Supernatural Religion Volume I Part 31

{377}

which we give them: Matt. vii. 21, Luke x. 16, Matt. vii. 22, 23, xiii.

42, 43, vii. 15, part of 16, 19. It will be remarked that the pa.s.sage (k 2) Luke x. 16, is thrust in between two consecutive verses in Matthew, and taken from a totally different context as the nearest parallel to k 2 of Justin, although it is widely different from it, omitting altogether the most important words: "and doeth what I say." The repet.i.tion of the same phrase: "He that heareth me heareth him that sent me," in Apol. I, 63,(1) makes it certain that Justin accurately quotes his Gospel, whilst the omission of the words in that place: "and doeth what I say," evidently proceeds from the fact that they are an interruption of the phrase for which Justin makes the quotation, namely, to prove that Jesus is sent forth to reveal the Father.(2) It may be well to compare Justin's pa.s.sage, k 1--4, with one occurring in the so-called Second Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, iv. "Let us not, therefore, only call him Lord, for that will not save us. For he saith: 'Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall be saved, but he that worketh righteousness.'... the Lord said: 'If ye be with me gathered together in my bosom, and do not my commandments, I will cast you off and say to you: Depart from me; I know you not, whence you are, workers of iniquity.'"(3) The expression [--Greek--] here strongly recalls the reading of Justin.(4) This pa.s.sage, which is foreign to

{378}

our Gospels, at least shows the existence of others containing parallel discourses with distinct variations. Some of the quotations in this spurious Epistle are stated to be taken from the "Gospel according to the Egyptians,"(1) which was in all probability a version of the Gospel according to the Hebrews.(2) The variations which occur in Justin's repet.i.tion, in Dial 76, of his quotation k 3 are not important, because the more weighty departure from the Gospel in the words "did we not eat and drink in thy name," [--Greek--] is deliberately repeated,(3) and if, therefore, there be freedom of quotation it is free quotation not from the canonical, but from a different Gospel.(4) Origen's quotation(5) does not affect this conclusion, for the repet.i.tion of the phrase [--Greek--] has the form of the Gospel, and besides, which is much more important, we know that Origen was well acquainted with the Gospel according to the Hebrews and other apocryphal works from which this may have been a reminiscence.(6) We must add, moreover, that the pa.s.sage in Dial 76 appears in connection with others widely differing from our Gospels. The pa.s.sage k 5 not only materially varies from the parallel in Matt. xiii. 42, 43 in language but in connection of ideas.(7) Here also, upon examination, we must conclude that Justin quotes from a source different from our

{379}

Gospels, and moreover, that his Gospel gives with greater correctness the original form of the pa.s.sage.(1) The weeping and gnashing of teeth are distinctly represented as the consequence when the wicked see the bliss of the righteous while they are sent into everlasting fire, and not as the mere characteristics of h.e.l.l. It will be observed that the preceding pa.s.sages k 3 and 4, find parallels to a certain extent in Matt. vii. 22,23, although Luke xiii. 26, 27, is in some respects closer to the reading of Justin k 5, however, finds no continuation of parallel in Matt, vii., from which the context comes, but we have to seek it in xiii. 42, 43. K 5, however, does find its continuing parallel in the next verse in Luke xiii. 28, where we have "There shall be (the) weeping and (the) gnashing of teeth when ye shall see Abraham," &c There is here, it is evident, the connection of ideas which is totally lacking in Matt. xiii. 42, 43, where the verses in question occur as the conclusion to the exposition of the Parable of the Tares. Now, although it is manifest that Luke xiii. 28, cannot possibly have been the source from which Justin quotes, still the opening words and the sequence of ideas demonstrate the great probability that other Gospels must have given, after k 4, a continuation which is wanting after Matt. vii. 23, but which is indicated in the parallel Luke xiii. (26, 27) 28, and is somewhat closely followed in Matt. xiii. 42, 43. When such a sequence is found in an avowed quotation from Justin's Gospel, it is certain that he must have found it there substantially as he quotes it. The pa.s.sage k 6,(2) "For many shall arrive," &c, is a very important one, and it departs

