Light shining out of darkness : the fidelity of the four evangelists evinced by their apparent imperfections ..
%. i:^ 5:^ o^ s^ ^£^ 5^ ^2^ (IK THK PRINCETON, N. J. i» o >r ^'V-Ji* X o :v <j i«- SAMUEL AONEW, OF P II I I. A D F. I. P H I A . PA. U Case, Division '^f^'-^f' Section ■«' ''^ =^'^*-''|~r «^----^^:=r■,cV.^^»-T ^:,^-i-i^V - -,^=^ -'-9 *»":' Na LIGHT SHINING OUT OF DARKNESS. THIi FIDELITY OK THE FOUR EVANGELISTS KVINCKI) HY THKIR AI'PARKNT IMTPJRFECTIONS. THE RKV. ALFRED "UOBEllTS, M. A., LATK OF TRINITY COLI.EGK, OXFORD. LONDON. JAMES NlSnET AND CO., HEKNEKS STREET. .MDCCCXXXIX. T. C. JOHNS, Ked I ion Court, Kket ;-lrett. P R E F A C E. The following- work orig-inated in a few loose papers, upon some peculiarities in the Gospel Narratives, which occasionally appeared in the pages of "The Christian Observer." It has no pretensions to disclose any new branch of Internal Evidence ; but rather to carry into fuller detail, and to hold forth in more varied lights, one which has hitherto (as it appears to me) been slightly and generally treated. The Author does not undertake to address him- self directly to any of those who march under the banners of unbelief — to the Atheist, who anxious to throw off the re- IV PREFACE. straint of religion altogether, would secretly undermine its foundations — to the Deist, who instead of receiving his religion from above, and allowing his Maker to be the Expounder of His own AYill, is deter- mined to fabricate a creed for himself — to the Neologist, who professedly embraces Revelation, but will cut and shape it in accordance to his specu- lative fancy ; he would rather wish to devote his labours to the service of the serious and sober inquirer into Truth. If he shall be enabled to soften one doubt of a candid mind ; to render one passage of the Word of God more clear, more interesting, or more consolatory to the weakest Christian ; or to throw the faintest light upon one link of the mighty, but sometimes "dimly seen" chain of Christian Evidences, he will consider that his en- deavours, however imperfect, have not PREFACE. T been altogether in vain. But whatever may be his doubts as to the success of his work, he has none of the ultimate triumi^h of that Cause to which it is designed to be a slender contribution — a Cause, which, when all the works and reasonings of man shall have passed away, can never fail, for it is founded upon a rock — ' the Rock of Ages.* An indifferent state of health and spirits, which can offer no apology for any unsoundness in the writer's principles, or even incorrectness in his arguments, may yet, he trusts, form some extenuation of those superficial inaccuracies, and that want of clear arrangement which may be too often apparent. Upon the whole he would wish, humbly, yet tranquilly, to commit this his first publication, to the Divine blessing, and the deliberate judg- ment of the Church. C O N T E N T S. Page Introduction j, CHAPTER I. Upon the Obscurities in the Narrative parts of the Tour r;ospcls ........ 13 CHAPTER n. Instances of particularity and minuteness of detail in the Evangelists 31. CHAPTER III. Improbable remarks or Incidents .... 38 CHAPTER IV. Objections or difficulties introduced in the History itself 49 CHAPTER V. Variations and resemblances between the Works of the several Evangelists ... . . .82 CHAPTER VI. Peculiar characteristics of our Eord's conduct and lan- guage, r,s rcpretenled ill (lifferent Gospels loy via CONTENTS. CHAPTER VII. Upon the character and behaviour of Pontius Pilate, as described in the Gospels . . . . .147 CHAPTER VIII. The Kvangelists contrasted with Writers of Romance — their simplicity and negligence . . 1G7 CHAPTER IX. Conclusion 191 INTRODUCTION. There have been many, in every age of the World, who have either openly maintained, or at least secretly imagined, that a single unquestion- able miracle, wrought before their eyes in proof of Revelation, would at once chase away from their minds every cloud of doubt and uncertainty. The futility of this very plausible notion has been often exposed. It is contradicted by the testi- mony of our own consciences when rightly and fairly consulted ; for true self-knowledge must convince us that the evil plant of unbelief springs from a deeper root than simple incredulity. — But let the supposition be made that this Sign or ' Manifestation' from Heaven Avere actually grant- ed— that every individual had been enlightened by a direct and conspicuous Revelation — are we justified in supposing that the tongue of blasphemy would be for ever silenced — that the webs of sophistry would be scattered to the winds — that the hosts of infidelity would never again assault our Zion ? This we are by no means entitled to expect : it is far more likely that such assaults, instead of losing any portion of their force or malignity, would only assume a new direction. We should then be reminded that human senses are fallible, that imagination is ever liable to mislead the judgment, that our powers of observa- tion are limited, and our memory deceitful ; or perhaps recourse would be had to some theory, which (like those of Pyrrho and Bishop Berkeley) might throw into doubt the reality of our percep- tions. While Mankind continue morally consti- tuted