at considerable intervals. Between the healing of Peter's wife's mother, for instance, (Mark i. 30, and Luke iv. 38,) and the healing of the leper (Mark i. 40, and Luke v. 12), our Lord appears to be represented by St. Mark (i. 38, 39; see also Luke iv. 44) as going into the next towns and preaching throughout all Galilee; whilst between the healing of the leper (Mark i. 40-45, and Luke v. 12-15) and the crossing over into the country of the Gadarenes, with its attendant circumstances (Mark iv. 35, and Luke viii. 22), we have, in chapters ii., iii., and iv. of St. Mark, and in chapters v. 16, to viii. 21, of St. Luke, the record of very many seemingly intermediate events, which by St. Matthew are recorded in a totally different connection. (See those chapters in full.) a

But St. Matthew does not actually state that the order in which he relates these circumstances was the very order in which they happened. He seems to do so; but he only seems. He does not necessarily imply that it was. Our Lord having delivered the discourse called the Sermon on the Mount, St. Matthew, in connection with that Sermon, simply tells us in the chapter that follows, that 'when he was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed him' (viii. 1); and then, but without any such connecting particle as to denote identity of time, goes on to say :

:

a The contents of these chapters are as follows:Mark, chap. ii.-1. Christ after some days' enters again into Capernaum, and healeth one sick of the palsy; 13, he goes forth again by the sea-side, and teaches the multitude; 14, passing by, he calls Matthew from the receipt of custom; 15, eateth with publicans and sinners; 18, excuseth his disciples for not fasting; and, going through the corn-fields on the Sabbath day, for plucking the ears of corn.

Mark, chap. iii. 1. He again entereth into the synagogue and healeth the withered hand; 7, withdraws himself with his disciples to the sea; 13, goeth up into a mountain and chooseth his twelve Apostles; 22, is accused of casting out devils by Beelzebub; 31, his mother and his brethren seeking him, he showeth who are his brother and sister and mother.

Mark, chap. iv.-1. Again teacheth by the sea-side; 3, delivers and explains the parable of the sower, and other parables; 35, on the same day, when the even was come, he crosses over to the other side of the lake, and rebukes the wind.

Luke, chap. v. 16 to end.-16, Christ withdraweth into the wilderness; 18, he healeth one sick of the palsy; 27, calls Matthew from the receipt of custom; 30, eateth with publicans and sinners; 33, excuseth his disciples for not fasting.

Luke, chap. vi.-1. Going through the corn-fields on the Sabbath-day, he excuseth his disciples for plucking the ears of corn; 6, entering into the synagogue on another Sabbath,' he healeth the withered hand; 13, chooseth the twelve Apostles; 20, delivers the sermon commonly called the Sermon on the Mount, or a summary of the same.

Luke, chap. vii.-1. Enters into Capernaum; 2, heals the centurion's servant; 11, the day after,' enters the city of Nain and raiseth the widow's son; 19, John the Baptist sendeth two of his disciples to Jesus; 36, a woman anointeth the feet of Jesus.

Luke, chap. viii.-1. Goeth with the twelve 'throughout every city and village preaching the glad tidings of the kingdom of God;' 4, delivers and explains the parable of the sower, and other parables; 19, his mother and his brethren seeking him, he showeth who are his brother and sister and mother.

2. And behold there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.

6

3. And Jesus put forth his hand and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.

'4. And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man, but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded for a testimony unto them.

5. And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion beseeching him,

6. Saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented.

7. And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him.

8. The centurion answered and said,' &c. .

'13. And his servant was healed in the selfsame hour.

14. And when Jesus was come into Peter's house, he saw his wife's mother laid and sick of a fever,

15. And he touched her hand, and the fever left her; and she arose and ministered unto them.

16. And when the even was come, they brought unto him many that were possessed with devils; and he cast out the spirits with his word and healed all that were sick.

17. That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses.

18. And when Jesus saw great multitudes about him, he gave commandment to depart unto the other side. And a certain scribe came, &c. &c.' (viii. 2-19.)

But so far as the connecting phrases And behold,' or ' And when,' are concerned, these several occurrences may have happened in immediate succession, or they may not. The only two events that are clearly represented by St. Matthew as having happened upon the same day, and in close succession, are the healing of Peter's wife's mother, and, when the even was come,' the healing of the many that were possessed with devils; and with reference to these two, the statements of St. Mark (i. 32), and of St. Luke (iv. 40), are precisely the same as that given by St. Matthew. At first sight, indeed, the crossing over into the country of the Gergesenes in consequence of the 'great multitudes that were about him,' seems also to be represented by St. Matthew as having taken place upon the evening of this same day-so seems, that were it not for the accounts given by St. Mark and St. Luke, the former of whom virtually and almost expressly tells us that between the healing of Peter's wife's mother, and the crossing over, with its

In the common Authorized Version, the translation is, in this instance, 'Now when;' but And when' is more literal. 'Now when' would seem to denote an identity of time, which the Greek fails to express, and which the parallel accounts of St. Mark and St. Luke, as already remarked, seem to disprove. And when' is therefore, we think, preferable.

attendant circumstances, there was a long interval of very many days (i. 29 iv. 35), and the latter of whom implies as much (iv. 38 to viii. 22), almost any one would take for granted that such was indeed the case. But St. Matthew does not expressly assert that it was, nor do his words of necessity even imply it. The statement given in the verses that immediately precede (viz., verses 16 and 17), would indeed (were it not for the opposing or apparently opposing statements of St. Mark and St. Luke, respecting the multitudes that on the evening of the day in question brought to our Lord the many that were possessed with devils, and the many that were sick) naturally lead us to conclude that the multitudes of these verses, and the multitudes of verse 18, in consequence of which he was induced, in order to avoid their importunity and pressure, to depart to the other side, were the very self-same multitudes; and the day of the healing of these multitudes, and of the crossing over, the very self-same day. But St. Matthew does. not say that they were, though his words may seem to imply that they were. We may, therefore, and must (if the accounts given by St. Mark and St. Luke be such as to oblige us to refer the crossing in question to a later day) conclude that they were notespecially as multitudes,' 'great multitudes,' and 'much people,' were our Lord's almost constant attendants.

