An Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to S. Matthew 9781463229054

Citation preview

An Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to S. Matthew

Gorgias Occasional Historical Commentaries

14

Gorgias Occasional Historical Commentaries is a series that seeks to reprint historically important biblical commentaries. Rather than seeking to cover each book of the Bible as a standard commentary series would do, this series strives to bring back to the community of biblical scholars works that have had impact on subsequent biblical studies but which have been difficult to locate for decades or more because they have gone out of print.

An Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to S. Matthew

Alfred Plummer

1 gorgias press 2010

Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2010 by Gorgias Press LLC Originally published in 1909 All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. 2010

1

ISBN 978-1-61719-742-0

ISSN 1935-4398

Reprinted from the 1909 London edition.

Printed in the United States of America

AN

EXEGETICAL

COMMENTARY

ON THF.

GOSPEL ACCORDING TO

S. MATTHEW THE REV. ALFRED PLUMMER, M.A., D.D.

TO T U B

MEMORY

A R T H U R THOMAS OXCE

IIIS

AFTERWARDS FOR THIS

VOLUME i s

TEACHER FRIEND

DEDICATEl)

BY THE

LLOYD

I'UI'IF-

HIS

EVER IIIS

OK

WRITER

PREFACE THE attempt to write this commentary has been made under impulses given, in the one case consciously, in the other not, by two friends. For some years, Bishop Lloyd of Newcastle-on-Tyne, whose loss we are still deeply lamenting, had been urging the writer to do something of the kind; and one of the latest letters received from him,—a letter written shortly before his death, expressed delight that this volume was progressing. And it was the writer's privilege to take a very small part in the production of the invaluable work on this Gospel by the Rev. W. C. Allen in the International Critical Commentary published by Messrs. T. & T . Clark. T o share in that work was to be inspired to continue it. This volume, therefore, has two aims over and above the desire to do something in accordance with Bishop Lloyd's earnest wishes. On the one hand, this sequel to Mr. Allen's commentary has for its object to call the attention of some who do not already know it to a book which Leaflet 31 of the Central Society of Sacred Study (July 1907) pronounces to be "the best English commentary on the first Gospel " (p. 5), and of which reviewers have said much the same. On the oilier hand, this volume aims at supplementing the earlier one. A reviewer in the Guardian doubted whether Mr. Allen " w a s well advised to restrict himself so rigidly to questions of literary, as distinct from historical—not to say theological and religious—interest." How well he would have dealt VII

vm

i'RKFACE

with the historical, theological, and religious sides of his subject is shown in those places in which he s o m e w h a t transgresses his self-imposed limits. B u t there can be no doubt that his desire to do the critical and literary part of the work (which was the part most needed) with thoroughness has caused him to omit a good deal that his readers would have been glad to h a v e from him. T o s u p p l y , if possible, some of the elements w h i c h he has passed by, or has treated very briefly, is another of the aims of this volume. T h e works to which this c o m m e n t a r y is indebted are numerous. A list of some of them is given below, partly as an expression of gratitude, p a r t l y as some help to others w h o desire to labour in the same field. A n asterisk indicates that the writer's d e b t is large, and that others m a y e x p e c t to find much to aid them. For further information the list of works in the writer's International Critical Commentary on St. Luke, pp. l x x x - l x x x v i i i , 577— 580, m a y be consulted. A b b o t t , E. A.

.

I'aradosis, London, 1904.

Johanniiie Vocabulary, 1905. *Johannine Grammar, 1906. Alexander, W. M. Demonic Possession in the New

Testament,

Edinburgh, 1902. Allen, W. C. .

Briggs, C. A.

* A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to St. Mattheiv, Edinburgh, I 9°7*The Messiah of the Gospels, Edinburgh, 1894. New Light on the Life of Jesus, Edinburgh, 1904.

The Ethical

Teaching of Jesus, New York,

1904.

Criticism and the Dogma of the Virgin Birth (N. Amer. Rev., June 1906). 1 Bruce, A. 1!. .

The Synoptic Gospels (The Expositor's Greek Testament), London, 1897.

Burkitt, P. C.

*Evangdion

Da-Mepharrcshe,

Cambridge,

iQ°4-

The Gospel History

and

its

Transmission,

Edinburgh, 1906. 1

T h i s v a l u a b l e essay has been published separately.

Scribner, 1509.

i Ki-:; Barton and Mathews Charles, R . H. .

Dalman, G. . . Deissmann, G. A.

Donehoo, J. de Q.

Girodon, P. . Godet, F. . Gore, C.

.

.

.

Gould, E. P. .

.

Gregory, C. R. . Grenfell Hunt

and

Harnack, A. .

Harris, j . Rendel Hastings, J. .

\>

i

IX

Constructive Studies in the Life of Christ, Chicago. The Book of Enoch, Oxford, 1893. The Apocalypse of Baruch, London, 1896. The Assumption of Moses, London, 1897. The Ascension of Isaiah, London, 1900. The Book of Jubilees, London, 1902. *The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, translated, from the Greek, London, 1908. *The Greek Versions of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Oxford, 1908. * T h e Words of fesus, Edinburgh, 1902. * Bible Studies, Edinburgh, 1903. The Philology of the Greek Bible, London, 1908. New Light on the New Testament, Edinburgh, 1907. The Apocryphal and Legendary Life of Christ, New York, 1903. Encyclopedia Biblica, London, 1899-1903. Commetitaire critique et moral si/r I'livangile selon Saint Luc, Paris, 1903. Introduction au Nouveau Testament, Neuchatel, 1897. The Incarnation of the Sou of God (The Bampton Lectures, 1891), London, 1891. Dissertations ou Subjects connected with the Incarnation, London, 1895. The New Theology and the Old Religion, London, 1907. A Critical and Exegetical Commentarv on the Gospel according to St. Mark, Edinburgh, 1896. Canon and Text of the Neiv Testament, Edinburgh, 1907. Sayings of our Lord from an early Greek Papyrus, London, 1897. New Sayings of Jesus, London, 1904. Die Chronologie der altchristliche Literatur bis /Eusebius, Leipzig, 1897. *The Sayings of fesus-, the Second Source of St. Matthew and St. Luke, London, 1908. The Newly Recovered Gospel of St. Peter, London, 1893.

. * Dictionary of the Bible, Edinburgh, 1902, with Extra Volume, 1904.

1898-

X

Hastings, J. .

PREFACE

. * Dictionary of Christ ami the Gospels, 19061908. Hawkins, Sir J. C. * Hone Synopticœ, Oxford, 1899. Herford, R. '1'. . Christianity in Talmud and Alidrash, London, 1:903. lioltzmann, H. f. Einleitung in das Neue Testament, Freiburg i. I!., 1892. Holtzmann, O. . The Life of Jesus, London, 1904. Hort, F. J. A. . *fudaistic Christianity, London, 1894. '''The Christian Ecclesia, London, 1897. Jülicher, A. . . An Introduction to the New Testament, London, 1904. Kennedy, H. A. Sources of New Testament Greek, Edinburgh, A. 1895. Klostermann, E. Handbuch zum Neuen Testament ; Markus, Tubingen, 1907. Knowling, R. J. Our Lord's Virgin Birth, London, 1907. Lang, C. G. . . Thoughts on Some of the Parables of Jesus, London, 1906. Lock and Sanday Two Lectures on the Sayings of Jesus recently discovered at Oxvrynchus, Oxford, 1897. Mackinlay, Ci. . The Magi, Hoiv they recognised Christ's Star, London, 1907. Maclaren, A. . * The Gospel according to St. Matthew, London, 1905, 1906. Moulton, J. H. . *A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Edinburgh, 1906. Moulton, R. G. . 'The Afodern Header's Bible, London, 1907. Nicholson, E. 13. The Gospel according to the Hebrews, London, 1879. 7he Gospel according to St. Matthew, London, 18S1. Oxford Society 'The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers, of Historical Oxford, 1905. Theology Plummer, A. . . A Criiical and Exegetical Cotnmentarv on the Gospel according to St. Luke, Edinburgh, 1896. I'olano, H. . . The Talmud (The (.'hautlos Classics), London, n.d. Resell, A. . . Das Kindheit $ Evangelium (Texte und Untersuchungen, x. 5), Leipzig, 1897. *Agrapha, Aussercanonische Schriftfragmente (Texte und Untersuchungen, NF. xv. 3, 4), Leipzig, 1906.

PK Kl-'A CK Robinson, J. A . . Robinson James Salmon, G.

and .

Sanday, W.

.

Schürer, E.

Smith, 1)..

Steinbeck, J. Swete, H. B..

Taylor, C. Wellhausen Wright, A. Zahn, T. .

XI

The Historical Character of Si, John's Gosfci, London, 1908. The Gospel according to Peter, London, 1892. *The Human Element in the Gospels, London, 1907. * Inspiration (The "Hampton Lectures, 1893), London, 1893. Sacred Sites of the Gospel, Oxford, 1903. The Criticism of the lourth Gospel, Oxford, 1905. * Outlines of the Life of Christ, Edinburgh, 1906. '''The Life of Christ in Recent Research, Oxford, I 9°7* History of the Jewish PeopU in the Time of Jesus Christ, Edinburgh, 1885-1890. '!rGeschichte des Jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu. Christi; dritte Auflage, Leipzig, 1898. 'Hie Gospel according to St. Matthew (The Westminster New Testament), London, 1908. *Das göttliche Selbstbewusstsein fesu nach dem Zeugnis der Synoptiker, Leipzig, 1908. The Akhmim Fragment of the Apocryphal Gospel of St. Peter, London, 1893. *The Gospel according to St. Mark, London, 1902. * The Appearances of our Lord after the Passion, London, 1907. Sayings of the fewish Fathers comprising Pirqe Aboth in Hebrew and English, Cambridge, 1897. Das Evangelium Matthaei, Berlin, 1904. * Synopsis of the Gospels in Greek, London, 1903. Einleitung in das Neue Testament, Leipzig, 1899. *Das Evangelium des Matthäus, Leipzig, 1903. Introduction to the New Testament, Edinburgh, 1909.

'The Journal of Theological Studies, and Oxford, 1899-1909.

London

C

O

N

T

K

N

T

S

+ /•ACE

I N T R O D U C T I O N

.

.

.

§ I. T H E

AUTHOR

.

§ 2. T H E

SOURCES

.

§3.

PLAN

§4.

THE

§ 5. T H E §6.

OF T H E

RIARCHS"

AND

.

.

THE

BIRTH

AND

THE

PREPARATION

.

OF

THE

THEIR

INFANCY FOR

MINISTRY

IN

GAI.II.EE

IN

OR

THE

JOURNEY

THE

LAST

THE

PASSION,

I. II.

PATTHE XXXIV

OF T H E

THE

MINISTRY

DEATH,

I

.

20

GALILEE

PKR.-EA

IN T H E

MESSIAH

MINISTRY

45

NEAR

THROUGH

.

TO

HOLY

AND

200

TO J E R U S A L E M CITY

.

GENERAL

. .

258 283

RESURRECTION

352

.

GREEK

XXR XXXI

I_439

THE

.

TWELVE

RELATION

.

.

.

THE

I N D E X E S

GOSPEL .

,

.

WORK

FIRST

.

GOSPEL

C O M M E N T A R Y

VII

XVIII

OF T H E

.

TESTAMENTS

FIRST

.

XI

GOSPEL

DATE

vii-xlvi

.

CHRISTOLOOY

"THE

.

441-451

. .

.

XII!

.

441 449

I

N

T

R

O

THE

D

U

C

T

I

O

N

AUTHOR.

ID IN n o case is the title to a book of the New T e s t a m e n t part of t h e original d o c u m e n t . It was in all cases a d d e d by a copyist, a n d perhaps not by the first copyist. Moreover, in all cases it varies considerably in form, the simplest forms being the earliest. T h e " according to " neither affirms nor denies authorship ; it implies conformity to a type, a n d n e e d not m e a n m o r e t h a n " drawn u p according to t h e teaching of." But it is certain that the Christians of the first four centuries who gave these titles to t h e Gospels m e a n t more t h a n this : they believed, a n d m e a n t to express, that each Gospel was written by the person whose n a m e it bears. T h e y used this m o d e of expression, rather t h a n the genitive case used of t h e Epistles, to intimate that the same subject had been treated of by others; a n d they often emphasized the oneness of t h e subject by speaking of " t h e G o s p e l " rather than " t h e Gospels." T h i s m o d e of expression is a c c u r a t e ; there is only o n e Gospel, ' t h e Gospel of G o d ' ( R o m . i. i ) concerning H i s Son. But it has been given us in four shapes (evayye\iov TiTpajji,opiu jut an in the literature of ihe Church of the first three centuries. We cannot even tell bom the stalemenls about it precisely who, of the writers who reicr to it, reallv saw it. Y e s , we are even not sure that it is not kaleidoscopic or plural. It may be that several, or at least two, different books are referred to, and that even by people who fancy that there is but one book, and that they know" it. . . . Nothing would be easier for any one or every one who saw, read, or heard of that book to call it the Gospel lo the Hebrews, the Gospel according to the Hebrews, 01" the Hebrews' Gospel. . . . We shall doubtles- some dav receive a copy of it in the original, or in a translation. It may have contained much of what Matthew, M a r k , and L u k e contain, without that fact having been brought to our notice in the quotations made from it. F o r those who quoted it did so precisely in order to give that which varied from (he contents of our four Gospels, or especially of the three synoptic ones." T h e origin of this

X

GOSPEL

ACCORDING

T O S.

MATTHEW

perplexing document must be placed early. After Matthew and Luke became well known a Gospel covering much the same ground would hardly have been written. E. B. Nicholson lias collected and annotated (he quotations from i t ; R . Handmann, in Tcxtc und Untersuchungai, 1888, has done the same. See also Mgr. A. S. Barnes, Joar. of Th. St., April 1905.

The collection of Utterances made by Matthew and used by the compiler of the First Gospel, and the similar collection used by Luke, were not such as we might have expected. The selection was determined by the needs and hopes of the first Christians, who wanted moral guidance for the present and revelation as to the future. Hence the sayings of Christ preserved in the Synoptic Gospels are largely of either a moral or an apocalyptic character. 1 Utterances which seemed to teach principles of conduct, and prophecies or parables respecting the Coming and the Kingdom were specially treasured. Some of them were misunderstood at the time, and some appear to have been misreported, either from the first or in repeated transmission ; but the result is a body of doctrine, of marvellous unity and adaptability, the great bulk of which must be faithfully reported, because it is inconceivable that the Evangelists or their informants can have invented such things. It is evident that these informants, in the last resort, are the memories of the first body of disciples, who, happily for us, were sometimes stronger in memory than in understanding. They remembered what perplexed them, because it perplexed them ; and they reported it faithfully. That a collection of sayings and narratives was made during our Lord's lifetime, as Salmon {The Human Element in the Gospels, p. 275) and Ramsay (.Expositor, 1907, p. 424) suppose, is scarcely probable (Sanday, The Life of Christ in Recetit Research, p. 172). The answer, therefore, to the question, Who was the author of the First Gospel ? is a negative one. It was not S. Matthew. T h e writer was an early Jewish Christian, not sufficiently important to give his name to a Gospel, and in no way desiring to do so. But he used a great deal of material which was probably collected by S. Matthew, whose name thus became connected with the First Gospel as we have it. 2 That it is in no sense the work of S. Matthew is not probable. Some more conspicuous Apostle than the toll-collector would have been chosen, if the title had 110 better basis than the desire to give a distinguished name to a nameless document. Andrew, or James the son of 1 j. R . Ropes, The Apostolic Age, p. 222. There is good reason believing that there existed a written collection of sayings which had definite title Abyoi rod Kv/iiov 'Iyjtrov, to which reference is made Acts xx. also in Clem. Rom. Cor. xiii., xlvi. ; and in Polycarp, ii. Sec llarnack, Sayings of Jesus, pp. 187-189. 2 See Briggs, 'The Ethical Teaching of Jesus, pp. 2, j , 20.

for the 35 ; The

THF.

SOURCES

xi

Zebedee, or Philip would have been preferred. And the writer has given us " a Catholic Gospel," written in " a truly Catholic temper." "Wherever his own hand shows itself, one sees that his thought is as universalistic as it is free from the bondage of the Law. . . . The individuality of the author makes itself so strongly felt both in style and tendency, that it js impossible to think of the Gospel as a mere compilation " (Jtilieher). On the contrary, as Renan says, " the Gospel of Matthew, all things considered, is the most important book of Christianity— the most important book that has ever been written." Not without reason it received the first place in the N.T. " The compilation of the Gospels is, next to the personal action of Jesus, the leading fact in the history of the origins of Christianity;—I will even add in the history of mankind" {Les Evangiles, p. 2 1 2 ; Eng. trans, p. 1 1 2 ) . The writer of this Gospel rises far above the limitations of his own Jewish Christianity. T o see in it anything directed against the teaching of S. Paul is strangely to misunderstand it. So far as there is anything polemical in Mt., it is directed, not against the Apostle of the Gentiles, but against Pharisaic Judaism. This wide outlook as to the meaning and scope of Christianity is clear evidence that what he gives us as the Messiah's teaching is not the writer's own, but the teaching of Him in whom both Jew and Gentile were to find salvation. Its Catholic Christianity, which is the spirit of Christ Himself, has made this Gospel, from the first century to the twentieth, a favourite with Christians. THE

SOURCES.

TO some extent these have been already stated. T h e writer of our First Gospel used Mk. in nearly the same form as that in which it has come down to us, 1 and also a collection of Utterances which was probably made either wholly or in part by S. Matthew. This second document, which quickly went out of use owing to the superiority of the Canonical Gospels, is commonly spoken of as " the Logia," or (more scientifically) as " Q," a symbol which commits us to nothing. Besides these two main sources, there were at least two others. These are ( 1 ) the O.T., the quotations from which, however, may have come from a collection of passages believed to be Messianic, rather than from the writer's knowledge of the O.T. as a whole; and (2) traditions current among the first Christians. It is also 1 If there were differences, it is not impossil >lc that the ioxt of M k . which M t . used w a s inferior to that which has come down to us : corruption had already begun.

xii

GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. M A T T H E W

possible that some of the many attempts at Gospels, mentioned by S. Luke in his Preface, may have been known to our Evangelist and used by him. But the only one of his sources which we can compare with his completed work is the Second Gospel, and it is most instructive to see the way in which he treats it. This has been worked out in great detail by the Rev. W. C. Allen in his admirable work on St. Matthew in the International Critical Commentary, which ought to be consulted by all who wish to do justice to the Synoptic problem. Here it will suffice to make a selection of instances, paying attention chiefly to those which illustrate the freedom which the compiler of the First Gospel allowed himself in dealing with the Second. 1. H e appropriates nearly the whole of it} T h e chief omissions a r e : Healing of a demoniac (Mk. i. 2 3 - 3 8 ) ; Prayer before preaching in Galilee (i. 3 5 - 3 9 ) ; Seed growing secretly (iv. 2 6 - 2 9 ) ; Healing of a deaf stammerer (vii. 3 2 - 3 6 ) ; Healing of a blind man (viii. 2 2 - 2 6 ) ; T h e uncommissioned exorcist (ix. 3 8 - 4 0 ) ; Widow's mites (xii. 4 1 4.4). A n d there are other smaller omissions. 2. H e makes considerable changes in order, chiefly so as to group similar incidents and sayings together, and thus make the sequence more telling. T h u s we have three triplets of miracles : leprosy, paralysis, fever (viii. 1 - 1 5 ) ; victory over natural powers, demonic powers, power of sin (viii. 23-ix. 8 ) ; restoration of life, sight, speech (ix. 18-34). A n d he omits sayings where Mark has them, and inserts them in a different connexion, generally earlier. T h u s Mk. iv. 21 is inserted Mt. v. 15 instead of xiii. 23, 2 4 ; Mk. iv. 22 is inserted Mt. x. 26 instead of xiii. 23, 2 4 ; Mk. ix. 41 is inserted Mt. x. 42 instead of xviii. 5 ; M k . ix. 50 is inserted Mt. v. 13 instead of xviii. 9 ; M k . xi. 25 is inserted Mt. vi. 14 instead of xxi. 22. 3. Although he adds a great deal to Mark, yet he frequently abbreviates, perhaps to gain space for additions. H e often omits what is redundant. In the following instances, the words in brackets are found in Mark but not in the First Gospel. ' [The time is fulfilled, and) the K i n g d o m of G o d is at hand : repent ye [and believe in the gospel]' (Mk. i. 15). ' A n d at even, [when the sun did set]' (i. 32). ' A n d straightway the leprosy [departed from him, and he] was cleansed' (i. 42). ' [And the wind ceased] and there was a great calm 1 (iv. 39). ' Save in his own country, [and among his own kin,] and in his own h o u s e ' (vi. 4). Such things are very frequent. H e also omits un1 W h y did both he and S . L u k e h a v e so h i g h a n estimate of M k . as to incorporate it in their o w n G o s p e l s ? B e c a u s e M k . w a s b e l i e v e d to be the m o u t h p i e c e of S . P e t e r , and b e c a u s e his G o s p e l emanated (as is h i g h l y p r o b a b l e ) from the great centre of all k i n d s of i n t e r e s t s — H o m e .

THE

SOURCES

xiii

essential d e t a i l s ; e.g. ' H e was with the wild b e a s t s ' ( M k . i. 1 3 ) ; ' with the hired servants ' (i. 2 0 ) : ' with J a m e s and J o h n ' (i. 2 9 ) ; ' u p o n the c u s h i o n ' (iv. 3 8 ) ; ' a b o u t 2 0 0 0 ' (v. 1 3 ) ; ' 2 0 0 p e n n y w o r t h ' (vi. 3 7 ) ; ' s o as 110 fuller on earth can whiten t h e m ' (ix. 3 ) ; ' 3 0 0 p e n c e ' (xiv. 5 ) ; the young man who fled naked (xiv. 5 1 ) ; ' t h e father of Alexander and R u f u s ' ( x v . 2 1 ) . A n d he frequently omits notes about the crowds which impeded Christ (Mk. i. 3 3 , 45, ii. 2, 4, iii. 9, 10, 20, vi. 3 1 ) . 4. On the other hand he frequently expands. Compare Mk. i. 7, 8 with Mt. iii. 7 - 1 2 ; M k . iii. 2 2 - 2 6 with Mt. xii. 2 4 - 4 5 ! M k . iv. with Mt. x i i i . ; M k . vi. 8 - 1 1 with Mt. x. 5 - 4 2 ; M k . xii. 3 8 - 4 0 with Mt. xxiii. : M k . xiii. with Mt. x x i v . - x x v . 5. A m o n g the many changes in language which he makes the following are conspicuous ; and in considering the numbers we must remember the different length of the two Ciospels. Mark has ' a g a i n ' (W/W) about 26 times, Matthew about 1 6 , of which 4 are f r o m M a r k . M a r k has ' s t r a i g h t w a y ' (cuftis) about 4 1 times, M a t t h e w about 7, all from Mark. M a r k has the historic present about 1 5 0 times, Matthew about 93, of which 2 1 are from M a r k . A n d the compiler seems to have disliked the imperfect tense. H e frequently turns Mark's imperfects into aorists, or avoids them by a change of expression. Comp. M k . vi. 7, 20, 4 1 , with Mt. x. i , xiv. 5, 19, 36 j and M k . x. 48, 52 with Mt. xx. 3 1 , 34. Such alterations are very frequent. 6. B u t the compiler, besides making changes of order and language, a n d sometimes abbreviating and sometimes expanding Mark's narrative, occasionally makes alterations in the substance of Mark's statements. S o m e of these seem to aim at greater a c c u r a c y ; as the substitution of ' t e t r a r c h ' (Mt. xiv. 1 ) for ' k i n g ' (Mk. vi. 14), the omissions of ' w h e n A b i a t h a r was high p r i e s t ' ( M k . ii. 26), ' c o m i n g from (work in the) field' (xv. 2 1 ) , ' h a v i n g bought a linen c l o t h ' (xv. 46), a n d perhaps the change from ' a f t e r three d a y s ' (viii. 3 r , ix. 3 1 , x. 3 4 ) to ' o n the third d a y ' (Mt. xvi. 2 1 , xvii. 23, xx. 19). B u t other changes involve more substantial difference ; e.g. 1 L e v i the son of A l p h s e u s ' (ii. 1 4 ) becomes ' a man called M a t t h e w ' ( M t . ix. 9 ) ; ' G e r a s e n e s ' (v. 1 ) becomes ' Cladarenes' (Mt. viii. 2 8 ) ; ' D a l m a n u t h a ' (viii. 1 0 ) becomes ' M a g a d a n ' (Mt. xv. 39). Where M a r k has one d e m o n i a c (v. 2) and one blind man (x. 46), the compiler gives two (Mt. viii. 28, xx. 30). 7. Sometimes b e alters the narrative of Mark in order to make the incident a more clear case of the fulfilment: of prophecy. Mark has, ' Y e shall find a colt tied, whereon no man ever yet s a t ; loose him a n d bring him ' (xi. 2). F o r this he has, ' Y e shall find an ass tied and a colt with h e r ; loose and bring to M e ' (Mt. xxi. 2), a n d then he goes on to quote the

xiv

GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. MATTHEW

prophecy, ' riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.' Mark says, ' They promised to give him money' (xiv. n ) ; for which the compiler substitutes, ' They weighed to him thirty pieces of silver ' (xxvi. 15), which comes from Zech. xi. 12, and a little later he quotes Zech. xi. 13, which he erroneously attributes to Jeremiah (xxvii. 9). Mark has, ' T h e y offered Him wine mingled with myrrh' (xv. 23). In Mt. xxvii. 34 the ' m y r r h ' is changed to 'gall,' perhaps to suggest a reference to Ps. lxix. 21. In a similar way Justin Martyr ( A p o l i . 32) says that the foal of the ass was " t i e d to a vine," in order to make the incident a fulfilment of ' binding his foal unto the vine' (Gen. xlix. 1 1 ) . 8. The compiler tones down or omits what seems to be unfavourable to the disciples. The' rebuke, ' Know ye not this parable? and how shall ye know all the parables?' (Mk. iv. 1 3 ) becomes a blessing in Mt. xiii. i 6 f f . T o r they understood not concerning the loaves, but their heart was hardened' (vi. 52) is omitted. At Mk. viii. 29 the compiler inserts ' Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona,' etc. (xvi. 1 7 - 1 9 ) . H e omits (xvii. 4) that Peter ' wist not what to answer' (Mk. viii. 6 ) ; also that they ' questioned among themselves what the rising from the dead should mean' (ix. 10). For ' they understood not the saying, and were afraid to ask H i m ' (Mk. ix. 32) he substitutes, 'they were exceeding sorry' (xvii. 23). For 'they disputed one with another, who was the greatest' (Mk. ix. 34) and were rebuked for so doing, he substitutes, 'the disciples came unto Jesus, saying, Who then is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven ? ' (xviii. 1). The ambitious petition of the sons of Zebedee (Mk. x. 35) is assigned to their mother (Mt. xx. 20). ' T h e y wist not what to answer H i m ' (Mk. xiv. 40) is omitted (Mt. xxvi. 43). 9. Still more instructive and interesting are the cases in which the compiler tones down or omits what might encourage a low conception of the character of Christ. Reverential feeling seems to have made him shrink from the freedom with which the earlier record attributes human emotions and human limitations to our Lord. ' And when He had looked round on them with anger, being grieved at the hardening of their heart' (Mk. iii. 5) is omitted Mt. xii. 13. ' H e marvelled because of their unbelief,' and ' He could there do no mighty work 1 (vi. 5, 6) is changed to ' He did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief' (Mt. xiii. 58). ' H e sighed deeply in His Spirit' (viii. 12) is omitted Mt. xvi. 4. ' H e was moved with indignation' (x. 14) is omitted Mt. xix. 14. 'Looking upon him loved h i m ' (x. 2 1 ) is omitted Mt. xix. 21. ' B e g a n to be greatly amazed' (xiv. 33) is changed to 'began to be sorrowful' (Mt. xxvi. 37).