as they are at present, the spirit of unbelief will, under every degree of light, continue to operate — its partizans will always find new weapons ready made to their hands — new artifices prepared for every emergency — and they will employ these with vigour and perseverance, though they should live amidst the blaze of open miracles. Now if the proof of Christianity entirely de- pended upon direct 'Manifestations' of divine Power, the slightest doubt with which infidels could shake our belief in their certainty, would disturb the whole fabric. We may hence learn the advantage which arises from the various and complex nature of the evidences which we actually possess. If an infidel could explain away the fulfilment of Prophecy, the onus would still devolve upon him of disproving the miracles : If he could fix a stigma also upon these, there would still be undeniable phenomena of which a satis- factory account must be given, before the adver- sary could claim his triumph. Let us represent to ourselves a studious man, born and brought up in some distant country, without the knowledge that such a Religion as the Christian existed, suppose this man, sitting down with the works of the four Evangelists spread before him : He might certainly lose much by the absence of those various grounds of conviction which we enjoy — nevertheless, with no other data than these volumes, he might be fully competent to decide this great question — whether these works were the fruit of forgery and fiction, or worthy to be looked upon as the productions of true men. ■Internal Evidence has some certain advan- tages peculiar to itself. It stands independently upon its own basis. It shines with an unborrowed light. It has also a tendency continually to increase in power and lustre. The proofs from External Evidence are of a more stationary cha- racter; if they do not rather lose than acquire strength by the flux of time. It is true that Prophecy is very gradually receiving accessions, according to the march of events — but internal b2 proofs, without waiting for this development, are continually spreading themselves into new rami- fications, and disclosing new illustrations in pro- portion to the attention bestowed upon them. In this respect the study of the Word of God may be compared to that of His Works in the visible cre- ation : considerable knowledge of human nature and exercised literary habits are requisite to detect it ; yet in proportion as it is elaborated by patient inquiry, it becomes more and more satisfactory to the Christian student. It is then found to present a complex tissue of circumstances, the harmonious arrangement of which lies far beyond the reach of accident, imposture, or fiction. The work of Soame Jenyns affords a clear and general, though perhaps somewhat cursory and superficial view of the Internal Evidences of our Faith, presenting only those strong and prominent features in the character and conduct of the Apostles, which distinguish them from impostors or enthusiasts. The Horce Paulhice of Paley traces farther this branch of the Christian Evi- dence : Seizing one of those peculiar attributes of Truth, which bears the least marks of study and contrivance, — namely ' Undesigned Coinci- dences,' and pursuing with careful steps these broken and devious tracks through the Acts of the Apostles, and the Epistles of St. Paul, this writer has brought a valuable accession to the armoury of the Christian student, llie Rev. J. Blunt has, in our own day, applied the same argument to the four Gospels, and to other parts of the Sacred volume. Both have made it their study to draw forth into light the latent harmonies of the Word of God — not with a neological design of bringing every mystery or obscurity of Scripture to the test of unaided Reason, but in order to deduce from its facts and sentiments, as they stand, such inferences as may be satisfactory to the candidly sceptical — interesting and consolatory to the Christian mind. Such purposes as the above, especially the last, the author of the present Treatise would wish to have been constantly present to his thoughts. The particular path of enquiry he has chosen may appear from the following outline. Many infidel and sceptical writers have laboured to hold forth the narrative books of Scripture to the finger of scorn, as loose unfinished productions, replete with error and inconsistency. The few charges of the latter kind which wear the least colouring of probability, have been often and elaborately dis- cussed : my present concern is with those lesser irregularities and negligences, those omissions and seeming improbabilities, which have often afforded a false triumph to the enemy, and an equally false alarm to the timid believer. It shall be my endeavour to show in some detail, that these apparent defects, instead of weakening the basis of our Faith, have a tendency, when fairly ex- amined, to add largely to the strength of its collateral Evidence. In whatever degree upon a rigid investigation, our Gospels may appear de- ficient in polish, in order, and in symmetry, they will be found proportionably to rise above the suspicion of forgery or fiction. An impostor would find few experiments more dangerous than, for the sake of giving