Jesus Christ before His ministry

Front matter

I

Chap. Copyright No...

Shell...!

Contents

Page Preface v

Introduction xi

Chapter

Introduction

THE SOURCES OF THE LIFE OF JESUS

n^HE earliest information about Jesus which we have is given us by St. Paul. His name is continually repeated in the few letters of the apostle which have come down to us, and Paul appears to have been very precisely informed upon the principal events in the life of his Master. Had he known him personally? It can hardly be supposed ; but it is highly possible that he had seen him, and often seen him, walking in the porticos of the Temple ; perhaps he had heard him replying to the Pharisees when he himself, a young and high-spirited disciple of Gamaliel, was carrying on his studies in Jerusalem.

However this may have been, Paul counted among his intimate friends men who had lived in Jesus' company, Barnabas l and Silas, 2 for example, and in the earlier

1 Acts iv. 36, etc. 2 Acts xv. 22.

xii INTRODUCTION

days John surnamed Mark, 1 who later became the companion of Peter.

Paul had also spent a fortnight at Jerusalem with Peter and James; 2 he had had the opportunity of receiving from their lips many details of the life of Christ, and he certainly had done so. We know that Paul narrated the life of Jesus in his churches, and in particular that he described his Passion in such moving terms that it seemed as if Jesus were crucified anew before his hearers. 3 He also described the resurrection of the Lord — we know with what power and what insistence. 4 More than this, his letters abound in allusions to the teachings of Jesus, concerning marriage, 5 for example, or the Lord's Supper, 6 or mere citations of the Master's precepts. 7

Taken as a whole the testimony of St. Paul gives a very accurate, very clear, and very lifelike portrait of Jesus. The principal features of his life are brought out by the apostle, and his allusions con-

3 Gal. iii. 1. 4 1 Cor. xv. and passim.

5 1 Cor. vii. 10 f. si Cor. xL 23 ft.

7 See also Acts xx. 35.

INTR OD UCTION xiii

firm in advance that which the Gospels say at a later day.

This, in a few words, is what Paul gives us to know about Jesus: his birth, his Davidic origin, the time of his appearing, which was that determined by God, the humility of his earthly condition, his perfect holiness, his Messianic dignity, the character of his life : perfect fulfilment of the will of God; that of his mission: to preach, himself, to the people of Israel only, and to leave instructions for the future with twelve apostles, by them making the gift of his Gospel to all men ; his death upon the cross, which is the seal of the new covenant; the circumstances accompanying his death: the last supper; the institution of the Holy Communion; the betrayal' by Judas ; finally the resurrection on the third day; the order of the appearances of the Risen Lord, concluding with his life in heaven with God, whence he shall return to judgment. It is evident that in the details given and the allusions here and there made by St. Paul, nothing essential is lacking in the life of Jesus Christ.

After St. Paul we must cite as among the most ancient documents the earlier

XIV INTRODUCTION

chapters of the book of the Acts of the Apostles. Not that this book was written at an early date ; at earliest it was hardly written before the year 80; but in the beginning of his narrative Luke, who is its author, gives a picture of the first Church in Jerusalem, — a Church composed of ocular witnesses of the earthly work of Jesus, his immediate disciples, who in the words they utter recall the essential features of their Master's life.

The discourses of Peter, especially, are extremely important. In them we see what was the Gospel of the earliest days ; when the apostle speaks of Jesus Christ we have the witness of the disciple to his Lord given only a few weeks after his death. He pictures Jesus as a just man, approved of God and men, the servant of Jehovah, preaching the Good Tidings, healing the sick, going about doing good, choosing twelve apostles. 1

He also narrates his death, with the betrayal by Judas, the special guilt of the Sadducees in forcing Pilate's consent, the accusation brought against the Christ of having wished to destroy the Temple i Acts ii. 22 ff. : iii. 13 ft. : iv. 10 ff.

INTR OD UCTION XV

and abrogate the Law, his resurrection on the third day, the preaching of remission of sins through his name, — all this expressed with a grand simplicity which inspires confidence. The narratives with which the Book of the Acts opens give us the primitive Gospel, that of the oral tradition; they have an unmistakable stamp of originality, and are of priceless value to the historian.

