St. John*, when the high prieft afked him of his disciples and his doctrine, "I fpake openly to the world, I ever taught in the fynagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always refort, and in fecret have I faid nothing; why afkeft thou me? Afk them which heard me, what I have faid unto them;" is very much of a piece with his reply to the armed party which seized him, as we read it in St. Mark's gospel, and in St. Luke's: "Are you come out as against a thief with fwords and with ftaves to take me? I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and ye took me not." In both anfwers we difcern the fame tranquillity, the fame reference to his public teaching. His mild expoftulation with Pilate upon two several occafions, as related by St. John, is delivered with the same unruffled temper, as that which conducted him through the last scene of his life, as defcribed by his other evangelifts. His an

xviii. 20.

+ Mark xiv. 48. Luke xxii. 52.

xviii. 34. xix. II,

fwer,

pro

fwer, in St. John's gofpel, to the officer who ftruck him with the palm of his hand, "If I have spoken evil, bear witnefs of the evil, but if well, why fmiteft thou me *?” was fuch an answer, as might have been looked for from the perfon, who, as he ceeded to the place of execution, bid his companions as we are told by St. Luke †) weep not for him, but for themselves, their pofterity, and their country; and who, whilft he was fufpended upon the cross, prayed for his murderers, "for they know not (faid he) what they do." The urgency alfo of his judges and his profecutors to extort from him a defence to the accufation, and his unwillingness to make any (which was a peculiar circumftance) appears in St. John's account, as well as in that of the other evangelifts ‡.

There are moreover two other correfpondencies between St. John's hiftory of the

* xxviii. 23.

1

+ xxiii. 28.

See John xix. 9. Mat. xxvii. 14. Luke xxiii. 9.

tranfaction and theirs, of a kind somewhat different from thofe which we have been now mentioning.

The three first evangelifts record what is called our Saviour's agony, i. e. his devotion in the garden immediately before he was apprehended; in which narrative they all make him

pray,

"that the

cup might pass from him." This is the particular metaphor which they all afcribe to him. St. Matthew adds, "O my Father, if this

cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done *." Now St. John does not give the scene in the garden; but when Jefus was feized, and fome resistance was attempted to be made by Peter, Jesus, according to his account, checked the attempt with this reply: "Put up thy fword into the fheath; the cup which my Father hath given me, fhall I not drink it †?” This is fomething more than confiftency: it is coincidence: because it is extremely

* xxvi. 42.

+ xviii. II.

natural,

natural, that Jefus, who, before he was apa prehended, had been praying his Father,

that that cup might pass from him," yet with fuch a pious retractation of his request, as to have added, "If this cup may not pass from me, thy will be done;" it was natural, I say, for the same person, when he actually was apprehended, to express the refignation to which he had already made up his thoughts, and to exprefs it in the form of speech which he had before used, "The cup which my Father hath given me, fhall I not drink it?" This is a coincidence between writers, in whofe narratives there is no imitation, but great diverfity.

A fecond fimilar correfpondency is the following: Matthew and Mark make the charge, upon which our Lord was condemned, to be a threat of destroying the temple; "We heard him fay, I will deftroy this temple, made with hands, and, within three days, I will build another made without hands *;" but they neither of them in

* Mark xiv. 5.

3

form

form us, upon what circumstance this calumny was founded. St. John, in the early part of the hiftory*, fupplies us with this information; for he relates, that, upon our Lord's first journey to Jerufalem, when the Jews afked him, "What fign fhewest thou unto us, feeing that thou doest these things? he answered, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raife it up." This agreement could hardly arise from any thing but the truth of the cafe. From any care or defign in St. John, to make his narrative tally with the narratives of the other evangelifts, it certainly did not arife, for no fuch design appears, but the absence of it.

A ftrong and more general inftance of agreement, is the following. The three firft evangelists have related the appointment of the twelve apoftles+; and have given a catalogue of their names in form. John, without ever mentioning the appointment, or giving the catalogue, fuppofes, through

*ii. 19.

Mat. x. I. Mark iii. 14. Luke vi. 12.

out