an artless air to his history, to adopt a course which would lay him open to the cavils of the critic and objector — to venture upon negligencies chiefly obvious to those ignorant or su- perficial readers who must always be most numerous. But there are also reasons which must have made such a procedure peculiarly hazardous to men in the situation of the four Evangelists. They were, in the first place, far from possess- ing cultivated minds ; two, at least, of their number, could originally have known no lan- guage but that of Judea. Further, if we suppose them to have written in the first century, they must have been wanderers and almost outcasts upon the face of the earth, " Without any certain dwelling-place," every where strangers, and living always in the midst of enemies, circumstances most unfavourable to the execution of any literary task. The character and prepossessions of the people whom they addressed, should also be con- sidered. They had three classes to deal with. — 1st. The Gentiles, whether Greeks or Romans, who disliked every thing Jewish, — despised every thing which brought no incense to hu- man reason and science, and were cordially opposed to all tenets which could be suspected of interfering with the established worship of the state; indeed their hostility to a religion which sought out and maintained the truth, while it would tolerate no error, was apparent in the train of bloody persecutions which soon succeeded the publication of the Gospel. — 2nd. They had to en- counter the Jews, whose most inveterate preju- dices and dearly-cherished hopes, Christianity appeared to dissipate — who considered the preach- ing and writing of the Apostles as immediately aimed against themselves — who were also best acquainted with the origin and history of the first believers — while they were most strenuously disposed to contradict, to silence, or, if possible, utterly to destroy them. 3rd. They addressed the Christians, many of whom were actual agents in the scenes which these histories describe, or perfectly well acquainted with them, and others would carefully compare the writings of their teachers with the verbal testimony they produced. It would therefore appear important that these narratives should contain nothing likely to stagger the faith of these young converts. The subject also of the evangelical memoirs was calculated to increase the embarrassment of the writers. This arose partly from the claim therein advanced to the power of working miracles, of whose reality and divine origin their enemies would naturally require the fullest proof, especially as the Apostles asserted the continuance of these supernatural gifts ; partly from the mean and des- pised birth, circumstances, and fate of Him whom they proclaimed as the anointed Prince and Prophet of the Jews, the " Desire of all nations ;" partly from the humiliating nature of the doctrines they taught. They promulged tenets, not only pecu- liarly unpalatable to the Jew and the Gentile, but directly opposed to the strong and native current of human prejudice and passion. What could be more unwelcome than the mediation of a Redeemer to those who thought that their out- ward privileges, their profession, or their works, had power to save them? What could appear more futile than the forgiveness of sin to those who had no anxious sense of its guilt and its danger ? or what more mortifying than the ne- cessity of a Divine renewal and sanctification, to them who thought they had already the will and power to perform good and even meritorious actions. The doctrines they preached were in- deed of such a nature that none but the humble. the teachable, and the simple-minded, could cor- dially embrace them. The circumstances we have stated would strongly tend to aggravate the difficulty of a for- gery on the part of the Evangelists — they must render it incomparably more arduous for its con- trivers to maintain an air of veracity — to conciliate, or to interest their readers. The same conside- rations also afford us peculiar opportunities of investigating the true character and intentions of these authors. Uneducated persons usually retain more strongly than others their original propensities — they are more undisguised in dis- playing them — and situations of difficulty, toil, and danger, naturally throw out into strong relief these native pecuharities. Thus situated, with what views and feelings might our historians be expected to enter upon the undertaking of writing their master's life — a project, upon the success of which they must be prepared to stake the safety of their whole cause. On the supposition that they were not writers of truth and honesty, only two hypotheses appear to present themselves to our notice: either that having involved them- selves in the Christian system, they thought thoy might serve its cause by imposing upon mankind a suppositious history; or that they judged that a historical romance grounded upon the origin of their faith, might prove interesting and per- b3 10 haps edifying to their Fellow Christians. In a word, their memoirs, if not true histories, must be regarded either as deliberate forgeries, or as avowedly tales of wonder founded upon truth. In either of these supposed cases, * we