Gospels, which, however, sometimes (especially Mark and Luke) speak of him without this appendage; but the fourth Gospel, though it contains many allusions to John, does not once, we believe, term him “the Baptist." Is this trifling circumstance of no moment? We think it has a significance, for we remember that the fourth Gospel intimates that "Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John," and that while John was alive. Why should John, if this were so, be singled out for the distinctive appellation, for he did not introduce baptism? If not generally practised among the Jews before the time of John, as is asserted by some, it was well known among them, and was in great use with the Essenes, in the very neighbourhood of the district where John laboured.

The Synoptic Gospels do not allude to Jesus baptizing at all, nor to his disciples doing so during his life.

First, then, as to the baptizing,—Josephus sides with the Synoptics. Second, as to the comparative influence of the preaching of John and Jesus during John's active life. According to the Synoptics, Jesus did not commence his till John's had ceased. According to the fourth, Jesus not only began before the Baptist was silenced, but was more popular and had a greater number of disciples than John, for, as the latter was told, "all men come to him " (John iii. 26). But John's influence is thus described by the synoptists: "Then went out unto him Jerusalem, and all Judæa, and all the region round about Jordan.'

* Matt. iii. 5; see also Mark i. 5, and Luke iii. 21.

Now, in which scale must the authority of Josephus be placed? Decidedly in that of the Synoptics, for that historian represents the imprisonment and even death of John as arising out of the fear of Herod that John, because of the immense influence he had over the people, might raise a rebellion. Jesus was active in Galilee, according to all the Gospels, and Galilee was under the same Herod (Antipas); how, then, if Jesus' influence was the greater, and if Jesus was the King to whom John bore witness, how was it that Jesus was not the chief object of Herod's suspicious fears? The account of Josephus agrees well with the statements of the Synoptics, unintentionally confirming them, for they represent John as (at that time alone) having a most wide-spread influence in Perea, the other portion of Herod's dominions, which included Galilee and Perea, and as predicting the immediate establishment of a kingdom; thus the account of Josephus is confirmed by them, showing, as they do, that there really was some ground for suspicion of rebellion.

But if John merely pointed to Jesus as the baptizer with the Holy Ghost, and "the Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world," it is difficult to understand what there was in this (Jesus' kingdom, according to the fourth Gospel, not being of this world) to raise any fears even of Jesus, much less of John, in the mind of Herod.

Thirdly, John's chief mission in preaching, according to the fourth Gospel, was to bear witness to Jesus;

according to the Synoptics, to announce the coming kingdom, and to prepare the way for it by turning the people to righteousness. With these again Josephus is in accord, for he represents the Baptist as "commanding the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness to one another and piety towards God." But this is too like the function of " that prophet" of whom Moses wrote, and that of the Elijah of Malachi; and John, according to the fourth Gospel, was neither.

Many inaccuracies are pointed out by some eminent critics, to which we shall not allude, confining ourselves to the more obvious matters, which do not require the telescopes of the learned.

The quality of the teaching can be thus judged of, as compared with that of the first Gospel; and though we need not make the contrast so wide as did John Stuart Mill, when he condemned the fourth Gospel, or a great portion of it, as "poor stuff," while, on the other hand, he praised the "Sermon on the Mount" and the general teaching of the Synoptical Gospels as evincing sublime genius of the highest order, "personal originality combined with profundity of insight," —we shall join the great and increasing number of persons who affirm the superiority of the teaching in the earlier Gospels, and especially of that in the first. Notwithstanding the dissent of Neander, we think it is not without reason that "some recent writers contrast the thoroughly practical bearing of the Sermon on the Mount with (what they call) the mystical character of the discourses recorded by John. They

find everything in the former simple and intelligible, while the latter abounds in paradoxes, and seems to study obscurity."

We before remarked on the general character of Jesus' teaching in the fourth Gospel as compared with its predecessors, when showing the difference between them-how that the fourth was the Gospel of faith in doctrine, while they inculcated works of righteousness; we now venture to assign the superiority distinctly to the Synoptical Gospels. It is becoming more and more generally acknowledged that character -inward and outward righteousness-is far more important, yea, beyond comparison, than correctness of belief in the mysteries of dogma. As said before, it matters much whether Belief or Righteousness is put foremost.

The following passages may serve to remind the reader of this difference between the first and last Gospels. Let him weigh them carefully in pairs, and judge for himself which set contains most solid metal.

FIRST GOSPEL. Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God.

Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in nowise enter into the kingdom of heaven.

FOURTH Gospel.

He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.

Except a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Not every one that saith

That whosoever be

unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter lieveth on him (the Son) should

into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Woe unto you, for ye have left undone the weightier matters of the law, Justice, Mercy, and Faith.

Every one therefore which heareth these words of mine, and doeth them, shall be likened unto a wise man, which built his house upon the rock.

If ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

After this manner therefore pray ye Our Father which art in heaven.

not perish, but have eternal life.

If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin but now they have no excuse for their sin. He that hateth me hateth my Father also.

He that heareth my word, and believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life.

Except ye believe that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

No one cometh unto the Father, but by me.

"To do as you would be done by, and to love your neighbour as yourself, constitute the ideal perfection of utilitarian morality." So Stuart Mill says, and he has discerned the Master in the carpenter of Nazareth, the "sublime genius" who knew how to distil from a whole literature its vital essence, the golden ball which outweighs a vast bulk of dross, "the drop which balances the sea."

These generalizations we find only in the Synoptics: they are the chief evidences of their author's greatness of perception, and show most strikingly the superiority