1

was the case. If however like other historians he used written documents in the composition of his work, his not saying so is not surprising, for he would naturally expect that to be taken for granted.

So far as his words throw any light on the subject at all they favour the idea that his materials were in writing. The use of the term avará§aola ("to set forth in order ") is certainly much more appropriate to the arranging in order of paper manuscripts than to the reporting and writing out of spoken statements. The word Tapédooav ("they delivered "), again, is used in its more strictly accurate meaning if it was written documents that the eye-witnesses and ministers of the word delivered. The object of the verb is wanting in the Greek and is supplied in the English version by the pronoun “them." To discover what is implied by this pronoun we must be guided by the usage of the verb that governs it, and that leads to the choice of a real material article such as a collection of papers, rather than information conveyed in the shape of addresses or oral narrations. The instances in which the word is used in the latter sense are rare and hardly to the point; and, considering how accurate Luke usually is, and with what care this Introduction is composed, it seems right to take it in its literal and ordinary signification.

It is true that the two words just noticed relate, not to Luke's own work, but to that of the many who before him had taken in hand to draw up a narrative; but the conjunction Kåμoù in the third verse implies that his method was not different from theirs. Further the word πаρηкоλоvůŋкóTI ("having traced the course") which Luke uses of himself indicates something very different from attending meetings and reporting speeches. Taken with the adverb åkрißŵs (“accurately") it is difficult to see how he can mean anything else by it but close personal investigation; and it seems to describe well the work of scrutinizing, translating and arranging a number of manuscript reports.

The passage apparently alludes to the fact asserted by

ús

Papias: "Matthew composed the utterances in the Hebrew dialect, and everyone translated them as he was able" (Ματθαῖος μὲν οὖν Ἐβραῖδι διαλέκτῳ τὰ λόγια συνετάξατο ἡρμήνευσε δ ̓ αὐτὰ ὡς ἐδυνάτο ἕκαστος). Luke in effect intimates that, many persons having undertaken to compose a redaction in Greek of the Aramaic manuscripts in circulation, it seemed good to him also, after a thorough investigation of the facts, to write out, from the similar materials he had acquired, a consecutive narrative for the use of his pupil or friend Theophilus. Theophilus, whose Greek name should be observed, must be understood to represent the numerous Greek-speaking converts who had been brought to Christ as the result of Paul's preaching, and who needed an authentic narrative in that language of the facts forming the foundation upon which their faith was built.

I take it then as a conclusion to which all must come who look the subject fairly in the face, that Luke used written documents in the composition of his Gospel. It is not essential to my argument to insist that James was the author of the greater part of them; but the probability that such was the case is so strong that I feel justified in assuming it provisionally and until a better claimant for the honour appears. If however the reader prefers, where I use the name of James, to substitute that of Andrew or Philip or any other, it need not affect the main lines of reasoning as to the solution of the Gospel problems. The point, in this place, to be kept steadily in view is, that Luke was not himself an eye or ear-witness of the facts and sayings which he related, and that many years had passed away between the time when the original notes thereof were written, and the time when he redacted the notes, and arranged them in the form of a book. And, supposing the writer of the original notes to have died in the interim, the want of chronological order which is so frequently observable in the book is fully accounted for.

As a matter of convenience then, the name of James will still be used when speaking of the author of the notes in question.

Chapter V

LUKE'S DIFFICULT TASK

UDGING by the length of many of the displaced portions,

JUDGING

it seems that the sheets of papyrus on which James wrote his notes contained, as a rule, when filled up, as much as, translated into Greek, would amount to not less than forty or more than seventy words each, the most usual number being between fifty and sixty. In some cases however as when a single short incident was recorded, or at the conclusion of a narrative or discourse, the contents might be less even than the equivalent of forty Greek words.

These papers were probably left in order by James; but after his death they would be frequently referred to, and, it may be, copied. Hence they gradually became more and more disarranged, until at length, when they were handed to Luke, he found it necessary to sort and re-arrange them as well as to translate them from Aramaic to Greek. If in doing this he had had the Gospel of Matthew or of Mark before him his work would have been easy enough; but these works, if already published, had not come in his way. He doubtless obtained all the information and help he could from Apostles and other persons living and accessible; but after a lapse of twenty-eight years their recollection would avail him little, especially in regard to the sequence and connection of events and utterances. Accordingly (not to mention the supernatural aid of the Holy Spirit, but treating the subject from a purely literary standpoint) he was thrown almost entirely on his own resources.

We may almost imagine we see Luke sitting at a table on

which are spread out a great number of small slips of paper. He is trying to find the right place for each, and to fit them together in their proper sequence. Sometimes the order in which some of them still remain, or the continuation of a subject from one page to another, gives him a clue. Sometimes their connection with some well-known leading event is obvious and thus he is enabled to fix their place. But in many there is nothing whatever to guide him, and he can only locate these where in his own judgment seems most suitable. In such cases some displacements are inevitable.

As a whole, that is as regards the principal facts, the arrangement is chronologically correct. If in a considerable number of instances the details are not in order of time, or in the connection in which the facts recorded actually occurred, no student has thereby been misled on any vital matter. The question of divine inspiration is not affected, as the Gospel makes no claim to being composed in chronological order. The worst results that have followed have been the perplexity of critics and the despair of harmonists.

B

Part VI

THE WRITERS AND REDACTORS

EFORE proceeding to examine the Gospels in detail, it is necessary to say something about the persons who took part in their composition, either as original reporters, or redactors, or both.

Mary and Joseph

Nothing whatever is known about Mary and her husband beyond what is recorded in the New Testament. The stories in the Apocryphal books and other traditions are all absolutely worthless.

The honourable position held by women is one of the most striking proofs of the civilization of the period. Their high social standing both among Jews and Gentiles is well known to all students of Scripture and of the Greek and Latin classics. There is no reason to doubt that in Palestine girls as well as boys went to school and were taught to read and write.

lt may be assumed that she who was chosen to be the Mother of our Lord was above the average in intelligence and had received a fair education. That such was the case is confirmed by the Song of praise attributed to her. True it contains very little that is original; but the sentences selected show that she had a large acquaintance with Scripture, and the few phrases she composed herself, with the arrangement of the whole, evince a gifted and cultured intellect.

I have already given reasons for holding that the narratives in Matthew and Luke relating to the birth, infancy and early