Chapter LXXVIII.—Of the Question Whether There is Any Contradiction Between Matthew and Mark on the One Hand, and John on the Other, in So Far as the Former State that After Two Days Was to Be the Feast of the Passover, and Afterwards Tells Us that He Was in Bethany, While the Latter Gives a Parallel Narrative of What Took Place at Bethany, But Mentions that It Was Six Days Before the Passover.

152. Matthew continues thus: “And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, He said unto His disciples, Ye know that after two days will be the feast of the passover, and the Son of man shall be betrayed to be crucified.”701    Matt. xxvi. 1, 2. [It cannot be determined with certainty how much time is to be included in the phrase “after two days.” Moreover, the difficulty in regard to the time of the Last Supper affects this question, to some extent at least.—R.] This is attested in like manner by the other two,—namely, Mark and Luke,—and that, too, with a thorough harmony on the subject of the order of narration.702    Mark xiv. 1; Luke xxii. 1. They do not, however, introduce the sentence as one spoken by the Lord Himself. They make no statement to that effect. At the same time, Mark, speaking in his own person, does tell us that “after two days was the feast of the passover and of unleavened bread.” And Luke likewise gives this as his own affirmation: “Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the passover;” that is to say, it “drew nigh” in this sense, that it was to take place after two days’ space, as the other two are more apparently at one in expressing it. John, on the other hand, has mentioned in three several places the nearness of this same feast-day. In the two earlier instances the intimation is made when he is engaged in recording certain matters of another tenor. But on the third occasion his narrative appears clearly to deal with those very times, in connection with which the other three evangelists also notice the subject,—that is to say, the times when the Lord’s passion was actually imminent.703    John xi. 55, xii. 1, xiii. 1.

153. But to those who look into the matter without sufficient care, there may seem to be a contradiction involved in the fact that Matthew and Mark, after stating that the passover was to be after two days, have at once informed us how Jesus was in Bethany on that occasion, on which the account of the precious ointment comes before us; whereas John, when he is about to give us the same narrative concerning the ointment, begins by telling us that Jesus came to Bethany six days before the passover.704    John xii. 1. Now, the question is, how the passover could be spoken of by those two evangelists as about to be celebrated two days after, seeing that we find them, immediately after they have made this statement, in company with John, giving us an account of the scene with the ointment in Bethany; while in that connection the last-named writer informs us, that the feast of the passover was to take place six days after. Nevertheless, those who are perplexed by this difficulty simply fail to perceive that Matthew and Mark have brought in their account of the scene which was enacted in Bethany really in the form of a recapitulation, not as if the time of its occurrence was actually subsequent to the [time indicated in the] announcement made by them on the subject of the two days’ space, but as an event which had already taken place at a date when there was still a period of six days preceding the passover. For neither of them has appended his account of what took place at Bethany to his statement regarding the celebration of the passover after two days’ space in any such terms as these: “After these things, when He was in Bethany.” But Matthew’s phrase is this: “Now when Jesus was in Bethany.” And Mark’s version is simply this: “And being in Bethany,” etc.; which is a method of expression that may certainly be taken to refer to a period antecedent to the utterance of what was said two days before the passover. The case, therefore, stands thus: As we gather from the narrative of John, Jesus came to Bethany six days before the passover; there the supper took place, in connection with which we get the account of the precious ointment; leaving this place, He came next to Jerusalem, sitting upon an ass; and thereafter happened those things which they relate to have occurred after this arrival of His in Jerusalem. Consequently, even although the evangelists do not mention the fact, we understand that between the day on which He came to Bethany, and which witnessed the scene with the ointment, and the day to which all these deeds and words which are at present before us belonged, there elapsed a period of four days, so that at this point might come in the day which the two evangelists have defined by their statement as to the celebration of the passover two days after. Further, when Luke says, “Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh,” he does not indeed make any express mention of a two days’ space; but still, the nearness which he has instanced ought to be accepted as made good by this very space of two days. Again, when John makes the statement that “the Jews’ passover was nigh at hand,”705    John xi. 55. he does not intend a two days’ space to be understood thereby, but means that there was a period of six days before the passover. Thus it is that, on recording certain matters immediately after this affirmation, with the intention of specifying what measure of nearness he had in view when he spoke of the passover as nigh at hand, he next proceeds in the following strain: “Then Jesus, six days before the passover, came to Bethany, where Lazarus had died, whom Jesus raised from the dead;706    Ubi fuerat Lazarus mortuus quem suscitavit Jesus. and there they made Him a supper.”707    John xii. 1, 2. This is the incident which Matthew and Mark introduce in the form of a recapitulation, after the statement that after two days would be the passover. In their recapitulation they thus come back upon the day in Bethany, which was yet a six days’ space off from the passover, and give us the account which John also gives of the supper and the ointment. Subsequently to that scene, we are to suppose Him to come to Jerusalem, and then, after the occurrence of the other things recorded, to reach this day, which was still a two days’ space from the passover, and from which these evangelists have made this digression, with the object of giving a recapitulatory notice of the incident with the ointment in Bethany. And after the completion of that narrative, they return once more to the point from which they made the digression; that is to say, they now proceed to record the words spoken by the Lord two days before the passover. For if we remove the notice of the incident at Bethany, which they have introduced as a digression from the literal order, and have given in the form of a recollection and recapitulation inserted at a point subsequent to its actual historical position, and if we then set the narrative in its regular connection, the recital will go on as follows;—according to Matthew, the Lord’s words coming in thus: “Ye know that after two days shall be the feast of the passover, and the Son of man shall be betrayed to be crucified. Then assembled together the chief priests and the elders of the people unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, and consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill Him. But they said, Not on the feast-day, lest there be an uproar among the people. Then one of the twelve, called Judas Scarioth, went unto the chief priests,”708    Matt. xxvi. 2–5, 14, etc. etc. For between the place where it is said, “lest there be an uproar among the people,” and the passage where we read, “then one of the disciples, called Judas, went,” etc., that notice of the scene at Bethany intervenes, which they have introduced by way of recapitulation. Consequently, by leaving it out, we have established such a connection in the narrative as may make our conclusion satisfactory, that there is no contradiction here in the matter of the order of times. Again, if we deal with Mark’s Gospel in like manner, and omit the account of the same supper at Bethany, which he also has brought in as a recapitulation, his narrative will proceed in the following order: “Now after two days was the feast of the passover, and of unleavened bread: and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take Him by craft, and put Him to death. For they said,709    Dicebant enim. Not on the feast-day, lest there be an uproar of the people. And Judas Scariothes, one of the twelve, went unto the chief priests, to betray Him.”710    Mark xiv. 1, 2, 10. Here, again, the incident at Bethany which these evangelists have inserted, by way of recapitulation, is placed between the clause, “lest there be an uproar of the people,” and the verse which we have attached immediately to that, namely, “And Judas Scariothes, one of the twelve.” Luke, on the other hand, has simply omitted the said occurrence at Bethany. This is the explanation which we give in reference to the six days before the passover, which is the space mentioned by John when narrating what took place at Bethany, and in reference to the two days before the passover, which is the period specified by Matthew and Mark when presenting their account, in direct sequence upon the statement thus made, of that same scene in Bethany which has been recorded also by John.711    [This view is rejected by Dr. Robinson in his Harmony, but accepted by many commentators. See Robinson’s Greek Harmony, rev. ed. pp. 236–238.—R.]