THTC SOUROKS

xv

The compiler also omits questions which seem to imply ignorance on the part of Christ. 'What is thy n a m e ? ' ( v . 9). ' W h o touched My garments?' (v. ;o). ' H o w many loaves have y e ? ' (vi. 38). « Why unth this generation seek a sign?' (viii. 12). ' Seest thou aught?' (viii. -'3). 'What question ye with them?' (ix. 16). ' H o w longtime is it since this hath come unto h i m ? ' (ix. 21). 'What were ye reasoning in the w a y ? ' (ix. 33). 'Where is My guest-chamber?' (xiv. 14). The compiler also omits what might imply that Christ was unable to accomplish what H e willed. 'Jesus could no more openly enter into a city' (i. 45). ' H e said unto him, Come forth thou unclean spirit' (v. 8) when the demon had not yet come forth. ' H e would have passed by them ' (vi. 48). 'Would have no man know it; and H e could not he hid' (vii. 24). ' I f haply H e might find anything thereon . . . for it was not the season of figs' (xi. 1 3 ) ; as if Christ did not know tii! l i e came and looked, and as if He had expected what could not be. Perhaps the change from 'driveth Him forth' (Mk. i. 12) to 'was led u p ' (Mt. iv. 1 ) is of a similar character. T o the same feeling we may attribute the remarkable change of ' Why callest thou Me good ? None is good save one, even G o d ' (x. 1.8), into 'Why askest thou Me concerning that which is good? One there is who is good' (Mt. xi\. 1 7 ) ; and the probable omission (the reading is doubtful) of ' neither the Son ' (xiii. 32) in Mt. xxiv. 36. The change of 'the carpenter' (vi. 3) into 'the carpenter's s o n ' (Mt. xiii. 55) is of a similar k i n d ; and perhaps the change of ' Master, carest Thou not that we perish?' (iv. 38) into 'Save, Lord, we perish' (Mt. viii. 25). But perhaps this last change was nutde to shield the disciplesSide by side with this toning down of what might: lessen the majesty of Christ's person is a readiness U> heighten what illustrates it. When Mark says that 'they brought to Him all that were sick and them that were possessed,' and that ' He healed many and cast out many demons' (i. 32, 34), the compiler says that ' they brought to Him many possessed,'and that ' H e cast out the spirits with a word, and healed all' (Mt. viii. iC). H e thrice, by inserting 'from that hour,' insists that the healing word took effect immediately (ix. 22, xv. 28, xvii. 18). H e makes the fig-tree wither immediately, and states that the disciples were amazed at the sudden withering, whereas Mark indicates that they did not notice the withering till next day. He omits the two miracles in which Christ used spittle as a means of healing (Mk. vii. 3 1 , -viii. 22), and lie omits the convulsions of the demoniac boy, which might imply that Christ had difficulty in healing him (Mt. ix. 20). He also represents

xvi

G O S P E L A C C O R D I N G TO S.

MATTHEW

J a i r u s ' d a u g h t e r as being raised b y m e r e l y taking her h a n d : no word is r e c o r d e d (ix. 2 5 ) . 1 T h e s e nine classes of c h a n g e s , which by no m e a n s e x h a u s t the subject, strongly c o n f i r m the generally a c c e p t e d v i e w that the G o s p e l a c c o r d i n g to S. M a r k is t h e earlier. W e can see in the majority of cases why the c h a n g e f r o m M a r k to M a t t h e w has b e e n m a d e . A s s u m e that M a t t h e w is p r i m a r y , a n d t h e c h a n g e s to what M a r k gives us w o u l d b e unintelligible. Moreover there is the f a c t that s o m e of the c h a n g e s m a d e in M a t t h e w are f o u n d in L u k e also. T h a t again points to M a r k being t h e earliest. 2 T h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the material w h i c h is c o m m o n to both M a t t h e w a n d L u k e , but is n o t f o u n d in M a r k , d o e s not l e a d to such sure r e s u l t s ; a n d a variety of h y p o t h e s e s are possible, ( i ) B o t h the c o m p i l e r of M a t t h e w a n d ' t h e b e l o v e d p h y s i c i a n ' m a y h a v e u s e d t h e s a m e collection of U t t e r a n c e s , translated f r o m the H e b r e w of S. M a t t h e w the A p o s t l e . (2) S. L u k e m a y h a v e u s e d a collection similar to the o n e u s e d by the c o m p i l e r , b u t v a r y i n g s o m e w h a t f r o m it. (3) E a c h may have used several s u c h collections, h a v i n g a g o o d d e a l of c o m m o n m a t e r i a l ; a n d S . L u k e k n e w of t h e e x i s t e n c e of m a n y s u c h d o c u m e n t s . (4) E a c h m a y h a v e d r a w n f r o m oral traditions, w h i c h to a large extent h a d b e c o m e s t e r e o t y p e d . (5) S . L u k e m a y h a v e seen the Cxospel a c c o r d i n g to M a t t h e w . W i t h our present k n o w l e d g e , certainty is i m p o s s i b l e . T h a t S. L u k e a n d the c o m p i l e r of M a t t h e w u s e d M a r k , pretty n e a r l y a s we h a v e it, is c e r t a i n ; that they had o t h e r a n d similar materials, is certain ; a n d that e a c h u s e d materials w h i c h t h e o t h e r d i d n o t use, a n d p e r h a p s d i d n o t k n o w , is also certain. B e y o n d that, all is m o r e or less r e a s o n a b l e conjecture. T h a t e a c h of t h e m u s e d M a r k as w e h a v e it, is a r e a s o n a b l e c o n j e c t u r e ; a n d B u r k i t t a g r e e s with W e l l h a u s e n that " M a r k w a s k n o w n to both the o t h e r S y n o p t i s t s in the s a m e f o r m a n d with the s a m e contents as we h a v e it n o w " {The Gospel History and its Transmission, p. 64). B u t p e r h a p s it w o u l d b e m o r e a c c u r a t e to s a y that o u r M a r k is d e r i v e d f r o m o n e c o p y of the a u t o g r a p h , a n d that the o t h e r t w o S y n o p t i s t s m a d e u s e of a n o t h e r ; a n d we must r e m e m b e r that in t h o s e days s c r i b e s w e r e not m e r e copyists w h o s e o n e a i m was to c o p y a c c u r a t e l y ; they thought that it w a s their duty to edit a n d i m p r o v e what they h a d b e f o r e them. A g a i n , it is a r e a s o n a b l e c o n j e c t u r e that the material u s e d by the S y n o p t i s t s e x i s t e d originally in A r a m a i c , 1 Perhaps the two demoniacs and the two blind men (viii. 28, xx. 30), where Mark mentions only one, may be placed, under this head. 2 See an excellent article 011 " T h e E a r l y Church and the Synoptic

Gospels" in the Journal

of Theological Studies, April 1904, pp. 3 3 0 - 3 4 2 ;

also January 1909, pp. 168, 1 7 2 .

TIIE

SOURCES

xvii

a n d that m o s t of it h a d been translated into G r e e k b e f o r e they u s e d it. I f c o p y i s t s s o m e t i m e s e d i t e d what they c o p i e d , m u c h m o r e did E v a n g e l i s t s edit the materials which thev used. W e see this in their g r o u p i n g , in their w o r d i n g , a m i in their insertion of editorial notes. S u c h notes were i n d i s p e n s a b l e . A writer w h o has to unite in c o n s e c u t i v e n a r r a t i v e a n e c d o t e s a n d uttera n c e s of w h i c h the historical c o n n e x i o n has b e e n lost, m u s t insert editorial links to f o r m a s e q u e n c e . H e m a y or m a y n o t h a v e i n d e p e n d e n t authority for the link, but a link of s o m e k i n d h e must h a v e , w h e t h e r there b e authority for it or not. A n d in s o m e cases the d i s c o u r s e s o r narratives which he h a s to p i e c e together m a y b e s a i d to be the authority for what is inserted, f o r s o m e t h i n g of the k i n d must h a v e t a k e n place, or what is r e c o r d e d c o u l d not h a v e h a p p e n e d . T h u s , the r e c o r d of a long d i s c o u r s e on a m o u n t implies that the L o r d went up the mount, that H e h a d a n a u d i e n c e , a n d that, w h e n all w a s over, H e c a m e d o w n again. T h e s e details, therefore, are i n s e r t e d (v. i , viii. i). After c h a r g i n g the A p o s t l e s , H e m u s t n a v e g o n e e l s e w h e r e to teach (xi. i ) . T h e s a m e thing w o u l d h a p p e n at the e n d of o t h e r discourses (xiii. 5 3 , xix. 1 , xxvi. 1 ) . W h e r e there was n o t h i n g k n o w n to t h e contrary, it m i g h t b e a s s u m e d that the T w e l v e u n d e r s t o o d H i m (xvii. 1 3 ) , even w h e n at first they h a d not d o n e so (xvi. 1 2 ) . I f the E v a n g e l i s t felt quite certain of the m e a n i n g of o u r L o r d ' s words, h e m i g h t g i v e the s u p p o s e d m e a n i n g as h a v i n g b e e n actually s p o k e n by H i m (xii. 40). If a prophecy, which the M e s s i a h must h a v e k n o w n , s e e m e d to be verya p p r o p r i a t e , H e might be s u p p o s e d to h a v e q u o t e d it (ix. 1 3 , xii. 7, xiii. 1 4 , 1 5 , xxiv. 30). I f , at the S u p p e r , the T w e l v e said to H i m , one b y one, ' I s it I ? ' then J u d a s must h a v e said so, a n d the L o r d w o u l d a n s w e r him (xxvi. 25). I f the w o m e n on E a s t e r m o r n i n g f o u n d the stone a l r e a d y r e m o v e d f r o m the t o m b , the r e m o v a l m u s t h a v e h a d a c a u s e ; arid if there w a s an e a r t h q u a k e , this must h a v e h a d a cause. It was reported that an A n g e l h a d b e e n s e e n : then, d o u b t l e s s , he was the c a u s e (xxviii. 2 - 4 ) . T h e r e are other p l a c e s w h e r e we m a y r e a s o n a b l y c o n j e c t u r e that w e are r e a d i n g editorial c o m m e n t rather than t h e r e p r o d u c t i o n of historical t r a d i t i o n ; e.g. xiii. 3 6 a, x v i . i t / ; , xxii. 3 4 ; a n d there m a y b e e v e n m o r e than these. E d i t o r i a l a d d i t i o n s of this k i n d d o not look like the work of a n A p o s t l e a n d an eye-witness. I f the f i r s t G o s p e l , as we h a v e it, were the p r o d u c t i o n of S. M a t t h e w , we should, as in the F o u r t h G o s p e l , h a v e m u c h more important additions to what is told us b y S. M a r k . I n the f e e d i n g of the 5.000, c o n t r a s t the v i v i d details w h i c h j n . a l o n e gives with the trifling i n f e r e n c e s which are p e c u l i a r to M t . I n the story of the P a s s i o n a n d of

xviii

GOSPEL ACCORDING

T O S.

MATTHEW

the R e s u r r e c t i o n , t h e s a m e k i n d of c o n t r a s t will be felt. These e d i t o r i a l notes, t h e r e f o r e , are a s t r o n g c o n f i r m a t i o n of the v i e w that o n l y to a very l i m i t e d e x t e n t c a n o u r f i r s t G o s p e l b e r e g a r d e d as the c o m p o s i t i o n o f t h e A p o s t l e . T h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e s e n o t e s d o e s n o t interfere with the s u b s t a n t i a l t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s of t h e G o s p e l s , liven when we h a v e set a s i d e all the verses w h i c h s e e m to b e editorial, t h e n u m b e r of t h e m is n o t large, a n d is a l m o s t infinitesimal in c o m p a r i s o n with t h e r e m a i n d e r . A n d it m u s t b e r e m e m b e r e d that w e may b e m i s t a k e n a b o u t s o m e of t h e m , a n d also that s o m e , a l t h o u g h editorial, m a y b e q u i t e true. A t a n y rate t h e y r e p r e s e n t w h a t writers in A.D. 6 0 - 1 0 0 r e g a r d e d as sufficiently p r o b a b l e to be affirmed. PLAN

OK T H E

GOSPKL.

As a l r e a d y i n t i m a t e d , the f r a m e w o r k is that o f M k . O m i t t i n g the first two c h a p t e r s r e s p e c t i n g t h e B i r t h a n d I n f a n c y of the M e s s i a h , w h i c h h a v e n o parallel in M k . , we m a y e x h i b i t the c o r r e s p o n d e n c e , or w a n t of c o r r e s p o n d e n c e , b e t w e e n t h e t w o G o s p e l s s e c t i o n b y section. I f b o t h G o s p e l s are a n a l y s e d i n t o five m a i n d i v i s i o n s , t h e relations of t h e d i v i s i o n s t o o n e a n o t h e r will s t a n d thus : — MAKK.

MATTHEW.

i. 1 - 1 3

Introduction to the G o s p e l

iii. 1 - i v .

i. 1 4 - v i . 13 v i . 1 4 - i x . 50 x. 1 - 5 2 xi. i - x v i . 8

M i n i s t r y in G a l i l e e M i n i s t r y in t h e N e i g h b o u r h o o d Tourney through Periea to Jerusalem L a s t W e e k in J e r u s a l e m

iv. 1 2 - x i i i . 5 8 xiv. i - x v i i i . 35 xix. i - x x . 34 xxi. i - x x v i i i . S

II

I t is in the first t w o d i v i s i o n s that M t . m a k e s m o s t c h a n g e s in t h e order of the shorter s e c t i o n s of w h i c h t h e y are c o m p o s e d . B u t f r o m xiv. 1, a n d still m o r e d e c i d e d l y f r o m x v . 21, h e follows the order of M k . very c l o s e l y , a l t h o u g h h e b o t h a b b r e v i a t e s a n d expands. A n d it s h o u l d b e n o t e d that w h e r e M t . d e v i a t e s f r o m the order of M k . , L k . c o m m o n l y f o l l o w s it. M k . is nearly a l w a y s s u p p o r t e d by either M t . or L k . or b o t h : his is the original order. W h e n w e s u b t r a c t f r o m M t . w h a t has b e e n d e r i v e d f r o m M k . , w e h a v e a r e m a i n d e r very d i f f e r e n t f r o m that w h i c h is p r o d u c e d by s u b t r a c t i n g f r o m L k . w h a t has b e e n d e r i v e d f r o m Mk. I n the latter case w e h a v e n o t o n l y various d i s c o u r s e s , e s p e c i a l l y parables, w h i c h h a v e n o t b e e n r e c o r d e d e l s e w h e r e , but also a large p r o p o r t i o n o f narratives, w h i c h L k . a l o n e h a s preserved. B u t in t h e c a s e o f M t . , that w h i c h r e m a i n s a f t e r M k . has b e e n s u b t r a c t e d consists a l m o s t w h o l l y of d i s c o u r s e s , for w h i c h t h e c o m p i l e r e v i d e n t l y h a d a g r e a t liking. T h e amount

P L A N OF T H E

GOSI'lil,

xix

of narrative which he alone has preserved foi us is not very g r e a t ; nor, with the exception of the contents of the first two chapters, is it, as a rule, of first-rate importance. It consists of such stories as Peter's walking on the sea, the d e m a n d for the Temple-tax, the suicide of J u d a s , tin: message of Pilate's wife a n d his washing his hands, the earthquake and the resurrection of the saints, the setting of a watch at the sepulchre a n d the subsequent bribing of the guards. What the Evangelist chiefly has at heart is to add to Mk.'s narratives of the doi/igs of the Messiah a representative summary of the teaching of the Messiah. ' F r o m that time began J e s u s to p r e a c h ' (iv. 1 7 ) . ' H e opened H i s mouth a n d taught t h e m ' (v. 2). ' H e departed thence to teach and p r e a c h ' (xi. j). ' H e taught them in their s y n a g o g u e ' (xiii. 54). ' A n d J e s u s went about all the cities and the villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the G o s p e l of the K i n g d o m ' (ix. 35). Statements such as these show clearly the writer's deep interest in all that the Messiah said', a n d the n u m b e r of sayings which he has collected shows this still more. I n this presentation of the words of Christ in this G o s p e l the E v a n g e l i s t is f o n d of gathering into one discourse a n u m b e r of shorter sayings, as may be seen from comparison with S. L u k e , who has these same sayings scattered about, in various connexions, in his Gospel. T h e chief example of this is the Sermon on the M o u n t (Mt. v.-vii.). B u t there are other instances of what seems to be a similar process, making at least seven in all. T h e r e is the address to the Apostles (x. 5 -42) ; the collection of parables (xiii.); the discourse on the little child and the sayings which follow it (xviii.); the three parables of warning to the hierarchy (xxi. 28-xxii. 1 4 ) ; the W o e s against the Pharisees (xxiii.); a n d the discourse on the L a s t T h i n g s (\xiv,, xxv.). To these we may perhaps add the discourse about J ohn the Baptist, which is grouped with other sayings (xi. 4 - i y ; .io-go). F i v e of these seven or eight discourses are clearly marked off, as we shall see, by the Evangelist himself. I t is often pointed out that in this G o s p e l incidents and sayings are frequently arranged in numerical groups of three, live, or seven. Triplets are very common. T h e opening genealogy is artificially compressed into three divisions, each having two sevens in it. T h e r e are three events of the C h i l d h o o d , the visit of the M a g i , the flight into E g y p t , and the return (ii. 1 - 2 3 ) ; three temptations (iv. i - - n ) ; three examples of righteousness, alms, prayer, and fasting (vi. 1 - 1 8 ) ; three prohibitions, H o a r d not, J u d g e not, ( j i v e not what is holy to the dogs (vi. 1 9 - v i i . 6 ) ; under ' H o a r d n o t ' there are three aims, the heavenly treasure, the single eye, and the banishment

XX

GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. M A T T H E W

of anxiety (vi. 1 9 - 3 4 ) ; threefold ' B e not a n x i o u s ' (vi. 2 5 ; 3 1 ; 3 4 ) ; three commands, Ask, E n t e r by the narrow gate, Beware of false prophets (vii. 7 - 2 0 ) ; three pairs of contrasts, the broad and narrow way, the good and bad trees, and the wise and foolish builders (vii. 1 3 ; 1 7 ; 2 4 - 2 7 ) ; threefold ' i n T h y N a m e ' (vii. 22) ; three miracles of healing, leprosy, palsy, fever (viii. 1 - 1 5 ) ; three miracles of power, storm, demoniacs, sin (viii. 2 3 - i x , 8 ) ; three miracles of restoration, health, life, sight (ix. 8 - 3 4 ) ; threefold ' F e a r n o t ' (x. 26; 2 8 ; 3 1 ) ; threefold ' i s not worthy of M e ' (x. 37, 3 8 ) ; three cavils of the Pharisees (xii. 2 ; 1 4 ; 2 4 ) ; three signs to the Pharisees, J o n a h , Ninevites, and Queen of the South (xii. 3 8 - 4 2 ) ; ' e m p t y , swept, and garnished' (xii. 4 4 ) ; three parables from vegetation, Sower, Tares, and Mustard-seed (xiii. 1 - 3 2 ) ; three parables of warning (xxi. 28-xxii. 1 4 ) ; three questioners, Pharisees, Sadducees, and lawyer (xxii. 1 5 ; 23 ; 3 5 ) ; three powers with which G o d is to be loved, heart, soul, and mind (xxii. 37). I n ch. xxiii. we have numerous triplets: ' Scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites (passim); feasts, synagogues, and market-places ( 6 ) ; teacher, father, and master ( 8 - 1 0 ) , T e m p l e and gold, altar and gift, heaven and throne ( 1 6 - 2 2 ) ; tithing of mint, dill, and cummin contrasted with judgment, mercy and faith ( 2 3 ) ; tithing of trifles, straining out gnats, cleansing of cup and platter ( 2 3 - 2 6 ) ; prophets, wise men, and scribes (34). I n the remaining chapters we have other e x a m p l e s ; three parables against negligence, the Faithful and the Unfaithful Slaves, the T e n Virgins, and the Talents (xxiv. 4 5 xxv. 3 0 ) ; three addresses to the T h r e e in Gethsemane (xxvi. 38 ; 40, 4 1 ; 45, 4 6 ) ; three prayers in Gethsemane (xxvi. 39 ; 42 ; 4 4 ) ; three utterances at the Arrest, to J u d a s , Peter, and the multitudes (xxvi. 5 0 ; 5 2 - 5 4 ) ; three shedders of innocent blood, Judas, Pilate, and the people (xxvii. 4 ; 2 4 ; 2 5 ) ; three signs to attest the Messiahship of the Crucified, the rending of the veil, the earthquake, the resurrection of saints (xxvii. 5 1 - 5 3 ) ; three groups of witnesses to the Resurrection, the women, the soldiers, and the disciples (xxviii. x - 1 0 ; n - 1 5 ; i 6 - 2 o j ; the last words to the Church, a claim, a charge, and a promise (xxviii. 1 8 - 2 0 ) ; of which three the second was threefold, to make disciples, to baptize, and to teach ( 1 9 , 2 0 ) ; of which three the second again has a triple character : ' into the N a m e of the Father and of the Son and of the H o l y G h o s t ' (19). Many of these thirty-eight instances have no parallel passage in M k . or L k . In many of the others it will be found that the parallel passage omits one or more member of the triplet or adds one to i t ; e.g. L k . (vi. 4 3 - 4 9 ) has the good and bad trees, and the wise and foolish builders, but not the broad and narrow way. Elsewhere (xiii. 24) he has the narrow door, but no broad or

