it 
 could not go before Ihem. To remove this ditficulty read 
 ver. 2: " while we were in the East &c." (r) They weie 
 not led to X. but came to Him. Not guided to Bethlehem 
 until they asked for tlie child. When directed again to 
 Bm, they saw the star the second time. Popular tradition 
 is that the star led them. Ans : Kepler the iirst to sug- 
 gest the natural explanation in 1604. (See Andrews 
 pp. 9-10). He observed in that year a conjunction 
 of Jupiter and Saturn, in Pisces, in Dec. 1603. Mars was 
 added in the following spring, and a new star of surpass- 
 ing brillianc}' appeared in the autumn of 1604. In 747 
 A. U. C. there were three such conjunctions of Jupiter 
 and Saturn, and Mars w.as added in 748 A. U, C. Both 
 of these conjunctions have been supposed to be the star 
 of the Magi. Habbi Abarbanel states that the same thing 
 occurred at the birth of Moses, and also in 1463, which 
 led him to look for the birth of the Messiah in his own 
 day. Wieseler says it was a new star iu 749 and 750, 
 and finds it recorded in the Chinese annals. This clashes 
 with Zumpt, whose theory is determined \)y the date that 
 Cyrenius was governor of Syria, as previously stated, 
 Ques : How is this star to be associated with X's birth? 
 Ans: 1. They knew this was the part of the heavens 
 
36 
 
 which belonged to Joclea. 2. A prevailing expectation 
 at the time tor a Deliverer, who sliould appear in Judea. 
 (Vide Suetonius and Tacitus). 3. Collateral traditions 
 from common souices of knowledge. Oliin.cse sages, 33 
 years later, coming west, inquired for the long expected 
 and common Saviour. 4. These were combined with 
 Jewish exjjectations. Jews were scattered widely over 
 the world, who spread knowledge of God and Messianic 
 predictions, David and Daniel had prophesied of Him. 
 \n Xum. 24: 17 and Is. 60: o, lie is spoken of under 
 the figure of a star. Mary applies N. 24: 17 to X. 
 Balaam's words may have been handed down outside of 
 the church. These passages may have given shape to 
 astronomical expectations rejative to X. Hence the Magi 
 were natural!}' led to observe heavenly i)henoniena. 
 Hengstenberg objects. 1. aarr^p is applicable to only 
 one bod}', and o.arpov to a constellation. The former is 
 true, but the use of the latter is wide. 2. Kepler has 
 been reviewed by Pritchard. He says conjnnction in no 
 case was perfect. Tlie stars always se[)arated l>y two 
 diameters of the moon between. Ans: Still, the phe- 
 nomenon was very remarkable as well as the coincidence 
 of his calculations. The two planets came together about 
 tliree hours and a half before sunrise, and lience in the 
 East. The tirst appearance would be seen in the East 
 May 20, 747, just before sunrise. The second in Xov. 
 five months later in the south, at 8 P. M.: hence star ap- 
 peared toward Bm. The former indicated the birth, 
 the latter the way to Bm. This involves those who claim 
 747 in all the chronological difficulty to whicli we have 
 referred. Accordingly, the birth of X. is put three years 
 earlier, and makes Him 33 years at Baptism. Therefore 
 the Magi did not probably set out at the first appearance, 
 but delayed some time. Again, trie term of Quirinus 
 was not earlier than 750, whereas this makes nativity 
 three years before. But the taxing might have been four 
 years earlier than 750. The only alternative for this 
 naturalistic explanation is to adopt the theory of a new 
 star, natural or miraculous. 3. Objections : Why should 
 Herod slaughter 3 year old children? As the first star 
 was only five months before, therefore we must agree 
 that star at Bm. was a new star or a miraculous one. 
 
Milton supposes a leadiiio^ of the rajs; Dr. Pritclfard the 
 ijoiiig and standin^:^ of the star was in consequence of the 
 Magi's journeying- and arrival ; Dr. Alexander that the 
 words mean they saw the star again on the road to Bni. 
 and thus coniirined their hopes, and hence it was a star 
 seeming to go hefore them. 4. God would not use their 
 false notions of astrology for such an end. Strauss asks, 
 Is astrology wrong elsewhere but right in this case ? 
 Ans : God employs men as the}' are, bringing good out 
 of evil. Also, astrolog}^ was then considered as associa- 
 ted with all true astronomy-. It embodied true science. 
 Astrology and Alchemy embraced all that was known of 
 science. There are perplexing ditiiculties either way. 
 Still, the astrological phenomena must have given cor- 
 roboration to the expectations for the Messiah. Observ- 
 ed at the time of birth, and hence they turnish collateral 
 evidence to the time of the nativity. 
 
 Mythists assert the whole to be a myth. Arabian mer- 
 chants befriended the parents in their poverty. The magi 
 were fixed upon, as they were astronomers ; and star, be- 
 cause of O. T. passages referring to a great light, and 
 which were literallv understood. The gifts referred to 
 Isaiah 60 : 6. " 
 
 As to the general effect, Herod and the city were trou- 
 bled. The wise men of the Jews called and questioned, 
 and replied, " Christ was to be born in Bm."' Mic, 5 : 2. 
 Note the difference in reading between Micah and Matt. 
 A striking illustration of two opposites meaning the 
 same thing. Warned of God in a dream, the magi 
 avoided Ilerod and returned home another way. 
 
 §11. FUfi lit into Eg II pi — Herod's Cm tit i/ — The Return. 
 Matt. 2 : 13-23. Besides saving tlie child's life, it sym- 
 bolically embodies the great truth that the Messiah was 
 to suffer. Hitherto all peaceful. Except poverty and 
 humility, nothing as yet indicated His suffering. The 
 design of the flight is five-fold. 1. To introduce the suf- 
 fering element. 2. Christ's kingly office set forth. 
 I'rincely honors bestowed. 3. O. and N. T. typical 
 relations established. Egypt was a refuge, being near 
 and under Roman power. Moses was saved there, where 
 also was the transitional state, of the church from the 
 family to the nation. Church came up out of Egypt 
 
38 
 
 when preserved. Now in danirer clmroli repairs there 
 again. Ciirist is saved. 4. In Egypt, IIos. 11 : 1 fulfil- 
 led. Obj'n : mi&api)lieatipn. Ans : The ealiiiig of Israel 
 from Egypt bears a ty[neal relation to Christ, o. New 
 evidence uf miraculous care observed for the child. Jo- 
 seph consjiicuous, as evidence for miraculous conception, 
 and pi-eservation. Hence he is too much nnderi'ated. 
 
 3Iasscu-rc of the Innocents. Objections : 1, Herod defeat- 
 ed his [)ur])ose b}^ inqniiiug of the Magi. Too cunning 
 for this. Better accom])lished by seci'tt messenger, &c. 
 2. Silence of contemitoi-aneous history. Could sucli {cru- 
 elty escape notice ? No, say negative critics. Josejihus 
 and Roman historians mak(? no record of it. Answer : 
 Whatever was unpleasant to Ronian ears Josephus was 
 careful to omit. Roman historians did not mention it 
 because they liad no sympathy with Jewish hist'y. Again, 
 tliis was only as a drop in the bucket as (compared with 
 Herod's cruelties. Through jealousy he killed his wife 
 and sons. Wlien dying he issued orders to destroy his 
 nobles, that there might be weeping at his death. 
 
 The wise men mocked Herod. Pride, ambition and 
 fear caused him to kill all the male children, roue "nctoa.^. 
 No mention of secrecy. From two years old and under 
 cannot be limited to those beginning their second year, 
 nor can it be said Christ was two years old. If tlie child 
 had just been seen by the Magi, why those two yrs. old 
 and under? Herod would have killed enougli children 
 without extending his order to those two ^-ears old. Ans. 
 Prophecy was thus fulfilled, Jer. 31 : 15. Objected again 
 that the prophecy is misapplied. Rachel is poetically 
 represented as rising from tlie grave, owing to the depor- 
 tation of captives at Ramah, the descendants of Jos. and 
 Benj. Here as rising to weep for the massacre of the 
 innocents at Bm. Ans. : Typical connection between 
 the two events. As to the number of children slaugh- 
 tered, sceptics exaggerate. Voltaire says 14,000. Anti- 
 quarians estimate the population by measurement of 
 space. This necessarily is liable to mislead. Vai'iously 
 estimated about 90, 10, or 12. Smallest most probable. 
 
 Mytliists, &c., say all heroic persons passed thi'ough 
 dangers during infancy and childhood. Romulus, Remus, 
 Cyrus, &c. Hence the eventful infancy of Christ, or, it 
 
39 
 
 was a pure invention to connect it with Moses and Heb'wg 
 in Eiivpt. The place of sojourn is unknown. Traditions 
 clash. Some, near IIeIioi)olis ; others, at Memphis. 
 Nor is the duration of the sojourn fullj known. Varies 
 as the date of birth by different critics. The return was 
 soon after Herod's death, as Jos. had not heard of his 
 successor. We may note Math.'s agreement with con- 
 temporaneous liist. Period of intricate changes, yet no 
 mistake is made. Herod's territory divided into three 
 parts. Herod Antipas, tetrarch over Galilee and Perea; 
 Archelaus: Judea, Idumea and Samaria. Herod had 
 ap{)ointed Archelaus king, but Augustus allowed him the 
 title of Ethnarch. Philip was allotted Trachonitis, Au- 
 ranites. The gospel narrative moves through all these 
 witliout a single blunder. 
 
 It was Joseph's intention to return to Bm. Warned 
 in a dream to return again to N"azureth. Propliecy ful- 
 filled, Jud. 13 : 5. That Nazareth is never mentioned in 
 
 0. T. is based [lartly on the etymology of the word. Sup- 
 posed to be from a Heb. word meanin.g n twig ; otliers 
 from a word signifying a crown. Allusion to Is. 11 : 1 
 compared with 53 : 3. Messiah to be a twig from the 
 prostrate stem of Jesse, i. e., of humble origin. There 
 is reference to the reputation of the town. " Can an3^ 
 good come out of Nazareth ?" Christ fulfilled prophecy 
 by living tliere. The return and settlement at Nazareth 
 close the period of infancy. 
 
 The peculiarities of this first subdivision of the prepar- 
 atory period are heightened by the silence that followed. 
 
 1. Alatt. and Lk. combine to form a unit, fitting like a lock 
 and key. 2. The supernatural and historical elements 
 are one. If miracles, they must be received on liistorical 
 evidence. Bleek says Christians cannot but expect 
 Christ's entrance into tlie world accoTupanied by peculiar 
 signs. 3. The attempt to discredit is based on subjective 
 and rationalistic grounds, i. e., difficulty to believe, vary- 
 ing with the individual. Critics argue in circulo. The 
 choice is between Matt, and Strauss. 4. The historical 
 characteristics already justified in connecting with O. T. 
 The typical and symbolical exhibited, and facts imply 
 and embody truths, which were brought out. 
 
 Second Siibdidsion of Preparaior>/ Period.— Its limits com- 
 prise the return and end of 30 years of quiet life at Naz- 
 
40 
 
 aretb, or settlement at ISTazareth to commencement of 
 mini.'^try. Profound silence. No uninspired writer could 
 refiaiii from liis own interpolations. Hence the contrast 
 between apocrypha and N. T. Desi2;n of the silence. 
 1. Essential to have a fuil account of Christ's origin, liis 
 ministry, public work and sacrifice. To this tlie g-ospels 
 correspond. 2. Period of growth, not work. Just enough 
 presented to maintain hist, connection. Silence a check 
 upon those who w^ould dwell on unimportant truths. 
 More would have been gratification of curiosity' to which 
 sacred historians never descend. Otherwise the narrative 
 would be impaired. 3. Such given as adds to our ideas 
 of Christ. Two extremes to be avoided : (a) That Christ 
 learned nothingin a natural way, but all superiiaturnl,even 
 to reading and writing. Thisview unwarranted b}- facts, 
 and unnecessar}' to his divinity. (/>) Naturalistic. This 
 exalts liis mental [)owers to the exclusion of the divine. 
 This untrue, as the people wondered at his wisdom, hav- 
 ing never learned. Narrative says " he taught not as one 
 taught by the scribes." He probably lived and learned 
 as other boys. Supposed to have learned his father's 
 trade. Mk. 6 : 3. See Dr. Alexander. 
 
 Gospel Lessons. — 1. Early life uneventful. 2. Growth, 
 not action. Grew in wisdom and stature. 3. He grew 
 in favor with unbelieving Galileans, who knew him best. 
 His brethren the most difficult to persuade, and his 
 townsmen sought twice to kill him. They were scan- 
 dalized by his assuming superiority. Tliere was no 
 unnatural and repulsive precocity in him. He possessed 
 a perfect human nature. Early Fathers say he had no 
 personal beauty, based on Is. 53: 2. Later view founded 
 on Ps, 45. 4. The most important is the following : 
 
 §12. Visit to the Pa.s.sowr.— Lk. 2 : 41-52. This "single 
 paragraph presents the fact of his extraordinary powers. 
 Were it not for this, there would be room for the asser- 
 tion that Christ received no miraculous gift till Baptism. 
 The event marks a transition in his consciousness. The 
 growing boy, full of heavenly wisdom, seeking after 
 knowledge, kind to his parents, obedient in all things. 
 Olshausen beautifully says, " He was a perfect boy, per- 
 fect man." A marked arrival of fuller consciousness of 
 his mission is also noticeable. Impressed with his desti- 
 
41 
 
 ny. Ill analoecy with human experience. Christ had a 
 child knowledo;e of himself. Now a youth's experience, 
 tlien the sudden mental changes, of which a youth is 
 often conscious. Hence glimpses of a portentous future. 
 How or when came to Jesus the consciousness of liis 
 Messiahship we ai-e not told. It must have been gradual. 
 A sinless being, with a knowledge of sin, yet pure, and 
 conscious of difference between himself and others, 
 Reading the law, and yet having perfect love to God ; 
 the types and prophecies of O. T. and conscious of their 
 fulfillment in liimself. A gradual conception of his Mes- 
 sianic character must have been wrought in liin). There 
 are evident traces however, when touching upon great 
 truths, of modern flashes gleaming in upon his soul. 
 This is one, and those at Baptism and on Mt. of Trans. 
 
 At this point the " Lives of Christ " open themselves. 
 The authors show what is to be their tiieory of the per- 
 son of X., upon which they explain the events of his life. 
 Rationalists deny or explain away the supernatural. 
 Orthodox wi-iters vary. It is important to know the 
 author's standpoint, and guard against misiijterpretation 
 of forms of statement. Ebrard, Pressense, and Beecher 
 explain by the xii^ roffc^ theory, which is a self-limitation, 
 or self-'^mptying of the Logos. Divine and human one 
 and tlie same. Not two natures, but one. Distinction 
 made betvvepii essential nature and attributes. X. was 
 God essentially and potentially, but emptied liimself of 
 his Divine contents. A babe like any other babe. Void 
 of ideas, was a bundle of germs which developed through- 
 out his whole life, and at exaltation his Divinity fully 
 restored. The human developed into the Divine ; the 
 Infinite having become finite, and the finite growing back 
 into the Infinite. This theory denies the real humanity 
 of X., robs him of human sympathy. X. is an uiideified 
 God. 
 
 Others lower X's humanity by separating it too much 
 from his divinity. He possessed all of our humanity, 
 but the converse is not true. Hence his was not ours, 
 but his own. Yet ours touches his. For this view, two 
 reasons. 1. He was sinless, therefore his capacities un- 
 like ours. We do not know what sinless humanity is, 
 2, He was Divine, and two natures in his person, there- 
 
42 
 
 fore above ns. All he did was not as a mere man. The 
 human infineiiced hythe divine, and hence all he did was 
 done by God. Illustration: A Christian is exalted, 
 owing ro the indwelling of the H. G. So X., though a 
 man, is exalted, by a personal union with the Father and 
 H. G. Hence as a man is intinitelj above any other 
 man, Paul maintains this in Hebrews, as the ground of 
 the infinite value of his sacritice. It is possible to so 
 view X. as to conceive of him as sustaining a double per- 
 sonalltii. Mojit of the " Lives of Christ " are based on 
 German theories, largely tainted with this speculation. 
 This is growing common with tlie Baptists. We study 
 him not merely as coinciding with our views of his 
 nature, but as a true man, developing according to his 
 nature, acting and acted upon. 
 
 Jesus went up to tlie temple with his parents. At 12 
 Jewish boys became " sons of the law," and took part in 
 the feasts &c. The country was safe from former dan- 
 gers. When X was about 10, Archelaus was banished 
 to Gaul. The government in the hands of procurators, 
 subordinate to governor of Syria, and thus Galilee, Sama- 
 ria and Judea were under Roman protection. The 
 parents returned from Passover but Jesus stayed behind. 
 They had proceeded a day's journey before they missed 
 him, thinking he was with his kinsmen. Failing to dis- 
 cover his whereabouts, they returned to the city. Found 
 him the third day at the temple, "'sitting in the midst of the 
 doctors." " Sitting" does not necessarily imply equality. 
 Strauss says it is unnatural that a boy of 12 should be 
 instructing men, that a scholar would have stood. "Hear- 
 ing and asking" imply instructing. Ans : Nothing in 
 the narrative inconsistent with an intelligent boy, pure 
 and curious for knowledge. Scholar standing was not 
 customary. The mother's question shows their mutual 
 relation. It is beautiful, rexvou, t: irrocYjaa:; rj/jJu 6'jt(0(: ; 
 The reply is variously interpreted. The grammar admits 
 of two. Some supply ellipsis locally — "Why did yon 
 look elsewhere, did you not know I would be in my 
 Father's house?" Better: "in my Father's affairs." 
 and thus at the Temple, as the article is indeiinite. The 
 first recorded words of X., and an acknowledgment of 
 God as his Father. Others affirm that at this juncture 
 
43 
 
 the conscionsness of his destiny became more real. Pre- 
 viously lie had been passive, but not so now. Best 
 humanitarians claim the words are expressive of penetra- 
 ting insio-lit into his divine mission. We may remark 
 that the incident serves to enhance our interest occasion- 
 ed by his miraculous birth. The parental anxiety, inquiry 
 for a lost cliild, public place where he was found, were 
 all calculated to arouse thouglits in the parent's minds. 
 
 Critical Objections. 1. Unnatural that his mother should 
 lose him. Ans : He was old enough to take care of him- 
 self. Easily lost in a large crowd. 2. Unnatural that he 
 should cause his mother so great anxiety, and then give 
 her such a reply. Ans : Replj' not rough, but a gentle 
 admonition that her claims were subordinate to a higher 
 duty. 3. If the circumstances of conception were true, 
 the mother could not fail to comprehend his answer. 
 Ans: Mary may not have fully known what he meant. 
 12 years could have glided by with nothing extraordina- 
 ry. Hence the origin of the Mythical interpretation, 
 based on Moses and Samuel. From the narrative, we 
 learn that he returned to ISTazareth and was subject to 
 his parents. 
 
 Joseph's death. Supposed to have died soon after this. 
 Not mentioned again. ApociTphal gospels say he died 
 wlien Jesus was 19. Evidently dead at the time of cru- 
 cifixion, as Jesus gave his mother into John's care. 
 
 Whj/ Nazareth chosen as abode f 1. To fulfill prohecy. 
 2. It was his parents' home. 3 It afforded safety. 
 Greater danger in Jerusalem. 4. Could gain more influ- 
 ence in Galilee than in Jerns. under the Pharisaic eye. 
 5. Isolated from Jewish instruction, he is supposed to 
 have been taught of Ggd. His wisdom given by inspira- 
 tion. 6. Reared where the scenes of his public ministry 
 were to be chiefly laid. Renan: "The whole Galilean 
 ministry was within sight of his youthful home." Pres- 
 ent Nazareth consists of 3000 inhabitants. It lies in a 
 narrow valley, shut in between two rocks. North of the 
 Esdraelon plain, the hill looks n. e. to Ilermon. There- 
 fore the view was familiar to him when looking towards 
 the snovv-ca[>ped Hermon, the northernmost point of X's 
 work. The eastern view confronted by Tabor, west 
 by Carmel and the sea. The southern by Gilboa and 
 Samaria. 
 
§13. Genealogies. Mth. 1 : 1-17 : Lk. 3 : 23-38. The 
 importance of these lies in the necessity to prove X's 
 Messianic chiinis. The Jewisli o:;eneaIogies were sacredly 
 kept and open to all. Strauss considers them fraudulent, 
 and that they involve difficulties, heing opposed to 0. T. 
 Hence no proof of Christ's Davidic descent. 1. On the 
 contrary, the royal line could not be obscure. People, 
 would have guarded the royal seed as He was to descend 
 from David. This was the promise. If Christ had been 
 of Davidic descent, he would have been hailed as Mes- 
 siah. Ans : ]^o theocratic rulers on account of sin. 2. 
 Birth at Bm. was not generally believed, nor does Jesus 
 reply to tliis. Joim 7 : 42. A Xazarene,andso he passes in 
 Gospels and Acts. Ans : Nowhere else charged, not in 
 Sanhedrim. Were the charge sul)stantial, it would have 
 been fatal to him. He was not ignorant of his lineage, 
 as he calls himself jOarfc/'s son. Peter at Pentecost, tlie 
 Acts and Epistles use it. Strauss says title is officially 
 no real fact.- 3. I*To concurrent testimony, no reference 
 to Ebionites. Ans: Abundant pi-oof without the gene- 
 alogies. "The son of" or " begat" not limited to literal 
 relationship of father and son. This true when line runs 
 out. This remark clarities Mth.'s gene;ilogy. Remote 
 ancestors called fathers when distinct line vanishes. 
 Case: Math, says "Jacob begat Joseph." Lk., "Joseph 
 was the son of Heli." No literalness here. Again, Mth. 
 speaks of three divisions of fourteen genealogies each. 
 Difficulty. But the most obvious way to remove it is to 
 count David twice. Another difficulty. In second table 
 four kings omitted which Chronicles supplies, thus mak- 
 ing eighteen generations instead of fourteen. Therefore 
 " so all the generations" must mean all given in Mth. 
 Charge of ignorance absurd, as every child in Judea 
 knew the royal list better than we do the Presidential, 
 or the royal line of Gt. Britain. But why fourteen ? 1. To 
 aid memory. 2. Symbolic value of the'nnmber of letters, 
 which were fourteen. David=14. ]>, V^, D* = 14. 3. 
 Periods chronologically equal. Untrue, because the first 
 period is twice as long as the other two. 4. These 
 periods of national history. This the most satisfactory, 
 i.e., the theocratic descent. What names omitted and 
 why ? Amaziah, Joash and Ahaziah, occurring between 
 
( ^ ^ ^^-a^n^' ?^^ur^J ^^try^u^Y C^^^^-*''^/ /ou)'iy\^ 
 
45 
 
 Jorarn and Ozias. Some say because they descended 
 from Jezebel, and others because they were mere ciphers. 
 Jelioiachim omitted as captivity began in liis reign, or 
 because made king by a foreign power. Objection to 
 Mth. 1 : 11. Jechonias had no brethren. Ans: Breth- 
 ren may mean contemporaries. Again Jechonias had no 
 children, hence not the ftuher of Sahithiel. " Write the 
 man childless." Jer. 22 : 23. Perhaps this meant he 
 should lack in a direct line of successors to the throne. 
 All these little difficulties sufficiently accounted for. 
 
 Discrepancks hetween Mth. and Lk. 1. Mth's genealogy 
 opens the narrative and was probably copied. Lk's is 
 introduced as a i)art of X's i)ersonal history. 2. Mth. de- 
 scends while Lk. ascends. 3. Math, traces the royal line, 
 Lk. the natural to Adam. 4. Lk. fuller than M'th., giv- 
 ing 42 names to Mth's 2S. To David the lists agree. 
 Difficulty : Between Salmon and David only three names 
 occur for 400 or 500 years. Same dif. in Ruth, and 
 hence another instance of contradiction. Ans: Names 
 omitted. Said that Raliab was anothei" line than Jewish. 
 
 Dlcergence of lincnr/e froin iJcrid (/.oiimii'an/. Mth. fol- 
 lows Solomon. Lk. Nathan. Two hypotheses : 1. Both 
 Mth. and Lk. give Joseph's genealogy. 2. Mth. that of 
 Joseph and Lk. Mary's. (1) current before Reformation, 
 and now supported by many of the best critics, viz. Alford, 
 Meyer, &c. (2) held by' Wieseler, Ebrard, Greswell, 
 Alexander, &c. If both of Joseph, why different? Ans: 
 One through kings the other from father to son. How 
 same names in two different lines, e. g. Salathiel and 
 Zorobabel ? Ans: 1. Two persons with same name. 
 2. A mere coincidence. Lines together in Salathiel, as 
 direct line runs out and, Sal. nearest heir. This explains 
 how Jechonias is Salathiel's father, while Lk. makes 
 Salathiel son of Neri. Main obj : If both Joseph's, 
 they only establish X's legal right to the throne, but no 
 personal descent. Ans : Some sa}' this was all that was 
 required. But prophecy does not allow this as it is too 
 definite. Compare 2 Sam. 2 : 12 and Acts 2 : 20 ; 13 : 23. 
 
 Hijpotheds of Jos. and 3Iari/. First cousins relieves the 
 objection. Grandfather of both one and the same per- 
 son : Matthat and Matthan. .Matthan had two sons. 
 Heli and Jacob. Hence Jos. and Marv were first-cousins — 
 
46 
 
 of Davidic origin. M. had sisters, but no mention of 
 brothers. Tradition says M. was a ward of Jos. Thus 
 a partial relief afforded if genealogies be of Jos. They 
 give X's right to the throne personally and officially. Ob- 
 jections against Lie's giving Mary's : 1. Female line not 
 recorded." Ans : This not female, but genealogy of 
 woman through her father, and thus the male line of M's 
 ancestry. 2. "M. and Eliz. were cousins, and Eliz. of 
 unroyal line, hence M. not of royal line, Ans : This 
 could be on mother's side. Intermarriage allowed among 
 the tribes. 3. M's name not mentioned in Lk's genealogy, 
 but purports that of Jos. Ans: This not easily over- 
 come, yet not absolutely fatal to the theory, as Lk. says, 
 " who was supposed to be the son of," &c. 4. No other 
 proof that M. was from David. Ans: Untrue — proved 
 outside of genealogies that Christ was of royal line, which 
 confirms the probability that list was M's. Lk. 1 : 31-32. 
 This prior to marriage and thus necessary that the child 
 should have a volantari/ father. This the light in which 
 she could understand her union with Jos. if she were of 
 the house of David. Lk. 1 : 27. David may refer to the 
 principal subject, as well as to the nearest antecedent, 
 i. e. Jos. M. went to Bm. to enrol her name the same 
 as Jos. Lk. 2: 4. So tar then as she was not from 
 Levitic genealogy, proofs contrary. All texts which 
 prove Christ to be from David also prove the same for M. 
 
 This subject is beset with difficulties. Slight mistakes 
 destroy certainty. Genealogical principles unknown to 
 us. Much has been cleared up which critics deemed 
 insurmountable, and hence reasonable to suppose that 
 coming researches will remove all difficulties. (See 
 Smith's Diet., Arthur Harvey, and Dr. Green on Colenso.) 
 
 §14. Histon/ of John the Baptist. Mth. 3: 1-13; Mk. 
 1: 1-8; Lk.'S: 1-18. Ministry of John and Tempt, 
 introduced Christ's public v/ork. Lk. begins by formal 
 transition of six dates. Mth. and Mk. begin with preach- 
 ing of the Baptist. Prophecy groui)s the Ba|)tism and 
 entrance upon public work. Predictions of Alalachi are 
 now fulfilled. John began to [)reach in 749. a Sabbatical 
 year by best chronology, which relieved the people from 
 labor and thus afforded them leisure to attend John's 
 ministry. " The word of the Lord came to John in the 
 

47 
 
 wilderness," given to commence work directly, and hence 
 he was inspired and divinely guided. Rationalists say 
 this was useless, that John had a conviction that he was 
 a man of God, and, seeing the condition of the people, 
 undertook the work of reformation. But the scriptures 
 show he was under divine guidance. 
 
 Desifpi of John's Miiil^tr)/. — 1. Preparation for Christ. 
 John represented O. T. economy, and was the last and 
 greatest of O. T. prophets, heing an embodiment of its 
 spirit. Hence first design was to announce I^ew Dispen- 
 sation. Popular belief in external kingdom, which John 
 proposed to remove. 2. Preparation of people by repen- 
 tance. O. T. economy educated religious life without 
 satisfying it and the people to e.x'pect the Messiah. But 
 the majority of the people had lost the spiritual import 
 of prophetic teaching. The Sadducees were sceptical 
 and Pharisees self-righteous. The earnest Essenes had 
 become fanatics. Hence the necessity of repentance to 
 restore the spiritual, so that Christ might come in con- 
 tact with O. T. religion in revived life and power, and 
 not an eliete religion. 3. To point out the Messiah in 
 the person of Jesus of Nazareth, and hand over to Christ 
 the O. T. Dispensation. " This was He of whom," &c. 
 4. To show both dispensations united in Christ, that the 
 old yielded to him and withdrew. 
 
 John accomplished his designs, first by preaching. No 
 new doctrine, but a return to the power and spirit of the 
 O. T. Its character was severe, denunciatory, and replete 
 with threatenings of wa-ath. Abounded in O. T. figures. 
 Points out specific sins. Calls all to repentance, but 
 never inculcates asceticism, yet wants them to observe 
 the purity represented by it. Points to Christ as the 
 lamb of God, advances upon Isaiah by pointing to the 
 individual. His preaching more weighty because of the 
 purity of his life. Personally fitted to revive O. T. relig- 
 ion, representing the formal and spiritual. 
 
 Design furtheV shown by the rite of baptism. The 
 people were wont to connect the spiritual with the sym- 
 bolical. Baptism somethinsr new, not associated with the 
 law. Its significance was the washing away of their sins, 
 a restoration of the spiritual. John charged with having 
 learned his baptism from the form of receiving prose- 
 
48 
 
 lytes. Ans : As an initiatory rite of J iidaism it did not 
 assume form until after the destruction of the temple. 
 He received it from the washinscs of the O. T. 
 
 John's rehitions to O. T. 1. By birth, beins^ of priestly 
 orio;!!!. 2. By his fulfilment of Malachi's prophecy, 3:1, 
 anil Isa. 40: 3. 3. By the place he frequented, viz., the 
 Desert of Judea, or, as Lk. says, "the reo:ion round about 
 Jordan," i. e. between mountains, lower Jordan and the 
 Dead Sea. Boundai-y crossed where Israel entered Ca- 
 naan. Symbolical of the moral and reliirious destitution 
 of the i)eople. So regarded in O. T. ITence John lived 
 unlike his master, who sought men at their own homes. 
 He must be found in the wilderness. His personal 
 api)earance was peculiar. Dress made of the cheapest 
 and coarsest material, and had camel's hair uhich is shed 
 yearly. But this raiment was not official, only assumed 
 by Elijah and John to sj-mbolize renouncement of ease 
 and lu.vury. In 2 Kings 1 : 8 Elijidi called a " hairy 
 man.'' Comp. Zech. 13 : 4. Hence our conclusion. His 
 food was locusts and wild honey. The nearest at hand. 
 All these things were fit to mark liim as a representative 
 of O, T. dispensation. 
 
 Was Jolm's preaching merely negative ? Was his 
 repentance a saving grace? Did bajitism cleanse or 
 simply symbolize? Rationalists affirm that repentance 
 meant renouncing of sin outwardly. Some orthodox 
 writers say no vitality in John's work. Answer: John 
 taught all the grace and power of 0. T. Hence real re- 
 pentance and faith, as far as O. T. exhibited. He vindi- 
 cated the relation between O. and N. T. " I baptize 
 with," &c. Further said baptism was u mere external 
 ceremony; others make the contrast between John and 
 Christ, " I baptize in dependence upon him who," &c. 
 J5est : No allusion to Christian baptism as an ordinance. 
 Eminent authorities hold this view. Christian baptism 
 not yet cstablisiied. Meaning then, " I baptize ceremo- 
 nially with efficacy." Propo'sed to the people's faith— 
 " He shall pour out the Spirit." Thus the distinction is 
 in degree and not in kind.. "He shall .... with fire:" 
 
 1. Keference to judgment fire. Next clause, "chaff", &c." 
 
 2. Purifying fire. Drs. Alexander and Schaff. Better: 
 Holy Ghost, and therefore zeal. 
 
49 
 
 The popular success oT John was immense. Jerusalem 
 emptied itself to the banks of the Jordan. Jndea, Sama- 
 ria and Galilee gathered there. Priests, scribes, lawyers 
 and soldiers, all conditions thronged to hear him. Yet, 
 success not enduring, as the masses only received him , 
 formally. His power enhanced by his peculiar position, 
 as a voice from the desert. Had he preached in Jerusa- 
 lem it is said he would have been powerless. 
 
 §15. The Baptism of Jesus. — Matt. 3 : 13, 14 ; Mk. 1 : 
 9-11; Lk. 3 : 21-23. John began six months before. 
 Christ now ready to be brought before the excited crowd. 
 It was the design of Christ's journey, to be baptized. 
 " Tou i^o-Tcod/juai, " which denotes purpose. The act 
 anomalous, that the less should bless the greater. Matt, 
 says John felt this and tried to hinder him. Christ's 
 words peculiar: suffer now. Two things iniplied in them : 
 1. Something was to be allowed, suffered, although unu- 
 sual. 2. Seemingly temporary. "Suffer it to be so no^i'." 
 It is TZfnzou, seendy -to complete the law's obligation, 
 what is right in a specific sense for the fulfillment of 
 re(lem|>tion. The refusal of John shows : 1. John knew 
 and believed Jesus to be the Messiah. 2. Was subordi- 
 nate, did as Christ commanded him. John baptized on 
 Christ's authority. What was the design? As John's 
 baptism involved confession of sin, what relation did 
 Christ's bear to this? 1. Strauss: Confession of sin 
 actual. 2. Others, it implied peccability, and hence 
 Lange, it was ceremonial unclean ness. Too narrow a 
 view. 3. Schenkel says it means sympath}- with othei's. 
 4. Ti'ue view. As the circumcision, it was expressive of 
 his assumption of his people's sins. In the law's view he 
 v;as a sinner, and therefore exhibited the necessity of the 
 washing away of the sins assumed. As Messiah he was 
 sin-bearer. Objection to last : Jesus confounded with 
 the people ; they made confession, and might infer Christ 
 did likewise for his own sins. Guarded : Lest they might 
 think so, the divine and John's testimony intervened. 
 The design is again shown as manifesting the unity of 
 the two dispensations. The chief representatives of each 
 meet. The O. T. covenant baptizes the N. T. covenant. 
 Christ publicly gives authority to the work of John, and 
 John confesses Christ to be superior to himself. John 
 decrea-ed, Christ increased. 
 
50 
 
 Buptisni served to iunnij;nrate tlie work of Christ. Af- 
 forded opportunity to God to reeoiiMiize liis Son. This 
 was the chief import of t!)0 baptism — 'r^joo [ia-Tcndv^ro^, 
 the genitive absolute, Lk. 3: 21. Main subjects the mi- 
 raculous manifestations. Divine attestations necessary 
 to the Messiah's coming. Wiierefore Christ's arrival 
 delayed till a great concourse had flocked to John. 
 
 At Baptism Christ was anointed for his work by the 
 Spirit. Not only formal, but full of vital power. The 
 person of Christ is acted upon. Ilo'y Gliost the agent 
 in making him a fit place for the indwelling of the Logos. 
 John's baptism represented cleansing from sin wliich is 
 the Spirit's work. In the case of Christ tlie gift con- 
 firmed by a sign of the Spirit's descent. The sign and 
 descent go together. Lk. says " Jesus was praying" — a 
 religious act, a real communication of the Spirit to Jesus. 
 After baptism is the temptation, the trying of liis gift. 
 Conjecture: Christ now for the first time realizes his 
 mission, the full consciousness of his sacrificial character. 
 Aus : It is not given to penetrate so deeply into the mind 
 of Christ. Certain : lie did advance in knowledge of an 
 important spiritual crisis. Always full of the Spirit 
 sufiiciently for his purposes, but now receives it immea- 
 sural)ry for bis public ministry. Had it before in kind, 
 not in degree, as now he is the organ of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 As a dove. 1. Motion of the dove — gliding. 2. 
 Quickness. 3. Softness of the dove. But t'hese are in- 
 consistent with what Lk. says, aoj/.tarixio ec'dsi ; hence an 
 appearance, a bodily shape, real dove shape, if language 
 means anything. Why dove ? 1. Reference to O. T. 
 after the deluge. 2. Brooding, symbolical of new crea- 
 tion. 3. Purity. 4. Symbol of sacrifice, ceremonial 
 associations. (3) and (4) combined the best. Represented 
 the whole spirit of his ministry. 1. The salvation he 
 preached was peaceful, pure and lovely. 2. A sacrificial 
 work. 3. Productive agency of Spirit at creation — 
 brooding dove. Ditficulty : Alth. 3 : 16— " the lieavens 
 were opened aurcj)— to hini ;" Mk. 1 : 10 — ' He saw tlie 
 heavens, &c.;" John 1: '32— "I saw," i.e., John Bap. 
 Hence the Baptist must have seen the Spirit himself. 
 Ans : 1. This was the sign by which he could recognize 
 Christ. Van Oosterzee considers the event as private, 
 
51 
 
 and Spirit seen only by Jolin and Christ. 01>j : a. Nat. 
 inter, deny the objective reality of the phenomena. The 
 vision became so only in the spiritual world, and for the 
 spiritualized, h. Discrepancy in the several accounts. 
 Mth. and Mk. say " Jesus saw ;" John — Baptist " saw;" 
 while Lk. is sjeneral — " heaven opened and Spirit de- 
 scended." 2. Dramatic representations, in the reconcilia- 
 tion between O. and X. T. Voice from heaven not con- 
 lined to John and Jesus alone. " My beloved Son " 
 founded on 2 Sam. 7: 12. But the expression does not 
 imply that he became Son at baptism, because of his 
 eternal relationship. Ps. 2 : 25, 42 and " In whom I am 
 pleased" from Is. 42. Lauije says aorist, denoting an 
 eternal act; Alexander— a definite act. The last best. 
 
 In this expression we have another attestation to 
 Christ's Messiahship. Thisis the revelation of the Trinity 
 in their personal agency in redemption. The first in 
 conception. The Father at baptism declares the Son's 
 Messiahsliip and the Spirit gives grace for the office. 
 Minor differences in form of expressions made a subject 
 of cavil. Mth: "This is my, &c." whilst Mk. and Lk. 
 " Thou art, &c." Some think both are proper and that 
 there were two utterances from heaven. Words were 
 doubtless in Hebrew or Aramaic and here in an inspired 
 translation. 
 
 Objections: — 1. Shortness of time. If John began six 
 montlis before there w^as not time enougli for his success 
 and influence. Ans : John's work not independent but 
 an appendage to Christ's. Results accounted for by the 
 condition and great state of expectancy of the Jews. 
 Strauss makes John to have begun when about 20 years 
 old, long before Christ came to liim. 2. Inconsistency 
 between John and Syn. Syn. say John knew Jesus whilst 
 John says tiie Baptist did not know him. Again John 
 represents the Bap. as recognizing Christ as the Messiah 
 from the first, whereas Syn. affirm that he sent a deputa- 
 tion to Jesus from prison, saying " Art thou he that 
 should come?" Strauss says John's gospel belongs to a 
 later period, that John would not have said the "Lamb 
 of God" as yet because he did not know him as the suf- 
 fering Messiah. Had he understood him, he would have 
 baptized him and given up his work. Ans: In baptiz- 
 
52 
 
 iiii^, John obeyed. Strauss attain : If the miraculous 
 conception were true, Christ had no need of the Spirit at 
 this time, and lience tlie event is a myth. Aorain : John 
 an Essene, and he baptized and lived as the Essenes did. 
 This o:ives a historical root of Cliristianity. John Bap- 
 tist and Essenisi;: are the germs of Christianity. John 
 saw the necessity of a moral reformation, and if the peo- 
 ple could be aroused, the Messiah would appear, and 
 hence he proclaimed time for repentance had arrived. 
 But John according to Strauss never acknovvleged Jesus 
 as Messiah. Later, Christ is baptized and indoctrinated 
 into Messianic ideas. Jesus possessed a freer and clearer 
 nature than John, and felt a lack in John's negative 
 method. Hence he realized all tho-^e graces of his nature 
 whicli resulted from his communion with God, and which 
 were unattainable by ascetic methods. They looked upon 
 each other as other teacliers did. Strauss has three 
 mytiiical stages of growth : 1. Church idea of the dignity 
 of Jesus required that John should acknowledge his 
 Messiahship. 2. Lk.'s story of his childhood. 3. John's 
 account of a clear acknowledgment of Christ by the Bap- 
 tist from the first. Strauss' canon : That account which 
 tends to exalt the person of Christ is the mythical one. 
 This rules out John's narrative altogether of the Baptist's 
 recognition of Christ from the first. Tl^e remainder of 
 John's gospel is assumed. 
 
 The residuum : l.,The relation of John to the Essenes, 
 v,-ho were entirely different. Essenes were dualistic. 
 Enjoined asceticism upon all, John on himself. 2. The 
 ascetic washings were not baptisms but oft repeated. 
 John's once for all. 3. Strauss: John founded a sect. 
 Ans : ITntrue, but called the whole nation to repentance. 
 Asceticism taught i)urity consisted in mortification, but 
 receivers of John's baptism did not l)elong to any such 
 school. 4. It involves a long continuation of Christ 
 with John which is inadmissible. Renan : Christ more 
 independent than John. Before Christ came, John had 
 formed a full idea of reformation. Likewise Christ had 
 deferred doing good until he had seen John and improved 
 on him. Schenkel says Christ and John were antagon- 
 istic. Christ at first sympathized with John, but after- 
 wards regarded his influence injurious. Baptism of Christ 
 
63 
 
 only a transaction in his soul, which he conceived to bo his 
 divine mission, and hence separated tVoni John. Keim 
 holds it was purely humanitarian. Relates with rever- 
 ence. Christ merely a man. Outward signs unreal, but 
 baptism a consecration to a work which John had begun. 
 
 §16. The Temptation. — This is a great mystery, as it 
 involves the doctrine of his person. Follows baptism. 
 Hengstenberg holds th;it there is not room enough in 40 
 days tor Bap. and Tempt. 
 
 Designs : 1. Typical. The heads of the Messianic and 
 evil kingdoms brought face to face. Jesus, full of the 
 Spirit, is subjected to a trial of strength with Satan, and 
 triumphs in the complete overthi'ow of his adversary. 
 Tempt, recalls the history of redemption, tiiat of a conflict 
 between the kingdoms of light and darkness. "Seed of 
 the woman" in O. T. now fulfilled. Christ overcomes 
 for his people, therefore, in connection with baptism and 
 before his life work. 2. Had Messianic designs, {a) It 
 formed a part of Christ's humiliation. (6) All the temp- 
 tations prof)Osed false views of the Messianic work. 
 What could be accomplished only through suffering, 
 Christ is urged lo do at once by unlawful means. 8. 
 Personal reference to his own inward experience. Spends 
 forty days in prayer and lasting, and thus by outward 
 means he was prepared for liis work. 4. Exemplary. It 
 shows us how to triumph, by prayer, fasting and the Holy 
 Scriptures. Christ's practical sermon on " Resist the 
 devil and he will flee from you." A complete circle of 
 temptations, addressed to his whole nature, so that he 
 was tempted " in all points like as we." 
 
 " Led by the Spirit." 1. His own mind. 2. The 
 devil. 3. The Holy Spirit. Probably the last who led 
 him to conquest over Satan in the wilderness. The desert 
 was the Quarantania mountain near Jericho. '• With 
 wild heasts" indicates a contrast with Adam's situation. 
 " Forty days fasting" has O. T. associations. Obj : Im- 
 possible — too longatime. Ans : 1. Supernatural power. 
 2. Power of spirit over body exalted to an eminent degree 
 in Christ. 3. Abstinence only from ordinary nourish- 
 ments. Lk, 4:2: oux lipaytv., thus making his abstinence 
 total. Typical import in the number forty. Moses in- 
 terceded for his people forty days ; punishment consist- 
 
54 
 
 ed of forty strikes; Niiievitesfiisted forty days, Ezekiel's 
 piii-beariiig forty days, and purification same Ieiio;th. 
 IlciR-e connected with confession of sin. Mth. and Lk. 
 differ. One puts tempt, at the end of forty days, the 
 other says he was tempted ail tlie time. Most natural 
 exphmation that he was tempted in thought. 
 
 Character of the Temptations. I. "If thou be the Son 
 of God" refers to God's words at baptism. Satan wants 
 proof. " Command these stones, &c." Stones numer- 
 ous, a. Tempt, to ghittony. Improbable, because to 
 eat bread after forty days fasting would not be glutton}-. 
 b. Tempt, to distrust Providence, and escape suffering 
 insei)arable from the character and mission which he as- 
 sumed. Not exclusively app]ical)le to Christ. His suf- 
 ferings were representative. Jews looked for the Mes- 
 siah as an embodiment of plenty to supply their wants. 
 (See feeding of 5000.) Wliereibre Chi"ist was tempted 
 to do b}' one stroke what was to result from his death 
 and universal law of love among men. Ans : Deut. 8 : 3. 
 Misinterpreted as referring to truth. ISTo reference to 
 truth but to manna, as truth can not feed the body. Idea : 
 Man must look to God to supply all his wants, not 
 primarily either to ordinary or extraordinary means. 
 
 II. Directly opposed to the first. A presumptuous dis- 
 trust in God. As if Satan said, '"If God is to support 
 you, try him." Imitates Christ by quoting Ps. 91 : 11- 
 12. TTTspuyiou zoo isooi). a. Roof of Solomon's porch. 
 h. Royal porch, c. Double pitch of roof like wings, d. 
 Wing, as we use it. He is urged to forego suffering. 
 x\gain Christ takes suffering as the appointed means to 
 fulfill his mission. He quotes Deut. 6: 16. Double 
 meaning. (1.) Thou shouldst not tempt me who am 
 your sovereign. (2.) T should tempt God by so doing. 
 
 III. " All kingdoms." Xot Palestine. Did Satan ()wn 
 the world? Then he had a right to give. Called and is 
 the prince of this world. TlTe world and Messiah antag- 
 «mistic. Not Christ's kingdoms now, though they are 
 one day to be Christ's. Falseness of his claim lay in 
 regarding his power as superior to Christ's, whereas"^ all 
 his power is allowed h'un for the good of the church. The 
 supreme sin in the temptation is the worshipping of Satan. 
 (Question whether (a) civil homage due, a sovereign ov {h) 
 
55 
 
 reliijions worship is doinaiuled here. The two are insep- 
 arable. To acknowledge Satan would be to receive from 
 him. Tompt. was to seculariry and idolatr}'. Jews es- 
 pecially exposed to this, adapting themselves to surround- 
 ing nations by adopting their idols. Satan proposed to 
 give the Icingdoms of the world immediately. This was 
 just the object of Christ's coming, i.e., to establish Mes- 
 sianic sway over the whole eartli. The people ex[)ected 
 this, but Christ chose the spii'itual and suffering instead 
 of the temporal. The humiliation andsuii'eringare seen to 
 be his choice rather than his accepting the proffer of Satan. 
 From Deut. 6: 13, " Thou shalt &c." Signal honor put 
 on Deut. (Especially assailed by late critics.) Thrice 
 quoted by Christ under the usual form : ytyudrTTac. 
 
 Remarks : The three tempTations were a summary of 
 his life sufferings. His trium[)h a token of final triumph. 
 Three tilings. 1. Rebellion vs. Cod. 2. Denial of 
 Christ's supreme Divinity. 3. Subjection of the same to 
 Satan. Not vulgar seductions of sense, but are addressed 
 to an enlightened, lofty nature. Hence they are the 
 highest conceivable forms of sin. Addressed to the 
 whole nature, corresponding to the different periods of 
 life, the sensual (childhood), intellectual (youth), and 
 imaginative (manhood). The three temptations are 
 therefore comprehensive. As to their order, Mth. and 
 Lk. differ, hence the Rationalistic cavils. Mth.'s order 
 is preferred. 1. Because it exhil)its the contrast between 
 the first two. 2. Lk.'s •' get thee behind me Satan" more 
 fitting for the closing scene. Not easily ascertained what 
 determines Lk.'s order. 
 
 When Temptations ended " the devil departed from 
 him." "-'///'' -/ainoii, tilla fixed season, i. e., to be renewed 
 at times. Some refer it to Gethsemane, but properly his 
 whole life was a temptation. Following the departure 
 of the devil "angels ministered unto him," Jerf/.ovoov is 
 serving food, and hence appropriate. 
 