But it is very evident that if we knew nothing more about Jesus than this, his person and work would remain almost unknown to us. Neither the Jews nor the Gentiles of his day wrote of him. The Talmud mentions his name, it is true, and even assumes to narrate his trial; but the story merits no credit, being only a tissue of falsehoods dictated by hatred. 1 Yet it serves to confirm the fact that Jesus withstood the legalism and formalism of his people, and attacked the traditional precepts of the Pharisees.

As for Gentile writings, Suetonius, in an inexact and insignificant passage, mentions Jesus Christ under the name Chrestus; 2

1 Jems. Talm. Sank. 14, 16 ; Babyl. Sank. 43 a, 67 a.

2 Life of Claudius, § 16.

Xvi IX TROD UC TI ON

Tacitus, somewhat more explicit, 1 speaks of "Christ who was put to death under Tiberius, by the order of Pontius Pilate, and whose detestable superstition has spread everywhere abroad, even unto Rome." Finally, the younger Pliny, early in the second century, describes in a letter to Trajan 2 the assemblies of Christians in his province, saying that they sing hymns, "speaking to Christ as to a God." All these insignificant facts, which we mention only for the sake of completeness, teach us nothing about Jesus Christ which we did not already know; and, all things considered, the Gospels are the only true source of the life of Jesus.

Let us endeavor to describe how they were written, and say what degree of confidence we may accord to them. If we study them attentively, collecting the testimony of the oldest Fathers of the Church concerning the writings of the apostolic epoch, the following is what we shall discover : —

The first disciple of Jesus who to our knowledge 3 concerned himself with put-

1 Annals, xv. 4A. 2 Correspondence, 10, 96.

8 " To our knowledge," because a great number of

INTR OD UCTI ON x Vll

ting into writing his Master's words, is the apostle Matthew. Between the years 50 and 60 he composed a collection of the discourses, sayings, and parables of Jesus, writing it in the Aramaic tongue, that is, in the very language in which Jesus spoke. Matthew's collection was several times translated into Greek with many alterations, but none of importance. This primitive writing by Matthew, that is, the collection of the sayings of Jesus in Aramaic, no longer exists.

About ten years after Matthew, between 60 and 70, a disciple of Peter, John surnamed Mark, who served him as interpreter, wrote a summary of the preachings of that apostle. This writing still exists just as Mark composed it ; it is our second Gospel. . It is true that some critics hold that ours is only a second recension, differing somewhat from the original. But this hypothesis is not indispensable, and it is probable that it is the very text of Mark which we have before us. Later appeared a Gospel which also has been preserved, which we have in our New Testament,

gospels were written in the first century, all except four being lost.

b xviii INTRODUCTION

which we call the Gospel according to St. Matthew, and whose true author is unknown.

This is how this author composed his book. He took one of the Greek translations of Matthew's collection of discourses, and also the summary of Peter's preaching which Mark had made, and combining these two documents he produced our first Gospel. Here and there he added what he had learned from oral tradition; for example, the manner of Jesus' coming into the world, his genealogy, his birth, the visit of the Wise Men; the opening chapters of his book ; and a few other facts scattered through the body of the work, which he alone relates. 1 The author had a well-defined purpose in writing this Gospel : to prove that Jesus Christ fulfilled the prophecies relating to the Messiah, and realized the promises made to the Jews in the Old Testament.

About the same period, a little after 70 a.d., Luke composed the third of the Gospels which we have in the New Testa-

1 For example, the miracle of the stater, xrii. 24- 27; the resurrection of the saints at the time of Jesus' death, xxvii. 52, 53.