P L A N OF T H E

GOSl'KL

xxi

wide door. F o r ' j u d g m e n t , mercy, a n d f a i t h ' Lk. (xi. 42) lias ' j u d g m e n t a n d t h e love of God.' H e has (\i. 39, 42) the cleansing of c u p a n d dish, a n d the tithing of small herbs, hut he omits t h e straining out of the gnat. For the threefold ' B e not a n x i o u s , ' h e has (xii. 22, 29, 32) ' B e not anxious,' ' S e e k not",' ' F e a r not.' O11 the other hand, for heart, soul, a n d mind he has (x. 27) heart, soul, strength, and mind. T h e r e can be n o d o u b t that some of these triplets were in t h e sources which both Mt. a n d Lk. used, for both Gospels have them. I n a few cases it is just possible that Lk. derived them from Mt. ; b u t it is m u c h more reasonable to assign their origin to the s o u r c e s ; e.g. the three temptations probably come from s o m e u n k n o w n s o u r c e ; t h e three addresses to t h e T h r e e in G e t h s e m a n e are in Mk,, though not in Lk., a n d may be assigned to Mk. ; a n d there are other triplets, not included in t h e above list, which are in b o t h Mt. a n d Lk. and may be attributed to the sources which they u s e d ; e.g. ' a s k , ' ' s e e k , ' ' k n o c k ' (vii. 7 ; Lk. xi. 9 ) ; reed, m a n in soft clothing, prophet (xi. 7 - 9 ; Lk. vii. 2 4 - 2 6 ) ; Chorazin, Bethsaida, C a p e r n a u m (xi. 2 0 - 2 3 ; Lk. x. 1 3 - 1 5 ) . But, when all deductions are made, there remains a considerable n u m b e r of triplets which M t . has constructed either by grouping or by modifications in wording. Groups of five are less common. Mt. has m a r k e d off for us five great discourses, each of which is closed by him with the s a m e formula, ' I t came to pass when J e s u s finished' (e'yeVero ore cre'Accrev 0 'IjjcroSi), vii. 28, xi. I, xiii. 53, xix. I, xxvi. 1. These five discourses a r e : the Sermon on the M o u n t ; t h e address to the Apostles ; the collection of parables ; t h e discourse on the little child with the sayings which follow i t ; a n d the great apocalyptic discourse. T h e Sermon 011 t h e M o u n t contains five corrections of inadequate conceptions a b o u t the Law, each of them i n t r o d u c e d by the words, ' B u t I say unto y o u ' (v. 22, 28, 34, 39, 44) j a n d in the apocalyptic discourse there are two parables in which t h e n u m b e r five is prominent, the five wise a n d the five foolish virgins, a n d the five talents which gained other five. I n chapters xxi. a n d xxii. there are five questions ; a b o u t authority, tribute, resurrection, great c o m m a n d m e n t s , a n d the Son of David. Of the five great discourses, the address to the Twelve (x. 5 - 1 5 ; 1 6 - 2 3 J 2 4 ~ 3 3 ; 3 4 - 3 9 i 4 0 - 4 2 ) and the great eschatological discourse (xxiv. 5 - 1 4 ; 1 5 5 1 ; xxv. 1 - 1 3 ; 14- 30 ; 3 1 - 4 6 ) can b e divided into five p a r a g r a p h s ; but the latter can also be conveniently divided into seven (xxiv. 5 1 4 ; -28; 2 9 - 3 1 5 3 2 ~ 5 1 J xxv. 1 - 1 3 ; 14 3 ° ; 3 ' 4r>). T h e discourses in ch. xi. ( 7 - 1 9 ; 2 0 - 2 4 ; 2 5 - 3 0 ) a n d in ch. xviii. ( 3 - 1 4 ; 1 5 - 2 0 ; 2 1 - 3 5 ) fall readily into three divisions ; but by further subdivision they can be m a d e into five. T h e Sermon on the M o u n t can also be

xxii

GOSl'KL ACCORDING TO S. MATTHEW

divided into five parts (v. 3 - 1 6 ; 1 7 - 4 8 ; vi. 1 - 1 8 ; 19-vii. 6 ; 7-27), and some of these parts can be readily subdivided into five or three paragraphs. We have seen that this Gospel can be placed side by side with Mk. and analysed into five main divisions. This means omitting the first two chapters, which have no parallel in Mk. If we add these two chapters as an Introduction, and break the last great division into two (xxi. i - x x v . 4 6 ; xxvi. i-xxviii. 20), thus separating the last days of work from the 1'assion, Death, and Resurrection, we have a Gospel in seven main divisions. But the clearest examples of grouping by seven are the seven parables in ch. xiii. and the seven woes in ch. xxiii. Some find seven Beatitudes at the opening of the Sermon, and seven petitions in the Lord's Prayer. It is also possible to find a group of seven in vi. 2 5 - 3 4 (see notes there); and there are some who think that the separate instructions to the Twelve have been gathered up by Mt. " into a single sevenfold commission," It has been already pointed out that a fivefold division seems to fit this discourse well; but, if we are to find a seven in the Mission of the Twelve, we shall find it more securely in the seven centres of work which resulted from it,-— our Lord, and six pairs of Apostles. It is plain from what has just been stated that groups of five and groups of seven are far less frequent in this Gospel than groups of three. Even if we were to count all the possible instances of five and of seven, they would hardly amount to half the number of triplets. The five great discourses, the seven parables, and the seven woes are evidently intentional groupings. Many of the others which have been suggested may be intended also ; but we cannot be certainThere is nothing fanciful or mystical in these numerical arrangements. Groups of three and of seven are frequent in the O.T., and were in use before its earliest books were written. Three is the smallest number which has beginning, middle, and end, and it is composed of the first odd number added to the first even number. T h e days of the week, corresponding to phases of the moon, made seven to be typical of plurality and completeness. Although seven is a sacred number often in the O.T. and sometimes in the N.T.; e.g. in the Apocalypse, yet there is no clear instance of this use in the Gospels. All that the Evangelist need be supposed to imply by these numerical groupings is orderly arrangement. Everything in the Gospel history took place and was spoken tvirxr/p.0vm rat Kara. rd^iv (1 Cor. xiv. 40); and everything must be narrated 'decently and in order.'

P L A N OF TIIF. C.OSi'KL

xxin

It is possible that these groupings into threes, or fives, or sevens, or tens would aid the memory of both teachers and learners, and would in this way be useful to catechists. It is also possible that the E v a n g e l i s t had this end in \iew in making these numerical groups. Sir J o h n H a w k i n s (//one SymtfUi«-, p. 1 3 1 ) favours such a theory. " T h i s seems to have been done in J e w i s h fashion, a n d perhaps especially for the use ol Jewish-Christian catechists a n d catechumens, . . . W h e n we think of the five books of the Pentateuch, the I've b o o k s of Psalms, the five Megilloth, the five divisions which Dr. E d e r s h e i m and others trace in Ecclesiasticus, the live parts which M r . Charles as well as previous scholars see in the I took of E n o c h (pp. 2 5 - 3 2 ; Hastings' DB. art. ' E n o c h ' ) , and the five Pereqs which m a k e up the Pirqe Aboth, it is hard to believe that it is by accident that we find in S. Matthew the live times repeated formula about J e s u s ' e n d i n g ' H i s sayings (vli. 2>-, xi. 1 , xiii. 5 3 , xix. 1, xxvi. 1). A r e we not reminded of the colophon which still closes the second book of Psalms, ' T h e prayers of D a v i d the son of J e s s e are e n d e d ' (Ps. lxxii. 20) " C o m p . also, ' T h e words of J o b are e n d e d ' ( J o b xxxi. .10). Of course the fact that Mt. consciously m a d e five great discourses does not prove that he did so in order to assist the memory of catechists and catechumens, but some of his numerical groups may h a v e h a d this aim. Other instances of the occurrences of these and other numbers in this G o s p e l might be c i t e d ; but they are of less importance. S o m e of them are probably to be understood quite literally. It so happened that there were three, or five, or s e v e n ; as in Peter's proposal for three t a b e m a cles, or the five loaves and the five thousand, or the seven loaves and the seven baskets. I n other cases it is a round number, as in Peter's question, ' U n t i l seven t i m e s ? ' B u t the examples given a b o v e fully justify the statement that these numerical arrangements are a characteristic of the First Gospel. I t is this intense desire for what is orderly that has caused the Evangelist to gather together detached sayings of the Messiah a n d group them into continuous discourses. T h e large proportion of discourses in this Gospel has often been pointed out, a n d it is one of the reasons which quickly made the Gospel so much more popular than the earlier G o s p e l of Mark. In M k . about half consists of discourses, in L k . about two-thirds, in Mt. about three-fourths. T h e main portion of Mt., the ministry in Galilee a n d the neighbourhood (iv. 1 2 - x v i i i . 35), is e x p a n d e d from M k . chiefly by the insertion of discourses, and it seems to be arranged on a fairly symmetrical plan. 1 . Opening

c

activities, grouped round a prophecy of

Isaiah

XXIV

G O S P E L A C C O R D I N G TO S. M A T T H E W

(Mt. iv. 15, 16), and ending with the Sermon on the Mount (iv. 12-vii. 29). 2. Ten acts of Messianic Sovereignty, grouped round a prophecy of Isaiah (Mt. viii. 17), and ending with the Charge to the Apostles (viii. i - x . 42). 3. Many utterances of Messianic Wisdom, grouped round a prophecy of Isaiah (Mt. xii. 1 8 - 2 1 ) , and ending in seven illustrations of teaching by parables, which are grouped round Ps. lxxviii. 2 (xi. i-xiii. 58). 4. Continued activities in and near Galilee, grouped round a prophecy of Isaiah (Mt. xv. 8, 9), and ending in the discourses on offences and forgiveness (xiv. i-xviii. 35). Thus, chapters v.-vii., x., xiii., and xviii. seem to be intended as conclusions to definite sections of the Gospel, and they consist almost entirely of discourses. The compiler's preference for discourses is shown, not only by his insertion of them, but by his abbreviation of mere narrative. He frequently, as we have seen, omits details. He cares little about local colour or chronological order. His aim is to produce a definite impression—the Messianic dignity of Jesus. This aim is clear from the outset. ' Book of the generation of Jesus, Messiah, Son of David, Son of Abraham' (i. 1). T h e descent from David is emphasized (xii. 23, xxi. 9, 15, xxii. 42) as indicating that H e is the Messianic King (ii. 2, xxi. 5, xxvii. n , 29, 37, 42). The book is at once Jewish and anti-Jewish. It is manifestly written by a Jew for Jews. Its Jewish tone is conspicuous throughout. Palestine is 'the Land of Israel' (ii. 20, 21); its people are ' I s r a e l ' (viii. 10) or 'the lost sheep of the house of Israel' (x. 6, xv. 2 4 ) ; its towns are ' the cities of Israel' (x. 2 3 ) ; and God is 'the God of Israel' (xv. 3r). Jerusalem is ' the holy city' (iv. 5, xxvii. 53), an expression found in Is. xlviii. 2, lii. 1 ; Dan. ix. 2 4 ; Tob. xiii. 9 ; but in the N.T. peculiar to this Gospel and the equally Jewish book of Revelation (xi. 2, xxi. 2, 10, xxii. 19). References to the fulfilment of Jewish prophecies abound (i. 22, ii. 6, 15, 17, 23, iii. 3, iv. 14, viii. 1 7 , xii. 17, xiii. 14, 35, xxi. 4, xxiv. 15, xxvi. 3 1 , 54, 56, xxvii. 9). It is evidently the aim of the Evangelist to let his fellow-Christians of the house of Israel know the certainty of that in which they had been instructed, viz. that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah foretold in prophecy. And the book is anti-Jewish in showing that, although the Messiah was of them, and came to them first (x. 5, 6), yet by their rejection of Him they had lost their birthright of priority. T h e old exclusive barriers had been broken down, and the Kingdom of Israel had become a Kingdom of the Heavens, open to all nations. In order to enjoy the Messianic glory, the Jew must cease to be a

T H E CIIRISTOLOGY

OF T H E

K I R S T COST'EI,

xxv

J e w , m u s t b e c o m e a C h r i s t i a n , with J e s u s as his M e s s i a h , a n d b e a s u b j e c t in a K i n g d o m that was n o l o n g e r J e w i s h . Thus this G o s p e l r e p r e s e n t s a m o m e n t of transition, a p a s s a g e f r o m the p e c u l i a r p e o p l e to the whole race of m a n k i n d . O n the o n e h a n d , the M e s s i a h is c o m e , ' n o t to d e s t r o y but to f u l f i l ' (v. 1 7 , i S ) , a n d , as regards H i s work on earth, is sent only to I s r a e l (xv. 24). B u t , on the other h a n d , the L a w a n d the P r o p h e t s find their limit in the B a p t i s t (xi. 1 2 , 1 3 ) ; the S o n of M a n is L o r d of the S a b b a t h (xii. 8 ) ; t h e r e is n o moral pollution in f o o d (xv. 1 1 , 1 9 ) ; the K i n g d o m is a b o u t to be t r a n s f e r r e d to others (xxi. 4 3 , c o m p . viii. 1 1 , 1 2 ) ; a n d the G o s p e l of t h e K i n g d o m is to be p r e a c h e d in all the w o r l d to all p e o p l e s (xxi.v. 1 4 ) . And thus the b o o k , w h i c h o p e n s within the narrow limits of J e w i s h thought, with the origin of the M e s s i a h as ' S o n of D a v i d ' a n d ' S o n of A b r a h a m ' (i. 1 ) , e n d s with the great c o m m i s s i o n of the M e s s i a h to t h e ' little flock' of J e w s that h a d not shared in the national rejection of H i m , ' G o y e a n d m a k e disciples of all the n a t i o n s ' (xxviii. 1 9 ) .

THE

CHRISTOLOGY

OF T H E F I R S T

GOSPEL.

W e h a v e j u s t s e e n that the i m p r e s s i o n w h i c h this E v a n g e l i s t desires to e n f o r c e is that of the rights of sovereignty w h i c h J e s u s p o s s e s s e d , in the first p l a c e o v e r the a n c i e n t p e o p l e of I s r a e l , a n d , after their rejection of H i m as the M e s s i a n i c K i n g , o v e r all t h e n a t i o n s of t h e earth. T h e K i n g of I s r a e l by right of d e s c e n t b e c o m e s , as M e s s i a h , the K i n g of the world. F o r H e is n o t only the S o n of A b r a h a m a n d t h e S o n of D a v i d , but also t h e S o n of M a n a n d t h e S o n of G o d . The Son of Man. I t is s p e c i a l l y in the F i r s t G o s p e l that our L o r d is set b e f o r e us as the S o n of M a n . T h e expression occurs f r e q u e n t l y in all f o u r G o s p e l s ; a b o u t 80 times in all, of w h i c h 4 0 or m o r e times a r e distinct occasions. A n d the e x p r e s s i o n is invariably u s e d b y C h r i s t , a n d of H i m s e l f . N o Evangelist s p e a k s of H i m as the S o n of M a n , or represents a n y o n e as a d d r e s s i n g H i m as the S o n of M a n , or as m e n t i o n i n g H i m by this d e s i g n a t i o n . O u r L o r d , like m a n y J e w s of P a l e s t i n e in H i s d a y , s p o k e b o t h A r a m a i c a n d G r e e k , but H e , n o d o u b t , commonly spoke Aramaic. F r o m this fact, a n d f r o m the a s s u m p t i o n that, so far as we k n o w , the d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n ' son of m a n ' in the s e n s e of ' h u m a n b e i n g ' (vios avdpw-rrov = o avOpw7ros) a n d ' the S o n of M a n ' (o wos TOV avOptDttov) c o u l d n o t b e e x p r e s s e d in A r a m a i c , 1 it has b e e n a r g u e d that o u r L o r d 1 This is assumption, and not fact. It is more reasonable to assume, from the use in Daniel and the Book of Enoch, that it must have been possible to express this difference in Aramaic (see Allen, St, Matthew, p. lxxiii).

xxvi

GOSPEL A C C O R D I N G T O S. M A T T H E W

never called Himself ' the Son of M a n . ' In passing, it may be urged that Christ sometimes spoke Greek, and that it is possible that H e may have used the very words B vlos TOV avOpunrov of Himself. But, in any case, the conclusion drawn from the linguistic peculiarities of Aramaic is far short of demonstration, and it is incredible. It is contradicted by the whole of the evidence that bears directly on the subject. It assumes that, although H e never used the title, all four Evangelists have insisted upon giving it to H i m r e p e a t e d l y : and yet in the Gospels we find that they never use it of H i m , but report that ]fe frequently used it. O n any theory of authorship, the Gospels represent the memories of people who must have known whether Christ used this remarkable expression of Himself or not. A n d we may be sure that, the further we get away from the memories of the first generation of disciples, the less likelihood there would be of any such title being invented and put into Christ's mouth. Something expressing His Divinity rather than H i s humanity would have been chosen. W e may regard the unanimous testimony of the four Gospels as decisive respecting H i s use of the t e r m ; and His use of it explains that of Stephen (Acts vii. 56), w h o would know the Gospel tradition. T h e compiler of Matthew found the expression used 14 times in M a r k ; and he has kept all these. 1 Besides these cases, he uses it 19 times. T h a t means that he found it in both his two main sources, Mark and the L o g i a or collection of Utterances ( Q ) ; for most of the additional 19 must have c o m e from this second source. T h a t again is strong evidence that the phrase was used by C h r i s t : and also that our Evangelist welcomed the phrase as significant and appropriate; for his treatment of Mark shows that he did not scruple to omit, or even to alter, what he did not approve. T h e passage in Daniel, ' O n e like a son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and c a m e to the A n c i e n t of Days,' and received a dominion which is universal and eternal (vii. 13, 14), 2 " Doubts have been thrown, on linguistic grounds, upon the use by our Lord of the title Son of Man with reference to Himself. Those doubts have receded ; and I do not think that they will ever be urged with so much insistence again. . . . Here is an expression which can only go back to our Lord Himself, and it bears speaking testimony to the fidelity with which H i s words have been preserved " (Sanday, The Life of Christ in Recent Research, pp. 123-125 ; see also pp. 65-69, 100, 159, 190). 1 There is an apparent exception in xvi. 21, which is no real exception, for the term is used by anticipation in xvi. 13. In 8 cases the phrase is common to Mt., M k . , and L k . In 8 it is common to Mt. and L k . In 9 it is found in Mt. alone. In 8 it is found in L k . alone. In. has it 12 times. T h e total for the four Gospels is 81 times. - Dan. vii. 18 seems to show that this ' S o n of Man,' like the 'beasts,' is

T H E C H R I S T O L O G Y OF T H E F I R S T G O S P E L

xxvii

and several passages in E n o c h (xlvi., li. 4, liii. 6, cv. 2), which possibly are, but probably are not, post-Christian, show that the phrase h a d c o m e to be used of a D i v i n e Messiah. B u t there is nothing specially Christian in this supernatural Messiah. H e is the S o n of G o d , but H e is not the Word, not God. T h a t H e is to live on earth, or has lived on earth, a n d died, and risen again, is not hinted. I t is a Jewish, pre-Christian Messiah that is indicated by ' the S o n of M a n . ' But it may be securely asserted that the term was not commonly recognized among the J e w s as a n a m e for the Messiah. In that case, our L o r d , who carefully abstained from calling Himself the Messiah, would never, until H e had revealed H i m s e l f as the Messiah, have used the expression of H i m s e l f . I t is clear that that revelation was m a d e very gradually. U p to the question at Oesrtrea Philippi (Mt. xvi. 1 3 - 1 6 = M k . viii. 2 7 - 2 9 = L k . ix. 1 8 - 2 0 ' ) H e had not so revealed H i m s e l f : and even then H e forbade that this partial revelation should be m a d e public (Mt. xvi. 20=- Mk. viii. 30=-L k . ix. 2 1 ; Mt. xvii. 9 = M k . ix. 9 ; comp. L k . ix. 36). Y e t there are passages in which ' the S o n of M a n ' is used by our L o r d of H i m s e l f before the incident at Cicsarea I'hilippi. T h e r e are nine such in Matthew. A s our Evangelist so often groups things independently of chronology, we may believe that some of these nine cases, though placed before Caesarea Philippi, really took place afterwards. B u t that can hardly be the case with M t . ix. 6 = M k . ii. 1 0 = L k . v. 24,01- Mt. \ii. 8 - M k . ii. 3 8 = Lk. vi. 5, or M t . xii. 3 2 = L k . xii. to. We may be confident, therefore, that as J e s u s used this term of Himself so early in the Ministry, it cannot have been one which was generally known as a n a m e for the Messiah. O u r L o r d seems to h a v e chosen the expression because it h a d mysterious associations which were no! generally known, a n d because it was capable of r e c e h i n g additional associations of still greater importance. It was like H i s parables, able to conceal Divine truth from the unworthy, while it; revealed more and more to those whose hearts were being prepared to receive it. I t insisted upon the reality of His humanity a n d H i s unique position as a member of the human race. It hinted at supernatural birth. I t harmonized with Messianic claims, if it did not at once suggest them. A n d , when it b e c a m e connected with the future glories of the S e c o n d A d v e n t , it revealed what it had previously veiled respecting the present ofiice a n d eternal pre-existence of H i m in whom human nature found its highest and most complete expression. T h u s it canu: to indicate the to be understood collectively. They arc 'yanniiai uyr..i-,iies ; lie is the 'saints of the Most. High.' But in the l'>;ilnh >>l Kolnnn/n (xvii, xviii) and in the Apoc. of Batuch (lxxii. 2. 3), as in Kiux-h, ac clearly have an individual, who is both Kine; and fiul^e.

xxviii

GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. MATTHEW

meeting-point between what was humanly perfect with what was perfectly Divine. 1 The Son of God. Apart from the Fourth Gospel (v. 25, ix. 35 [?], x. 36, xi. 4), we could not be certain that our Lord used this expression of Himself; and even with regard to those passages we must allow for the possibility that S. John is giving what he believed to be Christ's meaning rather than the words actually used. In Mt. xvi. 16, for ' the Christ, the Son of the living God,' Mk. has only 'the Christ,' and Lk. 'the Christ of God.' In Mt. xxvi. 63 we are on surer ground; there 'the Christ, the Son of God,' is supported by Mk.'s ' the Christ, the Son of the Blessed,' and by Lk.'s ' the Son of God.' And we have it in the voice from heaven at the Baptism (iii. i 7 = Mk. i. n = Lk. iii. 22) and at the Transfiguration (xvii. 5 = Mk. ix. 7 = Lk. ix. 3 5 ) ; in the devil's challenge (iv. 3, 6 = Lk. iv. 3, 9 ) ; in the cries of the demoniacs (viii. 29 = Mk. v. 7 = Lk. viii. 2 8 ; comp. Mk. iii. 1 1 ) ; and in the centurion's exclamation (xxvii. 54 = Mk. xv. 39). But, allowing for all critical uncertainties, we may regard it as securely established that expressions of this kind were used both by our Lord and of Him during His life on earth. Dispassionate study of the Gospels, even without the large support which they receive in this particular from the Epistles, will convince us that Jesus knew that H e possessed, and was recognized by some of those who knew Him as possessing, a relation of Sonship to God such as was given to no other member of the human race. A merely moral relationship, in which Jesus reached a higher grade than other holy persons, is quite inadequate to explain the definite statements and general tone of the Gospels. T o take a single instance; the parable of the Wicked Husbandmen indicates clearly His own view of His relationship to God who sent Him. There had been many sent, but all the others were servants. H e is the only ' son,' the sole ' heir,' the one whose rejection and murder at once produces a crisis fatal to the wrong-doers. As Dalman says, Jesus " made it indubitably clear that H e was not only a but the'Son of God." 2 The sovereignty of which H e was the heir was the sovereignty over the world and over all its tenants. It is evident that the editor of this Gospel is fully convinced of the appropriateness of this far-reaching expression. If 'the Son of the living G o d ' has been added by him to Peter's confession (xvi. 16), it is because he felt that the addition was 1 See Hastings' DR. ii. pp. 622 ff. and iv. pp. 579 IT. ; also Sanday, Outlines of the Life of Chris!, pp. 92 ff. ; Calmes, /ivangile scion S. Jean, pp. 1 5 9 f t - ; Xahn 011 Mt. viii, 1 8 ; Drummcmd in Journal of Theological Studies, April and July 1901. 2 The Words of Jesus, p. 280. See also Hastings' Dli. ii. pp. 850 f., and iv. pp. 570 ff. ; Sanday, The Life of Christ in Recent Research, pp. 1 3 0 - 1 3 3 ; Gore, The New Theology' and the Old Religion, pp. 87-95.