 Nature of the Temptation. How was Chi'ist approached ? 
 Owing to difficulties, sound, sober critics have taken 
 refuge in the symbolical rather than the literal, e. g., 
 Pressense and Lange. Doubtless it was something akin 
 to humanity because of the " worshipping him." 
 Grounds: 1. Bodily appearance of Satan without 
 
56 
 
 analogy in scripture. Ans : S. can assume the form of 
 an "iiiigel of liglit" if he wishes. 2 Cor. 11: 14. Why 
 not that of man ? 2. Unimaginable that S. could trans- 
 port Clirist through the air, &c. Ans: These cavilers 
 admit S. has power over the soul which is far greater, 
 then why not over the body ? Dr. Alexnnder : No com- 
 pulsion. Verb means " they went together," and thus a 
 part of Christ's humiliation in allowing himself to be 
 tempted. 3. If Christ did not know S. he was not omnis- 
 cient, if he did he would not have conversed with him. 
 4. He could not see the world's kingdoms at once with- 
 out a miracle and if he did Satan performed a miracle. 
 Ans: Who knows Satan's power — how much divine 
 power God had given him ? JsixvOaiuis. " causes to see." 
 Man}' believe S. caused all this to pass before the mind's 
 eye. If this is so say some critics this surrenders the 
 literal inter'n. Not so. It is deciding whether the literal 
 or metaphorical should be applied to the passage. 5. 
 Strauss : Satan too cunning to make such a proposal. 
 Again : If Christ could be tempted he was not sinless, 
 if so, no temptation. (Lange and Pressense : Christ had 
 but one essence and that divine.) If it be necessary to 
 suppose that Christ could sin in order to be tempted, 
 then the divine essence could have sinned. Ques. of mid- 
 dle ages since Augustine : Can we conceive of Christ 
 as peccable? Now, we must hold two things. 1. Christ's 
 tempt, not merely an external act. His struggles tierce 
 and internal. They shook hisvery soul. " In all points.'" 
 2. " Yet without sin." Wherefore he was sinless. 
 
 Diverse views of the occurrences. 1. Strauss de- 
 clares it to be a myth. Meyer says there was a cuniiict be- 
 tween the kingdoms of light and darkness. 2. Schleier- 
 macher : A parable given by Christ, and mistaken by his 
 disciples. Intended to teach tliem how to escape temp- 
 tation. 3. Nat: External occurrence uttered in symbol- 
 ical language. Lange. 4. An ecstatic state of mind 
 brought about by fas'ting. Origen and Cyprian, with 
 Olshausen in modern times. 5. Simply a conflict in 
 Christ's mind produced by imagination. Therefore 
 Christ was necessarily sinful. Literature on this is 
 immense. V^de Trench's Studies on the Gospels. 
 
57 
 
 I'UBLTC MINISTRY. 
 
 Early Judean Ministry, 
 
 PrcUrnwari/ : SyiioptistsundJolm now differ. I. As to 
 limits of tlie period, Syns. speak of Christ as leaving 
 Jndea for Gal. imniediateh- after the Temptation and 
 tljere teaching. Thej mention no public work in Jndea, 
 previous to Ilis o:oing t(^ Jerusalem, toward the close of 
 His ministry. John (chs. 1-4) supplements theiraccount, 
 mentioning a brief visit to Galilee, then a going to Jeru- 
 salem to His first Passover, aud a subsequent tarrying 
 and baptizing in Judea. Hence, John chs, 1-4, may be 
 tei'nied History of Early Judean Ministry. 
 
 II. They differ as to Christ's teaching, its nature and 
 manner. 
 
 1. According to Syn. substance of Christ's teaching is 
 " kingdom of God," its nature, design, conditions of 
 memliership. (Sermon on Mt., Parables, etc) In John 
 tlie i»hrase occurs in but two chs. (3: 3-5, 18 : 36). 
 
 2. Syn. Christ silent as to Messianic claims, suppresses 
 popular Messianic enthusiasm and refuses Messianic 
 titles. In John His Divine Person is the main thetne. 
 (Nicodernns. Woman of Samar.) 
 
 3. Syn. say little of His sacrificial death. In John it 
 is predicted from the first. (Vide. 1 : 29, 2 : li>-22, 3 : 14. 
 
 4. In Syn. Christ teaches universality of gospel only 
 toward close of His life. John records it among His 
 earliest utterances. (Vide. 4 : 21-23). 
 
 Sceptics, exaggerating these difficulties, reject John, 
 begin with Gal. Ministry, and adopting Syn. account, 
 allege : 
 
 1. At first Christ had n'o consciousness of Messiahship, 
 but was driven to assume Messianic character to accom- 
 plish His plans. 
 
 2. Doctrine of a sacrificial mission grew up in His 
 mind oradnally. Strauss says both these ideas conceiv- 
 ed late in life while in Csesarea Philippi, when He saw 
 deatli was inevitable. 
 
 3. Idea of a universal gospel did not originate until 
 after His rejection by the Jewish nation. 
 
 To reconcile tliese"^ differences is the great problem of 
 gospel harmony. This may be done by showing 1st. 
 
58 
 
 That there is no inconsistency in the accounts, or 2. That 
 their conihination yields liistoric unity. (1.) These ac- 
 counts involve one another and are parts of one whole. 
 The idea of king and kingdom are supplemental. (2.) 
 Syn's teaching as to Person of Christ is not so meagre as 
 sceptics claim. Messianic titles are suppressed, be- 
 cause of false Messianic notions. From the outset 
 authority is claimed which is irrational unless divine. 
 
 Thecritical view requiresthe rejection notof John alone, 
 but also of a great portion of the Syn's account. (Bap- 
 tism, Temptation, Synag. at Nazaretli, Sermon on Mt., 
 Parables.) 
 
 (3.) In John, Christ does teach " the kins-dom." (To 
 Nicodemus 3: 3-5. Before Pilate 18 : 36.) In Syn. 
 there are passages teaching divinity (Matt. 11 : 25-30.) 
 
 (4.) A progress is marked in the self-revelation of Christ 
 in Jno. as well as in Syn. In public it is enigmatical; 
 direct declarations are private. (Cleansing temple. Dis- 
 course with J^icodemus and Samaritan woman.) 
 
 Historical reason for this ditference : Christ owed a 
 duty to the Jews as a nation, first. They could not be 
 rejected until they had rejected Him. Jno's plan is to 
 record instances of Christ's declaration of Messiahship 
 in Jerusalem, When rejected there. He goes to Galilee, 
 prepares for the founding of a church, with its otKcers 
 and government, as is related by the Syn. 
 
 Jno. 1-4 : 45 in the harmony are inserted between 
 Matt. 4: 11 and 12 (Vide Scheme.) To justify such 
 insertion, it must be shown : 
 
 1. No real contradiction exists between the two ac- 
 counts. 2. Tlie portion omitted was not in the plan of 
 the individnal writer. 3. Combination furnishes a con- 
 sistent view. 4. Many undesigned coincidences evince 
 that the accounts presuppose one another. 
 
 Reasons for insertion lure : 
 
 1. Mt. and Mk. indicate space between Temptation and 
 Galilean Ministry, by saying that Christ went to Galilee 
 because of the inprisonment of Jno. Bap. 
 
 2. These four chaps: Jno. record interviews between 
 Jesus and Jno. Bap. They must have occurred before 
 Jno. was imprisoned. They must have occurred after 
 the Baptism— as it is referred to as past (Jno. 1 : 32), 
 
and if later than tlie B.'iptisni they must he snhseqnent 
 to the Temptation, as nothing intervened hetween these 
 events (Mi<. 1 : 12). Fonr chs. of Jno. at least shonhl be 
 inserted here as the narrative is nn broken. Some har- 
 monists insert tive — thns changing the time of the begin- 
 ning of the Galilean minit^try. 
 
 Length of this period is inferred from §25. Jno. 4 : 
 35. Fonr months till harvest. Harvest time was the 
 middle of Nisan, i.e. beginning of April. 
 
 Fonr months previous brings ns to December, eight 
 months subsequent to the first Passcn-er (ch. 3), and one 
 year after the Baptism. Hence duration of Judean 
 ministi'v is estimated as one year. (So Meyer, Wieseier), 
 The e.\egesis of some assigns to this verse merely the 
 weight of a proverb — (1) Gratuitous. J^o evidence of 
 such proverb. (2) Foix*e of izc forbids (so Meyer vs. 
 Aiiord and Gieseler). These minor differences do not 
 essentially affect the events of the period. 
 
 Designs of the events of this period : 
 
 1. Primanj Offering Himself to nation as the true Mes- 
 siah — by, a. Testimony of Jno. Bap. b. Cleansing Tem- 
 ple — sliowing supreme authority in House of God. c. 
 Miracles. (/. Teaching siViritual nature of His kingdom. 
 
 2. Sceonddri/. Preparation for Galilean ministry, in 
 consequence of foreseen rejection by Jewish liierarchy — 
 by, a. Brief visit to Galilee. 6. Choice of disciples irre- 
 spective of existing theocrac.v. c. Stay in Judea, teach- 
 ingand baptizing with Jno. Bap., until his imprisonment. 
 
 Series of first things is given in Jno.; viz. first gather- 
 ing of disciples, first miracle, first Passover, first teach- 
 iinif, &c. Jno. records a week's history — day by day. 
 
 '1st day 1 : 19-28, 2d. 1: 29-34, 3d. 1: 35-42, 4th. 1: 
 43-51, and 2: 1, r^ 'JM''?- '^fi ^f'^'^J/->'^- e. the third day 
 after starting on His journey, making seven days in ali. 
 Compare Jno's record of last week of Christ's life, 
 
 §18. Testimoni) of John Bapt. to Jesus. Such testimony, 
 naturally to be expected at this period, historically oc- 
 curs. Sanhedrim send from Jerus. a deputation of Priests 
 and Levites to inquire into tlie meaning of John's work. 
 Their arrival at the Jordan coincides with Christ's return 
 from the desert of the temptatfon (v. 27.) (Others how- 
 ever place Christ's return at v. 29 on the day following). 
 
60 
 
 This (Icpntntion evinces the extensive iinpression i)ro- 
 cliiced by John's work. The mission v/ns authoritative, 
 sent out by the highest ecclesiastical court of the nation, 
 whose duty it was to investifjate all religions movements. 
 It was not necessarily liostile at iirst. Had they fonnd 
 John easil>' influenced and a courtier (Lk. 7: 25), they would 
 iiave favored his views and used him as an insti'ument in 
 furthering their own designs. (Jolin5: 35); but having 
 lieard his testimony to Chiisf, they charo-e him with 
 " having a devil." (Lk. 7 : 33). Their questions show 
 acquaintance with tlie prevailing belief that the Mes- 
 siah was at hand, and exhibit the state of popular Mes- 
 sianic expectations. Art thou the Christ, or Elias (Mai. 
 4 : 5), or that prophet. (Deut. 18 : 15.) 
 
 Does not John's denial that he is Elias, contradict 
 Clirist's express statement. Matt. 11 : 14 ? Ans : John 
 denies he is Elias in person; admits he is in spirit by 
 quoting prophecies referring to Elias, as referring to 
 himself oflicially. 
 
 Jews of that day, seem to have made a false distinc- 
 tion based on Deut. 18: 15, between Christ and " tluit 
 prophet." (John 4 : 19, 25, 6 : 14, 7 : 40, 41). 
 
 To these questions, John returns an abrupt " No," 
 wishing to keep himself in the background, while lie 
 bi'ings Jesus forward. He defines his own mission and 
 character, by simply quoting Is. 40: 3. 
 
 Points of interest are 1. Extent of John's influence. 
 
 2. Excited Messianic expectations and their character. 
 
 3. Providential care that rulers should be brought into 
 contact with Christ, and receive ample proof of His 
 claims, from the very first. 4. Humility of John Bap. 
 Lange notes analogy between temp, of Christ and John, 
 a temptation to external power. 
 
 Place. Text. liocpt. sv lirji^a^noa, (John 1 : 28), criti- 
 cal reading, liqd^au:a. Location, now unknown. Prob- 
 ably e. of Jordan ; a ford near Jericho. Renewed testi- 
 mony, (v. 29). "Lamb of God." One of the most 
 striking passages of scripture. It embodies the great 
 truths of both Testaments and declares the fulfillment of 
 prophecy. The theme of the O. T. is one to come. John 
 says ' Behold Him,' " He is here." 
 
61 
 
 Ilongstenberni; confines his reference to the Paschal 
 Lainb, iis beinii; tl)e true sin-oftV-rino-. Bnt John nses 
 " Lamb'' as rei'resontative of all O. T. sacrificial types. 
 
 Reasons for selecting; "Lamb" as a title of Chi'ist are, 
 1. Fnllills Is. 53: 7. "Lamb to the slann^hter," which 
 Jews recognized as Messianic. 2. Expresses the s[)irit 
 of Christ's ministry. (Comp. Rev. 5: 6.) 
 
 Some critics den}' a sacrilicial reference, others oliject, 
 1. That John in here teaching vicarions deatli of Christ 
 as Son of God, for the world, displays a knowledge of 
 doctrines not then current, but which were the after 
 development of advanced theology. 
 
 Ans. a. Objection based on subversion of history. 
 These conceptions of Messiah's work were fundamental : 
 they had died out of the popular creed and John's mission 
 was to revive them. 
 
 b. John speaks as a pro[)het and was himself surprised 
 at the manner in which his prophecies were fulfilled. 
 (Lk. 7: 20). 
 
 2d Oijjection, Jolm 1 : 33 " I knew him not" contra- 
 dicts Mt. 3: 14, wiiic'h presupposes knowledge of Jesus, 
 both as man and Messiah. 
 
 Ans. a. Distinction between knowiniz; officially and 
 personally. (Rob. Gk. Harm. p. 187, §18. Note.) John 
 Bap. was aware that Jesus of Naz. was Messiah of proph- 
 ecy. "But he knew not Jesus personally" before His 
 baptism, when the spirit descended as sign upon him. 
 This is not an explanation. If he did not know him per- 
 sonally, why refuse to baptize him (Mt. 3: 14). To ex- 
 plain by dignity of Christ's personal appearance (Far- 
 rar I. p. 114 seq.) is unsatisfactory. 
 
 h. Better explanation, oox fjozcv has only relative force. 
 John Bap.'s previous knowledge was subjective, now 
 possessing a new knowledge based on testimony from 
 heaven, he makes an otticial declaration. (Comp. relative 
 use of terms by John in chs. 2: 11, and a further and in- 
 creased belief based on testimony of miracles, also 7: 5). 
 
 §19. Jesus gains disciples. Had the writer of the fourth 
 gospel been an impostor, John Bap.'s testimony would 
 have been succeeded by the abandonment of his separate 
 work, his following Christ as a disciple, going with him 
 to Jerus. and testifying to His Messiahship before the 
 
. 62 
 
 Sanliedrim. Multitudes would have accepted and follow- 
 ed Him. On the contrary, the srospel narrative informs 
 us that but few believe, tliat Jolm Cap. recognizing the 
 independency of his own ministry keeps aloof from 
 Christ and continues bearing testimony to Him as the 
 Messiah. 
 
 Desupi of Christ in gatherinc/ disciples. 1. To lead people 
 to Him gradually. 2. lie tlius begins to lay the founda- 
 tion of that church which was to continue after He had 
 been taken away, an action based on foreknowledge of 
 His death. Although submitting Himself to the people 
 for their rejection, He acts as knowing the result. 
 
 V. 35-37. J^ext day at tenth hour i.e. 4 P. M., two dis- 
 ciplesof John follow Jesus: first converts : their address 
 " Rabbi" the first recognition of Christ as a teacher. 
 
 Of these two, one was Andrew, the other is argued to 
 have been Evangelist John, from, 1. His habitual silence 
 as to himself 2. The minuteness of the details proves 
 the narrator to have been an eye witness. 3. Syn. men- 
 tion John among the first disciples. 
 
 41 V. Twofold exegesis, — tzocotoq: 
 
 1. Andrew and Jolm seek each his own brother: An- 
 drew finds his /?'r.9/. (So Meyer and Alexander). 
 
 2. Both seek Peter : Andrew is first to find him. 
 
 43 V. The next day Philip, being called, brings Nath. 
 commonly understood to be Bartholomew — because 1. 
 John never mentions a Bartholomew nor the Synops. a 
 Nathaniel. 2. Time of his call, while journeying through 
 Gal.: (Barthol. resided at Cana of 'Galilee). "3. When 
 Christ showed Himself to His disciples after resurrection 
 at sea of Tiberias, Nath. was of their number. (John 
 21: 1,2.) 4. Philip brought Nath. : and the names Philip 
 and Bartholomew always together in the catalogues of 
 the Twelve. 5. Bartholomew is a patronymic, son of 
 Tolmai, by which name he was probably better known 
 than by that of Nathaniel. (Vide. Farrar I. p. 152 and 
 Note). Thus 6 disciples are called in the first week. 
 
 Objection : In Mt. 16 : 18, Peter's change of name is con- 
 nected with l\is confession, thus contradicting John 1 : 42. 
 Ans. Name Cephas is \\evQ given ; in Mt. Ciirist confirms 
 and (tp plies it. 
 
68 
 
 N'ote the character of those called; relio^ioiis-rQinded 
 men : come to Jordan to hear John ; meet Christ ; listen 
 to Bap.'s testimony concerning Him, and are convinced 
 of the validity of His claims. 
 
 Rationalists allege that Syn. (Lk. 5 : 1-11) represent 
 disciples as following Christ becanse of miracles He per- 
 formed. John says (1. 35-51) they were impressed by His 
 personal inllnence. These acconnts are not inconsistent. 
 According to both, Christ furnishes evidence of His 
 Messiahsiiip. Here He calls Philip with authority, shows 
 divine knowledge in reading mind of Nath., claims to be 
 the connecting link between heaven and earth. (Comp. 
 Gen. 28: 12.)" 
 
 Note the only recorded words of Jesus up to this point. 
 At 12 vears of age to His mother, Lk. 2 : 49. To John 
 Bap. Mt. 3: 15. ^To Satan, Mt. 1: 1-11. To His disci- 
 ples, John 1: 39. 
 
 §20. John 2 : 1-12. Marriage at Cana. John here 
 emphasizes the fact of tlie '■'• heghinincj of miracles." Ch. 
 2 : 11. Cana of Gal. mentioned, not to distinguish the 
 town from another of the same name, but to show that 
 the beginnings of Christ's work were in Gal. 
 
 Why in Galilee,and before in Jerusalem ? 1. Prediction 
 (Is. 9 :1, 2, quoted Matt. 4 : 14) that Gal. should be tirst 
 to receive spiritual light, is thus fulfilled. 2. John, who 
 confines his account to Christ's Judean work, thus shows 
 his knowledge of the work in Galilee. 
 
 Christ went to Galilee at this time, both as a prepara- 
 tion for the coming Gal. ministry, and to produce a 
 simultaneous impression in different parts of the country 
 by his appearance in various places within a short time, 
 giving opportunity for judgment upon himself and work. 
 This visit is an episode in Judean Period, pointing for- 
 ward to the next. 
 
 Farrar identifies Cana with Kefr-Kenna. (Vide Vol. 
 I. Note, p. 161. Andrews, p. 149.) Robinson prefers 
 Kana el Jelil. 
 
 That the marriage was among Christ's relatives has 
 been inferred from Mary's prominence at the feast ; as 
 to the parties themselves conjecture is fruitless. Joseph 
 being unmentioned, it may be assumed he was now dead. 
 Jewish marriage feasts usually lasted 7 days (Judg. 14: 
 12). Festivities had begun when Jesus arrived. 
 
64 
 
 Ohjectioim : 1. How did Mary know lie con!d perform 
 miracles, if this was first? especially as the occasion did 
 not demand it. Wine migiit readily be purchased. Ans : 
 Some, he wrought miracles in private; some, she looked 
 to him naturally for aid; others, from circumstances of 
 his birth, she had come to believe in his divinity ; others, 
 knowing his work had been inaugurated b\' his baptism, 
 she looked for a speedy fulfil ment of her hopes. 
 
 2. How reconcile Clirist's working the miracle with 
 his statement, " M3' hour is not yet come," v. 4. Ann : 
 Mistaken idea in her mind as to character of Messianic 
 kingdom, viz., time of material plenty. Clirist shows 
 thaHiuman motives, even the most urgent, were not to 
 be the cause of the manifestation of his glory as Messiah. 
 Com p. Lk. 2 : 49. 
 
 '6. Amount of wine produced. Each firkin or hath 
 CHeb.) contained from 7 to 9 gals., hence each jar held 
 about I of a barrel. (Vide Farrar, Vol. I., p. 166, note 
 2.) Ans: Some argue from v. 8, tliat the water became 
 wine, as drawn, or was a handsome wedding gift for a 
 poor household. The large quantity is significant of 
 Christ's giving without measure. It precludes all possi- 
 bility of collusion. 
 
 De-vigns. 1. To manifest his glory. 2. To relieve 
 want and embarrassment of host. 3. Teaches true mo- 
 rality ; contrasts John the ascetic with Christ, who did 
 not withdraw from the world, but lived above it. 4. 
 Enforces the sanctity of the marriage tie. It is analogous 
 to feeding the multitudes; but here, substance is changed, 
 there multi[»lied. (On tliis miracle, vide Princeton Re- 
 view, July and October, 1865.) 
 
 From Cana, Christ goes to Capernaum (emended text, 
 ere h'acpaouaohfi), probably to join a caravan there making 
 up for the feast. From Lk. 4: 23 it has been inferred 
 that Christ at this time wrought miracles there. It is 
 preferable to refer this allusion to healing nobleman's 
 son, Jno. 4 : 46-54. 
 
 §21. John 2:13-25. First Passover. Temple Cleansed. 
 Christ finds the Temple polluted by the presence of cat- 
 tle and doves for sacrifice, and of money changers, ex- 
 changing foreign coin. Although Christ used a scourge, 
 the force emi>loyed was moral and spiritual rather than 
 
65 
 
 physical. PdvTo.z (v. 15) refers to men as well as cattle. 
 Some infer from v. 16, said, etc., leniency toward (love- 
 sellers. Caj»tions cavil. Command is given, because 
 doves could not be scourged. 
 
 V. 16, " make not," etc. Comp. stronger utterance 
 Matt. 21 : 13, — quoted from Is. 56: 7, — employed at sec- 
 ond cleansing of the Temple. V. IT quot. from Ps. 69:9. 
 
 Significance of the act: 1. Teaches lesson in repent- 
 ance, and need of reformation. 2. Symbolic expression 
 of Messianic claims. D(^clares God his Father (v, 16), 
 assumes supreme authority in temple (fuUilling Mai. 3 : 
 1-3), refers to Temple as type of his body (v. 19), God's 
 permanent indwelling, typically represented in the Tem- 
 ple, being literal in his life. Christ in public declares 
 Messiahship thus enigmatically, because, 1. People are 
 not ready to receive him ; false Messianic notions pre- 
 vail ; more explicit statement would lead to popular out- 
 break. 2. Bible an oriental book. Jews an Eastern 
 nation. To them an enignnitic act needed no interpre- 
 tation. That the Jews understood him is evident from 
 their demanding a sign, v. 18. This shows they were 
 knowingly rejecting Christ, altliough possessing evidence 
 of John Bapt., of prophets, and of Christ's miracles. By 
 sign tliey denoted an outward manifestation coinciding 
 with their idea of Messiah. Sign given v. 19, afterwards 
 called sign of Jona, contains indisputable reference to 
 his resurrection (v. 21). This is onlj- occasion of Christ's 
 predicting his resurrection on third day. That his ene- 
 mies understood him is seen from their allusion to it 
 after his death. (Matt. 27 : 63.) 
 
 Criticcd Objections.' 1. Unhistoric expectation and pre- 
 diction of his death. He could not yet foresee this issue ; 
 people and disciples could not understand him. [Mean- 
 der and Olshausen, denying any reference to resurrection, 
 interpret, ' Persist and destroy tliis national temple, and 
 I will found a spiritual church.'] 
 
 Alls: Not necessary for Christ to limit his discourses 
 by what others could understand. True exegesis uses 
 vabv, V. 19, in typical, not double sense. 
 
 2. Obj. Boldness of act would enrage the Jews and 
 excite opposition. 
 
66 
 
 Ans : The siuldemiess and justice of tlie net eomliined 
 with the air of Christ's personal anthority (Cp. John 18 : 
 6) account for no popuhir distnrhanco. 
 
 8. Sjn. record a siniihir scene in Passion Week; could 
 not liave occurred twice, lience both are mythical. 
 
 Ans : Why not twice ? Appropriate at beginning and 
 end of ministry. A iirst and last oi)portunity of accept- 
 ing him. John, who above records the early Jndeau 
 ministry, mentions the cleansing occurring in that period, 
 and to avoid repetition omits the second, contained in 
 tlie Syn. Strauss understands cleansing as a real act, 
 but in opposition to Judaism and the entire sacrificial 
 system. 
 
 V. 23 alludes to further miracles. None recorded, 
 John introducing miracles only forsake of the connected 
 discourses. Verses 23, 25, Effect. " Many believed," 
 with evanescent faith, founded only upon the miracles. 
 (Comp. £7Ti(TT£U(Tau, V. 23, iKcazeuiv, v. 24. " Many trusted 
 him. He did not trust himself to them.") 
 
 §22. John 3 : 1-21. Discourse mith Nicodemus. Nico- 
 demus, member of Sanhedrim, on evidence of miracles 
 believes Christ to be a divinely appointed teacher. He 
 is mentioned (Comp. 7 : 50), Tabernacles, also (ch. 19 : 39) 
 burial. "Coming uy night" shows odium already at- 
 taching to Christ. Being a Pharisee and ruler, his visit 
 shows that Clirist's influence was not confined to a single 
 class. 
 
 Jesus teaches, 1. Nature, necessity, source of the new 
 birth. 2. Spiritual nature of kingdom of heaven. 3. 
 In order to regeneration there is necessity for faith in 
 himself, as only revealer of the Father, aiul sacrifice for 
 sin. Christ declares Ins pre-existence ; displays fore- 
 knowledge of the atonement. 
 
 Perplexity of Nicodemus evinces total loss among his 
 class, of spiritual meaning of O. Test. Christ's rebuke 
 (v. 10) sliows that he is teaching no new doctrine. 
 
 Objcciiovs to genuineness of the Discourse. 1. These doc- 
 trines not developed until later. 2. Terms and ideas are 
 those of heretical school in early church, especially such 
 phrases, " Christ the only revealer of the Father," "new 
 birth," etc. "■ Begeneration" not a N. T. word. Verbal 
 form occurs 16 times; peculiar to John. Only allied 
 form in N. T. is naXq-yr^eaia, Mt. 19: 28, Tit. 3 : 5. 
 
67 
 
 Strauss rei2:iirds whole discourse as fiction, bearino- 
 impress of Pseudo John's mind. Xieod. an ideal cliarac- 
 ter introduced as ott'set to the reproach tliat all ti.rst con- 
 verts were from tlie pooi'er class. 
 
 Bauer. All allegory ; Kicodemus representing unbe- 
 lieving Judaism, seeking a sign, a counterpart" of the 
 woman of Samaria, who represents believing heathenism. 
 
 Sceptical Inferencefi. These doctrines, peculiar to John's 
 gospel, are those of Gnosticism. Hence the fourth gos- 
 [)el must have been written as late as close of 2nd Cent, 
 by a Gnostic, probably a Valentinian. 
 
 Ans. 1, Terminology alone is peculiar to John. Both 
 Testaments teach these doctrines. Comp. O. T. expression 
 Ps. 51: 10 "clean heart:" also Paul's phrase '■'■y.natz'' 
 Gal. 6 : 15. 2. True relation of Gnosticism to N. T. 
 doctrine, a. Sce|>tics exaggerate the resemblance; more 
 difference than likeness, b. Gnosticism a heresy arising 
 within the churcli. Its ideas and terms are borrowed 
 from John. c. Alexandrian philosophy of wliich Gnos- 
 ticism was an off-shoot was imbued with O. T. ideas. 
 jS". T. was the development of these ideas. Hence both 
 drawing from a common source employed to some degree 
 similar modes of thonglit and expression, d. Christ 
 dealt with the philosophical questions of His time. e. 
 John, writing when Gnostic speculation had begun to 
 disturb the church, like Paul, (Cp. Eph. and Col.) 
 writes against it, using its nomenclature. Christ's 
 teachings now are clearer than those subsequently given 
 in Galilee, because, 1, His great purpose of offering 
 Himself to the Jews as their Messiah necessitated lucid 
 statement of nature and, blessings of His kingdom. In 
 Galilee His audiences were popular and His aim was to 
 establish the church. 2. This was private interview, 
 with a well disposed inquirer. (Cp. Woman of Samaria.) 
 §23. John 3 : 22-36. Jesus remains in Judea and bap- 
 tizes. Some conjecture, without reason, that Christ re- 
 turned from Jerus. into Gal. Christ leaves Jerusalem, 
 not on account of open hostility, but because after offer- 
 ing Himself to the Jews, he had been rejected. He tar- 
 ries in Judea (v. 22). 1. National promises must be 
 fulfilled: offer of Himself be made more general, not 
 restricted to a single feast. He may have attended 
 
68 
 
 Pentecost and Tabei-nacles dnrins:^ this period. 2. Jolm's 
 testimony liavin^r not yet ended, the Galilean Ministry 
 could not proj)erly beijin. 
 
 Meagre description of Christ's work at this period, no 
 miracles, no long disconrses, leads to inference that little 
 was done. His work is same as that of Bap. 1. Facts 
 show likeness. Chi'ist employed tlie same rite as John, 
 with same import, for as no subsequent mention of bap- 
 tism occurs until Pentecost, Chrtsiian baptism was not 
 instituted until after Christ's death. 2. Christ's early 
 teachino; in Galilee, evidently similar to that in Judea, 
 and John Bap.'s work, are described in the same language. 
 3. As Christ's work and John's are parallel in time, both 
 would naturally pursue the same line of teaching. There 
 would not be two different ba[)tisms in same period of de- 
 velopment. Remarks : John Bap.'s hold on the masses 
 gradually transferred to Christ: His work thus growing 
 out of John's. They do not unite, for that would destroy 
 their proper relation. Christ stands aside as Messiah. 
 John points to Him. They do not se|)arate widel}', either 
 in place or teaching, lest they should be mistaken for rival 
 prophets, v. 24. "John was not yet cast into prison." 
 From fcnirth gospel alone no e.xegetical reason can be 
 assigned for this statement. John however wrote with 
 Syn. before him. They make no mention of Judean 
 ministry but date Christ's work in Gal. from the impris- 
 onment of John Bap. John shows that his narrative of 
 Judean work does not conflict with any Syn. statements 
 because Christ had not at this time entered upon Gali- 
 lean ministry " for John was not yet cast into prison i. e. 
 Bap.'s testimony was not yet ended, it was not yet time 
 for Christ to leave Judea. ^-Enon near Salim probably 
 in Valley of Jordan Western side, near Jericho. (Farrar 
 I. p. 202, Note.) 
 
 v. 25. Question started as to purifying, between John's 
 disciples and a Jew (Emended Text" v. 25. loonacoo.) 
 Bap.'s disciples complain to him of Christ's bai)tizing. 
 He bears additional testimony to Jesus ; declaring that 
 not to accept Him as Messiah, means condemnation. 
 (v. 3G.) ^ 
 
 V. 31-86. Some say without good reason that these are 
 words of Evangelist, ratlier thiin of John Bap. for they 
 display an acquaintance with doctrines not then revealed. 
 
69 
 
 Points of interest. 1. John Bap. still had a body of dis- 
 ciples. 2. John still regards his ministry subordinate to 
 Ciirist. 3. Clear views of John noncerninu: Clirist. 
 
 §25. John 4 : 4-42. Woman of Samaria — S)/char. This 
 name occurs nowhere else. in scriiiture. Common view, 
 that it is nickname for Shechem, meaning "• drunkard," 
 or " liar " is based on, Is. 28 : 1-7, where i.phraimites are 
 Ci\]\ed, shiccoriai ''drunkards;" Hab. 2:18 moreh slieker 
 " teacher of lies " which is said to reler to Moreh, the 
 original name of district of Siiechem ; and habitual use 
 by John oH hyoutvo:; (v. 5) to denote a soubriquet (cp. 11: 
 16, 19: 13-17.) 
 
 Some say Sychar was suburb of Shechem. Jacob's 
 well, near entrance of valley, mile from present city, 
 " one of few spots identified with Christ's presence.'"' 
 6th hour i. e. noon. 
 
 Different tone of woman and i*\icodemus. l!^icodemus, 
 sober, grave, and earnest, regards Christ as teacher. 
 Woman, sprightly, conversational, looks upon Christ as 
 traveller. Ciirist varies His teaching to suit each case. 
 With Xicodemus an instructed Jew, lie dwells on 
 technical topics of religion e. g. doctrines of new-birth. 
 To the woman He speaks of a supply for the soul — thirst 
 cornmou to all. 
 
 Two views of Samaritans, 1. Common view. En- 
 tirely heathen ; no descent from Jacob, no right to 0. T. 
 privileges. 2. Mixed race — remnants of 10 tribes and 
 heathen settlers — looking for Messiah as a prophet (John 
 4 : 25j. They stand in N. T. as a link between Jews and 
 heathen. Not regarding them as chosen people. Christ 
 does not pursue ministry among them Mt. 10 : 5. 
 Although non- Judaic, they were not pagan (v. 20). 
 
 A historical import of this incident, prediction of the 
 universal spread of the gospel, — the natural sequel of 
 discourse with Nicodemus. To him Christ taught the 
 spiritual nature of His kingdom. If spiritual it must be 
 universal, and all formal barriers be done away. 
 
 Smaritans believd on hearing Christ's words (v. 41,42). 
 Jews disbelieved though beholding His miracles. 
 
 Sceptics objeet : Christ here nmkes distinct claim to Mes- 
 siaship, " I am He," but few days later, in Galilee, for- 
 bids any allusion to his divinity, even among disciples. 
 
70 
 
 Ans : Christ is ill foreio;!! country. His statements would 
 provoke no hostility from tlis rulers. This is no real 
 advance on His teaching to JSTicodemus or John Bapt's 
 testimony concerning Him. But now He assumes title 
 of Messiali for first time. 
 
 Distinguish in this period between private and public 
 teaching. His utterances in private are unrestrained, in 
 public, symbolic. 
 
 GALILEAN MINISTRY. 
 
 Ministry in Eastern Galilee. 
 
 Gal. Ministry extends from the close of Jurlean until 
 the three last feasts. The Feeding of 5,000 divides this 
 Ministry into those of Eastern and Northern Gal. Its 
 commencement and duration depend upon two questions. 
 
 1. Is Syn. journey {M\. 4 : 12. Mk. 1 : 14. Lk. 4 : 14.) 
 Same as that ot John 4, or subsequent to John 5? 
 
 2. Was feast of John 5. 1. Passover, Pentecost, Taber- 
 nacles, Puriin ? Wieseler has attempted to settle ques- 
 tion first by historically^ making time of John Bap's im- 
 •prisonment coincident with feast of Jol>n 5. 
 
 Discussion of Qaen. First. I. Those identifying, jour- 
 neys argue. \. Motive assigned by Syn. and John for 
 Christ's' leaving Judoa is similar (§24. Mt. 4: 12, Mk. 1 : 
 14. Lk. 4 : 14. Jno. 4 : 1-3). Syns. say it was im- 
 prisonment of John. John says he was aware that Phari- 
 sees knew that He " made and baptized more disciples 
 tlian John" (ch. 6). John had been imprisoned by Herod 
 through Pharisaic intrigue. Hence Jesus, as being barn 
 a greater object of hatred than John, departed into Gal. 
 to avoid persecution. Two ohj's: a. Syn. do not mention 
 Pharisees as concerned in John's imprisonment. Ans : 
 True ; but if not, why does Jesus leave Judea ? A pri- 
 vate quarrel between Herod and John is no sufficient rea- 
 son. Jno. (3:25 certainly implies Pharisaic hostility 
 evinced by endeavors to stir up differences between John 
 and Jesus. Jesus' saying (4 : 44) that " a prophet hath 
 no honor in his own country " (i. e. Judea) declares hos- 
 tility to himself and hence to John as they were engaged 
 in the same work. Objectors cannot say that Jesns de- 
 parted mcrelji to begin His Gal. work, for according to 
 their own theory the Gal. Ministry does not begintill 
 
71 ' 
 
 afteniext Passover, b. If John was imprisoned by Ilerod, 
 liow did Christ escape persecution by goins^ to Gal., 
 Herod's kingdom ? Christ's mission being religions, not 
 politicah Ans : He feared Pharisees, acting upon Her- 
 od's example, ratlier tlian Herod. His care even in Gal. 
 where their intinence was slight, to repress Messianic 
 entlinsiasm and His reserve as to his Messiahship, show 
 his apprehension of tlieir hostility. 
 
 2. Journey of John 4: 43 is emphasized as though a 
 formal leaving of Judea, while the return to Gal. after 
 feast of John 5 is passed over without mention. Gess. 
 characterizes John 4 : 43 as comm. on Mt..4: 14. 
 
 3. The discourse with Sam. woman (John 4) precisely 
 accords with this view. Christ, rejected by the Jews, 
 and about entering on His Gal. ministry, discloses the 
 nniversalit}' of the gospel. 
 
 4. Reception given Christ in Gal. (John 4 : 45) implies 
 a formal beginning of His work there of which John 
 gives a specimen 4: 46-54. If His work did not com- 
 mence at this time, if the Syn. account be not inserted 
 here, four months from this arrival until feast of John 
 5 : 1 are unaccounted for, a single miracle alone being 
 recorded. 5. At feast of John 5, John Bapt.'s mifiistry 
 is referred to as past (v. 35 '■'■was a light"), hence his 
 imjirisonment and Christ's consequent entering upon the 
 Gal. ministry must be placed before John 5. 
 
 II. Those holding journeys of Syn. and John 4 to be 
 different, argue : 1. The exegesis of John 4 : 1 implies 
 that John was still at large ivide And. p. 162; Wies. 161 ; 
 Gres. II. 212.) Ans : Best comm. explain, "John was not 
 as successful as Jesus." 
 
 2. From John 4 : 54,'" this is again second miracle," 
 etc., which mention seems to indicate that this miracle, 
 like the first at Cana, was something out of the ordinary 
 course of events, it has been argued that the regular Gal, 
 ministry had not yet begun. Aiis : The emphasis lies 
 upon f)3cov, i. e., second miracle performed by Christ 
 coming out of Judea info Galilee. 
 
 3. Ilostilfty of Pharisees undeveloped until charge of 
 Sabbnth-breaking at feast (John 5). Ans: Hostility in 
 its effects is certainly spoken o'f in ch. 3 : 22 and 4 : 3. 
 
 4. Unless Syn. account be introduced after John 5, we 
 are obliged to bring in after this time a Passover not 
 
• 72 
 
 mentioned by Syn. Ans : Tliis nr2:nnient does not liold 
 (Vr) in. mrtn^ure — Syn. omit other feasts, e. <>:., Tabei-naeles 
 and Dedication — nor [b) in mode — it is not tlieir plan to 
 record feasts at Jernsalem. 
 
 Ai\2:iimcnts pro and con nearly balance. Compromise 
 view is held by Ellicott and Tiscliendorf, influenced by 
 Wieseler's chronology, who say Syn. journey and that of 
 John 4 is identical, 3'et Syn. hisioiy/ does not commence 
 till after John 5. Aiis : The statement of Lk 4 : 14, "Je- 
 sus returned in power of Spirit into Gal." is irreconcilable 
 with this view of four months of inactivity. Also state- 
 ments intimat-ely connected must be forcibly se|>arated. 
 (Tiscli.in later editions makes retractions from Wieseler's 
 scheme of chronology.) Result. Weight of authority 
 places John Bap.'s imprisonment at John 4, and thus 
 identifies journeys (So Lange, Gess, Farrar, Robinson, 
 G res we II.) 
 
 Discussion of Ques. Second. What was feast of John 
 5:1? (Vide. Chronology on Duration of Public Ministry 
 also Farrar, Vol. I. p. 368 and Vol. II. p. 467 Excursus 
 VIII.). If the feast be not Passover the Gal. ministry 
 will be shortened by one year. The method of combin- 
 ing these two central points determines the entire Chro- 
 nology of Gospel History, and a knowledge of it is a key 
 to the understanding of any harmony. Adjustments of 
 different harmonists : 
 
 1. Robinson identifies the journeys; feast of John 5, he 
 considers Passover; hence, ministry in Eastern Gal. 16 
 months, in Northern Gal. 6 months, total Gal. ministry 
 22 months. 
 
 2. Andrew's places Syn. journey after John 5. : consid- 
 ers feast Passover; hence E. Gal. 12 months, N". Gal. 6 
 months, total Gal. ministry 18 months. Christ inactive 
 in Gal. 4 months before John o : 1. 
 
 3. Lichtenstein — places Syn. journey after John 5; 
 considers feast Tabernacles (in Oct. 6 months later) : 
 hence E. Gal. 6 months, N. Gal. 6 months, total Gal. 
 ministry 1 year. Christ inactive 10 months. 
 
 4. Wieseler — places Syn, journey after John 5.: con- 
 siders feast Purim (one month l)efore Passover John 6 : 
 4 according to his scheme second Passover) : hence E. 
 Gal. 1 month, E. Gal. 6 months, total Gal. ministry 7 
 
73 
 
 months. Result of this plan is demonstratio)i of its fal- 
 sit}^ J^iving but one month to E, Gul. to wliich otiier 
 schemes give six or twelve. This was most active period 
 of Christ's life : time is needed for development of Phar- 
 isaic opposition, |or change of popular sentiment, for 
 growth of faith, for falling off of the merely curious. 
 Mission of Twelve alone would occupy more than one 
 month. 
 
 5. Lange, Gess, Farrar — identify journeys ; consider 
 feast Purim; avoid Wieseler's brevity in E. Gal. by begin- 
 ning Gal. ministry between John 4, and 5, thus length- 
 ening E. Gal. to 5 months. They synchronize John 5, 
 and Mt. 11, also John 6. (Second Passover according to 
 their scheme) and Mt. 14. 
 
 6. Ellicott, Tischendorf, vide supra. " Compromise 
 view." 
 
 General Re salt. Harmon}- shows no contradiction in- 
 validating the Gospel narratives. Note. 1. Robinson's 
 scheme, identifying journej-s, making feast John 5: 1, 
 Passover, gives needed time in E. Gal, and accounts for 
 facts. Individual bias eliminated, we come back to this 
 scheme. 
 
 2. In no respect do these different schemes affect apol- 
 ogetic importance of Harmony. Same periods, with same 
 relations, intentions, and order, occur in all. They differ 
 only as to time of beginning Gal. ministry, its length, and 
 rapidity of its development. 
 
 Order of events during tliis period of ministry in E. 
 Gal : Narrative gathered from three Syn. who are some- 
 times parallel, sometimes supplemental. In obtaining 
 chronological order, positive statements, wdien occurring, 
 are to be followed, in other circumstances probabilities 
 are to be considered. The order is more irregular be- 
 cause of activity and greaf number of events, but the 
 commencement (imprisonment of John) and close (feed- 
 ing 5000) are tixed. Nothing following the passover of 
 Jolm 6 : 4 is to be included in this period, for no inter- 
 change of events between periods occurs in several gos- 
 pels. 
 
 Robinson arbitrarily takes Lk. 11-13 : 9 belonging to 
 last journeys to Jerusalem and, breaking up, inserts, in 
 E. Gal. Mk.'s and Lk.'s order scarcely disturbed ; only 
 
74 
 
 deviations Mk. §§ 24, 58, Lk. §§ 29, 58. Matt, much 
 disturbed in adapting to their order. To justify, note 
 
 1. Mt. makes no statement as to sequence in portions 
 changed. Tors often used loosely as connective, when 
 no consecution is intended. 
 
 2. Mt.'s gospel is topical, e. g., Teaching, 5-7; Mirii- 
 cles, 8-9; Parables, 13. Chronological ovdev qcneral ; 
 after Feeding 5000, consecutive. 
 
 CharaderiMics of this perwd, are 1. Activity, frequent 
 journeys, development of plan, miracles and teaching. 
 Christ's greatest success is achieved ; opposition is 
 aroused. 2. Preparation for founding the church, re- 
 jection of Jews as a nation being not "vet final. Christ 
 renews the offer of himself at feast of John 5. 
 
 Relation of Gal. to Judean work. Jesus' Messiahship 
 and the future church are the subjects of both periods, 
 butin different order. In Judea the prominent theme 
 IS his Messiahship, in Gal. the church, also sacrificial ele- 
 ment enters from succeeding period. This blending of 
 the period as record of a single life, the best answe^- to 
 sceptical objection of irreconcilable discrepancies. 
 
 P'our successive subjects of this period twice repeated 
 are, 
 
 1. Organization. Call of apostles, that there may be 
 witnesses of Christ's work, who shall f)nnd and guide 
 the church after his ascension. 2. Miracles. Attesta- 
 tions of Christ's divinity. N'ot arbitrary works of power, 
 but a regularly developed system. 3, Opposition. At 
 first secret, it increased until Christ was driven from 
 Capernaum, after which it became the main feature of 
 his life. 4. Teaching, a. Extended discourses, b. Para- 
 bles. (Andr. divides arbitrarily by "circuits.") 
 
 These topics are interwoven ; e. g. call of apostles 
 (organization) is connected with miracles ; miracles not 
 oidy attest divinity, but teach spiritual truth ; opposition 
 IS linked with teaching (John 10,) and parables (Mt. 21 : 
 23-46.) Teaching to some extent linked with all. Christ 
 IS set forth Prophet (teaching), Priest (propitiation), King 
 (organization). 2nd Passover divides ministry in E. Gab 
 into two parts of 4 and 12 months. Smaller period, dur- 
 ing which Christ's place of work is laid down and de- 
 veloped, is basis of Gal. ministrv. 
 
75 
 
 Characteristics of 4 months period. Choice of apostles. 
 Miracles, selected as specimens of important chisses. 
 Miracles predominate over teaching. People are first 
 aroused, then taught. 
 
 §26. John 4 : 48-45. Mt. 4 : 17. Mk. 1 : 14, 15. Lk. 
 4 : 14,15. Arrival ill Galilee. Reception Christ was cor- 
 dial, Galileans havijig witnessed Christ's miracles in 
 Jerus., (John 4: 45), John 4: 44 "his own country." 
 Meyer, Alford and Andrews (p. 168) say Gal. is meant; 
 others Nazareth, (Farrar Vol. I. pp. 219); best opinion is 
 Judea, his native country. Supplemental character of 
 John's gospel is seen in calling Judea Christ's country, 
 though not mentioning his birth there. Subject "of 
 Christ's teaching : Kingdom of God at hand, (Mk. 1: 15. 
 
 §27. John 4 : 46-54. Nobleman's son at Capernaum, 
 healed. Only event recorded by John between Christ's 
 leaving Judea to begin work in Gal., and his return to 2d 
 Passover. (5:1). John inserts to contrast faith of 
 Galileans — and unbelief of Jews. 
 
 V. 54. Emphasis on eA&cov, showing Christ wrought 
 this cure " as he was going " to Gal. Hence insert before 
 Syn. narratives. 
 
 Strauss. This miracle same as that Mt. 8 : 15 circum- 
 stances being the same ; but the differences are contra- 
 dictions, hence both are false, mere myths based on 
 Naaman's being healed at distance by Elijah. Ans: The 
 differences of time and place, plainly prove two distinct 
 miracles (Trench on .Mir, p. 100). 
 
 §28. Lk. 4: 16-31, Mr. 4: 13-16. Announcement, 
 Rejection at Nazareth. Do Lk. 4 : 16, Mt. 13 : 54, Mk. 6 : 
 1 as Lange, Farrar and Lich. say, refer to the same event? 
 Robinson and Andrews hold that these passages record 
 distinct occurrences, because 1. Mt. mentions Christ's 
 removal from Naz. to Cap. prior to Mt. 13 : 54 and Mk. 
 6: 1, Lk. 4: 28-31, assigns his rejection at N'az. as the 
 reason. 2. Lk. 4 : 29, 30, after discourse in synagogue, 
 Christ escaped death miraculouslj^ ; Mk. 6: 5, mentions 
 Christ healing sick at I^az. after discourse thus showing 
 there was no tumult. 
 
 3. Two visits not impossible. Would most probably 
 make his own countrymen more than one offer. (Comp. 
 Andrews, p. 198.) 
 
76 
 
 Reason for Visit. Christ first proclaimed his mission 
 at Jerus., the religious centre of God's chosen people. 
 So at the outset of Galilean ministry he aft'ords his own 
 kinsmen earliest opportunity of accepting him. Driven 
 from Nazareth, he goes to Capernanm (Mt. 4 : 13), reject- 
 ed there, he retnrns to Nazareth a second time. (Matt. 
 13 : 54.) 
 
 Synagogue nsages. (Farrar I. p. 220.) Only instance 
 of Christ's reading, usually addressed the people. (Cp. 
 Acts 13 : 15.) Chri-^t's intentions were not revolutionary. 
 He conforms to Jewish habits. Sacraments are first 
 innovations. First time Christ applies prophecy to him- 
 self Is: 61 : 1, describes work and character of Mes- 
 siali. Christ declares the passage refers to himself. 
 
 Contrast. Christ's rejection at Jerusalem following 
 an act symbolizing judgment (cleansing temple) ; at Naz- 
 areth after proclaiming the gospel. Gospel preaching, 
 severe or mild, to natural man displeasing. Hearers 
 become suddenly enraged, because Christ taught the 
 coming rejection of Jews and calling of Gentiles, illus- 
 trating this truth by O. T. facts (1 Kings 17; 2 Kings 5 : 
 14). Blind, impulsive, uncontrollable rage, not to be 
 explained by proverbial rudeness of Nazarines, for Christ's 
 allusions to national rejection. 
 