INTRODUCTION XIX

ment. This document, as we have it, has undergone no retouching. In writing it Luke had before him several narratives of the life of Jesus. As a foundation he too made use of one of the Greek translations of Matthew's collection of the discourses, though not the one made use of by the author of the first Gospel, and differing somewhat from that one. He also took advantage of the Gospel by Mark. In the third place he had at hand a collection made at a date unknown to us, including a number of words and deeds of Jesus during one or more journeys between Galilee and Judea, and of which the writers of the first two Gospels had no knowledge. This narrative of the travels of Jesus Christ was utilized by Luke from verse 5L of chapter ix. to verse 28 of chapter xix.

Luke had still other sources at his disposal. Such were the accounts of the Passion of Jesus Christ which he heard Paul give when he accompanied him on his missionary travels, and a collection by himself of Aramaean traditions concerning the birth of John the Baptist and of Jesus Christ.

XX INTRODUCTION

Such is the origin of our first three Gospels.

To find the most authentic accounts of Jesus Christ we must first turn to the Gospel by Mark: it is the oldest; it should be the fundamental basis of every orderly narrative of the ministry of Jesus. The facts he gives should take precedence on all accounts. The Gospel of Mark is more impersonal than those of Matthew and Luke. While these have each their own purpose, and pursue it, Mark has no other aim but to relate what he remembers, and he gives the facts in chronological order. His Gospel is consequently a true drama, the drama of the life of the misunderstood and murdered Messiah. There is no digression, no delay, no pause. All is animated, simple, natural. Mark neither interprets facts nor accounts for them ; he shows them. Therefore is this admirable document not simply the oldest Gospel; it is at the same time the surest, the most faithful, the most exact. But it is incomplete, and the critic must complete it with the aid of the other two Synoptics.

In this work his first care should be to compare Matthew and Luke, seeking all

INTR OD U CTION XXI

that they have preserved to us of the collection of discourses made by the apostle Matthew. In fact, we find in our first and third Gospels the substance of the words of Jesus collected by Matthew, since each of the authors had before him a Greek translation of this collection.

This, therefore, is the most authentic common foundation, the solid base of what we most certainly know about Jesus Christ.

Where the three accounts differ we must choose between them, always seeking the eldest text, a critical work of by no means insurmountable difficulty. Here the duty of the historian is to eliminate suspicious traditions, all that betrays a tendency foreign to strict historic verity, as, for . example, the injunctions which arise from doctrinal prepossessions. This work done, we must determine the framework of Jesus Christ's ministry, and make clear the order of the facts. It would be utterly impossible to perform this task if we had not the fourth Gospel, and here is the great usefulness, let us rather say, the unequalled value of the account of the life of Jesus of which it yet remains to speak.

With regard to the fourth Gospel, as with regard to the first three, historical criticism has arrived at nearly definitive results.

It is impossible to misapprehend the unhistorical character of this book. We mean by this that the author deliberately sets aside a great number of important events, and that his intention is not to give us a biography of Jesus Christ, but to prove that Jesus was verily the Word made flesh, or, as he himself said, the Christ, the Son of God. 1 It results from this that his account is quite fragmentary, and tinctured with theological considerations completely foreign to the history. This is an incontestable fact, which should be recognized by every one.

The fourth Gospel, then, cannot serve as a basis for the study of Jesus Christ's ministry, and this is why we began by speaking of the first three. They alone give us a solid preliminary standpoint.

But we have also to find a standpoint

in the fourth Gospel. All has by no

means been said when it is said that this

writing may not be taken for a complete

1 John xx. 31.

INTRODUCTION xxill

narrative of the life of Jesus; it remains to point out its high documentary value.

Side by side with the general unhistoric character which it presents to the impartial reader, another not less indisputable fact remains in our opinion to be recognized; that is, that the author lived in intimate association with an ocular witness of the life of Jesus, — a witness who felt himself to be of such authority as to give a different account from that of the first three evangelists, whose books he perfectly well knew, of sufficient authority to correct them, and put forth assertions which completed, rectified, and sometimes contradicted theirs. The author of the fourth Gospel knows to their minutest details a great number of perfectly certain, entirely authentic facts in the life of Jesus, of which the authors of the first three narratives were entirely ignorant.

