CHAPTER III.

[3.1] Luke xxiv. 47.

[3.2] Respecting the name of "Galileans" given to the Christians, see below.

[3.3] Matthew is exclusively Galilean; Luke and the second Mark, xvi. 9-22, are exclusively Jerusalemitish. John unites the two traditions. Paul (I. Cor. xv. 5-8) also admits the occurrence of visions at widely separated places. It is possible that the vision of "the five hundred brethren" of Paul, which we have conjecturally identified with that "of the mountain of Galilee" of Matthew, was a Jerusalemite vision.

[3.4] I. Cor. xv. 7. One cannot explain the silence of the four canonical Evangelists respecting this vision in any other way than by referring it to an epoch placed on this side of the scheme of their recital. The chronological order of the visions, on which St. Paul insists with so much precision, leads to the same result.

[3.5] Gospel of the Hebrews, cited by St. Jerome _De Viris Illustribus_, 2. Compare Luke xxiv. 41-43.

[3.6] Gospel of the Hebrews, cited above.

[3.7] John vii. 5.

[3.8] Could there be an allusion to this abrupt change in Gal. ii. 6?

[3.9] Acts i. 14, weak authority indeed. One already perceives in Luke a tendency to magnify the part of Mary. Luke, chap. i. and ii.

[3.10] John xix. 25, 27.

[3.11] The tradition respecting his sojourn at Ephesus is modern and valueless. See Epiphanius. _Adv. heret._ lxxviii. 11.

[3.12] See _Life of Jesus_.

[3.13] Gospel of the Hebrews, passage cited above.

[3.14] Acts viii. 1; Galat. i. 17-19; ii. 1, et seq.

[3.15] Luke xxiv. 49; _Acts_ i. 4.

[3.16] This idea indeed is not developed until we come to the fourth Gospel (chap. xiv., xv., xvi.). But it is indicated in Matt. iii. 11; Mark i. 8; Luke iii. 16; xii. 11, 12, xxiv. 49.

[3.17] John xx. 22-23.

[3.18] Ibid. xvi. 7.

[3.19] Luke xxiv. 49; _Acts_ i. 4, et seq.

[3.20] Acts i. 5-8.

[3.21] I. Cor. xv. 7; Luke xxiv. 50, et seq.; _Acts_ i. 2, et seq. Certainly it might with propriety be admitted that the vision of Bethany related by Luke was parallel to the vision of the mountain in Matthew xxviii. 16, et seq. transposing the place where it occurred. And yet this vision of Matthew is not followed by the Ascension. In the second conclusion of Mark, the vision with the final instructions, followed by the Ascension, takes place at Jerusalem. Lastly Paul relates the vision "to all the Apostles," as distinct from that seen by "the five hundred brethren."

[3.22] Other traditions referred the conferring of this power to anterior visions. (John xx. 23.)

[3.23] Luke xxiv. 23; Acts xxv. 19.

[3.24] _Acts_ i. 11.

[3.25] I. Cor. xv. 8.

[3.26] Matt. xxviii. 20.

[3.27] John iii. 13; vi. 62; xvi. 7; xx. 77; Ephes. iv. 10; I. Peter iii. 22. Neither Matthew nor John gives the recital of the Ascension. Paul (I. Cor. xv. 7-8) excludes even the very idea.

[3.28] Mark xvi. 19; Luke xxiv. 50-52. _Acts_ 2-12. _Apol._ i. 50. _Ascension of Isaiah_, Ethiopic version, xi. 22; Latin version (Venice, 1522), sub fin.

[3.29] Compare the account of the Transfiguration.

[3.30] Jos. _Antiq._ iv., viii. 58.

[3.31] II. Kings, ii. 11, et seq.

[3.32] Luke, last chapter of the Gospel, and the first chapter of the _Acts_.

[3.33] Luke xxiii. 52.