 Was escape miraculous ? Not so, some. Impressive- 
 ness. (Farrar, I., p. 227.) But as occurred among those 
 familiar with him supernatural escape more consistent. 
 Similar escapes, comp. John 7 : 30 ; 8 : 59; 10 : 39. 
 
 Lk. 4:23. What miracles? 1. Cross reference to 
 John, either 2 : 12 (some suppose miracles wrought wliile 
 on way to 1st Pass.), or, 2. Nobleman's son, John 4:46 
 —54. 
 
 Settled at Capernaum for at least one j-ear with Peter 
 or his mother. Selected because central, populous ; Eo- 
 man garrison ; commerce in fish; on caravan route ; suf- 
 ficiently distant from Tiberias, Herod's capital. Vide. 
 Farrar, L, p. 178.) Mt. 4 ; 13, 14, records this as fulfilling 
 Is. 9:1,2, '' by way of sea." 
 
 Site of Capernaum : It lay in plain of Gennesareth, 
 which was 4 miles in length. E.xact locality is unknown ; 
 either Khan Minyeh (Robinson) or Tell Hum (Farrar, p. 
 181 ; Andrews, pp. 203-220.) Unmentioned in O. Test. 
 
77 
 
 Josepluis carried there when wonnded. He hiys stress 
 on tomitains (Jos. iii. 10, §8) and lish. Same ionntains 
 at Khan Minveh, some say. IsTame Capernanin (Kefr, 
 Nahum, i. e. "ViMage ofNahnm) favors Tell Hum. Tell, 
 hill, substituted for Kefr, villag'e: ISTahum abbrev. Lake 
 called in O. T., Chinnereth, Josh. 13 : 27. ''Harp shape," 
 (Farrar, I., p. 175, note.) Sea of Galilee, of Tiberias, 
 Lake of Gennesaret, 14 miles long, 6 broad, 600 fr, below 
 Medit'n, shut in by liills, abounds with fish. Shores 
 thickly settled, 9 populous cities. Tiberias and Magdala 
 alone remain. Climate varied, botli temperate and trop- 
 ical ; vegetation luxuriant, fruit continuous. 
 
 §29. Organization. Lk. 5: 1-11; Mt. 4:18-22; Mk. 
 1 : 10-20. Call of Peter, And., James, John, first act of 
 Gal. ministry, that from hef/uiwn;/ Christ may have wit- 
 nesses and teachers. 
 
 Two theories of call. 1. Naturalistic. Simply adhered 
 to Christ from choice as Bap.'s disciples. Gradually, 
 more devoted and enthusiastic attached themselves more 
 closely to his person. Ans : Contradicts gospel narrative. 
 Call is earliest act of Christ, showing foresight in select- 
 ing men best qualified for his work. 2. Mild rationalists 
 admit early call, accounting for it by, a, Christ's natural 
 sagacity ; b. his natural discernment of character. Ans: 
 Inadequate to account for liistorical phenomena. 
 
 Circumstances, a, Public, Lk. 5 : 1, so validity of call 
 is attested. 6, Selected, not from educated, prejudiced 
 class, but simple hearted, best adapted for Clirist's work. 
 Their knowledge was to come from inspiration. Extreme 
 poverty erroneous ; in good business, partners, had "hired 
 servants." Mk. 1 : 20 ; "left all" no sacrifice unless some- 
 thing left. Subsequent poverty voluntary. Blunt : Zeb- 
 edee very old at this time and soon died. Comp. Mt. 8 : 
 21 " bury my father," Mt. 20: 20 ''mother of Zebedee's 
 children," Last, unnatural if Z. alive, c. Miracle proved 
 authority of call ; illustrated office and work to be under- 
 taken : toil, patience, ultimate success depending upon 
 God, then labor and God's power to cooperate. (Trench, 
 miracles, p. 106.) Some symbolize minutest details. 
 Canon of allegorical interpretation: Those facts alone 
 significant, originally intended to be such. Lk. places 
 call after miracles at Cap. (Lk. 4:33-41.) other Syn. 
 
78 
 
 before. Lk. wishes to contrast rejection at Nnz. on one 
 Sabbath, enthusiastic reception at Cap. on the next. 
 
 Difterences. 1. Mt., Mk. record no miracle, Lk. omits 
 Andrew's name, hence some say calls are different. Bnt 
 omissions are not contradictions, and a incidents in each 
 are same, b after call both accounts say they left all and 
 followed Christ. Lk. records miracle wishing to show- 
 deep impression on Peter's mind. 
 
 2. Lk. says, called while in boat, one call for all. Mt., 
 Mk. on shore, mending nets, each pair of brothers called 
 separately. Harmonize by making these acts successive. 
 Order. Christ's discourse, miracle, beckoning to other 
 boat for aid, call of Simon and Andrew, Christ afterward 
 walking on shore finds Jas., John mending the broken 
 net and calls them. (Smith's Diet. Peter, p. 2447, An- 
 drews, p. 228.) 
 
 3. Syn. apparently contradict John who puts call year 
 previous (John 1 : 35) hence, say sceptics, both accounts 
 mythical. Ans. Syn. don't say first call ; " at My word" 
 implies previous acquaintance, readiness in leaving busi- 
 ness shows minds made up. Gospels give distinct stages 
 of organization in calling of the apostles, a. John 1, call 
 at Jordan to be learners, not required to leave home or 
 relinquish business, b. Lk. 5. To be witnesses, in con- 
 stant attendance on Christ, c. Mk. 3: 13, 14. Prior to 
 sermon on Mt. Definite organization of Twelve. d. 
 Lk. 9: 1-6. Temporary commission conferring authorit}'' 
 to preaclt and work miracles. Full apostolic authority, 
 not until Pentecost. Miracle is an event in external world 
 due to immediate agency of God. (Hodge's Theol. Vol. 
 L p. 618.J 
 
 Some argue effect here might be produced witliout 
 divine interference, b}' union of second causes and divine 
 prescience, hence analogous to propliecy. Supernatural 
 element just as great but strictly miraculous element, i. e. 
 immediate exercise of divine power, does not enter. 
 (Comp. stater in fish's niouth Mt. 17 : 27. Comp. Ps. 8 : 
 8). Trench insists on this distinction : allow second 
 causes where we can. But, 1. These two cases belong to 
 class of events where Divine efficiency is intended to be 
 set forth. Ordinary reader makes no distinction. 2. 
 Impression on mind of eye witnesses opposes this dis- 
 
79 
 
 tinction. 3. Symbolical import of miracle overlooked 
 by this view. It teaches, God not only foreknows, but 
 his power cooperates with linman. 
 
 MiKACLES. 1. Classification. Some speak of miracles 
 of knowledge, of power, .of love. But sncli classifica- 
 tion is objectionable, foi", aceordinp; to definiiion, all mir- 
 acles are acts of power. If they are not acts of Divine 
 power immediatel}' exercised they are not miracles. The 
 expression " Miracle " should he kept distinct and ap- 
 plied to a special class of events. Regeneration etc. 
 should not be termed miracle. Power, love, etc. ma}* how- 
 ever be used to distinguish the main design of the miracle. 
 
 2. Various naynes. (Vide Trench p. 75). Gospels 
 speak (^^ a. aYjiucav, a token of presence and working 
 of God. I), zena^, a wonder, astonishment of beholder 
 transferred to the work. c. ouvaa-cz, powers i. e. of God. 
 d. Efiya^ works i. e. of Divinity. 
 
 3. Twofold design, and proof of each. a. Attract 
 attention and impress ; for alwaj's in the presence of 
 witnesses; cases of popular sympathy ; impression always 
 recorded, b' Relieve suffering ; for same o^ce might have 
 been produced by miracles of different characters, i. e. 
 of judgment. Fig-tree cursed is the only miracle of thi8 
 class. Destruction of swine work of demons, not of 
 Christ, c. Teach truth; they are dramatized parables, 
 each teaching some aspect of truth. 
 
 They teach: a. Christ's power and willingness to save 
 souls; b. Sinner's condition and way of approach, by 
 prayer and faith. Disease and death are parts of the 
 pen"a)ty of sin inflicted by the curse of the law ; hence 
 when these are removed a prrt of the punishment of sin 
 is removed. Mt. 8: 16, 17 quoted from Is. 53 : 4. The 
 atonement also is thus taught, Christ bearing oar sins. 
 d. Attest Christ^s claims ; for Christ says (Lk. 5 : 23, 24) 
 "whether is easier " . . . ''\mt XXvaI ]je maij know '' 
 etc. Vide also Mt. 11 : 3-5. Rationalists say, " if these 
 miracles were real, why disbelieved? Ans : Abraham's 
 answer is sufficient, Lk. 16 : 31. 
 
 Christ's miracles contrasted with those of O. T. and of 
 Apostles. 1. His were performed by his own power. 
 Others were wrought in his name or that of God. It is 
 no fair exception," as Rationalists declare, that Christ is 
 
80 
 
 said to sometimes work " by power of God," " by spirit 
 of God," " by tiiiger of God." Tliere were special rea- 
 sons for Christ's procedure on these spetnal occasions, 
 Som.etimes also Christ's true humanity is expressed by 
 his faith. 2. O. T. miracles were punitive, tliose of Christ 
 were miracles of mercy. 3. O. T. miracles largely con- 
 fined to the sphere of nature; Christ's were performed 
 in all si)heres, the larger portion on man. 4. O. T. mira- 
 cles wrouglit with delay, wrestling in prayer; Christ's 
 were performed with case, instantaneously. 
 
 The number of Christ's miracles must have been in- 
 definitelv great ; as the cases recorded are mere speci- 
 mens. Vide Mt. 4 : 24, 8 : 16, 11 : 5, 14 : 2, 15 : 30. V\^e 
 may imagine that no cases whicli could be brought to 
 him were not brought. Wlierever Christ went disease 
 and death disappeared. Thus was signified the fulness 
 and sutiiciency of Christ's salvation. 
 
 A selection from this vast number is made upon the 
 principle that each case shall make prominent some new 
 phase of truth. When repeated it is because of a difter- 
 ence in method of cure, or the eftect upon the subject, or 
 on account of some new development in the work of 
 Christ. 
 
 Nicmhcr recorded. Some include those of which Christ 
 was the subject, e. g., birth, resurrection, escape from popu- 
 lace. Otliers include also tlie case of Mary Magdalene, 
 although it is not mentioned in detail. Omitting these 
 the number may be given as 35. 9 on external nature, 
 26 of healing. Mt. records 20, Mk. 18, Lk. 20, John 8. 
 Only one is common to all evangelists, viz. feeding of 5,- 
 000. Eleven are common to three, viz. 10 to Mt., Mk. 
 and Lk.; 1 to Mt., Mk., John. Six were common to two, 
 viz., 3 to Mt., Mk., 2 to Mt., Lk., 1 to Mk., Lk. Mt. 
 records 3 alone, Mk. 2, Lk. 6, John 6. ■* 
 
 F«r<'oM5 principles of classification. 1. With reference 
 to power dis|)layed and sphere of exercise ; upon man ; 
 upon nature; inanimate and animate ; upon spirit world. 
 
 2. By truths embodied, a. Christ a Savior with almiglity 
 power, h. Character of sinner, blind, polluted, disabled. 
 
 3. liy faith of recipient, whether [)ersonal or intercessory, 
 strong or weak, that of a Jew or Gentile. 4. Mode of 
 working, at hand or at a distance, byword or touch. It 
 is impoohible to make a perfect clas-;ification. 
 
81 
 
 Theories. I. Rationalistic, Miracles are impossible. 
 Those seeniin2:ly niiracnlons occurrences alone took place 
 which may be ex[»iained naturally. A distinction is made 
 between miracles of healing and those in which nature 
 is the subject of Christ's power. The former are admit- 
 ted because tliey may be naturally explained ; the latter 
 are denied because inexplicable. Their presence in the 
 narrative is accounted for upon the mf/thk-al hypothesis. 
 Paulus: Jesus was a physician, having acquired his art 
 from the Essenes; lie gave prescriptions; a list of medi- 
 cines is enumerated from contemporaneous authors. 
 Celsus: Christ performed miracles by means of magical 
 arts learned in Egypt. Renan : Christ performed mira- 
 cles against his will. Popular expectation as to the Mes- 
 siah compelled him to become a wonder-worker. Hence 
 his miracles vrere mere deceptions. 
 
 Ans : The Scrijiture narrative represents Christ as 
 working without means, and producing by word alone 
 instantaneous effects. 
 
 IL.Psychologico-Ethical. Christ's miracles the result 
 of animal magnetism ; due simply to the influence of mind 
 over the bodily condition. The theory is based upon 
 observed facts, proving a, a mysterious influence of mind 
 over mind, and, b, the influence of mind and will over 
 body. In support of tljis view, 1. The}- argue from 
 Scripture, that faith was required in all cases in the recip- 
 ient or the cure could not be performed, e. g., no miracles 
 in Nazareth " because of unbelief," Mt. 13: 58. In Gal. 
 generally the people were in sympathy with him, hence 
 he could perform miracles. 2. Stress is laid on Christ's 
 human sympathy, his cjommanding presence, his superior 
 spiritualitj'. Thus he projected himself into the con- 
 sciousiiess of others. Some miracles, e. g., raising of 
 dead, healing of congenital blindness, cure of leper, can- 
 not be thus explained. Hence some are rejected. As to 
 others, it is said that Christ merely declared a cure 
 already wrou2:ht. 
 
 Strauss : Derogatory to make Christ's success depend 
 not on teaching but on momentary power. Character of 
 Jesus is weighted down with these cures. O. T. records 
 cures, therefore Christ performed some, but only when 
 he could not avoid so doinof." Stress laid on " siijn " 
 
82 
 
 being asked for, hence no miracles performed. " Sign 
 ofJona" referred to the preaching of Jonah. Christ 
 commanded tlie discip'es of Baptist to report to him the 
 spiritual results of his work — not real miracles — when he 
 said " the blind see," etc., Mt. 11 : 4, 5. 
 
 Strauss rejects all miracuk^us cures ; all miracles with 
 accompanying conversations ; miracles introduced later 
 to explain the conversation ; all mentioned as occurring 
 twice; all to which there are analogous parables — the 
 allegory transl'ormed by later writers into a miracle. 
 Thus tlie number is reduced, the residuum is explained 
 away. 
 
 All such writers are involved in the following dilemma : 
 either Christ is a mere enthusiast, uot above the people, 
 or a conscious deceiver. In either case how could Christ 
 be a moral teacher, the author of the Christian religion ? 
 Yet this they hold. 
 
 §30. Mk. 1 : 21-38. Lk. 4 : 31-37. HeM.lmg Demoniac 
 ill Stjnafjogae. Lk. says Christ's tirst Sabbath in Cap'm ; 
 next after rejection at Nazareth. Taught in Synag. with 
 aw^Ao?"% ; during service healed demoniac. Miracles of 
 dispossession peculiar to N. T. Jdctirov, oacnovcov, in 
 Homer=<ycoc; in later Ok, (Plato) beings intermediate 
 between God and man ; Philo and Josephus, souls of men, 
 especially the wicked ; Socrates, good spirit, tutelar di- 
 vii.ity ; LXX., heathen idols, lience Paul (1 Cor. 10 : 19), 
 heathen sacrifice to dacu.ovta. E. V. "devils " incorrect, 
 for in X. T. but one dca^iuAu:;. His servants are demons. 
 (Smith's Dic'y, Demons, p. 583.) (Demoniacs, Trench, 
 p. 125. Neander's Life Christ, pp. 145-151.) 
 
 Design of this class of miracles is to exhibit man as by 
 nature the helpless bond-slave of Satan, and Christ as the 
 only one able to effect his deliverence. While Christ 
 was upon earth peculiar license seems granted to evil 
 spirits. His power over them, besides attesting his di- 
 vinity was fulHUment of the Protevangelium. Gen. 3 : 
 15. Seven curses (including Mary Magdelene) of demon- 
 iacal posession are recorded. 
 
 Objections. 1. Phenomena of possession contradict 
 consciousness. Will is free. It cannot be so wholly con- 
 trolled by an unseen being much less could several 
 demons possess one man. Ans. We must not look to 
 
83 
 
 consciousness for information respecting facts outside the 
 sphere of consciousness. Scripture teaches Satan has 
 access to minds of men, to lead tliem captive at his will. 
 Possession must have accorded with their nature and ours. 
 
 2. Possession not recorded elsewhere in Scripture and 
 does not now occur : Ans. Latter position cannot be 
 proved. Special propriety of such cases at time of Christ ; 
 culmination of the conliict between the kingdoms of 
 good and evil. Saul is an instance found in O. Test. 3. 
 No curse of this kind mentioned in John but all are in 
 Gal. Ans. Silence proves nothing. Joiin does introduce 
 the obnoxious doctrine. John 8:48. "hast a devil," 
 18: 27 " after the sop Satan entered into him." John 
 records only miracles introducing long discourses, hence 
 these omitted. 4. Demoniacal possession is analogous to 
 mania, idocy, epilepsy, etc., hence mere nervous affec- 
 tions controllable by will power. Jesus, possessing great 
 personal magnetism, wrought these apparently miracu- 
 lous cures. Ans. Mythical theory here is inconsistent; 
 aiming to prove the gospels myths, it admits that narra- 
 tive of these cures relates actual, historical events, hence 
 becomes Naturalistic. Dogmatic theory of Baur. Vic- 
 tory of Christ over heathenism set forth under this sym- 
 bolic form. Accommodation Theory. Spinoza : Christ, 
 though not sharing popular superstitions, accommodated 
 himself to them, by acting as though the cases of possess- 
 ion were real, while he knew they were only apparent. 
 Christ's literal words are parabolic. Ans: a, This view 
 irreconcilable with Christ's character, as portra^-ed by 
 those who hold it. It charges liim with conscious decep- 
 tion, b, Christ's language is not hypothetical, but explicit. 
 Separate personality of demons is evident, for Christ 
 distinguishes demon from person possessed, addresses 
 them, they answer, when cast out man becomes as other 
 men, they enter herd of swine, &c. (Vide. Ebrard, p. 251, 
 Farrar, I., p. 236, note.) 
 
 Christ silenced {(fi/uod/^u^he muzzled) demon's testi- 
 mony (Lk. 4 : 34, 35) because, a, He would not accept 
 testimony of such a witness. 6, To permit such a title, 
 "Holy One of God," at this ^tage of his work would 
 have precipitated Pharisaic hostility. Prominent features 
 of dispossession : loud voice, crying, bodily prostration. 
 
84 
 
 Etfect : Christ's authority estahlislied; his fame spread 
 abroad; attention attracted to iiis preaching. (Mark 1 : 
 27-28. 
 
 §31. Matt. 8 : 14-17 ; Mk. 1 : 29-34 ; Luke 4 : 38-41. 
 Peter's Wife's Mother. This miracle wrought same day 
 as preceding. Mt.'s plan being topical, not chronolog'l, 
 tliis is grouped with other miracles in ch. 8. Disease, 
 great "fever," Ttopt-y^ /isyd/.uj being medical phrase, it has 
 been inferred Luke was physician, and had personal 
 knowledge of tlie case. Fever probably signifies general 
 disability of sinner joined witli burning restlessne.-^s of 
 sinful desires. Mode of cure : Christ stood over her (Lk.), 
 took her hand, lifted her up (Mk.) and rebuked the fever 
 (Lk.) Note completeness of cure; no weakness, nor 
 gradual convalescence, but " immediately she arose and 
 ministered unto them." (Trench on Mir., p. 192.) 
 
 Sceptics argue from " rebuked fever," either possession 
 is ordinary disease, or fever is possession. Ans : Use of 
 figurative language is overlooked. This is an isolated 
 case — fever personified ; it does not answer or cry out. 
 Comp. Christ's command to winds, " Peace, be still." 
 
 This is first time Peter is distinguished above the other 
 apostles; miracle worked in his own family. Compare 
 ''wife's mother," Mk. 1 : 30 and 1 Cor. 9 : 5. Mk. 1 : 32, 
 33, says at sunset, whole city brought sick to Christ. 
 Some say, waited until evening, because unlawful to heal 
 on Sabbath, but that objection not yet raised. Observe 
 that it is first proposed by Pharisaic emissaries from Je- 
 rus'm. True explanation, cool of evening proper time 
 to move the sick. This Sabbath a specimen day. Crowds 
 seek him next morning. Note " all that were diseased," 
 contrasted with "them possessed with devils," Mk. 1 : 32. 
 Hence possession differs from ordinary disease. 
 
 §32. Mk. 1 : 35-39 ; Lk. 4 : 42-44 ; Mt. 4 : 23-25. First 
 Circuit in Galilee. Mk. 1: 38, 39, contains Christ's first 
 intimation of future plan of labor. Taken in connection 
 with disciples' statement v. 37, it teaches his work was 
 not stationary. Cap. being selected merely as headquar- 
 ters. It is conjectured tins circuit very brief, but a week, 
 a single miracle being recorded. Christ's work itinerant 
 and thorough (Mk. 1 : 39, *' synagogues in all Galilee"), 
 Christ's method, teaching in synagogues ; his doctrine, 
 
85 
 
 " kingdom of God," "gospel of the kingdom." Note 
 Christ's habit of private devotion, Mk. 1 : 35. 
 
 §38. Mt. 8:2-4: Mk. 1 : 40-45; Lk. 5: 12-16. Heal- 
 ing Leper. Ebrard, Trench, Lange, follow Mt.'s order; 
 Robinson, Lk's, who more carefully observes chronolog. 
 sequence. Ten lepers only recorded cure of this disease 
 Lk. 17 : 12). These two instances are onlv specimens, 
 Comp. Mt. 10 : 8 ; 11:5; Lk. 4 : 27 ; Lk. 7 : 22. Jose- 
 phus noies current shmder that Jews driven from Egypt 
 because of leprosy. Two kinds of leprosy, a. Elephan- 
 tiasis. (Job). 6. WhiteLeproys, kind mentionedin Leviti- 
 cus and gospels. Ceremonial law. Lev. 13. Sufferer 
 clothed in moui-ning, with head bare and gar lients rent. 
 When pronounced clean, ceremonies occupying a week 
 were requisite and all classes of sacritice. Import of 
 these requirements. Two views. 1. Michaelis and 
 Rationalistic School say were civil acts to prevent spread 
 of contagion, and for social protection. Ans : «. Dis- 
 ease was hereditary, but probably not contagious, e. g., 
 Naarnan, general of Syrian army. (2 Kings 5 : 1). Ge- 
 hazi conversed witli king of Israel (2 Kings 8 : 5). 
 (Trench on Mir. p. 174). h. This view does not account 
 for the religious rites, or sense of moral impurity attach- 
 ing to this disease. 
 
 2. True view. Leprosy selected as most appropriate 
 type of nature of sin ; hereditary, spreading from single 
 spot over entire body, incurable by human agencies, 
 loathsome. Lepers were thought smitten by God. 
 Hence Vulg. renders Is. 53: 4 ''quasi leprosum" giving 
 rise to idea that Christ was to be a leper. (Farrar VoL 
 I. p. 149). So Talmud and early church, hence disease 
 an honor. 
 
 Christ healing leprosy typified his ability to save from 
 sin. Symbolic nature of this disease is seen in form of 
 leper's request, to be cleansed, not healed and in, Christ's 
 answer " Be thou clean." Christ touched the leper, 
 although contrary to Mosaic law. Lev. 13 : 24-46 ; 
 Num. 5 : 2. Shewing that in his saving work he shrinks 
 from no man howeve^- polluted. (Farrar Vol. I. p. 275). 
 Leper commanded to shew himself to priests (Lev. 
 14: 4). a. To gain official recognition of cure. 6. To 
 exhibit his relation to the law, "Christ enjoins secresy 
 
S6 
 
 (Mk. 1 : 44). Objection— cure wrought in presence of 
 multitudes, hence secresy inipos.-ihle. Lange, Farrar, 
 Andrews, cure wrought in presence of but few. Grotius, 
 Bengel, Alexander, injunction limited to time between 
 cure and shewing himself to priests. (Trench on jMir. p. 
 180). Better opinion : Christ intended to repress fanati- 
 cal enthusiasm, which would hinder his work. He would 
 subordinate works to word. He would not attract peo- 
 ple as mere miracle- worker, but as Saviour. (Andrews 
 p. 235. Farrar Vol. I. 277). Man disobeying and spread- 
 ing report, (Mk. 1 : 45). Christ was forced to avoid all 
 centres of pojtulation because of undue popular zeal. 
 Supposition that Christ's retirement was caused by cere- 
 monial uncleanness, is fanciful. Naturalistic view. 
 Schenkel. Leprosy could not be healed by will power; 
 hence man was nearly well, Christ observing this, simply 
 announced it. 
 
 §34. Opposition. Mk. 2 : 1-12 ; Lk. 5 : 17-26 ; Mt. 19 : 
 2-8. Healing Paralytic on Christ's return to Cap'm after 
 Gal. circuit. Read Mt. 9 : 1 as conclusion of ch. 8 and 
 follow Mk.'s order. Mt. grouping miracles places this 
 as though wrought upon Christ's return from country of 
 Gergesenes. 
 
 This class of diseases exhibits the helplessness of sin- 
 ner. In healing them Christ always commands patient 
 to move the part paralyzed, thus setting forth nature and 
 power of true f\utli. Christ's command " Be clean," in 
 last miracle, emphasizes pollution of sin, "arise and walk," 
 its power. Mk. 2 : 1, iv w;f(y>, "at home," not "in the 
 house." Observe new step in teaching, by miracles. 
 Christ addresses man, " Thy sins be (correctly, hare been., 
 dipiiovTul, Doy'u-. perf pass., not subj.) forgiven thee," thus 
 directing attention away from mei-e external result to its 
 spiritual signification. 
 
 Some falsely infer from Christ's address that the palsy 
 was due to sinful indulgence, or that Christ accommo- 
 dates hiuiself to idea that all suffering was direct punish- 
 ment of specific sin. Scribes and Pharisees secretly 
 charge Christ with blasphemy. They were right in 
 supposing God alone could forgive sins, wrong in not 
 accepting proofs of Christ's divinity. 
 
 Emphasis of Christ's rei)ly (Lk. 5 : 23) rests on " .w//" 
 i. e. claim to be able. The former claim any one might 
 
87 
 
 make, the latter is more difficult of proof. At Christ's 
 word the man is healed. People are astonished and 
 o^lorify God. v. 24. Revelation of conscious divinity. 
 New element: Pharisaic opposition. While people wel- 
 come Christ with enthusiasm Pharisees, for first time, 
 raise opposition in Gal. This opposition was due to 
 influence of Pharisees at Jerus. and though not oflicially 
 sanctioned by them, shows they were carefully watching 
 Christ's movements. 
 
 §35. Mt. 9:9; Mk. 2 : 13, 14 ; Lk. 5 : 27, 28. Call of 
 31atthew. Call of Mt. to be Christ's apostle is related to 
 development of Pharisaical opposition, in the fact, Mt. 
 was publican and specially obnoxious to this sect (An- 
 drews p. 238.) The feast of Levi (Mt.) did not occur at 
 this time because 1. Twelve were with Christ at feast, at 
 call Mt. All not yet chosen. 2. Feast interrupted by 
 message of Jairus. Raising of Jairus' daughter occurred 
 subsequent to Christ's retuiMi from Gadara, Mt.'s call 
 previous to tliis. 3. Breach with Pharisees too marked 
 for this early period. 
 
 Mk. and Lk. relate under exactly similar circumstances, 
 call of Levi, yet in their lists of apostles mention no 
 Levi, but Matthew. Levi was prt»bably original name, 
 changed upon becoming apostle. Comp. Simon changed 
 to C'ephas. (John 1 : 42.) Matthew—' gift of God.'_ 
 
 Publican hateful to Jews, being constant reminder of 
 Roman domination, and taking advantage of his position 
 to practice great extortion. Humility of Mt. seen in 
 fact, lie alone records his name as " the publican." Mt. 
 10 : 3. (Farrar, Vol. I, p. 245.) For sceptical inferences, 
 vide. Ebrard, p. 265. - 
 
 §36. John 5: 1-47. Second Passorer. Galilean work 
 is here interrupted by a brief visit to Jerus. to attend 
 feast. Hostility of Pharisees compels Christ's speedy 
 return to Gal. not going again to Jerus. for eighteen 
 months. 
 
 Reasons for inserting John 5, here. 1. Lk. §37 gives 
 note of time viz. <T«;9^?az-<t> [^otoTSfUTrpcozco']. Text here is 
 doubtful, interpretation uncertain, the adjective never 
 occuring elsewhere. Wieseler suggests the reference is 
 to " first Sabbath in the second of the cycle of seven years, 
 which completed the sabbatical period." Wetsteiu, " the 
 first sabbath of the second month.*" 
 
88 
 
 Andrews explains with reference to annual feasts. 
 First Sabbath after Passover wn^ firsf. first Sabbath ; first 
 after Pentecost was second — first Sabbath ; first after 
 Tabernacles was third — first Sabbath : Comp. modern 
 usage — first Sunday after Epiphany, first after Easter, 
 first after Trinity, &c. (Andrews, p. 241.) 
 
 Scaliger. Ewald, Keini, Robinson, etc. suppose this 
 sabbath to be the first after the second day of Passover, 
 from which the fift}^ days to Pentecost were counted ; 
 the Sabbaths of this interval heino; numbered, the first 
 Sabbath after second day, third Sabbath after second day, 
 etc. (Andrews p. 240.' Lightfoot on Mt. 12: 1.) 
 
 Last view is to be preferred, it beino; the only explana- 
 tion appealino; to popular usage; likely that such a term 
 would be current with the masses. 2. Agrees best with 
 season of year. Standing corn ripe enouo:h to be pluck- 
 ed and eaten. This could not be before Passover, being 
 the time for oft'ering first fruits. 3. Results obtained. 
 The occurrences of this feast, if introduced here, harmo- 
 nize precisely with Syn. narrative. The agreement 
 amounts almost to-demonstration. A connected account 
 of the development of Pharisaic opposition, is furnished, 
 three successive instances being noted, viz, its outbreak, 
 at the healing of paralytic, §34, its growth at Christ's 
 call of the publican, §35, its increasing definiteness at 
 Passover, §36. At the feast of John 5:1, for the first 
 time, Christ is charged with Sabbath breaking. In the 
 Syn. narrative tlie same charge is taken up and pressed by 
 his enemies in Gal. The inference is unavoidable, that 
 John 5 should be inserted here. The supposition that 
 at this time Christ Avent up to the Passover and was 
 there openly charged with being a Sabbath-breaker, by 
 the Jews, Pharisees, the highest religious authorities, 
 gives the best and only adequate explanation of the in- 
 troduction at this point by the Syn. of the same charge, 
 as preferred against him by the Pharisees of Gal. Christ 
 had previously wrought many cures in Gal. on Sabbath, 
 and even in the Synagogues, without Pharisees making 
 slightest opposition, but their bitter persecution of him 
 on this ground, henceforward, admits of easy explanation, 
 when we find from John 5, that Jerus. Pharisees attempt 
 to kill him because of a Sabbath cure. 4. Gal. ministry 
 
89 
 
 began after John 4. Where can John 5, be inserted? 
 This the only place. 
 
 Site of'Bethesaida cannot be accurately determined. It 
 was near Sheep Gate (i. e, market), which was toward 
 the I^. E. of the city. Robinson identifies with small 
 intermittentspringcalled fount of the Virgin. Objected to, 
 as not large enough for the five porches, and multitude 
 of " sick folk." 
 
 Weight of authority rejects v. 3 (latter clause) and 
 whole of v. 4. Wanting in, B, D, and Sinaitic. Inter- 
 nal arguments against its genuineness are, 1. Never 
 alluded to elsewhere. If such s[tring existed, its fame 
 would be world wide. 2. Wholly out of analog}^ with 
 miracles of O. and N. T. No spiritual truth is connected 
 with it, to be believed or attested. Angelic agencj' never 
 recorded as working miracles elsewhere. i^Farrar Vol. 
 I. ]>. 372. Note.) In favor Text Rec|>t, Owen on John, 
 in loco. Reference to angel is variously interpreted. 
 
 1. Literal. The text accepted with all its dithculties, 
 on ground, that narrative is not 'mpossible. 2. Natural- 
 istic. Ilengstenberg, Robinson. Sining simply medici- 
 nal, its properties due to angelic agency, but the cure not 
 always immediate, nor all cured. 
 
 3. Allegorical. Take ayyuo^ in etymological sense, 
 " messenger," then spring is spoken of figui-ativcly as 
 God's messenger. 4. Best. Reject the doubtful verses, 
 and the difficult}^ vanishes with them. 
 
 Sabbath observance was test question. By it the Jews 
 were distiuguislied from Gentile nations. It was the 
 chief mark of their national and theocratic fidelity. At 
 time of Christ the ascendancy of mere ritual was such, 
 tliat its spiritual observance was scarcely known. Innu- 
 merable, minute and absurd regulations, had taken the 
 place t)f tlie Mosaic law. It was with this dead formality, 
 that Christ came constantly into conflict, and on account 
 of it was so repeatediv charged with Sabbath breaking. 
 (Farrar Vol. I. p. 430;§5). vv. 16-18. Jews " sought to 
 slay him." Many regard this as olficjial sentence of San- 
 hedrim, and Christ's discourse (v. 19-47) a defence de- 
 livered before them. No evidence that this was the case; 
 the murderous purpose to kill Christ is now found, a 
 pretext on which to base it is obtained, but the formal 
 decree to slay him is made some i:nontlis later. 
 
90 
 
 Christ'vS discourse contains clear and profound state- 
 ment of his relations to the Father. In Syn. he presents 
 on]}' popular arguments. Lessons of tlie discourse: 1, 
 God works ceaselessly. Sabbath commemorates rest 
 from creation not cessation tVom all work. 2. Christ's 
 work identical with God's, not mere imitation, and is 
 based upon his immediate perfect knowledge of the 
 Father. 3. Christ the source of life, and the judge of 
 all. Resurrection and judgment referred to. Eternal 
 generation taught. 4. Necessity and responsibility of 
 exercising faith in himself; rejecting him is to reject 
 God. Rage of Jews aroused because he claimed God as 
 his Father, " making himself equal with God." The 
 Pharisees, therefore, understood Christ as claiming 
 divinity. 
 
 Strauss alleges discrepancy in the gospel narrative of 
 the development of opposition to Christ on the ground, 
 that Syn. make its growth gradual, occasioned by Sab- 
 bath-breaking, while John traces it to Christ's teaching 
 concerning Ijis person, causing sudden outbreak. 
 
 Ans: This discrepancy much exaggerated. All four 
 evangelists make the origin of organized opposition, Sab- 
 bath-breaking. All ditference in their accounts of its 
 development is due to the characteristic dilierence of 
 Christ's ministry in Judea and Gal. Tn Judea his great 
 design was to manifest himself plainly to Jews as Mes- 
 siah : in Gal. to instruct believers who should organize 
 the church; in Judea he had to deal with the rulers, his 
 enemies : in Gal. with the people who heard him gladly. 
 
 Christ's allusion to John Bap.'s testimony as already 
 past (v. 35) strengthens the view that Gal. ministry began 
 previous to John 5. 
 
 §37. Mt. 12 : 1-8 ; Mk. 2 : 23-28 ; Lk. 6 : 1-5.^ Phick- 
 Ing Corn on the Sabbath. This incident occurred first Sab- 
 bath after Passover, while Christ was travelling, either 
 to visit different synagogues, or more likely, hastening 
 from Jerus. back to Gal. to escape impending persecution. 
 
 Conduct of Pharisees now changes. Hitherto their 
 hostility had been secret, henceforward their emissaries 
 follow Christ, striving to harass him, and destroy his in- 
 fluence. Plucking the corn was sanctioned by Mosaic 
 law (Deut. 23 : 25.) Christ replies to the charges of the 
 
91 
 
 Pharisees with five argnments. 1. David's eating shew 
 bread. (I. Sam. 21 : 1-7.) Point of comi)arison between 
 this case and Christ's is the breaking of hiw. Law of 
 Sabbath and law of sanctnary derived their anthorit}' 
 not from their essential holiness but from God alone, and 
 if in certain circumstances it was just for a man to break 
 the one, why might it not be lawful to break the other. 
 2. Law itself required of the priests more arduous toil 
 on Sabbath than on other days, in performing temple 
 services. 
 
 3. Hos. G : Q. "I desire mercy, not sacrifice." The 
 design of the law was blessing; by their formality 
 Pharisees had iTiade it a curse. 4. Sabbath designed for 
 man. Analogous to 3d. Sabbath instituted for man's 
 good, and not to be so burdened with observances that 
 his higher interests become subordinate to them. 5. 
 Christ'b supreme authority ; " Son of man, Lord of Sab- 
 bath" ; Sabbath law could be altered by him with same 
 authority as by God. Observe supplemental character 
 of gospels : of these five arguments, but two are common 
 to all the evangelists. Note increasing self-revelation of 
 Christ recorded by Syn. ; he is greater tlian temple ; has 
 authority over law equal to God. Thus Syn. and John 
 dift'er, not as to Christ's personal consciousness of Mes- 
 siahshij), but merely as to his mode of manifesting it. 
 
 §38. Mt. 12 : 9-11 • Mk. 3 : 1-6 ; Lk. 6 : 6-11. maling 
 inithcred hand on Sabbath. Occurred after Christ's return 
 to Galilee. Mk. uses definite article, 'Hhe synagogue," 
 probably the one in Cap. Wieseler's chronological 
 scheme giving him too many Sabbaths, for this month, 
 iie makes this Sabbath and the preceding, consecutive 
 days, one the weekly Sab. the other a feast Sab. Phari- 
 sees watch Christ to find pretext for persecuting him. 
 Christs asks them " Is it hiwful to do good on the Sab- 
 bath-days or to do evil ? to save life or to kill ?" Some 
 say this question is unfair; the Pharisees never held it 
 was right to do wrong. Ans. Christ takes extreme case. 
 Their forbidding attendance on sick oii Sabbath day, in- 
 volved serious responsibility, possibly loss of life. Not 
 to do good was to do evil. Christ had also in view their 
 purpose to kill him, hence uses this ad hominein argu- 
 ment: He intended to relieve sufiering, they were con- 
 
92 
 
 spiring to murder hi in ; which kept Sabbath better ? He 
 also argues iVorn their practice. Tiiey would never hesi- 
 tate to pull a sheep out of a pit on Sabbath, yet forbade 
 healing a crippled man. Talmud now forbids such help 
 to animals, but the injunction was perhaps occasioned 
 by Christ's argument, as there was nothiiig of the kind 
 in force then. Effect of this miracle was not as formerly, 
 to excite admiration of all, but tilled Pharisees with rage 
 and led them to counsel with Herodians against Christ. 
 
 Herodians. 1, Westcott's view. (Smith'sDict. p. 1054.) 
 Those who saw^ in the Herods a protection against direct 
 heathen rule, and those who looked with satisfaction 
 upon sucli a compromise between the ancient faith and 
 heathen civilization as Herod the Great and his succes- 
 sors aimed at, as the true and highest consummation of 
 Jewish hopes. 2. Common view. Herods mere tools 
 of Roman gov't, and the Herodians mere sycophants, 
 favoring Roman rule. Their union with Pharisees, 
 politically their opponents, is a great step in the opposi- 
 tion organizing against Christ. 
 
 §39. Mt. 12? 15-21; Mk. 3:7-12. Success. Christ's 
 popularity, despite increasing opposition grew so greatly, 
 that multitudes follow him from all parts of the country. 
 Gal., Judea, Idumea, beyond Jordan, Tyre and Sidon. 
 So great are the crowds, he is forced to enter a boat 
 " lest they should throng him." Multitudes typify final 
 success of the gospel and were fulfillment of Is. 11 : 10; 
 42: 1, which predict the Gentiles as sharers in Messianic 
 blessings. 
 
 The first stage of development of opposition is now 
 ended, and the subject of teaching becomes prominent. 
 The people having been aroused and drawn to him, they 
 are prepared to hear his words. 
 
 §40. Organization. Mt. 10 : 2-4; Mk. 3 : 13-19; 
 Lk. 6:12-19. Appointment of ihe Twdcc. This is third 
 step in organization, first at Jordan, second at Sea of 
 (jralilee. Mk. and Lk. clearly connect this, with Sermon 
 on .Mount; Mt., however joins it with their temporary 
 mission. Lk. 6 : 13. Note, different classes of follow- 
 ers distinguished, disciples in general and apostles chosen 
 from these. Nature of office. 1. To be with him as 
 witnesses. 2. To preach. 3. To work miracles. Mk. 
 
93 
 
 3 : 14, 15. These qualifications preclude the permanency 
 of this office. In gospels name apostle occurs but nine 
 times, Mt,, Mk. and John once each, Lk. six times, in 
 Acts more than thirty times. The\^ were " learners " 
 until Pentecost, after that fully apostles. Their miracu- 
 lous power was not coequal with that of Christ but was 
 limited to healing sick, raising dead, demoniacal posses- 
 sion. They had no power over nature, only over man, 
 their cures being illustrations of their saving work. 
 Number twelve, significant of perfection (Lange on Mt. 
 in loco.) Comp. 12 sons Jacob, stones of Jordan, High 
 Priest's breast-plate, 12 spies, 12 foundations of New 
 Jerus., 144,000, [jerfection perfected, the cliurch in heaven 
 (Rev.) There are four lists of apostles; three in gospels, 
 one in Acts 1 : 13. Each contains three classes of four 
 each. Peter heads the list. Each class invariably begins 
 with the same name. Iscariot is always last. Lebbeus 
 (Mt.,) Thaddeus (Mk.,) and Judas the brother of Jas. 
 (Lk.) are commonly considered as referring to same per- 
 son. (Farrar Vol. I., p. 251.) 
 
 §41. Teaciiinu. Mt. 5 : 1 to 8 : 1 ; Lk. G : 20-49. 
 Sermon on Jlount. Contrast in point of simplicity, pro- 
 fundity, grasp of principles, and authority, between 
 Christ's teaching and that of heathen philosophers or 
 Jewish scliools, aftbrds clear proof of his divinity. Four 
 forms of Christ's teaching. 1. Long discourses in John 
 relating to his person. 2. Long discourses in 8yn. 
 concerning kingdom of Heaven, involving his person and 
 sacrifice. Longest are, Sermon on Mt., and denuncia- 
 tions of woe against Pharisees. 3. Parables, setting 
 forth the nature of kingdom of heaven, the duties and 
 relations of its individual members. 4. iShort sayings, pithy 
 statements often repeated. Self-testimony of Christy in 
 John, is contained in long discourses ; in Syn. it consists 
 in the titles he assumes (e. g. Son of David, Son of Man, 
 Son of God), and claims which he makes, (e. g. to for- 
 give sins, to rai-e dead, to judge, etc.) . 
 
 1. Son of God. Expressions most frequent in John. 
 Theories. ' a. Lowest, Pantheistic. Strauss and Baur. 
 Great truth of Christ's teaching was universal fatherhood 
 of God, as contrasted with the vindictive Jehovah of O. 
 T. Christ's conviction of God's love to man and iiian's 
 
94 
 
 dependence upon God, raised him to his liigh plane of 
 tlionght, but being unacquainted with Pantheistic phi- 
 losophy, he erred in conceiving of God as a personal 
 being. As most vividly apprehending the fatherhood of 
 God, he is styled son of God. b. Evvald. By this title 
 Christ claimed nothing divine. Only higher, purer, 
 religious union with God. To him was given a perfect 
 divine communication, making him conscious (1) that 
 there was to be a perfected rule of God upon the earth, 
 (2) that he was to introduce it as its king. c. Orthodox 
 view. Christ, Son of God, by eternal generation. 
 
 2. Son of 31an. Expression occurs 78 times in gospels, 
 and but 4 times out of them. Christ's chosen term for 
 himself. It is applied to him b}' others but twice. Theo- 
 ries, a. At first, expressive merely of essential human- 
 ity and humiliation, of the fiict that Christ's sympathies 
 unite him as a brother, to all men. 
 
 Change occurs toward close of his ministry and the 
 title is used as containing Messianic force. Comp. Mt. 
 24 : 30; 26: 64 with Dan. 7 : 13, 14, a Messianic predic- 
 tion, b. Title denoted Christ was ideal man, nothing 
 superhuman. Gess remarks, this view irreconcilable 
 with Christ's constant claims of divine attributes, c. 
 Orthodox. " The Son of Man," above other men, dis- 
 tinguished by some peculiarity, wiiich may be discovered 
 by considering what is predicted of him, viz., divine 
 honors, jtrerogatives, etc. 
 
 Why does Christ employ this title ? 1. Ans : Iiicorputo 
 to hide his real divine nature till men should be prepared 
 to accept him. So Ewald, Bleek. 2. A mere circumlo- 
 cution for Jesus, with which it is interchanged. 3. Used 
 to set forth Christ's Messiahship. The title " Messiuh" 
 could not be employed because of the false ideas of the 
 people respecting it. Had he assumed this title men 
 would have expected him to fulfill their wrong concep- 
 tions. Jesus would not be called Christ until late in his 
 life. Only once did he call himself "the Christ;" and 
 that was at his trial and led to his condemnation. The 
 title evidently contains the two ideas of exaltation and 
 humiliation. After tlie Resurrection it was not used by 
 the disciples. It is evidently based on Ps. 8, and Dan. 
 7 : 13, 14. Gess sees a reference to tiie Protevangelium, 
 Gen. 3:15. 
 
95 
 
 The expressions '' kiiigdorn of heaven," " kingdom of 
 God," should also be noticed. " Kingdom of God " is 
 employed by Mk., Lk. and John. MaU. nsed the i)hrase 
 but twice. His expression is Kingdom of Heaven [zoju 
 ouf/aviov, plur., Heb. forni, alluding to different spheres.) 
 Some regard the two expressions as identical. Heaven 
 is put for God as being the place of his dwelling. This, 
 however, does not explain Matt.'s exclusive use of one. 
 Others, therefore, say the phrase " kingdom of heaven " 
 is used by Matt, to contrast the new stage of God's rule 
 with that of O. T. theocracy, i. e. gospel is heavenly ful- 
 fillment of God's rule on earth. "Kingdom of God" is 
 equally ai)plicable to both dispensations. The same 
 essential idea is, however, involved in both. Diff. views 
 held as to what Christ intended to do in establishing "the 
 kingdom" : 1. Infidel. Christ attempted to establish an 
 earthly kingdom, to free the Jews, but perished in the 
 attempt. 2. Rationalistic, a, He aimed at political 
 regeneration. Seeing that social reform was necessarj- 
 to this, he became a moralist, 6, Christ at first held the 
 same view as Pharisees. Gradually his mistaken ideas 
 were corrected, and he sought to carry on a spiritual 
 work. Renan : Christ vacillates between these two views 
 of his work, the Pharisaic and Spiritual. 3. Accommo- 
 dation--Schleiermacher, Schenkel : The aim which Christ 
 had in his mind was simply to found as a teacher a moral, 
 spiritual system. He however accommodated himself in 
 his instructions to the popular misconceptions of the 
 people with regard to the theocracy. Either he, like the 
 people, was blinded by misunderstanding, or he made 
 use of their false notions to elevate them. 
 
 Sfrmon on the Mount. Christ now gives a fuller and 
 more orderly arranged specimen of his teaching than he 
 had previously afl^brded the people. The time has now 
 come for a more complete revelation, that friends and 
 foes may be separated and the gospel system somewhat 
 consolidated. Place. According to tradition the Mt. of 
 Beatitudes, a lime-stone ridge 7 or 8 m. S. W. of Cap'm, 
 called Kurn Hattin on account of its two peaks. To this 
 identification Robinson objects that the Mt. is too far 
 distant from Gap'm to be consistent with Matt. 8 : 5 and 
 Lk. 7 : 1. The tradition, also, is oyly in the Latin church 
 
96 
 
 and from the 13th century. Matt. Jincl Lk. differ. As 
 to place,, Mt. says, "went up into a mountain and sat;" 
 Lk., ''came down and stood in the phiin." Mt. however 
 uses TO opo^ in a wide sense— a mountain district. Christ 
 '•went up to pray," (Lk. 6 : 12) and came down, i. e. part 
 way, to the level plain hetween the two peaks, and taui^lit. 
 As to time, Mt. places it at commencement of Gal. min- 
 istry; Lk. puts it some nmnths later in connection with 
 the call of the Twelve. The miracle followine^ in Mt. is 
 healing of leper ; in Lk., healing of centurion's servant. 
 In letigth, Mt, gives 107 verses ; Lk. but 30. The accounts 
 resemble one another in the facts that both are mountain 
 sermons occurring early in Gal. ministry; that the begin- 
 ning and close are alike in both, and the drift of thought 
 is tlie same. Theories of the relation hctioeen the two. 1. 
 Two accounts of the same sermon, blurred and distorted 
 by tradition. Some follow Mt. as most complete, others 
 Luke as presenting fewest difHculties. 2. Conscious 
 selection lies at base of differences; one discourse pur- 
 poselj' varied by Evangelists ; Lk. omits wliat was special 
 to Jews. This coincides with differences, but does not 
 offer an adecpiate explanation. 3. Couinio)). (3ne dis- 
 course; Lk.'s account historical as Christ gave it; Mt.'s 
 an amplilication by additions grouped fiom other dis- 
 courses, analogous to Mt.'s plan in parables. A specimen 
 of Christ's teaching. (K)jection to this is the unity of 
 Mt.'s account. Calvin and Nearider hold that both 
 Mt. and Lk. give specimens of Christ's teacliing. 4. 
 Two discourses on same occasion, the one esoteric 
 (Mt.'s) to the disciples, the other exoteric (Lk.'s) to 
 the multitude. (iSo Augustine, Lange). Objections : 
 There is nothing esoteric in Mt. Christ makes no 
 distinction of this kind in his teaching. 5. Two dis- 
 tinct, yet similar discourses. Christ re[)eats the same 
 truths because the circumstances and the wants of 
 the people were the same. (So Dr. Alexander.) The 
 choice lies between the third and fifth view. At all 
 events, Christ gave a discourse at the time of calling the 
 Twelve. 
 
