account of the generation of John rich; the parable of the unjust judge, the Baptist; the history of Zacharias; who feared neither God nor man; the advent of the Angel to Mary; thé the fruitless fig tree; the two disexclamation of Elizabeth, “Blessed ciples on the way to Emmaus (Luke art thou among women, &c.;" the des. xxiv. 13), and their subsequent concent of the angels who appeared to fession of an instinctive intuition of the shepherds, and the subject of the presence of Christ, in that their their communication; the testimony hearts burned when he spoke with of Anna and Simeon to Christ; the them (Luke xxiv., 32), finally the visit of Jesus to Jerusalem at twelve recognition of Christ by the disyears of age; the full account of ciples when he broke the bread (Luke John's baptism; the date of Christ's xxiv. 30-1). baptism; four additional portions of We next advance to the considerathe Sermon on the Mount--"Woe tion of the person of Luke. There unto you that are rich, for ye have re- can be no question about his identity ceived your consolation ; woe unto with the Luke who accompanied Paul you that are full, for ye shall hunger; from Troas to Philippi (Acts xvi. 10), woe unto you that laugh now, for ye where he remained, but afterwards shall mourn and weep; woe unto you accompanied Paul on his third journey when all men shall speak well of you, from this place through Troas, Mityfor so did their fathers to the falsé lene, Samos, Miletus, to Jerusalem prophets.” To Luke we are also in- (Acts xx. 6). Then he went with debted for the miraculous draught Paul from Cæsarea to Rome (Acts of fishes, through which Peter and xxvii. 1). He is called by the Church those who were with him left their Fathers, Lucanus, and in the Epistles nets and followed Christ; the curing of Paul he is mentioned also by on the Sabbath day of the woman that name as a faithful companion who had suffered eighteen years ; the (Col. iv. 14; Philem. xxiv. ; 2 Tim. cure, also on the Sabbath, of the iv. 11). dropsical patient, and the discussion The next question is, was he a which arose from it concerning the heathen Jewish Christian ? Sabbath; his warning to his dis- Opinions vary. In the olden times ciples against caring for meat and he was regarded as a Jewish proselyte, raiment, and the beautiful illustra- but in more modern times (Neander tion of God's feeding and clothing von Erlach), he is thought to have all creation; the calling in of the been a converted heathen. The style poor, the maimed, the halt, and the of the Gospel and the Acts -- the blind to the marriage feast; the im- prevalence of Hebraisms and other portunity of the midnight knocker ; phenomena-favour the earlier supthe salving of Jesus by the sinful position that he was a Jew; the Goswoman, connexion with the pel was evidently written for Greek parable arising from it, spoken by educated Christians of heathen origin, Jesus to Simon about the two debt- from the many explanations he makes ors; the parable of the rich man of Jewish customs ; for instance, he whose soul was required of him ; the explains the difference between the

l parable of the prodigal son, of the Pharisees and the Sadducees, in that rich man in luxury and Lazarus in the Sadducees denied the resurrection poverty ; the response to those who of the dead. In the speech of Peter, said to him, "Lord increase our recorded in Acts i. 19, he interpolates faith ;" the conversation with Zac- explanations—“And it was known chæus the publican; the account unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem, of the Pharisee and the Publican insomuch as that field is called (in worshipping in the Temple; the cur- their proper tongue) Aceldama (that ing of the ten lepers, the raising is to say, the field of blood).” the widow's son at Nain ; the poor The Greek of Luke is

yond questo be invited to a feast, and not the tion purer than that of the other

or

in

* Sceptics have often questioned the genuineness of this passage, saying—“Why should Peter explain these things about Jerusalem, when speaking at Jerusalem, but it is clear that the words we have enclosed in brackets must be read parenthetically. They were not spoken by Peter, but inserted by Luke, when writing the account in the Acts for the enlightenment of his Grecian readers.

Evangelists ; still the occurrence of an "bath " being the same quantity in

“ immense number of Hebraisms leads liquid measure as the epha is in dry to the supposition that what he about seven to ten gallons Euglish. wrote in Greek he conceived in So in the seventh verse he says, Hebrew. He frequently uses the “ εκατον κορους,” the “ cor” being in word" inua," not only for “word,” Hebrew measure equal to ten bathim. "speech," but for occurrence," in Another striking example is in the which it accords with the Hebrew manner in which he speaks of the word “dabar.”

