C 7 0 Pocket Reference Instant Help for C 7 0

Programmers 1st Edition Joseph Albahari download

https://textbookfull.com/product/c-7-0-pocket-reference-instant-
help-for-c-7-0-programmers-1st-edition-joseph-albahari/

Download more ebook from https://textbookfull.com

We believe these products will be a great fit for you. Click
the link to download now, or visit textbookfull.com
to discover even more!

C 7 0 in a Nutshell The Definitive Reference 7th

Edition Joseph Albahari

https://textbookfull.com/product/c-7-0-in-a-nutshell-the-
definitive-reference-7th-edition-joseph-albahari/

C 7 0 All in One For Dummies 1st Edition John Paul

Mueller

https://textbookfull.com/product/c-7-0-all-in-one-for-
dummies-1st-edition-john-paul-mueller/

C 7 0 All in One For Dummies 1st Edition John Paul

Mueller

https://textbookfull.com/product/c-7-0-all-in-one-for-
dummies-1st-edition-john-paul-mueller-2/

C# 9.0 in a Nutshell: The Definitive Reference 1st

Edition Joseph Albahari

https://textbookfull.com/product/c-9-0-in-a-nutshell-the-
definitive-reference-1st-edition-joseph-albahari/
Building Microservices with NET Core 2 0 Transitioning
Monolithic Architectures Using Microservices with NET
Core 2 0 Using C 7 0 Gaurav Aroraa

https://textbookfull.com/product/building-microservices-with-net-
core-2-0-transitioning-monolithic-architectures-using-
microservices-with-net-core-2-0-using-c-7-0-gaurav-aroraa/

Java 8 Pocket Guide Instant Help for Java Programmers

1st Edition Liguori Robert Liguori Patricia

https://textbookfull.com/product/java-8-pocket-guide-instant-
help-for-java-programmers-1st-edition-liguori-robert-liguori-
patricia/

C# 7 Quick Syntax Reference: A Pocket Guide to the

Language, APIs, and Library Mikael Olsson

https://textbookfull.com/product/c-7-quick-syntax-reference-a-
pocket-guide-to-the-language-apis-and-library-mikael-olsson/

C# 7 Quick Syntax Reference: A Pocket Guide to the

Language, APIs, and Library 2nd Edition Mikael Olsson

https://textbookfull.com/product/c-7-quick-syntax-reference-a-
pocket-guide-to-the-language-apis-and-library-2nd-edition-mikael-
olsson/

The Dead of Winter Three Giordano Bruno Novellas

Giordano Bruno 0 5 0 6 0 7 1st Edition S. J. Parris

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-dead-of-winter-three-
giordano-bruno-novellas-giordano-bruno-0-5-0-6-0-7-1st-edition-s-
j-parris/
C# 7.0 Pocket Reference
Instant Help for C# 7.0
Programmers

Joseph Albahari and Ben Albahari

C# 7.0 Pocket Reference
by Joseph Albahari and Ben Albahari
Copyright © 2017 Joseph Albahari, Ben Albahari

Printed in the United States of America

July 2017: First Edition

Revision History for the First Edition
2017-07-03: First Release
http://oreilly.com/catalog/errata.csp?isbn=9781491988534

978-1-491-98853-4
[M]
 Contents

C# 7.0 Pocket Reference 1

Conventions Used in This Book 2
Using Code Examples 3
O’Reilly Safari 3
How to Contact Us 4
A First C# Program 5
Syntax 8
Type Basics 11
Numeric Types 20
Boolean Type and Operators 28
Strings and Characters 29
Arrays 34
Variables and Parameters 38
Expressions and Operators 46
Null Operators 52
Statements 54
Namespaces 63
Classes 67
Inheritance 82
The object Type 91
Structs 95
Access Modifiers 96
Interfaces 98
Enums 101
Nested Types 104
Generics 105
Delegates 114
Events 120
Lambda Expressions 126
Anonymous Methods 131
try Statements and Exceptions 132
Enumeration and Iterators 140
Nullable Types 146
Extension Methods 151
Anonymous Types 153
Tuples (C# 7) 154
LINQ 156
Dynamic Binding 182
Operator Overloading 191
Attributes 194
Caller Info Attributes 198
Asynchronous Functions 199
Unsafe Code and Pointers 209
Preprocessor Directives 213
XML Documentation 215
Index 219
 C# 7.0 Pocket Reference

C# is a general-purpose, type-safe, object-oriented program‐

ming language. The goal of the language is programmer pro‐
ductivity. To this end, the language balances simplicity, expres‐
siveness, and performance. The C# language is platform-
neutral, but it was written to work well with the Micro‐
soft .NET Framework. C# 7.0 targets .NET Framework 4.6/4.7.

NOTE
The programs and code snippets in this book mirror those
in Chapters 2 through 4 of C# 7.0 in a Nutshell and are all
available as interactive samples in LINQPad. Working
through these samples in conjunction with the book accel‐
erates learning in that you can edit the samples and
instantly see the results without needing to set up projects
and solutions in Visual Studio.
To download the samples, click the Samples tab in LINQ‐
Pad and click “Download more samples.” LINQPad is free
—go to http://www.linqpad.net.

1
Conventions Used in This Book
The following typographical conventions are used in this book:
Italic
Indicates new terms, URLs, email addresses, filenames,
and file extensions.
Constant width
Used for program listings, as well as within paragraphs to
refer to program elements such as variable or function
names, databases, data types, environment variables, state‐
ments, and keywords.
Constant width bold
Shows commands or other text that should be typed liter‐
ally by the user.
Constant width italic
Shows text that should be replaced with user-supplied val‐
ues or by values determined by context.

TIP
This element signifies a tip or suggestion.

NOTE
This element signifies a general note.

WARNING
This element indicates a warning or caution.

2 | C# 7.0 Pocket Reference

Using Code Examples
The programs and code snippets in this book are all available
as interactive samples in LINQPad. To download the samples,
go to http://bit.ly/linqpad_csharp7_samples.
This book is here to help you get your job done. In general, if
example code is offered with this book, you may use it in your
programs and documentation. You do not need to contact us
for permission unless you’re reproducing a significant portion
of the code. For example, writing a program that uses several
chunks of code from this book does not require permission.
Selling or distributing a CD-ROM of examples from O’Reilly
books does require permission. Answering a question by citing
this book and quoting example code does not require permis‐
sion. Incorporating a significant amount of example code from
this book into your product’s documentation does require
permission.
We appreciate, but do not require, attribution. An attribution
usually includes the title, author, publisher, and ISBN. For
example: “C# 7.0 Pocket Reference by Joseph Albahari and Ben
Albahari (O’Reilly). Copyright 2017 Joseph Albahari, Ben
Albahari, 978-1-491-98853-4.”
If you feel your use of code examples falls outside fair use or
the permission given above, feel free to contact us at
permissions@oreilly.com.

Using Code Examples | 3

A First C# Program
Here is a program that multiplies 12 by 30 and prints the result,
360, to the screen. The double forward slash indicates that the
remainder of a line is a comment.
using System; // Importing namespace

class Test // Class declaration

{
static void Main() // Method declaration
{
int x = 12 * 30; // Statement 1
Console.WriteLine (x); // Statement 2
} // End of method
} // End of class

At the heart of this program lie two statements. Statements in

C# execute sequentially and are terminated by a semicolon.
The first statement computes the expression 12 * 30 and stores
the result in a local variable, named x, which is an integer type.
The second statement calls the Console class’s WriteLine
method to print the variable x to a text window on the screen.
A method performs an action in a series of statements, called a
statement block—a pair of braces containing zero or more state‐
ments. We defined a single method named Main.
Writing higher-level functions that call upon lower-level func‐
tions simplifies a program. We can refactor our program with a
reusable method that multiplies an integer by 12, as follows:
using System;

class Test
{
static void Main()
{
Console.WriteLine (FeetToInches (30)); // 360
Console.WriteLine (FeetToInches (100)); // 1200
}

static int FeetToInches (int feet)

{

A First C# Program | 5
 int inches = feet * 12;
return inches;
}
}

A method can receive input data from the caller by specifying

parameters, and output data back to the caller by specifying a
return type. We defined a method called FeetToInches that has
a parameter for inputting feet, and a return type for outputting
inches, both of type int (integer).
The literals 30 and 100 are the arguments passed to the Feet
ToInches method. The Main method in our example has empty
parentheses because it has no parameters, and is void because it
doesn’t return any value to its caller. C# recognizes a method
called Main as signaling the default entry point of execution.
The Main method may optionally return an integer (rather than
void) in order to return a value to the execution environment.
The Main method can also optionally accept an array of strings
as a parameter (that will be populated with any arguments
passed to the executable). For example:
static int Main (string[] args) {...}

NOTE
An array (such as string[]) represents a fixed number of
elements of a particular type (see “Arrays” on page 34).

