The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-12-16


Besides, men who arc honestly, and In
telligently telling substantially hne saw" ex
story will be sure to say some thi,ss 80
actly alike. Tradition seems 20 nav ~ .,
served Homcr's poems for hunuIso s,,e "a
years. Why should 1t not nave Pls s,,. M
certain characteristic sayings OF Jvou , ne
even The Sermon on the Mount 49,
are told. epake as never man spaike. uan ~
OF Ills sayings were so pungeh1'J put q"
TO stick in the memory. 49,. xo,rat,yes
The differences noticed IN tue hdt
can be accounted for on the grouIu oi u
ferences in the characters OF tne oSFe AZ
writer's, differences In their eu9cssion., aIiv
ferences in temperament, anu Ssp N,n, -,
the difference Of aim, or speciai punt "a
Matthew seems TO have had Hebrew
readers especially In view; ne We was
order 10 convince them that Jesus Wa
the Messiah" OF their prophets. Morf-
over, it Is probable that he wrote origlli',i,
ly in Ardmaic, the dialect then spynen ~,
Jesus to Abraham. the father OF tho re
brew nation. and not las Luxe 10 Au a,Is
the father OF the human race ~ iu"'eS
yssGy tSat Jesus %as the ointment OF
prophecy; mentions certain iessi ,'b.,e
as In Matthew X, 8, 6. and xv., -, WIZ ,Sa,
Christ confines His own mission, anu -, ', ,he
OF the Twelve to the lost sheeP . ot a,as
house OF Israel" Matthew also ASSUMES
the readers familiarity with tne laWs,
customs and localities OF falestne, ~
as religious teacher thus ansWerlng -, -
the Mosaic prophecy In Deuterohohlg
xviii, Is: The Lord thy GOO VIII r aise w
unto thee a Prophet from the iu'ust -.
thee, OF thy brethren, like unto me- nli,tc
Him We shall hearken" He gives CHRIST
discolrses with unusual fullness, especidi-
~ the Sermon on the Mount. Ihese let
culiarities all point 10 the cohclusly,iI til'a.
he wrote with special reference 10 iieO'e"
The Greek Gospel Of Matthew, as We
have il in our collection, can natuiy ~
regarded as n mere translation OF ne oits-
inaI Aramaic for the quotations from the
Old Testament are made with a Ireedon
and independence which mere trailsiatS,oi
would scarcely have allowed hiInselti,. ~ ~
sides there are other traces or oIlblnailey
which only a Greek scholar can "ppl0-
Ciate. 49,, ~
Matthews quotations from the Old Te5-
lament do not always follow the ~ ~
text, nor the Septuagint-tndl u, "
Greek translation OF the O!d Iesldihehl
which was then In common use, anu We
made by seventy Hebrew sChoidIs az
Alexandria in Egypt, about the latter pa .
OF the third century before Chrlst- IT,
probability is that Matthew hlmselI Niote
his Gospel in Greek after he had written
his original Aramaic Gospel, ana 'hat ne
did not translate IL from the Aram nc
Gospel, but wrote 1t independently. Inc
Greek Gospel was probably desisneq 10!
Greek-speaEng Hebrews, who couId ilot
read Aramaic. We must remehhDeI ttat
| the IteNitWS were lNtl4 SCI "a W. -
world. and that many Of them were porn
and educated IN regions where Greek WIS
the language Of everyday ne, Ihere
were Hebrews in Greece, ana III rome ~
| well as in Palestine, Just as mere are
now Hebrews in England, America anu
Germany.
An air Of direct. simple truthfulne.ss IS
strongly and strikingly characteristic OF
every one Of the four Gospels.