More than this : with regard to the two critical moments in the life of Jesus Christ, the revulsion of popular feeling after the multiplication of the loaves, and his death upon the cross, this author is at one with the first three evangelists, confirming and completing them. And, finally, the outline

Xxiv INT ROD UCTIOX

of the life of Jesus which, he gives is much better than theirs. They mention only one journey of Jesus Christ to Jerusalem, which is more than unlikely, which is impossible. The author of the fourth Gospel parts company with them at this point, mentioning several such journeys, because he is more accurate and knows the facts better.

For this reason the fourth Gospel is full of personal recollections whose character it is impossible to mistake. To take only a single example, its account of the Passion is the most vivid of the four, and among other details of marvellous truth the character of Pilate is admirably brought out.

It seems to us impossible to deny the fact that the ocular witness of whom we speak can be no other than an apostle, and this apostle no other than John. If the form given to the discourses of Jesus is peculiar to the author of this book, and if the fourth Gospel abounds in theological deductions which can be nothing other than the evangelist's own reflections and not the authentic words of Jesus, 1 there

1 It is to be observed that, in the first century, an author writing the life of any one not only pnt into

INTROD UCTION XXV

are also many utterances put into the mouth of the Christ which are certainly quite as historical as those which the first three evangelists attribute to him, and which bear the inimitable stamp of the authentic words of the Lord.

Therefore this book, which is not a life of Jesus Christ (it is at once too dogmatic and too fragmentary for that), is nevertheless a very accurate document, and must be consulted by those who would understand the life of Jesus. It may even be said that upon many essential points it is by much the most accurate of the four. Only the authority of an apostle can be the basis of a book which, when it appeared, differed so widely from the first three Gospels already received by the Church, accepted as true, consecrated by piety, and which parted company from them so entirely. 1

his mouth what he had really said, but what he might have said ; and the words which the author was convinced that he might have uttered were considered quite as authentic as if he had really spoken them.

1 The proofs of the historicity of the fourth Gospel so far as the last week and the Passion are concerned, are of altogether convincing force. Jesus names himself to the soldiers who have come to arrest him,

XXVI INTRODUCTION

Who, then, is the author of the fourth Gospel? Let us ask the book itself. It replies clearly that he draws very immediately from St. John, but is not St. John. When he speaks of the "beloved disciple," he speaks in the third person. Of course this might be only a literary form. Antiquity affords us a well-known example. The Commentaries of Julius Caesar were written by Caesar himself, and nowhere does he designate himself by the pronoun of the first person. But the system adopted by the writer of the fourth Gospel is very

Judas goes out from the upper chamber after receiving the sop, etc. The Gospel clears up many seeming improbabilities in the Synoptic account. John states that Jesus died on the very day when the paschal lamb was eaten; so does the Talmud ("the eve of Pasca," Babyl. Sank. 43a, 67a). He says nothing of the payment of money to Judas. With regard to the six months before the Passion, John alone is well informed. He shows the death of Jesus as already resolved upon in the month of February or March (xi. 53, 54); at that time Jesus retires to Ephraim, the order for his arrest is given (xi. 55, 56). The Synoptics know nothing of all this. Finally and especially the fact that immediately after his arrest Jesus was led to Annas (xviii. 13), who, as we know, had a house on the Mount of Olives, is the strongest possible proof of the historic value of the fourth Gospel (cf. Penan, Vie de Jesus, 1st edition, p. 394.)

INT ROD UCTI ON XX vii

different, for not simply does he never speak of John except in the third person, he is careful to distinguish himself from him ; he speaks of John without ever naming him, and always in terms of eulogy; he designates him with veiled expressions and in terms of invariable admiration: it is evident that he is tenderly attached to him. He brings out John's superiority, and the peculiar affection of Jesus for him. The apostle John, writing for himself, would not thus have written about himself; and yet all that we have said of the Johannine origin of the fourth Gospel remains. One solution alone is possible, — this book was written by a disciple of St. John who drew his inspiration from his master. We may almost say that the fourth Gospel was. composed in collaboration by the apostle John and one of his disciples who acted as penman; and just as he has nowhere written his master's name, he has nowhere made an error, and this book has nothing in common with what is called a pseudepigraph.