are compelled to assume that they built upon a certain foun- dation of fact. That Jesus Christ really existed — that He was put to death under Tiberius — that He was understood to work many miracles which were never contradicted — that His followers ra- pidly multiplied in every part of the Roman empire, in defiance of the sharpest persecutions, these are facts fully confirmed by heathen and Jewish authorities. It is impossible to deny them without undermining the pillars of all historical truth. Taking for granted then these, and a few other collateral facts, how should we con- ceive that the projectors of a fabrication, under the circumstances of difficulty I have described, would, in the two cases above supposed, be likely to proceed ? And first, we may consider the case of a deliberate forgery. They would make it then their careful aim to exclude from their history, — 1. Obscurities, especially in the narrative parts. 2. Needless particularity. 3. Improbable remarks or incidents. 4. (And chiefly) The introduction of unneces- sary difficulties and objections. 5. Disagreement w ith other histories. 6. Close resemblance to other histories. 7. Omissions of any important links in the nar- rative. Nearly the same objects would be kept in view by a mere romancer or fabulist, though he would certainly prosecute them with less care and circum- spection. His principal aim would be to astonish, interest and amuse — perhaps also to edify his readers. He would be very unlikely to indulge himself in minute, tedious, or superfluous remarks, or in needless repetitions, nor would he be willing to lose an advantage by the omission of any interest- ing circumstance. The object of the following pages shall be to ascertain whether the Evangelists appear, upon a minute inspection of their writings, to have been actuated by any such motives as the above, or whether, on the other hand, their histories 12 evince an absolute disregard of these precautions. There is also another test of truth and integrity, which I shall endeavour constantly to keep in view : although both an impostor and a romance-writer might study an appearance of truth, and artfully contrive to conceal art, yet is there a certain sim- plicity, equally indescribable and inimitable, which lies beyond the reach of fiction ; there is a certain easy and familiar style, which nothing but close and daily acquaintance with the objects de- scribed, can be expected to impart. This when complete and consistent, no study or invention can command — it is the genuine unaffected cha- racteristic of an actor in the scene which he pourtrays. I shall therefore endeavour to as- certain how far these various marks of truth are stamped upon the writings of St. Matthew and his companions — whether, in a word, the lesser peculiarities of their narrative^ are such as might reasonably be looked for in plain-dealing per- sons, surrounded by their advantages, their dif- ficulties, and their trials. CHAPTER I. UPON THE OBSCURITIES IN THE NARRATIVE PARTS OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. In conformity with the outline which has been laid before my readers, I now proceed to con- sider some of those occasional obscurities which are scattered through the writings of the four Evangelists. In the author of a forgery, we should certainly expect great artfulness, and the utmost caution. He must be aware that a want of perspicuity and fulness, even in the slightest circumstances, might render his narrative not only disagreeable, but incoherent, and therefore liable to suspicion. He could have no suffi- cient motive to aim at obscurity, but would rather affect a lucid style. If he sometimes chose for his model the abrupt and mysterious language of prophetic inspiration — in narrative, at least, he would make perspicuity his object. At the same time, it is highly probable that a 14 false history, though wonderfully clear, smooth, and consistent on the surface, would, upon mi- nute inspection, betray latent defects and in- congruities. On the other hand, a true historian would naturally be lucid and coherent in the general course of his narrative. But, having truth principally in view, and not, like the former writer, always anticipating the effect of that which proceeded from his pen, he might be expected to disregard points of lesser in- terest, especially where he felt engrossed by some more important matter ; or where he was conscious of perfect familiarity with his subject, and might expect his readers to view it in the same light. This would be likely to apply still more strongly to a person of inferior or narrow education, in whose works we should expect several things to be left un- explained, or to be glanced at in a slight and cursory manner. 2. Now it must, I think, be sufficiently evi- dent, that the most material events in the Evangelical History, our Lord's birth ; the re- surrection of Lazarus ; the cure of the man born blind ;> the trial, crucifixion, and ascension of Christ ; are narrated in a style strikingly perspicuous and simple. For the most part, there is nothing defective, nothing superfluousj and the whole tenor of the narrative is so 15 lucid, so natural, and so vivid, as strikingly to exemplify that figure called by Aristotle, tvtpyua,* by which we be come in a manner, witnesses, or even actors in the transaction de- scribed. Nevertheless scattered through these histories are certain remarks and allusions, which can be explained only by comparison with parallel passages ; in some cases, by collation with other books, or lastly, by mere conjecture. These appear to me to add to the artless character of the whole narrative. 