cal writers, John is, by far the most distinct, and when, therefore, we find passages omitting, what the other evangelists have written, and particularly obscure to those, who had not read the other evangelists, we may conclude the fact, to which he has either alluded, or which he has omitted, to be previously well known. He nowhere mentions, that Christ was baptized, or at least, that he was baptized by John, or that, at the baptism, the Holy Ghost, in the semblance of a dove, descended upon him, and yet he makes John the baptist, subsequently say, "I knew him not; but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he, which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.. And I saw, and bare record, that this is the Son of God," chap. i. 33, 34. If he is not a wonderfully confused and extraordinary narrator, he here assumes readers, who knew all this from the three first evangelists. Chap. iii. 24. " For John was not yet cast into prison." He here assumes as a fact, which the reader knows from other sources, that John the baptist had been imprisoned, but of which John the evangelist says nothing. This is the more striking, because John the evangelist wrote his gospel not in Judea, where the imprisonment and execution of John the baptist might have been locally known, but at Ephesus, where it could not have been known, except through the information of prior histo rians. Chap. iv. 43, 44. "Now after two days he departed thence, and went into Galilee; for Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath no honour in his own country; then, when he was come into Galilee, the Galileans received him." This would be perfectly obscure, if we did not know from the other evangelists, that Nazareth in Galilee was the place, where Jesus was educated, and from which he was, for that reason, named-that he once came as a Teacher, endowed with the power of miracles, into this his early dwelling place-that he was despised, and even threatened to be thrown headlong from a rock-that he then said what is here stated by John, namely, that a prophet is no where so despised as in his own country-that he abstained from further connection with them, and travelled in other parts of Galilee. He, who knows this from the other gospels, understands the gospel of John, which unites what is known in them, with the account of the journey to Samaria, a narration, peculiar to himself, and which, if he has not read them, renders a narration, (in every other respect, singularly clear,) difficult and unconnected. Chap. xii. 16. The disciples had long had it in remembrance, namely, that the Messiah, coming and riding upon an ass had been predicted in the prophets," and that they had done these things unto him." But John does not repeat what the disciples did, but assumes it, as already known from the other gospels, making, as is usual with him, additions of his own, that the disciples had loosened and brought him the ass, which some had bound upon the road. Chap. xv. 20. "Remember the word that I said unto you;" this implies a reader, who is acquainted with what Jesus had previously told to his disciples, and with the subsequent events; these, however, are not recorded by John, but by the other evangelists. In the history of the resurrection, other examples will be brought forward in illustration of this general observation. From these, however, the mode, or as we now say, the manner of John in narration, becomes easier to be understood. In concurrence with this, he generally omits what the other evangelists have written, and it is thus, that by far the greatest part of the life of Jesus, which we read in them, is wanting in him; we must not, therefore, argue from this omission that there is a contradiction between him, and the other evangelists; but this is a favourite ground with unbelievers; John does not even mention, that Jesus was born, but this, no unbeliever denies. When, however, he has any thing in common with the other evangelists, it is generally in one of these cases: 1. When he is desirous of using the repetition as an introduction to some very important and necessary detail, such for instance, as the history in the sixth chapter, of Jesus feeding five thousand men with five loaves, and of his walking on the sea. These are related by the four evangelists, but the object of John is to relate the valuable discourses connected with the middle of the chapter, and this he could not have done, or have been intelligible, unless he had introduced the previous history which gave rise to the discourses, and here, he as a subsequent writer, adds, and, I may say, improves. But of this hereafter. 2. Another time it seems to be his object to add circumstances, omitted in the other evangelists; as for instance, he relates, in common with them, in his twelfth chapter, the supper at Bethany, the unction of Jesus, and his entrance into Jerusalem, but here there are important additions, especially that of Lazarus, of whom, as I have observed in my introduction, the others had so much reason to be silent, and whose name illustrated his splendid entrance into Jerusalem, chap. xii. 1, 2, 17, 18. nor must we omit the name of Judas Iscariot, (v. 4, 5.) who may here have formed his resolution to betray Jesus from a principle of hatred and envy. In fact, the history of the temper and treason of this unfortunate man, and at the same time, the strongest evidences of Christianity may be more completely and instructively drawn from this evangelist, than other. from any 3. When the other evangelists have been either incomplete, or obscure, he either amplifies, or illustrates; so far at least I may say, and, in truth, I do not like to go further, if I wish to adhere to the doctrine of our church, with respect to the divine inspiration in historical details, and their miraculous infallibility. Assuming, however, the reverse, then I should |