without waiting for the solution of this mystery, ran immediately back to Jerusalem, in order to acquaint Peter and John. Both ran with her to the grave. In the mean time, the other women had seen an angel, who told them that Jesus lived, and commanded them to announce it to his disciples. Upon their return, Jesus himself appeared to them, and gave them a similar order to the disciples; they did not meet Peter, John, and Mary Magdalene, but these three, without having heard any thing from the other women, came to the grave. Peter and John returned to Jerusalem, when they had sufficiently examined the grave, and proved that it was empty; but Mary Magdalene remained, and now she saw for the first time, two angels in the grave, but whom she did not know to be angels; then Jesus, whom she supposed to be the gardener, but whom she knew from his addressing her by the name of Mary; she then spoke to him, and received from hin commands for his disciples. Thus, no evangelist is at variance with another. It is not, therefore, necessary to go into any further cavil, for where two, if not three distinct histories are mingled together, it is not

surprising, that after such a mixture, the adversaries of Christianity should be able to raise contradictions.

MARK XVI. 9, 10, 11.

Before I enter into an explanation of these verses, I must first speak of the last eight verses of this chapter, (v. 9-16,) they are found, it is true, in all the Greek manuscripts, which we have, of which, however, no one is older than the sixth century, nay more, all the old translations have them, even the Latin, and the Syriac made in the first century; therefore, whether genuine or added, they appear to be very old. But several Greek manuscripts have an observation upon them, though not always in the same words, yet in substance as follows, "These words are wanting in many," or rather," in the greater number of older manuscripts, and Eusebius has declared the gospel of Mark to be canonical only as far as the words they were afraid."" Other commentators consider them as genuine, and say,

66

6

they exist in the best manuscripts," but they observe at the same time," they are wanting in many other manuscripts ;" and they add,

that many older manuscripts, have, instead of these words, those already brought forward, (p. 144, 145,) at the end of the gospel. Whoever wishes to know the exact Greek words, and the manuscripts, in which these observations are contained, will find them in Wetstein. But what is most important is, that these eight verses did not exist in the time of Jerome, 1400 years ago in all the manuscripts of the Latin translation, and, in general, in few Greek manuscripts. His own words are worthy of being quoted; they relate directly to the three verses of Mary Magdalene, in which Hedibia found a contradiction, and proposed it as his third question. The answer of Jerome was, (Book 4, p. 172, Benedictine Edition, Quest. 3,) "The solution of this ques"tion is two-fold. For either we do not re"ceive the testimony of Mark, which is con"tained in but few gospels, and almost all the "Greek books have not this chapter at the "end, chiefly because it seemed to relate "things, different from, and contrary to the "other gospels." Under these circumstances, and as this passage existed in the fourth century only in a few Greek manuscripts, it be

comes, in fact, very doubtful. So much may be said both for and against these passages, that at last they only become more uncertain; as, for instance, in favour of the last verses.

66

1. It is scarcely conceivable, that the gospel of Mark should end with the eighth verse. For they were afraid," is surely an uncommon ending for a book, but the history itself is still more abrupt, for Mark stops in the middle of the history of the women going to the sepulchre. An angel appears to them, and says, Jesus is risen; that they are to announce this to his disciples, and to Peter. Jesus himself, however, had not appeared to them; they tell the disciples nothing; and yet how is Mark to know what he relates of the grave being found empty, and of their vision of angels? Is Jesus risen or is he not? If the gospel stops here, then the principal part of what he is desirous to relate, is precisely wanting.

2. There is nothing either in the language or construction, different from the style of Mark, and therefore it does not betray itself, as in the passages I have quoted, (see p. 144, 145,) to be surreptitious. But, on the other

hand, it may be said, that it does not contain that, which, according to the tenor of the history, we might expect from Mark. His custom is, as I have observed in my introductio to the New Testament, to dwell particularly on the circumstances which affect Peter, and that he would do so, we had a right to expect from his mention of him in the seventh verse: but we have nothing of the kind; particularly when we combine with it the following circumstances.

1. Peter had visited the grave himself, had examined it, and found it empty. (John xx. 2-9, Luke xxiv. 12.)

2. Jesus appeared specially to Peter, and sooner than to the other apostles. (Luke xxiv. 34. 1 Cor. xv. 5.) Upon both these circumstances, it is improbable that Mark would have been silent, or have not gone into detail.

If these were the only grounds for, or against the passage, it might, perhaps, lead to the following result:-I have said, in my introduction to the New Testament, that Mark may have given out two editions of his gospel, the first at Rome, and the second in Egypt. We might then say, that the first edition ended with the words, "for they were afraid ;" and

"