Christ," and commanded the converts "to be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ" (x. 36, 48). In his answer to the Apostles and brethren explaining his visit to Cornelius he spoke of the gift of the Holy Ghost to those who "believed on the Lord Jesus Christ" (xi. 17). Although in the earlier chapters of the Acts there is no instance of the name being thus employed by anyone except Peter, there can be no doubt that it was constantly in the mouth of the early believers, for, within fifteen years of the Ascension, they came to be themselves named after it (Acts xi. 26).

Now, as the title "Christ" is in no single instance used as a proper name by the writer of the narrative parts of either of the Gospels, it seems certain that these must have been written before it had become customary thus to employ it. But we have seen that this was done by the world even in the latter part of our Lord's ministry, and that the disciples began to adopt the practice immediately after the Ascension. We are therefore forced to the conclusion that the parts referred to were written before that event. This applies to every one of the Gospels, to John as well as to the Synoptics. The fact is the more striking, because the word is used as a name by three of the Evangelists in parts which were added by them when redacting the books for publication. The name Jesus Christ is found in the first verse, and perhaps in the first member of the eighteenth verse, of the first chapter of Matthew, passages which are plainly editorial additions to the original text. It is found also in the first verse of the first chapter of Mark, which is a heading also prefixed by the redactor. And it is found in the Prologue to John, which, as everyone admits, is quite distinct from the rest of the book. That John was accustomed to use the word as a name is proved by its occurrence six times in the first Epistle of John. It is found also in the second Epistle and the Apocalypse. In short, if there were no other evidence than that educed in this chapter-the usage of the New Testament as to our Lord's names-it should be considered sufficient to prove that

the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are all and each of them composed of contemporary records, and that we have in them reports, made at the time, of what our Lord said, and narratives, written on the spot by eye-witnesses, of what He did.

Chapter XI

ACCURACY OF THE REPORTS OF OUR LORD'S UTTERANCES AND OF OTHER QUOTATIONS

THE

HE great practical gain accruing from proof of the fact that our Lord's sayings were written down as He uttered them is of course the assurance it gives us of the accuracy of the reports so made. Conversely, if the accuracy of the reports can be established, that will go a long way to prove that they were written at the time the sayings were spoken.

That the Gospels do in the main correctly report the sayings of our Lord is seriously denied by no one. It is felt by all that it would be a far greater marvel for such a collection of sayings to have been the production of several men than of only one man. Such an idea is like the theory, which at one time was not without advocates, that Shakespeare's Plays were the joint work of a society consisting of several individuals. It was obvious that if that were so, instead of the latter half of the sixteenth century producing one man of extraordinary genius it produced several; and that of these extraordinary men all with but one exception succeeded in effacing themselves and their very name from the knowledge and memory of men. The improbability of this was so extreme that the theory quickly died a natural death. It is just as incredible that in the first century a number of men lived each of whom was capable of uttering some of the sublime truths attributed to Christ in the Gospels. Hence the most pronounced unbelievers admit that Jesus lived and that He spake the substance of all that is attributed to Him in the Synoptics, and at least a nucleus of the discourses in John.

Even Rénan admits as much as that: "One remarkable fact which proves that the so-called synoptical Gospels really contain an echo of the words of Jesus, results from the comparison of the Gospel of Luke with the Acts of the Apostles. On both sides the author is the same. Yet when we compare the discourses of Jesus in the Gospels with the discourses of the Apostles in the Acts, the difference is absolute; here the charm of the most utter simplicity, there (I should say in the discourses of the Acts, especially towards the last chapters) a certain rhetoric, at times cold enough. Whence can the difference arise? Evidently, in the second case, because Luke makes the discourses himself, while in the first he follows a tradition. The words of Jesus were written before Luke; those of the Apostles were not." (The Gospels, chap. xiii.) The fact of course is that both the discourses in the Gospels and those in the Acts are genuine; but the former were the utterances of the Master; the latter, of His disciples.

A careful examination, however, will show that these reports contain many indications, not merely of general accuracy, but of scrupulous exactness. There is a large field here for students to explore; I will mention only a few examples.

Expressions found in Quotations not used by the Evangelists

themselves

Whenever certain expressions are found with more or less frequency in the quotations of others, which however are never used by the writers of the Gospels themselves in the narrative portions of the Gospels, it is reasonable to conclude that such expressions were actually used by the speakers quoted, and therefore that the entire quotations are accurate reports. There are several striking examples of this.

Name "Christ"

It has been already shown that the title 'Christ' is never used by either Matthew, Mark, Luke or John as a proper name in the narrative parts of their respective Gospels. But

in quoting the words of others, Matthew repeats the title in this sense three times (xxvi. 68; xxvii. 17; xxvii. 22); Mark once (ix. 41); and John once (xvii. 3).

"Amen"-Verily

The Hebrew word "Amen" is never used, as our Lord used it, in the sense of "verily," by any other speaker, or by any writer in either the Old or the New Testament. But the formula, "Verily (Amen) I say unto you" is a frequent expression of Christ's according to all the Gospels; with however this remarkable distinction, that in the Synoptics it is always single, "Verily, I say unto you," whereas in John it is always repeated, "Verily, verily, I say unto you."

"Son of Man"

The title "Son of Man" is the name by which our Lord was wont to designate Himself. It is found in all the Gospels in Matthew thirty-two times; in Mark fifteen times; in Luke twenty-six times; and in John ten times. It is never so used in the Gospels except by our Lord Himself, and it occurs in that sense only thrice elsewhere in the New Testament. The use of this term by Him is most appropriate, and yet it is one that would never have suggested itself to His disciples. They were duly impressed with a sense of His deity, and spoke of Him without hesitation as the "Son of God"; but it could not have seemed to them to add to His dignity to call Him, what any other person might be called, "Son of Man." But on His part the use of that name was an emphatic assertion that He was something more than man; it declared His heavenly origin.

To make this clear let us take an illustration from recent history. In the year 1863 the Imperial Government of China, finding itself unable to repress the great Tai-Ping rebellion, which was desolating the land and threatened the destruction of the Government itself, secured the services of an Englishman, Charles George Gordon, to organise and command their army. Gordon's name was already famous as a bold and