Hebrew"ceseph," or "silver shekel," In the Gospel and Acts this use which he translates in the Septuagint occurs frequently (i. 37 ; ii. 15, 17, 19, manner by the genitive "doyupov"

αργυριου 51; Acts, v. 20-32; x. 22, 37). The applied to the number ; thus, in Acts frequent use of the imperative “idov" xix. 19, where he states the value of as an interjection is an Hebraism ; it the books of magic which were burnt occurs in the Gospel nearly sixty times at Ephesus to be “ αργυριου μυριαδας (fifty-nine), and in the Acts at least T&VTE"--50,000 silver shekels.* This twenty times. He designates the practice of giving the value of heathen Sunday as one of the Sabbaths, "uia books in a heathen city in Jewish Tūv oaßBarwv.” There are two forms reckoning, and heathen measures in in use in the New Testament for the Jewish forms, goes to prove the

proword Jerusalem—the Greek "'Iepoo- bability that he was a born Jew. olvpa" and the Hebrew "'Iepovoanje;" The mentioning of Luke by the both are found in Luke, but the Apostle in Coloss. iv. 10-14, after Hebrew form prevails; the Greek those specially designated as of the form occurs in the Gospel four times, circumcision, who had been fellowand in the Acts nineteen times, but workers with him at Rome, and of the Hebrew form is used in the Gos- consolation to him, does not prove pel twenty-six times, and in the Acts anything, against Luke being a Jew, forty times. There is a frequent use if carefully examined. of the equivalent to the Hebrew But we must pass on to notice an“vayyhi," and it came to pass ;” St. other feature in this Gospel of Luke, Luke renders it, “ YEVETO.'

." It occurs which proves that it was written by in the Gospel forty times. In the a person skilled in the medical art. Acts, written later, in which an effort Luke's account of our Lord's mirafter a better style of Greek can be acles of healing are given with an easily ascertained, this form of air of professional love and skill; he writing occurs less frequently though is much more minute in describing ten instances may be found.

them than the other Evangelists. He Luke also renders by "árokpiders," dwells upon the symptoms; he gives the concipient Hebrew “vayyomer the hour when the disease set in, the and “vayyam ;" this form occurs in length of time the patient had been the Gospel forty-three times, and in suffering, and the physical aspect of the Acts only ten times.

the sufferer. He uses also the proAlso the Hebrew form in citation fessional terms, such as are employed of a speech "lemor” is translated by by the Greek medical writers, Galen, Luke in the same way as the Seventy Hippocrates, and others. In fact, by "Xeywv” and “leyovtes." In the when we compare his accounts of Gospel this occurs forty-nine times, Christ's healings with those of the and in the Acts twenty-four times. other Evangelists, we feel that we

He also uses Hebrew measures, and have been reading a physician's prohe merely writes the Hebrew term in fessional report. He also notices Greek letters, but does not give the healing miracles not recorded elseGreek equivalent, as he would have where. done had he been a Greek. For in- To justify what we have said, we stance, in the Gospel xiii. 21, he men shall point out a few facts, which can tions gata tpia,” the Hebrew“sach," be easily verified, and may lead to the which is one-third of an epha. In discovery of others by those who are xvi. 6, he says—"Ėkatov Barous," the better read in the Greek medical

We can imagine what value was set upou books of magic, when we find that they were estimated at 50,000 silver shekels. The shekel being, at the time of Josephus, equal to about 28. 10d. of our money, which would bring the sum to nearly £7,100.

66

66

66

authors. He speaks of the man who Luke also uses the medical term laois was brought to Christ in the palsy as for healing, and “laoua” the verb to Trapalɛlouevos," that is, who had been heal; but Matthew, when speaking

taken with a mapalvors,” which is of healing, uses the verb "Depanevw;" exactly the way in which the Greek so also Mark and John. Luke also writers express it, never using the uses the verb “Depanevw," but more word Tapalvtikos," as is the case frequently the medical verb “iaoua" with the other Evangelists. In de- He uses the same form as the Greek scribing the casting out of the Devil medical writers for describing the (iv. 35) he depicts the symptoms gra- attack of disease. Of Peter's wife's phically ; he gives us the words of mother, Luke says she was συνεχοthe man in the agony of possession, LEVY TUPETY,"

," " taken with a fever and the physical struggle as the spirit so also, in the case of the father of left him, in which he was thrown to Publius, we are told he lay seized with the ground.

(not sick of, as our version renders it), In speaking of the fever of Simon's à fever and dysentery (bloody flux). wife's mother, he distinguishes it πυρετους και δυσεντερια συνεχομενον.”. with all the minuteness of a practical

In the account of the woman who physician, as a great fever." This had an issue of blood, Mark says that is quite in accordance with the rules she “suffered many things of many of Greek medicine. Galen, in his physicians, had spent all that she chapter on De Differentia Febris