Methods are one of several kinds of functions in C#. Another

kind of function we used was the * operator, which performs
multiplication. There are also constructors, properties, events,
indexers, and finalizers.
In our example, the two methods are grouped into a class. A
class groups function members and data members to form an
object-oriented building block. The Console class groups mem‐
bers that handle command-line input/output functionality,
such as the WriteLine method. Our Test class groups two

6 | C# 7.0 Pocket Reference

methods—the Main method and the FeetToInches method. A
class is a kind of type, which we will examine in “Type Basics”
on page 11.
At the outermost level of a program, types are organized into
namespaces. The using directive makes the System namespace
available to our application to use the Console class. We could
define all our classes within the TestPrograms namespace as fol‐
lows:
using System;

namespace TestPrograms
{
class Test {...}
class Test2 {...}
}

The .NET Framework is organized into nested namespaces. For

example, this is the namespace that contains types for handling
text:
using System.Text;

The using directive is there for convenience; you can also refer
to a type by its fully qualified name, which is the type name
prefixed with its namespace, such as System.Text.String
Builder.

Compilation
The C# compiler compiles source code, specified as a set of files
with the .cs extension, into an assembly. An assembly is the unit
of packaging and deployment in .NET. An assembly can be
either an application or a library. A normal console or Win‐
dows application has a Main method and is an .exe file. A
library is a .dll and is equivalent to an .exe without an entry
point. Its purpose is to be called upon (referenced) by an appli‐
cation or by other libraries. The .NET Framework is a set of
libraries.

A First C# Program | 7
The name of the C# compiler is csc.exe. You can use either an
IDE such as Visual Studio to compile, or call csc manually
from the command line. To compile manually, first save a pro‐
gram to a file such as MyFirstProgram.cs, and then go to the
command line and invoke csc (located in %Program‐
Files(X86)%\msbuild\14.0\bin as follows:
csc MyFirstProgram.cs

This produces an application named MyFirstProgram.exe.

To produce a library (.dll), do the following:
csc /target:library MyFirstProgram.cs

WARNING
Peculiarly, .NET Framework 4.6 and 4.7 ship with the C# 5
compiler. To obtain the C# 7 command-line compiler, you
must install Visual Studio 2017 or MSBuild 15.

Syntax
C# syntax is inspired by C and C++ syntax. In this section, we
will describe C#’s elements of syntax, using the following
program:
using System;

class Test
{
static void Main()
{
int x = 12 * 30;
Console.WriteLine (x);
}
}

8 | C# 7.0 Pocket Reference

Identifiers and Keywords
Identifiers are names that programmers choose for their classes,
methods, variables, and so on. These are the identifiers in our
example program, in the order in which they appear:
System Test Main x Console WriteLine

An identifier must be a whole word, essentially made up of

Unicode characters starting with a letter or underscore. C#
identifiers are case-sensitive. By convention, parameters, local
variables, and private fields should be in camel case (e.g.,
myVariable), and all other identifiers should be in Pascal case
(e.g., MyMethod).
Keywords are names that mean something special to the com‐
piler. These are the keywords in our example program:
using class static void int

Most keywords are reserved, which means that you can’t use
them as identifiers. Here is the full list of C# reserved key‐
words:

abstract double interface ref ulong

as else internal return unchecked
base enum is sbyte unsafe
bool event lock sealed ushort
break explicit long short using
byte extern namespace sizeof virtual
case false new stackalloc void
catch finally null static while
char fixed object string
checked float operator struct
class for out switch
const foreach override this
continue goto params throw
decimal if private true
default implicit protected try
delegate in public typeof
do int readonly uint

Syntax | 9
Avoiding conflicts
If you really want to use an identifier that clashes with a
reserved keyword, you can do so by qualifying it with the @ pre‐
fix. For instance:
class class {...} // Illegal
class @class {...} // Legal

The @ symbol doesn’t form part of the identifier itself. So

@myVariable is the same as myVariable.

Contextual keywords
Some keywords are contextual, meaning they can also be used
as identifiers—without an @ symbol. These are:

add equals join select

ascending from let set
async get nameof value
await global on var
by group orderby when
descending in partial where
dynamic into remove yield

With contextual keywords, ambiguity cannot arise within the

context in which they are used.

Literals, Punctuators, and Operators

Literals are primitive pieces of data lexically embedded into the
program. The literals in our example program are 12 and 30.
Punctuators help demarcate the structure of the program. The
punctuators in our program are {, }, and ;.
The braces group multiple statements into a statement block.
The semicolon terminates a (nonblock) statement. Statements
can wrap multiple lines:
Console.WriteLine
(1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10);

10 | C# 7.0 Pocket Reference

An operator transforms and combines expressions. Most opera‐
tors in C# are denoted with a symbol, such as the multiplica‐
tion operator, *. The operators in our program are:
. () * =

A period denotes a member of something (or a decimal point

with numeric literals). The parentheses, in our example, appear
where we declare or call a method; empty parentheses mean
that the method accepts no arguments. The equals sign per‐
forms assignment (the double equals, ==, performs equality
comparison).

Comments
C# offers two different styles of source code documentation:
single-line comments and multiline comments. A single-line
comment begins with a double forward slash and continues
until the end of the current line. For example:
int x = 3; // Comment about assigning 3 to x

A multiline comment begins with /* and ends with */. For

example:
int x = 3; /* This is a comment that
spans two lines */

Comments may embed XML documentation tags (see “XML

Documentation” on page 215).

Type Basics
A type defines the blueprint for a value. In our example, we
used two literals of type int with the values 12 and 30. We also
declared a variable of type int whose name was x.
A variable denotes a storage location that can contain different
values over time. In contrast, a constant always represents the
same value (more on this later).

Type Basics | 11
All values in C# are an instance of a specific type. The meaning
of a value, and the set of possible values a variable can have, is
determined by its type.

Predefined Type Examples

Predefined types (also called built-in types) are types that are
specially supported by the compiler. The int type is a prede‐
fined type for representing the set of integers that fit into 32
bits of memory, from −231 to 231−1. We can perform functions
such as arithmetic with instances of the int type as follows:
int x = 12 * 30;

Another predefined C# type is string. The string type repre‐

sents a sequence of characters, such as “.NET” or “http://
oreilly.com”. We can work with strings by calling functions on
them as follows:
string message = "Hello world";
string upperMessage = message.ToUpper();
Console.WriteLine (upperMessage); // HELLO WORLD

int x = 2015;
message = message + x.ToString();
Console.WriteLine (message); // Hello world2015

The predefined bool type has exactly two possible values: true
and false. The bool type is commonly used to conditionally
branch execution flow with an if statement. For example:
bool simpleVar = false;
if (simpleVar)
Console.WriteLine ("This will not print");

int x = 5000;
bool lessThanAMile = x < 5280;
if (lessThanAMile)
Console.WriteLine ("This will print");

12 | C# 7.0 Pocket Reference

 NOTE
The System namespace in the .NET Framework contains
many important types that are not predefined by C# (e.g.,
DateTime).

Custom Type Examples

Just as we can build complex functions from simple functions,
we can build complex types from primitive types. In this exam‐
ple, we will define a custom type named UnitConverter—a
class that serves as a blueprint for unit conversions:
using System;

public class UnitConverter

{
int ratio; // Field

public UnitConverter (int unitRatio) // Constructor

{
ratio = unitRatio;
}

public int Convert (int unit) // Method

{
return unit * ratio;
}
}

class Test
{
static void Main()
{
UnitConverter feetToInches = new UnitConverter(12);
UnitConverter milesToFeet = new UnitConverter(5280);

Console.Write (feetToInches.Convert(30)); // 360

Console.Write (feetToInches.Convert(100)); // 1200
Console.Write (feetToInches.Convert
(milesToFeet.Convert(1))); // 63360
}
}

Type Basics | 13
Members of a type
A type contains data members and function members. The data
member of UnitConverter is the field called ratio. The func‐
tion members of UnitConverter are the Convert method and
the UnitConverter’s constructor.

Symmetry of predefined types and custom types

A beautiful aspect of C# is that predefined types and custom
types have few differences. The predefined int type serves as a
blueprint for integers. It holds data—32 bits—and provides
function members that use that data, such as ToString. Simi‐
larly, our custom UnitConverter type acts as a blueprint for
unit conversions. It holds data—the ratio—and provides func‐
tion members to use that data.

Constructors and instantiation

Data is created by instantiating a type. We can instantiate pre‐
defined types simply by using a literal such as 12 or "Hello
world".
The new operator creates instances of a custom type. We started
our Main method by creating two instances of the UnitCon
verter type. Immediately after the new operator instantiates an
object, the object’s constructor is called to perform initializa‐
tion. A constructor is defined like a method, except that the
method name and return type are reduced to the name of the
enclosing type:
public UnitConverter (int unitRatio) // Constructor
{
ratio = unitRatio;
}

Instance versus static members

The data members and function members that operate on the
instance of the type are called instance members. The Uni
tConverter’s Convert method and the int’s ToString method

14 | C# 7.0 Pocket Reference

are examples of instance members. By default, members are
instance members.
Data members and function members that don’t operate on the
instance of the type, but rather on the type itself, must be
marked as static. The Test.Main and Console.WriteLine
methods are static methods. The Console class is actually a
static class, which means that all of its members are static. You
never actually create instances of a Console—one console is
shared across the entire application.
Let’s contrast instance with static members. In the following
code, the instance field Name pertains to an instance of a partic‐
ular Panda, whereas Population pertains to the set of all Panda
instances:
public class Panda
{
public string Name; // Instance field
public static int Population; // Static field

public Panda (string n) // Constructor

{
Name = n; // Assign instance field
Population = Population+1; // Increment static field
}
}

The following code creates two instances of the Panda, prints

their names, and then prints the total population:
Panda p1 = new Panda ("Pan Dee");
Panda p2 = new Panda ("Pan Dah");

Console.WriteLine (p1.Name); // Pan Dee

Console.WriteLine (p2.Name); // Pan Dah

Console.WriteLine (Panda.Population); // 2

The public keyword

The public keyword exposes members to other classes. In this
example, if the Name field in Panda were not marked as public, it
would be private and the Test class could not access it. Mark‐

Type Basics | 15
ing a member public is how a type communicates: “Here is
what I want other types to see—everything else is my own pri‐
vate implementation details.” In object-oriented terms, we say
that the public members encapsulate the private members of
the class.