THli CHRISTOLOGY OF T H E FIRST GOSPEL

xxix

necessary in order to express the full meaning of what the Apostle said. More often than any other Evangelist he records that the designation ' S o n of G o d ' was applied to Him (ii. 15, iii. 17, iv. 3, 6, viii. 29, xiv. 33, xvi. 16, xvii. 5, xxvi. 63. xxvii. 40, 43, 54). H e records the crucial passage in which He speaks of His relation to G o d as one of Sonship in a unique sense (xi. 2 5 - 2 7 ) , and also the two occasions on which God acknowledged H i m as His Son, His Beloved (iii. 1 7 , xvii. 5). And for this he prepares his readers by telling of His supernatural birth of a virgin, by conception of the Spirit of God, so that by prophetic sanction H e may be called ' God-with-us' (i. 20-23). And the Evangelist finds that this prophetic sanction extends throughout the career of the Son of God ; in the chief events of His infancy (ii. 5, 15, 17, 23), in the chief scene of His Ministry (iv. 14), and in the chief details of it. H e finds it in John's proclamation of His coming (iii. 3), in His healings (viii. 17), His retirement from public notice (xii. 17), the hardness of His hearers' hearts (xiii. 14), His consequent use of parables (xiii. 35), His riding into Jerusalem (xxi. 4), the flight of His disciples (xxvi. 3 1 ) , His capture by H i s enemies (xxvi. 54, 56), and even in the way in which the money paid for His blood was spent (xxvii. 9). He is ministered to by Angels (iv. 1 1 ) , who are at His disposal (xiii. 4 1 , xxi v. 3 1 ) , to use or not as H e wills (xxvi. 53), and who will attend Him in His future glory (xvi. 27, xxv. 3 1 ) . But the final purpose of the Son's mission was not simply to minister to the needs of men in body and soul, but ' to give His life a ransom for many ' (xx. 28) by shedding His blood for them (xxvi. 28). In the latter passage he adds to Mark's report that the blood is shed ' unto remission of sins.' 1 1 " J e s u s felt that H e stood in such closeness of communion -with God the Father as belonged to none before or after Him. He was conscious of speaking the last and decisive word : H e felt that what He did was final, and that no one would come after Him. The certainty and simple force of His work, the sunshine, clearness and freshness of His whole attitude rest upon this foundation. We cannot eliminate from His personality, without destroying it, the trait of superprophetic consciousness of the accomplisher io whose person the flight of the ages and the whole destiny of His followers is linked . . . L e t us contemplate this sovereign sense of leadership by which Jesus was possessed, and the inimitable sureness with which it unfolded itself in every direction. H e knew how to value the authorities of the past, but He placed Himself above them. H e was more of account than kings and prophets, than David, Solomon, and the Temple, The tradition of the elders l i e met with His ' But I say unto you,' and even Moses was not an author;;.} to whom H e gave unqualified submission."

A s Sanday points out, these are extraordinary admissions to be made by a writer (Bousset) who contends that the life of our Lord did not overstep the limits of the purely human. The facts, as lirusset himself states them, flatly contradict his own theory (The Life of Christ in Recent Research, pp.

189-191).

xxx

G O S P E L A C C O R D I N G T O S.

MATTHEW

T h e writer of this G o s p e l s h o w s us very plainly what J e s u s H i m s e l f thought of H i s own relations to G o d a n d to m a n . He sets H i m s e l f a b o v e the L a w (v. 2 2 - 4 4 , xii. 8) a n d the T e m p l e (xii. 6), and a b o v e all the P r o p h e t s f r o m M o s e s to the B a p t i s t , f o r J o h n is greater than the P r o p h e t s (xi. 9, r i ) , a n d H e is greater than J o h n (in. 1 4 , 1 5 , xi. 4 - 6 ) . T h e revelation w h i c h H e brings surpasses all that has b e e n r e v e a l e d b e f o r e (xi. 2 7 ) , a n d this revelation is to b e m a d e k n o w n , n o t m e r e l y to the C h o s e n P e o p l e (x. 6, xv. 24), but to all the nations (viii. i r , x x i v . 34, xxviii. 1 9 ) . H e is the S o u r c e of truth a n d of p e a c e (xi. 2 8 - 3 0 ) ; a n d a l t h o u g h H e H i m s e l f is m a n , H e c a n s p e a k of all other m e n as sinners (vii. 1 1 , x x v i . 4 5 ) . When the B a p t i s t shrinks f r o m admitting H i m to his baptism, H e d o e s n o t say that H e too has n e e d of c l e a n s i n g , but H e quiets J o h n ' s scruples by quite o t h e r m e a n s (iii. 1 5 ) . H e prays (xiv. 23), a n d prays for H i m s e l f ( x x v i . 3 9 , 42, 44), but H e n e v e r prays to b e forgiven. H e b i d s o t h e r s to pray f o r forgiveness, a n d for d e l i v e r a n c e f r o m t e m p t a t i o n (vi. 1 2 , 1 3 , xxvi. 4 1 ) , b u t H e n e v e r asks t h e m to pray f o r H i m . W i t h o u t proof, a n d without reserve, H e m a k e s e n o r m o u s c l a i m s u p o n the d e v o t i o n of H i s f o l l o w e r s (viii. 2 2 , x. 3 7 , 3 8 , x v i . 24), a n d H e says that the w a y to s a v e one's life is to lose it f o r H i s s a k e (x. 3 9 , xvi. 2 5 ) . H e c o n f e r s on Peter (xvi. 1 9 ) a n d o n all the A p o s t l e s (xviii. 1 9 ) authority to prohibit a n d to allow in the C h u r c h w h i c h H e is a b o u t to f o u n d ; a n d in the K i n g d o m w h i c h H e has a n n o u n c e d as at h a n d (iv. 1 7 ) H e p r o m i s e s to H i s A p o s t l e s thrones (xix. 28). T h e C h u r c h is H i s C h u r c h (xvi. 1 8 ) , t h e elect in it are H i s elect (xxiv. 3 1 ) , the K i n g d o m is H i s K i n g d o m (xvi. 28), a n d t h e A n g e l s in it a r e PI is A n g e l s (xiii. 4 1 , x x i v . 3 1 ) . E v e n during H i s life on earth H e has authority to f o r g i v e sins (ix, 6), a n d b y H i s d e a t h H e will r e c o n c i l e t h e s i n f u l race of m a n k i n d to G o d (xxvi. 28). A n d all this is little m o r e than the b e g i n n i n g . On the third d a y after H i s d e a t h H e will rise a g a i n (xvi. 2 1 , xvii. 2 3 , x x . 1 9 ) , a n d t h e n H e will possess G o d ' s authority in h e a v e n a n d i n e a r t h , a n d also H i s p o w e r of o m n i p r e s e n c e (xxviii. 1 8 , 20). A t a later p e r i o d H e will c o m e in glory to j u d g e the w h o l e world, to r e w a r d r i g h t e o u s n e s s a n d to p u n i s h u n r e p e n t e d sin (xvi. 2 7 , xxiv. 3 0 , 3 1 , 4 7 , 5 1 ) ; a n d the character of H i s j u d g m e n t s will d e p e n d u p o n the way in w h i c h m e n h a v e b e h a v e d towards those w h o are their brethren, b u t in H i s e y e s are His brethren a n d e v e n as H i m s e l f (xxv. 3 1 - 4 6 ) . 1 I n m o s t of these p a s s a g e s M t . is s u p p o r t e d by M k . (ii. 1 0 , 28, iii. r i , 1 2 , viii. 2 9 - 3 1 , 3 4 - 3 8 , ix. 9, 3 1 , 3 7 , x. 3 4 , 4 5 , xii. 6, xiii. 26, 2 7 , xiv. 3 5 - 3 9 , 6 2 , xv. 34, xvi. 6), to say n o t h i n g of the still stronger s u p p o r t to b e f o u n d in the F o u r t h G o s p e l . 1

See Briggs, Tht Ethical

Teaching ofJesus, pp. 199-206, 222.

THE

DATE

wxi

W e c a n n o t s u p p o s e that utterances such as these, so n u m e r o u s , so v a r i o u s , a n d y e t so h a r m o n i o u s , are the i n v e n t i o n of this or that E v a n g e l i s t . T h e y are b e y o n d the invention of a n y E v a n g e l i s t , a n d f e w of them are a n t i c i p a t e d in the O . T . In particular, there is n o hint in the O . T . of a second c o m i n g of the M e s s i a h ; it c a n n o t , therefore, b e m a i n t a i n e d that either J e s u s or the E v a n g e l i s t s d e r i v e d the i d e a of H i s c o m i n g again f r o m t y p e or p r o p h e c y . A n d what m a k e s the h y p o t h e s i s of i n v e n t i o n all the m o r e i n c r e d i b l e is the c o m b i n a t i o n in J e s u s of this c o n s c i o u s n e s s of D i v i n e p o w e r s with a c h a r a c t e r of d e e p h u m i l i t y , reticence, a n d restraint. W h i l e uttering these a m a z i n g claims with a serenity w h i c h i m p l i e s that they are i n d i s p u t a b l e , H e is still m e e k a n d lowly of heart (xi. 29), a l w a y s c h a r g i n g those w h o in s o m e m e a s u r e k n o w w h o H e is that they shall not m a k e H i m k n o w n (xii. 1 6 , xvi. 20, xvii. 9), b i d d i n g those w h o m H e has h e a l e d n o t to s p r e a d a b r o a d H i s f a m e (viii. 4, ix. 3 0 , xii. 1 6), d e c l a r i n g that H e c a m e n o t t o b e m i n i s t e r e d unto, but to minister (xx. 28), a n d in H i s ministering quite r e a d y to be stigmatized as t h e f r i e n d of tax-collectors a n d sinners (ix. n , xi. 1 9 ) . I f , then, criticism a c c e p t s t h e r e c o r d of H i s c l a i m s a n d of H i s a c t i o n s as s u b s t a n t i a l l y true, h o w are we to e x p l a i n t h e m ? W a s H e a n e c s t a t i c d r e a m e r , a f a n a t i c u n d e r the i n f l u e n c e of a gigantic d e l u s i o n ? T h i s question m a y b e a n s w e r e d by a n o t h e r . I s it c r e d i b l e that the limitless b e n e f i t s w h i c h h a v e b l e s s e d , a n d are daily b l e s s i n g , those w h o b e l i e v e that J e s u s is what H e c l a i m e d to be, are the o u t c o m e of a g i g a n t i c delusion ? The I n c a r n a t i o n e x p l a i n s all that is so p e r p l e x i n g a n d m y s t e r i o u s in the r e c o r d s of Christ's words a n d w o r k s , a n d in the s u b s e q u e n t h i s t o r y of the society which H e f o u n d e d . B u t nothing less than D i v i n i t y will e x p l a i n the d e v e l o p m e n t s in the life of J e s u s a n d of His Church. I f , therefore, the I n c a r n a t i o n is a fiction, if it is not true that G o d b e c a m e flesh a n d dwelt a m o n g us, then we m u s t a s s u m e t h a t flesh b e c a m e G o d , a n d that h y p o t h e s i s is, intellectually, a f a r greater difficulty t h a n G o d ' s b e c o m i n g m a n . T o m e n of this g e n e r a t i o n the I n c a r n a t i o n m a y s e e m to be i m p o s s i b l e , b u t with G o d all things are p o s s i b l e . 1 THE

DATE.

T h e t i m e a t which the u n k n o w n E v a n g e l i s t c o m p i l e d this G o s p e l c a n be fixed, within narrow limits, with a high d e g r e e of probability. A l l the e v i d e n c e that w e h a v e talis into place, if 1 S e e the notes on v. 2 1 , 2 2 , 4S, vii. 25. 2 4 - 2 9 , wii. 2 1 , 2 2 , ix. 1 2 , x. 1 6 - 1 8 , 3 2 , 39, xi. 2 3 , 24, xii. 4 1 , x \ . 28, xxii. 34, xxviii. i S ; Gore, The

New Theology and the Old Religion,

pp. 1 0 3 - 1 0 8 .

xxxii

GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. M A T T H E W

we suppose that he completed his work shortly before or (more probably) shortly after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. H e used Mark and a translation of the L o g i a which had been collected in ' H e b r e w ' by Matthew. T h e s e materials cannot well have been in existence much, if at all, before A.D. 65. The parenthesis in M k . xiii. 1 4 , ' l e t him that readeth understand,' is probably not to be taken as our Lord's words, directing attention to the saying in Daniel, for in M a r k Daniel is not m e n t i o n e d ; the parenthetical words are those of the Evangelist, warning the reader of his Gospel that, although the time to which the sign refers has not yet come, yet it must be near. T h i s seems to give us the time of the first march of the R o m a n s on Jerusalem (A.D. 66) as about the date for S. Mark's Gospel. 1 In xxiv. 1 5 our Evangelist retains the parenthesis. B u t we cannot use the same argument as to his date. H e does mention ' Daniel the Prophet,' and may understand the parenthesis as directing attention to the p r o p h e c y ; or he may have retained Mark's warning, although the reason for it had ceased to exist. Nevertheless, it is possible that both Gospels were completed before A.D. 70. B u t our Evangelist seems to have believed that the Second Advent would take place very soon, and would be closely connected with the tribulation caused by the destruction of J erusalem (xvi. 28, xxiv. 29, 34). A belief which caused our Lord's words to be so arranged as to produce this impression, would not have long survived the events of A.D. 70. When a year or two had passed, and the Second x\dvent had not taken place, the belief would be found to be erroneous. Therefore, while we can hardly place this Gospel as early as A.D. 65, we can hardly place it as late as A.D. 75. A n d , on the whole, a little after 70 is rather more probable than a little before. T h e later date gives more time for the publication of Mark and of the Logia in Greek. Moreover, ' the king was wroth, and he sent his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned their c i t y ' (xxii. 7) may be a direct reference to the destruction of Jerusalem regarded as a judgment on the murderers of the Messiah. A n d there is nothing in the Gospel which requires us to place it later than A.D. 75. T h e famous utterance, ' on this rock I will build M y c h u r c h ' (xvi. 18), must not be judged by the ideas which have gathered round it. ' On this rock I will build M y I s r a e l ' — t h e new Israel, that is to grow out of the old o n e , — is the meaning, a meaning quite in accordance with thoughts 1 The statement that Eusebius in his Chronicle places the composition of the First Gospel A.D. 41 = Abraham 2057, is untrue. The date of no Gospel is given in the Chronicle. For other statements see the Journal of Theological Studies, Jan. 1905, p. 203.

T H E DATK

"vX.XIll

that were current in the first generation of Christians. Still less does 1 tell it unto the Church : and if lie refuse to hear the Church a l s o ' (xviii. 1 7 ) point to a late date. T h e local community, either of Jews or of Jewish Christians, such as existed in Palestine from the time of Christ onwards, is what is meant. This early date is of importance in weighing the historical value of the Gospel. At the time when the compiler was at work on it many who had known the Lord were still living. Most of His Apostles may have been still alive. Oral traditions about Him were still current. Documents embodying still earlier traditions were in existence, and some of them were used by our Evangelist. It is possible—indeed, it is highly probable —that the sayings of Christ, which the Evangelist got from the translation of S. Matthew's Logia, and which form such a large portion of the Gospel, are the very earliest information which we possess respecting our Lord's teaching. In them we get back nearest to Him, of whom those sent to arrest Him testified : ' N e v e r man thus spake,' O¿SeVore l\aX-q••• tytvtTo p.l'/ a?). viii. 24. T h e r e w a s a greal earthq u a k e in th.e sea (creKJ/iu? tycucro iv tv daXacray).

xxiv. i i , 24. False Prop he IS foretold. xx iv. 29. The sun shall he d a r k e n e d . O n n p . x w i i . 45. 31. T h e v shall g a t h e r together (t?rLo vvai-ov-7Lv) H i s elect from t h e four winds. xxv. 33. l i e .shall set the s h e e p on Llis right h a n d , b u t the g o a t s on the left.

THE TESTAMENTS OK THE TWEl.Vli ¡'A FKiARl'HS

xlv

These tables give us more than sixty instances of resemblances between the Testaments and the First Gospel, of which nearly forty are concerned with the words of our Lord. More than twenty come from passages which have no corresponding passage in either Mk. or I.k. And in about ten of those which are in both Mt. and Lk. the possible parallel in the Testaments is closer to Mt. than to Lk. The preponderating similarity between the Testaments and Mt. is therefore strong, and it can be readily explained, if it was the Gospels which influenced the Testaments. What is the explanation, if ihc Testaments influenced the Gospels ? In several instances the .Armenian version omits the words which produce the resemUance ; and that fact creates a certain amount of probability that the resemblance is due to changes which are later than that version. Again, in some of the passages where these resemblances art- found there are differences of reading, and the resemblance is confmea to one of the variants. Zebulon viii. 6 ( i S ) is instructive. We have three readings: Kal to t/joVoj-Oi' u.avL'C^i (>:// l) : rrjv .'rnpiiv ¿{¡¡avifci (a e f , A, S l ) : o yap ¡JwrjiriKOKOs cnrXoey\va iXiows ouk i\€t (/'£")• The first of these recalls Mt. vi. 16 ; the last recalls Lk. i. 78. Are we to suppose that Mt. knew the one reading, and Lk. the other? Or did one scribe of the Testaments remember Mt., and the other Lk. ? In Levi v. 3 (59) Dr. Charles ivmself suggests that instead of CRXUR&YCREMI T O Karwirerturpa TO?• ¡uou we ought perhaps to read a-^urO-ijo^rtii TO a'Sv¡/.a, for eVSma is found in most texts : and certainly " s o as not to cover your shame" is a more fitting consequence of rending garments than of rending the Temple veil. We may therefore suppose that the reading to KaTairera. 1490). See 011 iv. 7 in the commentary attributed to Victorians (Migne, /'. L .

v. 324)-

- In the second century it was commonly believed thai M a r y was of the family of D a v i d ; Justin M . , Try. 43, 45, 100 ; Irenreus, i n . xxi. 5 ; Tert. Adv. Jud. 9 ; Ascension of Isaiah, x. 2 ; Gosp. of the Nativity of M a r y , i. 1. 3

Interpreter, January 1906, p. 199.

1.18-25]

THE

MESSIAH'S

JUkTIl

AND

INKAXCY

3

Evangelist is suggesting a parallel between them and the Virgin mother; and it is not easy to see how their inelusion in the genealogy is any answer to the slander which circulated among the J e w s in the second century, and possibly in the first, that Jesus was born out of wedlock and was the son of a paramour. It is more likely that this parade of names that might he supposed to be unfit for insertion in the pedigree of the Messiah is intended to teach that H e who ' c a m e not to call the righteous, but sinners' (ix. 13), and who so commended the faith uf those who were not of Israel (viii. 10, xv. .28; comp, Lk. xvii. 18, xix. 5), was Himself descended from flagrant .sinners and from a stranger. T h e difficulties connected with the details of the two pedigrees have been abundantly discussed in commentaries and in Dictionaries of the Bible, as well as in separate treatises, and to these the reader is referred. I t is sufficient to sav here that, although the difficulties are not such as to convict the pedigrees of being fictitious, it cannot be said that the proposed solutions of the difficulties are in most rases satisfactory. That there are errors in both lists of names is neither unlikely nor very important. Errors respecting matters of far greater moment can be shown to exist in the Bible, and there is nothing that need perplex us if errors are found here. T h e r e a d i n g in ver. 1 6 is uncertain, a n d it i- possible thai 110 G r e e k M S . has p r e s e r v e d the original text. If in e x p r e s s i n g the legal r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n J e s u s a n d J o s e p h Lhe b . v a n g e i b t use'! w o r d s whieh might tie u n d e r stood as e x p r e s s i n g actual p a t e r n i t y , sae'n w o l d s wouid .he l i k e l y to he c h a n g e d , a n d p e r h a p s altered in more « a y s than one. W h a t e v e r the r e a d i n g , it is quite certain f r o m what f o l l o w s w h a t the writer m e a n s . S e e Sanda'v, Outlines of the Life of Chris/, pp. 1 9 7 - 2 0 0 ; J i u r k i U , lirair;eiisn ,UtJMspharrsshc, ii. p. 2 6 2 ; X e s ' J e , 7- . ' ' Cri!isis>n of iiis \. /'. pp. 2 4 8 , 1 - r ^; 1 3 2 ; 2 4 9 ; K e n y o n , textual C si us s m / ths , \ . /. pp. 1 s..

/arm. Ehileilung, ii. pp. 292, .?.

I. 18-25. 'The Messiah's

Supernatural

Birth,

It is evident that the Virgin-birth did not belong to the main stream of Apostolic tradition. T h e two narratives of it come from private sources, Matthew's from Joseph, Luke's from Mary. H e r e we have the husband's impressions, his dismay and perplexity, his humane decision, and his submission to the bivine revelation. T h e r e we have the mother's impressions, her trouble and amazement, and her submission to the Divine decree. The two narratives are wholly independent, as their great differences show. T h e s e differences do not amount to contradictions, though we do not know how 10 harmonize them : and they

4

GOSPEL

ACCORDING

TO

S. M A T T H E W

[I. 1 8 - 2 5

are c o n f i n e d to details. 1 T h e y c o n f i r m the g e n e r a l trustworthiness of each narrative, f o r n e i t h e r c a n h a v e b e e n b a s e d on the other. T h e two accounts agree, not only as to the m a i n fact of the Virgin-birth, but also as to the m a n n e r of i t , — t h a t it took p l a c e through the a g e n c y of the H o l y Spirit. A n d this agreement c a n n o t b e due to the i n f l u e n c e of the Old T e s t a m e n t u p o n both writers. T h e r e is no such o p e r a t i o n of the H o l y Spirit o n a virgin in the O l d T e s t a m e n t , in w h i c h the very e x p r e s s i o n ' H o l y S p i r i t ' is rare. A n d elsewhere in the N e w T e s t a m e n t t h e I n c a r n a t i o n is i n d i c a t e d in a totally different way ( J n . i. 1 4 ) . A n d the two narratives agree with regard to f o u r other points, b e s i d e s the two central f a c t s just m e n t i o n e d . T h e y both s a y that, at the time when the D i v i n e will was m a d e k n o w n to M a r y a n d to J o s e p h , the two were e s p o u s e d to one another, that the C h i l d was to be called ' J e s u s , ' that H e was born at B e t h l e h e m in Juckea, a n d that the parents b r o u g h t H i m up at N a z a r e t h . T h e a c c o u n t in M a t t h e w is f u r t h e r c o n f i r m e d by its a c c u r a c y with regard to J e w i s h feeling a n d I,aw. J o s e p h ' s attitude is i n d i c a t e d with great naturalness a n d d e l i c a c y , a n d the necessity for divorce, although the m a r r i a g e h a d not yet taken p l a c e , is clearly shown. 'With the J e w s , e s p o u s a l was m u c h m o r e serious than a n ' e n g a g e m e n t ' is with us, a n d c o u l d b e s e v e r e d o n l y b y divorce.2 T h e d e l i c a c y a n d sobriety of b o t h narratives are f u r t h e r signs of historic reality. I t is true that m o r e or less a n a l o g o u s stories are to be f o u n d b o t h in p a g a n a n d in J e w i s h literature. But G e n t i l e readers w o u l d feel the u n s p e a k a b l e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n L u k e ' s narrative a n d the i m p u r e l e g e n d s a b o u t intercourse b e t w e e n mortals a n d deities in h e a t h e n m y t h o l o g y ; a n d J e w i s h readers, if they c o m p a r e d this c h a p t e r with the coarse i m a g i n a t i o n s of their own people in the B o o k of E n o c h (vi., xv., lxix., Ixxxvi., cvi.), w o u l d feel a similar contrast. A n d C h r i s t i a n legends e x h i b i t the like instructive contrast. T h e A p o c r y p h a l G o s p e l s , when they m a k e a d d i t i o n s to the C a n o n i c a l G o s p e l s , show that, e v e n with these to c o p y f r o m , the early C h r i s t i a n s c o u l d p r o d u c e nothing similar. T h e i r i n v e n t i o n s arc distressing in their unseemliness. I f the two E v a n g e l i s t s h a d sought material in l e g e n d s of pagan or J e w i s h or Christian origin, we should, h a v e h a d something very different f r o m the narratives w h i c h h a v e b e e n the j o y a n d the inspiration of C h r i s t e n d o m through c o u n t l e s s generations. 1 " Between these two accounts of Mt. and L k . 110 contradiction e x i s t s " (O. Iloltzmann, Life of Jesus, p. 85). As to the witness of S. Mark, see Vincent M ' X a b b , fonrnal of Theological Studies, April 1907, p. 448. 2 Apparently Joseph had made up his mind that divorce was the only

thing possible ; efiovk-qdrj airoXvaac, not ivQviiovp-evov (19, 20).