We have one proof of this assertion in a fact which it is impossible to contest. It is universally admitted that chapter xxi.

XX viii INTR OD UCTI ON

was added to the Gospel after its completion and even after St. John's death. Now, the style of this appendix — which in any case is not that of St. John, since it was written after his death — is precisely the same as that of the Gospel. It is by the same writer; then this writer not being John for the twenty-first chapter is also not John for the first twenty chapters. The appendix was added by the disciple who, a little while before, had written the Gospel under the direction of the apostle. This appears to us incontestable.

It is to be remarked also that the Gospel of John was thought in Hebrew, that the construction of the sentences is entirely Hebraic. We may therefore admit that we have an almost literal translation, made by him who held the pen while the apostle spoke to him in Aramaic. There was a duality of authorship, — a duality which is indeed betrayed by the pronoun in the first person plural, here and there employed.

More than this, the writer-secretary from time to time introduces his own reflections. For example he says : " He that hath seen

INTRODUCTION XXIX

hath borne witness, and his witness is true; and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye also may believe." 1 That is to say, " John attested what he saw when he related to me the death upon the cross, and now he knows that his attestation is true ; I hear him saying so at the moment when I am writing these lines." This is evidently a personal reflection of the writer, a writer who is not "he that hath seen."

This literary method of a book written by two people appears at first strange. It is not in the least so, if we put ourselves back in the time of the apostles. They, especially Peter and John, must have been very ill versed in Greek, if indeed they so much as knew a word of it. But if they wrote epistles or gospels, they could publish them only in Greek. If they had written them in their mother tongue, their books would not have been widely scattered, and they would have been lost, as Matthew's collection of the sayings of Jesus was lost. They therefore took collaborators, aids, secretaries. Peter, who had John Mark for interpreter, had also Silas, and caused Silas to write his epistle.

1 John xix. 35.

XXX INTRODUCTION

He says it in so many words. 1 In the same way John, having to write a gospel, acquitted himself of his task as he could, giving the facts to a secretary who assuredly was not chosen at hap-hazard, and who made admirable use of what the apostle related to him.

To return now to the question which we have put to ourselves: How may we reconstruct the outline of the ministry of Jesus Christ? Three Paschal feasts were celebrated in the course of it, 2 and it must therefore have occupied two and a half years. If next we attempt to put the events in their proper dates and to show a progress, a development, in the ministry of Jesus Christ, we must still address ourselves to the fourth Gospel.

The first three group the facts without the slightest hint of progress or development; but, on the other hand, we find in them, especially in the Gospel of Mark, notes of time which grow out of the nature of the events, and these indications of time impress themselves upon the reader all the more strongly because the Evan-

i 1 Pet, v. 12. 2 John ii. 23 : vi. 4 : xiii. 1.

INTR OD UC TION xxxi

gelists had no thought of indicating them, and were themselves not aware of them.

Thus there is a moment in Jesus Christ's ministry — a "turning-point," as the Germans say — which marks very nearly the middle of his public life, and which is indicated in all the four Gospels. 1 It is the moment when the people turn away from Jesus Christ, when he loses the popularity which up to that time he had enjoyed. It is precisely a year before his death; for this event followed the multiplication of the loaves, which St. John expressly places in the neighborhood of a Passover which can only have been that of the year 29. 2

Consequently, the ministry of Jesus Christ is to be divided into three parts; or, more correctly speaking, there are three periods of undeniable authenticity in the ministry of Jesus Christ, —

I. The Galilean Ministry (preaching of the Gospel of the Kingdom; the Beatitudes ; the visit to Nazareth ; the parables

i Matt. xvi. ; Mark viii. ; Luke ix. ; John vi.

2 " Can only have been," on the supposition that Jesus was crucified in the year 30, — a very possible date, but concerning the accuracy of which a degree of doubt exists.