3. Sometimes this obscurity arises from a cer- tain vagueness of expression; as in Luke i. 39, where the Virgin Mary is said to go into the hill country, "into a city of Juda." Whether Hebron be here intended, (as Lightfoot, Whit- by, and Doddridge suppose) or some other city, commonly known by that term ; or whether the phrase be wholly indefinite, M^e cannot pro- nounce ; but a writer studious of accuracy, would probably have named some particular place. 4. Sometimes we find an omission, which is supplied, as it were accidentally, after some interval. Thus, John i. 26, our Lord's fore- runner, when asked by the priests why he bap- tized, answered, " I baptize with water ;" and * See Do JRhct. 1. iii. c. II. 16 then proceeds to describe One who was vastly his superior. Here we should naturally ex- pect to hear that this Personage would do something greater than 'baptizing with water;' but the Evangelist stops short, and passes on to the appearance of Christ, with John's pub- lic testimony to his character. In v. 31, how- ever, he returns to the subject of ' baptizing with water f and, after mentioning the remark- able circumstances of our Saviour's Baptism, at last tells us (v. 33) " the same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." * Here is an important fact darkly alluded to, then sus- pended for several verses ; and again resumed. Hence a partial obscurity arises, which a nearer view indeed dispels, but which a deceiver would be anxious entirely to obviate. 4. In several instances the difficulty is to be traced to the exclusion of some slight circum- stance. When our Saviour came down from the Mount, after His transfiguration. He found His disciples, amid a great multitude, disput- ing with the Scribes. The Evangelist then says, Mark ix. 15, "all the people when they beheld Him were greatly amazed, f and run- * In St. Matthew iii. 1 1 , the two baptisms are imme- diately connected. t EKGaj-tjitofiai — expavcsco, obstupesco, attonitus sum Schleusncr. 17 ning to Him, saluted Him." Had they wit- nessed the glory of Christ on the Mount, this amazement would have appeared highly natural ; but why should His mere return so greatly astonish them, especially when their at- tention was occupied by the very extraordinary case of the demoniac who was brought to be healed ? Many commentators suppose that the face of our Lord retained a supernatural bright- ness upon it, like that which Moses displayed on his descent from Sinai, but this is merely a supposition. St. Mark supplies not the slight- est hint for our direction. Here is an omis- sion of one circumstance, which would at once have explained the whole. 5. A similar remark may be made upon the behaviour of our Lord's disciples on another occasion, Mark x. 32, " And they were in the way, going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus went before them ; * and they were amazed, and, as they followed, they were afraid." They had on several previous occasions gone up to Jerusa- lem, without expressing any such surprise or apprehension. Nothing is mentioned in the former part of the chapter, which would ap- pear to justify these feelings. On the con- trary, Christ had just before, v. 29, 30, held * See Luke xix. 28. 18 out to His disciples the prospect of a gra- cious remuneration for the sacrifices they had endured for His sake. If however we refer back to ch. ix. v. 30 — 1, we find our Saviour telling them, " The Son of Man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill Him, and after that He is killed, He shall rise the third day." These words, it is said, v. 32, the disciples " understood not, and were afraid to ask Him;" and, in the parallel passage. Matt. xvii. 23, we read they " were exceed- ing sorry." The language of our Lord was so plain, that they could not but comprehend its direct meaning. The point they were unable to understand, was doubtless how the Messiah, who, they thought, would speedily enter into His glory, could possibly die and suffer. The prediction they now heard greatly disappointed them, and appears to have dwelt upon their minds ; and hence their astonishment at learn- ing, that their Master, with these impressions, should still resolve to visit Jerusalem, the centre of danger; and should even go before them, as if eager to cast HimseK into the midst of the fire.* These considerations may to us, who soberly examine one Scripture by the light of another, well account for the * See also John xi. 7, 8. 19 amazement and fear which now seized upon our Lord's followers ; but to careless or ordi- nary readers, they would be unlikely to oc- cur : the passage would leave an uncertain impression on their minds — ^just that impression which a subtle deceiver would be assiduous to prevent. 