ページの画像
PDF
ePub

now enquire; if this be not, perhaps there may be several of

a

the like nature, that are. himself in his ift Epiftle makes mention of St. Mark, as being along with him, and calls him his fon: The Church which is at Babylon, elected together with you, faluteth you, and fo doth Marcus my fon. There can be no juft reafon to question, whether the fame Mark is here intended, who wrote the Gofpel; and if the word Babylon be here taken for Rome, as the Fathers, the papifts in general, and many other among the Proteftants do take it, then the foregoing account receives a very great confirmation, from St. Peter and St. Mark's having been at Rome together. So Jerome and Eufebius make use of this argument for this very purpose. The words of the latter are thefe; " But Peter makes mention of Mark in "his firft Epiftle, which they fay was wrote at Rome, and it "was that which Peter himself meant, when by a strong fi66 gure he makes use of the word Babylon to denote that "city, viz. Rome, in these words, The Church which is at Babylon, chofen together with you, faluteth you, and Mark my fon."

I would only add, that St. Peter

с

If then upon the whole it be reasonable to conclude, that St. Mark wrote his Gofpel at Rome, at the request of the brethren there, from the things which he had heard of St. Peter; we have, I think, an undeniable argument, that this Gospel is not an abstract, or epitome of St. Matthew's. If his Gospel be a collection of what St. Peter had told him, then it is not a bare transcript of St. Matthew: for to say, he took his Gospel from St. Peter's mouth, and transcribed it from St. Matthew's writing, is fomewhat like a contradiction. But besides this, if St. Mark had had St. Matthew's Gospel along

a1 Pet. v. 13.

See Dr. Hammond on 1 Pet. v. 13. and on Rev. xviii. 2.

καὶ συντάξαι φασὶν ἐπ ̓ αὐτῆς Ῥώ μης σημαίνειν τε τῦτ ̓ αὐτὴν τὴν πό λιν τροπικώτερον Βαβυλῶνα προσει πόντα, διὰ τέτων ̓Ασπάζεται ὑμᾶς ἡ ἐν Βαβυλῶνι συνεκλεκτὴ, καὶ Μάρκος ὁ υἱός με. Hift. Eccl. lib. 4 Τῷ δὲ Μάρκς μνημονεύειν τὸν 2. c. 15. Vid. etiam Vales. ad h. Πέτρον ἐν τῇ προτέρα Επιτολῇ, ἣν

Petrus in Epiftola prima fub nomine Babylonis figuraliter Romam fignificans. Hieron. De Vir. Illuftr. in voc. Marc.

P

loc.

with him at Rome, why should the Romans have pressed him so very earnestly to make an epitome of it? Was it too long, and did it contain any things that were tedious or fuperfluous? The truth is, if St. Mark, or any one else, had had St. Matthew's Gospel at Rome, there would have been no need of St. Mark's writing. “If (says the famous Cardinal Bellarmine a) "the Gospel of St. Matthew had been then at Rome in the "hands of any of the Chriftians, when St. Mark wrote there, "he would not have wrote." 99 And one would think they should rather have defired St. Matthew's Gofpel, being wrote by one that was an eye and ear-witness of what he faid. Befides, thofe for whom he wrote, wanted much of the zeal of the primitive Chriftians; nay, and of that zeal, which Eufebius fays they had for the Gospel history, if they did not defire an account of all that our Lord faid, and did. They would hardly defire, and be contented with a lefs full, when they could have a more full and perfect account. I conclude therefore, that St. Matthew's Gofpel was not then at Rome, and confequently that St. Mark did not epitomize, or make any use of it, when he compofed his Gospel.

a Immo fi tunc (fcil. quando Marcus Romæ feriplit) Evange lium Matthæi in manibus fidelium

Romæ fuiffet, credibile eft Marcum feripturum non fuifle. Bellarm, de Matrimon. Sacr. lib. 1. c. 16.

CHAP.

[merged small][ocr errors]

The Second Argument, to prove St. Mark's Gospel not to be an Epitome of St. Matthew's, because his Accounts are generally larger, and contain many more particular Circumstances, than St. Matthew's do. This evidenced by feveral Inftances.

Arg. II. ST. Mark's Gofpel is not an abridgement or epitome of St. Matthew's, because for the most part his accounts are much more large and full, and related with many more particular circumstances, than the fame accounts are by St. Matthew. There is fcarce any one ftory related by both these Evangelifts, in which St. Mark does not add fome confiderable circumstances, which St. Matthew has not; and if this be fo, I think there can be no more convincing evidence, that St. Mark did not defign to epitomize St. Matthew: but if we were to conclude any thing of this nature from comparing them together, the conclusion must be, that St. Matthew in all these parts did defign to abridge St. Mark.

The matter of fact, which I have here afferted, will eafily appear to be true to any one, who reads these two Gospels with this view, and compares them together. To fave the reader the pains, I have collected fome inftances, and set them down in such a manner, that by a bare cafting the eye upon them, the truth of that which I contend for, will fufficiently appear, viz. that St. Mark is generally larger in his accounts than St. Matthew.

A Table

A Table of feveral inftances, in which St. Mark relates his ftories more fully and with more particular circumstances, than St. Matthew.

The Story of the devils caft into the fwine.

St. MATTHEW.

Chap. VIII.

Ver. 28. And when he was come to the other fide, into the country of the Gergefenes, there met him two poffeffed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might país by that way.

29. And behold they cried out, faying, What have we to do with thee, Jefus, thou VOL. III.

St. MARK.

Chap. V.

Ver. 1. And they came over unto the other fide of the fea, into the country of the Gadarenes.

2. And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there met him out of the tombs, a man with an unclean spirit;

3. Who had his dwelling among the tombs, and no man could bind him, no not with chains.

4. Because that he had been often bound with fetters and chains, and the chains had been plucked afunder by him, and the fetters broken in pieces; neither could any man tame him.

5. And always night and day he was in the mountains, and in the tombs, crying and cutting himself with ftones.

6. But when he faw Jefus afar off, he ran and worshipped him;

7. And cried with a loud voice, and faid, What have I to do with thee, Jefus, thou Q

Son

St. MATTHEW.

Chap. VIII.

Son of God? Art thou come hither to torment us, before the time?

30. And there was a good way off from them, an herd of many fwine feeding.

31. So the devils befought him, faying, If thou caft us out, fuffer us to go away into the herd of fwine.

32. And he said unto them, Go; and when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine, and behold the whole herd of fwine ran violently down a steep place into the fea, and perished in the

waters.

33. And they that kept them fled, and went their ways into the city, and told every thing, and what was befallen to the poffeffed of the devils.

St. MARK.

Chap. V.

Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that

thou torment me not.

8. (For he faid unto him, Come out of the man, thou unclean fpirit.)

9. And he asked him, what is thy name? And he anfwered, saying, My name is Legion; for we are many.

10. And he befought him much, that he would not fend them away out of the country.

11. Now there was there nigh unto the mountains, a great herd of fwine feeding.

12. And all the devils be`fought him, saying, Send us into the fwine, that we may enter into them.

13. And forthwith Jefus gave them leave, and the unclean fpirits went out, and entered into the swine, and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they were about two thousand) and were choaked in the fea.

14. And they that fed the fwine fled, and told it in the city and in the country. And they went out to fee what it was that was done.

15. And they come to Je

fus,

« 前へ次へ »