festival of 'l'abernacles in October (John 7, 10), did not return again to Galilee; but spent the time intervening before the festival of Dedication in December, probably in Jerusalem, or, when in danger from the Jews, in the neighbouring villages of Judea; John 8, 59. Luke 10, 38 sq. Had Jesus actually returned to Galilee during this interval, it can hardly be supposed that John, who had hitherto so carefully noted our Lord's return thither after each visit to Jerusalem, would have failed to give some hint of it in this case also, either after c. 8, 59, or after c. 10, 21. But neither John, nor the other Evangelists, afford any such hint. Immediately after the festival of Dedication, Jesus withdrew from the machinations of the Jews beyond Jordan; whence he was recalled to Bethany by the decease of Lazarus; John 10, 40. 11, 7. He then once more retired to Ephraim; and is found again at Bethany six days before the Passover, John 11, 54. 12. 1.

Matthew and Mark contain no allusion at all to the festival of Tabernacles; nor do we find any express mention of it in Luke. Yet Luke 9, 51 is most naturally referred to our Lord's journey at that time; and it implies also that this was his final departure from Galilee; see Note on § 81. Luke and John are therefore here parallel. The circumstances of danger, which had induced Jesus during the summer to retire from Galilee in various directions (see Note on §68), as well as the approach of the time when "he should be received up," are reasons of sufficient weight to account for his having transferred, at this time, the scene of his ministry and labours from the north to Jerusalem and Judea, including excursions to the country on and beyond the Jordan.

In regard to the transactions during the whole interval of time comprised in this Part, Matthew and Mark are silent; except where they relate that our Lord, after his departure from Galilee, approached Jerusalem for the last time through Perea and by way of Jericho, where he was followed by multitudes; Matth. 19, 1. 2. 20, 29. Mark 10, 1. 46. With the transactions recorded by these two Evangelists during this last approach, Luke also has some things parallel; Luke 18, 15-43. The arrival at Bethany is common to the three; and in this they all accord with John; Matth. 21, 1. Mark 11, 1. Luke 19, 29. John 12, 1. 12 sq.

There exists consequently no difficulty in harmonizing Matthew and Mark, and so much of Luke as is parallel to them (18, 15 sq.) with John. But in Luke, from c 9, 51, where Jesus leaves Galilee, to c. 18, 14, where the record again becomes parallel with Matthew and Mark, there is a large body of matter peculiar for the most part to Luke, and relating prima facie to the time subsequent to our Lord's departure from Galilee. How is this portion of Luke's Gospel to be arranged and distributed, in order to harmonize with the narrative of John? The difficulty of course does not exist in the case of those Harmonists, who, like Calvin, Griesbach, and others, attempt to bring together only the first three Evangelists.

Those Harmonists who have likewise included John's Gospel, have hitherto generally, and perhaps universally, assumed a return of our Lord to Galilee after the festival of Tabernacles; and this avowedly in order to provide a place for this portion of Luke's Gospel. But the manner in which it has been arranged, after all, is exceedingly various. Some, as Le Clerc, insert nearly the whole during this supposed journey. Others, as Lightfoot, assign to this journey only what precedes Luke 13, 23; and refer the remainder to our Lord's

Bojourn beyond Jordan. In like manner Schleiermacher, Neander, Olshausen, and others, assume a return to Galilee before the festival of Dedication; but differ greatly in their distribution of this part of Luke.

If now we examine more closely the portion of Luke in question (9, 5118, 14), we perceive, that although an order of time is discoverable in certain parts, yet as a whole it is wanting in exact chronological arrangement. This indeed is admitted, at the present day, by all Harmonists and Commentators. It would seem almost, as if, in this portion peculiar to Luke, that Evangelist after recording many of the earlier transactions of Jesus in Galilee in accordance with Matthew and Mark, had here, upon our Lord's final departure from that province, brought together this new and various matter of his own, relating partly to our Lord's previous ministry in Galilee, partly to this journey, and still more to his subsequent proceedings, until the narrative (in c. 18, 15) again becomes parallel to the accounts of Matthew and Mark. Such, for example, is the incident of the Scribe and of another in Luke 9, 52 sq.-an occurrence of such a nature that we cannot well suppose it to have happened twice, and which Matthew narrates at Capernaum, on the occasion of our Lord's first excursion across the lake; see § 56. The sending forth also the Seventy evidently took place at or near Capernaum, c. 10, 1 sq. see § 80 and Note. The transactions narrated in c. 10, 17—11, 13, have marks of chronological connection; and the scene of them is obviously Jerusalem or its vicinity; see § 8689 and Notes. The healing of a demoniac and the consequent blasphemy of the Scribes and Pharisees in Luke 11, 14. 15. 17 sq. is parallel with the same events in Matthew and Mark, which these two Evangelists describe as having occurred in Galilee; see § 48 and Note. With this passage again Luke 11, 37-54 is immediately connected; see § 51 and Note. The transition to the next chapter (c. 12) is made by a phrase marking proximity of time; § 52 and Note. And, further, the words introducing Luke 13, 1, show that the conversation there given (vv. 1-9) immediately followed.-The remainder of this portion of Luke, c. 13, 10--18, 14 (with the exception of c. 17, 11-19, which obviously connects itself with the journey in c. 9, 51), contains absolutely no definite notation of time or place; nor any thing, indeed, to show that the events happened in the order recorded, or that they did not take place at different times and in different parts of the country. The only passage to which this remark does not perhaps fully apply, is c. 13, 22-35.

