who was revealed in the Gospel; and it was notorious that he was revealed as the son of Mary, who appeared in a human form. Two methods of extricating them from this difficulty presented themselves. They either denied that Christ had a real body, and held that he was an unsubstantial phantom; or, granting that there was a man called Jesus, the son of human parents, they believed that the on Christ quitted the pleroma, and descended upon him at his baptism. The former of these opinions seems to have occurred first, and those who held it were called from it Docetæ. These were the first heretics; and, as Jerom says, the body of our Lord was declared to be only apparent, while the Apostles were still in the world, and the blood of Christ was still fresh in Judæa.

The positions which St. John advances in the introduction, are afterwards supported in the discourses of Christ which he records. The other Evangelists have detailed such as respected the affairs of men, but his are dogmatical, and evidently selected as explanatory of the nature and divine legation of his Master. In the Epistles the inspired authors have enforced the fundamental doctrines of Christianity in their own words; but John in the very words of Christ himself; so that we are here admitted to a nearer view of our Redeemer than in any other of the sacred books. Michaelis and Rosenmüller are of opinion, that John had also an intention of opposing the Sabeans, or followers of John the Baptist; and unless there had been persons in his time who exalted too high the herald of the Saviour, the Evangelist would hardly have said that he was not the light which enlightens the world. It is also observable, that he connects this introduction, not, as a modern reader might expect, with the birth of the Messiah, but with his baptism by John, whose inferiority he thus pointedly marks by contrast. We learn from the Acts that Paul baptized twelve of these followers of the Baptist at Ephesus, the future residence of this Evangelist, where Apollos, a distinguished member of their body, was converted to Christianity. A few families professing this religion still remain at Bassora, and their Scriptures, written

in a dialect of Syria, have been brought to Europe, and translated by Norberg. In them the Baptist is called the Apostle of the light, his baptism the Baptism of life, and Jesus the Disciple of life; yet even in them he appears as John's inferior. This was probably not the case at first, for the Evangelist is anxious to put it beyond all doubt by commencing with the preexistence and proper deity of Jesus.

Some passages, no doubt, have been rendered more emphatic, by these critical investigations; but let us guard against the pernicious conclusion into which a curious inquirer may be betrayed so easily, that the main scope of this, or of any other book of holy writ, is the confutation of temporary error. If we concede, as men of learning are too apt to do, that our Lord and his Apostles had principally in view the prejudices and opinions of their own times, we shall infer that their declarations only indirectly concern us, and shall comparatively neglect their instructions. But we may be assured, that the manifold and varied wisdom of God, woautoixian σopía, looking forward to the end of time, has contrived that his word should be a lamp and a guide to every succeeding generation. As to this Gospel in particular, its author informs us, that, out of the innumerable incidents which he might have recorded, he has made such a selection as should convince his readers that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that "believing they might have life through his name." The various modifications of Gnosticism have been long extinct, and are imperfectly known even to the learned; but this proposition has still opponents, though of a different description; and this Gospel is as useful as ever, since it reveals in language as decisive against the modern rationalist, as the fanciful heretic of the primitive age, this vital doctrine of belief in the incarnate Son of God, which is the foundation of the Christian's hope, and is the only one that can purify the heart and overcome the world. The style is plain and generally perspicuous, and when obscure, the defect arises from the sublimity of the subject, to which no expressions are adequate; he "sounding forth, as a son of thunder, things higher than any intellect can

comprehend; and by a certain peculiar majesty of speech, bringing as it were out of the clouds and enigmas of wisdom, a devout knowledge of the Son of God"."