Dean Swift and Daniel Detoe possessed
| IN a most wonderful degree the faculty or
| realizing imaginary scenes events ah9
| persons, and thus of giving the AIR OF
| truth 10 their fictitious stories. But uin
| any mature man of fair intellect ana re
spectacle education ever take rulnvet 5
Travels" or Robinson CrusOe Tor NeIit"-
| bic history? And yet the keenest critics
| men OF the widest learning and the deep
est research-have devoted their liNes 10
the vain attempt 10 destroy the hlstOflcal
| Acts Of the Apostles. The 'Mythicdl
| theories of Strauss and Renan. the "Ien-
| dcntial' theOry Of Baur. ana suhQfy other
| theories, advocated by able men; nave nhd
| their day, and have all passed into me
| limbo of forgotten crOtchets. Even the
| great body Of educated men in the chris
| tendon Of to-day do not know that such
| theories have ever been held. 10 the
| mind Of educated Chrstendom, Strauss
and Baur are names without meaning. III
! their theories should be prOpounded 10 q
| man Of plain sense, he might well say
"This is the very coinage Of your brain;
|
| is very cunning In.
The only tenable theory Of the Gospels
| is that they ara trustworthy histories.
| And, as histories, these narratives pre-
| sent extraordinary and peculiar claims,
not only TO our attention, but 10 our ac-
Inc records which the Evangelists give
| Us OF the trial of Jesus differ considerably
| each from the other in matters or detdll ,
| and yet there is an air or truthtulncss,
| which no candid reader can miss, IN every
| one Of the narratives. There Is very NJ
| tie comment IN any OF them. 'Analysl
| OF character discussion or hollfea
| so dear 10 the modern Historian and nov
| elist-are almost utterly foreign 10 the
| spirit OF these writers. They coniine them-
| selves almost entirely 10 the TASK OF ten
| ing what the several characters said ana
| did. and the reader Is LETT 10 inIcr tho
| motives from the sayings ana dOlhss OF
| the several persons VINO aclcd lh lnt
| scene. We are not tOld what We oubuit ~
! think Of these persons. The ENanseusts
| do not argue 10 prove that Illdte ala
| wrong: nor do they use harsh epithets pa
! their statements as 20 the conducl or lhs
| priesthood. Suggestions are not lhuulBtu
| IN. opiniOns are not expressed. feeling Us
| suppressed and we have the nara. sohd
| facts unencumbcred with speculailons OF
/ any kind. And these CHARACTERISTICS ilthe
| the Evangclists the best witnesses IN tne
world: so that the Gospels are the best
| attested histories that exist.
| WHY any human being should accept as
| history SdlluSL account OF ia, t,tt1Pli,
| acy Of Catiline. and yet reject the IouIth
| Gospel, is a question whicn any ioslclal
| ought 10 find IL exceedingly. qlHicuil 10 an-
! swer. But logic has probably niue 70 40
! with the conclusions reached by most il-
fidels. a bad life is the greatest oOJectioA
| 20 the Bible.
! The calmness and serenity which an inc
| Evangelists exhibit, in their accounts or
| this Extraordinary trial are among the
! most striking points az these natIatiVes'
| We have little or no comment from THESE
| writers upOn the very remarkable trans
| acfions which they record. They coniine
| themselves almost exclusively 10 leidiihs
| carefully what was said ana zone. g
| ter's fan was grievOus. but not one OF me
| Evangclists mOurns over ~ Inc treat
| ment OF Jesus was shameiuily outIsfeotua
! but no Evangelist utterS a Woru OF invis-
| nation. Caiaphas was supefdtlNe
! scOundrcl. but even John does not say so.
| Tho facts are allowed 10 tell lher own
| terrible tale and the narrators IAN quiet
| " into the BACKGROUND. The story seems
| almost 10 tell itself. And this Is one oi
| The most powerful internal evidences oil
the good faith. as well as The competency
| Of the narratOrs. ,.,.,
Indeed. as n noted inhdei once confessed
"the only objection TO this Book uaylne
| his hand on the Bible) Is bad me. al =
| our Lord Himself empha sized TINS tnoush
| when He said: Light is come INTO ~.
world. and men loved darkness fatnel
| than light because their dceds were vFA
The Agricultural Department.
Editor OF The Times.