CAPUT LXXVIII. Quod commemorant Matthaeus et Marcus ante biduum futurae Paschae, et postea dicunt quod in Bethania fuit, quomodo non repugnet Joanni, qui cum ipsis narrat hoc idem quod factum est in Bethania, et dicit, Ante sex dies Paschae.

152. Sequitur Matthaeus: Et factum est, cum consummasset Jesus sermones hos omnes, dixit discipulis suis: Scitis quia post biduum Pascha fiet, et Filius hominis tradetur ut crucifigatur (Matth. XXVI, 1, 2). Huic attestantur alii duo Marcus et Lucas, ab eodem ordine non recedentes (Marc. XIV, 1, et Luc. XXII, 1). Neque hoc tanquam a Domino dictum insinuant; hoc enim intimare praetermiserunt: ex sua tamen persona et Marcus dicit, Erat autem Pascha et azyma post biduum; et Lucas, Appropinquabat autem dies festus azymorum, qui dicitur Pascha. Sic ergo appropinquabat, ut esset post biduum, sicut alii duo apertius consonant. Joannes vero tribus quidem locis commemoravit ejusdem diei festi propinquitatem, cum alia quaedam duobus superioribus locis narraret: tertio autem loco apparet ejus narratio circa ipsa versari tempora, ubi hoc etiam illi tres intimant, id est impendentis jam dominicae passionis (Joan. XI, 55, XII, 1, et XIII, 1).