 Design of the Sermon, and Connectum. with the Histori/. 
 The design of the discourse was to show the nature of the 
 Messiah's kingdonj. Christ cai::e preaching a kingdom 
 
97 
 
 and repentance. Naturally it would be asked, what is 
 this repentance, what this kingdom, what its relations to 
 Pharisaic ideas and to O. T. economy ? There was need 
 of explanation, that the people might know to what they 
 were committing themselves. Christ in this discourse 
 gives it, removing all erroneous views and false inter- 
 pretations of his work. Some have mistakenly thought 
 that Christ here sets forth a system of theology, others, 
 a system of Ethics. The sermon was related to Pharisaic 
 errors in teaching in opposition to them that member- 
 ship in God's kingdom was dependent not upon external 
 circumstances but upon personal character; that the Law 
 was to be observed not in a formal manner but in its 
 spirit. Three main divisions : 1. Ch. 5 : 1-16, character of 
 members ; characteristics required, spiritual. 2. Ch. 5 : 
 17-6. Claims of kingdom, a, 5 : 17-48, moral requisi- 
 tions : b. ch. 6, religious requisites. 3. Ch. 7, exhortations 
 to true life ; temptations and dangers, how avoided. The 
 effect was astonishment (Mt. 7 : 29) " for he taught them 
 as one having authority." Sceptics view this discourse 
 as genuine, making an exception in its favor. They 
 regard Christ as teachingan ethical and religious system. 
 The}^ draw a contrast between its free tone and the later 
 dogma of Paul and other Apostles. Hence Christian 
 dogma was a late invention. Christ taught morals, not 
 doctrine. Such is true Christianity, love to God as our 
 Father, to our brother-man as to ourself Ans : 1. Dis- 
 course was not intended to be a full system, but adapted 
 to the comprehension of the people. 2. Adapted to its 
 position in history of redemption. Revelation corres- 
 ponds to the period in 'which it is given. 3. Completed 
 Christian doctrine is based, on life, death and resurrection 
 of Christ, hence could not be brought forward at this 
 stage. 4. Unity of truth is always preserved, although 
 it is more definitely stated from time to time. O. T. and 
 Christ's teaching involved all fundamental doctrines. 
 In the Epistles, however, they assume a more analytic 
 form. 
 
 That the discourse is Evangelical not Ethical, as Skep- 
 tics assert, is seen : 1. Becaus'e its standard of spiritual- 
 ity is so high that supernatural aid is required. Need 
 of forgiven"ess is shown. Christ n^ist be sought and this 
 search is to be by means. 
 
98 
 
 2. Righteousness is distingnished from moral right 
 because it is connected with Christ's kingdom. His per- 
 son is involved in bis work. His disciples are spoken 
 of as those having purity. 
 
 The discourse was an evangelical restatement of Law 
 of Moses, and a preparation for the gospel. 
 
 H2. Miracles. Mt. 8: 5-13; Lk. 7: 1-10. Heaimg Cen- 
 turlon's servant. Capernaum. §42, 43, resume the subject 
 of miracles. All centurions mentioned in '^. T. appear 
 in a favorable light. Mt. 8 : 5, he loved Jewish nation 
 and built a synagogue. Though a heatheji Christ de- 
 clared of him, " I have not found so great faith, no not 
 in Israel." Comp. centurion at crucifixion (Mk. 15 : 39; 
 Lk. 23: 47.), Cornelius (Act. 10: 1.), Julius (Acts 27 : 1.) 
 (Smith's Diet. p. 406 ) Legion contained about 6000 in- 
 fantry, with a varying proportion of cavalry. It " was 
 subdivided into ten "cohorts ("band," Acts 10:1), the 
 cohort into three maniples, and the maniple into two 
 centuries, containing original h^ 100 men, as the name 
 implies, but subsequently from 50 to 100 men, according 
 to the strength of the legion." (Smith's Diet. Army p. 
 162.) Gal. was garrisoned with Roman soldiery ; Her- 
 od's bodyguards, and those farming imperial revenues. 
 
 New features in this miracle. 1. Intercessor}' faith. 
 Master prays for his servant. 2. Striking greatness of 
 faith. 'As his servants obeyed his word, so disease 
 would obey the word of Christ.' 3. It was a Gentile's 
 faith. This is first recorded instance of individual heal- 
 ing, outside the chosen people, hence intercession of 
 Jewish elders is sought. (Lk! 7: 3.) Christ praises this 
 Gentile's faith, as greater than any in Israel, and applies 
 this fact by declaring ' Many Gentiles shall be called, 
 many children of the kingdom cast ofi'' (Mt. 8: 11-12.) 
 Objections. 1. Mt. says centurion came in person to 
 Christ : Lk. he sent through the elders, then through 
 friends, but had no personal interview. Ans. " Qui 
 faeit per alium, facit per se." " What one does by his 
 agent, he does himself." Mt. dwells on mere fact of 
 miracle as displaying great faith ; Lk. goes into detail. 
 (Robin. Gk. Harm. p. 198.) 2. Christ lacks either sin- 
 cerity or foreknowledge. He starts for house, but does 
 not go to it ; either did not intend going and practiced 
 
99 
 
 deception, or changed his mind, because ignorant of what 
 he was about to do. Ans. This assumes Christ was 
 bound to disclose all his intentions. No inconsistency 
 in Christ's not knowing things about to happen. To 
 his human consciousness things came as to ours. 
 
 §43. Lk. 7:11-17. Raising son of widow of Nain. lik. 
 8 : 1-3, narrates a second general circuit of Gal. Some 
 hold this refers to prospective journey, undertaken 
 near close of ministry. . Common view (Andrews, Wiese- 
 ler,) the reference in Lk. is retrospective, summing up 
 the events narrated in §§ 43-47. Exegesis favorsthis 
 interpretation. " Nain, the modern Nein is situated on 
 the northwestern edge of the - Little Hermon,' where the 
 ground falls into the plain of Esdraelon." The entrance 
 must always have been up the steep ascent from the 
 plain, and here, on the west side of the \illage, the rock 
 is full of sepulchral caves. (Smith's Diet. p. 2058.) Christ 
 approaches i!^ain attended by many disciples, and much 
 people. Style of gospel description simple, beautiful, 
 impressive " only son of his mother, and she was awidou\'" 
 This was only time Christ was ever in plain of Esdraelon. 
 
 This class of miracles manifest Christ's power over 
 departed spirits and attest his claim to l)e source of life, 
 physical and spiritual. Three cases of this kind are 
 recorded, each exhibiting more striking power than the 
 preceding, viz., Jairus' daughter, from death bed; 
 Widow's son, from the bier; Lazarus, from the tomb. 
 Chronological order. Widow's son, Jairus' daughter, 
 Laz. Sceptical theories concerning these miracles. 1. Natu- 
 ralistic. Cases of susp.ended animation ; death otdy ap- 
 parent : pretended miracle, only resuscitation. 
 
 2. Mythical. Mere inventions of early church to make 
 Christ's life accord with 0. T. prophecy, and type. 
 
 Effect: all feared, glorified God, saying "Great 
 Prophet has arisen," " God has visited Israel." Christ's 
 fame spread not only through Judea, but through whole 
 " region round about." 
 
 §44. Opposition. Mt. 11 : 2-19 ; Lk. 7 : 18-35. 3Ies- 
 sage of John Bap. In this section renewal of opposition is 
 occasioned by Bap's disciples, and continues to §50. Mt. 
 places this narrative after sending out the Twelve, but 
 this is too late, for during absence of Twelve, John 
 
100 
 
 was beheaded ; Mk, 6 : 30 ; Mt. 14 : 13. Lk's order is 
 tlierefore best. The report of" Christ's miracles was the 
 occasion of Bap's message. John was imprisoned at 
 Machaerus, " on the borders of the desert, X. of Dead 
 Sea, on frontiers of Arabia," " identified with the ruins 
 M'Kauer." Fathers say John did not doubt himself, but 
 sent to Christ that his disciples miglit be satisfied. But 
 that Bap. was, at least to some extent, staggered and per- 
 plexed b}' Christ's method of developing his work, is 
 evident from fact of Christ's answer being addressed not 
 to disciples, but John himself. Message expresses im- 
 patience mingled with distrust. He was languishing in 
 prison, multitudes of others were being relieved and 
 blessed hy miracles; he, the forerunner, was forgotten, 
 ''was this really the Christ, or should they look for 
 another?" (Farrar Vol. L, p. 289.) Christ's only reply 
 is reference to his miracles, thus showing estimate he put 
 upon them : His works were equivalent to assertion of 
 divinity. John Bap. was greatest prophet because of his 
 position as '' index-finger of O. T." 
 
 Christ received by the people, but Pharisees and law- 
 yers doubted (Lk. 7 : 29.) 
 
 §45. Mt. 11 : 20-30. Upbraids the cities. Disciples of 
 John having returned to him, Christ gives his estimate 
 of the reception he had met in Gal. The same, or a simi- 
 lar denunciation of woes is recorded in Lk. 10 : 13, in 
 connection with sending out seventy. Exact location of 
 these cities is unknown ; probably W. shore Sea of Gal. 
 Their rejection of Christ contrasted with ancient heathen 
 opposition to theocracy, viz.. Tyre and Sidon, Sodom and 
 Gomorrah. There is no record of a single miracle, 
 wrought in Bethsaida or Chorazin, yet the Evangelist 
 says these were the cities " wherein most of his mighty 
 works were done." 
 
 §46. Lk. 7 : 3(5-50. Anoiniiiu/ by a ironiaiK This took 
 place at either Cap., Nain, Magdala. It difiers from the 
 case recorded by Mt., Mk., John as this is early in his 
 ministry ; that, in last week of his life. Romish tradition 
 considers this woman the Mary Magdelene, mentioned 
 a few verses later (Lk. 8 : 2) and makes her the repre- 
 sentative of penitent frailty. This idea is based wholly 
 on mere juxta[)osition, there being nothing definite to 
 
101 
 
 show that these are necessarily the same person, or that 
 seven devils were demons of impurity. This incident 
 contrasts with Christ's previous treatment, (§45,) is as- 
 sociated with new instance of opposition, and gives rise 
 to Christ's tirst parable :" the two debtors. (Farrar Vol. 
 I., p. 296.) 
 
 §47. Lk. 8 : 1-3. Second circuit in Gal. General state- 
 ment, summing up results of the journey, begun §43, 
 giving Christ's mode of living and travelling, and his 
 household, viz. the Twelve, and certain women, Mary of 
 Magdala (W. of Cap.,) Joanna of Herod's household etc. 
 Connection ; Love and devotion of these attendants con- 
 trasted with rejection and opposition of Pharisees and 
 masses. Chri>t was supported bv free-will offerings. 
 
 §48. Mk. 3: 19-30; Mt. 12: "22-37; Lk. 11: 14, 15, 
 17-23. Healing blind and dumb dernoniac. Events of §§48- 
 56 occur during a single day, the great day of parables, 
 which opens with cure of demoniac. Lk. records this 
 cure in ch. 11. during period of last journeys to Jerus. 
 Two methods of harmonizing with Mt. 1. Cases are the 
 same. Then must follow Mt's order because he gives 
 distinct note of time, ch. 13: 1. "that same day.'' 2. 
 Cases are analogous. (Andrews p, 365.) Historical re- 
 sult is unchanged by either method. Collision with 
 Pharisees did occur at this time, and only question is, 
 was it repeated? Xote intense excitement that was pre- 
 vailing. Mk. 3: 21, Christ's friends think him insane, 
 endeavor to put him under restraint; ordinary meals in- 
 terrupted, multitudes coming together " so they could 
 not so much as eat bread," (Mk. 3: 20 ;) Christ goes to 
 sea-side, is compelled to enter a boat to address them; 
 crowds ascribe to him Messianic titles. " Is not this the 
 Son of David?" Pharisees alarmed, unable to gainsay 
 the miracles, impute them to agency of Satan. Mk. 3 : 
 22 " the scribes which came down from Jerus." shows 
 Christ was being watched by Jewish authorities, and the 
 present opposition was official. Beelzebub, name of 
 Philistine deity, meaning "Fly god," Pharisees change 
 to BeelzebouC i- e., " Dung god." Christ's reply. 1. 
 Ad hominmn argument, " If I by Beelzeboul cast out 
 devils, by whom do you ?" Reference to incantations 
 and exorcisms of Rabbinical S,chools. 2. Parable of 
 
103 
 
 Definition of Parable — an illnstrution of moral or reli- 
 o;ious trutli derived from analogy of common experience, 
 it differs from the Fable in that " in the latter, qualities 
 or acts of a higher class of beings may be attributed to 
 a lower (e. g. those of men to brutes) ; while in the for-, 
 mer, the lower sphere is kept perfectly distinct from that 
 which it seems to ilustrate." ^S'eander: It differs from 
 the Myth " in being the result of conscious deliberate 
 thought, not the growth of unconscious realism, personi- 
 fying attributes, appearing, no one knows how, in popu- 
 lar belief." It difters from the Proverb in that '• it must 
 include a similitude of some kind, while the Proverb 
 may assert without a similitude, some wide generaliza- 
 tion of experience." It differs from the Allegory, in 
 that the latter really involves no comparison. Parable 
 may be v^^holly fictitious or partly based on real events. 
 
 Three great groups, distinctly marked in gospels: 1. 
 Seven in Mt. 13, illustrate nature of kingdom of Heaven. 
 2. Lk. Chs. 12-18, set forth immediate, personal rehitions 
 of the individual believer to God. 3. Mt. 25, those 
 pointing to Judgment and consummation of the king- 
 dom. These groups are supplemental in their relation 
 to one another. First group contains five fundamental 
 truths. 1. Sower and seed. Varied reception of gospel 
 truth, by different classes of hearers. 2. Tares and 
 wheat. Evil springs ui> among the good. 3. Mustard 
 seed. Leaven. Growth of church externally, internally. 
 4. Hid treasure, Pearl of greatprice. Value of kingdom, 
 necessity of sacrifice. 5. Net. Gathering of all kinds ; 
 mixed condition of visible church until end of world. 
 Skeptics reject Tares, and Net. because they imply con- 
 scious divinity of Clirist, and contain the lute ideas of 
 imperfection in the church. They assert Mk.'s parable 
 of seed growing secretly, is derived from that of the 
 Sower. Bengel says these Parables form outline of 
 Church History. Lange carries this idea to extreme, 
 viz. Sower, Apostolic Age; Tares, Ancient Cath. Church; 
 Mustard seed: State church under Constantine ; Leaven, 
 Mediieval Churcli ; Hid Treasure, Reformation ; Pearl, 
 Christianity vs. world ; Net, Final Judgment. A nat- 
 ural transition is observable running through all seven. 
 The}' illustrate self conscious divinity of Christ: field is 
 
102 
 
 strong man armed. If Christ by Satan was casting: out 
 devils, he must lirst have couquered Satan. 3. Warns 
 them against the unpardonable sin. 4. Denounces them 
 as generation of vipers, seed of serpent, i. e. children of 
 Satan in their nature, opinions, actions. 
 
 §49. Mt. 12 : 38-45 ; Lk. 11 : 16, 24-36. Pharisees seek 
 a sign. In fixce of all Christ's miracles they demand some 
 evidence of Messiahship that will accord with their per- 
 verted Messianic notions. Mt.'s order is preferred to 
 Lk.'s, because Ch. 12 : 46 chronological sequence is given, 
 " while he yet talked." Christ refused sign. He had 
 already furnished ample miraculous proof of Messianic 
 claims. 
 
 Parable of seven spirits, refers to present condition 
 of people. Apparently changed in feeling toward 
 Christ, they would shortly become more hostile toward 
 him, than ever before. Shows that Christ was not misled 
 by their seeming and probablv sincere faith. 
 
 §50. Mt. 12 ^46-50 ; Mk.^3 : 31-35 ; Lk. 8 : 19-21. 
 Mother and brethren desire to speak laitk him., his increas- 
 ing popularity and antagonism to the Pharisees giving 
 them concern about him. He shows his earthly relations 
 typify his spiritual relations to every true believer. 
 Great advance in Pharisaic opposition; charge of blas- 
 phemy has been made and retorted. 
 
 §§54, 55. Teaching. Mt. 13. Mk. 4. Lk. 8 : 4-16. 
 Great dcuj of Parables. Syn. here mark decided change 
 and advance in Christ's teaching. It was necessary 
 Christ should still instruct the people, but in order to 
 blind opposition, truth must be clothed in parabolic form, 
 that his enemies may hot employ his words against him. 
 
 Four general subjects twice repeated characterize the 
 ministry in E. Gal. up to this point: 
 
 1. Organization, §29 and §40: 2. Miracles, §§30-33 
 and §§42-43 ; 3. Opposition, §§34-39 and §§44-50 ; 4. 
 Teaching §41 and §§54-55. 
 
 Christ employs parables. 1. Symbolic method awakens 
 imagination, excites interest, exercises memory and 
 judgment. 2. "To him that hath shall be giv^en." The 
 recipients of God's grace, wiH be able to recognize his 
 truth even when clothed in symbolic form. What is 
 grace to believer, becomes judiciaj condemnation to un- 
 believer. Is. 6 : 9 is thus fulfilled! (See Mt. 13 : 11-15.) 
 
104 
 
 the world, he sends his angels, he, separates. He might 
 naturally in Parable have referred to God, but avoids 
 doing 80. Christ's exposition of Sower and Tares is 
 model of interpretation. Spiritual lesson should not be 
 sought in every particular, some details serving merely 
 to keep up connection. Fathers attempted to spiritualize 
 all the minutiae. Mt. 13 : 36, Christ's going into the 
 house makes apparent division in his discourse, parables 
 spoken before being addressed to people in general, 
 those afterward to his disciples only. Common 
 opinion is that these parables were all delivered 
 upon one day. Though this hypothesis is not neces- 
 sary, there is certainlv marked unity in these teachings. 
 :N"ote. §§48-56— one day: §57 one day: §§58-60 
 one day. These three days though possibly not succes- 
 sive, are not widely separated. 
 
 §56. Miracles. Mt. 8 : 18-27 ; Mk. 4 : 35-41 ; Lk. 
 8 : 22-25 ; 9 : 57-62. Crossed the Lake on evening of 
 same day, to escape crowds and avoid Pharisees. Cer- 
 tain man desires to follow Christ. He replies '' Foxes 
 have holes," Christ's poverty should not be exagger- 
 ated ; it was voluntary, not forced, v. 60. Christ's ser- 
 vice supersedes everything conflicting with it. New 
 class of 'Miracles introduced, those over nature, teaching 
 Christ's care and deliverance of his followers from dan- 
 ger. E. side urge Christ to depart, on AV. beg him to 
 remain. 
 
 §57. Mt. 8 : 28-34; Mk. 5 : 1-21 ; Lk. 8 : 26-40. 
 Demoniacs at Gadara. Text differs as to name of place. 
 This case, palpable proof of individuality of devils. First 
 recorded visit to E. of Lake; preparation for further 
 sojourn. Tells demoniacs to publish cures, because here 
 Christ was beyond the reach of Pharisees, and the report 
 would prepare for his subsequent visit. Swine shows 
 region outside Jewish influence. Their destruction no 
 part of the miracle, Mt. mentions two demoniacs, others 
 but one. Note contrast, dwellers oji E. of Lake urge 
 Christ to depart, on W. beg him to remain. 
 
 §58. Mt. 9 : 10-17 ; Mk. 2 : 15-22 ; Lk. 5 : 29-89. 
 Led's feast. Not positively successive; most think so. 
 Wieseler, Ellicott,Tischendorf, synclironize it with call of 
 Mt. Mt. gives feast on account of Christ's intended de- 
 
105 
 
 parture from Giil. Two new charges from Pharisees, 
 and disciples of John Bap.: a. Eating with publicans 
 and sinners. O. T. regulations insisted upon social 
 severance ; no Jew was permitted to eat with those cer- 
 emonially unclean, h. Christ and his disciples neglect 
 fasting. Former charges were, Christ's making himself 
 equal to God, breaking Sabbath, casting out devils bv 
 Beelzebub. 
 
 §59. Mt. 9: 18-26; Mk. 5: 22-43; Lk. 8: 41-56. 
 Jairus comes whilst Christ was conversing with disciples 
 of John, at Levi's feast. On vv^ay to Jairus' house, heals 
 woman with bloody issue. Peculiarity of cure, is mode 
 of approach. "Virtue {owajuv) had gone out of him" 
 does not signify emanation of unconscious power. Christ 
 voluntarily performed the cure. ' Trouble not the mas- 
 ter' Lk. 8 : 49, indicates respect of higher classes for 
 Jesus. Privacy of raising of Jairus' daughter was due 
 to Pharisaical opposition. 
 
 §60. Alt. 9: 27-34. Tnto hlind men and dumb demoniac. 
 Organic disease symbolizing darkness of mind, v, 27 
 " Son of David," Messianic title used as argument to ob- 
 tain cure, fov first time. v. 28 " Yea, Lord'' — Christ re- 
 quires faith. V. 34. Blasphemous charge of Pharisees 
 reiterated. 
 
 §62. Mt. 9:35-38; 10:1,5-42; 11 : 1 ; Mk. 6 : 6-13; 
 Lk. 9 : 1-6. Third circuit in Gal. Christ now sends out 
 the Twelve. Opposition had become dangerous. The 
 crisis of his life was fast approaching. Whatever he 
 would do to impress the people of Gal. must be done 
 quickly. Design of mission of Twelve, a. To facilitate 
 making such impression. Their mission a practical com- 
 ment on his own words, ' Harvest plenty, laborers few.' 
 h. To exercise apostles in independent action. Fourth 
 step in organization of his kingdom. They still held the 
 erroneous ideas common to the people, so Christ now 
 begins to separate them from the world. On their re- 
 turn, he retires with them to the desert for further in- 
 struction, c. To acquaint the people with apostles, as 
 those who had been with him from the first. Their 
 commission was temporary and national. Their circuit 
 ended, their miraculous power ceased. Into any 
 Samaritan village they were not to enter. Plenary apos- 
 
106 
 
 tolic authority conferred at Pentecost. Subject ot" their 
 teaching was, ' Kingdom of heaven at hand.' Their 
 miracles were limited to acts of healing. Anointing 
 with oil, oil being t_ype of Holy Spirit, shewed that they 
 were mere instruments, and made prominent in people's 
 minds the Spirit's agency. Disciples were to be supported 
 by those to whom they were sent. Mt. 10: 16 contains . 
 reference to future opposition Christ knew he was to 
 encounter. First reference to coming trials. 
 
 Xote prominent place given to his person and author- 
 ity ; whole work of disci^des derives its authority from 
 him, its trials are to be borne for his sake. 
 
 §63. Mt. 14: 1-2, 6-12; Mk. 6: 14-16; Lk. 9: 7-9. 
 Death of John Baptist. Date of death rightlyJnferred to 
 be just prior to third Pass., after feeding 5000. 
 
 Duration of his imprisonment depends on feast of John 
 5: 1. If Pass., then 16 months (Robinson), if not it 
 varies from 5 months to 3 weeks. John Bap. dies before 
 seeing the establishment of tlie kingdom be had heralded. 
 His early ministrj- had been full of glory, its end is tilled 
 with gloom. His fiite accords with his life. It was well 
 that ail ascetic, a preacher of repentance, a pioneer for 
 righteousness sake, should die a martyr. His life had 
 been l(Mig enough to disclose the unity of his work and 
 Christ's ; his death turned popular attention to Jesus. 
 As bis imprisonment had caused Christ to withdraw from 
 Judea, his death led him to retire into the wilderness. 
 
 §64. Mt. 14: 13-21; Mk. 6, 30-34; Lk. 9 : 10-17; John 
 6: 1-14. Return of Twelve. Feeding of 5000. John now 
 [)arallel with Syn. Twelve begin to return from their 
 mission, the disciples of John Bap. report their master's 
 death, hence Christ withdraws to N. E. side of Lake, for 
 rest and safety. Lk. 9 : 10 : Place belonged to a city 
 called Bethsaida. Common opinion is there were two 
 Bethsaidas, Bethsaida of Gal., Bethsaida Julias. Others 
 think there was but one, built upon both sides of the 
 Jordan: but this is improbable, no bridge being men- 
 tioned, and a ferry would have been very dangerous. 
 Bethsaida was an easy resort from Cap. and crowds fol- 
 lowed him, having seen him embark, going around the 
 Lake, by land. Christ was moved with compassion for 
 them, because they were as sheep having no shepherd, 
 
107 
 
 their only teachers he'mcr Pharisees. He therefore spends 
 the entire day in giving instrnction. 
 
 The nearness of the Passover accounts for the con- 
 course of such multitudes in that out-of-the-way place. 
 Beside 5,000 men, tliere being women and children, there 
 must have been congregated at least 10,000 souls. Their 
 orderh' arrangement in companies, prevented all con- 
 fusion, and imposture. One of Christ's greatest miracles ; 
 a species of creation ; extensive multiplication of created 
 things. 
 
 Skeptics note following differences in the accounts : 
 1. As to place. Desert place, yet in vicinity of city. 
 John says a mountain. 2. As to conversation. Syn,, 
 make the disciples the lirst tu mention feeding the multi- 
 tudes, John makes Jesus iirst to speak. 3. Repetition 
 of feeding midtitudes recorded by Syn. increases diffi- 
 culty of accepting either as genuine. These difficulties, 
 and the inconceivableness (to skeptics) of a miracle 
 displaying such creative power, have led to unusual etibrt 
 to explain it away. 
 
 1. 31ythical explanation. J^To such actual event occurred. 
 Christ's discourse concerning his body, John 6. fur- 
 nished mythical basis for current tradition. Strauss 
 finds its mythical origin, in manna of O. T. and in the 
 analogous miracles of Elijah, (1 King 17,) and Elisha (2 
 Kings 4.) 2. NatUTalisiic explanation. Christ excited chai-ity 
 among those in the caravan journeying to feast, to sup- 
 ply from their store of provisions those fainting with 
 hunger. Some say it was originally a parable of Christ's, 
 relating to spiritual food, transformed into a narrative; 
 others imagine that Mt. has unwittingly recorded two 
 separate traditions -of the same occurrence. Olshausen 
 and Lange, note the compressing into a single instant of 
 the many gradual processes of nature and of art ; not 
 only the growth of the grain, but also the preparation 
 of the food. Effect of fhis miracle (John 6 : 14.): Peo- 
 ple applv Messianic titles to Christ, and attempt to force 
 him to adopt their views of theMessiahship, and to com- 
 pel him to be their king. Lange remarks "the rabble 
 think they have found tlieir Bread King." Disciples em- 
 bark to cross the lake. -The people are sent away. 
 Christ goes apart into a mountain to pray. §65. Omit- 
 ted. 
 
108 
 
 ^66. John 6 : ^li— 1 : 1. Discourse in Si/nagor/xc at 
 Capernawn. Only extended pas8ao;e in John's gospel, 
 the scene of which is laid in Gal. John not only accords 
 with the Syn. in givinti: the miracle, hut also makes the 
 same crises in Christ's life and same effect prodnced on 
 his followers. Morning after the miracle, the multitudes 
 missing Christ and his disciples, follow him to Caper- 
 naum. This is culmination of ministry in E. Gal. False 
 Messianic excitement has been aroused by the miracle of 
 the loaves. Christ therefore, in the synagogue at Cap. 
 delivers a searching discourse calculated to separate the 
 spiritual from the sensual among the crowds that followed 
 him, thus drawing nearer to himself the true disciples 
 and driving away the mere carnally minded. He unfolds 
 the true character of his kingdom ; its blessings spiritual, 
 not material. Miracle furnishes theme of the discourse ; 
 earthly food is not to be sought, but himself, the bread 
 which came down from heaven, v. 63. '" The words 
 that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life," 
 is the key-note of the entire discourse. Three divisions: 
 1. ch. 6: 27-51. This the work of God, men should be- 
 lieve on Christ, and feed upon his flesh. Whosoever 
 comes to Him shall not be cast out, but shall obtain eternal 
 life. 2. Ch. 6 : 51-56: Comment on preceding statements. 
 Christ's flesh, the true bread from heaven. 3. Ch. 6 : 
 59-71. Effect of discourse: multitudes are offended and 
 desert him. 
 
 Never before, save to Nicodemus, had Christ declared 
 that he came down from heaven. He claims the power 
 to impart spiritual life. This discourse from a mere man 
 would have been blasphemy and folly. This was a test 
 event for his own apostles, v. 67 " Will ye also go 
 away ?" Peter answers v. 68 " To whom shall we go ?" 
 "Thy words are hard but it is a question of despair with 
 us," (v. 69) " we believe and are sure that thou art that 
 Christ." First time the title of Messiah passed between 
 Christ and his most intimate friends. 
 
 Critics object to this discourse as unhistorical ; could 
 not have been delivered previous to institution of Lord's 
 Supper, must have been wholly unintelligible both to 
 Christ and apostles, until that event. Peter's confession 
 of Christ's divinity is out of place before Pentecost. 
 
109 
 
 Ans : The very mystery and difficulty of this discourse 
 adapt it to the end for which it was intended, the siftincr of 
 believers from unbelievers. Christ shows (vv. 70, 71,) 
 that this discriminating- process must be applied even to 
 the Twelve. " Have I not chosen you twelve, and one 
 of you is a devil?" 
 
 John 7: 1 closes the ministry in E. Gal., and indicates 
 the extent to which opposition had increased during this 
 period, by the statement that Christ "would not walk 
 in Jewry " and was unable to attend tlie approaching 
 passover " because the Jews sought to kill Him." 
 
 THE AlINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 
 
 Second Period. 
 
 Duration of the Period : From the third Passover (coin- 
 cident with death of the Baptist) to the Feast of Taber- 
 nacles, six months later. The record is contained in Mt. 
 14: 13; 18: 35; Mk. 6: 30; 9: 50; Luke 9: 10-56. 
 John gives all in one verse, 7 : 1, which corresponds with 
 the statement of the Synoptists. It is a period of great 
 journeyings. The order of events in the Syn. is perfect. 
 This is because the period is shorter, and there is less 
 room for variations. Then the subjects of conversation 
 are closely connected with the historic events. 
 
 Characteristics of the Period : 1. Dangerous opposition 
 causing Christ's withdrawal from Capernaum. 2. This 
 withdrawal widened the sphere of action. Instead of 
 remaining in Capernaum he now goes into Phoenicia, 
 then into Decapolis, passing up the Jordan to Caesarea 
 Philippi. He had two ends in view: a. To avoid dan- 
 ger; h. to extend his .usefulness. Besides, his passing 
 the borders of the Holy Land signified the calling of the 
 Gentiles. 3. His teachings assumed a new character. 
 For the first time he teaches publicly his death and resur- 
 rection. 
 
 Object of the Period: To strengthen the faith of his dis- 
 ciples. Hence he uses express terms to teach his Mes- 
 siahship, in contrast with the preceding period. The 
 disciples are now taught rather than the people. The 
 main point was to prepare them for his approaching 
 death. The central event of the preceding period was 
 
110 
 
 the Sermon on the Mount; of this period, the Transfig- 
 uration. The events on these Mountains mark the 
 beginning and end of the Galilean ministry. 
 
 §67. Christ justifies his disciples for catinr/ with unwashed 
 hands. This charge of the Pharisees shows the strict 
 watch they kept over Christ's actions. The previous 
 charge was Sabbath-breaking. Now he is charged with 
 disregarding the traditions of the Jews on which the 
 Pharisees laid so much stress. Christ applies to them, 
 Isa. 29 : 13, and warns the multitude against this ritual 
 burden. Vide Mt. 15 : 1-20 . Mk. 7 : f-23. 
 
 §68. T/ie daughter of a Syro-Pha:nician iconian healed. 
 Mt. 15: 21-28;' Mk.'7: 24-30. The border between 
 Galilee and Phoenicia is called, from its two larger cities, 
 Tyre and Sidon. Did Christ go to the borders, or hei/ond, 
 or through ? (Mk. 7 : 24.) 
 
 The last view is the l)est for three reasons : 1. It agrees 
 best with the account in Mk. 2. It suits best the pur- 
 port of the miracles. 8. It is put almost beyond doubt 
 by the amended text — ota Icomvoc implying through 
 Phoenicia. 
 
 Tyre and Sidon were opponents of the Theocracy. 
 Therefore the miracle shows Christ's intevded mission to 
 the Gentiles. 1. Because the woman is called a Canaan- 
 ite, which people belonged originally to the land. 2. 
 She is called a Greek, whicli is the 0. T. name for Gen- 
 tile. 3. Christ's own words: "lam not sent but unto 
 the lost sheep of the house of Israel." 
 
 §69. Healinq of the deaf and, dumb ?uan. Mt. 15: 29-38; 
 Mk. 7: 31-37, 8: 1-9. From Phoenicia Christ passes 
 south through Decapolis, inhabited largely by Greeks. 
 Some say he came around south of the sea; others that 
 he traveled directly east from Phoenicia. It is more proba- 
 ble that he went north as far as Damascus, thus preparing 
 for Paul. Tlie same miracles are renewed because he is 
 iu a new country. 
 
 But the present miracle has some peculiarities. 1. 
 It is the first case of combined deafness and dumbness. 
 
 2. Xot an absolute but a partial dumbness — tongue-tied. 
 
 3. The mode of healing — takes the man apart and prays. 
 Wiiy ? Because the Messianic question is not prominent, 
 and the people are Polytheists. Therefore he wished to 
 
Ill 
 
 teach them of the true Grocl. Many other miracles were 
 wrought, and the effect of them is stated in Mt. 15 : 31. 
 Then follows the miracle of feeding the 4000, wrought 
 from compassion for the people far from home, and 
 especially to lead them to tlie true God. 
 
 §70. The Pharisees and Saddiicees again require a Sign. 
 Mt. 15 : 39 ; 16: 1-4 ; Mk: 8 : 10-12.^ Our Lord comes 
 back to Capernaum and again to Magdala, a little town 
 south of Capernaum. For the first time, the Pharisees 
 and Sadducees are united against him, which Lange 
 thinks is proof that the Sanhedrim had passed official 
 measures against him. For the fourth time the Phari- 
 sees seek a sign, and ('hrist's answer is recorded in Mt. 
 16 : 2-3. 
 
 §72. Blind Man of Bethsaida healed. This miracle is 
 mentioned b}- Mark alone. It is private, and the cure is 
 gradual, to illustrate, as some think, the gradual enlight- 
 enment of the regenerated soul. 
 
 §73. Peter's Confession at Ceesarea Philippi. Mt. 16 : 13- 
 30; Mark 8: 27-30; Luke 9: 18-21. Luke menHons 
 these events because so important. C. Philippi lay at 
 the base of Mt. Hermon, which is about 8000 ft. high. 
 The sources of the Jordan are here. (Vide Smith's Diet.) 
 
 Result of ike Geditean 3Iinistry. As a w.hole, the 
 result has not been to lead any but the disciples to believe 
 that he is the Messiah. This truth is not popularly pro- 
 claimed. He still enjoins them not to say tliat he is the 
 Christ. But the truth is so clear that it brings out Peter's 
 famous confession : " Thou art the Christ, the son of the 
 living God." Christ's reply contains ixx/.y^aiafov the first 
 time. It is used only once besides this in the Gospels. 
 (Malt. 18 : 17.) 
 
 The Rationalists confess that the agreement of the 
 Evangelists here denotes a crisis in the life of Christ, but 
 they dispute as to its nature. Baur and Strauss say that 
 " Son of Man " (Mt. 16 : 13) had not before been consid- 
 ered a Messianic expression. The change, therefore, was 
 from an idea secretly and suddenly entertained by Christ 
 to its open profession, Schenkel thinks the crisis to be 
 that after this he offered himself for the first time as the 
 Messiah. 
 
 But these theories require rejection of the Gospel by 
 John, and they subvert the whole history. The only 
 
11: 
 
 tiling true is tliat the claiiii to be the Messiali had not 
 been made prominent before. But the Disciples had 
 recognized him as Son of God before this. Vide Mt. 
 14 : 33. He now makes his claim public, and goes on to 
 teach that his kingdom would be independent of the old 
 Theocracy. " Upon this rock will I build my Church." 
 That is, the doctrine contained in Peter's confession 
 would be its corner-stone. 
 
 §74. Prediction of his Death and Resurrection. Mt. 16 : 
 21-28; Mk. 8:3i-38; 9:1; Lk. 9 : 22-24. This is a 
 new element in Christ's teaching. The Syn. recognized 
 tliis transition. Our Lord shows them that he had not 
 come to set up the material kingdom that they expected, 
 but that he was to suffer death. This shocked them, and 
 Peter says : " Be it far from thee. Lord." These predic- 
 tions are important in three respects: 
 
 1. In correcting the mistaken ideas of his Apostles. 
 These predictions prepared them for that sutfering which 
 they had not anticipated. 
 
 2. In preserving their faith. What would have be- 
 come of them when Christ's death came, without these 
 predictions ? 
 
 3. Although they did not apprehend his words at the 
 time, they did remember them during Passion Week 
 (Luke 24 : 7-8). The Divinity of the Savior gleams 
 through these predictions in a striking manner. They 
 are very minute, a. As to the place — Jerus., which he had 
 avoided, b. His death was not to be a local but an offi- 
 cial and national event, c. The mode of his suffering 
 was predicted. He was to be " put to death " — but wa's 
 to rise again on the third day. 
 
 The Rationalists make strong assaults upon these pas- 
 sages. I. l^hey i^\'A\n\ discrejmricy in the accounts. 1. John 
 is enigmatical while the Syn. are plain. 2. John's refer- 
 ences cover the whole life, while the Syn. refer only to 
 the end. 3. In John the words are addressed to the 
 multitude ; in the Syn. to the Disciples. 4. Christ ap- 
 peals to the O. T. and mistakes its meaning. He avails 
 himself of certain Messianic passages which the Ration- 
 alists deny to be so. 
 
 Ans : a. Christ appeals to the O. T. as proof only to 
 those who believe in the O. T. b. The objection is based 
 
113 
 
 on the false as&umption that only isolated passages refer 
 to the Messiah, whereas the whole O. T., especially the 
 whole ceremonial law, refers to Christ. lie is the key 
 to it all. c. The exegesis on which these discrepancies 
 are based is accepted only by unbelieving Jews and 
 Rationalists. 
 
 II. Again it is objected that if Christ predicted his 
 death in this way, the surprise and vacillation and in- 
 credibility of the Disciples, when his trial and death did 
 occur, are inexplicable. 
 
 Ans : a. Prophecies however explicit require fulfill- 
 ment as the key to their siguificancy and inspiration. 
 Although the second advent of Christ has been foretold, 
 how much do we know about it ? 
 
 b. Again this was a time of great excitement. The 
 Disciples wei-e struck dumb for the moment, and liad not 
 sufficient calmness to reason about these matters. 
 
 c. The true interpretation of these prophecies contra- 
 dicted all their notions of the Messiah. Besides, O. T. 
 prophecies were not all to be fulfilled in his present 
 advent. 
 
 III. These predictions simply a shrewd forecast. His 
 sriffering would bo at Jerus. because he could bring that 
 about. But the question arises, How did Christ know 
 he would not be arrested in Galilee, on this theory ? To 
 obviate this, Strauss says the whole matter was incorpo- 
 rated with the record and is without foundation. 
 
 Liiermediate Position of Thcistic critics : These ])redictions 
 belong to Csesarean period. Before this Christ had ex- 
 pected to convert the nation. But experience taught 
 that death was necessary to victory. 
 
 Ans : 1. It is inconsistent with the record in Mt. 12 : 
 40 ; 23 : 88, 39. 
 
 2. This theory is inconsistent with itself. For if the 
 Resurrection was not an actual fact, why did the 
 Apostles suffer martyrdom for their belief in it? 
 
 3. Christ's knowledge of the O. T. renders it impossi- 
 ble (Isa. 49: 3.) The Sceptics themselves claim that he 
 got his knowledge from O. T., and by a false exegesis 
 applied it to himself Hence on their own ground he 
 had a definite conception of his sufferings and death. 
 
 Another objection attempts to relieve Christ from all 
 participation in the theory of the Atonement. But see 
 
114 
 
 how one Sceptic devours anotlier. For some of them 
 say that all such passages are an interpolation, while 
 others deny that they teach the Atonement. 
 
 Transition Period. Thus far Christ had addressed the 
 Twelve. But he now turns to the multitude. He fore- 
 warns them of the cost of following him— great self denial 
 required, yet with the rewards" of eternal life. But 
 those who do not follow him must suffer the loss of their 
 souls. (This was the last N". T. passage commented on 
 by Dr. Addison Alexander just before his death.) 
 
 §75. The Transfif/uration. The events of this section 
 occurred about a v;eek after the preceding conversation. 
 'No difficulty in the fiict that Mt. says six days, and Lk. 
 eight, for both speak of one week, only one includes, and 
 the other excludes, the first and last days. Besides Lk. 
 says (l»cs^ = " about.'' Tradition makes Mt. Tabor in Gal. 
 the Alt. of Transfig. But this goes back only to fourth 
 cent, and then not to Palestine. Mt. and Mk. say " a 
 high mountain," and Lk. " the mountain." Robinson 
 and Staidey object to Tabor bee. at that time occupied 
 by a fortified city. Last events occurred in the region 
 of Caesarea Philippi. Lightfoot : " Evangelists intimate 
 no change of place." Besides, Mk. 9 : 30 says: "And 
 departing thence they passed through Galilee," implying 
 that they were not then in Gal. Current opinion favors 
 Mt. Her mo n. 
 
 Taking with him Peter, James and John, he goes into 
 the mountain to pray, and then took place the Trans- 
 figuration. What the Transfiguration was is a matter of 
 much conjecture. It is sufficient to know that Christ's 
 personal identity remained. (Farrar, chap. 36.) Peter 
 proposed to make three Tabernacles, or tents, that they 
 might dwell there. Then a cloud came, which is always 
 a sign of Jehovah's presence, and on looking Jiround 
 they saw Jesus alone. 
 
 Three-fold desir/n of the T ran sf (juration : 
 
 1. It afl:brded the Disciples a "new proof from Heaven 
 of Christ's divinit}', thereby strengthening their faith for 
 future conflict. 
 
 2. It was necessary for Christ's own spiritual support 
 and comfort, before entering upon the agony and death 
 which were near at hand — analogous to the baptism 
 before the Temptation. 
 
115 
 
 3. The design was symbolical — setting forth the nature 
 of Christ's kingdom, and the glory that shall follow those 
 that suffer for it. A specimen of the heavenly glory and 
 of the resurrection. Also shows the essential oneness of 
 Christ's kingdom with the O. T. dispensation. Moses 
 and Elias representative, men — one the giver, the other 
 the champion of the Law. These two last points set forth 
 in II. Peter 1 : 16-18. Christ charged them to tell no man, 
 because the multitudes had not faith to understand the 
 scene, and the Disciples themselves could not understand 
 " what the rising from the dead should mean." 
 
 In the next four sections, we have a. the healing of the 
 demoniac child, b. the second prediction of Christ's 
 death and resurrection, (\ the miraculous provision of the 
 tribute-money, and d. the contentions of the Disciples as 
 to who should be greatest in Christ's kingdom. 
 
 LAST JOURNEYS TO JERUSALEM. 
 
 Our Lord now begins his last journey to Jerusalem, 
 there to renew the evidence of his Messiahship. The 
 time is from Tabernacles to the Passover, six months lack- 
 ing one week. 
 
 Why is Luke so full ? a. Because he is supplementary. 
 b. It accords with his plan to bring out the personal re- 
 lations and human sympathies of Christ. 
 
 The question of Harmony is very difficult, because 
 John gives us five chapters Avliich must go into the 
 Synoptic narrative. Here is the problem: the Synopt- 
 ists, after the Galilean Ministry, relate a journey to Jeru- 
 salem as if it were the last. But John records ///r^e jour- 
 neys : (1) A journey to the feast of Tabernacles in Octo- 
 ber, (John 7, 10.) (2). A journey to the Feast of Dedi- 
 cation in December (John 10:22-23.) On account of 
 opposition Jesus retires to Bethany in Perea, but the 
 death of Lazarus brings him to Bethany, near Jerusalem. 
 Then on account of further opposition he retires to 
 Ephraim, (John 11 : 54.) (3) He sets out from Ephraim 
 for Jf-rusalem "six days before the Passover" (John 12: 
 1.) Where was Jesus during the two months between 
 the Tabernacles and Dedication ? 
 
 llow are these to be harmon-ized ? It is best to confess 
 that we have not enough material to settle the question 
 
116 
 
 satisfactorily. DeWette thinks the chapters in Luke are a 
 collection of unhistorical material which the writer die] 
 not know where to place. Exegetical objections to this 
 view: a. The unity of the discourses in Luke. b. All the 
 material furnished belongs to this period, llengstenberg 
 thinks no order is discernible between Luke and John. 
 Scldeiermacher, Olshausen and Neander think that the 
 accounts of the two journeys are blended, viz., the 
 journeys to the Tabernacle and Passover. The narrative 
 of the first two come in at Luke 18: 35. They record 
 no conversations or incidents previous to their becoming 
 parallel with Luke. 
 
 Greswell makes all the Synoptists connect with the 
 last journey in John. Then Luke 9 : 51 is parallel with 
 John 11 : 55. ' According to this view the Synoptists 
 pass over the pei'iod and record only the last joui'ney to 
 Jerusalem just before the Passover. By this view the 
 unity of Luke is preserved, and the Synoptists appear 
 to record only one journey. But thedifiiculty isthatearly 
 in Luke's luirration Christ is brought into the iiouse of 
 Mary and Martha at Bethany, (chap. 10) and then in 
 chap. 17: 11 he is passing through Galilee and Samaria. 
 Greswell thinks Luke refers to another village near 
 Jerusalem. But this would make the jouri\ey protracted 
 and irregular. Again John says our Lord passed some 
 time in Ephraim, after raising Lazarus. 
 
 Wieseler fixes on three points in Luke where it is said 
 Jesus vvas going to Jerus. and makes them correspond 
 with John's journeys: 
 
 1. To Tabernacles, Luke 9 : 51 compares with John 7: 10. 
 
 2. To Bethanv, " 13:22 '' " "11:1. 
 
 3. To Passover, " 17:11 " " "11:55. 
 Arguments for Wieseler' s view: It is claimed that the 
 
 narrative in John fits in to the break in Luke, e. g., we 
 are told that the "journey to the Tabernacles was made 
 secretly. This agrees with Luke's statement that he 
 w^ent through Samaria. The common way was through 
 Perea. The Samaritans reject him because his " face 
 was set towards Jerus." Here comes in the parable of 
 the good Samaritan. Such striking coincidences all 
 through have won over many supporters. Ellicott fol- 
 lows it in full, Tischendorf qualifies it by saying that 
 it is not so certain as it seems to be. 
 
117 
 
 , Objections. 1. Lack of positive evidence. But in such 
 a case we look onl}- for probabilities. 2. Luke purports 
 to give only onejournej. Ans. : Luke does not say there 
 was but o??( journey. 3. Luke 9 : 51 seems to refer to a 
 period just before his death. Ans. : Couhl as well refer 
 to the whole period of six months. 4. Luke 13 : 22 must 
 mean, it is said, into or up to Jerus. But tiiis interpreta- 
 tion denies that sf'c ever has the sense of direction. 5. 
 The phm implies a sojourn in Jerusalem from the Taber- 
 nacles to Dedication, This is said to be contrary to 
 John 12: 1. Tischendorf takes an exception to Wieseler 
 and makes the Dedication occur in John 10: 22. An- 
 drews ag-rees as to the last two journeys, but makes this 
 difference : He considers Luke 9 : 51 the journey to 
 Dedication, and makes it parallel with John 7 : 10, which 
 passage he makes refer to a final departure. Objections 
 to Andrews: 1. It assumes a new return to Galilee 
 after Dedication, 2. It is unnatural to put John 7, 8, 9 
 at the close of the Galilean ministry. They belong to 
 this period of journeyings. 
 
 Robinson makes Lukel3 : 22 — 19: 28 the last journey ; 
 Luke 10: 17—11: 33 the journey between Tabernacfes 
 and Dedication, and Luke'll : 33—13: 10 he puts in the 
 ministry in Eastern Galilee. Objections: 1. It is arbi- 
 trary. 2. It breaks up the connection just where com- 
 mentators find a striking unity. 3. Robinson himself 
 says, " I suggest." The sceptics say that this diversity 
 proves the record unhistorical. 
 