Conversions
C# can convert between instances of compatible types. A con‐
version always creates a new value from an existing one. Con‐
versions can be either implicit or explicit: implicit conversions
happen automatically, whereas explicit conversions require a
cast. In the following example, we implicitly convert an int to a
long type (which has twice the bitwise capacity of an int) and
explicitly cast an int to a short type (which has half the bitwise
capacity of an int):
int x = 12345; // int is a 32-bit integer
long y = x; // Implicit conversion to 64-bit int
short z = (short)x; // Explicit conversion to 16-bit int

In general, implicit conversions are allowed when the compiler

can guarantee they will always succeed without loss of informa‐
tion. Otherwise, you must perform an explicit cast to convert
between compatible types.

Value Types Versus Reference Types

C# types can be divided into value types and reference types.
Value types comprise most built-in types (specifically, all
numeric types, the char type, and the bool type) as well as cus‐
tom struct and enum types. Reference types comprise all class,
array, delegate, and interface types.
The fundamental difference between value types and reference
types is how they are handled in memory.

16 | C# 7.0 Pocket Reference

Value types
The content of a value type variable or constant is simply a
value. For example, the content of the built-in value type int is
32 bits of data.
You can define a custom value type with the struct keyword
(see Figure 1):
public struct Point { public int X, Y; }

Figure 1. A value type instance in memory

The assignment of a value type instance always copies the

instance. For example:
Point p1 = new Point();
p1.X = 7;

Point p2 = p1; // Assignment causes copy

Console.WriteLine (p1.X); // 7
Console.WriteLine (p2.X); // 7

p1.X = 9; // Change p1.X

Console.WriteLine (p1.X); // 9
Console.WriteLine (p2.X); // 7

Figure 2 shows that p1 and p2 have independent storage.

Figure 2. Assignment copies a value type instance

Type Basics | 17
Reference types
A reference type is more complex than a value type, having two
parts: an object and the reference to that object. The content of a
reference type variable or constant is a reference to an object
that contains the value. Here is the Point type from our previ‐
ous example rewritten as a class (see Figure 3):
public class Point { public int X, Y; }

Figure 3. A reference type instance in memory

Assigning a reference type variable copies the reference, not the

object instance. This allows multiple variables to refer to the
same object—something that is not ordinarily possible with
value types. If we repeat the previous example, but with Point
now a class, an operation via p1 affects p2:
Point p1 = new Point();
p1.X = 7;

Point p2 = p1; // Copies p1 reference

Console.WriteLine (p1.X); // 7
Console.WriteLine (p2.X); // 7

p1.X = 9; // Change p1.X

Console.WriteLine (p1.X); // 9
Console.WriteLine (p2.X); // 9

Figure 4 shows that p1 and p2 are two references that point to

the same object.

18 | C# 7.0 Pocket Reference

Figure 4. Assignment copies a reference

Null
A reference can be assigned the literal null, indicating that the
reference points to no object. Assuming Point is a class:
Point p = null;
Console.WriteLine (p == null); // True

Accessing a member of a null reference generates a runtime

error:
Console.WriteLine (p.X); // NullReferenceException

In contrast, a value type cannot ordinarily have a null value:

struct Point {...}
...
Point p = null; // Compile-time error
int x = null; // Compile-time error

NOTE
C# has a special construct called nullable types for repre‐
senting value type nulls (see “Nullable Types” on page
146).

Predefined Type Taxonomy

The predefined types in C# are:
Value types
• Numeric

Type Basics | 19
 — Signed integer (sbyte, short, int, long)
— Unsigned integer (byte, ushort, uint, ulong)
— Real number (float, double, decimal)

• Logical (bool)
• Character (char)

Reference types
• String (string)
• Object (object)

Predefined types in C# alias .NET Framework types in the Sys

tem namespace. There is only a syntactic difference between
these two statements:
int i = 5;
System.Int32 i = 5;

The set of predefined value types excluding decimal are known

as primitive types in the Common Language Runtime (CLR).
Primitive types are so called because they are supported
directly via instructions in compiled code, which usually trans‐
lates to direct support on the underlying processor.

Numeric Types
C# has the following predefined numeric types:

C# type System type Suffix Size Range

Integral—signed
sbyte SByte 8 bits –27 to 27–1
short Int16 16 bits –215 to 215–1
int Int32 32 bits –231 to 231–1
long Int64 L 64 bits –263 to 263–1

20 | C# 7.0 Pocket Reference

 C# type System type Suffix Size Range
Integral—unsigned
byte Byte 8 bits 0 to 28–1
ushort UInt16 16 bits 0 to 216–1
uint UInt32 U 32 bits 0 to 232–1
ulong UInt64 UL 64 bits 0 to 264–1
Real
float Single F 32 bits ± (~10–45 to 1038)
double Double D 64 bits ± (~10–324 to 10308)
decimal Decimal M 128 bits ± (~10–28 to 1028)

Of the integral types, int and long are first-class citizens and
are favored by both C# and the runtime. The other integral
types are typically used for interoperability or when space effi‐
ciency is paramount.
Of the real number types, float and double are called floating-
point types and are typically used for scientific and graphical
calculations. The decimal type is typically used for financial
calculations, where base-10-accurate arithmetic and high preci‐
sion are required. (Technically, decimal is a floating-point type
too, although it’s not generally referred to as such.)

Numeric Literals
Integral-typed literals can use decimal or hexadecimal notation;
hexadecimal is denoted with the 0x prefix (e.g., 0x7f is equiva‐
lent to 127). From C# 7, you can also use the 0b prefix for
binary literals. Real literals may use decimal or exponential
notation such as 1E06.
From C# 7, underscores may be inserted within a numeric lit‐
eral to improve readability (e.g., 1_000_000).

Numeric Types | 21
Numeric literal type inference
By default, the compiler infers a numeric literal to be either of
type double or an integral type:

• If the literal contains a decimal point or the exponential

symbol (E), it is a double.
• Otherwise, the literal’s type is the first type in this list that
can fit the literal’s value: int, uint, long, and ulong.

For example:
Console.Write ( 1.0.GetType()); // Double (double)
Console.Write ( 1E06.GetType()); // Double (double)
Console.Write ( 1.GetType()); // Int32 (int)
Console.Write (0xF0000000.GetType()); // UInt32 (uint)
Console.Write (0x100000000.GetType()); // Int64 (long)

Numeric suffixes
The numeric suffixes listed in the preceding table explicitly
define the type of a literal:
decimal d = 3.5M; // M = decimal (case-insensitive)

The suffixes U and L are rarely necessary because the uint, long,
and ulong types can nearly always be either inferred or implic‐
itly converted from int:
long i = 5; // Implicit conversion from int to long

The D suffix is technically redundant, in that all literals with a

decimal point are inferred to be double (and you can always
add a decimal point to a numeric literal). The F and M suffixes
are the most useful and are mandatory when you’re specifying
fractional float or decimal literals. Without suffixes, the fol‐
lowing would not compile, because 4.5 would be inferred to be
of type double, which has no implicit conversion to float or
decimal:
float f = 4.5F; // Won't compile without suffix
decimal d = -1.23M; // Won't compile without suffix

22 | C# 7.0 Pocket Reference

Numeric Conversions
Integral to integral conversions
Integral conversions are implicit when the destination type can
represent every possible value of the source type. Otherwise, an
explicit conversion is required. For example:
int x = 12345; // int is a 32-bit integral type
long y = x; // Implicit conversion to 64-bit int
short z = (short)x; // Explicit conversion to 16-bit int

Real to real conversions

A float can be implicitly converted to a double, given that a
double can represent every possible float value. The reverse
conversion must be explicit.
Conversions between decimal and other real types must be
explicit.

Real to integral conversions

Conversions from integral types to real types are implicit,
whereas the reverse must be explicit. Converting from a
floating-point to an integral type truncates any fractional por‐
tion; to perform rounding conversions, use the static Sys
tem.Convert class.
A caveat is that implicitly converting a large integral type to a
floating-point type preserves magnitude but may occasionally
lose precision:
int i1 = 100000001;
float f = i1; // Magnitude preserved, precision lost
int i2 = (int)f; // 100000000

Arithmetic Operators
The arithmetic operators (+, -, *, /, %) are defined for all
numeric types except the 8- and 16-bit integral types. The %
operator evaluates the remainder after division.

Numeric Types | 23
Increment and Decrement Operators
The increment and decrement operators (++, --) increment and
decrement numeric types by 1. The operator can either precede
or follow the variable, depending on whether you want the
variable to be updated before or after the expression is evalu‐
ated. For example:
int x = 0;
Console.WriteLine (x++); // Outputs 0; x is now 1
Console.WriteLine (++x); // Outputs 2; x is now 2
Console.WriteLine (--x); // Outputs 1; x is now 1

Specialized Integral Operations

Division
Division operations on integral types always truncate remain‐
ders (rounding toward zero). Dividing by a variable whose
value is zero generates a runtime error (a DivideByZeroExcep
tion). Dividing by the literal or constant 0 generates a compile-
time error.