6. Although we have seen that the disciples were often perplexed and disheartened by our Saviour's announcement of His death and passion, the idea did not long dwell upon their minds — they still strove to shut their eyes upon a suffer- ing, and to cling to the image of a triumphant Messiah. They might have expected that their Lord's death was merely a parable or figure of speech — that legions of angels would appear to rescue Him from the fate he anticipated: or at least, that He would at some period, notwith- standing, " restore again the kingdom to Israel." Thus Luke xix. IL, we find Jesus speaking a parable, " because He was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear." Now if we revert to chapter xviii. 31 — 33, it would appear that there was little in their Lord's conversation at this juncture, to encourage, but rather much to dispel their carnal hopes. There might however be some circumstances by which these hopes were sustained: 1. Our Lord's expression to Zaccheus 20 immediately before, " This day is salvation come to this house," ver. 9. 2. The projected pubhc entry of Christ into Jerusalem, which soon fol- lowed, and for which the disciples seemed to be prepared. 3. His mention of ' rising again' after His sufferings, however this was understood by His hearers. 4. Nor was it long before that the Pharisees had asked when the kingdom of God should come, and that Christ had, in reply, uttered a very remarkable prophecy of His second advent. In Luke xviii. 7,16,24, we may find intimations by which the same ideas may have been kept floating in the minds of the disciples. All this may have prepared them to expect that this eventful journey to Jerusalem, might at length, usher in the glory of the latter days. They appear however to have been, at this period, in a state of great uncer- tainty, 'carried about by every wind of doctrine.' now disturbed at the prospect of coming dangers, — now elated by bright but unwarrantable hopes — a state of feeling, which appears very naturally from disjointed remarks in the history, but no at- tempt is made to reconcile any seeming anomalies. 7. In Matt. xvi. 1 — 4. the Pharisees are repre- sented as very urgent with Jesus, to " shew them a sign from heaven." In reply to this demand, He reminds them that the present dispensation disclosed signs the most convincing, to every mind which was not blinded by the film of prejudice — 21 and added that no sign should be given them, but " the sign of the prophet Jonas." These words must naturally have appeared an enigma to those who had heard no allusion to the subject before, and so must they a})pear an enigma to any cursory reader of the Bible. It is true those who would take the trouble to turn back to Matt. xii. 39, 40, might find that this sign related to a remarkable event which was to happen to Christ ; " for, as Jonas," he declared, " was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth :" but even these words must before the resurrection have appeared mysterious. The difficulty here is indeed very far from inexplicable, but it requires some investigation ; and this a politic writer would be anxious to spare his readers. 8. Luke xxii. 47. A person who had read no other gospel than this, might be startled to find Judas drawing nigh to kiss his Master, at the moment when he was directing a hostile attack upon His person. It might have appeared suffi- cient, had he simply pointed him out to the multitude. Even our Saviour himself is repre- sented as appearing surprised at the proceeding. Nevertheless we should search in vain for any com- ment upon it, in St. Luke, either here or else- where : only the possessors of Matthew's or 22 Mark's Gospel,* could learn the plan concerted between the chief priests and Judas, that whoso- ever he might kiss, should be apprehended. The enemies of Christ were doubtless anxious to gain possession of his person, with as much quietness, certainty, and promptitude, as possible ; but the circumstance appears too singular for a writer, studious of pleasing, to let it pass by without a word of explanation. 9. Luke xxiv. 49. In these words spoken just before his ascension, Jesus undertakes to send down upon his disciples what he terms the pro- misef of his Father : it is added, that they would soon be " endued with power from on high.'*'* Now where was this "promise" recorded? The very word is scarcely to be found elsewhere in St. Luke. Christians have indeed determined, with one consent, that the miraculous descent of the Holy Spirit is here to be understood ; but it may be rather doubtful whether they could have collected this even from a careful examination of St. Luke's gospel alone. John the Baptist (Luke iii. 16) certainly declares that the wonderful Person, whose forerunner he was, would baptize with the Holy Ghost ; but this could hardly have appeared to refer to the period succeeding our Saviour's death and resurrection. Again, Luke * See Matt. xxvi. 48. Mark xiv. 44. f 'ETTayyeXiav. 