efiovXero:

e v d i n o t

I. 18-25]

THE

MESSIAH'S

liIRTIT

AND

INFANCY

5

A n d e a c h E v a n g e l i s t g i v e s his a c c o u n t of the m a r v e l a s historical. H e b e l i e v e s it h i m s e l f , a n d is c o n f i d e n t that it will carry conviction. A n d it is not e a s y to s e e h o w either n a r r a t i v e c o u l d h a v e o r i g i n a t e d w i t h o u t a n historical f o u n d a t i o n . Nothing in early C h r i s t i a n literature w a r r a n t s us in b e l i e v i n g t h a t a writer of the first o r s e c o n d c e n t u r y c o u l d h a v e i m a g i n e d s u c h things a n d d e s c r i b e d t h e m thus. A s the other two G o s p e l s s h o w , t h e story of the V i r g i n - b i r t h is n o t r e q u i r e d to e x p l a i n t h e h i s t o r y of the M i n i s t r y , P a s s i o n , a n d R e s u r r e c t i o n . 1 T h i s history, a l t h o u g h it is g r e a t l y i l l u m i n a t e d w h e n the V i r g i n - b i r t h is a d d e d , is q u i t e intelligible w i t h o u t it, a n d p r o b a b l y m a n y of t h e first C h r i s t i a n s p a s s e d a w a y w i t h o u t e v e r r e c e i v i n g this i l l u m i n a t i n g a d d i t i o n t o t h e i r f a i t h . M o r e o v e r , both n a r r a t i v e s are i n t e n s e l y J e w i s h in t o n e ; a n d it is not l i k e l y that J u d a i s m , with its very high e s t i m a t e of the b l e s s i n g s of m a r r i a g e , w o u l d h a v e i n v e n t e d e i t h e r of t h e m . O f the t w o a c c o u n t s , t h a t by S. L u k e is p r o b a b l y n e a r e r to the o r i g i n a l s o u r c e . T h e r e is n o t h i n g i m p r o b a b l e in the h y p o thesis that h e r e c e i v e d it, p o s s i b l y in writing, f r o m M a r y h e r s e l f . S h e p e r h a p s k e p t it to h e r s e l f ( L k . ii. 5 2 ) till late in l i f e ; a n d , if there w a s a n y o n e b e t w e e n h e r a n d the E v a n g e l i s t , it is n o t l i k e l y that t h e n a r r a t i v e p a s s e d t h r o u g h m a n y h a n d s b e f o r e it r e a c h e d him. W i t h J o s e p h ' s a c c o u n t of the m a t t e r it m a y h a v e b e e n otherwise. H e s e e m s to h a v e d i e d l o n g b e f o r e his wife, a n d w h a t h e h a d to tell m a y h a v e p a s s e d t h r o u g h m a n y h a n d s b e f o r e it w a s written d o w n as w e h a v e it here. One may conjecture that J a m e s , the L o r d ' s brother, w a s o n e of t h o s e w h o h a n d e d it on to the E v a n g e l i s t . I t h a s b e e n u r g e d that the d o u b l e r e v e l a t i o n i n d i c a t e s f i c t i o n ; if a D i v i n e a n n o u n c e m e n t h a d b e e n really m a d e to either M a r y or J o s e p h , a r e p e t i t i o n of it to the other would h a v e b e e n n e e d less. T h i s is n o t s o u n d criticism. T h e annunciation to M a r y was n e c e s s a r y , in o r d e r to s a v e h e r f r o m cruel p e r p l e x i t y as to her subsequent condition. A n a n n u n c i a t i o n to J o s e p h was e q u a l l y n e c e s s a r y : h e c o u l d not h a v e b e l i e v e d s o a m a z i n g a story, if h e h a d h a d o n l y M a r y ' s w o r d f o r it. A g a i n , it h a s b e e n u r g e d t h a t b o t h n a r r a t i v e s a r e to b e d i s t r u s t e d , b e c a u s e h e r e J o s e p h r e c e i v e s the D i v i n e a n n o u n c e m e n t s in d r e a m s , w h i l e in L k . M a r y r e c e i v e s them in h e r waking moments. C e r t a i n l y it is p o s s i b l e that the s u p e r n a t u r a l a g e n c y is in e a c h c a s e d u e to t h e i m a g i n a t i o n of the w r i t e r : h e k n e w that a r e v e l a t i o n was m a d e , a n d he c o n j e c t u r e d the w a y in w h i c h the D i v i n e m e s s a g e w a s c o m m u n i c a t e d . Hut it is a l s o 1 B o t h S . M a r k a n d S . J o h n c o n f i r m the- Y i r ^ i i i - b i n h , though they d o not mention it. M a r k c a l l s J e s u s the ' S o n of M a r v ' (vi. 3 ) and the ' S o n of G o d ' (i. 1 ) , but h e n o w h e r e calls H i m the S o n of J o s e p h . J o h n sometimes corrects the earlier G o s p e l s , but he d o e s not correct the V i r g i n - b i r t h (i. 1 4 ) .

6

GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. M A T T H E W

[i. 18-25

possible that the mode of communication was in each case suited to the character of the person who received it. Mt. does not always give us dreams or object to Angels (iv. u , xxviii. 5 - 7 ) ; nor does S. L u k e do the opposite (Acts xvi. 9, xviii. 9, 10). T h e important question is, whether G o d did communicate this gracious mystery, first to Mary and then to Joseph. T h e precise mode of communication is of litttle importance. A n d it is worth noting that, when heathens are warned in dreams, no Angel appears to them (ii. 1 2 , xxvii. 19). V e r y possibly the information about all six dreams, the five in these two chapters and that of Pilate's wife, comes from the same source. In marked contrast to the similar promises to Abraham and to Zacharias (Gen. xvii. 19, 2 1 ; L k . i. 13), the Angel here ( 2 1 ) does not say ' shall bear thee a son ' : there is no . Mayor, Ep. of S. James, pp. v - x x x v i ; Smith's DB., 2nd ed., artt. ' Brother,' 'James,' 'Judas, the Lord's B r o t h e r ' ; Hastings' DB. and DCG., artt. 'Brethren of the Lord,' ' M a r y the V i r g i n ' ; J . B. Mayor, Expositor, July and August 190S. In dealing with his fellow-countrymen, whom he wished to bring over to allegiance to the Messiah, the writer of the First Gospel points out that in three conspicuous instances those who were nearest to the Messiah, after having at first found an occasion of falling in Him, became convinced that in Him and in His word the Divine Wisdom was justified (xi. 19). At His Birth, in the middle of His Ministry, and at His Death, precisely those who had the best means of judging about the matter were first of all offended, and then were divinely helped to a better appreciation of His character as the promised Messiah and Saviour. At the outset, even before He was born, Joseph, the son of David, doubted whether she who was the Mother of the Messiah was not a faithless spouse (i. 19). When the Messiah's work had so increased that He appointed twelve of His best disciples to assist Him in it, John, the greatest of the Prophets, sent to Him to ask whether one who was so slow to assert Himself was to be regarded as the promised Messiah (xi. 2, 3). When the Messiah's work was closed, and to human eyes seemed to be a failure, and He was already under sentence of death, the first of the Apostles, one of the chosen Three, publicly declared and swore that he did not know the Man (xxvi. 70-75). It was not to be wondered at, if other Jews, who had never seen Jesus of Nazareth, should have misgivings about H i m ; but, with these three examples before them, they might take courage and accept Him as their MessiahThe date of Christ's birth cannot be determined with certainty. Sir William Ramsay has argued in favour of B.C. 6. Colonel Mackinlay has shown that H.C. 8 is more probable (The Magi, how they recog/iiscd Christ's Star, pp. 1 3 5 ff.); and this Ramsay admits. He says : " Though the evidence is still inconclusive,

II. 1-12]

THE

MESSIAH'S

1IIRTI!

AND

INKANCY

it seems more probable that his date 8 n.c. is right. It is clearly demonstrated that there was n system of periodic enrolment in the Province of Syria according to a fonrteen-ycars cycle, and the first enrolment was made in the year 8 -7 iu\ {Christ Born in Bethlehem, p. 170). Such was the rule, but in carrying out of such an extensive and novel operation in the Roman world delays sometimes occurred ; and an example of such delay for about two years (as revealed by a recent discovery) is quoted in my article ' C o r r o b o r a t i o n 7 in the Expositor, Nov. 1901, pp. 321 f. Accordingly I concluded that the enrolment in Herod's kingdom was probably delayed until autumn 6 i;.c. While such delay is possible, it has against it the distinct testimony of Tertullian that the enrolment in Syria at which. Christ was born was made by Saturninus, who governed the Province 9 - 7 n.c. T h e evidence which determined me to favour the date 6 n.c. is distinctly slighter in character than that which supports the date 8 is.c." (Preface to Mackinlay's The Magi, how they recognised Christ's Star, pp. ix, x). A s to the time of year, Mackinlay gives reasons for preferring the Feast of Tabernacles, and probably the first day of it, to any other season (p. 176). If this is correct, then, although 25th December must be quite wrong for the day of the Nativity, yet 2Sth D e c e m b e r may be fairly exact for the murders at Bethlehem, which took place about three months after the Nativity (p. 199). W h e n we consider how very little of ch. i. affords any scope for the writer to give any evidence of characteristics or peculiarities of style, the number of expressions which are found broadcast over the rest of the Gospel is large. Even in the first seventeen verses, which are occupied with the pedigree of the Messiah, there are two or three characteristic expressions: viol Aauei'S ( l ) , Acyo/xfros (16), and TO? X/KCTTOD (17), which anticipates xi. 2. In the narrative portion we have l8ov (20), tfiaivecrdai. (20), utos AaveiS (20), i'va TrXijfiutdfi (22). T h e following are peculiar to Mt. : ku.t ovap (20), pijOcv (22); peculiar to this c h a p t e r : fitroiKeo-ia ( 1 1 , 12, 17).

II. 1-12. The

Visit of the Magi

to the .V, ivfom

Messiah.

T h e r e can be no doubt that the Evangelist regards this narrative, like that of the Virgin-birth, as historical. H e has it on what he believes to be good authority, and he would have his readers accept it as completely as he does himself. A n d there is no sufficient reason why they should refuse to do so : for the story is not in any way incredible in itself, and it is difficult to find any satisfactory explanation of its origin, excepting that in

12

G O S P E L A C C O R D I N G T O S. M A T T H E W

[IX. 1 - 1 2

the main it is true. 1 T h e a t t e m p t s to explain it by l e g e n d a r y a n a l o g i e s are very u n s u c c e s s f u l . T h e e x a m p l e s cited are m o r e r e m a r k a b l e for their d i f f e r e n c e s than f o r their r e s e m b l a n c e s ; a n d , e v e n if the r e s e m b l a n c e s were great, it would b e a m o n s t r o u s principle to lay d o w n , that what r e s e m b l e s fiction m u s t itself b e fiction. T h e only e l e m e n t in the story w h i c h r e s e m b l e s l e g e n d is the s t a t e m e n t that the star ' went b e f o r e them, till it c a m e a n d s t o o d o v e r where the y o u n g c h i l d was,' a s t a t e m e n t of " great poetical b e a u t y , " which m a y be i n t e n d e d to m e a n n o m o r e than that what they h a d s e e n in the h e a v e n s led to their finding the n e w b o r n M e s s i a h . B u t the m o d e of s t a t e m e n t m a y b e due, not to a poetic vein in the E v a n g e l i s t , w h o does n o t elsewhere s e e m to h a v e a n y such vein, b u t to his i n f o r m a n t s , or to the M a g i t h e m s e l v e s . T h e e x p r e s s i o n m a y b e Oriental rhetoric, or it m a y state what a p p e a r e d to them to b e the c a s e . E v e n if we p r o n o u n c e this detail to b e deliberate e m b e l l i s h m e n t , that does not s h o w that the whole story is a fiction.2 T h e r e is a b u n d a n t e v i d e n c e of a wide-spread desire a n d e x p e c t a t i o n of a c o m i n g D e l i v e r e r or universal K i n g s o m e time b e f o r e the B i r t h of C h r i s t . E a s t e r n astrologers w o u l d search the h e a v e n s for signs of this great event. W h e t h e r it w a s p l a n e t a r y c o n j u n c t i o n s which are k n o w n to h a v e t a k e n place in B.C. 7 - 4 , or transitory p h e n o m e n a which c a n n o t n o w be c a l c u l a t e d , that attracted the attention of the M a g i , c a n n o t be d e t e r m i n e d . The character of the p h e n o m e n a , or a k n o w l e d g e of J e w i s h anticipations, m a y have d i r e c t e d t h e m to P a l e s t i n e . T h e r e m a i n d e r of the narrative n e e d s n o e x p l a n a t i o n ; but, if w e like to o m i t the M a g i ' s d r e a m , a n d substitute f o r it a f e e l i n g of distrust for H e r o d , w e shall h a v e an a c c o u n t which r e a d s like sober history, w h o l l y in h a r m o n y with the k n o w n c i r c u m s t a n c e s of the time a n d w i t h the cruel character of H e r o d . T h e O l d T e s t a m e n t is n o t the s o u r c e of the star or of the g i f t s ; f o r the E v a n g e l i s t , in spite of his great f o n d n e s s f o r f u l f i l m e n t s of p r o p h e c y , d o e s n o t q u o t e 1 The objection made to it by Celsus, that Magi have been confused with Chaldeans, is very weak (Orig. Con. Cc/s. i. 58), and does not seem to have been taken up by Jewish opponents of Christianity. 2 It is not often that we find anything of real poetical beauty in the apocryphal additions to the Gospels ; but, as to the star, we are told that it fell into the well at Bethlehem, and there sometimes it is still seen by those who are pure in heart (Donehoo, Apocryphal and Legendary Life of Christ, PP- 73. 74)Bethlehem is specified as ' of Juckea, not to distinguish it from Bethlehem of. Galilee (Josh. xix. 15}, but, either in accordance with O . T . usage, or (more probably) to indicate that the King of the Jews was born in the territory of the tribe of Judah. Jerome says that ' i n the actual H e b r e w ' {in ipso HtdiraiiO). by which he probably means the Gospel according to the Hebrews, the reading was ' of Judali,' not »of Judaea,' which he regards as a mistake of the copyists.

II. 1 - 1 2 ]

THE

MESSIAH'S

lìIKTIl

ANP

INFANCY

13

either N u m . xxiv. 1 7 for the one, or Ps. ix\ii. 10, 75, Cant. iii. 6, Is. lx. 6 for the other. T h e gifts mentioned are intrinsically probable, independently of any pvoplu-ey or previous narrative. W e m a y believe that the Evangelist knew that the Star in B a l a a m ' s prophecy indicated the Messiah Himself, as even the T a r g u m s interpreted it. It was Christians who, under the influence of this narrative, misinterpreted Balaam's Star as meaning the star which guided the M a g i ; and it was Christians who, under the influence of Ps. Ixxii., turned the Magi into kings. T h e expression ' K i n g of the J e w s ' (2) shows that the M a g i were heathen. ' I n the e a s t ' (ir r f j ih-aroXfj) .should probably be ' a t its r i s i n g ' : the appearance in the heavens, net in a particular quarter of the heavens, suggested the birth of a king. 1 The Evangelist purposely speaks of H e r o d as ' 1 K-rod the k i n g ' to explain why he was t r o u b l e d : his throne was in danger. 'AH J e r u s a l e m ' («RAO-A 'IÍ/XKTÓ/YV/WI : the feminine singular is unusual) is c o m m o n hyperbole : it was to their inten si not to have a disputed dynasty. T h e expression ' c h i e f priests and seribes of the people' indicates representatives of the Sanhedrin. Conip. xxi. 23 and xxvi. 3, where we h a v e ' e l d e r s of the people? In xvi. 2 1 all three of the component elements are mentioned. H e r e begins, by implication, the Evangelist's attitude of condemnation towards the official instructors of the Jewish nation. A message is brought, under highly exceptional and remarkable conditions, that the K i n g of the J e w s has been b o r n ; and these national leaders take no kind of pains to find out whether or 110 it is true : they hope that it is not. for they do not want to have to decide between rival claims. T h e only person who takes any trouble in the matter is Herod, and his aim respecting the newborn K i n g of the J e w s is 10 compass His destruction. Pagans, who had noti, mg to guide them but smatterings of science mingled with much superstition, nevertheless are so kindled with enthusiasm by the sign-, which G o d , by means of these imperfect instruments, had granted to them, that they take a long journey and make carefui investigations, in 1

' W e saw ' ( R Y . ) is better than ' We ha.ve -ecu ' ( A Y . ) ; |. I I . M e n i t e l i ,

Grammar opN.T. Greek, i. p. 138.

I n the T e s t a m e n t s of the X I I . Patria reus there are m a n y poinl.s of contact with the N . T . . especially with M l . In the Messianic hymn near ihe end of the T e s t , of I.cvi w e have this prediction : Then shall ihe L o r d raise vip a n e w priest ; T o him adì the words of the L o r d shall he revealed ; A n d he shall d o j u d g m e n t of truth on the earth. A n d his star shall arise in heaven as of a k i n e , lighting up the light of Knowledge as tile sun in the d a y t i m e " {Levi xviii. 2, 3). S e e below on iii. 1 7 , F o r the " vernacular g e n i t i v e " in e'iòofxtv ~)àp a è r e e TliV chrre'/ja see A b b o l l , fohamUm Grammar, 2 7 8 2 ; the etiectis to emphasize ' s e e n ' and ' s t a r , ' esp. the latter. F o r the use of rpo a l o n g w a y t o w a r d s p r o v i n g t h a t t h e s e first t w o c h a p t e r s h a v e t h e s a m e a u t h o r a s t h e r e s t of the Gospel. T h e t a b l e s d r a w n u p b y S i r j . H a w k i n s ! / / -;. .Vj'.'/ry / / . , p p . 3 - 9 ) b r i n g t h i s result o u t very c l e a r l y . " If t h e N a t i v i t y S . o r y b e n o t a n i n t e g r a l p a r t of t h e hirst G o s p e l , it m u s t b e c o u n t e d o n e of t h e c l e v e r e s t of l i t e r a r y a d a p t a t i o n s , a v e r d i c t n o t l i k e l y to b e p a s s e d o n it b y a s a n e critic i s m " ( l i u r k i t t , /'//',.o/ ;, ,7 // i,'• >/ / h : . ii. j). 259). C h a r a c t e r i s t i c : ¡'5o;''([, 19), irp^aKwetv (2, 8, 11), inrydytiv (4), rj-yfpwp (6), Tore (7, 11), (7, I(>), r> \ ' r ' i i ( 1 4 ) , 6vfJ.ovvfiiv is c o m m o n l y u s e d . A n e v e n t t o o k p l a c e , e i t h e r ¿Va 7r\7]pw0y (i. 22, ii. 1 5 , iv. 14, xxi. 4, x x v i . 56— M k . xiv. 49), or i'Jttws ttX'ijpcbOji (ii. 2 3 , viii. 1 7 , xii. 1 7 , xiii. 3 5 ) ; or it Look p l a c e , a n d r o r e ¿irXiipwOp (ii. 1 7 , xxvii. 9 ) — w h a t the t ' r o p h e t h a d said.

I I I . 1 - I V . 11. T H E P R E P A R A T I O N F O R T H E M I N I S T R Y . I I I . 1-12. The

Herald

of the

Messiah.

T h e Evangelist has shown us how the Magi from the E a s t have done homage to the newborn Messiah, and how the usurper-king tried to kill Him and failed. T h e true K i n g , exiled for a time, outlived the usurper and returned to H i s own country, but not as yet to reign. A t last the time draws near, and He has His herald in J o h n the Baptist. 1 T h e appearance of the son of Zacbariah as a Prophet on the banks of the J o r d a n , preaching repentance-baptism for the remission of sins, and proclaiming the near approach of the K i n g d o m of God, produced an excitement throughout the nation which it is not easy for us to estimate. After having had a long ' T h i s p r e p a r a t o r y m i n i s t r y of J o h n is in all f o u r G o s p e l s . I t is p a r t of t h e earliest Christian tradition. E a c h G o s p e l h a s d e t a i l s w h i c h a r e n o t in t h e o t h e r s , b u t all a g r e e a s t o d i e chief e l e m e n t s . T h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y r i t e of r e p e n t a n c e - b a p t i s m for J e w s is in all f o u r . T h e p r o c l a m a t i o n of t h e c o m i n g M e s s i a h is distinct- ; a n d t h e c o m i n g h a s t w o r e s u l t s , — r e d e m p t i o n for t h o s e w h o a r e read}', a n d j u d g m e n t f o r t h o s e w h o a r e n o t . See Briggs, The Messiah of the Gospels, p p . 63 ff. I t is p o s s i b l e t h a t , ir. t h e q u o t a t i o n , ' i n t h e w i l d e r n e s s ' s h o u l d b e t a k e n w i t h ' m a k e y e r e a d y t h e w a y of t h e L o r d , ' a s in t h e R V . of I s . x l . 3 , a n d n o t w i t h ' T h e voice of o n e c r y i n g . '

20

GOSI'EI.

ACCORDING

TO

S. M A T T H E W

[ill.

1-12

to Palestine ( 1 9 - 2 3 ) . In what follows we have another group of three connected e v e n t s : the preaching of J o h n (ii:. 1—12), the Baptism of the Messiah ( 1 3 - 1 7 ) , and the Temptation (iv. i - i r ) . T h i s c h a p t e r c o n t a i n s a c o n s i d e r a b l e n u m b e r of t h e e x p r e s s i o n s w h i c h a r e e i t h e r p e c u l i a r t o M t . o r a r e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of his style : see a b o v e o n v e r . 1 2 . S e v e r a l of t h e m a r e f o u n d in c h . i. a l s o , a m i t h e y e/> a l o n g w a y t o w a r d s p r o v i n g t h a t t h e s e first t w o c h a p t e r s h a v e t h e s a m e a u t h o r a s t h e r e s t of the Gospel. T h e t a b l e s d r a w n u p b y S i r j . H a w k i n s ! / / -;. .Vj'.'/ry / / . , p p . 3 - 9 ) b r i n g t h i s result o u t very c l e a r l y . " If t h e N a t i v i t y S . o r y b e n o t a n i n t e g r a l p a r t of t h e hirst G o s p e l , it m u s t b e c o u n t e d o n e of t h e c l e v e r e s t of l i t e r a r y a d a p t a t i o n s , a v e r d i c t n o t l i k e l y to b e p a s s e d o n it b y a s a n e critic i s m " ( l i u r k i t t , /'//',.o/ ;, ,7 // i,'• >/ / h : . ii. j). 259). C h a r a c t e r i s t i c : ¡'5o;''([, 19), irp^aKwetv (2, 8, 11), inrydytiv (4), rj-yfpwp (6), Tore (7, 11), (7, I(>), r> \ ' r ' i i ( 1 4 ) , 6vfJ.ovvfiiv is c o m m o n l y u s e d . A n e v e n t t o o k p l a c e , e i t h e r ¿Va 7r\7]pw0y (i. 22, ii. 1 5 , iv. 14, xxi. 4, x x v i . 56— M k . xiv. 49), or i'Jttws ttX'ijpcbOji (ii. 2 3 , viii. 1 7 , xii. 1 7 , xiii. 3 5 ) ; or it Look p l a c e , a n d r o r e ¿irXiipwOp (ii. 1 7 , xxvii. 9 ) — w h a t the t ' r o p h e t h a d said.

I I I . 1 - I V . 11. T H E P R E P A R A T I O N F O R T H E M I N I S T R Y . I I I . 1-12. The

Herald

of the

Messiah.

