Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All tagonism with the rest of the evangelists. As power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. the matter stands, however, the words are simply Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing these: "Behold, He goeth before you into Galthem in the name of the Father, and of the ilee; there shall ye see Him;" and there is no Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to statement of the precise time at which that observe all things whatsoever I have commanded meeting was to take place whether at the you and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto earliest opportunity, and before He was seen by the end of the world." I In these terms has them elsewhere, or at a later period, and after Matthew closed his Gospel. they had seen Him also in other places besides Galilee; and, further, although Matthew relates that the disciples went away into Galilee into a mountain, he neither specifies the day of that departure, nor constructs his narrative in an order which would force upon us the necessity of supposing that this particular event must have been actually the first appearance. Consequently, we may conclude that Matthew stands in no antagonism with the narratives of the other evangelists, but that he makes it quite competent for us, in due consistency with his own report, to understand the meaning and accept the truth of these other accounts. At the same time, as the Lord thus pointed, not to the place where He intended first to manifest Himself, but to the locality of Galilee, where undoubtedly He appeared afterwards; and as He conveyed these instructions about beholding Himself at once through the angel, who said, "Behold, He goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see Him;" and by His own words, "Go, tell my brethren, that they go into Galilee, and there shall ye see me ; in these facts we find considerations which make every believer anxious to inquire with what mystical significance all this may be understood to have been stated.

80. Thus, then, were it not that the consideration of the narratives given by others of the evangelists led us inevitably to examine the whole subject with greater care, we might entertain the idea that the scene of the Lord's first manifestation of Himself to the disciples after His resurrection, could be nowhere else but in Galilee. In like manner, had Mark passed over the angel's announcement without notice, any one might have supposed that Matthew was induced to tell us how the disciples went away to a mountain in Galilee, and there worshipped the Lord, by his desire to show the actual fulfilment of the charge, and of the prediction which he had also recorded to have been conveyed by the angel. As the case now stands, however, Luke and John both certify with sufficient clearness, that on the very day of His resurrection the Lord was seen by His disciples in Jerusalem, which is at such a distance from Galilee as makes it impossible for Him to have been seen by these same individuals in both places in the course of a single day. In like manner, Mark, while he does report in similar terms the announcement made by the angel, nowhere mentions that the Lord actually was seen in Galilee by His disciples after He was risen. These, therefore, are considerations which strongly force upon us an inquiry into the real import of this saying, "Behold, He goeth before you into Galilee! there shall ye see Him." For if Matthew himself, too, had not stated that the eleven disciples went away into Galilee into a mountain, where Jesus had appointed them, and that they saw Him there and worshipped Him, we might have supposed that there was no literal fulfilment of resurrection is manifest. For Luke and John the prediction in question, but that the whole announcement was intended to convey a figurative meaning. And a parallel to that we should then find in the words recorded by Luke, namely, "Behold I cast out devils, and I do cures to-day and to-morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected;" which prediction certainly was not accomplished in the letter. In like manner, if the angel had said, "He goeth before you into Galilee, there shall ye see Him first; " or, "Only there shall ye see Him;" or, "Nowhere else but there shall ye see Him; unquestionably, in that case, Matthew would have been in an

Matt. xxviii. 16-20.

2 Luke xiii. 32. See above, Book ii. chap. 75, § 145.

81. In the first place, however, we must also consider the question of the time at which He may thus have shown Himself in bodily form in Galilee, according to the statement given by Matthew in these terms: "Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them; and when they saw Him, they worshipped Him; but some doubted." That it was not on the day of His

agree in telling us most plainly that He was seen in Jerusalem that very day, when the night was coming on; while Mark is not so clear on the subject. When was it, then, that they saw the Lord in Galilee? I do not refer to the appearance mentioned by John, by the sea of Tiberias; for on that occasion there were only seven of them present, and they were found fishing. But I mean the appearance detailed by Matthew, when the eleven were on the mountain, to which Jesus had gone before them, according to the announcement made by the angel. For the import of Matthew's statement appears to be this, that they found Him there just because He had gone before them according to appointment.