{380}

emphatically from the parallel in our first Gospel. Instead of being, like the latter, a warning against false prophets, it is merely the announcement that many deceivers shall come. This pa.s.sage is rendered more weighty by the fact that Justin repeats it with little variation in Dial. 35, and immediately after quotes a saying of Jesus of only five words which is not found in our Gospels, and then he repeats a quotation to the same effect in the shape of a warning: "Beware of false prophets," &c, like that in Matt. vii. 15, but still distinctly differing from it.(1) It is perfectly clear that Justin quotes two separate pa.s.sages.(2) It is impossible that he could intend to repeat the same quotation at an interval of only five words; it is equally impossible that, having quoted it in the one form, he could so immediately quote it in the other through error of memory.(3) The simple and very natural conclusion is that he found both pa.s.sages in his Gospel. The object for which he quotes would more than justify the quotation of both pa.s.sages, the one referring to the many false Christians and the other to the false prophets of whom he is speaking. That two pa.s.sages so closely related should be found in the same Gospel is not in the least singular.

There are numerous instances of the same in our Synoptics.(4) The actual facts of the case then are these: Justin quotes in the Dialogue, with the same marked deviations from the

{381}

parallel in the Gospel, a pa.s.sage quoted by him m the Apology, and after an interval of only five words he quotes a second pa.s.sage to the same effect, though with very palpable difference in its character, which likewise differs from the Gospel, in company with other texts which still less find any parallels in the canonical Gospels. The two pa.s.sages, by their differences, distinguish each other as separate, whilst, by their agreement in common variations from the parallel in Matthew, they declare their common origin from a special Gospel, a result still further made manifest by the agreement between the first pa.s.sage in the Dialogue and the quotations in the Apology. In k 7,(1) Justin's Gospel subst.i.tutes [--Greek--] for [--Greek--], and is quite in the spirit of the pa.s.sage O, "Ye shall know them from their _works_" is the natural reading. The Gospel version clearly introduces "fruit"

prematurely, and weakens the force of the contrast which follows. It will be observed, moreover, that in order to find a parallel to Justin's pa.s.sage k 7, 8, only the first part of Matt. vii. 16, is taken, and the thread is only caught again at vii. 19, k 8 being one of the two pa.s.sages indicated by de Wette which we are considering, and it agrees with Matt. vii. 19, with the exception of the single word [--Greek--]. We must again point out, however, that this pa.s.sage in Matt. vii. 19, is repeated no less than three times in our Gospels, a second time in Matt iii. 10, and once in Luke iii. 19. Upon two occasions it is placed in the mouth of John the Baptist, and forms the second portion of a sentence the whole of which is found in literal agreement both in Matt.

iii. 10, and Luke iii. 9, "But now the axe is laid unto the root of the trees, therefore every tree," &c, &c.

{382}

The pa.s.sage pointed out by de Wette as the parallel to Justin's anonymous quotation, Matt. vii. 19--a selection which is of course obligatory from the context--is itself a mere quotation by Jesus of part of the saying of the Baptist, presenting, therefore, double probability of being well known; and as we have three instances of its literal reproduction in the Synoptics, it would indeed be arbitrary to affirm that it was not likewise given literally in other Gospels.

The pa.s.sage X(1) is very emphatically given as a literal quotation of the words of Jesus, for Justin cites it directly to authenticate his own statements of Christian belief He says: "But if you disregard us both when we entreat, and when we set all things openly before you, we shall not suffer loss, believing, or rather being fully persuaded, that every one will be punished by eternal fire according to the desert of his deeds, and in proportion to the faculties which he received from G.o.d will his account be required, as Christ declared when he said: To whom G.o.d gave more, of him shall more also be demanded again." This quotation has no parallel in the first Gospel, but we add it here as part of the Sermon on the Mount. The pa.s.sage in Luke xii. 48, it will be perceived, presents distinct variation from it, and that Gospel cannot for a moment be maintained as the source of Justin's quotation.

The last pa.s.sage, ft,2 is one of those advanced by de Wette which led to this examination.(3) It is likewise clearly a quotation, but as we have already shown, its agreement with Matt v. 20, is no evidence that it was actually derived from that Gospel. Occurring as it does as one of numerous quotations from the Sermon on the Mount, whose general variation both in order and

{383}

language from the parallels in our Gospel points to the inevitable conclusion that Justin derived them from a different source, there is no reason for supposing that this sentence also did not come from the same Gospel.