T h e Evangelist has shown us how the Magi from the E a s t have done homage to the newborn Messiah, and how the usurper-king tried to kill Him and failed. T h e true K i n g , exiled for a time, outlived the usurper and returned to H i s own country, but not as yet to reign. A t last the time draws near, and He has His herald in J o h n the Baptist. 1 T h e appearance of the son of Zacbariah as a Prophet on the banks of the J o r d a n , preaching repentance-baptism for the remission of sins, and proclaiming the near approach of the K i n g d o m of God, produced an excitement throughout the nation which it is not easy for us to estimate. After having had a long ' T h i s p r e p a r a t o r y m i n i s t r y of J o h n is in all f o u r G o s p e l s . I t is p a r t of t h e earliest Christian tradition. E a c h G o s p e l h a s d e t a i l s w h i c h a r e n o t in t h e o t h e r s , b u t all a g r e e a s t o d i e chief e l e m e n t s . T h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y r i t e of r e p e n t a n c e - b a p t i s m for J e w s is in all f o u r . T h e p r o c l a m a t i o n of t h e c o m i n g M e s s i a h is distinct- ; a n d t h e c o m i n g h a s t w o r e s u l t s , — r e d e m p t i o n for t h o s e w h o a r e read}', a n d j u d g m e n t f o r t h o s e w h o a r e n o t . See Briggs, The Messiah of the Gospels, p p . 63 ff. I t is p o s s i b l e t h a t , ir. t h e q u o t a t i o n , ' i n t h e w i l d e r n e s s ' s h o u l d b e t a k e n w i t h ' m a k e y e r e a d y t h e w a y of t h e L o r d , ' a s in t h e R V . of I s . x l . 3 , a n d n o t w i t h ' T h e voice of o n e c r y i n g . '

III. 1-12]

PREPARATION

FOR

TfTK

MINISTRY

s u c c e s s i o n of P r o p h e t s , t h r o u g h w h o m c l o s e c o m m u n i o n with J e h o v a h was a l w a y s p o s s i b l e , {here h a d b e e n , since M a l a c b i (c. 4 6 0 - 4 3 0 k . c . ) , f o u r w e a r y centuries, d u r i n g w h i c h God s e e m e d to h a v e c e a s e d to t a k e ¡merest m lii.s p e o p l e : ' T h e r e was n o v o i c e , nor a n y that a n s w e r e d . ' 'Phis o p p r e s s i v e s i l e n c e h a d at last b e e n b r o k e n , a n d o n c e m o r e i«od h a d » m e s s a g e for t h e nation, s p o k e n by the living v o i r e ol a herald - e n t by H i m , a n d n o t m e r e l y r e c o r d e d in i h r p r o p h e t i c scrolls. JJul the m e s s a g e of this n e w P r o p h e t was not altogether a c c e p t a b l e . It was a great j o y that a P r o p h e t h a d a p p e a r e d . I t was i n d e e d g o o d tidings that t h e K i n g d o m of C o d w a s at hand, liui, it was n o t s u c h w e l c o m e n e w s that not every i n g their sins to s u b m i t to t h e rite of b a p t i s m . In this he c o n f o r m e d 10 t h e ideas of his nation. I n the East, n o t h i n g of i m n o r t a m v takes p l a c e in religion w i t h o u t s o m e external act w h i c h a p p e a l s to t h e s e n s e s and t h e i m a g i n a t i o n ; a n d hen."\. J o h n ' s b a p t i s m . I t was this surprising r e q u i r e m e n t that won for him the liti-* b v w b H i h e b e c a m e k n o w n , ' t h e B a p t i s t ' or ' t h e H a p t i a - r ' (Ml;, i. 4, vi. 14, 24). A n d it was this w h i c h m a d e t h e emissaries of t h e h i e r a r c h y c h a l l e n g e his right t o m a k e lews s u b m i t to this symb o l i c a l bath (Jn. i. 25). I t m i g h t a l m o s t be said that J o h n h a d e x c o m m u n i c a t e d the w h o l e nation, and w o u l d re-rulmii n e n e t o c o m m u n i o n , u n l e s s t h e y professed, not merely sorrow f o r their sins, b u t r e s o l u t i o n to break off from t h e m a n d siarr afresh. As a t o k e n of this s o l e m n c h a n g e of life, he p l u n g e d ti:em u n d e r the

22

GOSPEL ACCORDING

TO K. M A T T H E W

[ill. 1 - 1 2

water, to bury the polluted past, a n d then m a d e t h e m rise a g a i n to newness of life. A n a l o g i e s f o r this s y m b o l i c a l w a s h i n g h a v e b e e n sought in the levitical purifications of the J e w s a n d the f r e q u e n t bathings of the E s s e n e s . B u t there was this m a r k e d diff e r e n c e . T h e s e purifications a n d bathings were r e p e a t e d daily, or hourly, if technical p o l l u t i o n was s u s p e c t e d ; w h e r e a s J o h n ' s b a p t i s m was a d m i n i s t e r e d only o n c e . It represented a decisive crisis, which, it was a s s u m e d , c o u l d n e v e r b e e x p e r i e n c e d a g a i n . I t has b e e n d i s c u s s e d w h e t h e r ' b a p t i s m unto (r.k) remission of s i n s ' m e a n s that f o r g i v e n e s s was the i m m e d i a t e effect of the baptism, or that it was an u l t i m a t e result towards w h i c h the rite was p r e p a r a t o r y . W a s it a s y m b o l that the baptized p e r s o n was then a n d there forgiven, or a p l e d g e that h e w o u l d be f o r g i v e n ? T h e latter seems to be correct (see S w e t e on M k . i. 4 ) . 1 Cyril of J e r u s a l e m , in c o m p a r i n g J o h n ' s b a p t i s m with the C h r i s t i a n rite, says that the former " b e s t o w e d only the r e m i s s i o n of s i n s " (Catech. xx. 6 ; c o m p . iii. 7). B u t there is nothing in S c r i p t u r e to show that it did as m u c h as that. T e r t n l l i a n points out that ' baptism for the remission of s i n s ' refers to a future remission, which w a s to follow in C h r i s t (De Bapt. x.). T h e e x p r e s s i o n of A m b r o s e , that o n e is the ' b a p t i s m of r e p e n t a n c e , ' the other the ' baptism of grace,' l e a v e s the question of f o r g i v e n e s s open. But, if J o h n h a d p r o f e s s e d to forgive sins, w o u l d not that h a v e b e e n challenged, as it was in our L o r d ' s c a s e (ix. 3 ; M k . ii. 7 ; L k . v. 2 1 , vii. 4 9 ) ? A n d , if it h a d b e e n generally u n d e r s t o o d that J o h n ' s baptism w a s a w a s h i n g a w a y of sins, would our L o r d h a v e s u b m i t t e d to it ? Its m a i n a s p e c t was a preparation for t h e K i n g d o m , a n d as such it fitted well into the opening of the M e s s i a h ' s ministry. T o every one else this preparation w a s an act of repentance. T h e Messiah, who needed no repentance, could yet a c c e p t the preparation. J o h n ' s rite c o n s e c r a t e d the p e o p l e to receive s a l v a t i o n ; it c o n s e c r a t e d the M e s s i a h to b e s t o w it. O f the two notes in J o h n ' s trumpet-call it was the s e c o n d which characterized him as the h e r a l d of the M e s s i a h . T h e old P r o p h e t s h a d cried, ' R e p e n t y e ' : h e a l o n e w a s c o m m i s s i o n e d to proclaim that ' t h e K i n g d o m of H e a v e n is at h a n d . ' I t is a new reason for r e p e n t a n c e that the long-looked-for K i n g d o m w o u l d c o m e soon. J o h n ' s b a p t i s m s h o u l d be c o m p a r e d , not so m u c h with levitical purifications or E s s e n e bathings, w h i c h a p e r s o n c o u l d administer to himself a n d c o u l d r e p e a t , as with the b a p t i s m of proselytes, w h i c h was a d m i n i s t e r e d by a n o t h e r a n d c o u l d n o t b e repeated. I t did not m e r e l y restore the c l e a n s e d person to his n o r m a l condition ; it a d m i t t e d to a new condition. T h e practice 1 Salmon thinks otherwise; but his reasons arc not convincing Human Element in the Gospels, p. 46).

{The

III. 1-12]

PREPARATION

FOR

TIIM

MINISTRY

o f a d m i t t i n g p r o s e l y t e s b y b a p t i s m w a s in e x i s t e n c e b e f o r e J o h n ' s d a y , a n d it n o d o u b t i n f l u e n c e d h i m . T h e peculiarity of J o h n ' s b a p t i s m w a s t h a t it w a s a d m i n i s t e r e d to J e w s . It> it tin: J e w i s h n a t i o n w a s f o r c i b l y i n s t r u c t e d in t h e m o m e n t o u s t r u t h , t h a i , although they were A b r a h a m ' s seed, they could not enter the M e s s i a n i c K i n g d o m , which was now so near, without a thorough moral purification. It was J o h n ' s f u n c t i o n to r e a c h m e n ' s c o n s c i e n c e s ; a n d n o earlier P r o p h e t h a d been m o r e successful in d o i n g s o . T h o s e w h o c a m e to h i m n o t m e r e l y c o n f e s s e d t h e i r s i n s ; b y s u b m i t t i n g to b a p t i s m t h e y m a d e a p u b l i c r e s o l u tion to r e n o u n c e t h e m . T h e r e a r e q u e s t i o n s of c h r o n o l o g y a n d g e o g r a p h y w h i c h c a n n o t b e d e t e r m i n e d with c e r t a i n t y ; b u t they a r e n o t of g r e a t i m p o r t a n c e , a s is s h o w n b y t h e s m a l l a m o u n t o f a t t e n t i o n bestowed on them by the Evangelists. W e d o n o t at all k n o w h o w l o n g J o h n w a s in t h e w i l d e r n e s s b e f o r e h e c a m e f o r w a r d a s a P r o p h e t a n d a s t h e h e r a l d of t h e M e s s i a h . A n d it is n o t e a s y to m a k e out exactly w h e n a n d w h e r e h e a n d the M e s s i a h c a m e i n c o n t a c t w i t h o n e a n o t h e r , o r w h e n t h e M i n i s t r y of t h e M e s s i a h begins. O n t h e f o r m e r q u e s t i o n s e e S u n d a y , Siirn [(. See A. Robertson, /A / /. //,.';/;/ e/: / • '//;> iqoi, pp. 7 ^ 7 7 ; anil for S. Paul's equivalent, Samhy in the /ouma! of Th. Si,, Inly moo, p. 481. 2

26

GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. M A T T H E W

[HI. 1-12

planted in the minds of H i s hearers as a sort of nucleus round which different truths may gather. T h e K i n g d o m is sometimes the Way, sometimes the Truth, sometimes the Life. Perhaps most of all it is the Life. It is something living, organic, and inspiring, in which the: will of God, through the free and loyal action of those who receive it, prevails. It works inwardly, both in individuals and communities, but it manifests itself outwardly. It wins adherents, and inspires and controls them. A n d it possesses powers, not merely of growth and improvement, but of recovery and reformation. While it prevails against the opposition and persecution of enemies, it triumphs also in the long-run over the errors and slackness and corruption of its own supporters. We possess it, and yet we have to seek it and win it. It is within us, and yet we have to strive to enter it. T h e truth about it is so vast that we need to have it stated in all kinds of ways in order to appropriate some of it. I n this world there is so much that cannot he regarded as part of the Kingdom, or even brought into harmony with it, that the tendency to connect the idea of it almost entirely with the future is very natural; and that is what we find in the First Gospel. T o the Evangelist the K i n g d o m of Heaven is that Kingdom which the Messiah will found or bring with Him, when H e returns in glory on the clouds of H e a v e n (xxiv. 30, xxvi. 64) ; it is still in the future. T h e parables in which the judgment, with bliss for the righteous and woe for the wicked, is indicated, represent this judgment, and the consequent bliss or woe, as future. This is evident in the Tares (xiii. 37 ff'.), the Virgins (xxv. r ff.), and the Talents (xxv. 14 ff.). Still more clearly in the discourse about the Sheep and the Goats (xxv. 3 1 ff.). A n d this return of the Messiah to begin the K i n g d o m was believed to be imminent. It would follow closely on the tribulation which must result from the destruction of Jerusalem (xxiv. 16, 29), and some of the generation then living would live to see it (xxiv. 3 4 ; comp. xvi. 28). Cheerful trust and confidence was to be the attitude of those who looked forward to its coming. T h e faithful were to pray for its coming (vi. 10). It was well worth while to part with one's dearest possessions and even with life itself, in order to secure admission into it (xiii. 4 4 46, xvi. 25, 26). ' T h e K i n g d o m of the H e a v e n s ' is not the Church. The Church is visible, the K i n g d o m not. T h e K i n g d o m is the end, complete, perfect, and final: the Church is the means to the end, working towards perfection and striving to realize its ideal. S o far as it expresses the will and character of the Messiah, the Church may be called the K i n g d o m of Christ, but it is not what is set before us in this Gospel as ' t h e K i n g d o m of the Heavens.'

III. 1 - 1 8 ]

PREPARATION

FOR

T1IK

MINISTRY

I n this verse the leading idea is that of warning : ' repent, for the judgment of impenitent sinners is at hand.' T h e quotation from Js. xl. 3 is in all four Gospels, and it is clear from J n . i. 23 that the Baptist applied the words to himself. H e was a Voice making known tin- Word, and meaningless without the Word. T h e quotation is mainly from the Septuagint. T h e words from Malaohi are given xi. to. J o h n consciously took Elijah as his model (2 K i n g s i. 8). T h e r e is the same rough garb and ascetic life, the same isolation from society and fearlessness towards it, the same readiness to rebuke either kings or multitudes. H e r o d and Herodias arc to h i m as A h a b and Jezebei to his predecessor. T h e lives of both Prophets are a protest against the corruptions of contemporary society. B u t far less than .Elijah is J o h n a despairing pessimist : his message is full of hope. A n d in this Gospe 1 . as in M k . and J n . , he comes on the scene with the same startling suddenness with which Elijah enters ( 1 K i n g s xvii. 1). ' ' J o h n leaps, as it were, into the arena full grown and full a r m e d " (A. Maelarcn ; comp. Pere Didon, Jesus Christ, pp. I < J I , 196). But his asceticism was not mere acting ; it was the expression of his character a n d the instrument of his work. T o the self-indulgent, selfdenial is impressive. I n the summary of the Baptist's preaching ( 7 - 1 2 ) , which perhaps both Mt. and Lk. take from memoirs of the Baptist (either written or in a stereotyped tradition), the dominant idea is that of judgment. In L k . (iii. 7) this stern warning is addressed to the people ; but it is probable that it was addiessed to the Pharisees a n d Sadducees, to whom it is much more appropriate. 1 A s addressed to them it shows how, from the very first, the leading sections of the nation were told that their rejection of the Messiah would be fatal. J o h n welcomed the multitudes, but he suspected, or by spiritual intuition discerned, the insincerity of these professional religious guides. T h e formal pictv of the Pharisees and the self-indulgent scepticism of the S a d d u c e e s would be equally hateful to him, and he meets them with indignant surprise. W h y had they c o m e ? Curiosity about this revolutionary preacher, possibly a wish to get a handle against him, or to learn how he gained such a hold upon the multitude, may have influenced them ; or the pressure of the people may h a v e been too great for them to resist—they must come and see for themselves. All that is clear about them is that J o h n does 1 W h e n M t . a n d L k . differ in t h o s e sections which are cimilium to both but a r e absent f r o m M k . , it is n L .nerally Alt. liiat s e e m s lu be n e a r e r to the original source. T w i c e e l s e w h e r e in M l . (xii, 3 4 , xxiii. 3 3 ) the P h a r i s e e s a r e a d d r e s s e d as ' v i p e r s ' b r o o d , ' both times by our L o r d . T h e r e is no parallel to either p a s s a g e in L k . I l e r e the thought may lie of s n a k e s Hying b e f o r e a prairie-lire.

28

GOSPEL

ACCORDING

T O S. M A T T H E W

[ill. 1

12

not regard them as true penitents. T h e y claim to be Abraham's children, but they have a very different parentage. Their serpent-like natures are among the crooked things that must be made straight, before they can be fit for a baptism of repentance. If they are in earnest, let them give some proof of it, and never suppose that mere birth from Abraham can save t h e m 1 ( R o m . ii. 1 7 - 2 9 ) . T h i s is the first marked instance of the feeling of abhorrence for the Pharisees which runs through the First Gospel, and which continues down to xxvii. 62, where see note. Neither in M k . nor in L k . is there any indication that the Pharisees were denounced by the Baptist. A n d J n . , though he says that the Pharisees sent to inquire about the Baptist (i. 19, 24), gives no denunciation of them. Yet tire .Baptist seems to think them not quite hopeless. He exhorts theni to bring forth good fruit before it is too late ( S - 1 0 ) . H e warns them that even now, although they do not at all expect it, judgment is at the door, and procrastination will be disastrous. Every one who does not repent will be destroyed (vii. 19) like a fruitless tree.Here the address to the Pharisees and Sadducees, which Mt. and L k . have in common, ends. What follows ( 1 1 , 1 2 ) is common to all four, but by the others is placed somewhat differently (Mk. i. 7, 8 ; Lk. iii. 16, 17 ; J n . i. 26, 27). Mt. adds it to the address to the Pharisees, with which it does not agree. J o h n was not baptizing f/tem unto repentance; nor would he. have promised that the Messiah would baptize them with the Holy Spirit. B u t the ruling idea of this second address [vv. i t , 1 2 ) is still one of judgment. It is his office to bind them to a new life, symbolized by immersion in water. But One far mightier, whose bondservant he is unworthy to be," is coming to immerse them in an element far more potent—the Holy Spirit and fire. Mt. alone lias ' u n t o repentance' ( 1 1 ) ; comp. xxvi. 28. T h e meaning of ' baptizing with fire' (which is not in M k . or Jn.) is difficult. Apparently the same persons ( ' y o u ' ) are baptized with the Spirit and with fire. I n that case, the ' fire' would mean the illuminating, kindling, purifying character of the Messiah's baptism (Mai. iii. 2, 3) to all those who prepare them1 On the variation between /.vreia. irarpos, with Mt. xv. 1 3 ; and Smyrn. 6, 0 %topwr x^pttro, with Mt. six. 12. See LightfoolV notes in each place. There are other passages, less clear than these, where Ignatius seems to recall Mt. Mk. tells us that Jesus, ' straight way coming up out of the water, saw the heavens being rent asunder' (< u,> r oxiO>p< -'oi'i rovs ovpavovs), a graphic expression, which is the more remarkable because there seems 1.0 be no other example of this verb (which all three have of the rending of the veil of the Temple) being used of rending the heavens. Here both Mt. and L k . have the O . T . verb, which was evidently in common use for the opening of the heavens («pe^Sxtfi^w niv$ oi ovpavoi) ; com p. J n . i. 5 1 ; Acts x. 1 1 ; R e v . iv. I. So also in the Septuagint : Is. lxiv. I, Lzek. i. 1 , which is perhaps the earliest example of the idea of theheavens being opened. In Gen. yii. 1 1 I lie windows ot heaven are opened for the rain, and in Ps. Ixxviii. 23 the doors of heaven for the manna, but that is not the same idea : nevertheless there also the same verb is used. The Testaments of the X I I . Patriarchs exhibit the same constant usage : I.cvi ii. 6, v. I, xviii, 6 ; ft:.dah xxiv. 2. The last two passages are Messianic, and are strikingly parallel ::o the Gospel narrative. ' ' T h e heavens shall be opened, and from the temple of glory shall come upon him sanctilication, with (tie Father's voice as from Abraham to Isaac. And the glory of the Most High shall lie uttered over him, and the spirit of understanding and sanclification shall rest upon him [in the water]." The last three words are probably a Christian interpolation of early date. Near the end of the passage we read that " t h e I.ord shall rejoice in His children, and be well pleased in Ilis beloved ones for e v e r " ; ::.a.i ci-8oirfrtt eVt reus dyair'ijTois tu'rc'h i'us cti'wfos (xviii. 13). The similar passage in the TestamenL of Judah vui.s thus: " A n d 110 sin shall be found in him. And the heavens shall be opened unto him, to pour out the spirit, the blessing of the Holy Father.'' For the combination of opened heavens with a voice from heaven, comp. the Apocalypse of Baruch xxii. I : " T h e heavens were opened, and I saw, arid power was given to me, and a voice was heard from on h i g h . " 1 For the opening of the heavens without a voice comp. Cic. Dc Divin. i, 43 ; L i v y , xxii. I. Other references in Klostermann on Mk. M t . follows M k . in s t a t i n g t h a t J e s u s s a w t h e Spirit d e s c e n d i n g ; J n . says that the Baptist saw i t ; L k . that the d e s c e n t took p l a c e as J e s u s was praying. W e need not suppose t h a t o t h e r s s a w it, o r e v e n t h a t o t h e r s w e r e p r e s e n t . Possibly o u r L o r d w a i t e d till H e c o u l d b e a l o n e with J o h n . With the s y m b o l i c a l v i s i o n of t h e d o v e w e m a y c o m p a r e t h e s y m b o l i c a l v i s i o n s of J e h o v a h g r a n t e d t o M o s e s a n d o t h e r P r o p h e t s ; a n d w e h a v e n o r i g h t to s a y t h a t s u c h v i s i o n s a r e i m p o s s i b l e , a n d t h a t t h o s e w h o s a y t h a t t h e y h a v e h a d t h e m a r e v i c t i m s of a delusion. E v e r y m e s s e n g e r of G o d m u s t b e endowed, with the S p i r i t of G o d in o r d e r t o f u l f i l his m i s s i o n ; a n d t h e r e is n o t h i n g incredible in the s t a t e m e n t t h a t in t h e c a s e o f t h e M e s s i a h , a s in t h e c a s e of t h e A p o s t l e s , t h i s e n d o w m e n t w a s m a d e k n o w n b y a 1 Zahn compares the combination, 'opened His mouth and taught' (v. 2); comp. Acts viii. 35, x. 34, xviii. 14.

III. 1 3 - 1 7 ]

PREPARATION

EOk

"I 1 I K

MINISTRY

33

perceptible sign. 1 In the case of Old T e s t a m e n t Prophets, there was sometimes a violent effect on body a m i mind, when the Spirit of the L o r d came upon them. B u t here, as at Pentecost, all is peaceful, a n d peaceful symbols are seen. T h e sinless Son of M a n is the place where this D o v e can find rt>t for its foot (Gen. viii. 9) a n d abide upon H i m (Js. xlii. Again, in the case of the repentant people, the baptism in watrr v/as by |ohn, the baptism in the Spirit was to be looked for fix,-in the Messiah. I n the Messiah's case, the two baptisms are simultaneous. He who is to bestow the Spirit Himself received it, and H e receives it under the form of a dove. T h e contrast between this anointing of the Messiah, this coronation of the promised K i n g , a n d the Herald's proclamation of the coming of the K i n g d o m is remarkable. J o h n had foreseen that the coming of the Messiah would be accompanied bv an outpouring of the S p i r i t ; but his m i n d is full of the thought that G o d ' s vineyard has become a wilderness, and that vast changes are necessary in order to make Israel in any degree readv for the coming of the Messiah. M a n y , perhaps most, will be found still unprepared, and ' t h e C o m i n g ' will be chiefly a coming of j u d g m e n t . T o him, therefore, the outpouring of the Spirit is a baptizing in fire. Fire to him is the most fitting symbol. But when the Messiah Himself conies to him, J o h n sees the Spirit descending in the form of a dove (sec Driver on Gen. i. 2 and Deut. xxxii. 1 1 ) . M e e k n e s s a n d gentleness are the qualities commonly associated with the dove. 'I'he metaphor of lire is t r u e ; the Spirit of necessity searches a n d con.Minics ; Inn the attributes of the D o v e are equally true. T h e Messiah is ' m e e k a n d lowly in h e a r t ' (xi. 29, xxi. 5 ) : it is by meekness that H i s ministers prevail (x. 16), and it is the meek who inherit the earth (v. S). B u t we are not to understand that H e who was conceived by the Spirit was devoid of the Spirit until the Baptism ; - nor that the gift of the Spirit then made any change in H i s nature. 1 It is of no importance whether the eye saw and the ear heard ; whether, W h a t is of if others had been present, they would have seen and heard. importance is, that there was a real manife.slahon, a communication from G o d to man, and no mere delusion of a disordered brain. W h a t was perceived as a dove was the Spirit of God, and what was pciccivcd as a. voice was the word of God. 2 It w a s perhaps in order to avoid this idea thai M l . • >6j, followed by L k . , changed the els airo? of M k . into ( V avriv : ' into Ilim ' might seem to imply that previously there bad been a void. In the Ebioni'e (lo.-pc! quoted by Epiphanius {.fin r . x x x . 13) the dove is described as e - ¡ ! ; i n t o Ilim : eTSev to -irvevfitx to ayiov €v i ' l ' u l irepiaTtpas : u_r< Xfininris /,-cd etc. t'V/oi'cri?? iis array. T h e r e also w e have " a great ligln acoompar.vin ia : -ji1 orpau^cv (2) ; see D a l m a n , The Words of Jesus, pp. 91 II'. Xeitlic. i:«sa ' 10.t:c_li! (14) occur elsewhere in the X . T .

I V . 1 - 1 1 . The

Temptation

of the

Messiah.

It is the common experience of mankind that times of special spiritual endowment or exaltation are followed by occasions of special temptation. T h e Messiah is no exception. No sooner is H e anointed with the Spirit for the work of the Ministry than H e has to undergo a fierce conflict with the great personal power of evil. W e have no right to assert that there had been no previous attacks ; and we know that there wen.; subsequent attacks (xvi. 2 3 ; L k . xxii. 28, 4 2 - 4 4 ) . But this attack is of a special k i n d ; it is an attempt to overthrow tin; .Messiah at the very opening of His public career as the Saviour of the- world, just as the Agony in the garden was caused by an attempt to overthrow Him when that career was near its awful close. And it is encountered under the guidance of the Spirit, as all three Evangelists point out. Jesus, who certainly from His IJaptism onwards is fully conscious of His Messiahship. knows what awaits H i m in the wilderness. H e goes timber to meditate upon the work which His Father has given Him 10 do. and which must be carried out in accordance with the Father's will. T h a t work was ' to destroy the works oi the dcvtl : conflict with the evil one was of its very essence front beginning to end. And conflict involved the inexpressible torture of contact. Contact with moral evil is intense suffering to a pure soul. What must this have been in the case of J e s u s ? Yet He shares this most acute agony with His saints. 1 T h e temptation in which the Son of Man conquered is the counterpart of the temptation in which man first fell. As the descendant and representative of a fallen race, it is His mission 1 Pere Didon, Ji'sus Christ, p. 214. mitites (Augustine).

,-ht Aoe fugmti /7icrys, a n d /¿yi'y h a s been a d d e d a f t e r a u r u j to m a k e t h e c h a r g e more emphatic. I n t h e A text of t h e L X . X t h e w o r d i n g of I )eut. v i . 1 3 h a s b e e n b r o u g h t i n t o h a r m o n y in both p a r t i c u l a r s w i t h M t .