, I., had, and was nothing bettered, but says that there were two forms of grew worse.” Luke speaks with more fever, the great and the little, "ovvnder reserve about the physicians , says ήδη τους ιατροις ονομαζειν τον μεγαν τε και that the wornan spent all her living uikpov mupetov.". Also the expression, upon them, but could not be healed “and it left her," " ¿Onkev aúrny,” that by them; and in the word “. προσαναis, the fever with which she was“ovvi- lwoaga,” he uses a much more correct xóuevn," and, as it were, bound by it; term for the spending of money, as but, when cured, she was released, got the verb applies to ordinary expendiup, and ministered to them. The same ture; but the“ daravnoaoa" of Matthew phraseology is used by Hippocrates means a wilful, riotous expenditure, Aphoris, iv. 30, 61, "áğınoi è Tvpetos." and is so used by Luke in the parable

ó In recording the eschatological dis- of the Prodigal Son, "Paravnoavtos ta course of Christ, in cap. xxi., where he aŭtov tavra. speaks of surfeiting from drunkenness, We may, therefore, conclude with Luke uses the proper medical term, safety that the author of the Third a term found in none of the other Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles Evangelists, " Kpalt alm," the same term was Luke, “the beloved physician, used by Hippocrates. Ammonius de- mentioned by Paul in his Epistle to fines the distinction between pairaln the Colossians, iv. 14. and μεθη; κραιπαλη is the surfeit of We now advance to the examinayesterday's drunkenness (xocoin ueen), tion of the internal evidence of Luke's and Mɛon is the drunkenness of the Gospel to the truth of the statement same day. Eustathius defines it as, of Irenæus, that Luke, the follower "Ó Ék peons talpos o ŠOTI KEVNOU KAI divn- of Paul, put together in a book the σις του καρα ήγουν της κεφαλής.” Hes- Gospel as preached by him. chius as,“ j à Toxdiens ueOns kepalalyn.” Lucas autem sectator Pauli quod ab The same term is used by Athenæus. illo predicabatur Evangelium in libro

In the Acts, where Luke describes condidit.” (Cont. Hæres, lib.iii., c. 1.)* the miracle of Paul, who struck Ely- The first question which arises is mas blind, he uses the term “áxlus," the proemium upon which whole a term to be found nowhere else in treatises have been written. Diffithe New Testament; but Galen uses culties have been pointed out in the it as a medical term in a passage exegesis of the passage, but they have where he speaks of a certain disease generally been created by dogmatic of the eye, which was called “ dx\us," necessities. The Greek is of a subecause those who were afflicted with perior and more classical kind than it were said, "dia tivos áxivos Bleyelv" the rest of the Gospel, and may be (to see through a sort of mist). thus translated :

6

* Cited by Euseb.. H. E., v. 8. See also Kirchhoffer Quellensammlung: p. 38.

verses

are

“Since many have taken it in hand, to arranged, and have come down to us arrange thoroughly a whole history concern- unbroken through nineteen centuries, ing the things which have been firmly we may believe that Luke must have established amongst us, as they who were had the Gospels of Matthew and eye-witnesses from the beginning, and Mark before him; and the difference becoming (afterwards) (yevouEvol") ministers of the Word, have handed them between his Gospel and those of down to us, it appeared (expedient) to me, Matthew and Mark, the principal of who have assiduously followed up every- the tollo, will prove to us the fact thing from the beginning, to write to thee, that his was written as a still furmost excellent Theophilus, in a connected ther and fuller contribution to the order, that thou mightest completely appre- then received lives of Christ. hend the certainty of the accounts in which This really is the only satisfactory thou hast been instructed."

solution of the remarkable similarities From this proemium, which is a between the three Gospels, which most satisfactory account of the occur also alongside many aberraorigin of our Gospels in general, as tions. The whole of the Gospel of well as of that of Luke in particular, Mark, with the exception of a few we may glean—Ist, that the Apostles, verses, may be found in Matthew and who, during the life of Christ, were Luke. Many of the eye-witnesses of his deeds, and who, verbally repeated. How does this after his departure, becoming minis- occur? If we accept the tradition of ters of the Word,* had taught to the the Church, the truth of which all Churches certain facts concerning the the evidence we can gather goes to life of Christ, and his sayings, and prove, we can easily understand how that many had endeavoured to form Mark might have used Matthew; a complete biography, "diny nois,” from for that Matthew was written these facts.

first is not simply true by unani2nd. That Luke had assiduously mous tradition, but is apparent examined these biographies from the to anyone who will examine the first, and, as a result of his examina- two gospels without prejudice. That tion, it occurred to him to endeavour Luke used both may be fairly inalso to give a complete account of ferred from what he said in the what had happened. Therefore, proem to his Gospel, that he had as: Luke must have had some reason for siduously examined the records which doing this, which reason was con- had come to hand from the follow firmed by his examination of what who had recorded what the eye-witwas extant concerning our Lord's life nesses had taught : now Matthew upon earth. It does not follow, we know was an eye-witness himself, then, that he rejects these records as and Mark, the companion of Peter, apocryphal as some have thought,t had that apostle as his authority. but that he accepted them on the That Luke had other sources of authority of the eye-witnesses, who information, and of more complete were their authors. He must, there- information than we find in Matthew fore, have had some further informa- and Mark, is evident from the points tion in his possession which would in which his Gospel is distinct from complete them. If we accept the the other two; Luke, as we have almost probable fact, which is also in ready shown, goes farther back into accord with the universal tradition of the history, and gives us an account the Church, that the Gospels were of the birth and childhood of John written in the order they were first the Baptist, the forerunner of Christ,