No one who has attentively considered the whole of these pa.s.sages from the Sermon on the Mount, and still less those who are aware of the general rule of variation in his ma.s.s of quotations as compared with parallels in our Gospels, can fail to be struck by the systematic departure from the order and language of the Synoptics. The hypothesis that they are quotations from our Gospels involves the accusation against Justin of an amount of carelessness and negligence which is quite unparalleled in literature. Justin's character and training, however, by. no means warrant any such aspersion,(1) and there are no grounds for it. Indeed, but for the attempt arbitrarily to establish the ident.i.ty of the "Memoirs of the Apostles" with our Gospels, such a charge would never have been thought of. It is unreasonable to suppose that avowed and deliberate quotations of sayings of Jesus, made for the express purpose of furnishing authentic written proof of Justin's statements regarding Christianity, can as an almost invariable rule be so singularly incorrect, more especially when it is considered that these quotations occur in an elaborate apology for Christianity addressed to the Roman emperors, and in a careful and studied controversy with a Jew in defence of the new faith. The simple and natural conclusion, supported by many strong reasons, is that Justin derived his quotations from a Gospel which was different from ours, although naturally by subject and design it must have been related to them. His

{384}

Gospel, in fact, differs from our Synoptics as they differ from each other.

We now return to Tischendorf's statements with regard to Justin's acquaintance with our Gospels. Having examined the supposed references to the first Gospel, we find that Tischendorf speaks much less positively with regard to his knowledge of the other two Synoptics. He says: "There is the greatest probability that in several pa.s.sages he also follows Mark and Luke."(1) First taking Mark, we find that the only example which Tischendorf gives is the following. He says: "Twice (Dial.

76 and 100) he quotes as an expression of the Lord: 'The Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the Scribes and Pharisees (Ch.

100 by the 'Pharisees and Scribes'), and be crucified and the third day rise again.'(2) This agrees better with Mark viii. 31 and Luke ix. 22 than with Matt. xvi. 21, only in Justin the 'Pharisees' are put instead of the 'Elders and Chief Priests' (so Matthew, Mark, and Luke), likewise 'be crucified' instead of 'be killed."'(3) This is the only instance of similarity with Mark that Tischendorf can produce, and we have given his own remarks to show how thoroughly weak his case is. The pa.s.sage in Mark viii. 31, reads: "And he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the Elders and the Chief Priests [--Greek--], and the Scribes and be killed [--Greek--], and after three days [--Greek--]

{385}

rise again." And the following is the reading of Luke ix. 22: "Saying that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the Elders and Chief Priests [--Greek--] and Scribes and be killed [--Greek--], and the third day rise again." It will be perceived that, different as it also is, the pa.s.sage in Luke is nearer than that of Mark, which cannot in any case have been the source of Justin's quotation.

Tischendorf, however, does not point out that Justin, elsewhere, a third time refers to this very pa.s.sage in the very same terms. He says: "And Christ.... having come.... and himself also preached, saying.... that he must suffer many things from the Scribes and Pharisees and be crucified, and the third day rise again."(l) Although this omits the words "and be rejected," it gives the whole of the pa.s.sage literally as before. And thus there is the very remarkable testimony of a quotation three times repeated, with the same marked variations from our Gospels, to show that Justin found those very words in his Memoirs.(2) The persistent variation clearly indicates a different source from our Synoptics. We may, in reference to this reading, compare Luke xxiv. 6: "He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee (v. 7), saying that the Son of Man must be delivered up into the hands of sinful men, _and be crucified_, and the third day rise again."

This reference to words of Jesus, in which the words [--Greek--]. occurred, as in Justin, indicates that although our Gospels do not contain it some others may well have

{386}

done so. In one place Justin introduces the saying with the following words: "For he exclaimed before the crucifixion, the Son of Man,"

&c.,(1) both indicating a time for the discourse, and also quoting a distinct and definite saying in contradistinction to this report of the matter of his teaching, which is the form in which the parallel pa.s.sage occurs in the Gospels. In Justin's Memoirs it no doubt existed as an actual discourse of Jesus, which he verbally and accurately quoted.