Overflow
At runtime, arithmetic operations on integral types can over‐
flow. By default, this happens silently—no exception is thrown
and the result exhibits wraparound behavior, as though the
computation were done on a larger integer type and the extra
significant bits discarded. For example, decrementing the mini‐
mum possible int value results in the maximum possible int
value:
int a = int.MinValue; a--;
Console.WriteLine (a == int.MaxValue); // True

The checked and unchecked operators

The checked operator tells the runtime to generate an Overflo
wException rather than overflowing silently when an integral-
typed expression or statement exceeds the arithmetic limits of
that type. The checked operator affects expressions with the ++,

24 | C# 7.0 Pocket Reference

−−, (unary) −, +, −, *, /, and explicit conversion operators
between integral types.
You can use checked around either an expression or a state‐
ment block. For example:
int a = 1000000, b = 1000000;

int c = checked (a * b); // Checks just the expression

checked // Checks all expressions

{ // in statement block.
c = a * b;
...
}

You can make arithmetic overflow checking the default for all
expressions in a program by compiling with the /checked+
command-line switch (in Visual Studio, go to Advanced Build
Settings). If you then need to disable overflow checking just for
specific expressions or statements, you can do so with the
unchecked operator.

Bitwise operators
C# supports the following bitwise operators:

Operator Meaning Sample expression Result

~ Complement ~0xfU 0xfffffff0U
& And 0xf0 & 0x33 0x30
| Or 0xf0 | 0x33 0xf3
^ Exclusive Or 0xff00 ^ 0x0ff0 0xf0f0
<< Shift left 0x20 << 2 0x80
>> Shift right 0x20 >> 1 0x10

8- and 16-Bit Integral Types

The 8- and 16-bit integral types are byte, sbyte, short, and ush
ort. These types lack their own arithmetic operators, so C#

Numeric Types | 25
implicitly converts them to larger types as required. This can
cause a compilation error when trying to assign the result back
to a small integral type:
short x = 1, y = 1;
short z = x + y; // Compile-time error

In this case, x and y are implicitly converted to int so that the

addition can be performed. This means that the result is also an
int, which cannot be implicitly cast back to a short (because it
could cause loss of data). To make this compile, we must add an
explicit cast:
short z = (short) (x + y); // OK

Special Float and Double Values

Unlike integral types, floating-point types have values that cer‐
tain operations treat specially. These special values are NaN
(Not a Number), +∞, −∞, and −0. The float and double classes
have constants for NaN, +∞, and −∞ (as well as other values
including MaxValue, MinValue, and Epsilon). For example:
Console.Write (double.NegativeInfinity); // -Infinity

Dividing a nonzero number by zero results in an infinite value:

Console.WriteLine ( 1.0 / 0.0); // Infinity
Console.WriteLine (−1.0 / 0.0); // -Infinity
Console.WriteLine ( 1.0 / −0.0); // -Infinity
Console.WriteLine (−1.0 / −0.0); // Infinity

Dividing zero by zero, or subtracting infinity from infinity,

results in a NaN:
Console.Write ( 0.0 / 0.0); // NaN
Console.Write ((1.0 / 0.0) − (1.0 / 0.0)); // NaN

When you use ==, a NaN value is never equal to another value,
even another NaN value. To test whether a value is NaN, you
must use the float.IsNaN or double.IsNaN method:
Console.WriteLine (0.0 / 0.0 == double.NaN); // False
Console.WriteLine (double.IsNaN (0.0 / 0.0)); // True

26 | C# 7.0 Pocket Reference

Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
 23. Antoine Anderledy (Swiss) 1884-1892
24. Luis Martin (Spanish) 1892-1906
25. Francis Xavier Wernz (German) 1906-

The bibliography of Jesuitism is of enormous extent, and it is impracticable to cite more

than a few of the most important works. They are as follows: Institutum Societatis Jesu (7
vols., Avignon, 1830-1838); Orlandini, Historia Societatis Jesu (Antwerp, 1620); Imago
primi saeculi Societatis Jesu (Antwerp, 1640); Nieremberg, Vida de San Ignacio de Loyola
(9 vols., fol., Madrid, 1645-1736); Genelli, Life of St Ignatius of Loyola (London, 1872);
Backer, Bibliothèque des écrivains de la Compagnie de Jésus (7 vols., Paris, 1853-1861);
Crétineau Joly, Histoire de la Compagnie de Jésus (6 vols., Paris, 1844); Guettée, Histoire
des Jésuites (3 vols., Paris, 1858-1859); Wolff, Allgemeine Geschichte der Jesuiten (4
vols., Zürich, 1789-1792); Gioberti, Il Gesuita moderno (Lausanne, 1846); F. Parkman,
Pioneers of France in the New World and The Jesuits in North America (Boston, 1868);
Lettres édifiantes et curieuses, écrites des missions étrangères, avec les Annales de la
propagation de la foi (40 vols., Lyons, 1819-1854); Saint-Priest, Histoire de la chute des
Jésuites au XVIIIe Siècle (Paris, 1844); Ranke, Römische Päpste (3 vols., Berlin, 1838); E.
Taunton, History of the Jesuits in England (London, 1901); Thomas Hughes, S.J., History
of the Society of Jesus in North America (London and New York, 1907); R. G. Thwaites,
Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents (73 vols. Cleveland, 1896-1901). (R. F. L.; E. Tn.)

JESUP, MORRIS KETCHUM (1830-1908), American banker and philanthropist, was

born at Westport, Connecticut, on the 21st of June 1830. In 1842 he went to New York City,
where after some experience in business he established a banking house in 1852. In 1856 he
organized the banking firm of M. K. Jesup & Company, which after two reorganizations became
Cuyler, Morgan & Jesup. He became widely known as a financier, retiring from active business in
1884. He was best known, however, as a munificent patron of scientific research, a large
contributor to the needs of education, and a public-spirited citizen of wide interests, who did
much for the betterment of social conditions in New York. He contributed largely to the funds
for the Arctic expeditions of Commander Robert E. Peary, becoming president of the Peary
Arctic Club in 1899. To the American museum of natural history, in New York City, he gave large
sums in his lifetime and bequeathed $1,000,000. He was president of the New York chamber of
commerce from 1899 until 1907, and was the largest subscriber to its new building. To his
native town he gave a fine public library. He died in New York City on the 22nd of January 1908.
 JESUS CHRIST. To write a summary account of the life of Christ, though always involving
a grave responsibility, was until recent years a comparatively straightforward task; for it was
assumed that all that was needed, or could be offered, was a chronological outline based on a
harmony of the four canonical Gospels. But to-day history is not satisfied by this simple
procedure. Literary criticism has analysed the documents, and has already established some
important results; and many questions are still in debate, the answers to which must affect our
judgment of the historical value of the existing narratives. It seems therefore consonant alike
with prudence and reverence to refrain from attempting to combine afresh into a single picture
the materials derivable from the various documents, and to endeavour instead to describe the
main contents of the sources from which our knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ as an historical
personage is ultimately drawn, and to observe the picture of Him which each writer in turn has
offered to us.

The chief elements of the evidence with which we shall deal are the following:—

1. First, because earliest in point of time, the references to the Lord Jesus Christ in the
earliest Epistles of St Paul.