 Coincidences of John and Luke : 1. Both represent Jesus, 
 after the Galilean Ministry, as entering upon an extended 
 period of journeyings. 2. Both agree that the region 
 was Judea and Perea. 3. Both agree that it was tow- 
 ard Jerus. 4. Both 'agree as to the character of the 
 works and teaching, for both refer to a period of hostility 
 which brings out declaration of his Divinity. 
 
 Design of the Period: A more open avowal of Mes- 
 siahship — at the feast and while journeying. He oft'ers 
 himself again at Jerus. and is rejected. Notice the ad- 
 vance in the doctrine of his person. He speaks of com- 
 ing forth from God; of his pre-existence; of his one- 
 ness with the Father; of his being the source of life. 
 But he still withholds the titles, MeWah and Christ. 
 
118 
 
 The sphere of labor is now changed from Galilee to 
 Judea. Ill the Sjnoptists this is brought out in the 
 journeyings through Perea. The opposition increases. 
 The Pharisees seek to break down his popularit}' by put- 
 ting difficult questions so worded that a direct answer 
 would oft'end one party or another. For example, the 
 question about divorce. On the other hand, our Lord 
 delivers a series of discourses against the Pharisees, 
 warning the people against them. John gives evidence 
 of the covert purpose of the Pharisees to put Christ to 
 death, John 7: 25. 
 
 Christ now proceeds to give private instructio?i to his 
 disciples, in reference to the change so soon to occur. 
 He gives new charges, prophecies and parables. (The 
 numbering of tlie sections, from this point, is irregular, 
 but Tischendorf's pUm is preferred.) 
 
 §81. Final Departure from Galilee. Luke's expression 
 is remarkable : " He steadfastly set his face to go to 
 Jerusalem." The journey was not compulsory but 
 voluntary. 
 
 Objections: L He said to his brethren that he would 
 not go, and atterwards went up secretly (John 7: 8-11.) 
 It is claimed that this is either vacillation or deception. 
 Ans : Our Lord's words refer to the time and manner of 
 his going. Did not say he was not going, but '• I go up 
 not yet." He refused to go in the public procession. 
 
 2. Again, it is said tliat the rejection of his messen- 
 gers at the Samaritan village (Lk. 9: 53) does not agree 
 with the favorable reception in John 4th. 
 
 Ans: The latter was at the lieginning, the former at 
 the close of his Galilean ministry. The rejection by the 
 Samaritans is now caused by their prejudices. Christ's 
 face now toward Jerus. He was therefore regarded as 
 favoring the Jews. 
 
 3. Again it is said Lk. 9 : 52 re})resonts Christ's last 
 journey to be through Samaria. But Mt. and Mk. make 
 it through Perea. Andrews (p. 361) answers this by the 
 reasonable supposition that he started to go through 
 Samaria, but after his rejection changed his jilan and 
 went through Perea. 
 
 §83. Feast of Tabernacles. This was one of the great 
 annual feasts of the Jews, (Lev. 23 : 34) to commemorate 
 
119 
 
 the Divine goodness in the Wilderness, and also to show 
 gratitude for the rich fruits of the season. It was the 
 most joyous of all the Jewish festivals, — so joyous that 
 Plutarch mistook its character and called it a festival in 
 honor of Bacclius. 
 
 There was a division of sentiment concerning Christ 
 among those at Jerus, Some said, '' He is a good man : 
 others said, N"ay but he deceiveth the people " (John 7 : 
 12.) Another expression of John is noticeable : " How- 
 beit no man spake openly of him for fear of the Jews." 
 This refers to the Jews who opposed Christ. The people 
 did not know whicli side to take, because it was uncer- 
 tain what the Sanhedrim would do. 
 
 Historic Points : 1. Christ takes up his discourse with 
 the Pharisees where he had left off (John 7 : 23) eighteen 
 months before. The miracle to which he refers in v. 21, 
 is the healing of the impotent man at Bethesda, which 
 was followed by the charge of Sabbath-breaking. He 
 here openly charges them with their purpose to kill him. 
 
 2. The emphatic statements in verses 28-31 of his Divin- 
 ity. This gave great otfense to some, but no man laid 
 hands on him, and many believed in him, asking " When 
 Christ Cometh will he do more miracles than these which 
 this man hath done ?" 
 
 3. The official act of the Sanhedrim to arrest him, be- 
 cause of his influence over the people. Alf this on the 
 first day. ]^ow we come to the second day — " that great 
 day of the feast" which was the last. Jesus stood and 
 cried : "If any man thirst, let him come unto me and 
 drink." The water which suggested this invitation is sup- 
 posed to have been that which was taken from the pool of 
 Siloam on each of the, seven days and poured upon the 
 ground in commemoration of the miraculous provision 
 of water in the Wilderness. In it Christ saw a type of 
 that Spirit which the world was to receive through him. 
 The officers report to the Sanhedrim that they were una- 
 ble to arrest him. The reason they give is remarkable : 
 " ]S"ever man spake like this man" — showing the strong 
 impression Christ's personal bearing had made upon 
 them. The answer is received with ridicule : " Are ye 
 also deceived ?" 
 
120 
 
 Except for the remonstrance of jSTicodemns (v. 51), the 
 Sanhedrim would have condemned Christ, immediately. 
 To him they sneerinsjly replied : " Art thou also of Galilee ? 
 Search and look, for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet." 
 But in the last statement they were mistaken. 
 
 §84. Woman tnken m Adidkn/. Most critics reject the 
 first eleven verses of the 8th of John. The external and 
 grammatical evidence against it is very strong. Tregelles 
 claims that it is not original with John, but is an ancient 
 extra-canonical record of an actual fact. The passage is 
 not in the Sinaitic, Peshito, A., B., or C, uncial MSS. 
 It is found only in the Vatican MS. and some of the 
 early Fathers. But it seems to accord too well with the 
 character of Christ, to be an invention. 
 
 §85. Discourses in the Temple. The effect of striking out 
 John 8 : 2-11 would be to bring all these discourses on 
 the last day of the feast. But it is more natural to con- 
 sider the references in John 7 : 37 and 8 : 14 to relate to 
 two dift'erent days. If this be correct, tliere are two 
 prominent periods of teaching : (1) 8:12-21; (2) 8:21- 
 59. 
 
 In the first, Christ proclaims himself the Light of the 
 world. The Pharisees object to his bearing witness of 
 himself, and say his record is not true. Our Lord proves 
 its Truth, a. by saying that the Father bears testimony of 
 him; and 6, by declaring his oneness with the Father. 
 
 In the second, he discourses of his origin, of his going 
 away, and of their dying in their sins. lie charges tliem 
 with the design of killing him, and alludes to the nian- 
 ner of his death in verse 28th : '' When ye have lifted 
 up the son of man." 
 
 The pre-existence of Christ is asserted by him in ex- 
 press terms. The Jews regard the declaration as blas- 
 phemy and give way to rage. They tear up the stones 
 from the Temple pavement to put him to death as a blas- 
 phemer. But Jesus hid himself, and so got out of their 
 way. 
 
 §90. Healiiif/ of a max blind from birth, on the Sabbath. 
 Robinson postpones this till just before tlie Dedication. 
 But the prevailing opinion is that it comes in immediately 
 after stoning referred to in John 8 : 59, In proof of 
 Messiahship, Jesus opens eyes of blind num. The Phari- 
 
121 
 
 sees after conversing with the Latter, are enraged because 
 he adheres to Jesus, and cast him out of the "Syiiao-ogne. 
 (Farrar, cliap. 41, Vol. IT.) The effect of this niirade^was 
 to produce a division among the people. Many of them 
 claimed that he had a devil. Others, that a devil could 
 not open the eyes of the bjind. (John 10: 19-21.) 
 
 §89. The Seventy sent out. Tisch. places this section in 
 the interval between Dedication and Tabernacles ; 
 Wies. while Jesus is on the way to Tabernacles. Place :' 
 Majority say Perea, some Gal. Best, Perea, Judea 
 and Samaria. The design has a clear reference to 
 Christ's coming once more to otter himself as the Mes- 
 siah. Meyer: This whole journey intended to present 
 to the people opportunity for final decision. Andrews : 
 Their mission was not only to preach the kingdom, but 
 to proclaim the King. In addition, probably a desire to 
 accustom the disciides to their work, and familiarize 
 the people with them as witnesses of the truth. Some 
 say that the second order of church officers, viz.; Pres- 
 byters, is here established. Wies.: The Seventy repre- 
 sent the calling of the Gentiles. Their mission was the 
 counterpart of that of the Twelve. The latter chosen in 
 reference to the twelve tribes ; the seventy with reference 
 to the seventy nations of the Gentiles for which prayers 
 were ottered, or the number may have reference to*^the 
 seventy ciders of Israel, or to the Sanhedrim. But the 
 leading idea seems to be a visitation of the whole country 
 (Vide Ebrard, pp. 322-3; Andrews, pp. 352-355; Farrar, 
 Vol. 11., ch. 42. Also comp. Gen. 10 and Gen. 46 • 27 
 with Deut. 32 : 8.) 
 
 Objections : I. Silence of the other Evangelists, Lk. 
 being the only one that -mentions the Seventy. An's : a. 
 The objection would be valid if the Seventy had been 
 set up as a permanent order in the church. Other 
 Evangelists silent concerning a great portion of this 
 period, but say nothing contrary to Lk's account. 
 
 II. Instructions to Seventy and Twelve so similar that 
 the Evangelists give ditterent accounts of same occur- 
 rence. Ans: a. The instructions were similar because 
 the duties were similar, b. But there is an important 
 ditterence in the fact that a permanent commission was 
 given to the Twelve but not to the Seventy. Ebrard • 
 
122 
 
 Address to Twelve has the character of induction into a 
 jyermancnt office, whereas that to Seventy has reference 
 to a single task. 
 
 III. Symbolical use of number Seventy is proof of a 
 later date, and of artifice. Ans : Some number of mes- 
 sengers must have been chosen, and whatever it might 
 be Uie Sceptics would be sure to find fault witli it. 
 
 §89. TJie Seventy return. Difficult to assign this section 
 with any certainty. The Seventy probably returned, 
 two by two, bringing a glorious report (Lk. 10: 17-21.) 
 
 §86. The Good ^Samaritan. Lk. 10 : 25-37. In the 
 parable Christ teaches that God may make distinctions 
 among men, but men may not. All men are our neigh- 
 bors. Hence, we must do. good to all men. 
 
 Second Group of Parables : There are seventeen in all, 
 closely connected and illustrating personal duties — four- 
 teen of them peculiar to Lk. Three things worthy of 
 notice: 1. Tlieir appropriateness to the plan of Luke's 
 gospel. They set forth God's mercy to sinners, and the 
 duties consequent therefrom. Mt.'s group of seven all 
 addressed to the people and the Disciples ; Lk.'s intend- 
 ed lor publicans and sinners. Mt.'s relate to the king- 
 dom of God ; Lk.'s point out the way of salvation. 2. 
 Their appropriateness to the period of Christ's life, in 
 which he finaMy offered himself to the nation. 3. They 
 are directed against prominent errors of the Pharisees. 
 
 Classification of these Parables. They may be reduced 
 to a four-fold division : 
 
 I. Those showing the love of God in Christ as the 
 source of all blessing, a. To the poor and lowly — para- 
 ble of Marriage Supper, b. As preventing grace — Lost 
 Sheep, Lost Piece of Money, Prodigal Son. 
 
 II. Those showing the means of obtaining God's 
 mercy, and the resulting duties. a. Importunity in 
 prayer— Friend at Midnight, Importunate Widow, b. 
 Kepentance and humility — parable of Pharisee and 
 Publican, c. Watchful preparation— the Waiting Ser- 
 vants (Lk. 12: 27.) d. Counting the cost — Building a 
 Tower, e. Universal love to our neighbor — the Good 
 Samaritan. /. Using this world's good's without abusing 
 them — Unjust Steward. 
 
123 
 
 III. Those showing the judgments which follow neglect 
 or abuse of God's nierc}'. a. Abuse of God's grace — 
 Barren Fig-tree. b. Abuse of God's providence— Rich 
 Man that built Larger Barns, c. Abuse of Wealth — 
 Dives and Lazarus, d. Danger of partial moral refor- 
 mation. Leads to worse state than the first — Return of 
 Unclean Spirit. (Lk. ll': 24.) 
 
 IV. Those showing that rewards and punishments are 
 to be proportioned to fidelity of stewardship — Parable 
 of Ten Talents — Mustard Seed — Leaven. 
 
 Sections 48, 49 and 51 are parallel with Mt. 12, and 
 for this reason Robinson treats them together. Vide 
 small syllabus, p. 12. 
 
 §91. Feast of Dedication. Previous to this feast, (John 
 10: 22.) Jesus had retired to Bethany in Perea. Why 
 return to Jerus. ? Not merely to keep the Feast, since 
 the whole land kept it, but to confront the Pharisees. 
 Not a feast of the Law, but instituted by Judas Macca- 
 baeus, 164 B. C, in honor of tlie cleansing of the Tem- 
 ple, and the rebuilding of the Altar, after the Expulsion 
 of the Syrians. Season: The oidy feast in the winter- 
 time, which, according to Wieseler, fell this year on 
 Dec. 20. (Vide Farrar, chap. 45.) Christ was walking 
 in this place because it was winter, the porch being part 
 of the original temple which escaped destruction by 
 Nebuchadnezzar. 
 
 Scene interesting because it discloses the struggle in 
 the minds of the Pharisees. " Ilow long dost thou make 
 us to doubt? If thou be tlie Christ tell us plainly." 
 (John 10 : 24.) Request not unreasonable for Christ had 
 all along claimed the office, and cfeclaimed the title. 
 Two views in regard tp the spirit of the question : 
 
 I. That it was insidious and dishonest, intended to 
 draw out a definite claim of Messiahship so that they 
 could have something definite on which to base their 
 charges. 
 
 II. That it was honest and fair. Christ had never told 
 them positively that he was the Messiah, and now when 
 challenged he still does not answer dii-ectlj', because of 
 their misconceptions. According to their understanding 
 of the term he was not the Messiah. But he affirms his 
 Messiahship to them in three ways : 1. He had told 
 
124 
 
 them before, and they did not believe him. 2. By refer- 
 ring to the works he had wrought. 3 His gift to his 
 sheep is eternal life, and he is the Son of God, one with 
 the'Father. This enraged the Jews and they took up 
 stones to stone him. " But," says Farrar, " his undis- 
 turbed majesty disarmed them with a word." " Many 
 good deeds did I show you from my Father ; for which 
 of these do yon mean to stone me?" He then quoted 
 the 82nd Psalm, where judges are called gods. But he 
 executes a higher ofiice. This seems to ascribe his Son- 
 ship not to his nature, but to his being sent by the Father. 
 
 Ans. : 1. The terms used imply his prp-existence. 2. 
 Even if he does here advance only the lowest claim to 
 the title, " Son of God," it. is no proof that he does not 
 elsewhere use it in highest sense. N"o one besides 
 Christ ever says, " I and my Father are one." 
 
 Then they attempt to seize him, but Farrar says " they 
 could not. His presence overawed them. They could 
 only make a passage for him, and glare their hatred upon 
 him as he passed from among them." 
 
 Because of the opposition Christ goes to Bethany in 
 Perea, where John had been baptizing. The latter is 
 mentioned because a witness for Christ. How long he 
 staid there is not known, but St. John tells us that many 
 resorted to him and believed on him, being convinced of 
 the truth of John Bap.'s testimony. (John 10: 41-42.) 
 (The sections from 95 to 101 were passed over.) 
 
 §§92, 93. Raising of Lazarus. Counsel of Caiaphas. A 
 message comes to Christ in Perea from the sisters of 
 Lazarus, stating that their brother is sick. After two 
 days Christ came to Bethany and found that Lazarus had 
 been buried four days (John 11.) 
 
 Theories explaining the time : a. Lazarus died on the 
 day when the message was sent. Christ delayed two 
 days, and then went to Bethany occupying one day with 
 the journe}'. 
 
 b. Christ received the message that Lazarus was sick, 
 waited two days for his death, and occupied four days 
 with the journey. Farrar takes the former view, mainly 
 on the ground that Bethany in Perea, where Christ was, 
 is only^about 20 miles from the Bethany near Jerus., 
 where Lazarus lived. He also infers that the family of 
 
125 
 
 Lazarus was one of wealth and position from its proximity 
 to Jerus. and from tlie concourse of Jews who had come 
 to sympathize with the hereaved sisters. (Farrar, chap. 
 
 47.) 
 
 Opposition among the Jews : This is again referred to in 
 the remonstrance of the Disciples against Christ's going 
 up to Jerus. lest he should be killed. Thomas says: 
 " Let us also go tliat we may die with him." (John 11 : 
 16.) Christ goes up voluntarily to sacrifice himself. 
 
 Design of the 3Ihricle : To understand it aright, recall 
 design of period — to give tlie people final opportunity of 
 accepting liim as Messiah. On the other hand, the peo- 
 ple hesitated to come to a decision because the action of 
 the rulers was uncertain. Clirist's object was to secure a 
 decision of the people, for or against him. Hence the 
 prayer at the grave of Lazarus, — " because of the people 
 which stood by." (John 11 : 42.) This culminating event 
 is, therefore, reserved until near the close of Christ's 
 ministry, and for the neighborhood of Jerusalem. The 
 proof that the Father had sent him is thus given in the 
 presence of the rulers. Still, there is a contrast between 
 the openness of his private teaching, e. g., to Marthf^^ 
 when he says, " I am the resurrection and the life," and 
 his public teaching when he says, " that they may believe 
 that thou has sent me." 
 
 Efect of the Miracle : Very profound. Many be- 
 lieved, and others ran with excitement to tell the ruleus. 
 (John 11 : 45-46.) This was the last link in the chain of 
 events which led to the malicious decision of the Sanhe- 
 drim. Farrar: " They foi<W not deny the miracle ; they 
 loould not believe on hinj who had performed it ; they 
 could only dread his growing influence, and conjecture 
 that it would be used to make himself a king, and so 
 end in Roman intervention and the annihilation of their 
 political existence." 
 
 Why should the people's faith in Christ produce such 
 a result ? Two ans : 1. Some say this was a mere pre- 
 tense by the Pharisees. 2. True view is that Pharisees 
 recognized real result of Christ's claims. If the spiritual 
 view of Christ's kingdom were now to prevail with the 
 people all hope of political deliverance and independence 
 would be lost, as well as their present sources of liveli- 
 
126 
 
 hood. Being engaged in a bitter struggle for national 
 independence, they were convinced by the address of the 
 High Priest that 'it was better for one man to perish 
 -rather than that the whole nation should perish (John 
 11 : 50-51.) They would not even stop to inquire whether 
 this one person were innocent or guilty, says Farrar. 
 Still, though selfish and Pharisaic, their reasons contained 
 elements of power. " Then from that day forth they took 
 counsel together for loput him to death," although this 
 was not the first time the Pharisees, as a party, had so 
 determined. Vide John 5 : 16-18. At Tabernacles 
 Jesus accused them of this design. John 7: 19. 
 
 Advice of Caiaphas : John remarks that the words of 
 Caiaphas ' were not his own, but a prophecy of the 
 Atonement, he " being the High Priest that same year." 
 (Vide suggestive note by Farrar on the expression "that 
 same year!" Vol. II., p. 174.) Common view is that 
 the prophecy was involuntary on part of Caiaphas. But 
 what he meant in a low sense, God meant in a high 
 sense. 
 
 Objections to the Miracle : Sceptics flourish here. Spin- 
 oza savs if he could have believed that miracde he would 
 have become a Christian and broken in pieces his own 
 philosophical system. 
 
 1. It is said the Disciples misunderstood Jesus when 
 he said, " Our friend Lazarus sleepeth," and that Martha 
 misunderstood him when he said, " Thy brother shall 
 rise again," which would not have been the case if he 
 had been in the habit of working miracles. 
 
 2. It is alleged that the Jews would not have referred^ 
 to an inferior miracle— opening the eyes of the blind — if 
 Christ had power to raise the dead. 
 
 Ans: The Jews refer to the blind man's case because 
 it was of recent occurrence, and had made a deep im- 
 pression. The other cases of resurrection had taken 
 place in Gal., and could have been known to the Jews 
 near Jerus., only by report. _ , , ,. 
 
 3. It is alleged that we cannot consistently believe 
 that Christ would wait two days after receiving the mes- 
 sao-e that Lazarus was sick. If Lazarus was not dead, it 
 was cruel in him to tarry ; if he was dead, it was mere 
 ostentation to delay. 
 
127 
 
 Ans : If there was any delay, which some deny, its 
 object was to exercise the faith of the sisters and the Dis- 
 ciples. Besides, it is possible that he had an important 
 work to finish in Perea. 
 
 4. The prayer at the grave is objected to. It is said to 
 be out of analogy with his other miracles. Strauss does 
 not hesitate to call it a "sham prayer," offered for the 
 sake of appearance, in reference to those that stood by, 
 
 Ans : Christ did not not pray on other occasions, be- 
 cause he desired to give evidence of his own power and 
 divinity. Here he prays to show his relation to the 
 Father, appealing to God in the sight of the Jews. 
 
 5. Another objection is found in the silence of the 
 Synoptists concerning a family made so prominent by 
 John. Luke mentions Martha and Mary, but neither 
 Lazarus nor Bethany. 
 
 6. The Synoptists silent about the miracle, which was 
 the most important of all. 
 
 Aiiswei' : a, Lazarus and his family were specially 
 obnoxious to the Jews because of their intimacy with 
 Jesus, and especially because Lazarus was a living wit- 
 ness of his power to raise the dead. Hence there is a 
 convincing argument in the fact that the Syn., writing 
 first, forbore to make this family prominent lest they 
 should suffer persecution. This obstacle, however, no 
 longer existed when John wrote. But it may be added 
 danger to themselves seems never to have influenced the 
 Evangelists to hide any of the facts of Christ's life. 
 
 b. But a better answer is found in the settled plan of 
 the Syn. not to relate any events occurring at Jerus. until 
 the closing week of Christ's life. They confine them- 
 selves mainly to Gal. Min, Each tells the things most 
 directly within his own scope. Hence, Farrar : " Now 
 since raising of Lazarus was no greater evidence, to them, 
 of miraculous power than those which they recorded, 
 and since it fell within the Judean cycle, the omission of 
 the miracle is no more inexplicable than the omission of 
 the miracle of Bethesda (John 5,} or the healing of the 
 man born blind, (John 9.") Farrar, chap. 47. 
 
 It is further objected that we cannot accept the Syn.'s 
 account of the sudden burst of applause with which 
 Jesus was received in Judea after the Gal. Min : Mt, 19: 
 
128 
 
 1, 2. But notice that it is Feast-time when lie reaches 
 Jerus., and ninltitucies from Gal. are ah-eady there. 
 
 Naturalistic Theory of the 3Iirade.: 1. ISTot actual natu- 
 ral death. Only a case of trance. " lie is not dead but 
 slcepeth " is to be taken literal!}'. Renan claims there 
 was actual collusion between Christ and the sisters. 2. 
 The miracle o^rows out of a misunderstanding of the con- 
 versation with Martha about the resurrection. 
 
 iMytldcal Theorij : Strauss held this theory at first, but 
 he at last adopted the Tubingen view mainly. He says 
 raising of Lazarus is a fiction based on one of Luke's 
 parables. Baur and others say it is a creation of the 2nd 
 century, and its germ was the expression, " I am the 
 resurrection." But all these theories illustrate the 
 credulity of unbelief, since any one af these views is 
 harder to support than the plain Gospel narrative. (Vide 
 Ebrard, pp. 351-358.) 
 
 Christ retires to Ephraim. On account of the action of 
 the Sanhedrim, (John 11 : 47-54) Christ retires to the 
 citv of Ephraim, to delay the execution of the decree 
 until his time should come. Where is Ephraim ? Some 
 say east of the Jordan. More likely near Jerusalem. 
 Some identify it with the Ephraim i'n 2 Chron. 13 : 19, 
 near to Bethel, or twenty miles north of Jerusalem. 
 Josephus speaks of a cavalry expedition of Vespasian 
 by way of Ephraim to Bethel. (Vide Robinson's Greek 
 liar. pp. 203-4; Farrar, Vol. XL, p. 176.) Intervening 
 sections not touched upon. Vide small syllabus, p. 14. 
 
 §107. Third Prediction of Christ's Death. This predic- 
 tion more specific than in 74th or 77th section. Judicial 
 death now predicted, to be accomplished by the help of 
 the Gentiles, (Mt. 20 ; Mk. 10; Lk. 18.) He foretells 
 the manner of his death, viz., by crucifixion, and predicts 
 that he shall rise on the third day. He tells this to the 
 Twelve alone. Mark notes the fear of the Disciples, 
 chap. 10: 32, from wliich it may be inferred tiiere was 
 something supernatural in Christ's appearance. 
 
 PASSION^ WEEK. 
 
 Natural Divisions : 1. From the arrival in Bethany to 
 the Passover Supper — six days. 2. From the Supper to 
 the Crucifixion. 3. From the Resurrection to the Ascen- 
 
1l9 
 
 sion. Recorded in Mt. 21-28 chaps.; Alk. 11-16; Lk. 
 19-24; Joliii 12-21. Space given by each Evangelist; 
 Mt. little more than one-third ; Mk. little less than one- 
 third; Luke one-fourth ; John nearly one half. In many 
 cases three, in some four, parallel accounts. 
 
 Characteristics of the Period: I. A period of voluntary 
 sacrifice. Christ's hour is now at hand, and he submits 
 voluntarily to be condemned and executed by his ene- 
 mies. Seeks the most public places. Takes possession 
 of the Temple, and for three days holds his foes at bay. 
 All their former plots to take him had failed. But now, 
 by an event, accidental on their part, but designed on 
 his, they are enabled to seize him, and lie without resist- 
 ance gives himself up to them. His death, therefore, 
 voluntary, and hence sacrificial — a sacrifice for sin. No 
 other theory can explain the facts. 
 
 II. It is a period in wliich Christ prominently asserts 
 his claims to the title of Messiah. This he does in three 
 ways: a. Typically by securing tlie Hosannas of the 
 multitude as he enters Jerus. "b. Publicly during his 
 trial, c. By his teaching. 
 
 III. The Teaching is supplemental and appropriate to 
 the period. In all Christ's teachitig there is a marked 
 advance. We have here three kinds of teacliing : a. 
 Tlie last of the three groups of Parables : 1. Concern- 
 ing "Kingdom of Heaven ;" 2. The way of salvation ; 
 3. The Judgment, b. Final discourses against Phari- 
 sees, c. Consolatory instruction to Disciples. In Mt. 
 these instructions largely prophetic; in John both pro- 
 phetic and consolatory. Explains to them that he must 
 go away in order that the Comforter may come. 
 
 Order of Ecents. The Evangelists governed by same 
 plan. The order is alike in alTfour except in two instan- 
 ces : a. John makes the Supper at Bethany the first 
 event of the week, while Syn. place it on the'^eve of the 
 third day. ^>. They differ as to the time of cursing the 
 barren fig-tree. In their plan, Mt. refers to propliecy, 
 Mk. to details, by days, and Lk. is supplementary. Rul- 
 ing idea is contrast between Christ's personal dignity and 
 gentleness and his cruel treatment by the pries'ts, rulers 
 and people. 
 
 Succession of doijs. This is obtained from Mk. by count- 
 ing back from the Passover Supper five days ; and also 
 
130 
 
 from John 12 : 1. " Then Jesus six days before the Pass- 
 over came to Bethany." John's peculiar idiom means, 
 literally, six days. Notice we have in John a lueek both 
 at the beginning and end of Christ's ministry. Mode of 
 counting days involves two questions : a. Shall we count 
 in both extieines? b. Was 14th Nisan, Thursday or 
 Friday? Did the Supper come on the day of the feast, 
 or on the evening before? The day of Crucifixion, we 
 have seen in the opening lectures on Chronology, was 
 Friday, 15th Nisan. The Supper was the regular Paschal 
 meal eaten on Thursday the 14th. 
 
 Theories: 1. Wies., Lich., Andrews count back six 
 days from Thursday the 14th, excluding the latter, which 
 brings us to Friday, the 8th as the day of arrival in 
 Bethany. 2. Lange includes Thursday which gives the 
 9th, or the Jewish Sabbath as the day of Christ's arrival. 
 Lange supposes that Christ halted on Friday a Sabbath- 
 day's journey from Jerus. 3. Those who follow Bleck's 
 arrangement, as Tisch., Ell., Alford and Schaff', make 
 Friday tlie 14th Nisan. But as they count backward six 
 days excluding Friday the days of the week remain un- 
 altered. 4. Robinson holds Friday to have been the first 
 day of the feast. Six days before would make the arrival 
 in Bethany on Sunday, and he supposes the Jewish Sab- 
 bath to have been spent in Jericho. 
 
 Objections to Robinson : a. He begins a day later 
 than any other Harmonist and compresses the 4th and 
 5th days into one. (Mk. 14:1.) h. The feast did not 
 begin on the 15th. (Lerit. 23 : 5.) c. It is contrary to 
 tradition which makes Palm Sunday the commemorative 
 day of Christ's entrance into Jerus. Robinson makes 
 the entrance on Monday, d. His own earlier editions 
 take the other view. Farrar : " Thither (the loved home 
 at Bethiiny) he arrived on the evening of Friday, Nisan 
 8, A. U. C. 780 (March 31, A. D. 30,) "six days before the 
 Passover, and before the sunset had commenced the Sab- 
 bath hours." Vol. II. p. 188. Vide Andrews, pp. 396- 
 7-8. 
 
 §§111, 131. Supper at Bethany. John places this on the 
 evening before the public entrance into Jerus. The 
 Synoptists place it on the eve of Tuesday, or two days 
 
131 
 
 before the Passover (Mt. 26 : 2.) This difference alleged 
 to be irreconcilable. 
 
 Ans : Neither John nor the Syn. date the Supper 
 positively. The six days of John do not date the Supper 
 but the arrival in Bethany; and the two days of Mt. and 
 Mk. do not date the Supper but the betrayal of Judas. 
 Farrar: " It is only in appearance that the Syn. seem 
 to place this feast two days before the Passover. They 
 narrate it there to account for the treachery of Judas, 
 wliich was consummated l)y his final arrangements with 
 the Sanhedrim on the Wednesday of Iloh.' week ; but we 
 see from St. John that this latter must have been his 
 second interview with them — at the iirst interview all 
 details had been left indefinite." (Farrar, Vol. XL, p. 
 188, Note.) 
 
 Robinson follows order of Syn. Tliese are his rea- 
 sons : 1. The offence taken by Judas at this feast was 
 the occasion of his treason. Rulers had resolved to delay 
 arrest. But Judas' proposal on Tuesday, (Supper on 
 Tuesday eve.) gave thetn an unexpected opportunity. 
 Ans : It does not appear that Judas went immediately to 
 the priests. 
 
 2. The TOTS of Mt. — " then Judas] went out.*' Ans : 
 But zure is not always used by Mt. in reference to time. 
 He often makes it connect passages which are not suc- 
 cessive. 
 
 3. John transposes events in order to complete account 
 of occurrences at Bethany. 
 
 Arguments infacor of John''. s order : 1. John more com- 
 plete. 2. Trj iTta'jiJiou (John 12 : 12) — " the next day " — 
 was the day of public entrance. Best exegesis favors 
 John's order. 3. Whple passage in Mt. and Mk. 
 seems to be parenthetical. Balance of probability in 
 favor of John's order. According to latter Christ arrived 
 in Bethany on Friday. His friends make him a feast. 
 as had been done when he left Capernaum and Perea. 
 He did not decline this mode of being honored. Sisters 
 of Lazarus improve the occasion to display their grati- 
 tude, and Jesus makes reference to his approaching death. 
 
 Popular Excitement. In John 11 : 55-57, we read that 
 many went from the country to. Jerus. to' the Passover. 
 The great theme of conversation anions: the rulers was 
 
132 
 
 Christ. " What think ye, that he will not come to the 
 feast?" They expected negative answer. He had not 
 come to previous feast. From John 11 : 57 we learn that 
 the Sanhedrim had made pnhlic charges against Christ, 
 and were waiting to take him. But their donhts are 
 soon solved hy the public arrival of Jesus, which in- 
 creased the excitement. Multitudes flocked out of the 
 city to meet him. 
 
 Place of the Supper : It is urged that it must have been 
 in the liouse of Martha and Mary because they were 
 present and •' Martha served," which is supposed to con- 
 tradict Mt. and Mk. who say it was in the house of Simon 
 the leper. But, as Ebrard suggests, why could not 
 Martha insist upon " serving" in the house of the host 
 with whom her family were intimate ? • Some say that 
 Simon was the father of Lazarus ; others that lie was tlie 
 husband of Martha. Or he may have been the owner 
 of the house in which Martha and Mary lived. 
 
 Mode of Anointmg : John says the fed ; lAi. and Mk. 
 the luad. Ebrard, in reply to objectoi'S, inquires. Why 
 not both? Then according to John, it was Judas who 
 objected to the waste ; according to Mt. it was '' his dis- 
 ciples." Ans: Where is it denied by John that none of 
 the disciples but Judas objected ? John mentions Judas 
 in order to give the motive for his objection. 
 
 Another objection is founded upon the resemblance 
 between this anointing and the one in Lk. 7 : 36. 
 Lightfoot : Three anointings: one in Joim, one in 
 Mt. and Mk., and one in Lk. He denies any 
 contradiction. Strauss claims that the whole record 
 has to do with only one case of anointing. Ebrard an- 
 swers Strauss by saying that tlie only resemblance be- 
 tween present anointing and that in Lk. 7 : 36 is that the 
 name in both cases is Simon and the fed of Jesus are 
 wiped, with the hair. But one Simon was a Pharisee, the 
 other a quiet follower of Jesus. Ebrard also suggests that 
 there was quite probably more than one Simon in Pales- 
 tine, and that it was not impossible that the circumstance 
 of wiping the feet should be repeated. (Ebrard, pp. 
 366-369.) 
 
 Lessons taught. 1. The offering was valuable in itself — 
 " very precious." This may apply both to the box and 
 
133 
 
 the contents. 2. The quantity was hirge — worth about 
 fifty dollars. Farrar tVoni this infers that the family was 
 rich. Judas is indignant at the waste, but Jesus defends 
 Mary's act, and declares that it shall be a memorial of 
 her throughout the world. The inference is that the 
 expression of a lofty religious sentiment justifies great 
 expenditure, provided it is subordinate to deeds of charity 
 to our neighbor. 
 
 Other suggestions: a. Character of the sisters always 
 the same. Martha "serves;" Mary sits at Jesus' feet. 
 h. Meaning of" this Gospel." Meyer says the reference 
 is to his death of which he had first spoken. The wide 
 preaching of the Gospel is also referred to. Alford says 
 it is the prediction of a future written Gospel. Notice 
 how literally the prediction concerning Mary has been 
 fultille(h The rebuke stimulated the malice of Judas 
 until he became a traitor. 
 
 §112. Public Entrance into Jerus. 1. Time : It was on 
 Sunday, 10th Nisun. Bleek says Sunday, and Robin- 
 son, Monday. That it was a day after a night in Beth- 
 any appears from John 12: 12. 31eaninf/ of the event: 
 He rode npon a carpet of branches and garments. It 
 was a public acknowledgment of his kingl}' claims as the 
 Messiah. His hour had come. Hence the contrast with 
 liis previous conduct is very noticeable. Important that 
 the people should be impressed as well as the Disciples. 
 Appropriate that his last public act should be the clearest 
 proof of his Messiahship. 
 
 Sif/nijicance of date. Plis entrance on the 10th of the 
 month is directly associated with the Law in Exodus 12: 
 3. It was the day when the Paschal Iamb was set apart. 
 So the Lamb of God sets his willing seal to his own con- 
 secration as the sacrifice for sin. Symbolical acts : a. 
 Riding on an ass's colt. This was fulfillment of the 
 prophecy in Zech. 9:9. b. It was specially" significant 
 of his kingship. Not on a war-horse, but on an ass sig- 
 nificant of peace in Oriental countries. The animal, too, 
 was a colt " whereon never man sat." Like the alabaster 
 box unprofaned by other use. c. Strewing branchesand 
 garments also significant of royalty, d. The people also 
 bore palm-branches in their hands, as emblems of victory. 
 
 Sudden Enthusiasm of the People. This was occasioned 
 by his acceptance of their homage. Always ready to 
 
134 
 
 support him when the result seemed likely to be their 
 restoration to temporal and political superiority. The 
 multitudes quoted Ps. 118. This originally composed at 
 the restoration of the Temple, and now applied to the 
 Messiah by the people, showing that they regarded Jesus 
 as one whom they had looked for. " llosanna to the Son 
 of David." Jesus had never before allowed the public 
 ascription of Alessiahship, because it would rouse opposi- 
 tion before his work was completed. But now his work 
 was done. The Pharisees, feeling scandalized, said unto 
 him : " Master rebuke thy Disciples." Jesus answered 
 that •' if these should hold their peace, the stones would 
 immediately cry out," i. e., to silence the people would 
 be to suppress eternal truth. Robinson introduces the 
 Hosannas of the children, the day after the feast at 
 Bethany, in this place. But most Harmonists follow 
 Mt's order, and introduce this after cursing of fig-tree. 
 Prophecies fulfilled : Isa. 62 : 11 with Zech. 9 : 9 ; also 
 Gen. 49: 10, 11. 
 
 ■ Lamentation over Jeriis. This scene is preserved by Lk. 
 and connected directly with public entrance. While 
 tliey are hailing him as king, he foresees the sad fate of 
 the city. Judicial blindness had seized the rulers and 
 the people. He sees that tlie majority will rebel against 
 him and aid in putting him to death ; that the enemies 
 of the Jews will dig a trencli about Jerus., and not 
 leave one stone upon another. (Lk. 19:43,44.) This 
 prophecy was literally fulfilled, for the Roman army was 
 encamped on the very spot where this i)rediction was 
 uttered. 
 
 The Pharisees were ready to give up in despair when 
 they saw Christ's popularity. Effect on the people : The 
 whole city was moved — iasio&rj^i. e., shaken. Christ thus 
 had an opportunity to finish his work, for his enemies 
 no less than his friends were involved in the excitement. 
 Road by which he entered: Mount of Olives not a single 
 hill, but a ridge with three summits. Three roads cross 
 it. The nortliern one is steej); the second is half way 
 down the mountain ; and the third, which Christ prob- 
 ably took, and "which sweeps round the southern 
 shoulder of the central mass," is the main road for all 
 kinds of travel. On this road tliere is a projecting n)ass 
 
135 
 
 of rock around which the road suddenly turns to the 
 north, and then the whole city bursts suddenly upon the 
 vision. This angle has been fixed upon as the place 
 where Jesus stood as he wept over the city. 
 
 Location, of places : Bethany signifying House of 
 Dates, is from Ih to 2 miles S. E. of Jerus, Its modern 
 name is Lazarieh, which thus continues to bear witness 
 to the great miracle wrought there. Now a small village 
 of some twenty houses, occupied by Bedouin Arabs. 
 Bethphage, House of Unripe Figs, according to Lightfoot 
 was a suburb of Jerus., though hardly an}' two opinions 
 agree. (Andrews, pp. 404-5.) 
 
 Objections: 1. The Syn. introduce the narrative as 
 though the last journey were continuous. Jolm says 
 that Jesus passed the night at Bethany, and the " next 
 day " went to Jerus. Ans : John gives the natural order 
 of events while the Syn. record simply the connection 
 of events. Ebrard denies that it is any where stated that 
 Jesus went to Jerus. the same day he left Jericho, as 
 Strauss assumes in order to prove an alleged contradic- 
 tion. 2. If Jesus started from Bethany as John says, 
 then he could not have sent there for the animals. Ans : 
 Who says he did send there for the animals? The "vil- 
 lage " referred to by Mt. and Mk. refers not to one of 
 those named, but to another on the way to Jerus. And, 
 as Ebrard suggests, why could he not send forward for 
 the colt after he had gone some distaui^e from Bethany? 
 (Vide Ebrard, pp. 371-2 on the expression "drew nigh.") 
 
 3. Mode of obtaining the animals supposes a mythical 
 origin for the narrative. Ans: The objection is trilling. 
 The method chosen is in fulfillment of prophecy. Some 
 suppose the owner of the animals believed in tlie Lord; 
 others, that a pre-arrangement had been made with him. 
 
 4. It is said that Mt. (21 : 7) represents Jesus as riding 
 on both animals. Ans : A similar expression is used in 
 Acts 23 : 24. But nobody infers that Paul rode several 
 animals at once. (Ebrard, p. 372.) Christ's entrance is 
 alleged to have been an attempt to excite revolution. 
 This is an old charge. It is refuted by the fact that after 
 the triumphal entrance he immediately withdraws to 
 Bethany, thereby, as some suppose, signifying that he 
 left Jerus. to its fate. 
 
136 
 
 §113. Cursiiifi the Fifi-tree ; Chan sin g the Temple. Bleek 
 j3nts these events on Sunday, lOtli Nisan ; Wies, on the 
 11th and Rob. on the 12th. Difference between Mt. and 
 Mk. very sliglit. Mt. puts the events in their natural 
 connection, without noticins^ the division of time. Puts 
 cleansing of Temple immediately after entrance, and 
 cursing of Fig-tree next morning. (Mt. 21 : 17-18.) 
 This tree often planted by the way-side for its shade and 
 because " the dust was thought to facifitate its growth." 
 Its fruit was common property. Being hungry he ap- 
 proaclied this tree whose rich foliage promised fruit. 
 Finding nothing but leaves, Jesus said, '• Let no fruit 
 grow on thee henceforward forever." 
 
 Objection?: 1. It is said if he had known there were no 
 figs he would not have sought them. If he did not 
 know then he is not omniscient. Ans. : The objection 
 assumes that he was bound to tell all he knew. 2. AVhy 
 did he expect fruit at this season ? Mk. says, " for the 
 time of figs was not yet." Ans.: a. "It was not the 
 time of year, but the strii<ing qaantittj of leaves for the time 
 of year, which led to the expectation that there would 
 certain)}' be figs upon the tree," says Ebrard. h. Al- 
 though not the general season for figs as Mk. states, 
 " there is to this day, in Palestine, a kind of white or 
 early fig which ripens in spring, and much before the 
 ordinary or black fig." Furthermore, the autumn figs 
 often remained on tlie trees through the winter, until 
 the new spring leaves had come. (Farrar, Vol. II., pp. 
 213-4.) 
 
 3. It is charged that this act was not only the destruc- 
 tion of a shade tree but also an expression of unworthy 
 anger, Ans. : The lesson taught is of far more import- 
 ance than the tree. Farrar asks, " Is it a crime under 
 a???y circumstances to destroy a useless tree? If not, is it 
 more a crime to do so by miracle ?" This is the only in- 
 stance of a miracle of Judgment. The act was a sym- 
 bolic one. The tree with its luxurious leaves was a type 
 of the Jewish Church, outwardly fiourishing, but inward- 
 ly barren. It was therefore destroyed. Tlie act is related 
 on the one hand to the lamentation over Jerus., on the 
 other, to the parable following, (Farrar Vol. IL, pp. 215- 
 16.) Ebrard says Strauss's conjecture that Christ was 
 
137 
 
 moved only by anger at not finding any figs, " is too 
 \v(n'tliless and wicked to have sprung from anything 
 but utter insanity." 
 
 Cleansing the l^ernple. Symbolically, this act is the 
 counterpart of the preceding. Christ here assumes pos- 
 session of the Temple in anticipation of the future reign 
 over the church, and his final success. It was also the 
 manifestation of his Messiahship, as the Pharisees plainly 
 understood. For they said, " By what authority doest 
 thou these things ?" The whole Temple services were 
 fulfilled in Christ, who is God with us. Temple was the 
 place where God then met with his people. Now, in 
 Christ God meets with them. In John 2 : 16, it is writ- 
 ten " make not my Father's house a house of merchan- 
 dise." In Mk. 11 : 17, " My house shall be called of all 
 nations the house of prayer." These two passages gene- 
 rally considered to form a climax. Emphasis in hitter 
 [tassage is on " all nations," making the final univer- 
 sality of ChristiMuity prominent. The second point is 
 the spiritual relation of the people of God. John 2: 13 
 points to reformation; Mk. 11 : 17 to judicial judgment. 
 Jews must be driven out to make room for others. The 
 rulers are again enraged and seek to destroy him, but 
 fail in their purpose. This Monday was a day of great 
 triumph, for, despite the Pharisees, he taught all day in 
 the Temple and at night went out of the city. 
 
 §114. Th". barren Fig-tree loithers away. On the way to 
 the city, in the morning, the Disciples saw that the fig- 
 tree had withered away. '• The quick eye of Peter was 
 the first to notice it." Instead of explaining its mean- 
 ing, Jesus gives them a suggestive lesson on "Faith, and 
 the encouragement to prayer. 
 
 §115. Authoritgof Christ questioned. Having arrived at 
 the Temple Christ walked about and taught as if he had 
 sole authority. The second step in events of the week 
 is found in events of this day. Christ does not yield 
 possession of the Temple to force. When he goes it is 
 voluntarily. Here we meet with efii'orts of the priests to 
 destroy his influence. It was necessary that his power 
 should be thus tested, so that the subsequent surrender 
 of himself should be clearly voluntary. The moral tri- 
 umph of this day is the preface of his trial. Notice 1. 
 
138 
 
 The assault of the Sanhedrim upon Ins authority. It is 
 followed by three parables — the two sons, tiie wicked 
 husbaiidnien, and the marriage of the king's son. All 
 set forth the judgment to come. 2. Crafty questions 
 intended to involve hira in ditficulty with civil authori- 
 ties, and break down his influence. Attempts by Phari- 
 sees, Sadducees and lawyers. 3. Long judicial discourses 
 against tlie Pharisees. 4. The prophetic discourses con- 
 cerning destruction of Jerusalem and the linal judgment 
 pronounced upon his departure irom the temple. (Mt. 
 25.) This discourse is the last of his public teaching, 
 except the one on occasion of the visit of the Greeks. 
 Jno. 12 : 20-50. This day has been called the great 
 prophetic day. Disproportionate lengtli of narrative 
 accounted for by fact tliat it is the day of final teaching. 
 Result of the consultation of the Sanhedrim : They 
 question him concerning his authority. It was ofiicial ; 
 put to him as soon as he reached the teniple, and involved 
 1. The fact that the rulers were divinely appointed, and 
 that Christ was acting in opposition to them. 2. Showed 
 an appreciation of his true Messianic claims. Hence it 
 v^^as a well chosen question, for the people were unwilling 
 for any other than a temporal Messiah. The Pharisees had 
 thought to receive the answer, " I am the Christ." But 
 if question was subtle, the answer shows Divine wisdom. 
 " The baptism of John, was it from heaven or of men ?" 
 Alleged that this answer, like their question, a trap, and 
 unworthy of Christ. But it is no evasion ; for 1. The 
 Pharisees put the issue between them on the ground of 
 authority. 2. If John had divine authority then his 
 record of Jesus was a sufficient answer to their question. 
 Tlie answer is at same time an exposure of the hypo- 
 critical pretence of the rulers of their zeal for authority. 
 They are obliged to confess their ignorance. Thne 
 parables concerning judgment follow closeh' on this 
 defeat. Lesson taught by them all is : rejection of Christ 
 by the nation transferred its privileges and blessings to 
 the Gentiles. As-sociation of the three kept up in the 
 figure. Parable of two sons. Makes his enemies judge 
 themselves. He sets forth their sins, liypocrisy, unbelief, 
 and disobedience. Primary application was either to 
 Jews and Gentiles, or to Phiirisees and Publicans. Same 
 principles involved. 
 
1S9 
 
 §116. The Wicked Husbandmen. The disobedience was 
 national, and not negative but active persecution and 
 consequent judg-ment. The figure of vineyard is sus- 
 tained—there conduct was personal, liere national. Sin 
 was not only in lefusing the Lord his vineyard, but in 
 killing his son. The vineyard vvas therefore taken from 
 them and given to the Gentiles. Shows the love of God 
 to- his church ; the exaltation of Christ, Ps. 118. *' The 
 stone which the builders rejected is become the head of 
 the corner." By striking transition Christ depicts a 
 negataw. ]\\(\gme\\X. "Whosoever shall fall, &c.," and then 
 a positive judgment "on whomsoever it shall fall, &c." 
 The verb here rneans.to winnmv, but in our version figure 
 of stone is retained and is probably correct. Pers'cmal 
 application of parable to Pharisees is made in Mt. 21 : 
 43. and results in an attempt by them to assault him. 
 
 §117. Marriage of the King's Son. Figure retained ; suc- 
 cessive missions, ill-treatment and refusal. The previous 
 parables dwelt on failure of duty, this teaches forfeiture 
 of privileges only alluded to at close of last. The <^race 
 of God more prominent in this. Main reference is tt) the 
 calling of the Gentiles. Should be carefully studied with, 
 and distinguished from, parable of the Great Supper in 
 Lk. 14. Point of view different in Mt. Calling of Gen- 
 tiles here cliecking of Pharisaic pride. Climactic relation 
 of two. Mt. closes with entrance of man without wed- 
 ding garment. Showing that personal, not national 
 qualifications are required. Publicans and harlots might 
 otherwise be led to think they were heirs of the king- 
 dom. Baptism, Charity, Faith, Christian life— a new 
 heart indispensable. Element of mercy in all this sever- 
 ity of Chiist — warning men of danger common to all and 
 into whicth the Jews had especially^fallen. 
 