' T h e devil leaveth H i m ' (a&irnriv avTov) means more than 'departed from H i m ' (DIREA-TRJ AIR OVTOV, L k . ) : it means 'left Him alone, ceased for a time to trouble Him,' or 'let Him go, released Him.' Lk. tells us that the departure of Satan was only 'until a convenient season' (d^pi Koupov). The evil one is defeated, but he is not destroyed, and ' the power of darkness' (Lk. xxii. 53) is again to do its worst before the final victory is won. Indeed, the temptation to adopt a selfish, spectacular, and secular Messiahship was again and again put before Him during His Ministry (Westminster N. T. p. 46). The ministry of Angels here, which is in Mk. also, but not in Lk., perhaps means that the miracle which the Messiah refused to work without God's sanction now takes place with His sanction, and that the Angels either supply Him with food or with support which rendered food unnecessary. 2 T h e Messiah returned to work that involved a severe strain upon His physical powers. His 1 I n x i i . 2 6 C h r i s t s u b s t i t u t e s ' S a t a n " f o r t h e ' l i e e l z e l n t l ' of t h e P h a r i s e e s . E l s e w h e r e l i e s p e a k s of h i m a s 0 SiaftoXos ( \ i i i . 3 9 , \ \ v . 4 1 ) a n d 0 xovqpoi ( x i i i . 1 9 , 3 8 ) , n e i t h e r of w h i c h n a m e s is f o u n d in M k . X o r does M k . use 0 ireipafav (Alt. iv. 3). 2 F o r t h i s m e a n i n g oi A c t s vi. 2.

81aKQPelv

c o m p , x x v . 44 : I . k .

xxii. 27 ; J n . xii. 2 ;

44

GOSPET, A C C O R D I N G T O S. M A T T H E W

[IV. 1-11

h u m a n c h a r a c t e r had been s t r e n g t h e n e d b y t r i u m p h a n t resistance of p r o l o n g e d t e m p t a t i o n s . H i s human experience had been i n c r e a s e d r e s p e c t i n g the possibilities of evil ( H e b . v. 8) a n d the d a n g e r s w h i c h H i s mission w o u l d h a v e to encounter. A n d we m a y b e l i e v e that H e w o u l d be s u p p l i e d with all the p h y s i c a l strength that H i s h u m a n i t y required f o r the work that lay b e f o r e Him. Christ's r e f u s a l to avail H i m s e l f of supernatural a i d to a v e r t the d a n g e r of perishing with h u n g e r is parallel to H i s a b s t a i n i n g f r o m a s k i n g for supernatural aid to a v e r t the certainty of perishing on the C r o s s . H e w o u l d not turn stones into b r e a d , a n d H e w o u l d not h a v e legions of A n g e l s (xxvi. 5 3 ) , b e c a u s e in n e i t h e r c a s e was it H i s Father's will that H e s h o u l d d o so. H e knew that l i e was the F a t h e r ' s o n l y S o n , a n d H e k n e w w h a t H i s F a t h e r ' s will was. N o w that t h r o u g h o u t the strain of the t e m p t a t i o n s the F a t h e r ' s will has b e e n absolutely t r i u m p h a n t , s u p e r n a t u r a l m e a n s of s u p p l y i n g p h y s i c a l n e e d s a r e a l l o w e d Him. A n g e l s minister to H i m ( c o m p . t K i n g s xix. 5 - 9 ) , a n d H e has strength for the work which lies b e f o r e H i m . 1 T h i s is a foretaste a n d an earnest of the glory w h i c h is to be H i s hereafter. A n d it r e s e m b l e s that glory in being a return f o r what H e h a d f o r e g o n e in order to d o that which H i s F a t h e r h a d decreed for H i m . S a t a n had o f f e r e d H i m ' a l l the k i n g d o m s of the world a n d the glory of t h e m . ' ' T h e P r i n c e of this w o r l d ' ( J n . xiv. 3 0 ) h a d p l a c e d the w h o l e of his vast d o m i n i o n a n d its r e s o u r c e s at Christ's disposal, if H e w o u l d enter his service. T h a t offer h a d b e e n d e c i s i v e l y r e j e c t e d a n d the proposer of it h a d b e e n d i s m i s s e d . A n d , in a f e w years, all the power a n d glory w h i c h t h e evil o n e h a d o f f e r e d to H i m , a n d ten t h o u s a n d times m o r e w h i c h it was not in his p o w e r to offer, h a d b e e n b e s t o w e d upon H i m by H i s Father, b e c a u s e H e had r e f u s e d the tempter's c o n d i t i o n s a n d h a d a c c e p t e d s u f f e r i n g a n d s h a m e a n d d e a t h (xxviii. 1 8 ) . ' T h e S t r o n g e r ' than S a t a n , instead of sharing power with h i m , d e p r i v e d h i m of it ( L k . xi. 2 i , 2 2 ) : a n d ' t h e K i n g d o m of the w o r l d b e c a m e o u r L o r d ' s a n d FTis A n o i n t e d ' s , a n d H e shall reign for ever and e v e r ' ( R e v . xi. 1 5 ) . It is in the narrative of the Temptation that we have the first instances of our Lord's quoting Scripture. In this Gospel He quotes thirteen of the 1 In the description of the sixth heaven in the Testaments of the X I I . Patriarchs we have a verbal parallel: " I n it are the Archangels who minister and make propitiation to the Lord," or (according to other texts) " the host of the Angels are ministering," or " the Angels of the presence of the Lord who minister" (Levi iii. 5). With the narrative in Mk. i. 13, 14 comp. " T h e devil shall flee from you, and the wild beasts shall fear you, and the Angels shall cleave to y o u " (Naphtali viii. 4).

IV. 1 3 - 1 6 ]

THE

MINISTRY

IN

GALILEI-)

45

C a n o n i c a l Iiooks of the O . T . a n d m a k e s c l e a r reference to two other B o o k s ; a n d there a r e several possible references to O . T . , . • -re: Deuteronomy, I'salms, a n d I s a i a h a r e wkM f r c i j u e m l y q u o t e d . and we may b e l i e v e that thev w e r e often in our L o r d ' s t h o u g h t s In -• • s N e v i 1 1 h a ! i m • n •!. a ' . ' c s are'to the p a s s a g e s in .Ml. in w h i c h the !>•» nee ol ¡my certain {[notation from the S a p i e n t i a l Hooks is r e m a r k a b l e ; I mi •••»nip. xvi. 27 with l'rov. x x i v . 1 2 , a n d x i x . 26 with J o b xlii. 2 ; a l s o xii. 4 ; with the addition in the S e p t u a g i n t to l ' r o v . ix. 12. W i l l i l i c c l e s i a s t i c u s there are m a n y p a r a l l e l s : e.g. vi. 7, vi. 14, vi. 20, a n d x i x . 21 w i t h Ecclns. vii. 14, x x v i i i . 2, x x i x . 1 2 ; a n d v. 33, 34 with E c c l u s . xxiii. 9 - 1 1 . S e e also l-)c< lus. iv. 5, v. 13, vii. 35, ix. 8, x. 6, x i x . 2 1 , x x v i i . 6, xxviii. 3 - 5 , and W'isd. ii. 18, iii. 7, iv. 4, 16, x v i i . 2 1 .

IV. 12 X V I I I . 35. THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE AND THE NEIGHBOURHOOD. T h i s is t h e m a i n p o r t i o n of t h e G o s p e l . T o the end o f xiii. t h e s c e n e is c h i e f l y in G a l i l e e ; t h e s c e n e o f x i v . - x v i i i . is c h i e f l y in o r n e a r G a l i l e e . T h e sources are M a r k , the L o g i a of M a t t h e w , a n d s o m e i n d e p e n d e n t t r a d i t i o n s , w r i t t e n or oral. T h e G a l i l e a n s e c t i o n is in t h r e e d i v i s i o n s . 1. O p e n i n g a c t i v i t i e s , e n d i n g w i t h t h e S e r m o n o n t h e M o u n t (iv. 12—vii. 2 9 ) . 2. T e n A c t s o f M e s s i a n i c S o v e r e i g n t y , e n d i n g in t h e c h a r g e to t h e A p o s t l e s (viii. i - x . 4 2 ) . 3. M a n y utterances of M e s s i a n i c W i s d o m , e n d i n g in n u m e r o u s i l l u s t r a t i o n s of t e a c h i n g by p a r a b l e s (xi. i - x i i i . 5 8 ) . T h e remaining section constitutes a f o u r t h d i v i s i o n , c o n s i s t i n g o f a c t i v i t i e s in or n e a r G a l i l e e , a n d e n d i n g in t h e d i s c o u r s e s o n o f f e n c e s a n d f o r g i v e n e s s ( x i v . - x v i i i . ) . H e n c e c h a p t e r s v . - x i i . , x., viii., a n d x v i i i . a r c c o n c l u s i o n s t o definite divisions of the G o s p e l , a n d they consist a l m o s t entirely of discourses. T h e long G a l i l e a n section consists of nine subdivisions. W e begin with an historical introduction, dating f r o m J o h n ' s i m p r i s o n m e n t , a n d p l a c e d in s u r r o u n d i n g s w h i c h a r e a f u l f i l m e n t o f p r o p h e c y (iv. 1 2 - 1 6 ) . T h e n the Ministry begins with the c a l l o f t h e first d i s c i p l e s ( 1 7 - 2 2 ) . After a preliminary statement a b o u t t h e M e s s i a h ' s teaching a n d work ( 2 3 - 2 5 ) , we h a v e c o p i o u s i l l u s t r a t i o n s , b o t h of H i s t e a c h i n g ( v . - v i i . ) , a n d a l s o o f H i s w o r k (viii. i - i x . 3 4 ) . T h i s is f o l l o w e d b y t h e m i s s i o n o f t h e T w e l v e (ix. 3 5 - x i . t ) , b y i l l u s t r a t i o n s of t h e o p p o s i t i o n w h i c h His

GOSrEL ACCORDING TO S. MATTHEW

46

[IV. 1 2 - 1 6

ministry provoked and of His consequent isolation (xi. 2-xii. 50), and by illustrations of His public teaching by parables and His private interpretations of them (xiii. 1 - 5 2 ) . Henceforward Mt. keeps closely to the order of Mk., and the prolonged Galilean section comes to an end with the tragic rejection of the Messiah by His own people at Nazareth (xiii. 53—58). T h e substance of all this must, in the last resort, be carried back to the testimony of eye-witnesses : see Klostermann on Mk. i. 16.

I V . 1 3 - 1 6 . Fulfilment

of Prophecy by the Messiah's in Galilee.

Appearance

It was ' when He heard that John was delivered up ' by the Pharisees into the hands of Herod Antipas, that Jesus departed from the scene of John's activity and of the Pharisees' hostility, and withdrew once more to Galilee, where He made Capernaum, instead of His original home Nazareth (ii. 23), to be His headquarters. The expression, ' when H e heard' (¿KoiVas), is not in Mk., nor in Id;., who here arranges his material differently, but it is important, as illustrating a principle of our Lord's action which emerges from the narrative of the Temptation. He does not work miracles where ordinary means suffice. It is not by supernatural knowledge, but by common report, that f i e learns the persecution of the Baptist by the Pharisees (comp. xiv. 13). In both places the insertion of ¿xowas by Mt. is the more remarkable, because his tendency is to emphasize the supernatural powers of the Messiah. What specially interests him here, is the statement in Mk. i. 14, 21, that Christ not merely moved to these northern regions, but had Capernaum as the centre of His activity, in which fact he sees a fulfilment of prophecy. The fulfilment which he sees is partly geographical. H e understands the ' sea ' in Is. ix. 1, 2 to be the sea of Galilee ; and, on any hypothesis as to site, 1 Capernaum was on the Lake. Isaiah mentions Zebulon and Naphtali; and Capernaum was in the territory of these two tribes. Put more important than these geographical coincidences is the fact that the Prophet speaks of 'Galilee of the Gentiles' (VaXiXata TWV E&vZv),2 and also of ' a great light' that is to shine on the inhabitants of these darkened regions. This, like the visit of the Magi, and perhaps the warning uttered by the P>aptist (iii. 9), is an intimation that the salvation brought by the Messiah to the Jews does not belong to them exclusively, but is to extend to the heathen. Mt. once more shows his indifference to chronology. H e See Sanday. Sacred Sites, pp. 36 (T., and Jour, of Th. St., Ocl. 1903. 3 Comp. Ya.\i\aia aXXo^uXwc (I Mac. v. 15). 1

IV. 12-16]

T H E MINISTRY

IN < i.M.TI.KK

did not tell us how soon after the Birth the visit of the Magi took place, nor how long the retirement in Kgypt lasted, nor how long after the return to Palestine the appearance of the baptist and the Baptism of the Messiah took place. So here we arc left in doubt whether the interval between the Temptation and the beginning of the Messiah's Ministry in Galilee was one of days or of years. J u s t as the beginning of John's preaching is given without any connexion with the settlement of the Holy Family at Nazareth, so the beginning of Christ's preaching is given without any connexion with the Temptation, ft is the news- 'hat J o h n had been handed over to his enemies, not the victory of the Messiah over the evil one, which leads to the settlemen, at Capernaum as a centre for preaching. Mt. says that Jesus ' w i t h d r e w into Galilee' («I't^oj/ji/o-ei'), which does not mean that l i e returned thither after the Temptation ; 1 and perhaps Mt. means that H e retired to a part of the dominions of Antipas where H e would be less likely to be molested by him than in the region where the Baptist had been working. What Mk. gives as a date, 1 after J o h n was delivered up,' Mt. gives as a motive, 'when He heard that J o h n was delivered up.' A possible meaning is that, as the Baptist's activity had been made to cease, there was all the more reason for the Messiah to begin to preach ; and the best centre for H i m to choose for the purpose was the thick and mixed population on the west shore of the Lake. Vet it probably is not in order to hint at the excellence of the centre thai the Evangelist reminds us that Capernaum was ' by the sea,' but in order to prepare for a detail in the prophecy which he s about to quote. T h e quotation agrees with neither the Hebrew aor the L X X , yet it appears to be taken from some Creek version Jsee Allen, ad he., and Swete, Introduction to the O.T. in Greek, p. 31)6) of Is. ix. 1. As often, Mt. gives quite a new meaning to the prophecy which he quotes. Isaiah is thinking of the devastation of Palestine by the Assyrians in the reign of 1'ekah, and he has a vision of deliverance from the ravagers by a ruler of the house of David. T h e n follows the great prophecy, ' Unto us a child is born,' etc. In Mt. it is spiritual desolation (ix. 36) and a spiritual Deliverer (i. 2 1 ) that is meant. 2 1 ¿jfajisfe/u' is frequeni in Me, very rare in Mk. 111 unci Arts-, anil is net found elsewhere in the X.T. Here ilk. and l.k. (i'wlarpcfai) each use a different word. 2 A passage in the Testaments illustrates Me'-, applieation of [lie prophecy to the Messiah's preaehingot repenCanee : " for true re:K nianee afler a godly sort (/vara 6e.oi>, as 2 Cor. \ii. 10) dri\elh away the darkness, and enlighleneth the eyes, and stipplielh knowledge to the soul, and gaideih the purpose to salvation" (Gad v. 7). 'Galilee "f the (¡entiles' may mean 'Heathenish Galilee.'

48

GOSPEL

ACCORDING

IV. 17-22. The Messiah Four

T O S. M A T T H E W

begins to preach Disciples.

[IV. 17-22

and He

calls

' F r o m that time Jesus began.' 1 T h e formula with which the Messiah's preaching to the people is here introduced is repeated xvi. 2 i , and is perhaps intended to suggest a comparison between the two occasions. There Jesus has to give a very different kind of teaching, not to the people, but to the Twelve : ' From that time Jesus began ' to tell His disciples about His approaching Passion and Resurrection. The quotation of our Lord's words here illustrates Mt.'s practice of abbreviating Mk. by omitting one half of his double statements. Mk. condenses the substance of Christ's preaching thus : ' The lime is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand : repent ye, and believe in the gospel' • a very unusual phrase, in which 'gospel' means the 'good tidings' of the nearness of the Kingdom of God. As Mt. has already pointed out the fulfilment of prophecy, the first words are not needed ; and the last words are implied in what precedes. The substance of the Messiah's first preaching is the same as that of His Herald : He acts, so to speak, as His own Forerunner. 2 And it is because He is as yet His own Herald, that, although He proclaims the approach of the Kingdom, He says nothing of the King. But it is with regal authority that He calls His first disciples. 2 Without explanation, H e gives what, even in form, is a command rather than an invitation : and this assumption of authority is not resented, but instantly obeyed. And His words imply that this time (contrast Jn. i. 35 ff.) it is no temporary invitation ; they are to give up their calling as catchers of fish, and pursue a new calling as fishers of men. 3 From what they had learnt of Him during the preliminary Ministry in Judtea, about which Mt. and Mk. are silent, these fishermen knew to some extent what sort of work was in store for them, and under what kind of Master they would have to serve. All the patience, 1 The phrase dirò r&rt is rare in the N . T . (Mt, iv. 1 7 , xvi. 2 1 , xxvi. 16 ; L k . xvi. 16) and in the I . X X (Eccles. viii. 1 2 ; I's. xciii. 2). T h e exact time cannot be determined. Colonel Mackinlay argues for A.n. 25 ('J'he Magi, p, 63). A s he accepts A.D. 29 as the year of the Crucifixion, this involves a ministry of three years and a half, which has its difficulties. - They had previously been disciples of the liaptist, and through him had come to know Jesus. When the liaptist was put in prison, Jesus calls them to become His disciples. It is the Fourth Gospel that enlightens us on this point (Jn. i. 35-42). Here, contrary to the usage of each, Mt. has the historic present (19), and Mk. the aorist (i. 17). 3 Gould, on Mk. i, 17, points out that this is the first instance of parabolic language, so common in Christ's teaching afterwards. The Baptist had used harvest-work (iii. 12), as Jesus Himself does later (ix. 37, 38), to signify the gathering in of souls.

IV. 2 3 - 2 5 ]

T 1 1 F.

MINISTRY

IN

«;

YI.ILKK

49

perseverance, a n d courage which they had acquired in their uncertain a n d dangerous craft on the lake would he required, a n d they would have to sacrifice their h o m e a n d heir means of life. B u t neither pair of brothers hesitates, and each of the lour has the happiness of taking a brother with him. Apparently, S i m o n and A n d r e w leave their net in the lake, wiihout waiting to draw it in. T h e i r readiness is even more m a r k e d than that of the sons of Z e b e d e e , for they seem to have had no one to leave in charge of the nets (and b o a t ? ) which were their means of subsistence. Alt. is anxious to mark the readines-. >n both pairs of brothers. V e r y often he omits the ' s t r a i g h t w a y ' (e'Oiws) which is so frequent in M k . (iv. ¡ , viii. 4, 1 4 , i\. p 7, xii. 4 ; comp. M k . i. 1 2 , 29, 43, ii. (14), V TINRIXIIA RUN' otipaviov (17), TO €ÙCLyyé\iov rys ¡3a(ri\ei'as (23), aaXa/aa (23V Of the above, ihe following arc absent from the parallel passages: irpotripxcrilai (3, u , -ore (5), KCI'L ¡Soil (ll), ivaxapfu> (12), Xtyintros (18), (Kfîfav (21). The paragraph 2,5-^5 lm* no parallel. The word TrapciftaXciocrw? rs nowhere else in ihe \ . T . TRXRJPUORJ

V. VI. VII. Illustrations of the Messiah's The Sermon on the Mount.

Tt aching

T h e c o n c l u d i n g verse of ch. iv. is given partly as the e n d of the s u m m a r y of the Messiah's Ministry, partly as an introduction to the S e r m o n . O n e result of H i s .Ministry was that ' g r e a t m u l t i t u d e s ' (o^Xot iroWo!.: 1 M k . nearly always has ù'^Aos- iroÂAûç) followed H i m , c o m i n g from long distances. T h e s e multitudes constituted a large a u d i e n c e for His teaching ; and forthwith the E v a n g e l i s t gives us a b u n d a n t e v i d e n c e of what the l e a c h i n g was like. H e e v i d e n t l y regards the teaching as of more i m p o r t a n c e than the healing. In the s u m m a r y he m e n t i o n s the t e a c h i n g first; a n d here he gives us details about that before g i v i n g us details a b o u t the mighty works.M k . just mentions the astonishm e n t p r o d u c e d by the teaching (i. 22, .>3), and then passes to the details of healing ; and if was p r o b a b l y the small a m o u n t of t h e L o r d ' s teaching contained in his Gospel, as c o m p a r e d with Mt., which c a u s e d the latter to take the first place, although that of M k . was first in the field. I n d e e d there is some reason for thinking that, at a very early period of its existence, the G o s p e l of M k . was in danger of perishing a l t o g e t h e r ; as it is, its concluding portion has perished (Burkitt, The Gospel ilislorv and its Transmission, p. 2 6 1 ) ; and the other d o c u m e n t used by M t . and L k . ( Q ) has perished. 1 It is a favourite expression with Mi. (iv. 25, viii. 1. 18, \iii. 2, \v. ;o, xix. 2). 2 This is in accordance with Christ's own estimate of the comparative value of His words and His works: 1 lis word-ought (o suffice: without Ihe works, but He gives both (Jn. x. 38, xiv. 11).

54

GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. M A T T H E W

[V. 1

M t . again omits all indications of d a t e ; but it is o b v i o u s l y incorrect to say that he places the S e r m o n at the b e g i n n i n g of the Ministry. T h e r e are two proofs that he d o e s not. First, 1 the multitudes ' in v: i clearly refers to the ' great m u l t i t u d e s ' in the previous v e r s e ; a n d these great multitudes did not gather until our L o r d h a d been at work f o r s o m e time a n d the report of H i m h a d spread through Syria, P e n e a , J u d r c a , etc. Secondly, the teaching in the S e r m o n is not e l e m e n t a r y ; it: is evidently intended for those w h o h a d a l r e a d y r e c e i v e d a g o o d deal of instruction. T h e place at which the S e r m o n was d e l i v e r e d is a l m o s t as v a g u e as the d a t e : ' H e went u p into the m o u n t a i n . ' B u t no mountain has been mentioned. A s in xiv. 2 3 and x v . 29, high g r o u n d in the n e i g h b o u r h o o d of the lake is n o d o u b t m e a n t . 1 T h e c o n c o u r s e was so great that the shore of the l a k e was no longer a c o n v e n i e n t place for giving instruction, a n d our L o r d goes up to o n e of the terraces on the hills a b o v e the lake. I t is possible that there was s o m e o n e spot to which H e so often went up with H i s disciples that they c o m m o n l y s p o k e of it as '•the m o u n t a i n ' (TO opus), a n d that this d o m e s t i c n a m e for a particular place survives in the G o s p e l s ( M k . iii. 1 3 , vi. 46 : L k . vi. 1 2 ; J n . vi. 3, 1 5 ) . T h e mention of this going up to the high g r o u n d a b o v e the l a k e lets us k n o w that we are passing from the g e n e r a l sketch in iv. 2 3 - 2 5 to a definite occasion. A t the s a m e t i m e there is s o m e intimation that not all of it was d e l i v e r e d at o n e a n d the s a m e time, for s o m e of it is as clearly a d d r e s s e d to the Apostles ( 1 3 - 1 6 ) as other parts are to a larger circle of disciples ; a n d both classes of hearers are m e n t i o n e d (v. 1 , vii. 28). That our L o r d sat down - w o u l d intimate that H e was a b o u t to g i v e instruction for s o m e time (xiii. 2, x x v i . 5 5 ; M k . xiii. 3). The s o l e m n introduction, " o p e n e d H i s mouth a n d t a u g h t , " points in the same direction (comp. A c t s viii. 3 5 , x. 3 4 ; J o b iii. 1 ) . T h i s is the first mention of 1 H i s disciples,' which in this G o s p e l c o m m o n l y m e a n s disciples in the stricter sense. T h e critical questions c o n n e c t e d with the f o r m in which the S e r m o n has c o m e down to us n e e d not detain us long. They cannot be d i s c u s s e d without consideration of the similar, but m u c h shorter, report of a discourse in L k . (vi. 2 0 - 4 9 ) ; a n < 3 a m p l e materials for f o r m i n g r e a s o n a b l e conclusions respecting them will b e f o u n d in B i b l e Dictionaries, c o m m e n t a r i e s , a n d 1 It is strange that a n y ' s i m p l e b r e t h r e n ' should h a v e s u p p o s e d , as leronte states, that the M o u n t of O l i v e s is m e a n t ; and T a b o r is not very probable. 2 Sitting w a s the c o m m o n attitude (L_.k. iv. 2 0 ; A c t s xvi. 1 3 } , standing the exception (Acts ii. 1 4 , xiii. 16). E x c i t e m e n t or intense earnestness w o u l d m a k e standing more natural at times. On the solemn introduction see L o i s y , Le Discours sur la Montugtie, p. 1 3 .