contrary, we must understand him to refer to the number of the days, and not to the number of the manifestations themselves; and, further, it is to be observed that these days are not presented as coming in immediate succession after each other, but as separated by intervals in accordance with intimations given by the evangelist himself. For, keeping out of view His appearance to the women, it is made perfectly plain in the Gospel that He showed Himself three several times on the first day after He was risen; namely, once to Peter; again to those two disciples, of whom Cleophas was one; and a third time to the larger body, while they were conversing with each other as the night came on. But all these John, looking to the fact that they took place on a single day, reckons as one appearance. Then he identifies a second

It did not take place, then, either on the day and previous to His being seen by Thomas, this on which He rose, or in the eight days that fol- scene by the sea of Tiberias will not be the lowed, after which space John states that the third but the fourth time that He showed HimLord showed Himself to the disciples, when self. Here, indeed, we must take care not to Thomas, who had not seen Him on the day of let any one suppose that, in speaking of the His resurrection, saw Him for the first time. third time, John meant that there were in all For, surely, on the supposition that the eleven only three appearances of the Lord. On the had really seen Him on the mountain in Galilee within the period of these eight days, it may well be asked how Thomas, who had been of the number of these eleven, could be said to have seen Him for the first time at the end of these eight days. To that question there is no answer, unless, indeed, one could say that they were not the eleven, who by that time bore the specific designation of Apostles, but some other eleven disciples singled out of the numerous body of His followers. For those eleven were, indeed, the only persons who were yet called by the name of Apostles, but they were not the only disciples. It may perhaps be the case, therefore, that the apostles are really referred to; that not all but only some of them were there; that there were also other disciples with them, so that the number of persons present was made up to eleven; and that Thomas, who saw the Lord for the first time at the end of those eight days, was absent on this occasion. For when Mark mentions the said eleven, he does not use the general expression "eleven," but says explicitly, "He appeared unto the eleven." Luke, likewise, puts it thus: "They returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them." There he gives us to understand that these were the eleven - that is to say, the apostles. For when he adds, "and those who were with them," he has surely indicated plainly enough, that those with whom these others were, were styled "the eleven" in some eminent sense; and this leads us to understand those to be meant who were now called distinctively Apostles. Consequently, it is quite possible that, out of the body of apostles and other disciples, the number of eleven disciples was made up who saw Jesus upon the mountain in Galilee, within the space of these eight days.

82. But another difficulty in the way of this settlement arises here. For, when John has recorded how the Lord was seen, not by the eleven on the mountain, but by seven of them when they were fishing in the sea of Tiberias, he appends the following statement: "This is now the third time that Jesus showed Himself to His disciples, after that He was risen from the dead." 2 Now, if we accept the theory that the Lord was seen by the company of the eleven disciples within the period of these eight days,

-

that is to say, an appearance on another day with the occasion on which Thomas also saw Him; and he particularizes a third by the sea of Tiberias, that is to say, not literally His third appearance, but the third day of His self-manifestations. Thus the result is, that after all these incidents, we are constrained to suppose this other occasion to have occurred on which, according to Matthew, the eleven disciples saw Him on the mountain in Galilee, to which He had gone before them according to appointment, so that all that had been foretold, both by the angel and by Himself, should be fulfilled even to the letter.

83. Consequently, in the four evangelists we find mention made of ten distinct appearances of the Lord to different persons after His resurrection. First, to the women near the sepulchre.3 Secondly, to the same women as they were on the way returning from the sepulchre. Thirdly, to Peter.5 Fourthly, to the two who were going to the place in the country. Fifthly, to the larger number in Jerusalem, when Thomas was not present. Sixthly, on the occasion when Thomas saw Him. Seventhly, by the sea of Tiberias. Eighthly, on the mountain in Galilee, of which Matthew speaks. Ninthly, at the time to which Mark refers in the words, "Lastly, as they sat at meat," thereby intimating that now they were no more to eat with Him upon the earth." Tenthly, on the same day, not now indeed upon the earth, but lifted up in the