 §118. Question of Pharisees concerning Tribute. The Phari- 
 sees thus baffled retire and take counsel. Renew attack, 
 intending this time to embroil Christ with Pilate— send 
 spies, literally perjurers with instructions to be respect- 
 ful in manner. Dilemma— he must ofiehd either people 
 or the government. They expected a negative answer 
 which would justify a charge .of rebellion. Lk. 5: 20. 
 Notice hypocrisy of rulers— this decision expected of 
 them by Christ as basis of a charge, was to them a mat- 
 
140 
 
 ter of conscience — independence being a part of their 
 religion. Question also touched point of contrast be- 
 tween his and their doctrine of the Messianic kingdom. 
 These two questions involved whole case of Pharisees — 
 containing tlie two charges against him at his trial of 
 blasphemy and sedition — they wanted him to a\ow Iris 
 Divinity and also to oppose the Government ; the second, 
 a natural sequel of first, if you have such authority, how 
 reconcile it with Csesar's. But he replies by calling for 
 coin — the coinage of money is prerogative of the ruler 
 in all countries. He recognizes distinction between two 
 spheres of duty and that they are not inconsistent. Pre- 
 cise relation not here stated. His answer surprises 
 questioners, silences them, yet without ofience. 
 
 §119. Question of the Sadducces. Probably they came at 
 the instigation of Sanhedrim. Reply to previous ques- 
 tion was on their side and they try now to evoke a reply 
 against the Pharisees. This question dift'ers in spirit 
 from previous one which tho' hypocritical was serious 
 and important — \.\\\9, frivolous . Sadducees at first denied 
 tradition simply ; then certain portions of SS., and finally 
 denied the resurrection and future punishment — because 
 of their sceptical views. Their question, based on Deut. 
 25 : 5 wliich as law now obsolete on account of loss of 
 land boundaries, was not a real one. Impossible case 
 of woman married to seven brothers. Treats question 
 as unworthy of notice, proves resurrection from E.x. 3 : 6, 
 " I am the God of thy father &c." He is not God of 
 dead l)nt of living. No marriage relation after resurrec- 
 tion. 
 
 Strauss cliarges Christ with rabbinical finesse. 1. The 
 words in Ex. simpl}- meant continuance of covenant rela- 
 tions with Abraham's posterity. 2. Admitting Avords 
 refer to future state, they prove not resurrection but 
 immortality of the soul. Hence proof is irrelevant. 
 Ans. to first objection, a. Christ, some say, not arguing, 
 but simply stating the meaning of passage. /;. More 
 commonly held that he do.es argue. The relation between 
 God and the Patriarchs was a covenant relation and 
 therefore an enduring relation of force in both worlds. 
 Ans. to second objection. It is a complete answer to Sad- 
 ducees, because their denial of resurrection was based 
 
141 
 
 upon denial of innnortality of soul and greater includes 
 the less. Effect on multitude great, scribes even exclaim, 
 " Master, well said." Parties divided. Comj». with Acts 
 20. 
 
 §120. Laniyer's question-as to greatest commandment. Nat- 
 urally follows previous one, which had to do with the 
 law. "^ The dilemma? Two views. 1. The question was 
 much discussed among various parties of the Jews, and 
 any commandment specified by Christ would offend the 
 advocates of all the others. S'tier quotes from one of the 
 Rabbins, that Moses enjoined 365 prohibitions and 248 
 commands — in all 613. 
 
 2. A profound explanation is that attributed by Schaff 
 and Lange, (really as old as Chrysostom). The tenqjta- 
 tion lay in the o[)portunity given our Lord to assert his 
 own Divinity. They exi^ected him to fix on the unity of 
 God as the most important O. T. truth, and the command 
 to love him, the greatest. Had he done so he would liave 
 given them an opening by which to lead him to assert 
 his equality with God. That this is true view appears 
 from Christ's counter question, " How could David call 
 him Lord who is his Son." Christ's answer asserts the 
 unity of the law as opposed to the divisions of the Jews, 
 and the true principle of obedience as love to God, 
 whence flows love to man. The lawyer is struck with 
 conviction — " Master thou hast well said." 
 
 §12L Christ's question to the Pharisees. " How does 
 David call him Lord ?" This is not as some assert a mere 
 evasion. It is really the climax of the whole disputation. 
 To perceive this we must bear in mind the two charges 
 made at his trial, blasphemy and treason. Both had been 
 implied in the question concerning his authority and the 
 pacing of tribute, and both are best answered here. 
 Christ calls his enemies to the main point in dispute, 
 " What think ye of Christ." Quotes Ps. 110— admitted 
 by Jews to be Messianic — they do not deny his Davidic 
 descent. Christ shows that 0. T. declares him to be very 
 God and very man. He is David's son and yet David's 
 Lord. By introduction of this element, the greatest 
 commandment of the Law is fully stated. The effect was 
 — the common peoide heard him gladly. His opponents 
 cease their questioning. Notice : the statement, " No man 
 
142 
 
 durst ask him any more questions," is made by each of 
 theEvangelists, but at different points : Mt. 22 : 46, — after 
 Christ's counter questions ; Mk. 12 : 34 — after Lawyer's 
 question; Lk. 20: 40 -after Sadducees' question. This 
 ditference not contradictory ; for connection is really the 
 same. Account of woman taken in adultery, John 8 : 1- 
 11, inserted here by Lange. But external authority is 
 against the genuineness of the record. 
 
 §122. Judicial discourse against the Pharisees. The ap- 
 propriate close of the struggle appears in the denunciatory 
 discourse. Christ sums up all that he has said against 
 tlie Pharisees during his ministr3^ A considerable part 
 of the discourse appears in Lk. II. How is the resem- 
 blance to be explained? Tioo theories. 1. The same 
 language could have been twice uttered. It is likely 
 therefore that one Evangelist borrowed from the other — 
 or su[)plemented by memory from other discourses. 2. 
 Bot!i passages are historical. No warrant for any other 
 view — appropriateness of passage here is evident. Did- 
 sio7is of the discourse in Mt. vs. 1-13 are occupied with a 
 statement of the true character of the Pharisees — desire 
 of praise, uppermost rooms, greeting in the market, &c. 
 
 §123. Discourse continued. Woes upon the Pharisees. 
 Series of 7 or 8. These are the severest words ever 
 uttered by Christ. AH previous blood shed from Abel 
 to present required of this generation. Jews guilty of 
 same sins as their fathers and were to suffer for sins of 
 fathers. The sins of Pharisees were national and brought 
 national disaster. Yet Christ shows his mercy and love 
 in his lamentation over Jerusalem' vs. 37, 38. " Blessed 
 is he that cometh " refers to second advent or resurrec- 
 tion of Christ. 
 
 Counterpart of Sermon on Mount, often noticed. In 
 that, we have delineation of character of those who re- 
 ceive the kingdom and statement of consequent bless- 
 ings. In this, a description of those who reject the 
 kingdom and a recital of consequent woes. 
 
 §124. The Widow's Mite. From connection in Mt. it 
 is inferred that departure from the Temple was imme- 
 diately after close of the judicial discourse. In depai-t- 
 ing our Lord has one warm glance at [»iety of O. T. 
 Incident here recorded is in contrast with preceding dis- 
 
143 
 
 course. Sitting clown to watch the worshippers casting 
 gifts into the treasury, he sees a widow cast in two 
 lepta, less than one-tifth of a cent. Bengel remarks that 
 light is thrown upon her act by her throwing in two lepta, 
 for she might have kept one. Christ commends her 
 sacrificing spirit. 
 
 §125. Visit of certain Greeks. John 12: 20-26 is perti- 
 nent illustration of supplementary character of John's 
 gospels. Notice: 1. Connection in John — he records 
 notiii ng of long discourses against the Pharisees. But 
 a knowledge of it is essential to the understanding of 
 this event. John therefore puts it in contrast with the 
 bitterness of the Pharisees as recorded in the Synoptists. 
 2. Connection in harmony suggests similar idea. At 
 the close of the day of conflict with Pharisees, the 
 Greeks appear as the represcfitatives of the Gentiles and 
 accept that kingdom wliich the Jews reject. Many har- 
 monists refuse to separate this event from connection in 
 which it stands in John, making it take place on the 
 day of Christ's public entrance. Lange arbitrarily places 
 it on same day the Temple was cleansed. But it comes 
 in most naturally when he leaves the Temple finally. 
 Were the Greeks allowed to see Jesus ? Some think 
 that the interview was deferred until after the Resurrec- 
 tion, but there would be no force in Christ's reply to the 
 disciples, if the Greeks were not present. The incident 
 an appropriate close of the day of conflict. 
 
 §126. John's reflections upon the unbelief of the Jews: 
 John 12 : S7-50. Verses 44-50 are last words of Jesus 
 or a summing up of the Evangelists, because 1. They 
 are introduced after Christ went away and hid himself, as 
 if the}' were something remembered. 2. Jesus stood and 
 cried, which implies a great audience. 
 
 §§127-130. Great Prophetic Discourse on the destruction 
 of Jerusalem, the end of the world and the second advent. 
 Having kept possession of the Temple for three days and 
 having .been rejected by the Jews, Christ now leaves it 
 finally. Seated upon the Mt. of Olives his disciples 
 come to him and speak concerning the Temple. His 
 public teaching had ended, but there were two import- 
 ant instructions to disciples.' 1. The outward progress 
 of the kino;dom of Messiah until the second advent. 2. 
 
144 
 
 John 14 — 17 ehaps. o;ive the inward and spiritual condi- 
 tions by which the outward triumph was to be secured. 
 Such instructions naturally private, and necessary for 
 completion of his church's pre[iaration. In the O. T. 
 prophecy, the advent, the outpourino; of the spirit, the 
 foundation of the church and the tinal triumph of the 
 Messiah's kingdom are as a whole connected together. 
 To the O. T. prophecies concerning himself, he luid, at 
 different times, added his suffering, death and resurrec- 
 tion, the persecution of his disciples and the necessity of 
 patient self-denying labor. The great prophecy belongs 
 therefore to the transition stage in the development of 
 prophecy. It stands related both to the O. T. prophecies 
 and those of Paul and the Apocalypse. Two things 
 must be always remembered : 1. The main design of 
 the discourse was practical, to induce patient watch- 
 fulness. Hence a large part of Mt's 25 ch. is in form of 
 parables enforcing this duty. Signs of the advent given 
 are all negative. The disciples are to be on their guard 
 against misunderstanding them. 2. The indefinite con- 
 ceptions of disciples connecting the advent and the end 
 of the world largely condition the form of our Lord's 
 discourse. The combination of these events is the great 
 difficulty of the prophecy. Christ says " this generation 
 shall not pass away before all be fulfilled," The dis- 
 ciples, questions contain three periods according to the 
 pre-millenial theory: 1. When shall these things be? 
 2. What shall be the sign of thy coming? 3. And of 
 the end of the world. 
 
 It is best to find only two periods with two correspond- 
 ing questions. 1. When shall the destruction of Jerusa- 
 lem be? and, 2. When shall be the time of thy coming? 
 with which the disciples naturally associated the endof 
 the world. 
 
 Relates other Parables — the stewards, the virgins and 
 the talents. Parable of virgins teaches not only duty of 
 watchfulness but of watchful preparation. Bridegroom 
 delaying his coming sliows that the time of advent is 
 distant. A current pre-millenial theory encounters in 
 this parable a serious difficulty. Strauss, Alford and 
 others make it refer to Christ's coming at the first Resur- 
 rection. Bride is restored Jewish Church ; the vircfins 
 
145 
 
 are the Gentiles who will accompany him. Some hold 
 that the exclusion of virgins is not final. 
 
 Parable <>/ (he Talents. This adds fVuitfnlness to watch- 
 ful prei)aration. A close relation between parable of 
 King's Son and the Great Supper. So this resembles 
 that of the Pounds given in Lk. The diitei'ences are in 
 the sums given and the returns obtained. In Lk. equal 
 sums produce ditterent results. In Mt. the sums are 
 different, the increase is proportionate and the rewards 
 are equal. Taken together they leach that the gifts of 
 Heaven are all of grace, but tliat men are to be rewarded 
 according to their tidelitj'. In verses 31-46 we have the 
 last words concei'ning the judgment day, where we find 
 ground upon which rewards and punishments are to be 
 based— the treatment of his people. 
 
 Is the discourse parabolic or pi-oplietic? Arguments 
 for the former: 1. Its position, following so many para- 
 bles. 2. Its figures — the goats and sheep, arul their 
 separation, the colloquy between the good and the evil 
 and the Judge. For its prophetic chai-acter and literal 
 interpretation : 1. The language is didactic and not 
 figurative and the form is changed from the parabolic to 
 the prophetic. 2. The king of tlie previous parables is not 
 mentioned— prominent figure is the Son of Man. But if 
 this be a prophecy wdiich judgment is meant ? of the 
 elect or of the non-elect ? or is it the General Judgment? 
 The Millenarians as Stier, Alford, &c., say it is judgment 
 of the eOu/^ as distinguished tVom that of the ex^.r^zoc, and 
 give these reasons : 1. Test of judgment is not faith but 
 charity. Christians are however to be judged by their 
 faith. Ans : The works mentioned are expressions of 
 faith — the outward duty is taken for the inward state. 
 2. The parties judged are self-righteous "Lord when 
 saw we, &c.," Ans.: The language used is in reality an 
 expression of humility. Is it the final judgment ? The 
 majority of authorities take this view. The prophecy is 
 the fitting climax of his teaching concerning his king- 
 dom. 
 
 §131. Conspiracy of Rulers and Treason of Judas. The 
 peritlexitj of the jtriests stands in contrast with Christ's 
 foreknowledge. They had concluded they could not 
 take him at the feast, but Jesus knew that he was to die. 
 
146 
 
 Mt. 26 : 1, 2 contain a distinct prediction of the ernci- 
 fixioii. The baffled rulers hold council and seek liow 
 they may acconiplisli his death by craft. Opportu- 
 nity for them— Judas appears. They are rejoiced and 
 offer him a bribe. The traitor sets h'imself to watch an 
 opportunity to betray his master without incitinsi; resist- 
 ance. Opportunity is offered sooner than lie expected. 
 The Synoptists go back to the gupper at Bethany to ac- 
 count for his appearance. His hypocrisy was there exposed 
 and by his malice the purpose of God was accomplished. 
 When (lid Judas //o to the Priests? If he went to them 
 on Saturday night after the Supper he was in collusion 
 with tliem during the prophetic day ; or he may have 
 formed the design in liis mind during the feast, and have 
 held an interview with the priests on Tuesday night when 
 they were enraged by Christ's discourses, aiid'ready to 
 make a bargain with him. Or if Robinson's arrange- 
 ment be correct, placing the Supper on Tuesday night, 
 then Judas was with the priests on Wednesday. The 
 clioice is between the two first views. AVhcn did con- 
 sultation of priests occur, Tuesday or We(biesday ? It 
 depends upon the method of counting the "two "days" 
 spoken of by Christ. Some, as Afford and Ellicott, 
 count inclusively, making it Wednesday night. The more 
 common way is to count exclusively. Two days before 
 Thursday brings it then to Tuesday'evening. The plot- 
 ting was at same time as the discourses." This leaves 
 Wednesday as a day of rest in Bethany, a feature of the 
 history which Robinson's scheme leaves out. The Con- 
 sultation of the Pharisees was informal, and held in the 
 court of Caiaphas — tradition says at his country house 
 at the top of the Hill of Evil Counsel, where monu- 
 ment of Annas the father-in-law of Caiaphas is found. 
 The price of hctrmjal, recorded by Mt. oidy, was 30 [.ieces 
 of silver, about $18, the price of a slave, Ex. 21 : 32. 
 Zech. 11 : 12, 13. Smallness of price shows contempt of 
 rulers for Christ. Character and motives of Judas. His 
 name Iscariot is variously explained. Some make it 
 mean, man with a bag ;' others, strangling, alluding 
 to his death. But most commonly, ^ish '^Kerioth, a 
 man of Kerioth, a place in South of Judea. His 
 office among tlie Twelve was steward or almoner. 
 
147 
 
 (Lk. 8 : 1-3.) The money entrusted to him was not only 
 for the support of Christ and his disciples but for charity. 
 
 Difficulties: 1. Strauss and Meyer say that Synoptisls 
 and John do not harmonize — former say Judas went to 
 the Priests immediately after the feast in Bethany, the 
 latter, after Satan had entered into him at the Supper. 
 Ans : According to the accounts Satan entered into him 
 at different times. Tlie objection takes for granted that 
 Judas cculd not have dallied with an evil thought for 
 several days. All that John says is that his sin was in 
 consequence of the entrance of Satan. 2. It is alleged 
 that tlie Gospels do not furnish an adequate motivefor 
 Judas' treachery — the amount paid is too small even for 
 the priests to offer, much less for Judas to accept. Ans : 
 The objection does not properly estimate either tlie 
 power or the extent of covetousness. The smallest sum 
 is sutKcient incentive for the greatest crime when it is 
 once admitted as a motive power. 
 
 Contrast with 31ary : At the Supper, the disciples com- 
 plained of the waste occasioned by the anointing of 
 Christ. In succeeding verses Synoptists go on to show 
 tliat Judas sold Christ for 30 i>ieces of silver, one-third 
 the cost of anointing. Contrast not fortuitous. John 
 says Judas did not care for the poor, but complained of 
 the waste because he was a thief and had tlie bag. John 
 therefore puts character of Judas on a still lower level, — 
 not only covetous but dishorn st. 3. It is said that the 
 rebuke of Jesus was too mild to cause resentment ; i. e. 
 Ju(his u'as too bad a man to be offended at a mild rebuke. 
 Ans: To be exposed for meanness before a company is 
 not pleasant however- mild the language of rebuke. 
 Dilemma : Did Jesus know the character of Judas when 
 be chose him for a disciple ? John says he knew his true 
 character a year before. If so how then explain Mt. 26: 
 24? If Jesus knew him, wliy did he appoint him trea- 
 surer and place him in way of temptation ? Why did he 
 choose him as a disciple at all, and wliy did he bear so 
 long with his hypocrisy? Yet on other hand if Christ 
 did not know him, he was not omniscient. Ans: Judas 
 was necessary to the bringing- about of the crucifixion. 
 Strauss declares he was not. We answer, the divine plan 
 was that Jesus should sufler at the feast, and to this end 
 
148 
 
 was Judas foreordained. Christ's death was to be ac- 
 complished by the lowest form of human depravity — 
 dying for the sins of men, he must die thron<j:h the 
 most heinous phase of sin. His humiliation is the deeper 
 on account of Judas's treachery. Neander's idea : 
 Christ thought he could reform Judas, who was 'Apolitical 
 adrenturer. This view is held by some, Judas expected 
 to hold a high position in Messiah's kingdom, but Christ's 
 public entrance and the discourses following assured him 
 his hopes could not be realized, and filled with rage and 
 disappointment he betrays Jesus. Alford and others 
 think Judas may have been uncertain as to the result. 
 His betrayal of Jesus was intended only to result in his 
 trial. Even on this theory, notice Judas took care to 
 get the money. Whately and Hanna aver that Judas 
 thought Jesus would rescue himself by some great mira- 
 cle, expecting thus to have establishment of Christ's 
 external kingdom hastened. His motive thus made out 
 to be a good one. Ans : 1. It is inconceivable that Judas 
 could have had such an idea — he must then have been 
 insane. 2. In the Gospels the motive made prominent 
 is covetousness, wliich was sufficient to produce the result. 
 To this is joined resentment for rebuke received from 
 Christ at the Supper. 
 
 8. A fair inference is that he was disappointed in his 
 expectations as to the nature of the kingdom. This 
 however does not alleviate the bad character of the man. 
 " By their fruits ye shall know them." Lange says that 
 when Judas received the money he put himself outside 
 the pale of honorable motives. 
 
 §132. Preparation for the Passover. Wieseler and Rob- 
 inson say Nisan 14th. Bleek and Tischendorf say Thurs- 
 day, Nisan 15th. Wednesday had been spent as a day of 
 quiet at Bethany. The common arrangement adds to 
 this rest a portion of Thursday. The Passover Supper 
 was eaten on the first (r-y Tipcorfj) day of the feast of 
 Unleavened Bread — in the evening. During the day 
 close search was made for leaven whicli was the symbol 
 of that which must be put away. That this Supper was 
 the regular Passover Supper is proved, 1. By r-y TzotozYj. 
 This expression implies that it must l)e so. 2. From the 
 definite expression that follows, " When the Passover 
 
149 
 
 must be killed." 3. Agrees witli fact that priests had to 
 kill the lamb in the Temple. 4. The remark of the dis- 
 ciples, "where shall we i)repare,''' &c., shows that the 
 time had come. Sends two disciples who find the place 
 by a miraculous method. Objection that Mt. makes no 
 mention of this. But there is no contradiction, and the 
 miraculous is implied. Objection : Difficulty of obtaining 
 a place after preparations had been so long delayed. 
 Jerusalem crowded, even surrounding hills being occu- 
 pied with tents. Answer : B^nongh for the man to be 
 told, "the master needs a room." Secrecy the reason of 
 delay ; state of feeling in the city concerning Christ and 
 bargain of Judas on previous evening made it necessary. 
 Finding room as directed, Peter and John prepare for 
 the Su[)per, unleavened bread, bitter herbs, and a lamb. 
 Lamb, previously purcliased and set apart, was carried 
 to temple between three and six o'clock ; slain by the 
 priests and its blood sprinkled. 
 
 Passover Sapper. Order of Events. Difference of opin- 
 ion — on several points certainty is impossible. But 
 best harmonists are substantially agreed. Mt. and Mk. 
 agree in simple narrative. Lk. gives Christ's words at 
 opening of the meal. John gives incident of washing 
 disciples' feet. Commonly agreed that contention for 
 precedency and the washing of feet are to be placed 
 together ; because {a) Former would naturally occur 
 upon taking places at the table; [h) Latter, in beginning 
 or during the meal. Our version (John 13:2) implies 
 it was after the meal — yzvoidvou should be ycuoitiivou. sup- 
 per " being come" ; ic) connection in Lk. (v. 24) syevsro 
 ds, an aorist, better rendered "there was," not " had 
 been " ; {d) Design of Lk. for narrating events out of 
 natural order, was to contrast solemnity of scene and 
 Christ's authority and dignity with laxity of disciples. 
 Lk.'s order is : Christ's words — question of precedency 
 — Peter's denial, and desertion of all ; [e) Find natural 
 order in John ; (/) The internal agreement of Luke's 
 account with John's reads like one narrative. 
 
 W(t,s Judas present at the Eucharist? Lk. puts institu- 
 tion before pointing out of traitor; Mt. and Mk. after. 
 Most reformed writers deny presence of Judas, because 
 a. Inherent probability that he was sent out before the 
 
150 
 
 sacrament, b. John says, (13: 30,) Jndas went out im- 
 mediately after receiving tlic sop, and Eucliarist not be- 
 fore that. c. Pointing ont was while eating, but sacra- 
 ment was after supper. Jndas tooic wine as well as bread 
 before he left. d. Lk, changes order. 1. To cf>ntrast 
 spirit of Su[)per and spirit of disciples. 2. Mention of 
 cup in V. 17 naturally leads him to describe the Supper. 
 
 Exact time of (NstitiAtuHi Sacrament. See Lightfoot for 
 descri[)tion of Rabbinical customs. Possible that Christ 
 followed all the customs and observances, but still evi- 
 dent that Lord's Supper was grafted on the Paschal Sup- 
 per, Cannot identify exact time. Christ may liave 
 chosen to contrast the Supper. 
 
 §133. Opening words ami contention of the Twelve. Tliey 
 were seated — original rule to stand, reminding of liaste 
 in leaving Egypt. Christ in sanctioning this departure 
 from the rule, teaches that we are not bound in nnessen- 
 tials. Prominence of Sufering. " With desire I have de- 
 sired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer " — 
 liinting that his suffering was near at liand. Reason for 
 the desire — "For I will not eat again until it be fulfil led 
 in the kingdom of God "—makes last supper emphatic. 
 He takes "cup of blessing " — not cup of sacrament, 
 which is mentioned in 20 v. Inference is unfounded, 
 that Christ did not partake. Main idea of passage is in 
 7t}j]i)ajOr]. Central point of economy of Redemption is 
 reached — type i'ulfilled in presence of Antetype. Notice 
 allusion to the formulas of feast in eoxaiuazr^aa::. 
 
 Contention for pre-ejninence. Objections to its occurrence. 
 1. Strauss and DeWette. Mentioned only in Lk. and 
 the promise of exaltation is out of place. 2. Unnatural 
 that such dispute should occur among disciples at such a 
 time. Ans: It had occurred before", and clearly, shows 
 strong impression existing among them even now of 
 external nature of Christ's kingdom. Jesus rebukes 
 their worldly spirit — teaching that onl}^ liumility can 
 exalt; commends fidelity and promises exaltation to 
 thrones of judgment of twelve tribes. 
 
 §134. Was/ling Disciples feet. It may have been done 
 on entering, John 13:1-20; hinted at in Lk. 22:27. 
 John puts it after receiving of wine. Three lessons : a. 
 Proof of continued love of Christ. b. Example of 
 
151 
 
 hnnnlity. c. Implied snr.etification — washing of grace, 
 a part of Christ's service. Jolin only refers to Judas's 
 treachery 13 : 11. Ps. 41 : 9 fultillod. 
 
 §135. Fomt'mg out the Traitor. Separation of Judas 
 preceded the sacrament. Clirist's distress very great at 
 horror of tlie crime and sorrow for Judas. Announce- 
 ment withhehl till now tliat Judas ma}' be kept near. 
 Made now: 1. To show Christ's foreknowledge, and 
 make disciples believe after it occurred. 2. To be rid of 
 Judas' presence. 3. To carr}- out Christ's design of being 
 crucified at the Feast. 4. As a warning to disciples and 
 all his followers. 
 
 Effect on Disciples : At intimation of Christ that one 
 of them siiould betray him — natural they should not 
 suspect Judas. Ask each other " Is it I?" Translation 
 does not give force of Gk.; better read, " Lord it is not 
 
 1, is it ?" More simple and negative. Synoptists make 
 each disciple ask it of Christ. John omits this ; says 
 Peter beckoned to John to ask. Mt. and Mark give 
 Christ's reply, " He that dippeth," etc.; John, " To whom 
 T give the sop." 
 
 ^Otijections : 1. John's account does not imply private 
 communication of Peter, and act of dipping together 
 could not be distinctive. Ans : The act of simultaneous 
 dipping could be so marked as to call attention to Judas. 
 
 2. If public sign given, it could not afterwards be said 
 they did not understand his treason. Ans: Objection 
 based on wrong concei>tion of amount of their knowl- 
 edge. They did not know that betrayal would lead to 
 crucifixion. Andrews, &c., put questions of Syn. prior 
 to that of John, and point to iniquity ot deed. Again 
 Mt. and Mk's description more general than John's. 
 
 " Son of Man goeth but woe, &c.," often 
 
 quoted in proof of eternal punishment on ground that 
 hope of salvation after period of disappointment would 
 always render life desirable rather than never to have 
 been born. 
 
 Judas's perplexity : Feeling that the words were di- 
 rected to him and seeing attention of disciples directed 
 to him, he asks also, " Is it I ?"--consummate hypocrisy. 
 Night when he went out, implies quickness of his plan — 
 time was God's, deed was Judas's. Also significant of 
 
152 
 
 darkness he was soon to enter. Christ's glorying is 
 come. Departure of Judas was sign of liis victory — and 
 the beginning of his death and glory, "J. new Com- 
 mandment;" new not in principle or in nieasni-e, but in 
 degree and mode. Brother!}- love among christians made 
 test of discipleship — love flowing from faith in Christ, 
 
 §136. Prediction of Peter's drnial and dispersion of the 
 Twelve. John relates denial in close connection with 
 Christ's prophecy about going away. Lk, in connection 
 with strife for precedence ; Mt, and Mk, after the sacra- 
 ment, as if spoken on way to Gethsemane. Two alterna- 
 tires : Eobinson combines these — prediction uttered once 
 and before sacranient. Mt, and Mk. therefore relate 
 them retrospectively. Meyer, &c., say, prediction was 
 uttered tvv'ice to include twelve with Peter; at the Supper. 
 John and Lk.; and on way to Gethsemane, (Mt. and Mk.) 
 
 Design of ■predict in n to fortify disciples and prepare tliein 
 for trial of their faith — their conception of Christ's 
 kingdom was so mistaken, they needed to be huml)led. 
 This design shown also in Christ's appointment to go be- 
 fore into Galilee after his resurrection. What tiiey did 
 does not indicate utter apostasy — still sheep, though scat- 
 tered. He will deliver them by interceding — " I have 
 prayed for you that your faith fail not," The Cock's 
 Crowing. Mt,, Lk. and Jolin — "cock not crow;" Mk., 
 " not crow twice till thou hast denied me thrice." 
 
 §137, The Eucharist. The last passover culminated in 
 the institution of the Sacrament. It liow becomes a 
 commemorative and not a t^-pical ordinance. Changed 
 by Christ in person, its celebration by his people in 
 future will signify to them; a. A memorial expressive 
 of his dying love. b. A pledge or seal of his covenant. 
 c. To be partaken of by all on his authority and thus 
 unite them to him. Shows man's inability to live a 
 spiritual life. Needs an outward sign to strengthen weak 
 faith. This rite is distinctive mark of Christians in all 
 ages; sets forth Christ's death, and spiritual presence — 
 " the life of the crucified Savior." Precise time not cer- 
 tain. Paragraph in John so close that it is impossible 
 to break it. Lange and Tisch. place it in 32 v. A more 
 prevalent view is that sacrament came between 13 and 14 
 chaps, of John — confirmed by hymn being sung after- 
 
153 
 
 wards. Some associate tlie bread with tlie supper, and 
 Clip after— but more probable tbat tbe elements were not 
 separated. Variations in words of record : Lk. and 
 Paul (1 Cor. 11: 24) are alike; Mt. and Alk. are alike; 
 but add, after distribution- of bread the blessing of the' 
 cup. Explanation: Some think prayer was repeated— 
 3'et this was not essential to celebration or Paul would 
 not have omitted it. But the blessing or thanksqimng 
 should be made for both elements. Sceptics magnify 
 these discrepancies. But these words are repeated%on- 
 versationallyand taken from Aramaic where "^.s" is not 
 expressed: "this my body." Note also that 1. These 
 variations give fuller idea to the meaning. 2. They allow 
 freedom in celebration of tlie sacrament. 3. How are 
 we to distinguish between binding acts in the ordinance 
 and those not binding? Ans: a. Nothing actually binding 
 which does not appear in each acco"unt. 6. Nothing 
 binding which is not intended to be such by Christ. 4. 
 Is there distinction between breaking bread and pouring 
 out of wine ? The two acts are really one. Paul make^ 
 no distinction— neither without the other. Bread sig- 
 nifies nourishment of life. Wine shows more clearFy 
 atonemml; by blood of new covenant we are united to 
 Christ. 5. Did Jesus commune ? Lk. 22 : 17. "Took 
 cup and gave thanks," &c. Meyer and others think our 
 Lord only gave to disciples and did not partake himself. 
 Alford, that he took of Supper, but not of Sacrament. 
 Most think there is no distinction. He partakes with his 
 peo[)le — as their head. " I will no more drink of it," 
 &c., implies that lie drank. 
 
 _ Sceptical Objections : S'trauss admits a degree of proba- 
 bility in the occurrence of tbe Supper. Jesus may have 
 instituted it as a rallying point for his disciples. Others 
 deny any evidence that it was to be repeated as a bind- 
 ing ordinance. It was only for disciples— had no refer- 
 ence to the future. The celebration is due to and rests 
 iipou Paul's words (I Cor. 11 ch.,) written long after 
 Its adoption by the church and therefore must have 
 grown up at a later period. Ans: 1. Perpetual obser- 
 vance is alluded to by the Syn'. Mention of the Pass- 
 over itself is enough. " My blood of the new covenant 
 shed for many," has no meaning if Qonfined to disciples. 
 
154 
 
 " I will not drink it until I drink it new in the kingdom," 
 &c., referred by best exegesis to union and communion 
 of Christ with his disciples. 2. Institution does not rest 
 on divine communication to church alone, but on author- 
 ity of the Twelve as inspired witnesses. It is thus one 
 of the most important and authoritative monumental 
 records. It was universal in the church from earliest 
 times, must therefore have been established by the 
 apostles. Second Objection: John's Gospel leaves out 
 the Supper, but gives washing of disciples' feet. Ans : 
 John is supplenlentar3^ 
 
 Strauss asks why then did he not leave out the feeding 
 of the 5000, which is in all other Gospels ? John would 
 naturally be disposed to mention supper, especially on 
 opportunity to correct a false representation. Ans : 
 Supper already in church when John wrote and there- 
 fore needed no mention. Strauss says too important to 
 be left out. Ans : It was not adapted to John's purpose. 
 Strauss denies this. 
 
 Others say John was ignorant of the institution. Tins 
 supposition would accord with John's context but not 
 with his practice. His purpose to record Christ's long 
 discourses requires mention of feeding 5000. Omission 
 of Lord's Supper only shows characteristic difference 
 between John and other evangelists. 
 
 §§138 — 141. Final Discourse and Prayer. John's ac- 
 count, 14-17 chs., to be inserted in Mt. 26 between 29 
 and 30 vs.; in Mk. 14 between 25 and 26 vs. Different 
 opinions: a. He went into a safe room unknown to 
 Judas, b. Lange, &c., infer that John 14 was spoken at 
 table, and remainder of discourse on way to Gethsemane. 
 c. Difficulty then of separating discourse. When was 
 hymn sung? Whether last thing before they went out, 
 or after John 14: 31, or after the whole is uncertain. 
 
 Historical position and design of Discourse : A summing 
 up of Christ's teaching as a system — complete — con- 
 nected with his going away. It is our Lord's fullest ex- 
 position of the consequences of his resurrection and gift 
 of Holy Spirit — properly a transitional discourse, l^er- 
 sonal position of disciples a type of the church — they 
 were in sorrow and fear. He teaches necessity of his 
 going away and promises to send Holy Spirit to build up 
 
155 
 
 the spiritual kingdom he had established. Compare 
 previous discourse in Mt. 24 and 25 on great prophetic 
 day. Interval of vicissitudes and judgments between 
 his death and second Advent, but inward life and knowl- 
 edge of church were also to be extended. It combines 
 the general elements with personal elements of tender- 
 ness and love. Everv distress of the believer finds relief 
 in these chapters — germ of the Gospel. Meyer says no 
 need to descend to proof of divine origin. 
 
 Common misconception in regard to the disciples think- 
 ing too much of what they ought to have been. Narra- 
 tive guards against this; Christ said so much in order 
 that the spirit might bring to their remetiibrance what 
 had been said. They were in trouble and in sympathy 
 with their Lord, but did not understand their condition. 
 The whole prophecy was addressed to their misconception. 
 
 Analysis : Cli. 14, Christ goes to the Father, and promi- 
 ses the Spirit — vs. 1-14; going to the Father, he would 
 answer prayer — vs. 15-17; give Holy Spirit — vs. 18-24; 
 does not imply separation from his disciples. 
 
 Conditions, vs. 25-26 : Inspiration ; vs. 21-30. Bene- 
 diction. Ch. 15, Christ the Vine: Fundamental work of 
 the spirit, union with Christ. Those holding that he set 
 out for Gethsemane after record in 14th ch., say fio;Lire 
 was suggested to him by a vine on the roadside and by 
 burning of pruned branches; others, that he took figure 
 from gold vine around the pillars of the Temple ; others, 
 with more probability, that association of the cup was 
 sufficient. Vs. 1-11 : Union, condition of fruitfulness 
 and of God's love; vs. 12-19; Union with each 
 other; vs. 20-25: Relation to the world; vs. 26, 
 27: Personal and official gift of Holy Spirit. Chp. 
 16, Work of Holij Spirit; vs. 1-4, belong to last 
 ch.; persecution predicted; vs. 5-15: Work of Holy 
 Spirit in tlie woi-Id to convince and guide the church to 
 truth; vs. 15-22: Departure immediate; vs. 23, 24 : 
 Hearer of prayer ; vs. 25-33, Father's love and warning. 
 
 Ch. 17, Sacerdotal Prayer : Vs. 1-5, for himself, that 
 he maybe glorified; vs. 6-11, for disciples that they 
 might be one ; vs. 12-19, that they may be sanctified ; 
 vs."20-23 prays for all believers; vs. 24-26, that they 
 might be brought to his glory. 
 
156 
 
 §142. Gethse.mane. The Syn. record the agony in the 
 Garden. After singing the Hallel., Christ descends to 
 the streets to go to Olivet. A cold night — Peter warmed 
 himself; and it was moonlight, for tlie Passover was at 
 full-moon. Preparation completed, he went according to 
 liis custom to Olivet to spend the interval in prayer. 
 Passing out of the eastern gate, he descends to the 
 brook Kedron (fr. xsdpo^, cedar, or to be dark) now red 
 with blood of saci'lfice ; a stream dry in Summer, but 
 swollen in Winter from rain ; its bed 60 to 80 feet below 
 the present surface. Crossing this the}' reach -^(opsou, a 
 cultivated spot — Gethsemane — surrounded by a stone 
 wall 150 or 160 feet high, situated half a mile from tlie 
 city wall. Ohjection: Too near the city for retirement. 
 Ans : It may have been concealed by trees. Traditional 
 site contains eight olive trees said to have been growing 
 in time of Christ, and the tax-levy on which can be 
 traced up to occupation of Jerusalem by Arabs in seventh 
 century. 
 
 Leaving the rest to pray, he takes Peter, James and 
 John to witness his sorrow ; prays alone, returns, finds 
 them asleep ; remonstrates " Could ye not watch with 
 me one hour?" "The spirit is willing but the flesh is 
 weak." Some sa}' this is an apology for their weakness ; 
 others that spiritual or regenerated nature was willing 
 but corrupt nature weak ; others, sleep due to force or 
 depth of personal feeling. But Jesus evidently treats it 
 as a weakness. The 'prayer : Mt. and Mk. say it was 
 thrice repeated " falling on his face." Lk. says " kneel- 
 ing down " and intimates no repetition — an angel ap- 
 peared and he pra^^ed more intensely. Lk. adds also, 
 " his sweat was as it were great drops of blood." Some 
 say, like blood, i. e. in large drops. More commonly 
 understood as blood-colored — ^showing sympathy of his 
 physical with spiritual nature ; agonj^ caused palpitation 
 of heart, weakening the frame so that blood oozed from 
 the pores and colored the sweat. Prayer for relief not 
 to be explained away; it was real and sincere. "Thy 
 will be done ;" same words he taught liis disciples. 
 These words play conspicuous part in discussions of Per- 
 son of Christ — being exhibition of weakness of his 
 humanity. No authority to restrict the " cup " to suifer- 
 
157 
 
 ings in Gethsemaiie — refers also to his death. Mk. says 
 this hour, i. e. appointed season of The passion. That 
 suffering was natural anguish upon approaching death, 
 is lowest view and unsatisfactory, giving ground to infi- 
 dels who say others not having as lofty notions as Christ 
 died more nobly. Strauss makes it derogatory to char- 
 acter of Jesus and considers accounts given only as 
 opinions. Renan suggests a moral ground for liis suf- 
 fering — his disappointed expectations, and sorrow for 
 his people. None of these theories sufiicient to account 
 for fact. Suffering therefore must have been for sin. 
 His anticipations, though great, were exceeded by reality. 
 This excess of anticipated distress not superfluous. Some 
 suggest its important relation to agoin^ on the cross; 
 showing suffering as moral in nature, not merely ph3'si- 
 cal. But suffering in garden was greater tlian at cruci- 
 fixion — throws liglit also on mind of Jesus and gives im- 
 portant examples. Notice: First trial— in blood-like 
 sweat — was private. His inevitable anguish hidden from 
 profane eyes of men ; at cross he was as a lamb led to 
 slaughter. 
 
 Ohjenions : 1. Discrepancies between Mk. and Lk. 
 2. Lack of sympathy in the discourse. John passes over 
 agony entirely. 4. Main objection: Synoptists' account 
 inconsistent with John 14-17 chaps, especially in prayer; 
 not only an impossible change of mood but a falling from 
 state of strength and majesty to one of doubt and con- 
 flict; hence either one or both accounts not historical. 
 5. Unnatural for Christ to deliver a long discourse at 
 such a time and impossible for John to remember it. 
 Strauss, more consistent than the rest, considers it a »?j/i/i, 
 and makes these its stages : a. After the Passover, rev- 
 erence of believers led them to think Christ's sutferings 
 were foreknown to him. h. He not only foreknew, but 
 had actually experienced them. c, Had also intended 
 them beforehand. Ans : No real difhcuity ; John says 
 he speaks ; Syn., agonizes. No change of purpose but of 
 feeling. Perfection of human nature would tend to 
 change state of mind, while steadfast purpose under all 
 suffering proves his divine nature. 
 
 Reasoning of Rationalists Suicidal. They say natural 
 anguish at approaching death not suflicient to account 
 
158 
 
 for his intense suffering. They therefore admit the his- 
 torical fact of the suffering. But this suffering is unac- 
 countahle except on ground of union of divine and human 
 in Clirist, and his suffering for sin. As long as history 
 stands, sceptics are condemned. 
 
 §143. Betrayal and Airest. Jesus, returning from prayer 
 the third time, and finding the disciples asleep, says, 
 " Sleep on," and yet adds, "Arise." Sudden transition 
 explained : c?, As only a question : "Sleep ye on still ?" 
 (Greswell and Kohinson); h. As ironical (Calvin, Meyer); 
 c. Better to suppose interval of time elapsed between the 
 sentences. From his elevated position he sees the ap- 
 proaching procession after he spoke first. He then adds, 
 " Rise, let us be going." Mode, of Betra)/al : As Christ 
 pointed out traitor by " a sop," Judas points Him out 
 by " a kiss." Judas was at work while previous dis- 
 course was going on. Priests still afraid of people, who 
 would likely be about the streets on Passover night. 
 Judas directs the priests. Mk. and Mt. say a crowd; 
 Jno. a band and leader. Was it a Temple watch of 
 Levitcs, or a Roman troop? More likely the latter, as 
 priests would get these on the plea of keeping peace. 
 John says they came with torches; yet it was moonlight. 
 No inconsistency because tliey expected to search in 
 secret places. John says Jesus went forth and said, 
 "Whom seek ye ?" They fell io Ihe groniid. Some regard 
 this as eft'ect of personal power of Jesus on their feelings. 
 But words show it was miraculous — his answer to their 
 display of force. Some charge that it was a theatrical 
 display of power which he did not intend to use. A?is : 
 A miraculous evidence of divinity appropriate to the 
 occasion, and served also to shield the disciples. Ques- 
 tion of harmomj : John says Jesus immediately surrender- 
 ed ; Syn. say Judas gave a sign. Some think lie surren- 
 dered, and "then Judas, to keep his word, gave the kiss. 
 Judas may have advanced too tar beyond his companions, 
 who could not notice the kiss, and therefore waited till 
 Jesus came forward and addressed them. Robinson, 
 Alford, &c., put incidents in John 18 : 4-9 before Judas' 
 kiss. More |»robable that kiss was first. Peter's Sivord : 
 CJirist rebukes him and heals the servant. John gives 
 names. Syn. make Christ refer to cup of Gethsemane 
 
159 
 
 which John had not related. Lk. adds another class of 
 persons — priests, elders and captains of Temple. These 
 may have heen present fi-oni first and taken no part, or 
 liave arrived subsequently. Flight of Disciples needs 
 explanation. They could not understand all the predic- 
 tions. Until now they had always seen Christ victorious, 
 and seeing him make no i-osistance are thrown upon their 
 faith, which fails them. To understand their action, 
 must look from their standpoint. The youur/ man loith 
 linen garment — mentioned only hy Mark. Why insert 
 this when so much else of importance? Ans : a, Inci- 
 dent is a stroke of reality. When the mind is aroused 
 the smallest thing will strike it. Minute things confirm 
 the account, h, A familiar incident in court of justice. 
 Garment a common night dress, conspicuous. It attracted 
 the men and they seized it, when he fled naked, c, The 
 young man was John Mark himself (Lichtenstein). 
 Omits name from modesty. This removes all difficulty. 
 Likel}', for his mother was living in the cit}-. Lange 
 thiiiks he owned the vineyard and had been asleep in the 
 watch tower. 
 
 §144. Jesus led to Annas. Difficulties in harmon}' are 
 here presented. Jesus is led before Annas and examined 
 before Caiaphas. Jews are under necessity for haste. 
 The arrest is contrary to law, and they are afraid to hold 
 him prisoner on account of the people and his own mirac- 
 ulous power. While one part engaged with Judas, 
 another notifies the Sanhedrim. Their plan — to secure 
 sentence of death before an ecclesiastical court, then as 
 matter of form receive permission to execute it from the 
 civil court. If Sanhedrim sentenced him on charge of 
 blaspliemy, the people would be gained to their side. 
 Plan almost succeeded, but was made sul^servient to 
 foreordained plan of God. Difference in accounts : Each 
 gospel has its own plan ; Mt. contrasts Christ as Messiah 
 and King with his rejection by the people; Mk. gives 
 vivid descriptions of particular events, e. g., of Peter's 
 denials; Lk., human maltreatment of Jesus contrasted 
 with his dignity and love. So much is recorded in the 
 different accounts, and each luiving a different design 
 necessitates differences; but a knowledge of all removes 
 all difficulties. Three stages in the ecclesiastical trial : 1. 
 
160 
 
 Preliminary questioning by High Priest. 2. Trial before 
 Sanhedrim. 3. The sentence and resolution to take Him 
 to PiUUe. Mt. and Mk. tlins give tlie order: Before 
 Caiaphas, Peter's denials, Sanhedrim in morning. Lk. 
 gives: Peter's <]enials, the mocking, the morning trial, 
 Jno. gives: Meeting with Annas as tlie first Higli Priest, 
 Peter's first denial, examination, Peter's denials. Mt. 
 and Mk. alike, except Mk. omits name of High Priest. 
 Jesus is charged and condemned by His own confession. 
 Lk. differs, giving Peter's denial, tlien the morning trial, 
 account of which is almost same as that given by Mt. 
 and Mk, of council and trial held at night. 1. Question 
 of Harmony is between Syns. and Jno. Jno. represents 
 Jesus before Annas; Syn. before Caiaphas. Is Jno. 18: 
 13-24 a preliminary examination before Annas, or only 
 before him to be sent by him to Ca)a[ihas ? Wieseler, 
 Tisch. EII., Lange, &c. consider it one examination. But 
 this difficulty arises : Syn. say Peter's tlonials occurred in 
 house of Caiaphas, and examination and denials were at 
 same place at same time. Hence Meyer and Blackie 
 consider this an irreconcilable contradiction. One sup- 
 position, however, removes all difficulty: Annas and 
 Caiaphas occupied same house. No improbability in 
 this. Annas was old man and father-in-law to Caiaphas 
 (Stier, Ebrard, Alford, &c.) Solution .• Jolm's examination 
 was also in house of Caiaphas. (7, John's form of expres- 
 sion — gives long descri[>tion of Caiai)has, only naming 
 Annas. They led him to Annas first, as fatlier-in-law to 
 Caiaphas. Ao-ain, Joliii and Peter follow Jesus ; John 
 knowing the High Priest entered his palace, and through- 
 out describes tlie questioning as before High Priest, who 
 was Caiaphas. Passage therefore is easy if we admit 
 tliat Annas sent Jesus to Caiaphas at once, b, The de- 
 nials of i'eter are thus explained : Syn, and John repre- 
 sent them in hall of Caiaphas, e, Objections to this view 
 an argument in its favor; v. 21, "Now Annas had sent 
 him bound to Caiaplias, tlie High Priest." In beginning 
 tliey took him to Annas. Natural then to conclude that 
 Vv'hatever occurred before v. 24 happened before Annas. 
 On the other view tlieaorist aneazechv must be translated 
 as a pluperfect, "had sent;" but no need for forcing tense 
 thus. Statement (vs. 24-28) must be tal<:en parenthetic- 
 
161 
 
 ally in eoriiiection with the blow of the hand. He was 
 boniid and therefore defenseless. Most harmonists take 
 this view. 
 
 PrcUminarij Examination, probably dnring interval be- 
 fore Sanhedrim could assemble. Robinson's plan adopted, 
 though he obscures plan by gronjting Peter's denials by 
 themselves. Why should Jesus be taken before Annas 
 at all ? Because iie was father-in-law to Caiaphas and a 
 man of influence and ability. In questioning, Jesus 
 might show ground for accusing him. The examination 
 was informal. John shows it to be sucli, evidently, what- 
 ever view is taken. The High Priest's questions are 
 concerning his doctrine and disciples; oioayr^z, includes 
 substance and mode of teaching. Christ's answer, as in 
 the garden, shields the disciples. His teaching had 
 always been open. -'Ask them wliich heard me." He 
 disappointed the purpose of the High Priest and he was 
 struck by an attendant, and only returned a mild rebuke. 
 Violence having commenced, steadily inci-eased. Ohjec- 
 tion to John's account: He cunits examination of witnesses 
 and forms of trial as given by Syn. as well as Chi'ist's 
 avowal of Messiahship. Hence gives no issue to the trial. 
 Ana: a, John adheres to liis supplementary plan. 6, 
 Conclusion is involved in 19 ch., 7 v.: "We have a law, 
 and by our law lie ought to die." (\ Charge of blasphemy 
 was not real ground on which Caiaphas consented to 
 crucifixion — but consent of Pilate. 
 
