not known. When the four authentic Gospels were published, and came into general use, all others were quickly disregarded and forgotten.

St. Luke's Gospel is addressed to Theophilus ; but there was a doubt, even in the time of Epiphanius, whether a particular person, or any good Christian in general, be intended by that name. I am inclined to think that Theophilus was a real person, that opinion being more agreeable to the simplicity of the sacred writings.

We have seen that St. Luke was for several years the companion of St. Paul; and many antient writers consider this Gospel as having the sanction of St. Paul (h), in the same manner as St. Mark's had that of St. Peter. Whoever will examine the Evangelist's and the Apostle's account of the Eucharist in their respective original works, will observe a great coincidence of expression (i).

St. Luke seems to have had more learning than any other of the Evangelists, and his language is more varied, copious, and pure. This superiority in style may perhaps be owing to his longer resi dence in Greece, and greater acquaintance with Gentiles

(h) Nam et Lucæ digestum Paulo adscribere solent. Tert. adv. Marc. lib. 4. cap. 5. Lucas, sectator Pauli, quod ab illo predicabatur, in libro condidit. Iren. lib. 3.

cap. I.

(i) Compare Luke, ch. 22. with 1 Cor. ch. II.

Gentiles of good education, than fell to the lot of the writers of the other three Gospels.

This Gospel contains many things which are not found in the other Gospels, among which are the following: the birth of John the Baptist; the Roman census in Judæa; the circumstances attending Christ's birth at Bethlehem; the vision granted to the shepherds; the early testimony of Simeon and Anna; Christ's conversation with the Doctors in the Temple when he was twelve years old; the parables of the good Samaritan, of the Prodigal Son, of Dives and Lazarus, of the wicked Judge, and of the Publican and Pharisee; the miraculous cure of the woman who had been bowed down by illness eighteen years; the cleansing of the ten lepers; and the restoring to life the son of a widow at Nain; the account of Zacchæus and of the penitent thief; and the particulars of the journey to Emmaus. It is very satisfactory that so early a writer as Irenæus has noticed most of these peculiarities; which proves not only that St. Luke's Gospel, but that the other Gospels also, are the same now that they were in the second century.

PART II.

CHAPTER THE FIFTH.

OF ST. JOHN'S GOSPEL.

1. History of St. John.-II. Genuineness of his Gospel.— III. Place of its Publication.—IV. Its Date.-V. Ob

* servations.

I. JOHN

OHN was the son of Zebedee and Salome, and younger brother of James the Great, with whom he was brought up as a fisherman, and with whom he was called to be a disciple and apostle of Christ. John has not recorded the circumstances of his own call; but we learn, from the other three Evangelists (a), that it took place when he and his brother were fishing upon the sea of Galilee, and early in our Saviour's ministry. St. Mark, in enumerating the twelve Apostles, informs us that onr Saviour surnamed these two brothers Boanerges (b),

that

(a) Matt, c. 4. v. 21. Mark, c. 1, v. 19. Luke, c. 5. (b) Mark, c. 3. v. 17.

v. 10.

that is, Sons of Thunder, which title we may understand as a prophetic declaration of the zeal and resolution with which they would hereafter bear testimony to the great truths of the Gospel. James and John, according to the common prejudice of the Jews, considered the Messiah's kingdom as of a teinporal nature, and applied to our Saviour for situations of honour and

dignity in it. St. Mark (c) relates, that this

application was made by the Apostles themselves, and St. Matthew (d), that it was made by their mother for them in their presence; but both Evangelists represent our Saviour's answer as directed to the Apostles. These two brothers incurred the reproof of our Saviour upon another occasion, in which they shewed a similar ignorance of the nature of their Master's kingdom: they desired that they might be allowed to call fire from heaven to consume some Samaritans, who had refused to receive our Saviour, because he was going to Jerusalem: "Christ turned and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of; for the Son of Man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them (e)." John was one of the four Apostles to whom our Lord delivered his pre

(c) Mark, c. 10. v. 35.
(e) Luke, c. 9. v.54.

dictions

(d) Matt. c. 20. v. 20.

dictions relative to the destruction of Jerusalem, and the approaching calamities of the Jewish nation (f). Peter, and James, and John, were chosen to accompany our Saviour upon several occasions, when the other Apostles were not permitted to be present. When Christ restored the daughter of Jairus to life (g), when he was transfigured on the Mount (h), and when he endured his agony in the garden (i), Peter, and James, and John, were his only attendants. Peter and John were entrusted to make preparations for our Saviour's eating the last passover (k); but John had alone the distinction of leaning upon his Master's bosom, and of being called the beloved disciple of the Saviour of Mankind (1). That he was treated by Christ with greater familiarity than the other Apostles, is evident from Peter desiring him to ask Christ who should betray him, when he himself did not dare to propose the question (m). He seems to have been the only Apostle present at the crucifixion,

*

Luke, c. 8. v. 51.

(f) Mark, c. 13. v. 3. (g) Mark, c. 5. v. 37. (h) Matt. c, 17. V. I. & 2. Mark, c. 9. v. 2. Luke, C. 9. v. 28.

(i) Matt. c. 26. v. 36 & 37. Mark, c. 14. v. 32 &.33.

(k) Mark, c. 14. v. 13, Luke, c. 22. v. 8..

(1) John, c. 21. v. 20. C. 13. v. 23.

(m) John, c. 13. v. 24.