The Historical Character of St. John's Gospel, The Gospel according to Peter, London, 1892. *The Human Element in the Gospels, London, 1907. Sanday, W. . . *Inspiration (The Bampton Lectures, 1893), London, 1893. Sacred Sites of the Gospel, Oxford, 1903. The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel, Oxford, 1905. *Outlines of the Life of Christ, Edinburgh, 1906. *The Life of Christ in Recent Research, Oxford, 1907. Schürer, E... *History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, Edinburgh, 1885-1890. *Geschichte des Jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi; dritte Auflage, Leipzig, 1898. The Gospel according to St. Matthew (The Westminster New Testament), London, 1908. Smith, D... *Das göttliche Selbstbewusstsein Jesu nach dem The Akhmim Fragment of the Apocrypha *The Gospel according to St. Mark, London, 1902. *The Appearances of our Lord after the Passion, Sayings of the Jewish Fathers comprising Das Evangelium Matthaei, Berlin, 1904. 1903. Einleitung in das Neue Testament, Leipzig, 1899. Das Evangelium des Matthäus, Leipzig, 1903. Introduction to the New Testament, Edinburgh, 1909. *The Journal of Theological Studies, London and Oxford, 1899-1909. PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION SINCE this commentary was printed, several works of great importance have been published. Dr. Stanton has given us The Synoptic Gospels, being Part II. of his very valuable discussion of The Gospels as Historical Documents (Cambridge Press). A great many of his conclusions confirm views that are advocated in this volume. He is, however, not quite accurate in stating (p. 18) that the Oral Theory is adopted in the commentary on St. Luke in the International series: see p. xxiii in that volume. What was doubted there, and is doubted still by Dr. Stanton himself, is whether St. Luke can have had the Second Gospel in as full a form as that in which we possess it. Several of the Cambridge Biblical Essays, edited by Dr. Swete, contain a great deal that is most instructive to students of the first three Gospels. The same may be said in a still higher degree of the very remarkable commentary on The Synoptic Gospels by the Jewish scholar C. G. Montefiore (Macmillan). Some things in it a Christian must read with dissent, if not with distress; but there are many generous tributes to the character and teaching of Jesus of Nazareth, and also to the immense influence for good which the Gospels have had upon European society for nineteen centuries. References to all three of these works have been inserted in the present edition. Moreover, a second and enlarged edition of Sir John Hawkins' invaluable Hora Synoptice has appeared. The references to the first edition in this commentary (pp. xxiii, 23, 89, 120, 141) may be corrected to the second edition, as follows: p. 131 p. 163; pp. 174, 175 pp. 210, 211; p. 41-p. 53; p. 132 = p. 165; p. 174 p. 210. Those who desire a small commentary on St. Matthew will find the recent one by E. E. Anderson (T. & T. Clark) helpful. The essay of Professor S. L. Tyson on The Teaching of our Lord as to the Indissolubility of Marriage (University Press, Sewanee) may be read in connexion with what is urged in this commentary, pp. 81, 82, 259–261. XII CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . §1. THE AUTHOR §2. THE SOURCES $3. PLAN OF THE GOSPEL. $4. THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THE FIRST GOSPEL §6. "THE TESTAMENTS OF THE TWELVE PAT- COMMENTARY THE BIRTH AND INFANCY OF THE MESSIAH xxxiv I-439 I THE LAST WORK IN THE HOLY CITY THE PASSION, DEATH, AND RESURRECTION In no case is the title to a book of the New Testament part of the original document. It was in all cases added by a copyist, and perhaps not by the first copyist. Moreover, in all cases it varies considerably in form, the simplest forms being the earliest. The "according to" neither affirms nor denies authorship; it implies conformity to a type, and need not mean more than "drawn up according to the teaching of." But it is certain that the Christians of the first four centuries who gave these titles to the Gospels meant more than this: they believed, and meant to express, that each Gospel was written by the person whose name it bears. They used this mode of expression, rather than the genitive case used of the Epistles, to intimate that the same subject had been treated of by others; and they often emphasized the oneness of the subject by speaking of "the Gospel" rather than "the Gospels." This mode of expression is accurate; there is only one Gospel, 'the Gospel of God' (Rom. i. 1) concerning His Son. But it has been given us in four shapes (evayyéλov тeтρáμoppov, Iren. III. xi. 8), and "according to " indicates the shape given to it by the writer named. Was the belief of the first Christians who adopted these titles correct? Were the Gospels written by the persons whose names they bear? With the trifling exception of a few passages, we may believe this with regard to the Second, Third, and Fourth Gospels: but it is very difficult to believe this with regard to the First, the authorship of which is a complicated problem not yet adequately solved. But the following results may be accepted as probable, and some of them as very probable. Ancient testimony in favour of Matthew being the author is very strong. It begins with Papias and Irenæus in the second century, and is confirmed by Origen in the third and Eusebius in the fourth, not to mention a number of other early writers, 1 Eusebius, H. E. iii. 39, v. 8, vi. 25, iii. 24, v. 10. |