2. The Gospel according to St Mark.

3. A document, no longer extant, which was partially incorporated into the Gospels of St
Matthew and St Luke.

4. Further information added by St Matthew’s Gospel.

5. Further information added by St Luke’s Gospel.

6. The Gospel according to St John.

With regard to traditional sayings or doings of our Lord, which were only written down at
a later period, it will suffice to say that those which have any claim to be genuine are very
scanty, and that their genuineness has to be tested by their correspondence with the
great bulk of information which is derived from the sources already enumerated. The
fictitious literature of the second and third centuries, known as the Apocryphal Gospels,
offers no direct evidence of any historical value at all: it is chiefly valuable for the contrast
which it presents to the grave simplicity of the canonical Gospels, and as showing how
incapable a later age was of adding anything to the Gospel history which was not palpably
absurd.
 1. Letters of St Paul.—In the order of chronology we must give the first place to the earliest
letters of St Paul. The first piece of Christian literature which has an independent existence and
to which we can fix a date is St Paul’s first Epistle to the Thessalonians. Lightfoot dates it in 52
or 53; Harnack places it five years earlier. We may say, then, that it was written some twenty
years after the Crucifixion. St Paul is not an historian; he is not attempting to describe what
Jesus Christ said or did. He is writing a letter to encourage a little Christian society which he, a
Jew, had founded in a distant Greek city; and he reminds his readers of many things which he
had told them when he was with them. The evidence, to be collected from his epistles generally
must not detain us here, but we may glance for a moment at this one letter, because it contains
what appears to be the first mention of Jesus Christ in the literature of the world. Those who
would get a true history cannot afford to neglect their earliest documents. Now the opening
sentence of this letter is as follows: “Paul and Silvanus and Timothy to the Church of the
Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace to you, and peace.” Three
men with Greek or Latin names are writing to some kind of assembly in a city of Macedonia.
The writers are Jews, to judge by their salutation of “peace,” and by their mention of “God the
Father,” and of the assembly or society as being “in” Him. But what is this new name which is
placed side by side with the Divine Name—“in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ”? An
educated Greek, who knew something (as many at that time did) of the Greek translation of the
ancient Hebrew Scriptures, if he had picked up this letter before he had ever heard the name of
Jesus Christ, would have been deeply interested in these opening words. He would have known
that “Jesus” was the Greek form of Joshua; that “Christ” was the Greek rendering of Messiah, or
Anointed, the title of the great King for whom the Jews were looking; he might further have
remembered that “the Lord” is the expression which the Greek Old Testament constantly uses
instead of the ineffable name of God, which we now call “Jehovah” (q.v.). Who, then, he might
well ask is this Jesus Christ who is lifted to this unexampled height? For it is plain that Jesus
Christ stands in some close relation to “God the Father,” and that on the ground of that relation
a society has been built up, apparently by Jews, in a Greek city far distant from Palestine. He
would learn something as he read on; for the letter makes a passing reference to the
foundation of the society, and to the expansion of its influence in other parts of Greece; to the
conversion of its members from heathenism, and to the consequent sufferings at the hands of
their heathen neighbours. The writers speak of themselves as “apostles,” or messengers, of
Christ; they refer to similar societies “in Christ Jesus,” which they call “churches of God,” in
Judaea, and they say that these also suffer from the Jews there, who had “killed the Lord
Jesus” some time before. But they further speak of Jesus as “raised from the dead,” and they
refer to the belief which they had led the society to entertain, that He would come again “from
heaven to deliver them from the coming wrath.” Moreover, they urge them not to grieve for
certain members of the society who have already died, saying that, “if we believe that Jesus
died and rose again,” we may also be assured that “the dead in Christ will rise” and will live for
ever with Him. Thus the letter assumes that its readers already have considerable knowledge as
to “the Lord Jesus Christ,” and as to His relation to “God the Father,” a knowledge derived from
teaching given in person on a former visit. The purpose of the letter is not to give information
as to the past, but to stimulate its readers to perseverance by giving fresh teaching as to the
future. Historically it is of great value as showing how widely within twenty or twenty-five years
of the Crucifixion a religion which proclaimed developed theological teaching as to “the Lord
Jesus Christ” had spread in the Roman Empire. We may draw a further conclusion from this and
other letters of St Paul before we go on. St Paul’s missionary work must have created a
demand. Those who had heard him and read his letters would want to know more than he had
told them of the earthly life of the Lord Jesus. They would wish to be able to picture Him to
their minds; and especially to understand what could have led to His being put to death by the
Romans at the requisition of the Jews. St Paul had not been one of his personal disciples in
Galilee or Jerusalem; he had no memories to relate of His miracles and teaching. Some written
account of these was an obvious need. And we may be sure that any such narrative concerning
One who was so deeply reverenced would be most carefully scrutinized at a time when many
were still living whose memories went back to the period of Our Lord’s public ministry. One such
narrative we now proceed to describe.

2. St Mark’s Gospel.—The Gospel according to St Mark was written within fifteen years of the
first letter of St Paul to the Thessalonians—i.e. about 65. It seems designed to meet the
requirements of Christians living far away from Palestine. The author was not an eye-witness of
what he relates, but he writes with the firm security of a man who has the best authority
behind him. The characteristics of his work confirm the early belief that St Mark wrote this
Gospel for the Christians of Rome under the guidance of St Peter. It is of the first importance
that we should endeavour to see this book as a whole; to gain the total impression which it
makes on the mind; to look at the picture of Jesus Christ which it offers. That picture must
inevitably be an incomplete representation of Him; it will need to be supplemented by other
pictures which other writers have drawn. But it is important to consider it by itself, as showing
us what impress the Master had made on the memory of one disciple who had been almost
constantly by His side.

The book opens thus: “The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.” This “beginning” is
shown to be itself rooted in the past. Hebrew prophets had foretold that God would send a
“messenger”; that a voice would be heard saying, “Prepare the way of the
Beginning of Lord.” And so, in fact, John came, baptizing in the wilderness and turning the
Christ’s heart of the nation back to God. But John was only a forerunner. He was
Mission. himself a prophet, and his prophecy was this, “He that is stronger than I am
is coming after me.” Then, we read, “Jesus came.” St Mark introduces Him
quite abruptly, just as he had introduced John; for he is writing for those who already know the
outlines of the story. “Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee.” He was baptized by John, and as
He came out of the water He had a vision of the opened heavens and the Holy Spirit, like a
dove, descending upon Him; and He heard a Voice saying, “Thou art My Son, the Beloved: in
Thee I am well pleased.” He then passed away into the wilderness, where He was tempted by
Satan and fed by angels. Then He begins His work; and from the very first we feel that He
fulfils John’s sign: He is strong. His first words are words of strength; “the time is fulfilled”—that
is to say, all the past has been leading up to this great moment; “the kingdom of God is at
hand”—that is to say, all your best hopes are on the point of being fulfilled; “repent, and believe
the Gospel”—that is to say, turn from your sins and accept the tidings which I bring you. It is
but a brief summary of what He must have said; but we feel its strength. He does not hesitate
to fix all eyes upon Himself. Then we see Him call two brothers who are fishermen. “Come after
Me,” He says, “and I will make you fishers of men.” They dropped their nets and went after
Him, and so did two other brothers, their partners; for they all felt the power of this Master of
men: He was strong. He began to teach in the synagogue; they were astonished at His
teaching, for he spoke with authority. He was interrupted by a demoniac, but He quelled the
evil spirit by a word; He was stronger than the power of evil. When the sun set the Sabbath
was at an end, and the people could carry out their sick into the street where He was; and He
came forth and healed them all. The demoniacs showed a strange faculty of recognition, and
cried that He was “the holy one of God,” and “the Christ,” but He silenced them at once. The
next morning He was gone. He had sought a quiet spot for prayer. Peter, one of those
fishermen whom He had called, whose wife’s mother had been healed the day before, found
Him and tried to bring Him back. “All men are seeking Thee,” he pleaded. “Let us go elsewhere”
was the quiet reply of one who could not be moved by popular enthusiasm. Once again, we
observe, He fulfils John’s sign: He is strong. This is our first sight of Jesus Christ. The next
shows us that this great strength is united to a most tender sympathy. To touch a leper was
forbidden, and the offence involved ceremonial defilement. Yet when a leper declared that Jesus
could heal him, if only He would, “He put forth His hand and touched him.” The act perfected
the leper’s faith, and he was healed immediately. But he disobeyed the command to be silent
about the matter, and the result was that Jesus could not openly enter into the town, but
remained outside in the country. It is the first shadow that falls across His path; His power finds
a check in human wilfulness. Presently He is in Capernaum again. He heals a paralysed man,
but not until He has come into touch, as we say, with him also, by reaching his deepest need
and declaring the forgiveness of his sins. This declaration disturbs the rabbis, who regard it as a
blasphemous usurpation of Divine authority. But He claims that “the Son of Man hath authority
on earth to forgive sins.” The title which He thus adopts must be considered later.

We may note, as we pass on, that He has again, in the exercise of His power and His
sympathy, come into conflict with the established religious tradition. This freedom from the
trammels of convention appears yet again when he claims as a new disciple
Attitude a publican, a man whose calling as a tax-gatherer for the Roman government
towards made him odious to every patriotic Jew. Publicans were classed with open
Religious sinners; and when Jesus went to this man’s house and met a company of his
Tradition. fellows the rabbis were scandalized: “Why eateth your Master with publicans
and sinners?” The gentle answer of Jesus showed His sympathy even with
those who opposed Him: “The doctor,” He said, “must go to the sick.” And again, when they
challenged His disciples for not observing the regular fasts, He gently reminded them that they
themselves relaxed the discipline of fasting for a bridegroom’s friends. And He added, in
picturesque and pregnant sayings, that an old garment could not bear a new patch, and that
old wine-skins could not take new wine. Such language was at once gentle and strong; without
condemning the old, it claimed liberty for the new. To what lengths would this liberty go? The
sacred badge of the Jews’ religion, which marked them off from other men all the world over,
was their observance of the Sabbath. It was a national emblem, the test of religion and
patriotism. The rabbis had fenced the Sabbath round with minute commands, lest any Jews
should even seem to work on the Sabbath day. Thus, plucking and rubbing the ears of corn was
counted a form of reaping and threshing. The hungry disciples had so transgressed as they
walked through the fields of ripe corn. Jesus defended them by the example of David, who had
eaten the shewbread, which only priests might eat, and had given it to his hungry men.
Necessity absolves from ritual restrictions. And he went farther, and proclaimed a principle:
“The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath, so that the Son of Man is lord
even of the Sabbath.” For a second time, in justifying His position, He used the expression “the
Son of Man.” The words might sound to Jewish ears merely as a synonym for “man.” For
Himself, and possibly for some others, they involved a reference, as appears later, to the “one
like to a son of man” in Daniel’s prophecy of the coming kingdom. They emphasized His relation
to humanity as a whole, in contrast to such narrower titles as “Son of Abraham” or “Son of
David.” They were fitted to express a wider mission than that of a merely Jewish Messiah: He
stood and spoke for mankind. The controversy was renewed when a man with a withered hand
appeared in the synagogue on the Sabbath, and the rabbis watched to see whether Jesus
would heal him. For the first time, we read that Jesus was angry. They were wilfully blind, and
they would rather not see good done than see it done in a way that contradicted their teachings
and undermined their influence. After a sharp remonstrance, He healed the man by a mere
word. And they went out to make a compact with the followers of the worldly Herod to kill Him,
and so to stave off a religious revolution which might easily have been followed by political
trouble.

