to inquire, “Art thou he that cometh, or look we for another?" (Matt. xi. 2, 3). And this is all.

According to John, the mission of the Baptist was, after the descent of the dove, to give evidence, and to be a faithful witness to the fact of the Messiahship of Jesus; but of his ever having done this there is in the Synoptics not only no trace, but the first Gospel contains an inquiry by the Baptist altogether inconsistent with his exercise of such a function.

We have now to compare the Gospels in question, in relation to their accounts of the public teaching of Jesus himself as to his Messiahship.

The fourth Gospel was written "that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life in his name " (John xx. 31). After the public teaching of the Baptist to this effect (John having been regarded by the people generally as a prophet), it might be supposed that Jesus would publicly assume the functions of Messiahship, and this he therein accordingly does. It was the Messiah's office, as we have seen (according to this Gospel), to proclaim the commands of God, and to give power, through the Holy Ghost, to perform them. He not only does this all through that Gospel (i.e. he gives the commands from the first, deferring the communication of the Holy Ghost till after he had been glorified), but he does it as the Christ, the Son of God, and that (as might have been expected from John's definitive announcement respecting him) from the very com

mencement of his career.

The Jesus of the fourth Gospel declares his Messiahship from the beginning, not only to his own disciples, not only to his Galilean countrymen, but to the Jews generally in Jerusalem and elsewhere, notably to some Hellenists who had come to the Passover, and even to the Samaritans. This Gospel is consistent with itself throughout. The prophet of Nazareth is therein from the beginning pronounced by John to be, what also Jesus affirms of himself, and what he is confessed to be by all believers, viz. the Christ, the Son of God, the Saviour of the world; and, morcover, without this belief there is no salvation, for (John viii. 24) "except ye believe that I am he, ye shall die in your sins."

But turning now to the Synoptic Gospels, what do we find? "Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was the Christ " (Matt. xvi. 20; see also Mark viii. 30 and Luke ix. 21). But this was at a very late period of his public life, after not only the imprisonment, but the death, of John the Baptist. What could be the meaning of this prohibition, if people already knew, both from himself and from the testimony of the Baptist, that he was the Christ?

We have already seen, however, that in Matthew and Mark there has no witness to this effect been borne by the Baptist, and we shall see that these Gospels are also throughout consistent with themselves. According to these, Jesus has never, up to this time, publicly declared himself the Christ. There is, at

least, no record in them of his having done so. Indeed, he has but just admitted it to his disciples (Matt. xvi. 13-18): "Now when Jesus came into the parts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples [who had been sent over Galilee to announce the near approach of the kingdom, as John did, and to urge repentance, having now returned to their Master], saying, Who do men say that the Son of man is? And they said, Some say John the Baptist [risen from the dead, see Matt. xiv. 1, 2]; some, Elijah; and others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But who say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jonah: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter [a rock], and upon this rock I will build my Church," etc.

This acknowledgment, then, by Peter of Jesus as the Christ, appears here as a sudden burst of inspiration, a revelation to Peter from heaven. Peter, then, has never heard it from man, not even from the lips of Jesus himself? No, for "flesh and blood had not revealed it to him."

But this is flatly contradicted by the fourth Gospel (see John i. 40-42). "Andrew, Simon Peter's brother. He findeth first his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messiah (which is being interpreted, Christ). He brought him unto Jesus.

Jesus looked upon him, and said, Thou art Simon the son of John [or Jonah]: thou shalt be called Cephas (which is by interpretation, Peter.") And this was even while John was in mid-career, for it was John himself who had taught Andrew (his disciple) that Jesus was the Lamb of God, the Christ (that is to say, according to the Gospel in question).

These two accounts, then, are irreconcilable with each other. Besides, the people whose opinions Jesus desired to know are those well-affected towards him: his enemies term him a glutton, a winebibber, mad, possessed; only those who are favourably disposed towards him would pronounce him a prophet. And why, then, do none of these opine that he is the Christ? Because, as we may see by tracing the first and second Gospels through as far as this narration,* he has never been proclaimed to them as the Christ; it has never, either by Jesus or his disciples, been suggested to them that the prophet of Nazareth was their long-expected king.

In the first Gospel, Jesus sends his twelve disciples to announce, as John did, the near approach of the kingdom, it and the king thereof being still in the future. "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and charged them, saying, Go not into any way of the Gentiles, and enter not into any city of the Samaritans: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matt. x. 5-7). The Gentiles and the Samari

*.e. to Matt. xvi. 13 and to Mark viii. 27.

tans, what inheritance have they in David? What have they to do with Israel's Messiah? Only the people of Israel need to be prepared for the anointed King of Israel. So we read (Matt. xv. 24), “I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

But the fourth Gospel makes Jesus and his disciples not only go through Samaria, and stay two days in a Samaritan city, but Jesus announces himself as the Christ to them, and many believe on him.*

In the Synoptics, the people hear of a coming Messiah whose person is to them unknown, not even hinted at; but in the fourth Gospel, they hear of a Messiah who is among them in the person of Jesus of Nazareth.

If confirmation is needed, of the disciples being sent to preach a coming kingdom, see Matt. x. 23: "Ye shall not have gone through the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come." This phrase "Son of man" being here evidently used of the Messiah.

After the disciples had fulfilled their mission, and had returned to Jesus, and, though none of the people supposed him to be the Messiah, Simon had hailed him as such, and Jesus had accordingly renamed him the Rock, the foundation-stone of his kingdom (which name is given in the fourth Gospel at the very commencement of Jesus' first interview with him), even then the disciples are to tell no one, because clearly Jesus has not yet received Messianic power and glory. He is as yet but the heir to the kingdom, the Messiah John iv. 25, 26; 39-42.

*