V.l]

THE MINISTRY

TX

GALILEE

55

s e p a r a t e treatises. 1 I t is not of great i m p o r t a n c e to d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r M t . a n d L k . g i v e us divergent reports of o n e a n d the s a m e d i s c o u r s e , which is the o p i n i o n held by most s c h o l a r s ; or of t w o similar but different discourses, a d d r e s s e d to d i f f e r e n t a u d i e n c e s on d i f f e r e n t o c c a s i o n s , which is a t e n a b l e view, still advocated by some. N e i t h e r view is f r e e from difficulty. That a s e r m o n closely r e s e m b l i n g these two reports was actually d e l i v e r e d b y our L o r d , n e e d not be d o u b t e d for a m o m e n t : the contents a r e quite b e y o n d the p o w e r of any E v a n g e l i s t to invent, a n d the e v i d e n c e f o r the L o r d ' s utterance of this teaching is satisfactory. B u t s t u d y of t h e two reports will c o n v i n c e us that n e i t h e r of them is an exact reproduction of what was actually said. T h i s is at o n c e evident, if they are s u p p o s e d to be reports of the s a m e d i s c o u r s e ; a n d this c o n c l u s i o n c a n n o t b e e s c a p e d b y a d o p t i n g the theory of two original d i s c o u r s e s , ( i ) N o one, h o w e v e r greatly i m p r e s s e d , w o u l d be like!}- to r e m e m b e r every word that h a d b e e n said. (2} W h a t was rem e m b e r e d was n o t at o n c e written down. ( 3 ) E i t h e r b e f o r e or a f t e r it was written d o w n it was translated from A r a m a i c into G r e e k ; a n d translations of both k i n d s p r o b a b l y existed, s o m e m a d e f r o m A r a m a i c oral tradition, s o m e from A r a m a i c documents. W e may b e l i e v e that both M t . a n d L k . had the s e r m o n in G r e e k in a written f o r m , but by no m e a n s the s a m e written f o r m . (4) I t is e v i d e n t that, a l t h o u g h both reports are p r o b a b l y m u c h shorter than the original s e r m o n or s e r m o n s , yet in s o m e particulars they h a v e been enlarged. L k . to s o m e extent, a n d M t . to a still greater extent, has a d d e d to the original d i s c o u r s e s o m e sayings, which, although they were certainly s p o k e n byC h r i s t , were n o t s p o k e n in that p a r t i c u l a r c o n n e x i o n . The m o s t certain i n s t a n c e of this in M t . is the L o r d ' s Prayer a n d its i m m e d i a t e c o n t e x t (vi. 7 - 1 5 ) . B u t v. 25, 26, 3 1 , 3 2 . vli. 6 - 1 j , 2 2 , 2 3 m a y also b e s u s p e c t e d of h a v i n g b e e n a d d e d by c o m pilation, a n d this for two reasons : (n) b e c a u s e there is a w a n t of c o n n e x i o n with the main subject ; and (/>} b e c a u s e a g o o d deal of this material is f o u n d in L k . in quite a different s e t t i n g ; v. 25, 26 = L k . xii. 58, 59, v. 3 2 = L k . xvi. 1 8 , vii. 7 - 1 1 ---• L k . \i. 9 - 1 3 , vii. 2 3 = L k . xiii. 27. N e i t h e r of these reasons is conc l u s i v e ; f o r the a p p a r e n t want of c o n n e x i o n may be d u e to a b b r e v i a t i o n ; a n d it is quite p o s s i b l e that our L o r d m a y in s o m e c a s e s h a v e i n c l u d e d in a sermon what had been said on s o m e s p e c i a l o c c a s i o n , or m a y h a v e r e p e a t e d on s o m e special o c c a s i o n what h a d b e e n said in a s e r m o n . N e v e r t h e l e s s , the ' S e e especially Hastings' DB. v., art. 'Sermon on ihe Mount'; International Critical Comm. on S. Mallheiv and mi .V. Int., \ (.". (¡ore, The Sermon on the Mount, 1896; Ilase, Ceschiehte [cut, S 5 5 ; /)('(/., ;u't. ' Sermon on the Mount.'

5 ) probably implies the pre-existence of the Messiah, as also in x. 34 : compare wapeSodri (xi. 27). ' T h e Law and the Prophets' is a Jewish expression for the Scriptures: vii. 12, xi. 13, xxii. 40; Lk. \vi. 1 6 : comp. Lk. xvi. 29. 31, xxiv. 44 ; Jn. i. 45. Christ here says ' the Law or the Prophets,' because He might have upheld the one and rejected (he other ; but l i e has not come to abolish either.

76

GOSPEL

ACCORDING

TO

S. M A T T H E W

[V. 17-48

as of less interest for Gentiles. C o u l d he h a v e done so, h a d it been the main subject ? T h e first four verses ( 1 7 - 2 0 ) give the general principle of the Messiah's relation to the L a w : " not destruction, but fulfilment." T h e remainder ( 2 1 - 4 8 ) give the illustrations. A t the outset H e implies that H e is the C o m i n g O n e (5 epx'V" 1 ' 0 5 ) : ' T h i n k not that I came ' : and throughout H e speaks with a calm assertion of supreme authority, which impresses readers now, as it impressed hearers then. 1 H e is evidently conscious of possessing this supreme authority, and it manifests itself quite naturally, not in studied phrases, but as the spontaneous expression of H i s habitual modes of thought. O n e who knew that H e was the Messiah, and was conscious of His own absolute righteousness, would consistently, perhaps we may say, inevitably, speak in some such way as this. 2 C o u l d any one else speak in this quiet majestic way of 'fulfilling the L a w , ' or side by side with the L a w place H i s own declarations : ' B u t / s a y to 1 wit.' It is not obvious at first sight what Christ means by ' fulfilling (TTXrjpCoirai) the L a w . ' H e does not mean taking the written L a w as it stands, and literally obeying it. T h a t is what H e condemns, not as wrong, but as wholly inadequate. H e means rather, starting with it as it stands, and bringing it on to c o m p l e t e n e s s ; working out the spirit of i t ; getting at the comprehensive principles which underlie the narrowness of the letter. T h e s e the M e s s i a h sets forth as the essence of the revelation made by G o d through the L a w and the Prophets. T h r o u g h them H e has revealed H i s will, and it is impossible that H i s Son should attempt to pull d o w n or u n d o (KaraXvcrai) this revelation of the Father's will, or that H i s will, in the smallest particular, should fail of fulfilment. 8 Not until the whole of the Divine purpose has been accomplished (2ut it is by no means certain that ' Thou fool' (/mpi) is a stronger term of abuse than ' R a c a ' : it may be a translation of it. Our Lord Himself uses the word of the foolish, builder (vii. 26) and of the foolish virgins (xxv. 2, 3, 8), and S. Paul uses its equivalent in rebuking the Galatians (iii 1). T h e very word ' R a c a ' is a puzzle as regards orthography, derivation, and use (see Nestle in DCG.). But, assuming that ' T h o u fool' is much worse than ' Raca,' it cannot be meant that while the Sanhedrin can impose sufficient penalty for the one, nothing less than the fires of Gehenna would suffice for the other. 1 It is doubtful whether the Sanhedrin would regard the utterance of ' R a c a ' as an offence at a l l ; and certainly our Lord is not condemning all use of the word 'fool,' or all use of strong language (xii. 34, 39, xvi. 23, xxiii. 1 3 - 3 5 ) . Possibly Christ is ironically imitating the casuistical distinctions drawn by the Rabbis, and at the same time is teaching that all degrees of hatred and contempt, whether expressed or not, are sinful and are liable to (¿Vo^os) condemnation by man and by God, who alone can judge of the feeling and malevolent intention in the heart. 2 This point is enforced by a striking illustration. T o obey the law of love is better than sacrifice ; therefore postpone sacrifice rather than postpone reconciliation. Suppose that a man with feelings of enmity in his heart has actually come to the altar in the Temple with his offering. H e must not offer it until he has got rid of his bad feelings and done his best to make peace with the brother who, rightly or wrongly, is offended with him. One who hates the children of God will not be accepted as His child by the heavenly Father, and it is peacemakers who have a special right to be regarded as His children (c)).:! 1 1 G e h e n n a , ' a s a place of future punishment, is frequent in l i t . (v. 22, 29, 30, x. 28, xviii. 9, xxiii. 15, 33) ; in Mk. thrice ; in L k . , J a s . , 2 Pet. once each. F o r the important difference between ' Gehenna ' and ' H a d e s , ' the obliteration of which is one of the most serious defects in the A Y . , see commentaries, DB. and DCG. - Our Lord cannot mean that one who cherishes a:.:. i_\ feelings may be prosecuted: who is to k n o w ? He means that to cherish such feelings is a kind of murder, and merits the like penalty. Oeadnli ' { 2 4 ) ,

evyoeif (25), iiriopKfiv (33), fUXior (41), pairi^ew (39 and xxvi. 67).

T h e A V . i s i n a c c u r a t e a n d i n c o n s i s t e n t in t r a n s l a t i n g Xi'^yos ( v e r . 15) a n d ' l i g h t ' ( v i . 2 2 ) ; t h e R V . h a s ' l a m p " in b o t h [ d a c e s .

'candle'

9°

GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. MATTHEW

VI. 1-18. The Christian

Life contrasted with faulty Practice.

[VI. 1-18 Jewish

Haying compared the Jewish ideal, as taught by the Scribes, with the Christian ideal, as sketched in the Beatitudes, our Lord now goes on to contrast the ordinary Jewish practice, as exhibited in the conduct of the Pharisees, with the conduct which H e requires. The Pharisees claimed to be, and were commonly allowed to be, patterns for all who desired to be strict observers of the Law. Christ does not mention them by name, but speaks only of ' the hypocrites.' From chapter xxiii. it is evident who are meant, and even without that chapter the meaning would not be doubtful (xv. 7, xxii. 18). 'l'he 'righteousness' here (1) looks back to 'the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees' (v. 20), and signifies external conduct, deeds in observance of the Law. T o do these in order to be seen of men is fatal: they at once lose their goodness, and the doer of them loses all merit and all reward from God. This principle is stated quite simply, and is then illustrated by three things which are regarded as among the chief elements of religion, alms, prayer, and fasting (Tob. xii. 8), and which, in their wider sense, do cover a large sphere of duty. Alms may represent our relations to men, prayer our relations to God, and fasting our discipline of ourselves. And, if we omit the special directions about prayer ( 7 - 1 5 ) , which perhaps are no part of the original Sermon, for they spoil the balance of the parts, these three illustrations are set forth in the same way. In each case we have : ' Do not be hypocritical, but,' etc. The opening warning, ' T a k e heed' (ypauixiTi), shows how great the danger is. Hypocrisy is one of the most common and the most subtle of foes. The motives, even for our best deeds, are apt to be mixed, and the thought of men's admiration is often one of them. A very little of this may spoil everything. In this advertising age, in which a man hardly needs to sound his own trumpet, because there are so many who are ready to sound it for him, the danger is greatly increased. In this respect, Parish Magazines have a great deal to answer for. Christians, who never would yield to the glaring hypocrisy of pretending to be benevolent when they are not, have the sincerity of their benevolence marred by the knowledge that it is sure to be published. The light of a Christian character will shine before men and win glory for God without the artificial aid of public advertisement. Ostentatious religion may have its reward here, but it receives none from God. Ought the thought of God's reward to come in ? In the highest characters at their best it will not. They will act righteously for righteousness' sake, as loyal members of the

V I . 1-18]

THE

MINISTRY

IN

GALILEE

91

K i n g d o m , as true children of a heavenly Father. Rut the highest characters take time to d e v e l o p ; and, even when they are established, they are not always at their best. During the time of growth, and in moments of weakness later, the thought of the rewards which G o d has promised to those who obey Him may come in as a legitimate support and stimulus. T h o s e are no friends of human nature who tell us that a religion which " b r i b e s " men by the offer of a reward thereby debases morality. Men Everything depends upon the character of the reward. may have degrading ideas of the joys of the righteous in this world and in the n e x t ; but such ideas are no pan of the little which G o d has revealed to us on the subject. T h e r e is nothing degrading in working for the reward of a good conscience here, and of increased holiness hereafter, both enriched by God's love and blessing. See on x. 42. T h e first verse is an introduction to the whole triplet, and must not be restricted to the subject of alms. 1 Righteousness' covers alms, prayer, and fasting. E a c h of the separate subjects begins with ' w h e n ' (orav, 2, 5, 16). T h e reading, ' d o not your righteousness before men ' ( R Y . ) is right, rathi-r than ' d o not your alms before m e n ' ( A Y . ) . 'Righteousness' (juaiwiVi)) was sometimes used in the sense of almsgiving if.Xoytoa-wri) or any kind of benevolence ; and some copyists, thinking that it had that meaning here, changed the more comprehensive term into the narrower one. 'Righteousness ' is the reading of K ' H l ) , S y r - S i n . I .alt., O r i g - L a l . Hil. Aug. H i e r o n . , and is adopted by almost all editors. T h e agreement of R " ISarir) with S y r Cur. (your gifts) is curious, / a i m suggests thai the three readings are different oral translations of'the Aramaic \BinMttmg, ii. p. J I I ) .

In all three cases the picture drawn of the ostentation of the Pharisees is very graphic. ' Sound a trumpet' is probablyfigurative, for no such custom seems to be known. 1 This verse tells us that almsgiving was part of the service in the synagogue, and there we may believe that our L o r d gave what H e could' out of His slender means. There is a veiled irony in the declaration ' T h e y have received their reward,' and this adds to its impressive severity. ' T h e y receive their pay then and there, and they receive it in full (¿xe^ovtri TOV /.WROOV AI'RWV): God owes them nothing. T h e y were not giving, but buying. They wanted the praise of men, they paid for it, and they have got it. T h e transaction is ended and they can claim nothing more.But their loss is not the less, because they clo not know whal they have 1 Zahn compares J u v e n a l ' s hueina fmme iviw 1:521, ¡mil bit,-inn/or j/:j ¿Tidexo^'os ucpOct.l\p,ovs Trovijpovs {issaclar iii. 4, iv. 6) ; also 0 yap ayadbs avOpuiros ovk exei okct^lvov ¡> h a s TRJV OTKAIAIJOVIP' KAI FIADTXEIA.P OA'TOV. \\ln:h mav mean eiiher ' I l i s r i g h t e o u s n e s s a n d K i n g d o m ' or ' r i g h t e o u s n e s s a n d i l l s K i n g d o m ' : b u t t h e r e a d i n g is n o t like]}' (d he o r i g i n a l . It l o o k s like a c o r r e c t i o n t o . p l a c e ' r i g h t e o u s n e s s , ' w h i c h is t h e m e a n s .1! e n t w i n e t h e K i n g d o m , in a m o r e logical position. S e v e r a l F a t h e r s q u o t e a s a y i n g w h i c h m a \ h e an a d a p t a t i o n nf t h i s v e r s e , b u t w h i c h R e s e l l (A^raf/ia, p p . I l l , 1 1 2 ! b e l i e v e s !o be u n q u e s t i o n a b l y a g e n u i n e u t t e r a n c e of C h r i s t . It is g i v e n in its fullest t e r m b e O r i g e n [De Orat, 2 ; Op. i. p . 1 9 7 ) a n d by A m b r o s e ( / < / , i. 36.-/1/ Jionvit, 3 ,- O f . viii. 445) : " A s k for t h e g r e a t t h i n g s , a n d t h e s m a l l shall be a d d e d to a m . Ask 1 T h e i n t r o d u c t o r y Sia TOVTO >,:t;'IU. C l e m e n t s a y s s i m p l y ipy /.; n uo[i:iarlo"t]re TO aapfiarov OVK o^^erOe TOV liarepa. " Jesus s a i t h , E x c e p t y e f a s t t o t h e w o r l d , y e s h a l l in n o w i s e find the K i n g d o m o f G o d ; a n d e x c e p t y e k e e p the sabbath, y e shall not see the F a t h e r . " I n the S e p l u a g i n l w e h a v e traji^aTU'LLV TO. 6 rt etr].

134

GOSPEL

ACCORDING

TO

S. M A T T H E W

[Vili.

28-34

made against Him by the owners. It was the people of the country, not the owners in particular, who requested Him to depart from their borders; and, although it is likely that the loss of property had something to do with the request, yet it was dread of so powerful a Wonder-worker that chiefly moved them. Mk. (v. 15) expressly states that 'they were afraid,' and Lk. (viii. 37) says that the Gerasenes 'asked Him to depart from them, for they were holden with great fear.' Fear in the presence of the supernatural is common in man; and dislike of the presence of great holiness is specially natural in those who know that their own lives are quite out of harmony with heaven. This request of the inhabitants is a guarantee for the general trustworthiness of the narrative. Fiction would have made the inhabitants anxious to detain Him that He might work other wonderful cures, as was commonly the case in Galilee and Judiea, where He was regarded, not as a dangerous magician, but as a great Prophet. The name 'Legion' (Mk., Lk.) is another strong mark of reality.1 While it is reasonable to admit the possibility of some distortion of the facts in the process of transmission, it is uncritical and arbitrary to dismiss an incident, so strongly attested, as a myth. The difficult subject of diabolical possession cannot be dismissed as an empty superstition. Not only the Evangelists, including the beloved physician, distinguish clearly between possession and disease, but (according to their frequent testimony) Christ did so also. It is not untrue, but it is misleading, to say that their reports are coloured by the ideas prevalent in their age. It is equally true to say that their reports are very diffei-ent from the ideas of later Judaism on the subject of demonology, —all the difference between what is silly superstition and what is sober and credible. Christ did not treat possession either as disease or as sin. He seems never to have blamed the possessed, or to have suggested that they had brought the affliction on themselves. They were great sufferers, and in His compassion He freed them from suffering. But, if the reports of His method in dealing with this special kind of suffering are to be trusted, He went through the form of casting out demons; H e told the evil spirits to depart. If there were no evil spirits there, He either knew this or He did not; and one is involved in grave 1 On Mt.'s omission of the question, ' W h a t is thy name?,' and of other questions which seem to imply ignorance on the part of Christ, see Introduction, p. xv. Mt. seems also to have felt the difficulty of the statement that Christ gave the demons leave ((w¿Tpe\¡/ev avroU) to enter the swine. His 1 Go ' {¿TÍyere) is not ' G o into the swine,' but ' D e p a r t , leave the place. 1 It ignores their request rather than grants i t ; comp. iv. 1 0 ; 1 Cor. vii. 15. J . I?. Moulton, Gram, of N.T. Gr. p. 172. Mt. also, as before the choosing of the Twelve, omits ' t h e mountain' which both M k . and L k . mention.

IX. 1 - 8 ]

THE MINISTRY IN (lALILKI:,

'35

difficulty, whichever alternative one takes. It is rash to assume that there cannot have been any demons to be expelled. T h e hypothesis that they were there, and that they were expelled, is not antecedently incredible, and it is supported by evidence which cannot easily be explained away. That demoniacal possession never occurs now is another rash assumption. A medical man once told the present writer that he was confident that he had known of a case in his practice : the terrible phenomena seemed to admit of 110 other explanation. Hut physical maladies sometimes become extinct, and psychical maladies may do so also. Even if it be true that demoniacal possession is not found now, that is not conclusive against its taking place in other ages when the spiritual condition of society was very different. We must be content to leave the question open ; but the uniform evidence of the Synoptists is much easier to explain, if demoniacal possession was a fact. 1 E x p r e s s i o n s characteristic of M t . in rii. viii, : nci iSot'* (3, 2 4 , 29, 3 2 , 3 4 ) , TrporrepxiaddL (2, 5) 19, 25), irpQffKvvtiv (2}, Trpof-Lr (4), Tropti-eaOai {9 hi ), o iif:"'yfj.os (12), ~ OGOPTWP

OTTOJS

halfihiv ( 3 1 only). It is in this c h a p t e r that w c h a v e the first instances of what in the second half of the G o s p e l b e c o m e s c o m m o n . - - M t / s substitution of aorists for (he imperfects i n M k . W c h a v e irpoo-qTiyica^, aTreOavov ( i 0 , 3 2 ) for eqstpov,

iirviyovTo (Mk. i. 32, v. 13).

O n the possibility that Alt. h a s a r r a n g e d the p a r a g r a p h s in this chapter to correspond with p a r a g r a p h s in x x v i i . and x x v i i i . , see T . M i i n e in th(1 J o z t r . of Th. St., J u l y 1 9 0 4 , p. 6 0 2 .

The third miracle of the second triplet is the healing of the paralytic (ix. 1-8). Mt. is again more brief than Mk. (ii. 1 - 1 2 ) and Lk. (v. 17-26). ' H i s own city' means Capernaum, which is now His chief centre of activity (iv. 13). None of the Evangelists give any date, and Mk. alone mentions that the paralytic had four bearers. 'Seeing their faith ' is in all three narratives, and it is commonly interpreted as meaning the taith of the bearers, whose persistence in breaking through the roof, in order to place the sufferer near Jesus, is omitted by Mt. But we may allow some faith to the sick man himself, although it was probably not so strong as that of his friends. He knew, as they did not, that his physical weakness had been produced by previous sin; and he perhaps doubted whether the sin would not interfere with his cure. Hence Christ deals with the man's uneasy conscience first. The healing of that must precede the healing of 1

249.

W . Menzies Alexander,

Demonic Possession in Ihc N. T.

pp. 12, 2 0 0 - 2 1 2 ,

136

G O S P E L A C C O R D I N G T O S. M A T T H E W

[IX. 1-8

his body. If he had faith to believe in the forgiveness (and that sometimes requires a great deal), he would have faith to be healed. 1 The affectionate address, ' M y child' (TCKVOV) is in both Mt. and Mk. The gracious exhortation, ' B e of good cheer' (Odpaei), is in Mt. alone, who on two other occasions records it as uttered by Christ (ix. 22, xiv. 27). Mk. has it once of Christ (vi. 50); Jn. once (xvi. 3 3 ) ; and L u k e once (Acts xxiii. n ) . As used by Christ, it is never a mere exhortation ; it is followed by an act or assurance which is sure to cheer those to whom it is addressed; so, in a very marked way, here. The present tense (Mt., Mk.) is remarkable. ' T h y sins are receiving forgiveness' (¿ inroourg, Hist, de la Pal. pp. 86 ff. For vwofiovi) (22) as the link between persecution and victory see Ilort on Rev. 1. 9.

X. 16-23]

T H E MINISTRY IN C.ALILEK

153

Persecution is a temptation ;.o deny Christ, and those who meet persecution in a spirit of bravado have no right to expect to be delivered from succumbing to that temptation. T h e martyr's crown is not to be won, unless a man ' has contended lawfully' (2 Tim. ii. 5). This paragraph, like the preceding one ( 5 - 1 5 ) , closes with a ' Verily I say unto you.' A comparison of it with Mk. xiii. 9 - 1 3 will show that it cannot have been spoken in connexion with the first mission of the Twelve. But the concluding words are not easy to explain. T h e persecuted disciples are to flee, ' f o r ye shall not have gone through the cities of Israel, till the Son of Man be come ' (23). At least four things are open to question. What is the meaning of 'gone through ' (reAtVi/re), of ' the cities of Israel,' of ' the Son of Man,' of ' come ' ? ' (¡one through ' is often understood as meaning 'gone through in your missionary e f f o r t s ' : you will not have preached in all the cities of Israel. No lives must be needlessly sacrificed, for even all will not suffice to visit every town in Palestine in the short time at your disposal. Or again, 1 gone through ' may mean ' thoroughly won o v e r ' : you will not have completely converted all these cities. There is not very much difference between these two explanations ; but there is a third which is quite different. ' Gone through' may mean ' exhausted in your frequent flights ' : you will not have used as places of refuge all these cities. Y o u need not be afraid to fly as often as you are persecuted, for there are enough cities to last you till the Son of Man comes. This makes intelligible sense, but the solemn language used seems to require one of the other interpretations. It need not be doubted, however, that ' the cities of Israel' means the towns of Palestine. T h e proposal to understand by it all the cities in which there were any Jews would hardly have been made, except for the purpose of avoiding the difficulty caused by the delay of Christ's coming. In the many centuries which have elapsed since the words were spoken it would have been quite easy to have preached in all the cities of Palestine. The remaining two points may be taken together. " I n this Gospel the coming of the Son of Man is always a final coming after His death to inaugurate the Kingdom " (Allen). It is evident that in some way Christ's words produced the impression that H e would return soon. When that impression had been produced, the words themselves would be likely to undergo modification. Moreover, the coming to establish the Kingdom may have been confused with the coming to judgment. T h e nearness of the Kingdom may have been transferred to the other coming. We may suspect that the reports of His utterances respecting the Second Advent have become blurred in transmission.

154

GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. MATTHEW

[X. 24-26

S o m e important witnesses (D L , Syr-Sin. a b k A r m . ) after ' flee into the n e x t ' i n s e r t ' and if they persecute you in the other flee ye to another.' If this is genuine, the third interpretation of Te\(