Up to this point what have we seen? On the stage of Palestine, an outlying district of the
Roman Empire, the home of the Jewish nation, now subject but still fired with the hope of
freedom and even of universal domination under the leadership of a divinely
Recapitulation. anointed King, a new figure has appeared. His appearance has been
announced by a reforming prophet, who has summoned the nation to return
to its God, and promised that a stronger than himself is to follow. In fulfilment of this promise,
who is it that has come? Not a rough prophet in the desert like John, not a leader striking for
political freedom, not a pretender aiming at the petty throne of the Herods, not even a great
rabbi, building on the patriotic foundation of the Pharisees who had secured the national life by
a new devotion to the ancient law. None of these, but, on the contrary, an unknown figure from
the remote hills of Galilee, standing on the populous shores of its lake, proclaiming as a
message from God that the highest hopes were about to be fulfilled, fastening attention on
Himself by speaking with authority and attaching a few followers to His person, exhibiting
wonderful powers of healing as a sign that He has come to fulfil all needs, manifesting at the
same time an unparalleled sympathy, and setting quietly aside every religious convention which
limited the outflow of this sympathy; and as the result of all this arousing the enthusiasm of
astonished multitudes and evoking the opposition and even the murderous resentment of the
religious guides of the nation. Of His teaching we have heard nothing, except in the occasional
sentences by which He justified some of His unexpected actions. No party is formed, no
programme is announced, no doctrine is formulated; without assuming the title of Messiah, He
offers Himself as the centre of expectation, and seems to invite an unlimited confidence in His
person. This, then, in brief summary, is what we have seen: the natural development of an
historical situation, a march of events leading rapidly to a climax; an unexampled strength and
an unexampled sympathy issuing inevitably in an unexampled liberty; and then the forces of
orthodox religion combining with the forces of worldly indifference in order to suppress a
dangerous innovator. Yet the writer who in a few pages presents us with so remarkable a
representation shows no consciousness at all of artistic treatment. He tells a simple tale in the
plainest words: he never stops to offer a comment or to point a moral. The wonder of it all is
not in the writing, but in the subject itself. We feel that we have here no skilful composition, but
a bare transcript of what occurred. And we feel besides that such a narrative as this is the
worthy commencement of an answer to the question with which its readers would have come
to it: What was the beginning of the Gospel? How did the Lord Jesus speak and act? and why
did He arouse such malignant enmity amongst His own people?

We have followed St Mark’s narrative up to the point at which it became clear that
conciliatory argument could have no effect upon the Jewish religious leaders. The controversy
about the Sabbath had brought their dissatisfaction to a climax. Henceforth Jesus was to them
a revolutionary, who must, by any means, be suppressed. After this decisive breach a new
period opens. Jesus leaves Capernaum, never again, it would seem, to appear in its synagogue.
Henceforward He was to be found, with His disciples, on the shore of the lake, where vast
multitudes gathered round Him, drawn not only from Galilee and Judaea, but also from the
farther districts north and east of these. He would take refuge from the crowds in a boat, which
carried Him from shore to shore; and His healing activity was now at its height. Yet in the midst
of this popular enthusiasm He knew that the time had come to prepare for a very different
future, and accordingly a fresh departure was made when He selected twelve of His disciples for
a more intimate companionship, with a view to a special mission: “He appointed twelve that
they might be with Him, and that He might send them forth to preach and to have power to
cast out the devils.” The excitement and pressure of the crowds was at this time almost
overwhelming, and the relatives of Jesus endeavoured to restrain Him; “for they said, He is
mad.” The scribes from Jerusalem offered a more sinister explanation, saying that He was
possessed by the prince of the devils, and that this was why He was able to control all the evil
spirits. He answered them first in figurative language, speaking of the certain downfall of a
kingdom or a family divided against itself, and of the strong man’s house which could not be
looted unless the strong man were first bound. Then followed the tremendous warning, that to
assign His work to Satan, and so to call good evil, was to blaspheme against the Holy Spirit—
the one sin which admitted of no forgiveness. Presently, when He was told that His mother and
brethren were calling for Him, He disclaimed their interference by pointing to a new circle of
family relationship, consisting of all those who “do the will of God.”

Again we find Him teaching by the lake, and the pressure of the multitude is still so great that
He sits in a boat while they line the shore. For the first time we are allowed to hear how He
taught them. He gives them a parable from nature—the sower’s three kinds of failure,
compensated by the rich produce of the good soil. At the close He utters the pregnant saying:
 “He that hath ears to hear let him hear.” When His disciples afterwards asked
Christ’s for an explanation, He prefaced it by saying that the inner circle only were
Teaching. intended to understand. The disciples might learn that the message would
often prove fruitless, but that nevertheless an abundant harvest would result.
For the light was intended to shine, and the hidden was meant to be revealed. Another parable
compared the kingdom of God to seed which, when once planted, must inevitably germinate;
the process was secret and slow, but the harvest was certain. Again, it was like the tiny
mustard-seed which grew out of all proportion to its original size, till the birds could shelter in
its great branches. These enigmatic speeches were all that the multitudes got, but the disciples
in private were taught their lesson of hope. As we review this teaching it is very remarkable.
The world of common things is seen to be a lesson-book of the kingdom of God to those who
have eyes to read it. What that kingdom is to be we are not told; we are only taught that its
coming is secret, slow and certain. If nature in its ordinary processes was thus seen to be full of
significance, the disciples were also to learn that it was under His control. As the boat from
which He had been teaching passed to the other side, the tired Teacher slept. A sudden storm
terrified the disciples, and they roused Him in alarm. He stilled the storm with a word and
rebuked their want of faith. “Who then is this,” they whispered with awe, “that even the wind
and the sea obey Him?” On the opposite hills a solitary spectator had watched the rise and the
lull of the tempest, a fierce demoniac who dwelt among the tombs on the mountain-side. He
believed himself to be possessed by a regiment of demons. When Jesus bade them go forth, he
begged that they might be allowed to enter into a herd of swine which was hard by. His request
was granted, and the swine rushed over a steep place into the lake. It is worth while to note
that while most of the cures which Jesus had performed appear to have belonged to this class,
this particular case is described as an exceptionally severe one, and the visible effect of the
removal of his tormentors may have greatly helped to restore the man’s shattered personality.

We must not attempt to trace in detail the whole of St Mark’s story. We have followed it long
enough to see its directness and simplicity, to observe the naturalness with which one incident
succeeds another, and to watch the gradual manifestation of a personality at once strong and
sympathetic, wielding extraordinary powers, which are placed wholly at the service of others,
and refusing to be hindered from helping men by the ordinary restrictions of social or religious
custom. And we have seen as the consequence of all this the development of an historical
situation in which the leaders of current orthodoxy ally themselves with the indifferentism which
accepts existing political conditions in order to put down a disturber of the peace. We must now
be content with a broader survey of the course of events.

Two notable cures were wrought on the western side of the lake—the healing of the woman
with the issue and the raising of Jairus’s daughter. In each of these cures prominence is given
to the requirement and the reward of faith—that is to say, of personal
Healing confidence in the Healer: “Thy faith hath made thee whole.” “Fear not, only
Powers. believe.” After this Jesus passed away from the enthusiastic crowds by the
lake to visit His own Nazareth, and to find there a strange incredulity in
regard to one whom the villagers knew as the carpenter. Once more we come across a
mysterious limitation of His powers: “He could not do there any miracle,” save the cure of a few
sick folk; and He marvelled because of their want of faith. The moment had now come when
the twelve disciples were to be entrusted with a share of His healing power and with the
proclamation of repentance. While they are journeying two and two in various directions St
Mark takes occasion to tell us the current conjectures as to who Jesus really was. Some thought
him Elijah or one of the ancient prophets returned to earth—a suggestion based on popular
tradition; others said He was John the Baptist risen from the dead—the superstition of Herod
who had put him to death. When the disciples returned, Jesus took them apart for rest; but the
crowds reassembled when they found Him again near the lake, and His yearning compassion
for these shepherdless sheep led Him to give them an impressive sign that He had indeed come
to supply all human needs. Hitherto His power had gone forth to individuals, but now He fed
five thousand men from the scanty stock of five loaves and two fishes. That night He came to
His disciples walking upon the waters, and in the period which immediately followed there was
once more a great manifestation of healing power.

