FOUR REMARKABLE WITNESSES.

Te Aroha News, Volume VII, Issue 470, 10 May 1890, Page 4

FOUR REMARKABLE WITNESSES.

(By Mr Henry Varley.) It has long since been recognised that if the representations made by the four Evangelists concerning our Lord Jesus be false, their action is altogether inexplicable. That a group of men should agree together to deceive their fellows by the creation of an ideal character of surpassing moral excellence, is impossible. Should such a monstrous hypothesis be suggested, we are face to face with the fact that no motive can be assigned for the production of falsehood, and, what is a still greater difficulty, we are driven to the conclusion that the mosb perfect testimony concerning personal character ever delineated is a deliberate imposture. If this be true, we must admit that deception has produced sincerity, unholiness holiness, impurity purity, and a fourfold lie has begotten the impersonation of truth. It is simply impossible to reason with men who thus argue. The position of the Evangelists in relation to the reality of our Lord’s existence, who, to quote John’s words, “we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the word of life,” is a stronghold of conclusive testimony more impregnable than the Rock of Gibraltar is declared to be. THE ATTACK UPON THE STRONGHOLD. The enemies of Christianity have perceived this, and have not hesitated to use every kind of criticism, honest and dishonest, to show discrepancy in the evidence given by these strong and independent witnesses. The conclusion to which their testimony brings may be stated in the following words:—Allowing for the element of individuality in the writers, and that they never intended identical utterance in regard to their testimony, it is true to say that their evidence is absolutely conclusive concerning the life and character of our Lord, the very disparities of which prejudiced critics have made so much capital being amongst the strongest confirmations of their truthfulness. Estimated as a question of judicial trustworthiness, there is nob an unprejudiced lawyer in the land who dare affirm that the differences which are noticeable are necessarily incapable of explanation, or that they detract from, much less destroy, the substantial unity of the witnesses themselves. It has occurred in many cases that witnesses have combined for purposes of deception. Marked precision in reference to circumstances, language, and detail is regarded as one of the sure indications that what is popularly called “cooked evidence ” is being given. SEEMING DISCREPANCIES REFERRED TO. As an illustration, there is a seeming discrepancy concerning the blind men and the blind man of Bethsaida, bub who is prepared to say that the incidents are to be declared identical? Why may there nob have been two occasions upon which our Lord exercised His miraculous power in regard to the blind at Bethsaida? The evangelists do not pretend to give an exhaustive history either of the life or the actions of our Lord. Let it be remembered that three years and a half of His public ministry, teaching, healing, and miracles are compressed into twenty-eight chapters in Matthew’s, sixteen in Mark’s, twentyfour in Luke’s, and twenty one in St. John’s Gospel. THE ARGUMENT OF UNIQUE CHARACTER. There is one remarkable argument which to my mind is simply irresistible, as proving beyond all question that these men “ spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” I refer to the entire absence of personal feeling or opinion on the part of the Evangelists themselves in regard to the subjects of which they write. They are nob in the slightest degree influenced by partisanship on the one hand, or by individual sympathies, preferences, or feeling on the other. Excepting John’s utterance, “That he supposed the world itself could nob contain the books that should be written ” (John xxi., 25), and the beloved physician’s introduction (Luke i., 1-4), I know no single expression either of view or opinion on the part of the Evangelists themselves. There is no denunciation of opponents, neither comment nor 'statement which bears the slightest trace of personal feeling against the enemies of Christ, and, what is still more wonderful, no indication that they either sought to vindicate their Lord, or were in the least degree influenced in their expressions concerning Him by reason of their strong attachment or their remarkable companionship. It is astonishing that greater prominence has not been given to the unique character of this testimony, which, so far as I know, is without precedent or parallel in the whole range of literature.

THE WITNESSES COMPLETELY HIDDEN. The writers had known the Lord Jesus well ; they had been witnesses of His power, His tender grace and love ; they had seen His wonderful miracles, His blameless life, His unselfish character. Lepers had been cleansed by Him, the deaf had their hearing restored, the blind their sight, the dead their life. In truth they knew that to the poor the Gospel had been preached by the holy Son of God. They knew all this, and yet these four men, when their loved Lord was betrayed into the hands of His adversaries, unjustly condemned, and finally crucified as a malefactor, were so completely in subjection to the Holy Spirit that in their whole testimony not a single word occurs which can be cited as the product of personal feeling. No ans"er is evinced, no expression of feeling, sympathy, opposition, blame, or censure, is heard. In a sentence, the question may be asked : The men, the writers of the Gospels, where aro they? And the answer comes: They are completely hidden in the marvellous character of their theme, entirely subject to the great restraint of the Holy Spirit, the heavenly witnesser of Jesus, who had come to put in order those things concerning our Lord, of which the Evangelists had been witnesses. In another sense I may use the expression, and say of their testimony, “We see no man save Jesus only.” I venture to affirm that in the whole range of the world’s biographies this fact stands alone. It is unique in biographic literature. To illustrate my meaning, take, e.g., such a book as Macaulay’s “History of England how continually the brilliant author is to the front, with what warmth of ieeling he defends ! with what vigour of declamation he exposes and opposes ! You rise from the reading of the Gospels affirming, “Herein I see no man, save Jesus, the Christ, the Son of the Lining God.”