* It is quite clear from the construction that the αυτοπται απ’ αρχης and the υπηρεται doyou are the same persons; they were, during the lifetime of Christ, eye-witnesses of His deeds, and after His death, when they became ministers of the Word, they handed down to the Churches what they had seen and heard.

† De Wette even admits this in his Exeget. Handbuch, p. 5, he says on the passage :—“Wenn auch nicht des Anmaasliche und Vergebliche apokriphischen Versuche im Gegensatze der kanon. Evv; so doch das Schwierige, und Missliche des Unternehmens bezeichnend aber keinen Tadel enthaltend," in contradistinction to BaumgartenCrusius, who says :-“Das nollor erklärt, uns die vielen apokryphischen Evri'Exeget, Schriften, 1 Band, p. 41. But the apocryphal Gospels were of a much later date.

a

we

事

his preaching and baptism. He also Mary would have no occasion to comgives a fuller account of the child- municate anything to them about the hood of Christ, and, in addition, as earlier years of her son. But that we have already pointed out, more such devoted disciples would care than twenty historical facts which he nothing about the birth of their mashad collected, not to be found in the ter : that such a mother would cease other gospels;

therefore he had suffi- to talk about such a son : that she, cient reason to write in order a new who we are repeatedly told treasured Gospel, and there cannot be the slight- up in her heart the sayings of his est doubt, that amongst the writings childhood, with the natural, loving of the Toko which lay before him, he pride of a mother, would withhold must have had those of Matthew and those remembrances, is such an unpaMark.

tural and unreasonable explanation We now advance to the examina- that the mind which could suggest tion of the sources he had : whence it must have been warped by an overdid he get this additional informa- whelming prejudice against the truth. tion ? Upon what was the dopaleia, We shall not go into the other sources which he was going to impart to though they have their weight, but Theophilus, based ?

cannot help thinking that Schleiermacher has indicated the Matthew, who was amongst the most probable solution to this ques- twelve to whom Christ appeared, tion, both in his work on the writings and with the disciples and Mary of Luke and in his Life of Christ, after the ascension, whose Gospel has which has been recently brought many points in keeping with Peter, out.* He suggests the following might have obtained his information sources whence the particulars con- direct_from the mother herself, or cerning that most difficult portion of from Peter, or, which is still more the gospels : the childhood of Christ probable, that it would be well known came from Christ himself in his to the whole circle of disciples, and conversation with his disciples : from from Matthew's Gospel, from the Mary the Mother : from the Shep- apostolic tradition, and equally probherds : from the Brethren of Christ : ably from some of the writings menfrom Simeon and Anna ; " but with tioned by Luke, he may have obtainhis usual perversity he discards them ed his version. when he finds that if the truth of Many commentators adopt this view that supernatural birth, and the su- which was so wantonly abandoned pernatural phenomena attending it, by Schleiermacher among others. were established, it would overturn Olshausen, who says in his commenhis own somatic Christology, and tary—“The eye-witnesses are, withbring out that Divine nature of Christ out doubt, Mary the mother of Jesus, which was his labour to suppress. and other members of the family, of

He rejects the suggestion that whose internal history the first chapChrist could have been the source of ter treats, and clearly for the later this history, by the unreasonable sup- history of Jesus, and the Church-the position that he would be too much apostles.” Further on be repeats occupied with instructing his disciples concerning the dopaleta, that “ Facts in their work to talk about himself. like the begetting of Jesus by the Although he felt the force of the fact Holy Ghost could only be attested that Mary was intrusted to the care by Mary.” of John by Christ himself, and we But our work is more particularly have a clear account of her appear with the rest of the Gospel, which we ing after the ascension in the com- shall see is in keeping with the statepany of both John, the disciples, and ment of Irenæus, who says in that the brethren of Christ (Acts i. 13, 14); passage of his work upon which we yet Schleiermacher discards this on base our investigation into the origin the still more unreasonable grounds, of our Gospels "_"Et Lucas autein that such history would have no in- sectator Pauli quod ab illo predicaterest for the disciples, and that batur Evangelium in libro condidit.”

(

"Ueber die Schriften des Lukas Werke, 1 Abtlı. : 2 Bil, 1836. Leben Jesu. Berlin, 1864."