We have heard nothing for some time of any opposition; but now a fresh conflict arose with
certain scribes who had come down from Jerusalem, and who complained that the disciples
neglected the ceremonial washing of their hands before meals. Jesus replied
Opposition of with a stern rebuke, addressing the questioners as hypocrites, and exposing
the Scribes. the falsity of a system which allowed the breach of fundamental
commandments in order that traditional regulations might be observed. He
then turned from them to the multitude, and uttered a saying which in effect annulled the
Jewish distinction between clean and unclean meats. This was a direct attack on the whole
Pharisaic position. The controversy was plainly irreconcilable, and Jesus withdrew to the north,
actually passing outside the limits of the Holy Land. He desired to remain unknown, and not to
extend His mission to the heathen population, but the extraordinary faith and the modest
importunity of a Syrophenician woman induced Him to heal her daughter. Then He returned by
a circuitous route to the Sea of Galilee. His return was marked by another miraculous feeding of
the multitude, and also by two healing miracles which present unusual features. In both the
patient was withdrawn from the multitude and the cure was wrought with the accompaniment
of symbolic actions. Moreover, in one case Jesus is described as groaning before He spoke; in
the other the cure was at first incomplete; and both of the men were strictly charged to observe
silence afterwards. It cannot be a mere coincidence that these are the last cures which St Mark
records as performed in Galilee.

In fact the Galilean ministry is now closed. Jesus retires northwards to Caesarea Philippi, and
appears henceforth to devote Himself entirely to the instruction of his disciples, who needed to
be prepared for the fatal issue which could not long be delayed. He begins
Messianic by asking them the popular opinion as to His Person. The suggestions are
Teaching. still the same—John the Baptist, or Elijah, or some other of the prophets. But
when He asked their own belief, Peter replied, “Thou art the Christ.” He
warned them not to make this known; and He proceeded to give them the wholly new teaching
that the Son of Man must suffer and be killed, adding that after three days He must rise again.
Peter took Him aside and urged Him not to speak so. But He turned to the other disciples and
openly rebuked Peter. And then, addressing a yet wider circle, He demanded of those who
should follow Him a self-sacrifice like His own. He even used the metaphor of the cross which
was carried by the sufferer to the place of execution. Life, he declared, could only be saved by
voluntary death. He went on to demand an unswerving loyalty to Himself and His teaching in
the face of a threatening world; and then He promised that some of those who were present
should not die before they had seen the coming of the kingdom of God. We have had no hint of
such teaching as this in the whole of the Galilean ministry. Jesus had stood forth as the strong
healer and helper of men; it was bewildering to hear Him speak of dying. He had promised to
fulfil men’s highest expectations, if only they would not doubt His willingness and power. He had
been enthusiastically reverenced by the common people, though suspected and attacked by the
religious leaders. He had spoken of “the will of God” as supreme, and had set aside ceremonial
traditions. He had announced the nearness of the kingdom of God, but had described it only in
parables from nature. He had adopted the vague title of the “Son of Man,” but had refrained
from proclaiming Himself as the expected Messiah. At last the disciples had expressed their
conviction that He was the Christ, and immediately He tells them that He goes to meet
humiliation and death as the necessary steps to a resurrection and a coming of the Son of Man
in the glory of His Father. It was an amazing announcement and He plainly added that their
path like His own lay through death to life. The dark shadows of this picture of the future alone
could impress their minds, but a week later three of them were allowed a momentary vision of
the light which should overcome the darkness. They saw Jesus transfigured in a radiance of
glory: Elijah appeared with Moses, and they talked with Jesus. A cloud came over them, and a
Voice, like that of the Baptism, proclaimed “This is My Son, the Beloved: hear ye Him.” They
were bidden to keep the vision secret till the Son of Man should have risen from the dead. It
was in itself a foretaste of resurrection, and the puzzled disciples remembered that the scribes
declared that before the resurrection Elijah would appear. Their minds were confused as to
what resurrection was meant. Jesus told them that Elijah had in fact come; and He also said
that the Scriptures foretold the sufferings of the Son of Man. But the situation was wholly
beyond their grasp, and the very language of St Mark at this point seems to reflect the
confusion of their minds.

The other disciples, in the meantime, had been vainly endeavouring to cure a peculiarly
violent case of demoniacal possession. Jesus Himself cast out the demon, but not before the
suffering child had been rendered seemingly lifeless by a final assault. Then they journeyed
secretly through Galilee towards Judaea and the eastern side of the Jordan. On the way Jesus
reinforced the new lesson of self-renunciation. He offered the little children as the type of those
to whom the kingdom of God belonged; and He disappointed a young and wealthy aspirant to
His favour, amazing His disciples by saying that the kingdom of God could hardly be entered by
the rich; he who forsook all should have all, and more than all; the world’s estimates were to be
reversed—the first should be last and the last first. They were now journeying towards
Jerusalem, and the prediction of the Passion was repeated. James and John, who had
witnessed the Transfiguration, and who were confident of the coming glory, asked for the places
nearest to their Master, and professed their readiness to share His sufferings. When the other
ten were aggrieved Jesus declared that greatness was measured by service, not by rank; and
that the Son of Man had come not to be served but to serve, and to give His life to ransom
many other lives. As they came up from the Jordan valley and passed through Jericho, an
incident occurred which signalized the beginning of the final period. A blind man appealed to
Jesus as “the Son of David,” and was answered by the restoration of his sight; and when, a little
later, Jesus fulfilled an ancient prophecy by mounting an ass and riding into Jerusalem, the
multitudes snouted their welcome to the returning “kingdom of David.” Hitherto He had not
permitted any public recognition of His Messiahship, but now He entered David’s city in lowly
but significant pomp as David’s promised heir.

Two incidents illustrate the spirit of judgment with which He approached the splendid but
apostate city. On His arrival He had carefully observed the condition of the Temple, and had
retired to sleep outside the city. On the following morning, finding no fruit on
Entry into a fig-tree in full leaf, He said, “Let no man eat fruit of thee henceforth for
Jerusalem. ever.” It was a parable of impending doom. Then, when He entered the
Temple, He swept away with a fiery zeal the merchants and merchandise
which had turned God’s House into “a robbers’ den.” The act was at once an assertion of
commanding authority and an open condemnation of the religious rulers who had permitted the
desecration. Its immediate effect was to make new and powerful enemies; for the chief priests,
as well as their rivals the scribes, were now inflamed against Him. At the moment they could do
nothing, but the next day they formally demanded whence He derived His right so to act. When
they refused to answer His question as to the authority of John the Baptist, He in turn refused
to tell them His own. But He uttered a parable which more than answered them. The owner of
the vineyard, who had sent his servants and last of all his only son, would visit their rejection
and murder on the wicked husbandmen. He added a reminder that the stone which the builders
refused was, after all, the Divine choice. They were restrained from arresting Him by fear of the
people, to whom the meaning of the parable was plain. They therefore sent a joint deputation
of Pharisees and Herodians to entrap Him with a question as to the Roman tribute, in answering
which He must either lose His influence with the people or else lay Himself open to a charge of
treason. When they were baffled, the Sadducees, to whose party the chief priests belonged,
sought in vain to pose Him with a problem as to the resurrection of the dead; and after that a
more honest scribe confessed the truth of His teaching as to the supremacy of love to God and
man over all the sacrificial worship of the Temple, and was told in reply that he was not far from
the kingdom of God. Jesus Himself now put a question as to the teaching of the scribes which
identified the Messiah with “the Son of David”; and then He denounced those scribes whose
pride and extortion and hypocrisy were preparing for them a terrible doom. Before He left the
Temple, never to return, one incident gave Him pure satisfaction. His own teaching that all must
be given for God was illustrated by the devotion of a poor widow who cast into the treasury the
two tiny coins which were all that she had. As He passed out He foretold, in words which
corresponded to the doom of the fig-tree, the utter demolition of the imposing but profitless
Temple; and presently He opened up to four of His disciples a vision of the future, warning
them against false Christs, bidding them expect great sorrows, national and personal, declaring
that the gospel must be proclaimed to all the nations, and that after a great tribulation the Son
of Man should appear, “coming with the clouds of heaven.” The day and the hour none knew,
neither the angels nor the Son, but only the Father: it was the duty of all to watch.