For these reasons, like Newcome, I have distributed Luke 9, 51-10, 16, and 11, 14—13, 9, (as also 17, 11-19,) in Parts IV, V, as already specified, among the transactions of our Lord's ministry in Galilee, between his second Passover and his journey to the festival of Tabernacles. The remainder of this whole portion of Luke, viz. c. 10, 17—11, 13, and 13, 10-17, 10, as also 17, 2018, 14, remains to be disposed of in the present Part.

With many leading modern Commentators, I prefer here to follow the narrative of John, and infer that our Lord did not again return to Galilee after the festival of Tabernacles. So Lücke, Tholuck, Hengstenberg, De Wette, Meyer, and others. On this principle, therefore, the present Harmony is constructed. Hence, Luke 10, 17-11, 13 is inserted between the festival of Tabernacles and that of Dedication; see the particulars in the Notes on §§ 86-89.

More difficult is it to assign the proper place for Luke 13, 10-17, 10; the transactions recorded in which all cluster around or follow c. 13, 22, where

Jesus is represented as travelling leisurely through the cities and villages towards Jerusalem. Now this journey cannot have been the same with that in Luke 9, 51 and John 7, 10; because there Jesus went up privately, while here he is accompanied by multitudes, Luke 14, 25. Nor can it have been a later journey from Galilec; for that in Luke 9, 51 was the final one. Nor indeed were the Jews accustomed to go up from the country to Jerusalem at the festival of Dedication; see Note on § 91. Lightfoot Hor. Heb. on John 10, 22. Besides, Luke 13, 22 stands in connection with the warning received by our Lord against Herod, vv. 31-33; which under the attendant circumstances cannot well be regarded as having been given in Galilee, and much less in Jerusalem. But Herod was lord also of Perea; and in that province he had imprisoned and put to death John the Baptist; Joseph. Ant. 18. 5. 2. It would therefore be natural, that our Lord, who had been less known in that region, and who now appeared there followed by multitudes, should receive warning of the danger he was thus incurring. Hence, I have ventured to assign this part of Luke (13, 10-17, 10) to that period of our Lord's life and ministry, which was passed in Perea after the festival of Dedication.

Our Lord first withdrew soon after that festival from the plots of the Jews into Perea, the province beyond Jordan: "He went away again beyond Jordan, into the place where John at first baptized; and there he abode. And many resorted unto him and believed;" John 10, 40-42. How long Jesus remained in that region before he was recalled by the death of Lazarus, can be only matter of conjecture. In that interval Lightfoot places all this part of Luke after c. 13, 22; see Opp. II. p. 39. In this I am unable to accord with that profound scholar; because the language of John does not necessarily imply that our Lord at this time made any journey or circuit in Perea itself. At least, it could not then and there be said of him in any sense, that "he went through their cities and villages, teaching, and journeying towards Jerusalem," Luke 13, 22; for he had just departed from Jerusalem, and was recalled to Bethany by a special message from the sisters of Lazarus, John 11, 3. 7. All this would seem to imply rather, that Jesus remained during this excursion, at least mainly, in the district "where John had baptized;" so that Martha and Mary knew at once where to send for him. It follows also as a natural inference, that this first sojourn beyond Jordan could not well have been a long one, nor probably have occupied more than a few weeks out of the four months intervening between the festival of Dedication and the Passover.

After the raising of Lazarus, Jesus again retired from the machinations of the Jews to "a country near to the wilderness, into a city called Ephraim, and there continued with his disciples;" John 11, 54. The Evangelist John records nothing more of his movements, until he again appears in Bethany six days before the Passover; John 12, 1. But the expression used by John as to his sojourn at Ephraim, (literally: there he passed the time,) does not preclude the idea of excursions from that place, nor of a circuitous route on his return to Bethany and Jerusalem at the Passover. Now Matthew, Mark, and Luke affirm expressly, that on his return Jesus went up to Bethany from Jericho; and the two former narrate, as expressly, that in thus reaching Jericho he had come "into the coasts of Judea by the farther side of Jordan," where great multitudes followed him, and he healed them and taught them, as he was wont; Matth. 19, 1. 2. Mark 10, 1. With all this the language of Luke 13, 22 accords

perfectly: "And he went through the cities and villages, teaching, and journey ing towards Jerusalem;" as does also the mention of the multitudes in Luke 14, 25. With this too accords Luke 13, 31-35, including the warning against Herod and our Lord's reply; as also the touching lamentation over Jerusalem, where Jesus was so soon to suffer. With this accords, further, the fact, that the narrative of Luke subsequent to the portion in question, viz. Luke 18, 15 sq. is parallel with that of Matthew and Mark during the same journey; see §§ 105-109.

