xxx. 3, liv. 21, lix. 8, lxix. 4, lxxxiii. 7); "The Lord shall visit them in the consummation of the end of the days" (Assumption of Moses, i. 18); "Thus will they destroy until the day when the great consummation of the great world be consummated over the watchers and the godless" (Book of Enoch, xvi. 1); where the expression sometimes means the end of the world, sometimes the Messianic age. There is nothing improbable in the supposition that Christ Himself made use of it. Dalman (Words, p. 155) goes too far when he says: "As the term occurs only in Matthew, it will belong not to Jesus Himself, but to the Evangelist." Is it impossible that a phrase which Christ Himself had used should be preserved by only one Evangelist? Whatever may be the origin of the phrase, one feels how suitable it is as a solemn conclusion to the Gospel.

It was suggested above that the narrative of the visit of the women to the sepulchre (1-10) may possibly refer to the same visit as that which is recorded of the Magdalen alone (Jn. xx. 1, 2, 11-18). Here it is necessary to consider whether this appearance to the Eleven (16-20) is not to be identified with that to 'more than five hundred brethren at once' which S. Paul mentions (1 Cor. xv. 6). One tradition may have singled out the Magdalen in the former case and have been silent respecting her companions; and something of a similar kind may have taken place with regard to an appearance in Galilee. The Eleven were the most important element in the company of witnesses, and it is possible that in some narratives no one else was mentioned. It is obvious that if the appearance was to be made to hundreds of persons, it must take place in the open air, and the high ground above the lake was a suitable place. A manifestation to the Eleven could take place in Galilee, as at Jerusalem, in a room. Comp. Lk. xxiv. 33-43, where others besides the Apostles were present. In any case, the appeal which S. Paul makes to the testimony of so large a number of still living witnesses cannot be dismissed as a 66 'battered sophism." "It would have been dangerous for the Apostle to appeal to the survivors of the five hundred in a letter written to Corinth, where he had enemies who were in frequent communication with Jerusalem" (Swete, Appearances, p. 84). The probability that, if the Risen Messiah appeared at all to human eyes, He would appear to others besides the Apostles, is great. It would have placed the Eleven at a serious disadvantage if they had been the only disciples who could affirm that they had seen Him. According to the evidence which has come down to us, both in Jerusalem and in Galilee a number of persons, in addition to the Apostles, were allowed to see and hear Him, and in some cases even to touch Him. And yet, in the first instance, none of them expected to do so. They

1 Maclaren says that "it is obviously the same incident," which is too strong a statement. "There is no veiled personality now, as to Mary and to the two on the road to Emmaus; no greeting; no demonstration of the reality of His appearance. He stands amongst them as the King.'

had made up their mind that they would never see Him again.

On the other hand, however many appearances there may have been in Jerusalem and in Galilee to the Apostles and others, we read of no appearance to Christ's enemies, to the chief priests, or elders, to Pilate or to Herod. There was no attempt to force them to believe. He had refused the demand for a sign from heaven, when the Pharisees challenged Him to give one. He had worked no miracle before Herod. What the suffering Christ had refused to do, the triumphant Christ abstained from doing. The wills of His enemies were still left free, and they could continue to reject Him and oppose Him, if they so pleased. The desponding doubts of a loyal Apostle who was yearning to see Him again, and yet would accept no testimony respecting a fact which seemed to be far too good to be true, He was willing to dispel; such doubts could be utilized for the more confirmation of the faith. But the obstinate hostility of those who had declared Him to be a deceiver was left without any special privilege or intervention for its cure. When He was ministering to men's bodies and was ready to heal them, we are told that there was a time when 'He could not (ovk édúvato) there do any mighty work, save that He laid His hands upon a few sick folk and healed them' (Mk. vi. 5), because of their unbelief; and it is possible that there were similar limitations with regard to His appearances after the Resurrection. Those appearances did not depend solely upon His own will: something depended upon the condition of the recipients. To hostile or unwilling hearts there was no appearance.1

This does not mean that it was necessary that the recipients of this favour should be expecting it. If that were true, there would be some ground for the objection that those who declared that they had seen Him were quite honest, but were victims of a delusion: they saw what they had hoped to see, and what they had made up their minds that they were sure to see. Experience has proved that such delusions are possible for groups of persons as well as for individuals. But all the evidence that we possess contradicts this supposition. Except the meeting on 'the mountain' in Galilee, 'where Jesus had appointed them,' all the appearances were surprises; and in

1 It is one of the many signs of inferiority in the Gospel according to the Hebrews that it makes a servant of the priest (presumably the high priest) a witness of the Risen Lord. Jerome tells us that this Gospel narrated that "when the Lord had given His linen cloth to a servant of the priest (servo sacerdotis) He went to James and appeared to him; for James had sworn that he would not eat bread from that hour wherein he had drunk the cup of the Lord until he saw Him rising again from the dead" (Catal. Script. Eccl., Jacobus).

some cases those who saw Him and talked with Him did not at first know that it was He. Nevertheless, we may reasonably believe that a readiness to accept whatever He might desire to bestow upon them was one of the conditions of being able to see and hear and touch Him after His Resurrection; and this condition was wanting in those who had crucified Him.

But, although the large majority of those who had seen Him during His ministry thus forfeited the privilege of being among the witnesses of His Resurrection, this did not mean that they were for ever excluded from that equally real presence which He has promised to all faithful disciples throughout all time. They lost the opportunity of seeing the Risen Lord before His visible presence was withdrawn from human eyes. But, as we know from history, after the Holy Spirit was given to the Church, many of those who had been His opponents, including not a few of the priests,1 joined the company of His disciples, and thus became partakers of His farewell blessing: 'Lo, I am with you all the days, even unto the end of the world.'

Characteristic expressions in ch. xxviii. : τάφος (1), καὶ ἰδού (2, 7, 9, 20), σεισμός (2), προσέρχεσθαι (2, 9, 18), ἔνδυμα (3), δεῦτε (6), πορεύεσθαι (7, 11, 16, 19), προσκυνεῖν (9, 17), τότε (10), ιδού (7, 11), συνάγειν (12), ἡγεμών (14), μαθητεύειν (19), συντελεία τοῦ αἰῶνος (20). Peculiar: κουστωδία (11), συμBouλiov λaußáveiv (12), dioтášelv (17 and xiv. 31 only); peculiar to this chapter: eldéa (3), and perhaps onuitav (15), but the common reading, diepnμloon (ABCDL) is probably right here as in ix. 31 and Mk. i. 45.

1 Acts ii. 41, iv. 4, v. 14, vi. 7.