 Peter^s Denials: In John, during first examination; 
 Mt. and Mk. postpone them till the formal trial. All 
 agree it was at night, before cock crew. Lk. therefore 
 puts denials first, because failure of the disciples' faith in 
 him was no small element of his suffering. John tells 
 how they gained admission to the palace — one of them 
 being known to the High Priest. They were soon sep- 
 arated. Peter warms by the fire in the court. First 
 Denial: No special difficulty. Addressed bj- damsel or 
 portress, whose attention was probably attracted at his 
 entrance. No one joined her in lier accusation. Second 
 Denial: Went to tlie j)orch afterwards when the cock 
 crew. Mk. same girl ; Mt. another; Lk. a man. John, 
 "they." l*robable that portress addressed him again in 
 presence of another maid who joined in — others repeat 
 
162 
 
 it. Third Denial: An interval perhaps of an hour had 
 ehipsed.. Peter, to alhiy suspicion, joins in conversation 
 and betrays ]iis Galilean lang'nai!:e. Kinsman ofMalchiH 
 (John) begins to acoise him, a]id is joined by bystander!^. 
 Charge now made by so nian}-, and on good grounds, 
 threatens immediate danger, and Peter therefore denies 
 with oaths. Cock crew about 3 a. m. Sceptics say eight 
 or nine denials ; but the charges may have been man}-, 
 with only three denials. " Looked upon Peter." Jesus 
 was in the large hall, Peter in the court in sight. Or it 
 may liave occurred as Jesus was passing from Annas to 
 Caiaphas. See Andrews, p. 491, seq. 
 
 §145. Jcsas before Sanhedrim. Mt. and Mk. put meet- 
 ing of Sanhedrim and condemnation before Peter's deni- 
 als, as if at night, and distinguish a reassembling in the 
 morning. Lk. speaks of no nigh.t meeting but records 
 all as happening in the mornini>\ Is examination in Lk. 
 22:66-71 different from xVIt. 26:57,58, or is Luke's 
 simply a fuller report of a second morning examination 
 recorded in Mt. 27 : 1 ? Oris the last the same meeting, 
 and therefore Mt. and Mk.'s accounts are to be transfer- 
 red to the morning ? Sceptics say they are irreconcila- 
 ble. Most orthodox interpreters resort to the harmony, 
 1. The simplest method :s to consider that Mt. and Mk. 
 describe a different meeting from Lk. (Lange and An- 
 drews). The order then is: Christ taken from Annas 
 and sent immediately to Caiaphas, who, while Sanhedrim 
 is convening, questions Christ — then Peter's denials 
 begin. Sanhedrim opens — trial goes on — mockery &<;. — 
 in the morning a formal session of Sanhedrim whose same 
 questions are repeated and a charge of blasphemy brought. 
 Christ sent to Pilate. This order has its plausibilities: 
 a. It keei:)S each account in its own order, Mt. 27 : 1, Mk. 
 15 : 1 agree with Lk. 22 : 66 as to time. b. The order of 
 time favors it, " When it was day." Mk. is still stronger 
 — s'jOsco-; Mt. and Lk. say early dawn. Lk.'s examination 
 in the morning is parallel witii what Mt. and Mk. say was 
 early in the morning; natural impression from Mt. and 
 Mk. is that trial was at night, c. Certain dilierences in 
 the accounts imply two ditterent meetings. In Lk. no 
 formalities, no witness given. " Art thou the Christ," 
 as if question was repeated, and designed to leave no 
 
163 
 
 donbt in any mind that Christ real!}' claimed to be such. 
 Tliis was the more necessary it' mornino^ meeting was 
 fuller and more ibrmal. '/. Jewish authorities aflirn) that 
 it was illegal to try any case at night or pass sentence on 
 same day as trial, c. The.hutteting and mocking which 
 Lk. records before nu)rning session is likely same as Mt. 
 and Mk. record at night. Robinson thinks they were 
 repeated — difficult to suppose however. /. Andrews &c., 
 argue that morning session was in a different place from 
 ihe informal one at night. Lk. says they hrouglit him 
 to their own Council Chamber; the trial therefore in the 
 liouse of High Priest is ditferent from that in the Council 
 Chamber. The Council C/inniber of Sanhedrim — connected 
 with the Temple enclosure. They were driven out of 
 the place a year l)efore the crucifixion, and held their ses- 
 sion in shops. Argument for plan is doubtful. 2. Rob- 
 inson, Ellicott, Alfbrd, Meyer. Lichtenstein maintain that 
 Mt. and Mk. are parallel with Lk. — only one trial, and 
 that in morning. 31(nn Benson for this view: the 
 question in Lk. is so much like that in Mt. and Mk., 
 it is not necessary to suppose it was repeated. The 
 order then is: From Annas to Caiaphas — preliminary 
 questions before Caiaphas when mornir.g conies, Ohjec- 
 tions to this view : a. Mt. and Mk. speak of presence of 
 Saidiedrim in house of Caiaphas, when Jesus first arrives 
 there. Robinson assumes that they mention this by an- 
 ticipation, b. Mt. and Mk, transpose the denials of 
 Peter, putting them nfler the trial, whereas, they hapjiened 
 during the night and during the trial, c. Mt, 27 : 1 and 
 Mk. io : 1 seein to in)i)ly a night and morning meeting. 
 Some say not mean a new meeting but only a resumption 
 of the narrative interrupted by mention of denial. Others 
 suppose Matt. 27 : 1 was simply a ]>rivate caucus of mem- 
 bers. This method yields a [lerfectly good and historic- 
 ally true narrative. The only historical difference 
 between the two views is: Adoption of a trial by night 
 would prove an unseemly haste on part of, priests to carry 
 out their design so early in morning. 
 
 T/ic Trial. Was the court legally constituted and the 
 trial fair? Salvador (Institt. de Moise) views the trial 
 from a Jewish standpoint. Answered by Dupin. Philip- 
 son, that all was done bj' the Romans. Comp. Friedlieb. 
 
164 
 
 Jews claim Clirist was an imposter, and that the tr'al 
 should bejnds^ed from their point of view. False claim. 
 Peter at Pentecost puts it in ]))-nper lio^lit — done by 'daw- 
 less hands,'"' (Acts 2: 28), "tlirougli iu-norance" (Acts 3 : 
 17). Even o;rantino: Jewish claim, the trial of Christ 
 was neither fair nor legal. 
 
 1. It was prejudged. Since previous Passover, Jews 
 "sought to kill him"' (John 7 : 1). After raising of Laz- 
 arus a formal council and plot to put him to death (John 
 11 : 47-53). Did not now design to give him fair trial. 
 
 2. The charge before Pilate not the I'eul ground of 
 their persecution. His gathering men for a spiritual 
 kingdom would distract attention from resisting the 
 Romans, yet they represent to Pilate that lie is |)lotting 
 against Ci^sar (Lk. 23 : 2). Their charge of blasphemy 
 (John 19 : 7) founded on an adnnssion forced by High 
 Priest during the trial. Heal ground is political jealousy. 
 They fear the influence of his doctrines. 
 
 3. It was conducted in haste and in cruelty, (thus 
 against their own law). "They spat in his face ; they 
 smote him with rods; they struck him with closed flsts 
 and with their open palms." (Farrar.) At same time, 
 it was a representative, national act ; jurisdiction belong- 
 ed to Sanhedrim. The legal form of obtaining witnesses 
 was obeyed. This necessary because of Romans (John 
 18:31) and because people were in his favor. The 
 chief priests and Sanliedrim " sought false witness." 
 When before .High Priest, there were no witnesses. 
 Christ then appealed to publicity of liis ministry and 
 demanded witnesses (John 18 : 19-23). They must, 
 therefore, obtain true testimony, yet apply it against 
 Christ. This is difficult. At last, two bear witness : 
 " This feUow said, ' I am able to destroy the temple of 
 God and to build it in three days.' " Falsity lay in their 
 ap[)lication — wresting his meaning. Yet not even so 
 was their witness f'(^-y (Mk. 14 : 59). Difficult to prove 
 Christ claimed to be Messiah. Some say, strange, since 
 Christ had publicly claimed Messiahship and divinity. 
 Ans : His mode of teaching was nevertheless enigmati- 
 cal. Most take c'(t/j to mean witnesses not ar/ree (so K. V.) 
 Law required at least two (Deut. 17 : 6). Sanhedrim in 
 a dilemma: will not acquit, cannot condemn. This 
 
165 
 
 equivalent to a confession of his innocence. Even this 
 semblance of a trial writes their own accusation. Notice 
 the facts of his life, miracles, doing good, etc., Jiot denied. 
 In charge concerning temple, possibly they thought a 
 claim to divinity or threat against temjile involved. So 
 high priest: "Answerest thou notliing?" " But he held 
 his peace.'' Farrar contrasts with trial of Herod before 
 Sanhedrim (Jos. Antt. Bk. 14: 9: 4). 
 
 Why Christ makes no reply ? Before High Priest, in 
 private, and before Pilate, a heathen, Christ answers. 
 To false witness now, he answers not a word. Strauss 
 finds ill this silence a riiijth founded on Is. 53: 7, "As a 
 sheep before her shearers is dumb, etc." Reasons for 
 silence : 
 
 1. Their testimony proved nothing, and was confuted 
 by their disagreement. 
 
 2. They would not believe, had he answered. 
 
 3. N"ot his design to be acquitted. A voluntary sacri- 
 fice. 
 
 4. Silence thwarts them and brings out his dignity and 
 resignation. "They felt before that silence as if they 
 were the culprits — he the judge." 
 
 Priests now change i)lan : would make Christ condemn 
 himself — illegal. Excited High Priest stands : "Answer- 
 est thou nothing ?" Adjures him, "Art thou the Christ, 
 the Son of God'? (Mt. 26*: 63) the Son of the Blessed ?" 
 (Mk. 14: 61). Does "Son of God " here impljMdea of 
 divinity — or is it simply a Messianic title? 
 
 In favor of latter view : 1. " Son of God " one of cur- 
 rent titles of the Messiah, based on Ps. 2 : 7, not implying 
 divinity. Idea of divine nature of Messiah lost among 
 Jews. 
 
 2. In his answer Christ puts another Messianic title 
 over against this — " Son of man," based on Dan. 7 : 13. 
 Held by Meyer and Gess. 
 
 In favor of former: 1. Christ had used it as implying 
 divinity, and they so understood him. (John 5 : 18 ; 10 : 
 36.) 
 
 2. This accounts for their rage. Mere claim of Mes- 
 siahship does not account for it.- Rage because, f/, priv- 
 ileges to be taken away, and 6, Jesus claimed to be the 
 " Son of God." Form of question makes the distinction 
 — adjures him " by the living God.*' 
 
166 
 
 3. This accounts for cliarirc of blnsplieniy— not so other 
 views. Mt. 26 : 65. 27 : 40, John 19 : 7 sliow their ground 
 of accusation was in tiiis title. 
 
 Christ answers, in this decisive, tragic moment, the 
 only time when silence might have saved liim: " I am, 
 anci hereafter ye shall see the Son of Man, etc." (Matt. 
 26 : 64, -b d-o.z). Comp. Dan. 7 : 13. Some refer words 
 to last judgment. Yet a.-dt>zc (from now on) would 
 appear to refer to spiritual king(h)m. Whatever the 
 exegesis, Christ's design appears two-fold: 1. To assert 
 his "divinity. 2. To warn his enemies. "Jesus sii:;ply 
 intends to indicate the point of his deepest humiliation 
 as the tiiDuin/ point between his recU^eming woi'k and that 
 of judgment, and to dcchire that at the very period when 
 they thought to destroy liim, his true glory would begin." 
 (Ebrard.) Note, this the first public assumption of title, 
 Messiah. Had before revealed it to woman of Samaria 
 (John t : 26) ; to disciples at Cn^sarea Philippi (Matt. 16 : 
 20); cautions dis(Mples to tell no man. His claim to be 
 " Son of God " always aroused violence, e. g. at the feast 
 of the Jews (John 5:17, 18); in Galilee (John 6 : 40, 41); 
 at Dedication (John 10 : 30, 31); Jews not sure he is the 
 Christ (John 10 : 24). Now lirst asserted before his 
 enemies, when he intends to abide consequences. Culmi- 
 nates in a long conflict between him and the priests who 
 would liave accepted him had lie accommodated liimself 
 to their views of Messiah. Effect: 1. High Priest rent 
 his clothes, forbidden by Lev. 10 : 6 and 21 : 10. Farrar 
 savs: " But Jewisli Halacfia considered it lawful in case 
 of blasphemv (1 Mace. 11 : 71 ; Jos. B. J. 2 : 15 : 4)." 2. 
 All vote him "worthy of death." From Lk. 23 : 51 some 
 except Joseph of Arimathea from Council. Say he was 
 not called. Probably both he and iS'icodemus present. 
 Even small minorities may be right. 3. Buffet and mock 
 him. They "struck him In the face," "spit in his face," 
 "smote hirn with the palms ot their hands, saying Pro- 
 phesy, etc." Does this occur twice, or is Lk. [larallel 
 with Mt. andMk. ? Ebrard says twice. Robinson, Gres- 
 well, say once. Probably parallel : 1. Improbable Luke 
 would represent violence occurring in regular court. 
 2. Position in narrative explained by contrast of men 
 mocking, with Peter weeping bitterly. By whom ? Mt. 
 
1G7 
 
 says indefinitely, "tliey ;" Mk. says -'some;" Lk., " the 
 men tliat held Jesus." Inference that Sanhedrim did it 
 first, and Jionian oflicers or soldiers followed their ex- 
 ample, Jews reject this interpretation. Where occur? 
 Some say, in prison ; Lange, in guard-room of priest's 
 house. Tliese are onl}' guesses. Strauss sa\-s mockery 
 a mvth founded on Is. 53, " bruised for our iniquities, 
 etc." 
 
 §146. Mornwfi Mcetiwi of Sanhedrim. (Lk. 22 : 66-71.) 
 On Friday loth ]S'isan, Wieseler, Lange, Robinson ; 14th 
 Nisan, Bleek. Was this an informal consultation, or a 
 continuation of night session ? Or was all by daylight, 
 or a new meeting very early? In our view a new 
 meeting for threefold purpcise: 1. To convince by- 
 standeis. 2. The Oral Law ordained trial by daylight, 
 Zohar, 56. Farrar : -'And they who could trample on 
 all justice and all mercy were yet scrupulous about the 
 infinitely little." 
 
 3. To consult how to put Iiim to death. Farrar : 
 " His 3d actual but His first formal and legal trial," and 
 in a note: — " It is only by courtesy that this body can be 
 regarded as a Sanhedrim at all. Jost observes that there 
 is in the Romish period no traces of any genuine legal 
 Sanhedrim, apart from mere special inconiDetent gather- 
 ings. (See Jos. Ant. XX. 9. §1 ; B. J. IV.' 5, §4).'" The 
 question " Art thou the Christ?" and his answers read 
 as though referring to a former trial. Then they "bound 
 him " and led him Pilate, a transfer from ecclesiastical 
 to civil court. Their evidence of his Messianic claim 
 established. Strauss retains trial, on charge of over- 
 throw of existing institutions, and condemnation for 
 claim to be Messiah. Some Jews maintain that as tliey 
 had not power of life and death, responsibility rests on 
 Romans. 
 
 §151. Jadas lumrjs himself (Mt. 27: 3-10, Acts 1 : 18, 
 19). Robinson transposes suicide till Christ was given 
 up to be crucified. "Till then he had hoped, perhaps, 
 to enjoy the reward of his treachery, without involving 
 himself in the guilt of his master's blood. Mt, places it 
 here. Better to follow order of J]vang. till proof to con- 
 trary. Introduced as showing by striking example the 
 effect of ill-treating Christ ; also brought by Mt. in con- 
 
168 
 
 trast with repentance of Peter. Another testimony to 
 innocence of Christ (Mt. 27: 4.) Lange, as symbolical 
 of the suicide of tlie nation. Theory that condemnation 
 of Christ took Jndas by surprise inconsistent with spirit 
 of his own confession (v. 4) and every fact of case. 
 
 Casts money in the Holy Place, where lie had no ripjht 
 to enter — intent to return it to them. Si.irniticant that 
 blood-money returns to Temple, Christ's body. UitJer- 
 ences : 1. Mt. says "hanged himself "—Peter (Acts 1 : 
 16) "falling headlong, he burst asunder" — not incon- 
 sistent if he hanged himself and rope or branch broke. 
 
 2. Mt. says ""priests bought." Peter: "Now (his 
 man purchased a Held." Farrar : "There is in a great 
 crime an awful illuminating power. In Judas as in so 
 many thousands before and since this opening of the eyes 
 which followed the consummation of an awful sin to 
 which many other sins have led, drove him from remorse 
 to despair, from despair to murder, from murder to 
 suicide." Robinson '• in Acts 1 : 18 ixzrjaaTo is to be ren- 
 dered : he r/ave occasion to purchase. Analogous to Mt. 
 27: 60; Joiin 3 : 22 ; 4:2, etc." 
 
 §146. (resumed.) Jesus before Pilale. Had Sanhedrim 
 the power of life and death ? No. 
 
 1. Distinctly stated in John 18: 31 and confirmed by 
 Talmud (Berachoth f 58 ; 1— see Buxtorf Lex. Tal. p. 
 514.) 
 
 2. Impossible that the Romans would leave them such 
 power. 
 
 3. Accounts best for anxiety to procure Pilate's con- 
 sent. 
 
 Dolliuger thinks they had this power but could not 
 put to death at feast time. Objection : Sanhedrim 
 stoned Stephen. This, however, was the tumultuous act 
 of a mob. Paul after being tried by Sanhedrim was sent 
 to Rome. Two results accomi>lished by Providence : 
 1. Christ's death by crucifixion (John 18: 32.) 2. Par- 
 ticipation by Gentiles. 
 
 Pilate wa's fifth Procurator of Judea which was a liard 
 country to govern. Not under Questor, nor was it a 
 proconsular" or imperial province. Pilate insulted the 
 Jews, a. by removing army and images from Ciesarea to 
 Jerusalem (Jos. Antt. 18 : 3, §1.) b. By expending sacred 
 
169 
 
 money — Corban — on aqueducts (Jos. B. J. 2 : 9, §4). c. 
 By setting up in Jerusalem shields dedicated to Tibe- 
 rius (Philo. Legat. ad Caium §38). d. By mingling the 
 blood of Galileans with their sacrifices (Lk. 13 : 1)!^ Re- 
 moved A. D. 36 (Same year as Caiaphas), by Vitellius, 
 Legate of Syria, on accusation of Samaritans"^ for having 
 slain many while assembled on Mt. Gerizim (Jos. AntT. 
 18 : 4, §§1, 2). Eusebius says, wearied with misfortunes, 
 he killed himself Traditions: 1. Banished to Vienna 
 Allobrogum, where there is a pyramid called Pontius 
 Pilate's tomb. 2. At Mt. Pilatus by the lake r)f Lucerne, 
 plunged into dismal lake at the summit. (See Smith's 
 Diet.) 
 
 Has strong conviction of innocence of Jesus and en- 
 deavors to free him. He is impressed by. Christ's claim 
 to be the Son of God, and by his wife's' dream. Pilate 
 IS perplexed by the Priests \accusing, while the people 
 are favoring Christ. His great fault is cowardice. He 
 acted from policy and not from principle (Chrysos). 
 Collateral evidence in Tacitus Ann. 15 : 44 ; . " Per pro- 
 curatoreni Ponliam Pilatnm. suppUcio ajfecius eraC Also 
 know from Justiti, Tert., Euseb., that Pilate made report 
 to Tiberius (of Christ's trial and condemnation), which 
 is lost. " Acta Pilati " now extant, spurious. 
 
 Accusation of Sanhedrim. Still early when they lead 
 Christ to the Prsetoriura, which is generally understood 
 to be the white marble palace of Herod ; by some (Ewald, 
 Meyer, Lange), the tower of Antonia. In John 19: 13, 
 '•the Pavement," outside of the Prretorium. Bears on 
 direction of Via Dolorosa. Jews did not enter Pr^torium 
 lest they should be polluted for Passover. John 18 : 28, 
 not proof it was Nisan 14th. So Pilate goes out to them. 
 Synoptists give general description. John gives conver- 
 sation between Pilate and the Priests, also between Pilate 
 and Jesus. Farrar : " The last trial is full of passion and 
 movement: it involves a threefold change of scene, a 
 threefold accusation, a threefold acquittal by the Romans, 
 a threefold rejection by the Jews, a threefold warning to 
 Pilate and a threefold eftbrt on his part, made with ever 
 increasing energy and ever deepening agitation, to baffle 
 the accusers and to set the victim free,''^ 
 
 Pilate and the Priests. First attempt is to obtain as a 
 favor crucifixion of Christ. Chlirge of blasphemy 
 
170 
 
 aajainst God not sufficient before heathen Pihite, and the}- 
 had no other. " What accusation bring ye ?'■ If he were 
 not a malefactor etc., implies guilty of no ordinary crime. 
 Pilate is sarcastic ; " take ye him and judge him." If you 
 condemn, you must bear the responsibility. I execute, 
 when I judge. Jews say " not lawful for us." Th«n 
 began they to accuse him (Lk. 23 : 2 between John 18 : 
 82 and v. 33) of perverting the nation, forbidding tribute, 
 and claiming to be king. Notice: 1. Not same charge 
 as before Sanhedrim. 2. Charge false in feet. They 
 knew Christ taught submission to the government. 3. 
 Ignominious, as Priests advocate that for which they con- 
 demned Christ. 
 
 Pilate and Jesus go witiiin the Prsetorium. Pilate did 
 not trust the Jews ; knew they would not condemn 
 Christ for treason against the Romans, — endeavors, ac- 
 cording to Roman law, to obtain confession of accused. 
 Syn.optists give affirmation. John fuller: " Art thou a 
 king then ?" Could not say " no." Pilate might not 
 understand "yes," Reply: •' Sayest thou this of thy- 
 self?" Design : Hengst., Stier, to arouse Pilate's con- 
 science. Meyer, Christ demands who is his accuser 
 Olsh., Laiige, to bring out sense in which Christ put the 
 question. Jesus makes clear that his kingdom is not of 
 this world. Pilate, " thou art a king then ?" deprecating 
 accent on ^/;en. Ans : " Thou sayest it . . . every 
 one that is of the truth heareth ray voice." Pilate's 
 famous question, "What is truth?" Whether in ear- 
 nest (Chry.sos.), impatient (Farrar), contemptuous 
 (Meyer), skeptical, or indifferent, Pilate gives additional 
 testimony to the innocence of Christ : " I find in him 
 no fault at all." 
 
 Priests enraged make new charges. He stirreth up 
 the people, beginning from Galilee (Lk. 23: 5). Pilate 
 hearing the word Galilee, eagerly dismisses him to 
 Herod. Second effi-)rt to release Jesus. 
 
 Objections: 1. Synoptists give Pilate's question to 
 Jesus, as ff outside; John says in the Prpetorium. Ans: 
 Synoptists give general account, do not say it was outside. 
 No contradiction. 2. How did John know private inter- 
 view ? Ans: He was present, or Pilate reported, or 
 Jesus stood at the door and all heard, or some prosecutor 
 
171 
 
 was voluntarily within. Strauss, all an invention of 
 John. Baur finds a tendency of Evangelist to throw guilt 
 on Jews. 3. The narratives separately unintelligible. Ace. 
 to John, Pilate's questions to Jesus before accusation. 
 Ans: John assumes possesi?ion of Sj'noptists — also, Pilate 
 knew much of Jesus. Whole city in excitement. In 
 Synoptists, Jews accuse, Jesus admits and without in- 
 vestigation (mentioned by John), Pilate pronounces him 
 innocent. John supplements not contradicts. 
 
 %\^1. jfesns before Herod. (Lk. 23 : 6-12). Priests dis- 
 appointed. Pilate sends Christ to Herod : 1. To get rid 
 of a troublesome case. 2. To keep from offending the 
 priests. Other motives subordinate. Herod Antipas, 
 tetrarch of Galilee, was in Jerusalem to keep the Pass- 
 over. Receives Jesus with curiosity. A frivolous, un- 
 scrupulous, dissolute monarch, sensuous and mercurial 
 in character, susceptible of religious impressions, unwill- 
 ing to renounce sins. Shows no appreciation of the 
 case ; hoped to see a miracle. Had Christ worked one 
 miracle here or before Pilate he might have caused his 
 release. Reserve of Christ sublime. Herod is disap- 
 pointed atid sends Jesus back vrith scorn. Judas, Priests, 
 Pilate and Herod all testify to his innocence. He is 
 mocked and arrayed in cloak. Color? /a^«-/>dtv— bright. 
 If white, means innocence or a candidate for office : if 
 red, royaltv. Probably red military robe. Shows mock- 
 ery. Fulfillment of Ps. 2. (See Acts 4: 25-27). Herod 
 and Pilate made friends. Enmity probably because of 
 Galileans slain (Lk. 13: 1). Where Herod lodged doubt- 
 ful ; probablj' in old Herod Palace, Pilate in the new. 
 Objections: 1. Why was Jesus sent back ? Ans: Olsh., 
 because birth in Bethlehem was ascertained. More likely, 
 could not find ground to condemn him, would not op- 
 pose Priests by acquitting, so preferred to return Pilate's 
 compliment. 2. Why mentioned by Luke only ? Strauss, 
 because it never happened. Ans : ITot essential to his- 
 tory. No eflt'ect except additional humiliation and new 
 testimony to innocence. 
 
 §148. Pdatc's third effort to release Jesus. (Mt. 27 : 15- 
 26; Mk. 15: 6-15; Lk. 23: 13-25: John 18 : 39,40). 
 Synoptists full. John two verses. Mt. and Mk. contrast 
 jfesus and Barabbas. Pilate proposes to chastise and re- 
 
172 
 
 lease him; a compromise between sense of justice and 
 fear of insurrection. Not succeeding, proposes to release 
 a criminal, according to custom at Passover. Pet)ple, 
 influenced by Priests ^Mt. 27 : 20), demand Barabbas. 
 Pilate had been warned by misgivings of conscience. 
 Now a second solemn warning in the dream of his wife. 
 Again urges release ; failing, he yields him to be cruci- 
 fied. Nodce, Pilate comes out and takes a seat on the 
 bench (Mt. 27: 19) in a place called " Pavement," Gab- 
 batlia (John 19 : 13). Probably, portable, mosaic pave- 
 ment (Caesar carried one) in definite locality Gabbatlia. 
 Where ? Lightfoot, outer court of Temple, i. e. of Gen- 
 tiles. Common opinion — open space before Prfetorium. 
 Not secret, examined in their presence; acquits him 
 fully. If innocent why punish ? May have thought him 
 worthy of some punishment, and wished to please the 
 Priests. Now proposes to treat him as guilty -fatal step. 
 Expects support of the people to release him but is dis- 
 appointed. No custom known of releasing at feast. 
 Originated probably with Pilate. Ewald, to commem- 
 orate deliverance from Egypt; others, an allusion to 
 scape-goat. Not so ; scape-goat referred to Christ. Was 
 Barabbas mentioned first by Pilate (Mt. 27 : 17), or by 
 people (Lk. 23: 18)? Ans': By Pilate, as Mt. is most 
 specific. People choose. Note 1. Barabbas guilty of 
 crime charged against Christ. 2. Hypocrisy of Priests 
 confessed in choice of Barabbas, a murderer, political 
 and social disturber. 3. Christ's purity in strong con- 
 trast. 
 
 Barabbas probably a zealot, making insurrection 
 against the government. Name— Son of the father, 
 dish, supposes he was a false Messiah. Syriac version 
 reads Jesus — Barabbas, which reading is adopted by 
 Tisch., Meyer and Schafi'. Accounted for by supposition 
 that he was pseudo Messiah ; rejected by Lachm. Treg. 
 Popular mind changed ; now demands Barabbas. Mean- 
 while comes message from Pilate's wife (Claudia canon- 
 ized by Greek Church)'. A disturbing morning dream 
 (ar\p.tpov). Some say suggested by God's spirit; others, 
 by Devil to avert crucifixion because of consequences. 
 Bible does not attribute foreknowledge to Satan. 
 Proves Pilate not unimpressible. Pilate remonstrates, 
 
173 
 
 but is overborne by tlie tumult. The voice of the peo- 
 ple and the chief priests prevailed. Choice of people 
 renders rejection of Christ national. How account for 
 change of popuh'r mind towards Jesus? a. People at 
 entrance to Jerusalem mostly Ga'ileans, now Jerusalem- 
 ites. Inadequate reason as from narrative we infer 
 that people as a whole do both. h. Hatred of 
 Romans, and unpopularity of Pilate. People side with 
 thier own priests, c. Christ now convicted of blasphemy. 
 d. Fundamental reason, disappointment of Messianic 
 hopes. At Christ's entrance, looked for external king- 
 dom. Xow humiliated, condemned, mocked. Might 
 defend himself by miracles but refuses. His own dis- 
 ciples forsook him and fled. While this explains, it is 
 no excuse for their conduct. Nothing can wipe away 
 the stigma, the great sin of the world by vox populi. 
 
 Why did they cry " crucify," when this was not a Jew- 
 ish mode? J. A. A.: Jesus was substituted for Barab- 
 bas, who was to be crucified. It was simply because they 
 expected the Romans to perform it. They thus de- 
 nationalized themselves. Handwashing by Pilate, given 
 only in Mt. 27 : 24. Andrews transposes to John 19 : 15 
 (§150). Tisch. and Rob. follow Mt's order. Objected to 
 as Jewish practice (Dent. 21 : G-9). Ans : Also heathen 
 (vid, Livy 37 : 3, Ov. Fast. II. 45); a natural symbolic 
 act, evidence of Pilate's inner convictions. 
 
 Compare words of Judas and Pilate. Judas: " I have 
 betrayed the innocent blood." Priests. " See thou to 
 that." Pilate: " I am innocent of the blood of this just 
 person : see ye to it." Then the terrible imprecation 
 by all the people, " His blood be on us and on our 
 children." Tliis curse fultilled in history of Jews to this 
 da3'. Strauss says imprecation invented later to account 
 for destruction of Jerusalem. Ans : There is no real 
 argument against its historical character, for it arises 
 naturally in the struggle between Pilate and Priests ; it 
 is not needed to account for the destruction of Jerusa- 
 lem (this long ago foretold) ; it explains Pilate's readi- 
 ness in giving up Christ and releasing Barabbas. 
 
 Pilate proves false to traditionaiw Roman tolerance in 
 religion, and yields Christ on the ground the Jews tirst 
 urge, as a favor. The Hierarchy, Political power and 
 
174 
 
 the people here combine to condemn the Lord of Glorv. 
 (Comp. Ps. 2 : 1, 2). Some say scape-goat typified Barab- 
 bas. But Barabbas bears avvaj' no sin. Both goats tvpify 
 Christ. Skeptics throw away historical accuracy of trial. 
 §149. Jesus delivered up, scourged and mocked. (Mt. 27 : 
 26-30; Mk. 15 : 15-19 ; John 19: 1-3.) Lk. alone men- 
 tions abuse from Herod. Mt. and Mk. allude to scourging 
 as part of usual process before crucifixion ; John as though 
 Pilate wished to excite compassion or contempt and pro- 
 cure his release. That this was purpose of Pilate, see Lk, 
 23: 16-23. Many hold Christ was twice scourged. Im- 
 probable that Pilate would allow to be repeated this 
 cruelty so dangerous to life. Soldiers were employed, 
 and not lictors, as Pilate was a sub-governor, and not 
 Proconsul. The word used {iffw.yOjMao.i) implies that it 
 was done not with rods but with the flagelluni. Farrar: 
 " It was a punishment so hideous that, under its lacerat- 
 ing agony, the victim generally fainted, often went away to 
 perish under the mortification and nervous exhaustion 
 which ensued." Why such malignity of Roman troops ? 
 Sharing tlie hatred against the Jews, infiamecl by popular 
 clamor and by contrast of claims and humble appearance 
 of Christ, they are rude enough to enjoy this brutal sport 
 as a break in the dull monotony of their life. The pub- 
 licity is noticed ; ontlpav, technically, cohort, is the whole 
 band (armed by Pilate for fear of tumult). Scourged in 
 the Prsetorium., enclosed court of the Palace. Then 
 mock him as king, putting on him a scarlet (Mt.), or 
 purple (Mk.) soldier's cloak ; on his head the painful 
 crown of thorns; in his hand a reed. Did Christ grasp 
 the reed with his hand? Slight importance. Probably 
 hands bound. They soon " took the reed and smote him 
 on the head," and then paid mock homage. Why all 
 this indignity allowed? 1. Exhibits the evil of sin ; 
 human cruelty' exhausting itself against a Savior. N^ever- 
 theless " b}^ his stripes we are healed." 2. Shows Gentiles 
 voluntarily participated in rejecting Christ. Brings out 
 character of Jesus — his sublime forbearance, his super- 
 human dignity. A mere man could not have borne it. 
 All this quietly wiped out by skeptics. Strauss concedes 
 the scourging may have been performed. 
 
175 
 
 §150. Pilate still sefks to release Jesus. Ecce Hayno. Jno. 
 19 : 4-16.) Given by John alone. Some take this 
 section with §148. Confnsinir, and forbidden by fact 
 that this is after scourgins:. Pilate tries to excite pity or 
 contempt by leading Christ ont in humiliated appear- 
 ance, and says " Behold the Man !" An arch on Via 
 Dolorosa marks the scene. Doubtful. Effect is only to 
 call out new rage — " Crucify him, crucify him." Meyer 
 insists that the populace is not mentioned in whole sec- 
 tion. Some say, because priests were afraid of vacillating 
 populace. Most, priests mentioned as being leaders. 
 Jews fear Pilate will insist on releasing Christ, when he 
 says ironically, " take ye him and crucify him, etc." So 
 they now introduce the charge of blasphemy : "We have 
 a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made 
 himself the Son of God." Effect on Pilate extraordinary 
 — hears it for first time. Superstitious and afraid before, 
 he now associates this claim of divinity with his notions 
 of demigods, and is more afraid. Leads Christ back to 
 Pr^torium, and in tones of deepest agitation asks: 
 "Whence art thou?" Contrast spirit of question with 
 that in previous chapter. Jesus now silent. Pilate 
 threatens. Jesus answer^: "Thou couldest have no 
 power, etc., . . . therefore he that delivered, etc." John 
 ly : 11-12. y^hy therefore ? Not because lesser guilt 
 rests on weakness and timidity of Pilate (Luther), but 
 because Jews illegal and willing persecutors, while Pilate 
 with less knowledge is the unwilling though rightful 
 judge. Farrar : " Thus with infinite dignity, and yet 
 with infinite tenderness, did Jesus judge his judge." 
 Pilate felt it, and on t-liat (E. V. "from thenceforth,") 
 determined to release him. If ever a prisoner had a 
 chance to be released by his judge, Christ had now. This 
 is the crisis of the trial, flews threaten, "If thou let this 
 man go, thou art not Caesar's friend." Pilate knows the 
 jealous severity of Tiberias towards subordinates, and 
 remembering his own former cruelties, now yields to the 
 threat. He brought Jesus forth and sat down on the 
 judgment seat, and said in scorn, " Behold your king!" 
 They cry, "Crucify." Pilate:- "Shall I crucify your 
 king?" They answer: "We have no king but Ctesar." 
 This is tlie lowest point in their hypocrisy. They claim 
 
176 
 
 loyalty to Cfesar and thus renounce all expectation of the 
 Messiah. This ends the trial. N'otice Pilate has made 
 six efforts to release Christ. 1. Told priests and people. 
 " I find no fault in this man.'" 2. Sends him to Herod. 
 3. On return from Herod, "I will therefore chastise him 
 and release him." 4. Appealed to the people to release 
 Christ rather than Barabbas. 5. After scoursjing, said, 
 " Behold the man !" 6. After claim of " Sou of God " 
 made known. 
 
 §151. See §146. 
 
 §152. Jesus led away to be eruciHed. (Mt. 27: 31-34; 
 Mk. 15 : 20-23 ; Lk. 23 : 26-33 ; John 19 : 16, 17.) 
 
 I. Time of Crucifixmi : Important discrepancy between 
 John and Sjmi. Alexander: Impossible there should be 
 a mistake in so public a transaction. Mk. 15 : 25 says, 
 " it was the third hoar (9 a. m,), and they crucified him." 
 This agrees with M.M.L. that there was darkness from 
 sixth to ninth hour, and with time required for trials. 
 John 19 : 14, "And it was the preparation of the Passo- 
 ver and about the .s?27/i hour (noon); and he saith unto 
 the Jews, Behold j^our king !" Various attempts to 
 remove the difficulty (see Andrews). 1. John's reading 
 an error of transcription, rpczr/ instead of exr/^ sup- 
 ported by D. L. X., Euseb., Theophyl., Robinson, Far- 
 rar. Bnt best text is ixtr]. So A. B. E. X. etc. 2. 
 That John uses Roman reckoning from midnight. There- 
 fore 6 A. M. So Tholnck, Olsh., Ewald, Wieseler. But 
 John does not reckon in this way elsewhere, and 6 A. 
 M. would be too early. Too short time for trial, too long 
 between condemnation and crucifixion, 3. That prepara- 
 tion denotes not whole day but part immediately preceding 
 Sabbath from 3—6 p. m. Thus 6th hour before prepa- 
 ration would be 9 a. m. 4. That ajf>a is division of day 
 — 3 hours. " Thus 1st hour of day was from 6 — 9; the 
 3d from 9—12; the 6th from 12-^S, the 9th from 6—9 
 (Andrews). The 3d hour of Mk. was from 9—12. Dur- 
 ing this period Jesus was crucified. John refers to end of 
 period as 6th hour. So Grotius, Calvin, Wetstein, but 
 unsupported by usage. 5. Hofmann and Lichtenstein 
 put comma after Tvapaaxsui^, and read 6th hour of the 
 Passover ; counting from midnight, which brings us to 
 6 A. M. But feast beo-an at 6 a. m. not at midniirht. 
 
177 
 
 6. That "about the sixth hour'" taken in loose sense, 
 would be after 9 and before 12. So Andrews and EUi- 
 cot. Norton translates, " towards noon." 7. Lange 
 (best) that the two writers date according to different 
 idea. Mark may date frombefore scourging because of 
 significant antithesis he wishes to institute between 3d 
 and 6th hour. John says " towards noon," because the 
 second, more Sabbatic half of r.apaay.vjt] was approach- 
 ing. (See Lange on John 19 : 14.) Any one of these 
 solutions is more probable than to say none possible. 
 
 II. Place of Crucifixion: Mt., Mk. and John give the 
 name Golgotha (Aramaic), translated xnaviou totzo^ ; Cal- 
 variae locus (Vulg.), " place of a skull " (E. V.). Lk. 2^: 
 36. Lk. gives xnaucou, only place translated " Calvary." 
 Supposed by Jerome to be so called from uncovered or 
 unburied skulls ; others, that it was a place of execution. 
 But " Skull " is in the singular not plural, and Joseph, 
 a rich man, would not have a tomb in such a place. 
 Common explanation is that the name arose from conical 
 shape of the hillock or rock. Mount Calvary is a modern 
 expression. 1. Place was outside city walls. (Heb. 13 : 
 12, Mt. 28 : 11, (John 19 : 16, 17.) 2. It was near the city. 
 (John 19 : 20). 3. It was near the sepulchre, which was in 
 a garden and hewn in a rock. John 19 : 41. Fisher 
 Howe adds a. it was near one of the leading thorough- 
 fares (Mt. 27 : 39) ; b. it was eminently conspicuous (Mk. 
 15: 40; Lk. 23: 49). Andrews; "If the trial of our 
 Lord was at the palace of Herod on Mt. Sion, he could 
 not have passed along the Via Dolorosa." Church of 
 Holy Sepulchre is the traditional site, supported by Wil- 
 liams, Tisch., Lange, etc., and opposed by Robinson, Wil- 
 son and others. The main difficulty lies in settling the 
 course of the second wall — a question of time and money. 
 Eusebius says Helena (mother of Coustantine) built a 
 church over the site. Fergusson, on architectural and 
 other grounds, says that Mosque of Omar marks the true 
 site of the sepulchre. (See Smith's Diet. art. Jerusa- 
 lem.) Answered conclusively in £d. Revieiv and Bib. 
 Sacra. Yet architectural argument against traditional 
 site, is strong. 
 
 III. Significance of Crucifixion : Why this mode of 
 death ? Crucifixion known to Grecians, Romans, Egypt- 
 
178 
 
 tians, Parthians,PhcEnician8, Indians ; not used by Jews. 
 Significant that his death was in a mode familiar to whole 
 heathen world for lowest criminals. Josephus says: 
 " Titns could not find wood enough to make crosses or 
 places to put theni when he took Jerusalem." Cicero 
 (Verr. 5 : 64) speaks of it as a cruel and terrible punish- 
 ment, such as was not inflicted on Roman citizens. Be- 
 fore Christ, to hear the cross was a classic phrase express- 
 ing dishonor. This mode of punishment was abolished 
 by Constantine, through reverence for the cross. Un- 
 known to Jews, except after death the body was some- 
 times hanged (I)eut. 21 : 22, 23), as special curse (Num. 
 25 : 4 ; 2 Sain. 21 : 6). Controversial Jews do not use 
 the phrase crncif}/ ; these say they hanged him. Yet 
 crucifixion was predicted : Christ to be pierced (Ps. 22 : 
 16; Zech. 12 : 10). Also the scourging, the drink, and 
 the parting of the garments belong to this mode. The 
 same dishonor associated with Jewish hanging (Deut. 21 : 
 23) inflicted on Christ (Gal. 3 : 13). 
 
 From the Crucifixion we learn : 1. Judicial nature of 
 his death. He paid the supreme penalty to rescue us 
 from the curse of the law. 2. He died for the whole 
 world. Jewish Messiah died by Eornan punishment, 
 that " the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gen- 
 tiles," (Gal. 3: 14"). So he declared; "And I, if I be 
 lifted up, etc.," (John 12 : 33). 3. His death was conspic- 
 uous. Lifted up as brazen serpent, an object for faith of 
 all. 4. It was ignominious and painful. This shows 
 the nature of siiu See Plato's portrait of the just man 
 (Republic, II. 362), " He shall be scourged . . . and cru- 
 cified." Clem. Alex, says Plato speaks like a prophet ; 
 Lightfoot, that only chronological impossibility saves him 
 from imputation of plagiarism. 5. It was a lingering 
 death. We have three years with the living Christ ; 
 this gives three hours intercourse with the dying Christ, 
 6. R was fully attested : not done in a corner. No 
 rationalist can deny the fact. 
 
 No wonder death of Christ transformed the cross to 
 symbol of highest glory. Chrysostom says : " Symbol 
 seen everywhere, for we are not ashamed of the cross." 
 In decline of the church it became an object of worship. 
 
 IV. The Form of the Cross, etc. There were three 
 ancient forms in use : a. the crux decussata in shape of 
 
179 
 
 letter X (St. Andrew's); b. the crux conimissa, in shape of 
 letter T; c. the crux immissa, with upright one-third of 
 its length above the transverse f (Roman). Origen says 
 like T. So Tertullian, who argued from the mark like 
 a cross placed on forehead (Ez. 9: 4). Same form on 
 coins of Constantine, commonly supposed to be Roman 
 crux immissa. So gathered from comparisons of Justin, 
 Jerome, etc., to man praying with outstretched arms, to 
 four quarters of heavens. So in catacombs and early 
 paintings. So writing nailed above his head. 
 
 The cross (not a tree) was probably made of sycamore 
 or olive. Artists make it too high or too heavy. The 
 feet would come quite near the ground. The hyssop 
 was Old}' an herb, and the sponge on a hyssop branch 
 reached his mouth. The thrust from a spear was there- 
 fore nearly horizontal. Cross was light enough to be car- 
 ried by one man. 
 
 "And when they had mocked him, they took 
 oti" the purple from him and led him out to crucify 
 him," (Mk. 15: 20). Crown of thorns not mentioned ; 
 probably removed. Roman law that condemned should 
 be immediately executed ; important to priests as well 
 as against their law that body should remain out all 
 night (Deut. 21 : 23). They proceed immediately to 
 crucify. A quaternion of soldiers, and not lictors, as 
 Pilate was only sub-governor. The centurion was usually 
 mounted. K^ot told how far customs were observed. 
 Roman custom, a tablet hung around neck or carried be- 
 fore criminal. Jewish custom, a herald crying his name 
 and crime. Roman usage made condemned bear his 
 cross. John 19 : 17 says 'Jesus bore his cross ; Syns., they 
 compelled Simon, a Cyrenian, This probably when 
 Jesus became faint. Perhaps both together (see Lange 
 on Lk. 23 : 26). Meyer supposes him a slave; some say 
 he was seized because a disciple ; probablj' because he was 
 near. Cyrene is in Libya. There a colony of Jews ; 
 many in Jerusalem (Acts 2 : 10). Simon Mger and 
 Lucius, prophets or teachers, were from Cyrene (Acts 
 13 : 1). From fact that he was "coming from the coun- 
 try," no inference that this was a working and not a great 
 feast day. Multitudes of people and women followed 
 lamenting. Not the usual lanientation for dead, 
 
180 
 
 which, at least according to later traditions, was forbid- 
 den for criminals. Some say, they were his Galilean 
 friends. This does not agree with " Daughters of Jeru- 
 salem." Some say, from mere pity. Yet Christ deems 
 them worthy of a particular address. Christ's reply, like 
 his lamentation over Jerusalem, alludes to prophecies 
 fulfilled. (Is. 54 : 1 ; Hos. 10 : 8 ; Ez. 20 : 47, comp. 
 21 : 3 seq. ) These his last words of any length. Jo- 
 sephus gives a dire comment when Ije tells of women 
 eating their children during the siege. No instance in 
 gospels of women doing or saying anything against 
 Christ. Arrived at Gofgotha, they proceed to crucify. 
 Wine mingled with myrrh offered to deaden pain. Far- 
 rar : " It had been the custom of wealthy ladies in Jeru- 
 salem to provide this stupefying potion at their own 
 expense, and they did so quite irrespectively of their 
 sympathy for any individual criminal." No analogous 
 custom at Rome. Mt. says "vinegar mingled with gall." 
 Mk.,"wine mingled with myrrh." No contradiction. 
 Soldiers carried a light acid wine (Mt. 27 : 34). This was 
 mingled with pi;^, 1. e., anything bitter. Our Lord re- 
 fuses ; an act of sublimest heroism. Not his purpose to 
 avoid suffering. 
 
 §153. The Crucifixion. (Mt. 27:35-38; Mk. 15 : 24- 
 28 ; Lk. 23 : 33, 34, 38 ; John. 19 : 18-24). Mt. and Mk. 
 speak of dividing garments too soon. Was he condemned 
 and affixed to cross before or after its elevation ? Com- 
 monly after; so early fathers. About centre of cross a 
 sedile to support weight of body. Binding to cross essen- 
 tial to prevent tearing. Disputed whether the feet were 
 nailed separately or together. Most fathers say nailed 
 separately. Because Christ walked afterwards. Ration- 
 alists say feet simply bound, hence Christ did not die, 
 only swooned. Justin and Fathers say Ps. 22: 16 fulfil- 
 led, and cite Lk. 24: 39: "Behold my hands and my 
 feet." Two malefactors, robbers, were crucified with 
 Christ. Was this caused by the Jews to degrade Christ, 
 or by Pilate to insult the Jews? Probably the latter. 
 Is. 53 : 12 fulfilled. Mk. 15 : 28 omitted by A, B, C, D, 
 X, Tisch., Alf., etc. 
 
 The Seven Utterances. Luke only (23 : 34) gives first 
 utterance, " Father forgive them." No limitation in 
 
181 
 
 truth implied. Universal, hence appropriate in Luke. 
 Conjectured that these words were uttered during' nail- 
 ing. They signify : 1. Intercessioii of Christ as Priest, 
 a sacrificial act. 2. The state of mind of Christ in midst 
 of sutiering. 3. The spirit, of his teaching, " Love your 
 enemies." Fruits of this prayer at Pentecost. Comp. 
 Stephen's last words. 
 
 Farting of garments. Custom to divide garments among 
 executioners. Condemned was stripped naked, not even 
 cloth about the loins. Divided upper garment into four 
 parts. Cast lots for his coat. Priest's tunic seamless. 
 Must not infer Christ's coat a priest's. Prophecy fulfil- 
 led (Is. 53 : 12). Mt. 25 : end of v. 35 an interpolation. 
 