With regard to the third Gospel, Tischendorf says: "It is in reference to Luke (xxii. 44) that Justin recalls in the Dialogue (103) the falling drops of the sweat of agony on the Mount of Olives, and certainly with an express appeal to the 'Memoirs composed by his Apostles and their followers,'"(2) Now we have already seen(3) that Justin, in the pa.s.sage referred to, does not make use of the peculiar expression which gives the whole of its character to the account in Luke, and that there is no ground for affirming that Justin derived his information from that Gospel. The only other reference to pa.s.sages proving the "probability"

of Justin's use of Luke or Mark is that which we have just discussed--"The Son of Man must," &c. From this the character of Tischendorf's a.s.sumptions may be inferred. De Wette does not advance any instances of verbal agreement either with Mark or Luke.(4) He says, moreover: "The historical references are much freer still (than quotations), and combine in part

{387}

the accounts of Matthew and Luke; some of the kind, however, are not found at all in our Canonical Gospels."(1) This we have already sufficiently demonstrated.

We might now well terminate the examination of Justin's quotations, which has already taken up too much of our s.p.a.ce, but before doing so it may be well very briefly to refer to another point. In his work "On the Canon," Dr. Westcott adopts a somewhat singular course. He evidently feels the very great difficulty in which anyone who a.s.serts the ident.i.ty of the source of Justin's quotations with our Gospels is placed by the fact that, as a rule, these quotations differ from parallel pa.s.sages in our Gospels; and whilst on the one hand maintaining that the quotations generally are from the Canonical Gospels, he on the other endeavours to reduce the number of those which profess to be quotations at all. He says: "To examine in detail the whole of Justin's quotations would be tedious and unnecessary. It will be enough to examine (1) those which are alleged by him as quotations, and (2) those also which, though anonymous, are yet found repeated with the same variations either in Justin's own writings, or (3) in heretical works. It is evidently on these quotations that the decision hangs."(2) Now under the first category Dr. Westcott finds very few. He says: "In seven pa.s.sages only, as far as I can discover, does Justin profess to give the exact words recorded in the Memoirs; and in these, if there be no reason to the contrary, it is natural to expect that he will preserve the exact language of the Gospels which he used, just as in anonymous quotations we may conclude that he is trusting to memory."(3)

{388}

Before proceeding further, we may point out the straits to which an apologist is reduced who starts with a foregone conclusion. We have already seen a number of Justin's professed quotations; but here, after reducing the number to seven only, our critic prepares a way of escape even out of these. It is difficult to understand what "reason to the contrary" can possibly justify a man "who professes to give the exact words recorded in the Memoirs" for not doing what he professes; and further, it pa.s.ses our comprehension to understand why, in anonymous quotations, "we may conclude that he is trusting to memory." The cautious exception is as untenable as the gratuitous a.s.sumption.

Dr. Westcott continues as follows the pa.s.sage which we have just interrupted:--"The result of a first view of the pa.s.sages is striking.

Of the seven, five agree verbally with the text of St. Matthew or St.

Luke, _exhibiting indeed three slight various readings not elsewhere found, but such as are easily explicable_; the sixth is a _compound summary_ of words related by St. Matthew; the seventh alone _presents an important variation in the text of a verse_, which is, however, otherwise very uncertain."(1) The italics of course are ours. The "first view" of the pa.s.sages and of the above statement is indeed striking.

It is remarkable how easily difficulties are overcome under such an apologetic system. The striking result, to summarize Canon Westcott's own words, is this: out of seven professed quotations from the Memoirs, in which he admits we may expect to find the exact language preserved, five present three variations; one is a compressed summary, and does not agree verbally at all; and the seventh presents an important variation.

Dr.

{389}

Westcott, on the same easy system, continues: "Our inquiry is thus confined to the two last instances; and it must be seen whether their disagreement from the Synoptic Gospel is such as to outweigh the agreement of the remaining five."(l) Before proceeding to consider these seven pa.s.sages admitted by Dr. Westcott, we must point out that, in a note to the statement of the number, he mentions that he excludes other two pa.s.sages as "not merely quotations of words, but concise narratives."(2) But surely this is a most extraordinary reason for omitting them, and one the validity of which cannot be admitted. As Justin introduces them deliberately as quotations, why should they be excluded simply because they are combined with a historical statement?

