everlasting life." after me, let him

Matt. xix. 29.

"If

any man will come

deny himself, and take up his cross,* and follow me." Ch. xvi. 24. Ch. xvi. 24. This interruption of the common business of life was quite unnecessary for the introduction of a purer creed of religion and morals. This end might have been effected simply by preaching at each town or synagogue, the hearers being exhorted, as they were by Paul in later times, to continue in the vocations wherewith they had been called. What could Jesus do with crowds of followers, and what motive could he have for encouraging an excitement which must bring so much inconvenience and hazard upon himself, unless he really expected that some extraordinary change in the state of the nation was about to take place?

The exhortations to follow him are too frequent and too general to allow us to suppose that they were intended only for a few select disciples. Multitudes did

*The preceding chapter tends to prove that this is one of those speeches in which the writer has allowed himself to introduce his own knowledge of subsequent events. That Jesus did not really use these words, concerning the taking up of the cross, is inferred from the inconsistency of such predictions with many important parts of his history. But that he said the rest, or something equivalent to it, may be admitted from its agreeing not only with numerous other injunctions of the same kind, but with some of the principal events in his history; for multitudes did follow him, and this was one of the grounds of the accusation which led to his death. It is true, that conclusions arrived at in this manner cannot, in most cases, be considered as more than highly probable conjectures; but it has been already represented to the reader, that the materials remaining for the life of Jesus, do not, in many parts, admit of more than this. Those who have once allowed that there may possibly be an admixture of fiction in the report of the speeches of Jesus, must either renounce the whole as being of too doubtful authority to deserve attention, or endeavour to separate the truth from the fiction by a careful analysis.

follow him, and evidently with his permission and sanction. Matt. ix. 36, xii. 15, xv. 32, xix. 2. But after they had accompanied him for some time, he occasionally found it necessary, from fatigue or from a sense of inconvenience, to avoid them, or to send them away. The expectation of the kingdom was not sufficient to maintain crowds in the deserts; and in the absence or delay of signs from heaven, they must, of necessity, be dismissed. Matt. xiii. 36, xiv. 22.

After he had preached through most of the cities of Galilee, he began to upbraid Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum, because they repented not; and, according to Matthew, it was at that time that he uttered the prayer, "I thank thee, O father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes," xi. 25. Since he had been preaching to these cities to prepare for the kingdom of God, and since in the case of individuals he required some sign of adherence to himself, such as a profession of faith, or following him, it seems probable that by the repentance which he required of the towns, he meant not only the expression of contrition, but a recognition of his authority, and some public demonstration of preparation for the kingdom which he was about to introduce. This would account for the repulsive conduct of the towns of Galilee. The allusion to the ignorance of the "wise and prudent" in the prayer immediately following, seems to be a reproof directed against the men of influence and authority in those towns for their rejection of him." It was quite natural that the magistrates, rulers of synagogues, Pharisees, and other persons of weight, on whom rested the responsibility of preserving order in the province, should share the feelings of the priests at Jerusalem, and, in later times, of Josephus, and be anxious to curb rather than encourage the inclination of the multitude, to look for sudden political innova

tions and changes, whether to be brought about by human or superhuman means. Jesus, coming amongst them with the warning that the kingdom was nigh at hand, resembled too nearly Judas the Galilean, and later innovators, to be looked upon otherwise than with coldness and suspicion; and these pressing political considerations made the chief men in each town, with a few exceptions, disregard that which was superior and more innoxious in the claims of Jesus-the character of moral teacher and prophet. That which is of least interest to us, the political aspect of the proceedings of Jesus, was to them necessarily of most urgent importance.

There is a passage in Luke somewhat at variance with this view of the expectations of Jesus. "And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come; he answered them, and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation. Neither shall they say, Lo here! or lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within (or among) you." Luke xvii. 20, 21. But this passage occurs as the introduction to a discourse which alludes very plainly* to the siege of Jerusalem, and seems, therefore, to be one of those which we must regard as expressing more of the views of the writer's own time than of those of Jesus. By the time of the siege of Jerusalem, it had been seen that the kingdom which Jesus had announced as nigh at hand had not come with that open display which was at first expected; and it was therefore supposed to consist in the gradual and noiseless spread of his doctrine and church. same character, probably, is the passage, "The law and the prophets were until John: since that time (i. e. until the siege of Jerusalem) the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it." Luke xvi. 16.

Of the

* Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together.

66

If, however, the passage just quoted seem to render it doubtful whether Jesus himself expected some approaching national change, when he preached throughout the country that the kingdom of God was nigh,— where can we find evidence more decisive than the testimony of the disciples, who had heard Jesus himself, and consequently were better able to judge what his meaning was than readers who are obliged to gather it from a collection of interpolated fragments? Now Luke says, that when they approached Jerusalem, the disciples 'thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear," xix. 11. That their idea of the kingdom included a national deliverance, is proved by the speech attributed to Cleopas, "we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel," and that supposed to be spoken by the Apostles at the ascension, "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" It is a violent and unwarrantable hypothesis to suppose that the constant attendants upon Jesus had grossly misunderstood him concerning the chief subject of his preaching; one, too, on which they themselves had been sent out by him to preach. We must, therefore, conclude, that up to the time of his arrival at Jerusalem he had authorized them to expect, and did himself expect, in the kingdom of God, an approaching national deliverance.

According to Luke, Jesus spoke a parable to correct the notion that his kingdom should immediately appear. This parable of the nobleman who went into a far country to receive a kingdom, and to return, postpones the coming of the kingdom to a future uncertain date; and it is remarkable that from this time, the discourses alluding to the kingdom of heaven, instead of representing it as nigh at hand, place it after the siege of Jerusalem. At the passover supper Jesus is made to say, "I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God shall come," Luke xxii. 18; and the following verses

X

imply that this would be after his death. In this, and in the other discourses referred to, we perceive, amidst the manifest interpolations of later times, an alteration in the tone of Jesus concerning the kingdom; and coupling this alteration with the lamentation over Jerusalem, "How often would I have gathered thy children together, and ye would not," we are led to conjecture that Jesus himself must have changed his views about the time of his arrival at Jerusalem, so far, at least, as to admit that the national deliverance, of which he had expected to be the instrument, was not to be looked for within any definite period. But although his opinion concerning the date of the kingdom's manifestation might fluctuate, his ideas concerning its nature do not hitherto appear to have materially changed; for the parable, as given by Luke, evidently contains a larger mixture of temporal than of spiritual anticipations, and represents the Messiah under the common notion of a triumphant successor of David. It is said the nobleman's "citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us." The faithful servants are promised the rule over cities; and the contumacious citizens are thus condemned, " But those, mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring them hither, and slay them before me.

John alone makes Jesus say that his kingdom is not of this world, xviii. 36. It has been observed that this Gos

* Since Matthew's version of the parable differs considerably from Luke's, it is probable that both differ from what was originally said by Jesus. I assume Luke's to be the more correct, because the character attributed by him to the king agrees better with the original notion of the Messiah than that given by Matthew, who makes him the judge of all nations; an idea which, it appears from the Acts, became prevalent after the admission of the Gentiles.