Chapter II THE PROBLEMS HE most important of the Problems are two in number. The first, which has been styled by Ewald, "The Chief Problem of the Gospel Question," relates to the difficulties observed on comparing, or rather contrasting, the first three Gospels with the fourth. The second, commonly called the "Synoptic Problem," relates to the difficulties presented by a comparison of the first three Gospels amongst themselves. There is a third problem which really forms part of the Synoptic Problem; but which it will be convenient to deal with separately. It is found in the want of chronological harmony which is manifest in the arrangement of much of the first three Gospels, and may therefore be styled the "Chronological Problem." The Chief Problem Every thoughtful reader of the New Testament must observe a marked difference, both in style and substance, between the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke on the one hand, and that of John on the other. Whilst in Matthew, Mark and Luke a great number of the facts recorded are found to be common either to all or to two of them, most of the facts related in John are found in that Gospel alone. From the beginning of Christ's ministry to the time of His last visit to Jerusalem only three facts narrated in the first three Gospels or either of them are also recorded in the last. The facts referred to are, the feeding of the five thousand, His walking on the sea of Galilee, and the anointing of His feet by Mary at Bethany. This peculiarity is often accounted for by what is called the Supplementary Theory, that is to say that John, writing long after the other Gospels were in circulation, purposely made his narrative of a supplementary character, and recorded as a rule only sayings and doings of Christ which the earlier writers had left untold. But, not to mention many grave objections which have been raised to the Supplementary Theory, it entirely fails to account for some other striking features of the problem referred to. The first three Gospels are mainly occupied with our Lord's work in Galilee. If we had no information beyond what they supply, it might have been inferred that He made no visit to Jerusalem except the last, and that the whole duration of His ministry did not exceed some twelve or eighteen months. John, on the other hand, records several visits to Jerusalem during a ministry which must have lasted three or four years, and a large part of his Gospel consists of a narrative of what Jesus said and did in the Holy City on those occasions. And yet the Three give a very full account of what transpired in the Temple during the last visit, whilst the Fourth relates only a single incident that occurred at that time. What, however, is most perplexing is that the sayings and addresses recorded in the first three Gospels on the one hand, and the fourth Gospel on the other, though presenting so many points of resemblance as to prove them to be accurate reports of the sayings of the same Person, are yet very unlike both in their substance, and in their literary character and composition. The Kingdom of God is the theme of all four Gospels; but whilst the expression Kingdom of God' or 'Kingdom of Heaven' is found in the speeches recorded in Matthew thirty-six times, in Mark fourteen times, and in Luke thirty-two times, in John it only occurs twice. In the first three our Lord's sayings refer chiefly to the outward manifestations of the Kingdom, its claims on men's acceptance, the terms of admission to it, its laws, requirements and privileges, and the results of rejecting it. In the fourth the subject is rather the King Himself, His eternal Sonship, His vital union with His people, His purposes concerning them, and His gift to them of the Holy Spirit. Equally marked is the difference in their literary character. In the Three our Lord's teaching consists largely of those homely but wonderful stories which the Evangelists call 'parables.' Matthew and Mark indeed. say that He never spoke to the multitude without a parable. In John however the word elsewhere translated 'parable' (Tapaßoλ) never occurs, and, although there is plentiful illustration and much figurative language, not a single parable of the narrative sort, such as are found in the other Gospels, is recorded. Profoundest truth is taught in simple, clear, precise terms. There is no difficulty in the fact that our Lord should thus have varied the style and substance of His discourse. But it is most remarkable, and has hitherto seemed inexplicable, that the two classes of utterances should have been kept so entirely distinct; the one class being preserved in the first three Gospels alone, and the other exclusively in John. Why is no specimen to be found in the former of discourses like that delivered in the Synagogue of Capernaum after the feeding of the five thousand (John vi)? And why is no parable like that of the Sower, or the Good Samaritan, to be found in John? These and other difficulties suggested by the facts mentioned in the foregoing remarks constitute "the Chief Problem of the Gospel Question." The Synoptic Problem When the Gospel of John is left out of consideration and attention is exclusively directed to Matthew, Mark and Luke, another set of difficulties present themselves. The first thing we notice is that these three Gospels, as already mentioned, have very much in common. They relate in similar, though rarely in quite identical terms, many of the same facts in our Lord's ministry. For this reason many attempts have been made, from very early times to the present, to construct a harmony by placing the three narratives side by side in parallel columns. Arranged in this way they are said to form a 'Synopsis,' because the three narratives may be looked at together; and as a result the narratives themselves have come to be called the 'Synoptic Gospels.' An estimate made by Reuss gives the following results: Matthew, Mark and Luke contain respectively 341, 380 and 320 verses relating to the same subjects, and bearing a greater or less resemblance to one another. Matt. contains 330 verses not found elsewhere. Matt. and Mark contain 170-180 verses not found in Luke. Accepting this estimate as nearly enough correct for our purpose, it appears that Luke has far more independent matter than Matthew, whilst Mark has hardly any independent matter at all. As stated above, the incidents related in two or more of the Gospels are not usually told in precisely similar terms. There is sometimes, moreover, great diversity in details of fact and sometimes there are seeming discrepancies which cannot at first sight be easily reconciled. In no case however is there actual contradiction, and there is no reason to doubt that, were we in possession of all the facts, the harmony in every case would be found to be complete. But the difficulty from a literary point of view consists mainly in this; that with all these diversities there is yet great similarity in the language used by the Synoptic writers when two of them or the whole three relate the same incident. Three examples taken almost at random will suffice to show what we mean. Take first the accounts of the preaching of John the Baptist (Matt. iii. 1-12; Mark i. 2-8; Luke iii. 2-18.) It will be noted that Mark alone quotes from Malachi, "Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, who shall prepare thy way"; which words are however found in both Matthew (xi. 10) and Luke (vii. 27) as quoted by our Lord Himself on a subsequent occasion. All three use the word 'wilderness,' but whilst Luke mentions it to describe the place where the word of God came to John, Matthew tells us that that was where he preached, and Mark that it was there that he both baptized and preached. Matthew alone quotes these words of John, "Repent ye; for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand"; but both Mark and Luke state that he preached "the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins." All three apply to John the prophetic words of Isaiah, "The voice of one crying in the wilderness, but Luke continues the quotation, "Every valley shall be filled, "And every mountain and hill shall be brought low; And the crooked shall become straight, "And the rough ways smooth; "And all flesh shall see the salvation of God." Matthew and Mark alone describe John's clothing and food; whilst Luke gives a much fuller account of the substance of his exhortation than either of the others. Take next the account of the healing of the withered hand (Matt. xii. 9-13; Mark iii. 1-5; Luke vi. 6-10). Luke is the only one who mentions that it was the man's right hand that was withered. Matthew says, "they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day?"; whereas Mark says, they watched him whether he would heal him on the sabbath day"; and Luke's words are, "the scribes and Pharisees watched him, whether he would heal on the sabbath." Their motive in doing so is stated in all three; Matthew's and Mark's words being, "that they might accuse him"; and Luke's, that they might find how to accuse him." The answer of Jesus is thus recorded by Matthew: |