+

cloud, as He ascended into heaven, as Mark and posed the space of eight days, during which He Luke record. This last appearance, indeed, is was not seen, and makes His third appearance introduced by Mark, directly after he has told us take place by the sea of Tiberias. At the same how the Lord showed Himself to them as they time, even although He [should be supposed to sat at meat. For his narrative goes on con- have] manifested Himself to them and lived with nectedly as follows: "So then, after the Lord them every day after that period, that would not had spoken unto them, He was received up into come into antagonism with anything in the narheaven." Luke, on the other hand, omits all rative. And, perhaps, this expression, "for the that may have passed between Him and His space of forty days," which is equivalent to four disciples during the forty days, and, after giving times ten, and may thus sustain a mystical referthe history of the first day of His resurrection-ence to the whole world or the whole temporal life, when He showed Himself to the larger age, has been used just because those first ten number in Jerusalem, he silently connects there- days, within which the said eight fall, may not with the closing day on which He ascended up incongruously be reckoned, in accordance with into heaven. His statement proceeds in this the practice of the Scriptures, on the principle form: "And He led them out as far as to Beth-of dealing with the part in general terms as the any; and He lifted up His hands, and blessed whole.

them; and it came to pass, that while He 85. Let us therefore compare what is said blessed them, He was parted from them, and by the Apostle Paul with the view of deciding carried up into heaven." 2 Thus, therefore, whether it raises any question of difficulty. His besides seeing Him upon the earth, they beheld statement proceeds thus: "That He rose again Him also as He was borne up into heaven. So the third day according to the Scriptures, and many times, then, is He reported in the evangelical books to have been seen by different individuals, previous to His completed ascension into heaven, namely, nine times upon the earth, and once in the air as He was ascending.

that He was seen of Cephas." " He does not say, "He was seen first of Cephas." For this would be inconsistent with the fact that it is recorded in the Gospel that He appeared first to the women. He continues thus: "then of 84. At the same time, all is not recorded, as the twelve ;" and whoever the individuals may John plainly declares.3 For He had frequent have been to whom He then showed Himself, intercourse with His disciples during the forty and whatever the precise hour, this was at least days which preceded His ascension into heaven.4 on the very day of His resurrection. Again he He had not, however, showed Himself to them goes on: "After that He was seen of above five throughout all these forty days without inter- hundred brethren at once." And whether these ruption. For John tells us, that after the first were gathered together with the eleven when day of His resurrection-life, there elapsed other the doors were shut for fear of the Jews, and eight days, at the end of which space He ap- when Jesus came to them after Thomas had peared to them again. The appearance which gone out from the company, or whether the is identified [in John] as the third — namely, reference is to some other appearance subsethe one by the sea of Tiberias may perhaps quent to these eight days, no discrepancy is have taken place on an immediately succeeding created. Again he says, "after that He was day; for there is nothing antagonistic to that. seen of James." We ought not, however, to And then He showed Himself when it seemed suppose this to mean that this was the first the proper time to Him, as He had appointed occasion on which He was seen of James; but with them (which appointment had also been we may take it to allude to some special appearconveyed in the previous prophetic announce-ance to that apostle by himself. Next he adds, ment) to go before them into Galilee. And all" then of all the apostles," which does not imply throughout these forty days, He appeared on oc- that this was the first time that He showed casions, and to individuals, and in modes, just as He was minded. To these appearances Peter alludes when, in the discourse which he delivered before Cornelius and those who were with him, he says, " Even to us who did eat and drink with Him after He rose from the dead, for the space of forty days." 5 It is not meant, however, that they had eaten and drunk with Him daily throughout these forty days. For that would be contrary to John's statement, who has inter

Himself to them, but that from this period He lived in more familiar intercourse with them on to the day of His ascension. Finally he says, "And last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time." But that was a revelation of Himself from heaven some considerable time after His ascension.

86. Consequently, let us now take up the subject which we had postponed, and inquire what mystical meaning may underlie the report given by Matthew and Mark, namely, that on rising

61 Cor. xv. 4, 5.

BOOK IV.