23 xi. 13, it is announced that God would " give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him." This was indeed a promise, but it appears to have been a general one. The Holy Spirit seems to be here represented (as we learn from the parable of a Son asking his Father for bread,) as a gift neces- sary to all, and ready at all times to be bestowed upon believers in answer to heartfelt prayer. We find also in Luke xii. 11, 12, our Saviour pro- mising that when his servants were called to wit- ness a confession before rulers and magistrates, ' the Holy Ghost should teach them, in the same hour, what they ought to say.' Still this promise was indefinite, and the hearers would be likely to refer it generally to the particular occasions which our Lord specifies. If a benefactor were to give his dependent a general assurance of his favour and assistance, and long afterwards told him, that in a few days he would fulfil his promise to him, the poor man would probably be rather puzzled to understand what promise this could be, and still more to conjecture in what manner he was to expect its fulfilment. Now this diflBculty is not likely to have arisen in the case of Christ's disciples. We know from St. John's gospel, xv. 26, &c., that they had received the most express promise of a " Comforter," whom, after his departure, he would send unto them from the Father, ' even 24 the Spirit of Truth, who should teach them all things ;' nor can we doubt that the coming of this Divine Messenger must have formed a principal subject of our lledeemer"'s discourses with his friends, between his resurrection and ascension. Indeed St. Luke himself, in another work,* re- peats the present phrase, and explains it of the ' Baptism with the Holy Ghost.' The idea there- fore was, doubtless, familiar to the minds of the disciples ; but the present question is, whether this Evangelist could have expected this unex- plained phrase to be intelligible to an ordinary reader of his Gospel alone. 10. Another source of the obscurity which oc- casionally marks the evangelical narratives, may be found in their abrupt allusions to different points in the history, manners, and opinions of the times, John i- 21. The priests and Levites, who were sent to John the Baptist, after inquiring whether he was " the Christ," or " Elias," further ask, " Art thou that prophet ?" John v. 25. The phrase appears altogether doubtful ; but there is probably an allusion to some individual whom the Jews of that time were accustomed thus to designate, f If such a mode of speech were actually used on • Acts i. 4, 5— ii. 33- See also Gal. Hi. 14. Eph. i. 13. ■j" Thus our Saviour himself was reported to be "Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.'' Matt. xvi. 14. 25 this occasion, he might naturally employ it ; hut as it manifestly could convey no information to persons of other times and countries, an author who studied perspicuity, and shrank from difl&- culties, would hardly have thought of the re- mark ; still less would he have left it unexplained. 11. Mark ix. 11. "Why say the Scribes, that EHas must first come." When these w^ords were uttered, the disciples of Christ had just beheld their Lord transfigured in glory upon the Mount. With Him had appeared the spirits of Moses and Elias. This extraordinary vision reminded the Apostles of one of the current traditions of the times. The prophet Malachi had said, iv. 5, " Behold, 1 will send you Elijah, the Prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord." The Scribes, ever prone to de- press Scripture to the level of their own carnal imaginations, chose to understand the passage literally, and expected that Elias or Elijah, would become incarnate before the Messiah's kingdom was established. In the speech of the angel, however, to Zacharias, Luke i. 17, it is inti- mated, that this coming of the Prophet would be simply spiritual. " He,"" that is John the Baptist, " shall go before Him in the spirit and power of Elias." Still the Jews retained their prejudice, and when John proclaimed himself the forerunner of Christ, they supposed him to be the real Elias ; 26 but when he positively denied this, they began to think that Jesus might prove to be the ex- pected Incarnation of that Prophet.* Resolved to own none but the kingly and triumphant Christ of their own imaginations, they had no objection to bestow the dignity of his forerunner upon Jesus of Nazareth. With respect to the Apostles, their general standard of knowledge was, at this time, little superior to that of their countrymen. They, doubtless, expected a literal Elias; and when John the Baptist so expressly renounced that designation, when firmly convinced that their Master was indeed " the Christ, the Son of the living God," they were doubtless at a loss to determine how the prophecy could be fulfilled. This difficulty was rather increased than dimi- nished by the momentary appearance of Elias, long after their Lord had begun his ministry; and, in their perplexity, they asked, " Why say the Scribes that Elias must Jirst come. Our Saviour's answer does not appear calculated di- rectly to remove the ambiguity ; He declares it to be true that Elias " cometh first," v. 12 ; a person, in the character of Elias, was really to appear upon earth as the precursor of Christ. He then passes rather abruptly to the conside- ration of his own sufferings, which were naturally * See Matt. xvi. 14. 