Each Evangelist then, we perceive, has his peculiar manner, but simplicity is the characteristic of all, and that in design no less than in style. They neither explain nor command, promise nor threaten, commend nor blame; but preserve one even tenor, reporting what was said or done by the enemies and friends of their Master, without any encomium on the one, or invectives against the other. They seem to avoid naming any one, without necessity, of whom they have nothing good to report; the high priest, and his co-adjutor the Roman procurator, the tetrarch of Galilee, and the treacherous disciple, are the only persons named of the many who had a hand in Christ's prosecution and death. The suppression of these names would have impaired the evidence of the history; and justice to the eleven required, that the guilty Apostle should be specified. But the names of Joseph and Nicodemus, the only members of the Sanhedrim who did not concur in the sentence of condemnation, of Bartimæus, Zaccheus, Lazarus and his sisters, and others of whose good qualities we hear, are preserved; while the penmen make no secret of their own faults and those of their fellow disciples. Of this, the intemperate zeal, and the ambition of the sons of Zebedee, the incredulity of Thomas, and the presumption and denial of Peter, are eminent examples. Equally certain of all that they advance, the most signal miracles and the most ordinary events are narrated in the same tone, as by faithful witnesses, whose business it was to testify and not to argue. As to their Lord, they appear to consider his character as infinitely superior to any praise which they could bestow. Panegyric is the natural language of a disciple, or even of an impartial historian, after the recital of the unjust execution of any of those excellent men, of whom the world was not worthy; and the colouring is apt to be heightened, in proportion to the

b Basil. Hom. 169. Epiphanius adv. Hær. 73.

degree of the sufferings, and the worthiness of the sufferer. Both Xenophon and Plato close with praise their accounts of the death of their master, the only sage that ever was compared with Jesus; but his biographers do not presume to offer the tribute of their admiration, and instead of pointing out the wisdom and virtue of his life, they leave it to speak for itself. Hence animation is in a manner excluded from the narrative; no angry epithet or pathetic exclamation ever escapes them; no attempt is made to excite either pity or resentment. They lay before you nothing but facts, and are at no pains to make them appear credible, or to interest the reader in the subject of their narrative. About the ornaments of style they seem to have been indifferent, and their phraseology would be regarded as awkward and foreign; yet the more the Gentiles became acquainted with their books, the more they would discover of a charm in them, to which they found nothing similar; insomuch, that they were not ashamed to be taught by writers for whom they had previously entertained a sovereign contempt. Nor was this admiration of the sacred writings to be found only among the vulgar; it originated with them it is true, but it did not terminate there; for even those in the higher classes, who would be most shocked with inelegancies and barbarisms, found in the Scriptures an irresistible attraction, which overcame all their prepossessions, and compelled them to acknowledge, that no writers could so effectually convey conviction to the understanding and reformation to the heart, as these homely and artless biographers".

a Newcome on our Lord's conduct, p. 503.

The information and opinions contained in this section are derived chiefly from Jones's Method of settling the Canonical Authority of the New Testament; Lardner's Credibility of the Gospel History; Townson's Discourses on the Gospels; Campbell's Preliminary Dissertations; Bishop Marsh's translation of Michaelis; Hug's Introduction; and Greswell's Dissertations upon a Harmony of the Gospels.

D

SECTION II.

On Harmonies.

OUR Saviour's ministry having been narrated by four Evangelists, who have each not only peculiar matter, but also circumstantial variations of that which is common to the others, it is natural in studying any one Gospel, to compare it with the rest. The variations invite, and seem to require, adjustment. We accordingly find, that within a century of the publication of the last, a Harmony was compiled by Tatian, a pupil of Justin Martyr. In modern times above a hundred and seventy have been enumerated, and the number is the best proof of the difficulty of the undertaking. All may be reduced to two classes, one in which it is assumed that each Evangelist has written in chronological order, the other, in which it is allowed that some have deviated from it. Osiander, one of Luther's fellow-labourers, is at the head of the first, A.D. 1537; Chemnitz, 1593, at that of the second. In the former, of which Macknight's is the best known, there can be little important variation, as by maintaining that events recorded by two or three, with some minute difference, were not the same, they cut the knot instead of untying it. Thus they have the healing of the servants of two centurions, the raising from the dead of two damsels, the stilling miraculously two storms on the lake with nearly the same circumstances, and with the use of the very same words. In the second class there is of course more variety, because harmonists, though agreeing in their principle, differ in its application.

A Harmony is a much more difficult work than it appears to be to those who have not fully considered it; for not only few dates are given, but the events which Matthew relates in one order, are placed by Mark and Luke in another. Harmonists differ as to which they shall adopt, and in this diversity of opinion among eminent men, supported by ingenious