After long consideration, therefore, I do not hesitate to refer Luke 13, 22. with the transactions and discourses of which it forms the nucleus, mainly to a journey of our Lord through the populous region of Perea, on his return to Bethany after sojourning in Ephraim. There may also have been excursions from that city to the neighbouring villages of Judea, or even to the Jordan valley. This city Ephraim I hold to be probably identical with Ephron and Ophrah of the Old Testament; and therefore apparently represented by the modern Taiyibeh, situated nearly twenty Roman miles N. N. E. of Jerusalem, and five or six Roman miles N. E. of Bethel, on the borders of the desert which stretches along on the west of the Dead Sea and the Valley of Jordan; see Note on § 93. It occupies a lofty site; and from it one overlooks the adjacent desert, the Jordan with its great valley, and the mountains of Perea beyond, with the Saracenic castle er-Rubŭd, near Ajlûn, in the northern part of Perea, bearing about N. E. Even at the present day the hardy and industrious mountaineers of this place have much intercourse with the valley, and till the rich fields and reap the harvests of Jericho; see Bibl. Res. in Palest. II. p. 121. p. 276. It was therefore quite natural and easy for our Lord, from this point to cross the valley and the Jordan, and then turn his course towards Jericho and Jerusalem; while at the same time he exercised his ministry among the cities and villages along the valley and in the eastern region. Thither, indeed, he not improbably had sent before him the Seventy disciples (see Note on § 80); and some parts of the same district he himself had already visited.

I have therefore inserted the whole of Luke 13, 11-17, 10, after the mention of our Lord's sojourn at Ephraim; as belonging naturally to that period and to this return-journey through Perea. And then it only remained to let Luke 17, 20-18, 14 follow directly afterwards; because there is no mark nor authority for placing it any where else; and because too it immediately precedes, and thus connects with, that portion of Luke which is subsequently parallel to Matthew and Mark. Not that I would by any means assert, that all the events and the discourses of our Lord here given, are recorded by Luke in their exact chronological order; for this portion of his Gospel presents very much the ap pearance of a collection of discourses and transactions in themselves discon nected Yet, as there are no marks nor evidence, internal or external, by which to arrange them differently, it seems hardly advisable, on mere conjecture, to abandon the order in which they have been left to us by Luke himself.

If it be objected, that this arrangement crowds too many incidents and disCourses into this journey through Perea, the reply is not difficult. Matthew and Mark confine their previous narratives chiefly to Galilee; and give comparatively little of what took place later in Perea. Luke, besides recounting the like events in Galilee, has a large amount of matter peculiar to himself, withou any definite notation of time and place; and it is therefore not unnatural to

suppose, that an important portion of it may relate to this last journey. Again, there is room for allowing to this journey in Perea an interval of time, amply sufficient for all these transactions, and indeed many more. If we assume, that our Lord's first sojourn beyond Jordan, his return to Bethany, and the subsequent departure to Ephraim, occupied even two months (which is a large allowance), there still remained nearly two months before the Passover, in which to make excursions from Ephraim, and also traverse leisurely the distance through Perea to Bethany, requiring in itself, at the utmost, not more than five days of travel. If now we compare the transactions thus spread out over these two months (or not improbably over a longer interval), with those recorded during the following six days next before the Passover (see Part VII), we shal. hardly be very strongly impressed with the idea, that too much in proportion is thus allotted to this journey.

§ 83. Jesus had now been absent from Jerusalem a year and six months, since his second Passover.

§§ 86, 87. Our Lord had left the temple, and apparently the city; John 8, 59. The healing of the blind man occurred later; see Note on § 90. While thus absent from the city, and yet in its vicinity, Jesus visits Bethany and is received by Martha and Mary, with whom very probably he may have been earlier acquainted. This visit is placed by Luke in immediate connection with the incident of the lawyer and the parable of the Good Samaritan; which therefore are inserted here. The scene of that parable also implies, that it was spoken in the vicinity of Jerusalem and Bethany.

§ 88. Jesus repeats on this occasion the same model-form of prayer taught in the Sermon on the Mount, § 41. Luke's order is here retained; as there is no evidence by which to assign any other.

§ 89. Luke relates the return of the Seventy in immediate connection with their appointment (Luke 10, 1-16), evidently by anticipation. Their appointment appears to have been one of our Lord's last acts in Galilee; and they went forth, probably into Perea and elsewhere, while he proceeded to Jerusalem; see Note on § 80. Their return to him at or near Jerusalem, is therefore here placed as late as may be, before the festival of Dedication.

§ 90. With the healing of the blind man the discourse in John 10, 1 sq. stands in immediate connection; see c. 9, 40. And in the words of our Lord, John 10, 26, spoken at the festival of Dedication, there is a direct allusion to the figurative representation of the shepherd and his sheep in the same discourse. This implies that the same audience was then present, at least in part; and consequently, that the discourse in question had been delivered not long before. For these reasons the healing of the blind man would seem also to have taken place near the beginning of the festival of Dedication, or at least not long before.

§ 91. The festival of Dedication was instituted by Judas Maccabeus to commemorate the purification of the temple and the renewal of the temple-worship,