GOSPEL. perinanent observance of the Supper is practically derived from Paul couliues the authority lor this item ill the narrative wholly to the AposUe. In regard to the worth of his testimony, it is evi- dent, on the one hand, that the earliness of his account, in comparison with the Gosjiel records, gives it a relative value beyond theirs. This is confirmed by the almost uecessaiy assumption that, even if the peculiar way in which he intro- duces his account (verse 23a) was not intended by him to refer his knowledge of the facts to divine revelation, it was intended to place it on a high plane of authority. On the other hand, the fact that Paul is writing to the disorderly clnuch at t'orinth, and has in mind at this par- ticular jioint in his Epistle their shameful con- duct of the Lord's Supper, might lead Paul to read this purpose into the narrative of the event by way of emphasizing to his readers the con- tinual authority of the 8upper. It would be manifestly imwarranted, however, to hold that such action on Paul's part disposed of the ques- tion, since the portrayal of the Supper by JIark and Matthew as, in the mind of Jesus, a cove- nant between Himself and His disciples, implies an intended permanence in the observance of the event, which practically involves the com- mand, "This do in remembrance of Me," whether it was actually uttered or not. It would seem, llierefore, that whatever difficulties lie in the way of a complete solution of the problem, the foliowing essential facts are clear: That Christ, in a final supper with His disciples, symbolically referred the bread and wine of the meal to His approaching death as a sacrificial act on His part, in their partaking of which symbols they entered into a covenant realization of its benefits and recognition of its obligations. (e) The Keaurrection. — While none of the Gos- pels rec-ord the act itself, they all record the fact of the Resurrection, though in narratives which diller widely from each other. [The concluding verses of the last chapter of Mark (x'i. 9-20) are recognized as a later substitute for the end- ing of the Gospel, and .John xxi. as a probable supplement to the original Gospel.] The most significant divergence is regarding the scene of the chief api>earances of Jesus; Matthew (xxviii. 10-20) and. by implication, Mark (xvi. 7) piac- ing it in Galilee, Luke (xxiv. ) and John (xx.) in .Jerusalem. The minor divergences relate to individualities in the narration of events, in- volved in which are some notable peculiarities, such as Matthew's reference to the aecom])a.ny- ing natural and angelic events (xxviii. 2-4), and the gathering of the eleven at a mountain in Galilee (verses lti-2fl) : Jjuke's story of the two disciples on the way to Emniaus (xxiv. 13-1.5), and his account of .Jesus' final blessing of the disciple band and His ascension from them at Betlinny (verses .50.53): .John's record of the curing of Thomas's doubt (xx. 24-20). Further involved in these individualities of narration are some striking diflieulties of detail, such as the statement by J>uke (xxiv. 9) that the women told their experience at the sepulchre to the eleven and to all the rest, while Mark says that they said nothing to any man (x^'i. S) ; .John's statement that .Jesus forbade Alary to touch Him (xx. 17). while Matthew recounts that the wom- en, including Mary, were allowed to clasp His feet (xxN'iii. 9). Apart from these diversences. however, there manifest themselves the foUow- 61 GOSPEL. ing whole and partial agi'eements : ( 1 ) As to the visit of the women to the sepulchre: All the Synoptists unite in saying that they made their visit early in the morning, tinding the tomb empty and returning to the city with the fact impressed upon their minds (Mark xvi. 2-4, t); Matt. .x.xviii. 2, 3, 5, 6; Luke xxiv. 4-Oa). John confines his account to the experience of Mary Magdalene, but states also on her i«irt an earl.v-morning visit, implying the finding of an empty tomb and the announcement of the fact to Peter and John, who themselves go to the sepul- chre and contirm the stoiy by their personal observation and then return to their homes ( xx. 1-10; cf. Luke xxiv. 12). (2) As to the angelic appearances: All the Synoptists unite in relating a vision of angels at the tomb ( Mark and Jlat- thew one angel, Luke two ) , and a message from the angels, through the omen, to the discijiles, to the effect that Jesus was risen (Mark xvi. 5, G; Matt. x.viii. 2, 3, 5, G; Luke xxiv. 4-6a), JIark and JIatthew adding an announcement that Jesus would meet with His disciples in Galilee (Mark xvi. 7; Matt. x.:viii. 7); Luke, merely a reminder of what Jesus had said to His dis- ciples concerning His death and resurrection while He had been with them in Galilee (xxiv. 6-8). (3) As to the appearances of .Jesus Him- self: (a) Matthew and John unite in relating an appearance to the women after leaving the tomb (Matthew to the group, John to Mary Magdalene). On this occasion a message is given them by .Jesus Himself to His disciples (Matthew, that He would precede them into Galilee; .John, that He would ascend into heaven) (Slatt. xxviii. 10: John xx. 17). (b) Luke and John unite in relating an appearance to certain of His disciples during the evening of this same day. in which .Jesus convinced their unbelief by displaying to them the marks of His Crucifixion ; Ijuke adding the items of the disciples' fear at the ap]>earaiice and the material proof given by Jesus of His bodily existence, together with His instruction of them in the Scriptures' refei-ence to Himself and His word: .John, the items of the appearance being accomplished in spite of closed doors, of Jesus' impartation to them of the Holy Spirit, and His recognition of them as His representatives in the world (Luke xxiv. 36-49: .John XX. 19-23). In our study of the Gospel narratives, however, account must he taken of the definite statement made by Paul in his First Epistle to the Corinthians ( xv. 4-8 ) . where he gives a list of six apjiearances of Jesus — fii-st to Peter, then to the twelve, then to' a company of more than jive hundred disciples, after that to .James, then to all the Ajiostles. adding final- ly the appearance to himself^ This statement, like that regarding the Lord's Siip]>er, has prior- ity over the earliest Gospel account, and is placed by the Apostle on a high plane of reliability of source. In view of these facts, it is significant that its only divergence from the Gospel accounts is by way of supplementation to what they nar- rate. From all this. then, it would seem <iuite possible for .Jesus to have appeared to certain individuals amonc His disciples in .Jerusalem and its neighborhood within eight days after JHs Resurrection; later to have appeared to larger numbers of His followers in Galilee: and finally, before His ascension, to have appeared to the .•postoIie circle in .Jerusalem, leading them out to Bethany, where He was parted from them.