 Title over Cross. Mt., " This is Jesus the king of the 
 Jews." Mk., " The king of the Jews." Lk., " This is 
 the king of the Jews." John, "Jesus of I^azareth, the 
 king of the Jews." Xotice difi:erences : 1. John full, 
 others compress. 2. Three languages used. This might 
 account for differences. Farrar : " Title written in the 
 official Latin, in the current Greek, in the vernacular 
 Aramaic." 
 
 Vfhy did Pilate write this superscription? Ans : a. 
 To make a show of legality. b. To ridicule the Jews. 
 This last strongest, and proved by remonstrance of the 
 priests, " Write not. The king of the Jews; but that he 
 said, I am king of the Jews." What Pilate had written 
 in scorn was in reality a profound truth. Pilate had 
 vacillated in serious matters, now obstinate in small. 
 Lange insists (from Mt. 27 : 38) that the thieves were 
 brought on by a different guard of troops, after the title 
 was set up. Mt.'s use of tots not strongly temporal. 
 
 §154. jeios mock at Jesus on the cross. -He commends his 
 mother to John. (Mt. 27 : 39-44 ; Mk. 15 : 29-32 ; Lk. 23 : 
 35-37, 39-43 ; John 19 : 25-27.) Four classes participate 
 in mocking: 
 
 I. The passers by. (Mt, and Mk.) ISTot only the cas- 
 ual passers, but the crowd railed at him, wagging their 
 heads. Fulfillment of Ps. 22 : 7. Words of mockery : 
 "Thou that destroyest the temple, etc.," significant as 
 now being fulfilled. 
 
 II. Chief Priests, Scribes and Elders (Sanhedrim) mock 
 his official character. (MML.) They 'sneer (literally 
 
182 
 
 turn up the nose) at meaning of Jesus. " He saved 
 others, himself he cannot save." They mock also his 
 trust in God. Ps. 22 : 8. They unconsciously express 
 the profound truth that the salvation of others implies 
 sacrifice of self 
 
 III. The soldiers mock, saying, " If thou be the King 
 of the Jews, save thyself." It was near noon, their dinner 
 hour. They offer him vinegar (Lk.) i. e. their light acid 
 wnne. Some identify this with previous offering ; others 
 with offering just before his death. Ebrard : "A distinc- 
 tion is very properly made between (1) the myrrh offered 
 in order to stupefy; (2) the tantalizing offer of the j)osca 
 in Lk. 24 : 36 ; and (3) the offer of the j^osca immediately 
 before the death of Jesus." 
 
 IV. The two thieves railed on him, saying "If thou be 
 the Christ, save thyself and us." Notice, each class of 
 scoffers brings out specific difference between Christ and 
 themselves. All involve the false idea of the Messiah 
 and his kingdom. Strauss objects to the differences 
 in the accounts, and that priests could not quote Ps. 
 22:8,9 without acknowledging themselves enemies of 
 the Messiah. Ans : Proves too much. Strauss admits 
 many facts which were clearly predicted; this Psalm was 
 Messianic, and so naturally used. 
 
 Conversion of thief. Word implies violence rather 
 than theft. Substitution represented — "He was num- 
 bered with the transgressors." Cross of Christ discrim- 
 inates among men — election represented. Christ shown 
 as Prophet in words to penitent thief; as Priest, in offer- 
 ing up himself; as King, in pardoning. True repentance 
 at'eleventh hour represented. Abuse of the example 
 removed by example of the other thief. 
 
 Second Utterance : " To-day thou shalt be with me in 
 Paradise." Paradise used three times in N. T. Decisive 
 against Purgatory, not necessarily against an intermedi- 
 ate state of the dead. Still a question where Christ was 
 during three days. This utterance predicts Christ's 
 death 071 this day. Speedy death unusual. Objections: 
 1. Mt. and Mk. say both reviled ; Lk. says one, Ans : 
 MM. speak generically, or (better) both mocked, then 
 one repented. 
 
183 
 
 Third Utterance: "Woman, behold thy son !'" "Behold 
 thy mother !" Women at the cross, his mother and his 
 mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary 
 Magdalene. This utterance shows Christ's human love 
 for his mother and confidence in his friends. Shows his 
 grasp of the future of his people, and that he makes pro- 
 vision for them. Objected that M.M. speak only of 
 vv'omen, Lk. of his acquaintance, and only John of him- 
 self and Mary. No contradiction. Ohjected that John 
 says they stood by the cross, while Synoptists say afar 
 off. The Synoptists refer to later period. This utterance 
 Andrews supposes before, KrafFt after, the darkness and 
 final mocking — unimportant. Gospels show that Mary 
 laid up these things and pondered them in her heart. It 
 may be her influence is seen in John's gospel. 
 
 §155. Darkness. Death of Jesus. (Mt. 27 : 45-50 ; Mk. 
 15 : 33-37 ; Lk. 23 : 44-46 ; John 19 : 28-30.) A new 
 element in supernatural accompaniments, darkness, 
 earthquake, rending of veil, and opining of graves. 
 These are divine attestations to Christ, and symbols of 
 the effect of his death. Would have been unnatural and 
 out of analogy had no signs been given now. Darkness 
 from sixth to ninth hour. How long Jesus had hung 
 upon the cross depends on harmony of Mt. 15 : 25 with 
 John 19 : 14. It was high noon, when light and heat 
 greatest, that sun was darkened. Meyer says that Luke 
 implies sun partially obscured till noon, then darkened. 
 Substantiated by Cod. Sin,, which supplies in v. 44, rod 
 ■^Xcou ixXiTtoi^TOi;. 
 
 Extent of Darkness : Was it confined to Palestine, or 
 more extended ? If the- former, explains lack of mention 
 by contemporaries. Cause of darkness. Many fathers 
 say eclipse. Phlegon of Tralles says in 202 Olympiad 
 occurred greatest eclipse ever known. But this eclipse 
 was a year or two too late, and could not occur during 
 full moon. Seyftarth holds to eclipse, and supposes the 
 Passover two weeks after regular time. Some connect 
 darkness with earthquake. Majority say it was entirely 
 miraculous. 
 
 Objections: I.John omits all supernatural additions. 
 2. No adequate cause for them. 3. Not mentioned in his- 
 tory. 4. Not appealed to by Apostles. 5. Motive for 
 
184 
 
 mythical orio^in obvious. Ans : 1. Fricdlieb quotes Ter- 
 tulliau and Lucian as saying that the fact was recorded 
 in heathen accounts now lost. 2. Apostles refer to Resur- 
 rection as proof of supernatural, and greater includes the 
 less. If no other proof, authority of the three Evangelists 
 sufficient. The darkness symbolizes sympathy of nature. 
 The earth cursed because of man's sin now participates 
 in redemption. Corresponds also with darkness in soul 
 of Jesus. At his birth a new star came forth ; at his 
 death the sun was darkened. 
 
 Fourth Utterance: "My God, my God, why hast thou 
 forsaken me ?'^ Some say after darkness, because drink 
 offered; others, just before. This the only one of the 
 seven utterances preser.ved byM.M. Mt. gives Hebrew, 
 Mk. the Aramaic. Meaning of this utterance : It expres- 
 ses a reality. God had really forsaken him. His human 
 soul is left destitute. Expresses the extremity of what 
 he came to bear. Lange, sympathy of soul with body ; 
 Meyer, physical pain. Naturalistic interpreters deny 
 importance of the words. Others, little stress on mere 
 words, as they are simply the opening words of a Psalm 
 of triumph (Ps. 22). Others, an ordinary ejaculation of 
 distress. Others, failure of his plan. Others, mythical. 
 Bystanders say, " Behold he calleth Elias." Olshausen, 
 Lange, that terrified and confuseil, they think judgment 
 and Elijah truly coming. Most say, it was a wilful mis- 
 understanding. 
 
 Fifth Utterance: "I thirst." Was this to fulfil proph- 
 ecy (Ps. 69:21), or a real want? When he used the 
 language " I thirst," he meant it. Meyer : 1. John never 
 puts telic clause first. 2. Ps. 69 : 21 refers to previous 
 offer of vinegar. 3. Christ would not now say "I thirst," 
 if not true. (See Meyer on John 19 : 28.) This the only 
 word from the cross expressing physical suffering. Geth- 
 semane shows spiritual suffering not to be lost sight of; 
 this shows the same in regard to the physical. One ran 
 and filled a sponge with vinegar and gave him to drink. 
 Having satisfied this compassionate impulse, he joins the 
 rest in mockery : " Let alone ; let us see whether Elias 
 will come to take him down," Last words somewhat 
 differently reported. Mt, and Mk. say he cried with a 
 loud voice, and gave up the ghost. But word for voice 
 {(fcoyj) means articulate utterance. 
 
185 
 
 Sixth Utterance: "It is finished," given by John. To 
 be taken before utterance given by Luke, because more 
 appropriate and intelligible here. Evident reference to 
 V. 28. Perfect tense ; it has been and continues finished. 
 All O. T. prophecies and types fulfilled. He does not 
 mean simply the scripture has been fulfilled. The words 
 go back to the counsels of eternity. Redemption, and 
 Revelation of God to man are finished. Conip. John 17 : 
 4. Hengst. finds reference to Rs. 22 : 81. Finished is his 
 farewell greeting to earth ; the next utterance marks his 
 entraiice to heaven. 
 
 Seventh Utterance: "Father, into thy hands I commend 
 my spirit." (Lk. 23 : 46.) Tisch. reads Trarjazide/iac. This 
 more natural. His last words not an assertion of divin- 
 ity but trust. He resigns himself to his Father. Taken 
 from Ps. 31 : 5. 
 
 These seven utterances have a literature of their own. 
 Notice, 1. how many come from O. T.; 2. how wonderful 
 their comprehensiveness; 3. how natural their sequence. 
 He who exhausts them has little to know ahout either 
 covenant. 
 
 The first is a prayer for pardon of his enemies. 
 
 Second, Shows judgment and saving power. 
 
 Third, Christ's tender care for his people. 
 
 Fourth, Depth of punishment for sin. 
 
 Fifth, His humanity and physical suffering. 
 
 Sixth, His triumphant victory. 
 
 Seventh, His trust in God. 
 
 It is remarkable that the four Evangelists avoid the 
 expression, "he died." They say, "He gave up the ghost." 
 It was a voluntary act. • 
 
 §156. Supernatural accompaniments continued.. Impression 
 on different classes of witnesses. (Mt. 27 : 51-56 ; Mk. 15 : 
 38-41 ; Lk. 23 : 45, 47-49.) The veil of temple rent, 
 earthquake, graves opened and dead raised. Luke puts 
 rending of veil before statement of Christ's death. The 
 same word used in LXX. for both inner and outer veil. 
 Means here, inner veil. Denied, because 1. known only 
 to priests, who would not tell, and 2. not referred to later 
 in N. T. Naturalistic interpreters describe it as effect 
 of earthquake upon veil old or tender or fastened at four 
 corners. Tradition in Gospel of the Hebrews says a beam 
 
186 
 
 fell against it. Its meaning is plain. The typical system 
 is ended. All believers are now priests and may enter 
 tiirough the Veil to the Holiest of Holies (Heb. 10 : 19). 
 Earthquake and grave-opening mentioned by Mt. alone. 
 Objected 1. That this resurrection of saints was never 
 appealed to later. 2. What became of them ? 3. What 
 was the use of it ? Some try to destroy the text. Some 
 say earthquake opened graves, which were found empty, 
 hence the report. (Farrar.) Others, it was all visionary. 
 Strauss, all mythical ; they had not yet separated second 
 advent from first. Do the words "after his resurrection" 
 qualify their leaving the graves or their going into the 
 city? Most place all after his resurrection, because 1. 
 Christ is called the lirst-fruits, and 2. His resurrection 
 necessary to new life of the saints. How did they rise ? 
 Was it in physical bodies to die again? Most likely in 
 resurrection bodies — recognizable — not to live with 
 men, but to ascend with Christ. Who were they ? Some 
 say those recently dead, or they would not have been 
 recognized. Others say 0. T. Patriarchs and prophets. 
 Tradition gives their names. Meaning clear : The sacri- 
 fice now made is victory over death. Schaff: "So much 
 only appears certain to us that it was a supernatural and 
 symbolic event which proclaimed the truth that the death 
 and resurrection of Christ was a victory over death and 
 Hades, and opened the door to everlasting life." The 
 centurion and soldiers, after Christ's last cry (Mk.), and 
 the supernatural accompaniments (Mt.) say " Truly this 
 was the Son of God." Luke gives, " certainly this was 
 a righteous man." Some say the words must be taken 
 in heathen sense, i. e. a demi-god (So Meyer). More 
 common opinion is that the centurion had some knowl- 
 edge and this is incipient faith. At all events he is con- 
 vinced that Christ is true. He is the precursor of Cor- 
 nelius, the first fruits of Gentiles acknowledging the 
 Savior. We have important witness to truth of these 
 details. The mass of the people are impressed. Stricken 
 with terror and remorse, they smote their breasts and 
 returned (Lk. 23 : 48). Representatives of Israel and 
 the Centurion of the Gentiles are witnesses to the fact 
 and power of his death. The friends of Christ are also 
 present. Lk. says " all his acquaintance." Mt. and Mk. 
 
187 
 
 specify names of some of the women. By these friends 
 the knowledge of his teaching is preserved and handed 
 down. All classes are witnesses. 
 
 §157. Taking down from the Cross and Burial. Two 
 striking fulfillments of prophecy seen in a departure both 
 from Roman and Jewish usage. The Roman custom 
 was to leave the bodies hanging until devoured by birds. 
 Jews of course did not. (Deut. 21 : 23). And the Sab- 
 bath was an "High Day." Bleek: "High Day" be- 
 cause the first day of the Feast, or Nisan 15. But if it 
 were the second or 16th of Nisan, the day on which 
 the offerings were brought to the Temple — and from 
 which Pentecost was reckoned, it would also be an 
 " High Day:' 
 
 Did the Jews know that Jesus had died? Not told. 
 If they did, the request was for the thieves. This break- 
 ing of the legs was for torture. It was only the usual 
 adjunct of Crucifixion. There is no evidence that this was 
 the " merc_y stroke,'' for more merciful means were in use ; 
 as the stab, &c. It seems to have been rather for ad- 
 ditional torture and ignominy. Possibly they had in 
 mind, the prophecy implied in Exod. 12 : 46 — " Neither 
 shall ye break a bone thereof" — and wished to disprove 
 thereby his Messiahship. Some argue from John 19: 
 32 that a new body of soldiers were employed in this. 
 But the message was sufficient. They broke the legs of 
 the two thieves first ; probably because on the outside. 
 One of the soldiers thrust a lance into the side of Jesus, 
 to make sure of his actual death. It was an easier and 
 more certain mode than the breaking of his legs. As 
 already dead, there was no need of torture. Thus were 
 these soldiers witnesses of the reality of his death. 
 
 It has been argued against John's recording this inci- 
 dent, that " no one doubted Christ's death in his day." 
 Ans : 1. Even if true, the fact of his death is so im- 
 portant that John would not omit it. And the Corin- 
 thians did deny his real death already. Its bearing in 
 our own day is obvious. 2. It proves the reality of the 
 body of Christ against the Docet?e. John himself says 
 he did it to confirm the faith of his readers : a. Neither 
 shall ye break a bone thereof." Ex. 12 : 46. Ps. 34 : 
 30. h. " They shall look on him whom they have 
 
188 
 
 pierced." Zech. 12 : 10. The main fact is the lance- 
 thrust ; the flow of blood and water is secondary and 
 confirmatory, therefore not miraculous. No symbolical 
 meaning dwelt on but (I. John 5 : b) itself a symbol of 
 the atoning and cleansing power of Christ's blood. 
 Rationalists who deny the reality of his death deny the 
 spear-thrnst, or pronounce it superficial. This is contrary 
 to the words themselves — to the intention and to the 
 .invitation to Thomas — John 20 : 27. It was probably 
 the left side, as that was surer death, and it accounts for 
 the blood and water. The thrust nearly horizontal and 
 but slightly inclined upward. The nature of this flow 
 is included in the wider question — what was the physical 
 cause of his death ? 
 
 1. Miraculoiis Theory, held by the Reformers, Fathers, 
 Meyer, &c. If his death was miraculous, so was proba- 
 bly the flow of blood and water. The natural arguments 
 are a. his speedy death ; his strength of body and mind 
 10 the end; the expectation of the Jews that he would 
 linger. Pilate's surprise at the report of his death, h. 
 The terms employed: "-He gave up the spirit." c. 
 The words of Jesus : John 19 : 11 and 10 : 18. d. Argu- 
 ment from the divine nature. Also the frequent IST. T. 
 expression " he died for us." The Jews slew him, which 
 would not be true if he died from natural causes. 
 
 2. The spear thrust — the cause of his death. Founded 
 on a reading of Mt. 27 : 49; supported by B. C. L. and 
 Cod. Sin. But it is an interpolation and contradicts 
 John Griiner's view. His heart was pierced before death. 
 The water was from the pericardium. Debility and 
 anxiety produced eft'usion before his death. Ans : 
 The physiological facts are disputed, and the narrative 
 plainly implies death before the lance-thrust. 
 
 3. Weakness. To the objection that it was too sudden, 
 they answer: The perfection of his organization, or 
 mental anguish. What then of the blood and water ? 
 a. If the heart was pierced, there would be no flow from 
 it. 5. Extravasations. (^, The Bertholines argue a bloody 
 serum in the cavity of the chest. Fact is disputed 
 physiologically: and that is not blood and water, d. 
 Lange's idea is that his transformation had begun, e. 
 His death was natural but the blood and water was 
 miraculous. 
 
189 
 
 4. Stroud's theory. He died from a rapture of the ven- 
 tricle of the heart produced by mental agony. Blood 
 separated in the thorax. There was time enough and 
 this is analogous to the bloody sweat in Gethsemane. 
 Objection : The blood w^ould be coagulated. A coinci- 
 dence of his death and the knowledge on the part of 
 Jesus when the time came. But he may have spoken 
 after the rupture took place, or he may have been 
 warned by an increase of suffering. A difficulty here is 
 met in the words of the Psalmist, Ps. 16 : 10 in connec- 
 tion with St. Peter's assertion in Acts 2 : 31 ; " Neither 
 his flesh did see corruption." Does the separation of the 
 blood imply this ? Meyer says John intends to describe 
 it as miraculous. But compare the exegesis above. This 
 view an elevated one. But it subjects physical to moral 
 causes. If Christ's life was subject to physical causes, 
 so by analogy should be his death. It is impossible to 
 decide absolutely. Comp. Baur, Strauss, Hanna, An- 
 drews, Sir J. Simpson and Pseudo-John. 
 
 The Burial. The history of the burial, shows a series 
 of providences to adduce witnesses to the identity of the 
 body in the interval before Resurrection. 
 
 He was laid in a 7ieivtomh. Joseph of Arimatheaasks 
 for the body. John alone mentions jSTicodemus as tak- 
 ing part, as he alone mentions him before. " It was in 
 the power of governors of provinces to grant private 
 burial to criminals at the request of friends; and it 
 was usually done, except they were mean or infamous. 
 But for Joseph, Christ would probably have been buried 
 with the malefactors. De Wette argues that verses 38 and 
 31 are inconsistent. If Joseph came //era zauza and 
 o^rac— late in afternoon, a. how could Pilate be surprised 
 that he was already dead ? and b. how could Joseph go 
 to Pilate before the body was taken down by the 
 soldiers ? Liicke says dpr] means to take away to burial. 
 But Syn. say Joseph and Nicodemus took him doivn from 
 the cross, Lk. 23 : 53. Mk. 15 : 46. Friedlieb says 
 Joseph asked before the Jews — but Pilate waited to hear 
 from the Centurion. This disregards //era zaoza. Meyer 
 — Jews' request was first. Then the trouble is to find 
 time for Joseph to act. But soldiers would wait till the 
 malefactors' death before taking them down. Or Joseph 
 
190 
 
 may have followed the Jews very quickly. Very little 
 time was necessary. The tombs of rich families were 
 generally in a rock, hewn with the mouth so as to go 
 in horizontally. By this interment in the new tomb of 
 Joseph of Ariraathea was brought about, not only the 
 fulfillment of prophecy, but also a proof of his resurrec- 
 tion. No other had been buried there, hence, no other 
 could rise from that tomb. As early as Jerome was this 
 fact noticed as important. He compares it to the pure 
 womb of the Virgin Mary. 
 
 2. He was embalmed. If they had not known he was 
 dead, they would not have embalmed his body. "One 
 hundred pounds weight," extraordinary quantity; denotes 
 great honor. There is no proof that the disciples watched 
 the tomb. Great emphasis is laid on the constancy of 
 the women. The mother of Jesus is not mentioned. 
 The incident is important in the chain of testimony to 
 the identity of his body. A contradiction as to the time 
 of buying spices is alleged. Compare Lk. 23 : 56 with 
 Mk. 16 : \. 'No real contradiction. Some may have been 
 brought at one time, some at another, or some on both 
 evenings. But it is asked " If they saw the burial by 
 Joseph and Mcodemus, why this additional anointing?" 
 John 19:40 shows that Joseph's was used. Nor is it 
 probable that the women were ignorant of the first 
 anointing. No real difficulty. It was a new proof of 
 love. Becoming that the last sacred ofiices should be 
 performed by intimate friends. 
 
 Strauss asks: " If they knew the tomb was sealed, 
 and a watch set, how did they expect to get in ?" Some 
 reply, " they did not know." But the body was in 
 Joseph's tomb and his property: to be watched, but not 
 kept by the soldiers. 
 
 §158. The Watch at the Sepulchre. Saturday Nisan 16. 
 According to Bleek, Nisan 15. When did priests apply 
 to Pilate ? On Friday evening — which was part of the 
 Sabbath, or Saturday morning ? Either way they break 
 the Sabbath. But why not Saturday night? The words 
 force the conclusion that they went on the Sabbath. 
 But a night has intervened. There is however no break 
 in the continuity of the witness for identity. The Jews 
 would not seal an empty tomb. They would make sure 
 
191 
 
 of that. The prediction was that he would rise on the 
 third day. So no danger of his being stolen till the 3d 
 day. 
 
 bid Pilate mean by his reply " Ye have a watch," the 
 band of Levites comprising the Temple watch, or the 
 soldiers who crucified him? Better to understand it as 
 imperative — " Have a watch." They take Roman sol- 
 diers. Meyer singularly discards this whole account. 
 His objections : 1. That Christ's predictions were too 
 enigmatical to be known by the priests. Even the Apos- 
 tles did not understand them, and the priests did not get 
 them from the disciples after his death, for they were 
 depressed and had forgotten the prediction. The priests 
 say " We remember." They rtuuj have obtained it from 
 believers before the crucifixion. At any rate they wish 
 to test the truth of it ? 2 If the priests feared removal of 
 the body it was suicidal to allow it to remain in custody 
 of friends. But they did not fear till they heard the 
 friends had the body and then took immediate precau- 
 tions. If the body was taken away Pilate would punish 
 the soldiers in execution of Roman Law. But they 
 would invent an improbable lie. He argues the greater 
 probability is against the truth of the narrative. Where- 
 fore the Greek recension of Mt. But it is found in Mt. 
 alone, because Alt. wrote for Jews, 
 
 This Sabbath was indeed a final day. Lange says it 
 was not the last Sabbath of the old economy for that con- 
 tinued till Pentecost. 
 
 From thb Resurrection to the Ascension. 
 
 The length is not given in the Gospels. They record 
 but two Sabbaths and a journey to Galilee. But in Acta 
 1 : 3, '• for forty days, //era zb Tza&elv wjzbv" forty has 
 some significance. It was practically time enough to 
 prove the resurrection. Proofs are frequent varied and 
 numerous. We can trace a picture of the subjective 
 state of the disciples. Why was the mode of our Lord's 
 communication so changed ? He appears only at inter- 
 vals. Acts 1:3. Of course then not still in state of 
 humiliation. Had there been no change— resurrection 
 would have been more doubted. Again, it may have 
 been to change the feelings of the disciples towards him. 
 
192 
 
 Their faith and love to him must be made as great as to 
 God, by his total absence in body and yet spiritual presence. 
 Here they were in different places and yet all present in 
 body with him in each place. This shows how he is 
 with us now. 
 
 The nature of his Resurrection Body? Three an- 
 swers: I. Some argue with Rob. and Meyer that it was 
 the same material body which lay in the tomb. a. 
 Nature of proofs of identity : Jesus said " A spirit hath 
 not flesh and bones as ye see me have." Shows his 
 wounds and eats with them. b. The ascension was the 
 moment for transformation. According to this, his trans- 
 portation through space, . entering through the closed 
 doors, &c., are specific miracles. II. The change to a 
 spiritual body occurred at Resurrection. But this con- 
 tradicts his own words. Lk. 24 : 39. III. An interme- 
 diate condition suited to the period of transitions. A 
 material body but endowed with new properties. We 
 are safe only in holding to the facts which are : 1. The 
 body was the same. This was necessary to recognition. 
 2. Some change in appearance is shown by the tardy 
 recognition. This is partly accounted for by the subjec- 
 tive state of the disciples, partly as meant by him, for 
 Mk. 16 : 12 says, " ev kzifia nopcprj.'' 3. Either super- 
 naturally endowed, or instrument of miraculous power. 
 4. Not fully transformed. '^ Flesh and blood can not in- 
 herit the kingdom of God." 
 
 Harmony. We have four accounts from different 
 points of view, none complete. It is not a continuous 
 history of a life, but a series of disconnected miraculous 
 appearances, hence the difficulty. Doubtless, too, the 
 stupendous character of the events make witnesses con- 
 fused. Again all is not recorded. John 20 : 30. Acts 
 1 : 3. Comp. 1 Cor. 15. No contradiction can be estab- 
 lished. Means for determining the exact order do not 
 exist in the narrative. General traits are the same. The 
 same prominence given, in all, to the accounts of the 
 women and the angels. The same messages are sent to 
 the disciples. The very differences prove the simplicity 
 of the witnesses. So in general differences. It is re- 
 markable that Mt. should narrate only the events which 
 occurred in Galilee, while Mk. and Lk. those in Jud. 
 
193 
 
 and Jerus., John givins^ both, ch. 20 being hiid in Jeras. 
 and ch. 21 in Gal. Rationalists ascribe this to mixed 
 tradition. But it is really a striking proof of the very 
 opposite; and can be accounted for only b}- the special 
 design of each. Mt. depicts the royal majestj' of the 
 risen Lord, contrasted with Jewish expectations and con- 
 fines himself to Gal. as in his ministry. Beino: opposed 
 to Judaism, his record is out of Jerus. Mk. establishes 
 the fact of the resurrection by the transition in the mind 
 of the disciples from doubt to fixith, the risen Son of 
 God working on his church by his power througli the 
 ministers of his word. Lk. connects resurrection with 
 the sufferings and the. unity of the two and presents 
 Christ as the great High Priest — the Redeemer of all 
 men, proclaiming remission to all nations beginning at 
 Jerus. In John is shown the effect on the inner circle of 
 believers — the relation of the resurrection to the faith 
 and life of the individual. 
 
 N. B. (For the order of the several Evangelists see 
 Diagram). 
 
 Resulting Difficulties: 1. The time of the visit of the 
 women. Mt. says "at the end of the Sabbath." Hence, 
 it is argued it was at sunset. But rather, early in the 
 morning. All say very early. Mk. says however the sun 
 was risen, or else Mk. contradicts himself. Or we may 
 say one account may date from the time of starting and 
 the other from arrival. 
 
 2. Mt. and John do not give the object of their going: 
 but this is manifest. Mk. and Lk. distinctly say to 
 anoint his body. 
 
 3. Mt. seems to imply that they saw the earthquake 
 and the stone rolled away. Rob. suggests a pluperfect 
 sense. This is impossible. Aorists, however, are indefi- 
 nite. He don't say it then occurred. Some understand 
 the earthquake figuratively. The mere mention of this 
 is its refutation. The fathers say Christ left the tomb 
 before the stone was rolled away — as he needed no help 
 to rise. Henry says. Angels aided him as token of their 
 loyalty. Remark, thej' shall assist in the general resur- 
 rection. The act of resurrection was seen by none. 
 Only friends beheld the resurrected Lord. In regard to 
 the other difiiculties ; older harmonists took every thing 
 
194 
 
 as a different aeconnt and so give various companies of 
 women, &f'. Others make but one group. Ebrard says 
 the main point in all was the appearance of Christ to the 
 XI. Before, all was prefator3^ He gives as illustration : 
 " A friend of mine is at the point of death. I am just 
 returning from a journey. On my way I am met in suc- 
 cession by different friends : One tells me of his illness, 
 two others inform me of his death, a fourth gives me a 
 ring which he has bequeathed to me. I hasten to the 
 house and find a mournful scene. On my return I write 
 to an acquaintance, and with the scene at the house most 
 vivid in my mind, I write briefly of the rest, that on 
 my wa}^ home I met four, friends who told me of his 
 death and gave a ring. Of what importance to the 
 reader, whether all came together, or successively or 
 which brought the ring?" 
 
 4. While John speaks of Mary Mag. alone, Syn. 
 represent others. Mt. Mary Mag. and another Mary. 
 Mk. adds Salome. Lk. mentions two Marys, Joanna and 
 others, a. Ebrard takes John as fact. But Syn. group 
 her visit with others, b. Lange, Westcott, Ores, and 
 others separate Lk. and suppose two companies. One 
 led by Mary Mag., the other by Joanna. This is im- 
 probable, as Lk. mentions Mary Mag. himself, and leaves 
 the difficulty with John. More probably Lk. is with the 
 other Syn. c. Lightfoot, Eob., &c., say all came together 
 and John specifies Mary Mag. to tell individual faith. 
 
 5. How many visions of angels ? Syn. record as if the 
 women at first saw the angels. John as if they appeared 
 to Mary Mag. on the second coming. Clearly two ap- 
 pearances of angels. John confines his narrative to Mary 
 Mag. who ran back to the disciples before actually reach- 
 ing the sepulchre. Lightfoot combines them all into one. 
 Those who have two companies make three visions. 
 
 6. Number of angels. Mt. gives one sitting outside. 
 Mk. one inside. Some say the stone was rolled inward 
 so Mt. agrees with the others. Some say it was in the 
 vestibule. Some, there were two angels. Either they 
 did not see the aiigels till they were inside, or the angels 
 moved. Lk. says "they stood" which WM?/mean as some 
 render " appeared suddenly." John says Mary Mag. saw 
 two angels. This is a distinct vision. So Lk. also gives 
 
195 
 
 two. If two companies there is no question : if one — 
 there is no contradiction. The explanation seems to be : 
 There was one main fact, — a vision of angels — more ac- 
 curately, of two angels. 
 
 7. Message of angels. In Mt. and Mk. the angel tells 
 them to meet Jesus in Gal. This is natural, as Alt's 
 narrative is Galilean. Lk. reminds them of his words in 
 Gal. Jolm records the message as given by Jesus him- 
 self, to Mary Mag. Here those who make two compa- 
 nies have no difficulties, nor those of one companj^ either, 
 as each tells what his plan demands. Each account calls 
 to mind an empty sepulchre as the first witness. The 
 angels point to it, and this accounts for Mary Mag.'s haste 
 at her first visit. The angels first announce the fact " The 
 Lord is risen " as a report from heaven. That the 
 angels appear and disappear in a remarkable manner is 
 insisted on by those who make these mere visions, and 
 hence all dependent on the subjective state of the wit- 
 nesses. If so, how is it that the keepers see the angels? 
 This is to prove that the stone was not moved by the 
 earthquake. The disciples do not see them, beciluse their 
 faith is to be tried before they can be constituted eye wit- 
 nesses of the truth to the church. They must themselves 
 experience difficulties of faith in what seemed to them 
 disputable. The whole question of vision of angels ad- 
 mits of a very easy explanation on the ground of simple 
 natural variety of accounts. Lessing says : " Do you not 
 see that the Evangelists do not count the angels ? There 
 were millions of angels around the tomb." Lange : 
 " These harmonies are in the form of a four-voiced 
 narrative, and indicate an agitated state of the Evan- 
 gelists." 
 
 8. Did Christ appear to Mary Mag. alone or to more ? 
 Sceptics argue much from the ease with which women 
 are deceived. The great fact of the Resurrection of 
 Christ was to rest on testimony ; so it is first to come to 
 the disciples in that form, to subject them to trial and 
 discipline them. This is prominent throughout. Angels 
 bear witness to the women — they to the Apostles — they 
 to the world. Mt. makes tAvo Marys meet Jesus, iu 
 company with all the women. But John says Jesus met 
 Mary Mag. alone on her return to the city. Mk. says 
 
196 
 
 " He appeared first to Mary Ma_^." There are three ex- 
 planations : 1. Lightfoot, &c., make but one appearance 
 and that to Mary Mag. alone. Mt. generalizes. The 
 appearance was to Mary but he says " to the women." 
 2. Lange, Ores., two appearances, the first to Mary : 
 Strauss objects on ground of time. He says " Where 
 are the women all this time?" Do they, as some say, 
 linger near the tomb, or do thej^ go back to the city, or 
 is it as Gres. supposes, a week before Christ appears to 
 the other women? Most of us are content to say we are 
 responsible only for the succession of events and don't 
 care what the women were doing. Rob. says there were 
 two appearances, but the first was to the women. Mk's 
 statement that Mary was first is but relative— i. e., the 
 first of the three recorded by him. But Mk. is too 
 emphatic to admit of any such explanation. 
 
 9. According to Mt., Lk. and John, the women go im- 
 mediately in joy to the Apostles. Mk. says doosi^c duoip 
 iiTTou. Admission into two companies is artificial. Mk's 
 obvious meaning is they did not stop to tell every body 
 they met. 
 
 §163. Mari/ Magdalene summons Peter and Jo) ai. While 
 the women are with the angels, Mary Mag. has gone to 
 call John and Peter. There is a significance in their 
 being together and Mary's going to them. " Theyounger 
 reaches the tomb first " says Harte. Peter impidske is the 
 first to rush in.- There they find the linen clothes lying. 
 Kot carried away at if the body had been stolen, or 
 as if the death of Christ were an imposition and he had 
 escaped : but neatly folded, and laid away, indicative of 
 tranquillity. John " saw and believed " — what ? that 
 the tomb was empty ? No! but in the full significance 
 of the scene. Lk. makes Peter stoop. John very 
 vividly describes himself as stooping and looking in. 
 
 §164. Jes^is appears to 3Iary Macjdedene. Mary is con- 
 spicuous as of a most loving spirit. She is standing 
 weeping — and does not share the faith of John — and a 
 man appears. She does not at once recognize him. This 
 indicates a change in external appearance or Mary would 
 have known him. It also confirms the reality of the 
 resurrection. If it were a mere subjective vision, she 
 would have thouficht it to be Christ at first. This and 
 
197 
 
 the walk to Ernmaus are fatal to the visionary theory. 
 Notice the peculiar inconsistence of Strauss. He says 
 " A myth originating in Gal. some time after Christ's 
 death. It grew out of a growing reverence for Christ 
 and a study of Messianic prophecies." But how does it 
 suit Br. Strauss to account for Mary's seeing Christ 
 here? Her idea cannot be accounted for on this theory, 
 for. she had no thought of the resurrection and Strauss 
 says Christ had never predicted it ! 
 
 "Touch me not." The rebuke is to Mary's mistake. 
 She supposed that ordinary intercourse was to be re- 
 newed. Jesus warns her that it is not to be so. He 
 virtually says, "No longer is sense, but faith, to be the 
 mode of communion." iSo when he said to the eleven and 
 Thomas, " Handle me," there is no inconsistency, 
 as then he wished to convince them of his' bodily identity. 
 Mary is here already convinced of that. 
 
 §162. Jesus meets the women. Mt. says Jesus met the 
 women and gave them the message; how can we recon- 
 cile that with this? Some argue that they are the same 
 occurrence. But it is better to regard them as different. 
 Three Evangelists distinctly state that the Apostles did 
 not believe the report of the women. This is natural. 
 It doubtless sounded strange to them that the women 
 alone saw what Peter and John did not see. They were 
 in a state of fear and excitement. 
 
 §165. The Report of the Watch. Reported by Mt. only 
 as he alone gave the account of its being set. The oifer 
 of bribes to the soldiers. The story is incredible on the 
 face of it. It was impossible for the disciples to steal the 
 body. Grotius collects evidence of its currency among 
 the Jews in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, and says it was 
 still believed by them ! Strauss objects : " Is it likely 
 that the whole Sanhedrim at a regular meeting would 
 unite in giving official sanction to a lie ?" Ebrard 
 replies: "Is it likely that the whole Sanhedrim at a regular 
 meeting would unite in a judicial murder? — The mar- 
 vel is what pious, conscientious men the San. become in 
 the hands of Dr. Strauss. The whole of Christendom, a 
 multitude of humble, quiet men, may have devised and 
 adhered tenaciously to a bare-faced lie ; but the murder- 
 ers of Jesus were incapable of persuading these soldiers 
 
198 
 
 to propagate a trilling untruth, which their own conduct 
 had rendered necessary!" The priests believed the res- 
 urrection, as they knew of the empty tomb, not with a 
 full faith, but as they had ah-eady witnessed many mira- 
 cles. Their consciences were uneasy. The Apostles do 
 not refer to this because they had better proofs, and this 
 lie was not current in the places to v;hich they were 
 sent. Why not mentioned in Acts 4? Because the 
 Sanhedrim did not deny the resurrection in their earlier 
 persecutions. 
 
 §166. Jesus seen of Peter. The'i^m-go to Emmaiis. The 
 third appearance, and first to an Apostle, was to Peter 
 after the two went to Emmaus : Lk. 24: 34; I. Cor. 
 15:5. An honor to Peter considering his denial, and 
 intended as a help to his repentance. The walk to 
 Emmaus shows the feeling of the disciples. The mis- 
 take of these men and tlieir non-recognition are incom- 
 patible with the visionary theory. Who were the two ? 
 Wies., &c. understand Cleopas to be Alphaeus (Mt. 10:3), 
 and the other, the Apostle James his son. This is not 
 probable. Lightfoot thinks the second person was Peter. 
 Some, that he was Luke. Discrepancy: Mk. says their 
 report is not believed ; Lk. that the eleven anticipated 
 them with " The Lord is risen indeed and hath appeared 
 unto Simon." Therefore they did believe. The ques- 
 tion of Harmony is interesting, as on it turns the point, 
 whether the Apostles believed at all on testimony, or 
 remained unbelieving till they saw for themselves. The 
 margin of th^ E. V. "makes Mk.'s statement a question, 
 which has little foundation. Some say they believed 
 Peter, but could not believe the two from Emmaus, as 
 it was a seeming contradiction that Christ should be seen 
 by both. If this is a true solution it remains that all but 
 Peter (and Thomas) believed upon testimony. The two 
 going to Emmaus betray a dim idea that the third day 
 should bring some change and yet it was almost ended. 
 The breaking of bread probably not Lord's Supper. 
 The instructions of Jesus to the two agree with Lk's re- 
 port of the words of the angels. 
 
 §167. Jesus appears to the Ajmstles. Thomas absent. 
 Sunday evening. Most important and perhaps most de- 
 cisive for then were their doubts finally overcome, and 
 
199 
 
 they are appointed witnesses t'oi- the future. Given by 
 Mk., Lk., John, Paul, Mk. and Lk. close their narra- 
 tive here, as the last essential thing. Mk. introduces a 
 third appearance ; Lk. shows his bodil}' presence, — the 
 nature of his resurrection, body and the scars of his 
 crucifixion. The question now was not the fact of his 
 resurrection but the reality and identity of his body. 
 They were at their evening nietd, perhaps in the room 
 where they kept the passover. Coming through closed 
 doors — Lutherans say it shows the ubiquity of Christ's 
 person. The point of the visit was ti) show that he was 
 not a spirit. He declares his body to be "■ flesh and 
 bones." Handling him was an important evidence. (1 
 John 1 : 1). Lk. adds a crowning evidence in Christ's 
 eating. It is commonly accepted that it was not for 
 nourishment, but as evidence of his material body. 
 The identity of his body could not be better proved. 
 
 The Apostolic Commission is now given, which shows 
 the spiritual import of the resurrection. It was because 
 they were personally convinced that they are made wit- 
 nesses. Paul (1 Cor. 15: 5) speaks of Twelve. Syn. 
 give eleven. Clear and important that other Christians 
 were present as ixa&rjTac. The two from Emmaus were 
 plainly present. Thus the powers here conferred were not 
 conlined to apostles alone. Was the commission given 
 to-night? Mk. and Lk. add it here as the last thing. 
 Van Oos. puts it after v. 44. John leaves no doubt that 
 the commission was given here. So it was twice given. 
 The commission to witness, preach and administer dis- 
 cipline was based on the gift of the Holy Ghost as 
 authority. John says -he breathed on them, and saith 
 " Receive ye the Holy Ghost." This was in consequence 
 of the resurrection. It was not however plenary, but 
 partial and preparatory, corresponding to their wants till 
 Pentecost. There was need of it ; they were passing 
 through a critical period. A transition from doubt to 
 faith. They had still to gather and guide the body of 
 disciples till Pentecost. (IST. B. The distinction between 
 Tcveofxa dycov here and to nvebjia ajtov in Acts is untenable). 
 Strauss says the command to tai-ry at Jerus. (in Lk.) con- 
 tradicts the command to go to Gal. Van Oos. and Alf. 
 say this command was not given till after the return from 
 
200 
 
 Gal. Bnt there is no inconsistency. One qualifies the 
 other. The " tarry " qualifies the Commission. Make 
 Jerus. your headquarters, and do not go to preach till 
 after Pentecost. 
 
 §168. Jesus appears to the Twelve. Thomas present. 
 Time 2d Sabbath. John alone records it. 1. IIovv came 
 the apostles still in Jerusalem ? a. They would not travel 
 during the feast, which lasted till Friday, b. Some think 
 unbelief kept them. Thomas and others still doubted. 
 c. Others suppose the command to go was accompanied 
 by an intimation as to when and how. 2. Why together 
 on the first day of the week ? To commemorate the res- 
 urrection ? Certainly it is the beginning of the Christ- 
 ian Sabbath. They meet Christ on these days only. The 
 force of their example is sanctioned by Christ. What 
 was Thomas's reception ? Jesus commends Thomas for 
 faith, but shows there is a higher faith based on spiritual 
 evidences and shows the danger of subjecting faith to 
 sense or reason. Thomas is convinced before putting his 
 test to practice, and joyfully believes. 
 
 An important point: that the claim of Divinity is 
 variously made elsewhere, but here onlj- in the Gospels 
 is ^£oc applied to Christ by the disciples or accepted by 
 him. The Gospel of John begins: "The word was 
 God " and closes with " My Lord and My God !" 
 
 §169. Jesus appears to seven Apostles on the sea of 
 Tiberias. By most harmonists put before Mt.'s narrative 
 because of Jna 21 : 14. The charge of Meyer that Paul's 
 statement (I. Cor. 15 : 5-7), cannot be reconciled is not 
 sustained. One explanation is that Paul includes under 
 the expression "seen of the twelve," the three of John; 
 or it may be that Paul summarizes. The first appear- 
 ance would be at the grave, then at Jerus. in vicinity of 
 the tomb. But it must not be confined to Jerus. as the 
 witness is to extend to hundreds of believers in Gal. It 
 is also to show the bodily relations of Jesus ; he was 
 superhuman as to extension. Again, by this he corrects 
 the mistaken idea of the disciples, that the new Dispen- 
 sation should be also a Theocracy in Jerus. Comp. Acts 
 1. Disciples had gone to Gal. and returned to their 
 daily occupation. Early in the morning Christ appears 
 on the shore and repeats the miracle that had called them 
 
201 
 
 at first — thus reinstating them. A promise of great suc- 
 cess in their work is seen in the number of fishes taken. 
 There is no evidence that the fire and the bread were 
 miraculous. They were significant of rest after toil. The 
 results of toil give joy. Peter is especially reinstated. 
 The three-fold question refers to the denials: "Simon, 
 Son of Jonas!" alludes to his original nature, reminding 
 him of his unrenewed state. Notice the comparison 
 " more than these " based on " though all should forsake 
 thee, yet will not I." Peter's humility, appears in his 
 not using the comparison. Peter asserts but the hum- 
 bler personal love, (pdEco ; Jesus used the higher, ayoKoxo. 
 but at last descends to use even ipcXeco. Notice also [a) 
 lambs, [b) sheep, {c) little sheep. Also notiiatvziv and 
 ^oaxecv. The martyrdom of Peter is added to show his 
 confidence in Peter's constancy. When this book was 
 written Peter had been long dead and there is a reference 
 to John's life and exemption from martyrdom. Upon 
 Jno. 21 : 24 is based a strong. argument for the author- 
 ship of the book. 
 
 §170. Jesus meets the Apostles and 500 on a ynount in Gal. 
 Paul, I. Cor. 15: 6. This is the same as Mt.'s eleven. 
 It involves the question whether the commission was 
 given to the whole church or not. Not so, unless others 
 besides the eleven were present. The chief evidence is 
 from Mt. himself: 1. Why appoint a meeting on a 
 mount in Gal. for eleven only ? 2. Mt. says some w^or- 
 shipped but some doubted like Thomas. 3. Mt. 28 : 7 
 says ^' there shall ye see him." in the message to the 
 women. 4. There is reason why Mt. should emphasize 
 the eleven, as to him the ecclesiastical commission was 
 the prominent thing. ]^otice, they went where they were 
 commanded, hence had an interesting meeting. A for- 
 tuitous gathering is inconceivable. A general summons 
 was necessary. The 21st of John gives us the probable 
 occasion of the command. Compare the second or great 
 commission in Mt. with John. 1. This (Mt.'s) makes no 
 mention of suffering or of the reality of his resurrection 
 body. 2. It is fuller than the previous one. 3. Sets 
 forth the completed authority of Christ as its basis. In 
 Acts we have only the story of this work. This Com- 
 mission is the basis of the Christian sacrament of Bap- 
 tism. 
 
202 
 
 §171. Our Lord is seen of James, then of all the Apostles. 
 Which James? More likely James of Jerus. than the 
 son of Zebeclee, but it cannot be determined. Luke in 
 Acts implies manifestations which are not recorded. 
 Several facts are gathered from Acts 1, e. g.that Christ's 
 mother and brethren accompanied him to Gal. Addi- 
 tional evidences of continued false expectations on part 
 of the Apostles. Again they are to tarry in Jerus. till 
 they be " baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days 
 hence." Also the order of the conversion of the world 
 is given : "Tn Jerus. and in all Judea, and in Samaria 
 and even to the uttermost parts of the earth." From 
 the climactic advance in the proofs of the resurrection, 
 we find a final argument against the subjective visionary 
 theory. No such thing could have arisen from merely 
 accidental visions to different persons. 
 
 §172. The Ascension. At the end of the 40 days our 
 Lord once more appears. It is at Jerus. He ascends in 
 sight of the disciples. This is the proper conclusion of 
 the record. The Ascension is necessarily associated with 
 the resurrection for there could be no more death to 
 Christ. He must ascend, and in presence of the dis- 
 ciples. They had seen him appear and disappear for 40 
 days. If this then was no more formal than those, they 
 would be continually looking for him to return. Even 
 as it was they expected him ^o come again in their own 
 day. Also gives a definiteness and location to our ideas 
 of a risen Lord and a Christian heaven. We cannot now 
 enter into the difficulties suggested by the Lutherans and 
 others. Concerning the sacraments — local limitation, 
 &c., can only touch on critical objections. Place of the 
 Ascension : An apparent contradiction : Bethany (Lk.), 
 Mount of Olives (Acts). But they are so near to each 
 other that there is no real difficulty. Was it visible to 
 others than disciples? Hard to conceive that it was. 
 John and Mt. don't mention the ascension at all. Only 
 Mk. and Lk. tell of it, and Tisch, rejects aveipeptro from 
 Lk. Then Acts is our only authority for a visible ascen- 
 sion. But Tisch. is not followed by most critics. At 
 any rate, it is in Acts which is by Lk. Mk. and Lk. had 
 a special object in recording it. Both show Christ as the 
 Savior of the world and look to the future history of the 
 
203 
 
 church. And though Mt. and John omit it, yet they 
 refer to it in the Gospel. The going away is not the 
 iinal point, for he is to come again. 
 
 Mk. seems to connect the ascension immediately with 
 the first interview with the eleven on the resurrection 
 Sunday. Lk. seems to imply the same thing. It is after . 
 the report of the two from Emmaus. (Though in Acts 
 it is " after 40 days)." Upon this is based the theory of 
 repeated ascensions. Baur says Evangelists teach that 
 Christ's abode after the resurrection was in heaven. So 
 some Harmonists. The sceptics say there were two tra- 
 ditions of his Ascension. One on the first Sunday— and 
 another (Galilean) after an interval of 40 days. But 
 notice, the difliculty cannot be so great, or Lk. is at dis- 
 cord with himself He records it in both forms ; and a 
 sufficient explanation is found in the-intention of the two 
 passages. The mode of ascension was exquisitely ap- 
 propriate. His speaking with them — blessing them, and 
 then rising from them till a cloud enfolds him, concealing 
 him from'their sight. The words of the angels, also, to 
 the gazing disciples sanction the church's attitude of ex- 
 pectationT And he said that true waiting is to work as 
 well as to wait. 
 

 Date Due 
 
 
 I1S4 %. 
 
 
 
 
 F 8- ud 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ! 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 f.