XXX11 INTRODUCTION

of the Kingdom of Heaven ; teachings and cures). This first period is characterized by the lively enthusiasm which Jesus inspired, and the great popularity which he enjoyed. His ministry opened in hope and joy. He was encircled with universal sympathy. He went up and down the country performing miracles of benevolence, attacking the official representatives of the theocracy; and the multitudes approved. He replied to the messengers of John the Baptist, and pronounced upon him a decisive judgment. He proclaimed the freedom of the conscience. This period terminates with the discourse known as the Sermon on the Mount, in which are collected a large proportion of the discourses spoken during this time. The choice of the twelve apostles marks its close. II. The second period of Jesus' ministry now opens. It began with the open hostility of the Pharisees, who accuse him of casting out demons by Beelzebub. Jesus in his turn rebukes the Pharisees, and parts company with them. Soon the people also cease to understand him, and abandon him. By one of those changes of mood common to crowds, a reaction takes

INT ROD UC TION XXXiii

place. The popularity of Jesus suddenly wanes. The people accuse him of having trifled with their Messianic hopes. This crisis occurs precisely a year before Jesus' death. This second period is better known than the preceding one, — that of favor and success, which is somewhat enshrouded in obscurity and hesitation. These are its principal events: Jesus publicly breaks with the Jewish Messianic hopes ; learning of the death of John the Baptist, and feeling himself watched by Herod, he retires into solitude, and begins his ministry of wandering, often going beyond the limits of Herod's territory (Tyre, Sidon, Csesarea Philippi), and entering upon a life of greater intimacy with his apostles. This second period closes with the confession of Peter, and the first prediction of his own nearly approaching death by violence. These are the facts, the exterior events. To these exterior events correspond interior events in the soul of Jesus. The conviction dawns upon him that his work is not to be accomplished by words and miracles, and that his death is probably necessary to the coming of the kingdom. We say probably, for even while affirming that his

XXXI V IN TE OD UCTION

death was inevitable he hoped to the end that his Father would spare him this sacrifice. But he clearly saw that the conversion of his people was not to be secured simply by the means which up to this time he had employed. He was obliged to give up the hope of accomplishing the pure spiritualization of Judaism as certain of the Pharisees understood it. He himself gave up his Judaism, and became in the most absolute sense unsectarian. He was no longer to be simply the spiritual and moral Messiah who was born in the days of the temptation in the desert; he was to be the suffering Messiah, sealing his work by martyrdom. His death was to precede the coming of the kingdom, which he still continued to proclaim near at hand.

III. The third period may be entitled The Final Struggle and the Last "Week. 1 We shall study it in our third volume. It is the best-known period of Jesus' life. The light which authentic documents shed upon his life, a light which from the beginning grows ever stronger, is for these last days as perfect as could be desired.

1 Matt, xx.-xxTiii. ; Mark x.-xvi. ; Luke ix. 53- xxir. : John yii.-xx.

HIS PERSON, HIS AUTHORITY, HIS WORK

JESUS CHRIST DURING HIS MINISTRY

Chapter I ' The Earlier Activity Of Jesus

/^\UR first volume brought events down ^ > ^ to the time when Jesus, at about thirty years of age, began his ministry. Still thrilling through and through with the burning words of John the Baptist, and the solemn refrain of his preaching, " Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand," he began by repeating these words, and for the time he said no others. But it was not at Nazareth that he was to preach what he already called the " gospel," — the good news, that is, — the coming renovation of things, prepared for by a change in men's hearts and lives. In Nazareth he had no authority: he had been known there from childhood, and " no man is a prophet in his own country." And, besides, he would there remain unknown. Nazareth is hidden away in the hills ; he needed a centre from which to radiate into the far distance. Therefore he chose Capernaum, deciding that this village should be the point of departure for his preaching, his calls to his people. The choice was, no doubt, the result of careful investigation on his part. He might have stationed himself elsewhere ; but remaining in Galilee, giving up for the outset the idea of Jerusalem, 1 he could be nowhere better placed than in Capernaum. He certainly knew this town and all the lake shore, and in his youth he had often taken the six or seven hours' walk which separated Xazareth from the Sea of Galilee.