صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

that he did not sojourn at the city of Ephraim; but kept the direct road from Jericho; and when he came near Bethany, instead of going to visit the family of Lazarus, he only sent two of his disciples to fetch the ass's colt on which he proposed to enter Jerusalem. It is not possible, therefore, for two histories of the life and actions of the same person to be more directly contradictory to each other; consequently they cannot both be true. The language also of these two scriptures, respecting the person of our Lord himself, is equally irreconcilable. The supposed John begins with representing him as the divine Logos of Plato, under an human form, dwelling amongst men; repeatedly represents him as Omniscient,* and in almost every conversation with Samaritans, Jews, or his own disciples, makes him declare himself to be the Christ, the son of God, and never to acknowledge any other father hut God; though this writer, c. vi. v. 42, as well as Luke, c. iv. V. 22, informs us, that he was known by all the inhabitants of Nazareth to be the son of Joseph; and Luke, that he never spoke of himself, but under the denomination of the son of man; and that he expressly forbad his being called the Christ

See o. i. v. 48.-ii. 25.-iv. 18.-xxi. 17.

during his life, for reasons which he suggested in some of his discourses, before his death, but which he explained more clearly after his resurrection. From all which, it is abundantly evident, that the author of this Gospel was not the Apostle John, with whom Luke long lived in intimacy, and from whom and the other Apostles, he received the chief materials of his first history; but a convert of the second century from the Platonic school, who did not understand the Jewish prophecies concerning the Christ or Son of God, even after the explanation given of them by Jesus himself and all his Apostles: and who was one of the earliest fathers of that apostate, antichristian Church, whose doctrines are a heterogeneous compound of Paganism, Judaism, and Christianity.

III. Let us continue our attention, however, to the sequel of his narrative; and compare his account of what preceded, accompanied, and followed our Lord's crucifixion, with that which is given us by Luke.

The last named writer, we have seen, informs us, that the last supper our Saviour eat with his Apostles was the Paschal supper, which he told them, he had been particularly

desirous to eat with them; that at that supper, after instituting the communion of bread and wine, as a rite to be observed by his disciples, merely in grateful remembrance of him, he declared that one of them would betray him; but did not explain who it was. This author, on the contrary, tells us, that the last supper

he eat with them was before the feast of the Passover; and, instead of the institution of the Lord's supper, represents our Saviour as suddenly, after supper was ended, adopting the very unnecessary, useless, and unbecom ing ceremony of washing his Apostles' feet, a species of extraordinary, unmeaning humiliation, which none of them ever imitated; that, after this ceremony, he told them, one of them would betray him; and intimated to one Apostle, his favourite above the rest, that it was Judas Iscariot, by giving him a sop; though supper was already over. From hence, to his being led to Pilate's judgement hall, this author's narration differs very greatly from that of Luke; and there it flatly contradicts him. For persisting to say, that it was the preparation for the Passover, though Luke assures us the preceding day was the day on which it was necessary to kill the Paschal lamb; and that our Saviour accordingly then eat it with his Apostles; the author tells us, that the rulers of the Jews themselves, did not go into the judgement hall, for fear they should be defiled, so as to be prevented eating the Passover; and that; for that reason, the Roman Governor, with an amazing degroe of condescension, went out and in from his judge ment seat to them, and from them to the judgment seat, several times. Luke, however, in terms as diametrically opposite as truth to falsehood, affirms, that the Chief Priests and Elders of the Jews were present at Pilate's examination of our Saviour, and urged the only accusation against him; and tells us, that after Herod had sent him back to him, Pilate assembled the rulers and people of the Jews, and “said unto them, ye have brought “ this man unto me, as one that perverteth " the people; and behold I, having examined “ him before you, have found no fault in him" When Pilate had consented to gratify them by his crucifixion, this writer says, that Jesus himself bare his own cross to the place where he was crucified; Luke, that the Jews con pelled one Simon, a Cyrenian, to bear the cross after Jesus. Luke tells us, that after our Lord's death, Joseph of Arimathea took the body, and laid it in a new seo pulchre ; that the women were present, and saw how and where it was laid; and went. and prepared spices and ointments to embalm it with, as soon as the sabbath was ended. This writer, on the contrary, informs us, that Joseph and Nicodemus together embalmed the body with an hundred pound weight of myrrh and aloes, and other spices, “ as the manner of the Jews is to bury;" and then laid it in the sepulchre. Luke assures us, that in the evening after our Lord's resurrection, that is, in the beginning of the second day of the week, he appeared to all the eler ven Apostles and other disciples, who were assembled together with them; and, from that time to his ascension, was frequently seen by them at Jerusalem; that he then explained to them, the meaning of the prophecies concerning himself; instructed them in the nature and purport of the Gospel; and bid them tarry, at Jerusalem till the day of Pentecost, when they were to receive the Holy Ghost, or holy inspiration : that they did so, and never returned again to dwell in their own country, Galilee. The pretended John, in contradiction to all this, tells us, that the evening on which the disciples saw our Saviour, was the first day of the weekin which shews that he was no Jew, but one

« السابقةمتابعة »