27 at this period uppermost in his mind ; and then, in V. 13, retm-ns to the subject of Elias, who, he states, " is indeed come, and they have done unto Him whatsoever they hsted," and here the subject is entirely dropped by this Evangelist. In St. Matthew xvii. 11, &c. where a similar conversation is introduced, it is added, " the dis- ciples understood He spake of John the Baptist."* Now by the assistance of this, and the other texts I have cited, the whole matter becomes perfectly clear and consistent; and, without such assistance, we might expect a well-taught Christian of that age readily to comprehend it, but a person who knew Christianity solely through the medium of St. Mark's Gospel, would take a very different view of the subject — He would see no particular reason to consider John as the representative of Elias. Not the slightest allusion to Elias is made in the first chapter of this Evangelist, which describes the Baptist's ministry; he would find indeed Elias once appearing at a late period in the life of Christ, but might well be startled at the words Elias "cometh first," and perplexed by those that follow, " Elias is indeed come," &c. The Apostles might, indeed, without much * In chap. xi. v. 14, of the same Evangelist, our Lord also affirms of John, " This is Elias which was for to come." c2 28 difficulty, have gathered that John the Baptist was here specified. But all readers of the Gospel could not be gifted with their intimate knowledge of their Lord's affairs, still less with their disposition to receive His Word with all simplicity of mind. An author conscious of deceit would surely write rather for his enemies than his friends; he will rather arm himself against the suspicions,* than rely upon the favour of his readers. Luke xxii. 35.f The direction which our Savi- our here gives to His disciples, that every one who wanted a sword should now carefully provide one, may occasion us some surprize, as He had often urged upon them the doctrine of non-resis- tance ; but it seems still more singular, that when they informed Him that they had two swords, He should reply, " It is enough :" as this was mani- festly too scanty a supply for eleven men. It appears however that the thoughts of Jesus were now painfully occupied by the last terrible scenes of His mortal career, vividly pictured to His mind by the power of Omniscience.^ His heart was wrung by the thought of the treachery of Judas, and the cowardice of Peter, and He wished * See Paley's Evidences, ii. 94, upon John xx. 16, 17. t For the suggestion of this instance I must acknowledge the kindness of a friend. I See. V. 21—28, 31—40 of this chapter. 29 strongly to urge upon His disciples the pressing necessity, not indeed for carnal weapons ; but for the sword of the Spirit, the shield of Faith, the armour of watchfulness and prayer. This advice Christ conveyed in the figurative manner which was habitual to Him, and when the disciples, as we frequently observe, understood Him literally, EQs reply was intended probably to intimate that He meant to lay no stress upon warlike pre- parations— that He had other objects in view, which the time would not allow Him at present to explain. The mistake however of the Apostles continued, and when our Lord was apprehended, Simon Peter is represented* as ' having a sword,' drawing it, and wounding the servant of the High Priest ; and St. John here incidentally confirms St. Luke, showing that some of the Apostles, though not all, were provided with swords : for otherwise Peter would not have been distinguished as ' having one.' At the same time, the promptness of Christ in healing the servant — the sharp rebuke which He gave to His Apostle, and the whole subsequent conduct of the early Christians, evinces that it was far from our Saviour's intention to encourage the use of weapons among His followers. A certain dubiety however hangs over the conversation * John xviii. 10. 30 cited from St. Luke, which a relation of the whole discourse might have removed, but the Evangelist, without thinking of this difficulty, contents himself with simply detailing the things which left the freshest impression on his memory. CHAPTER II. INSTANCES OF PARTICULARITY AND MINUTENESS OF DETAIL IN THE EVANGELISTS. 12. An author who proposes to himself the attainment of some important and difficult object, would naturally disencumber himself of everything likely to draw attention to the weaker parts of his undertaking. For this reason the contriver of a forgery would guard against frequent allusions to persons and places of any general notoriety, either in public or private Ufe. This would apply yet more strongly to the mention of living personages. He must prepare himself to address many readers, well acquainted, either personally, or by familiar report with the place and time, with which he has connected his narrative. If then he spake of persons, in a conspicuous station, who never existed, or if to well known persons, he ascribed actions which they never performed, the result upon the minds of his readers could only be surprize, and enquiry, speedily followed by sus- 3-2 picion, or resentment . He would therefore judge it safer, to confine himself, for the most part, to generalities, but if the mention of well-known persons did occur, he would at least most care- fully abstain from representing, in any detail, the obnoxious parts of their character or conduct. 