153. Sed hoc videri potest parum diligenter intuentibus esse contrarium, quod Matthaeus et Marcus posteaquam dixerunt Pascha post biduum futurum, deinde commemoraverunt quod erat Jesus in Bethania, ubi de unguento illo pretioso dicitur: Joannes autem ante sex dies Paschae dicit Jesum venisse in Bethaniam, de unguento eadem narraturus (Id. XII, 1). Quomodo ergosecundum illos duos, post biduum futurum erat Pascha, cum posteaquam id dixerunt, inveniantur cum Joanne in Bethania illud de unguento quod ipse narrantes, tunc autem ipse dicat post sex dies futurum Pascha? Sed qui ita moventur non intelligunt Matthaeum et Marcum illud quod in Bethania de unguento factum erat recapitulando posuisse, non post illam de biduo praedicationem suam, sed ante jam factum cum adhuc sex dies 1153 essent ad Pascha. Non enim quisquam eorum cum dixisset, post biduum futurum Pascha, sic adjunxit de illo facto in Bethania, ut diceret, Post haec cum esset in Bethania: sed Matthaeus quidem, Cum autem esset, inquit, Jesus in Bethania; Marcus autem, Cum esset Bethaniae: quod utique intelligitur et antequam illa dicerentur quae ante biduum Paschae dicta sunt. Sicut ergo ex Joannis narratione colligitur, ante sex dies Paschae venit in Bethaniam: ibi factum est illud convivium ubi de unguento pretioso fit commemoratio; inde venit Jerosolymam sedens super asellum; deinde postea geruntur ea quae narrant post hunc adventum ejus Jerosolymis gesta. Ex illo ergo die quo venit in Bethaniam atque illud de unguento factum est, usque ad diem quo ista omnia gesta atque dicta sunt, intelligimus, etiam Evangelistis non commemorantibus, consumptum fuisse quatriduum, ut occurreret dies quem ante biduum Paschae duo definierunt. Lucas autem cum ait, Appropinquabat autem dies festus azymorum, non expressit biduum: sed hanc propinquitatem, quam commemoravit, in ipso intervallo bidui debemus accipere. Joannes vero cum dicit, Proximum erat Pascha Judaeorum (Joan. XI, 55), non hoc biduum vult intelligi, sed sex dies ante Pascha. Proinde, cum quaedam post hoc dictum commemorasset, tunc jam volens ostendere quam proximum fuisse Pascha dixisset: Jesus ergo ante sex dies, inquit, Paschae, venit in Bethaniam, ubi fuerat Lazarus mortuus, quem suscitavit Jesus (Id. XII, 1, 2). Fecerunt autem ei caenam ibi. Hoc illud est quod commemorant recapitulantes Matthaeus et Marcus, cum jam dixissent post biduum futurum Pascha. Recapitulando ergo ad illum diem redeunt in Bethaniam, qui erat ante sex dies Paschae, et narrant quod Joannes de coena et unguento: unde venturus erat Jerosolymam, et peractis illic quae narrata sunt, perventurus ad diem qui erat ante biduum Paschae, unde isti digressi sunt, ut recapitulando commemorarent quod ante in Bethania de unguento gestum est; cujus rei peracta narratione, illuc iterum redeunt, unde digressi fuerant, id est, ut jam sermo Domini narretur, quem habuit ante biduum Paschae. Nam si tollamus de medio quod gestum in Bethania digredientes ab ordine recolendo et recapitulando narrarunt, et ipsum ordinem contexamus, ita sermo dirigitur secundum Matthaeum dicente Domino: Scitis quia post biduum Pascha fiet, et Filius hominis tradetur, ut crucifigatur. Tunc congregati sunt principes sacerdotum et seniores populi in atrium principis sacerdotum, qui dicebatur Caiphas, et consilium fecerunt, ut Jesum dolo tenerent et occiderent. Dicebant autem, Non in die festo; ne forte tumultus fieret in populo. Tunc abiit unus de duodecim, qui dicitur Judas Scarioth, ad principes sacerdotum (Matth. XXVI, 2-14), etc. Inter illud enim quod dictum est, Ne tumultus fieret in populo, et illud quod dictum est, Tunc abiit unus de duodecim, qui dicitur Judas, interpositum est illud de Bethania, quod recapitulando dixerunt: quo nos praetermisso contexuimus narrationem, ut insinuaremus non repugnare ordinem temporum. Secundum 1154 Marcum autem, eodem Bethaniae convivio, quod recapitulando et ipse interposuit, similiter praetermisso, ita se ordo narrationis tenet: Erat autem Pascha et azyma post biduum; et quaerebant summi sacerdotes et Scribae quomodo eum dolo tenerent, et occiderent. Dicebant enim, Non in die festo; ne forte tumultus fieret populi. Et Judas Scariothes, unus ex duodecim, abiit ad summos sacerdotes, ut proderet eum (Marc. XIV, 1-10), etc. Etiam hic inter illud quod dictum est, Ne forte tumultus fieret populi, et illud quod adjunximus, Et Judas Scariothes unus ex duodecim, positum est illud de Bethania, quod recapitulando dixerunt. Lucas sane ipsam rem gestam in Bethania praetermisit. Haec diximus propter sex dies ante Pascha, quos dixit Joannes, cum in Bethania rem gestam narraret; et biduum ante Pascha, quod Matthaeus et Marcus dixerunt, cum post hoc a se dictum illud ipsum in Bethania quod Joannes, commemorarent.