Again, in the accounts given by St. Matthew and by St. Mark of the walking through the corn-fields on the Sabbath-day (Matt. xii. 1-9, Mark ii. 23 to end), and of the healing of the withered hand (Matt. xii. 10-15, Mark iii. 1-5), we have another instance of events, not coincident in point of time, being so related as if the date of their occurrence was the self-same day. This is especially observable in the relation of these circumstances as given by St. Mark.

'And it came to pass,' says St. Mark, 'that He went through the corn-fields on the Sabbath-day, and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn. And the Pharisees said unto him, &c. &c. And he said unto them, The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath; therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath. And he entered again into the Synagogue. And there was a man there which had a withered hand. And they watched him whether he would heal him on the Sabbath-day, that they might accuse him,' &c. &c. 'At that time,' says St. Matthew, Jesus went on the Sabbath-day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungered, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat. But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, &c. &c. But he said unto them, &c. &c. For the Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath-day. And when he was departed thence he went into their Synagogue. And behold there was a man which had his hand withered; and they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath-days? that they might accuse him,' &c. &c.

St. Luke, however, after relating the former of these two circumstances (vi. 1-5), expressly tells us (ver. 6) that the healing of the withered hand was on another Sabbath." Were it not for this express assertion, it would have been a very natural conclusion from the account of these occurrences, as given by St. Matthew and St. Mark, not only that they took place each one of them upon the Sabbath, but also that the Sabbath-day of their occurrence was the self-same Sabbath. But they neither of them assert that it was, though they seem to do so.

These instances might be very greatly multiplied, but it is needless, seeing that the same vindication will apply alike to them all. Before quitting our notice of discrepancies of this character, we cannot, however, but observe that, although a little examination would soon beget a contrary persuasion, there can be no question that the general belief of the great mass of men with reference to the narratives contained in the four Gospels is, that they are, and profess to be, arranged in strictly chronological order. They may not have examined the matter very minutely; but that they are so arranged is their impression. It is obvious to them, and that without any examination at all, that each one of the four accounts has a common beginning and a common end; that they all alike begin with the birth and baptism of our Lord, and close with his death and resurrection; and it is taken for granted that the intermediate facts of the narrative are equally consecutive. They (we refer not to the minority who compare and examine, but to men in general-to the majority who merely read) are the more disposed to assume this, because of the occurrence in the course of the narrative of certain words and phrases, from time to time, indicative of such consecutiveness. They have not so closely examined the text as to have ascertained whether these indications are to be found throughout, or whether their occurrence is only occasional—whether they connect together fact after fact, from the beginning of the history to the end, or whether they only group together a certain number.

Now, if it be true that ignorance is, to any and in any sense, the mother of devotion, it is no less true in the case of readers such as these, that ignorance is not at all unlikely to become to them eventually the mother, not of devotion, but of scepticism. For let them by some means or other discover that the circumstance which in one Gospel seems to be represented as occurring before another, is in some one of the other Gospels so arranged as to appear to have occurred after that other-let them discover that these differences of grouping and of arrangement are numerous; and let them, after much effort, be unable satisfactorily to reconcile these differences, and the consequence will almost inevitably be

suspicion and distress. They will be disposed to assume that the four Gospels cannot be, as they had hitherto believed them to have been, inspired. They can still believe them to be substantially correct; but they doubt, or almost doubt (for they are perhaps reluctant, after all, to believe them uninspired), whether they can be regarded as infallibly, thoroughly correct. They have discovered that which heretofore they had not even suspected, and which, moreover, they believe to be inconsistent with the inspiration of these accounts; and their inspiration they accordingly begin, though it may be with much unwillingness, to doubt of or to question.

6

6

6

Now all this mischief arises chiefly from their having failed, in the first instance, to make themselves acquainted with the actual state of the case. They have been proceeding on a false assumption, the assumption that the gospels are and profess to be (at least by implication) a statement of the facts therein related, arranged in every instance in the very order of their occurrence. They know, as we have already said, that this is the arrangement adopted in the case of some, of many of the facts recorded; for they are continually meeting with such expressions as then,' 'after these things,' on the same day,' the day following,' and the like; and they have too hastily assumed that this arrangement is the arrangement throughout. In other words, from not nicely attending to the instances where these expressions are employed and where they are not, they have imputed to the various gospel narratives a greater degree of consecutiveness-of asserted consecutiveness-than has been asserted by the Evangelists themselves. Let such, then, as soon as possible, make a yet further discovery; let them discover that the Evangelists make no such profession, and the difficulties arising from their discrepancies in this respect, are gone. It has been assumed by them that such is the profession made; let them ascertain whether it really be so, and they will find that it is not.

But not only are the writers of the Gospels not strictly chronological in their arrangement, but they also are not, and do not profess to be, full and complete in their accounts. The events which by one are condensed, by another are given in detail. Circumstances which by one are omitted, omitted even in instances where they may seem to be demanded, by another are recorded. This condensation on the one hand, and this more detailed account on the other, have of course led to yet further discrepancies, and that to a very great extent. By discrepancies we mean differences such as to appear to be contradictory and conflictingnot that they really are so, but that they seem to be so.

To discrepancies of this class must be referred such apparently conflicting accounts as those given respecting the two thieves; St.