THIS BOOK EMBRACES A DISCUSSION OF THOSE PASSAGES WHICH ARE PECULIAR TO MARK, LUKE, OR JOHN.

PROLOGUE.

up

CHAP. II. -OF THE MAN OUT OF WHOM THE UN-
CLEAN SPIRIT THAT WAS TORMENTING HIM WAS
CAST, AND OF THE QUESTION WHETHER MARK'S
VERSION IS QUITE CONSISTENT WITH THAT
OF LUKE, WHO IS AT ONE WITH HIM IN RE-
PORTING THE INCIDENT.

Art

1. As we have examined Matthew's narrative in its complete connection, and as the comparison which we have carried out between it and the other three on to its conclusion has established the fact, that not one of these evangelists contains anything either at variance with other 3. Mark proceeds with his narrative in the statements in his own Gospel, or inconsistent following terms: "And they were astonished at with the accounts presented by his fellow-histo- His doctrine: for He taught them as one that rians, let us now subject Mark to a similar scruhad authority, and not as the scribes. And there tiny. Our plan will be to omit those sections was in their synagogue a man with an unclean which he has in common with Matthew, which spirit: and he cried out, saying,3 What have we we have already investigated as far as seemed to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? requisite and are now done with, and to take thou come to destroy us?" and so on, down to those paragraphs which remain, with the view of the passage where we read, "And He preached submitting them to discussion and comparison, in the synagogues throughout all Galilee, and and of demonstrating their thorough harmony cast out devils."4 Although there are some with what is related by the other evangelists on points here which are common only to Mark to the notice of the Lord's Supper. For we and Luke, the entire contents of this section have already dealt with all the incidents which have also been already dealt with when we were are reported in all the four Gospels from that going over Matthew's narrative in its continuity. point on to the end, and have considered the For all these matters came into the order of narration in such a manner that I thought they subject of their mutual consistency. could not be passed over. But Luke says that this unclean spirit went out of the man in such a way as not to hurt him: whereas Mark's statement is to this effect: "And the unclean spirit MATTHEW BEING LEFT OUT OF ACCOUNT), FROM Cometh out of him, tearing him, and crying with ITS BEGINNING DOWN TO THE SECTION WHERE a loud voice." There may seem, therefore, to IT IS SAID, "AND THEY GO INTO CAPHARNAUM, AND STRAIGHTWAY ON THE SABBATH-DAY HE TAUGHT THEM: WHICH INCIDENT IS REPORTED

CHAP. I. OF THE QUESTION REGARDING THE
WITH THE REST IN WHAT IS NARRATED (THOSE

PROOF THAT MARK'S GOSPEL IS IN HARMONY

PASSAGES WHICH HE HAS IN COMMON WITH

ALSO BY LUKE.

be some discrepancy here. For how could the unclean spirit have been "tearing him," or, as Some codices have it, "tormenting him," if, as Luke says, he" hurt him not "? Luke, however, 2. Mark, then, commences as follows: "The gives the notice in full, thus: "And when the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son devil had thrown him in the midst, he came out of of God: as it is written in the prophet Isaiah ; him, and “hurt him not.” 5 Thus we are to unand so on, down to where it is said, " And they derstand that when Mark says, "tormenting him," go into Capharnaum; and straightway on the he just refers to what Luke expresses in the senSabbath-day He entered into the synagogue and tence, "When he had thrown him in the midst." taught them." In this entire context, every- And when the latter appends the words, "and thing has been examined above in connection hurt him not," the meaning simply is, that the with Matthew. This particular statement, how-said tossing of the man's limbs and tormenting ever, about His going into the synagogue at Ca- him did not debilitate him, as is often the case pharnaum and teaching them on the Sabbath- with the exit of devils, when, at times, some of day, is one which Mark has in common with Luke. But it raises no question of difficulty.

3 The words, Let us alone, are omitted. [So the Greek text, according to the best MSS. R.J

4 Mark i. 22-39.

5 Luke iv. 35.

226