We shall produce them. The first is in Apol. i. 66: "For the Apostles, in the Memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels,(3) handed down that it was thus enjoined on them, that Jesus, having taken bread and given thanks, said: 'This do in remembrance of me. This is my body.'

And similarly, having taken the cup and given thanks, he said: 'This is my blood,' and delivered it to them alone."(4) This pa.s.sage, it will be remembered, occurs in an elaborate apology for Christianity addressed to the Roman emperors, and Justin is giving an account of the most solemn sacrament of his religion. Here, if ever, we might reasonably expect accuracy and care, and Justin, in fact, carefully

{390}

indicates the source of the quotation he is going to make. It is difficult to understand any ground upon which so direct a quotation from the "Memoirs of the Apostles" could be set aside by Canon Westcott.

Justin distinctly states that the Apostles in these Memoirs have "thus"

[--Greek--] transmitted what was enjoined on us by Jesus, and then gives the precise quotation. Had the quotation agreed with our Gospels, would it not have been claimed as a professedly accurate quotation from them?

Surely no one can reasonably pretend, for instance, that when Justin, after this preamble, states that having taken bread, &c., _Jesus said_: "This do in remembrance of me: this is my body;" or having taken the cup, &c, _he said_: "This is my blood"--Justin does not deliberately mean to quote what Jesus actually did say? Now the account of the episode in Luke is as follows (xxii. 17): "And he took a cup, gave thanks, and said: Take this, and divide it among yourselves. 18. For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of G.o.d shall come. 19. And he took bread, gave thanks, brake it, and gave it unto them, saying: This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. 20. And in like manner the cup after supper, saying: This is the new covenant in my blood, which is shed for you."(l) Dr. Westcott of course only compares this pa.s.sage of Justin with Luke, to which

{391}

and the parallel in 1 Cor. xi. 24, wide as the difference is, it is closer than to the accounts in the other two Gospels. That Justin professedly quoted literally from the Memoirs is evident, and is rendered still more clear by the serious context by which the quotation is introduced, the quotation in fact being made to authenticate by actual written testimony the explanations of Justin. His dogmatic views, moreover, are distinctly drawn from a Gospel, which, in a more direct way than our Synoptics do, gave the expressions: "This is my body," and "This is my blood," and it must have been observed that Luke, with which Justin's reading alone is compared, not only has not: [--Greek--], at all, but instead makes use of a totally different expression: "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is shed for you."

The second quotation from the Memoirs which Dr. Westcott pa.s.ses over is that in Dial. 103, compared with Luke xxii. 42, 43,1 on the Agony in the Garden, which we have already examined,(2) and found at variance with our Gospel, and without the peculiar and distinctive expressions of the latter.

We now come to the seven pa.s.sages which Canon Westcott admits to be professed quotations from the Memoirs, and in which "it is natural to expect that he will preserve the exact words of the Gospels which he used." The first of these is a pa.s.sage in the Dialogue, part of which has already been discussed in connection with the fire in Jordan and the voice at the Baptism, and found to be from a source different from our Synoptics.(3) Justin says: "For even he, the devil, at the time when he also (Jesus) went up from the river Jordan when the voice

{392}

said to Him: 'Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee,' is recorded in the Memoirs of the Apostles to have come to him and tempted him even so far as saying to him: 'Worship me;' and Christ answered him [---Greek---], 'Get thee behind me, Satan' [---Greek---], 'thou shalt worship the Lord thy G.o.d, and Him only shalt thou serve.'"(1) This pa.s.sage is compared with the account of the temptation in Matt iv. 9, 10: "And he said unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. 10. Then saith Jesus unto him [---Greek---], Get thee hence, Satan [--Greek--]: it is written, Thou shalt worship," &c All the oldest Codices, it should be stated, omit the [--Greek--], as we have done, but Cod. D. (Bezae) and a few others of infirm authority, insert these two words. Canon Westcott, however, justly admits them to be "probably only a very early interpolation."(2) We have no reason whatever for supposing that they existed in Matthew during Justin's time. The oldest Codices omit the whole phrase from the parallel pa.s.sage, Luke iv. 8, but Cod. A. is an exception, and reads: [--Greek--]. The best