We now come to the final scenes. The passover was approaching, and plots were being laid
for His destruction. He Himself spoke mysteriously of His burial, when a woman poured a vase
of costly ointment upon His head. To some this seemed a wasteful act; but
Final Scenes. He accepted it as a token of the love which gave all that was in its power,
and He promised that it should never cease to illustrate His Gospel. Two of
the disciples were sent into Jerusalem to prepare the Passover meal. During the meal Jesus
declared that He should be betrayed by one of their number. Later in the evening He gave them
bread and wine, proclaiming that these were His body and His blood—the tokens of His giving
Himself to them, and of a new covenant with God through His death. As they withdrew to the
Mount of Olives He foretold their general flight, but promised that when He was risen He would
go before them into Galilee. Peter protested faithfulness unto death, but was told that he would
deny his Master three times that very night. Then coming to a place called Gethsemane, He
bade the disciples wait while He should pray; and taking the three who had been with Him at
the Transfiguration He told them to tarry near Him and to watch. He went forward, and fell on
the ground, praying that “the cup might be taken away” from Him, but resigning Himself to His
Father’s will. Presently Judas arrived with a band of armed men, and greeted his Master with a
kiss—the signal for His arrest. The disciples fled in panic, after one of them had wounded the
high priest’s servant. Only a nameless young man tried to follow, but he too fled when hands
were laid upon him. Before the high priest Jesus was charged, among other accusations, with
threatening to destroy the Temple; but the matter was brought to an issue when He was plainly
asked if He were “the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One.” He answered that He was, and He
predicted that they should see the fulfilment of Daniel’s vision of the Son of Man sitting on the
right hand of power. Thereupon He was condemned to death for manifest blasphemy, and a
scene of cruel mockery followed. Meanwhile Peter in the court below had been sitting with the
servants, and in his anxiety to escape recognition had thrice declared that he did not know
Jesus. Thus the night passed, and in the morning Jesus was taken to Pilate, for the Jewish
council had no power to execute their decree of death. Pilate’s question, “Art Thou the King of
the Jews?” shows the nature of the accusation which was thought likely to tell with the Roman
governor. He had already in bonds one leader of revolution, whose hands were stained with
blood—a striking contrast to the calm and silent figure who stood before him. At this moment a
crowd came up to ask the fulfilment of his annual act of grace, the pardon of a prisoner at the
Passover. Pilate, discerning that it was the envy of the rulers which sought to destroy an
inconvenient rival, offered “the King of the Jews” as the prisoner to be released. But the chief
priests succeeded in making the people ask for Barabbas and demand the crucifixion of Jesus.
Pilate fulfilled his pledge by giving them the man of their choice, and Jesus, whom he had vainly
hoped to release on a satisfactory pretext, he now condemned to the shameful punishments of
scourging and crucifixion; for the cross, as Jesus had foreseen, was the inevitable fate of a
Jewish pretender to sovereignty. The Roman soldiers mocked “the King of the Jews” with a
purple robe and a crown of thorns. As they led Him out they forced the cross, which the
sufferer commonly carried, upon the shoulders of one Simon of Cyrene, whose son’s Alexander
and Rufus are here mentioned—probably as being known to St Mark’s readers; at any rate, it is
interesting to note that, in writing to the Christians at Rome, St Paul a few years earlier had
sent a greeting to “Rufus and his mother.” Over the cross, which stood between two others, was
the condemnatory inscription, “The King of the Jews.” This was the Roman designation of Him
whom the Jewish rulers tauntingly addressed as “the King of Israel.” The same revilers, with a
deeper truth than they knew, summed up the mystery of His life and death when they said, “He
saved others, Himself He cannot save.”

A great darkness shrouded the scene for three hours, and then, in His native Aramaic, Jesus
cried in the words of the Psalm, “My God, My God, why has Thou forsaken Me?” One other cry
He uttered, and the end came, and at that moment the veil of the Temple was rent from top to
bottom—an omen of fearful import to those who had mocked Him, even on the cross, as the
destroyer of the Temple, who in three days should build it anew. The disciples of Jesus do not
appear as spectators of the end, but only a group of women who had ministered to His needs in
Galilee, and had followed Him up to Jerusalem. These women watched His burial, which was
performed by a Jewish councillor, to whom Pilate had granted the body after the centurion had
certified the reality of the unexpectedly early death. The body was placed in a rock-hewn tomb,
and a great stone was rolled against the entrance. Sunset brought on the Jewish sabbath, but
the next evening the women brought spices to anoint the body, and at sunrise on the third day
they arrived at the tomb, and saw that the stone was rolled away. They entered and found a
young man in a white robe, who said, “He is risen, He is not here,” and bade them say to His
disciples and Peter, “He goeth before you into Galilee; there ye shall see Him, as He said unto
you.” In terror they fled from the tomb, “and they said nothing to any man, for they feared....”

So with a broken sentence the narrative ends. The document is imperfect, owing probably to
the accidental loss of its last leaf. In very early times attempts were made to furnish it with a
fitting close; but neither of the supplements which we find in manuscripts can be regarded as
coming from the original writer. If we ask what must, on grounds of literary probability, have
been added before the record was closed, we may content ourselves here with saying that
some incident must certainly have been narrated which should have realized the twice-repeated
promise that Jesus would be seen by His disciples in Galilee.

3. Document used by St Matthew and St Luke.—We pass on now to compare with this
narrative of St Mark another very early document which no longer exists in an independent
form, but which can be partially reconstructed from the portions of it which have been
embodied in the Gospels of St Matthew and St Luke.

When we review St Mark’s narrative as a whole we are struck, first of all, with its directness
and simplicity. It moves straightforward upon a well-defined path. It shows us the Lord Jesus
entering on the mission predicted by the Baptist without declaring Himself to be the Messiah;
attracting the multitudes in Galilee by His healing power and His unbounded sympathy, and at
the same time awakening the envy and suspicion of the leaders of religion; training a few
disciples till they reach the conviction that He is the Christ, and then, but not till then, admitting
them into the secret of His coming sufferings, and preparing them for a mission in which they
also must sacrifice themselves; then journeying to Jerusalem to fulfil the destiny which He
foresaw, accepting the responsibility of the Messianic title, only to be condemned by the
religious authorities as a blasphemer and handed over to the Roman power as a pretender to
the Jewish throne. That is the story in its barest outline. It is adequate to its presumed purpose
of offering to distant Gentile converts a clear account of their Master’s earthly work, and of the
causes which led to His rejection by His own people and to His death by Roman crucifixion. The
writer makes no comment on the wonderful story which he tells. Allusions to Jewish customs
are, indeed, explained as they occur, but apart from this the narrative appears to be a mere
transcript of remembered facts. The actors are never characterized; their actions are simply
noted down; there is no praise and no blame. To this simplicity and directness of narrative we
may in large measure attribute the fact that when two later evangelists desired to give fuller
accounts of our Lord’s life they both made this early book the basis of their work. In those days
there was no sense of unfairness in using up existing materials in order to make a more
complete treatise. Accordingly so much of St Mark’s Gospel has been taken over word for word
in the Gospels of St Luke and St Matthew that, if every copy of it had perished, we could still
reconstruct large portions of it by carefully comparing their narratives. They did not hesitate,
however, to alter St Mark’s language where it seemed to them rough or obscure, for each of
them had a distinctive style of his own, and St Luke was a literary artist of a high order.
Moreover, though they both accepted the general scheme of St Mark’s narrative, each of them
was obliged to omit many incidents in order to find room for other material which was at their
disposal, by which they were able to supplement the deficiencies of the earlier book. The most
conspicuous deficiency was in regard to our Lord’s teaching, of which, as we have seen, St Mark
had given surprisingly little. Here they were happily in a position to make a very important
contribution.

For side by side with St Mark’s Gospel there was current in the earliest times another account
of the doings and sayings of Jesus Christ. Our knowledge of it to-day is entirely derived from a
comparison of the two later evangelists who embodied large portions of it, working it in and out
of the general scheme which they derived from St Mark, according as each of them thought
most appropriate. St Luke appears to have taken it over in sections for the most part without
much modification; but in St Matthew’s Gospel its incidents seldom find an independent place;
the sayings to which they gave rise are often detached from their context and grouped with
sayings of a similar character so as to form considerable discourses, or else they are linked on
to sayings which were uttered on other occasions recorded by St Mark. It is probable that many
passages of St Luke’s Gospel which have no parallel in St Matthew were also derived from this
early source; but this is not easily capable of distinct proof; and, therefore, in order to gain a
secure conception of the document we must confine ourselves at first to those parts of it which
were borrowed by both writers. We shall, however, look to St Luke in the main as preserving for
us the more nearly its original form.

We proceed now to give an outline of the contents of this document. To begin with, it
contained a fuller account of the teaching of John the Baptist. St Mark tells us only his message
of hope; but here we read the severer language with which he called men to repentance. We
hear his warning of “the coming wrath”: his mighty Successor will baptize with fire; the fruitless
tree will be cast into the fire; the chaff will be separated from the wheat and burned with
unquenchable fire; the claim to be children of Abraham will not avail, for God can raise up other
children to Abraham, if it be from the stones of the desert. Next, we have a narrative of the
Temptation, of which St Mark had but recorded the bare fact. It was grounded on the Divine
sonship, which we already know was proclaimed at the Baptism. In a threefold vision Jesus is
invited to enter upon His inheritance at once; to satisfy His own needs, to accept of earthly
dominion, to presume on the Divine protection. The passage stands almost alone as a
revelation of inner conflict in a life which outwardly was marked by unusual calm.

Not far from the beginning of the document there stood a remarkable discourse delivered
among the hills above the lake. It opens with a startling reversal of the common estimates of
happiness and misery. In the light of the coming kingdom it proclaims the
The Sermon on blessedness of the poor, the hungry, the sad and the maligned; and the
the Mount. woefulness of the rich, the full, the merry and the popular. It goes on to
reverse the ordinary maxims of conduct. Enemies are to be loved, helped,
blessed, prayed for. No blow is to be returned; every demand, just or unjust, is to be granted:
in short, “as ye desire that men should do to you, do in like manner to them.” Then the motive
and the model of this conduct are adduced: “Love your enemies ... and ye shall be sons of the
Highest; for He is kind to the thankless and wicked. Be merciful, as your Father is merciful; and
judge not, and ye shall not be judged.” We note in passing that this is the first introduction of
our Lord’s teaching of the fatherhood of God. God is your Father, He says in effect; you will be
His sons if like Him you will refuse to make distinctions, loving without looking for a return, sure
that in the end love will not be wholly lost. Then follow grave warnings—generous towards
others, you must be strict with yourselves; only the good can truly do good; hearers of these
words must be doers also, if they would build on the rock and not on the sand. So, with the
parable of the two builders, the discourse reached its formal close.

It was followed by the entry of Jesus into Capernaum, where He was asked to heal the
servant of a Roman officer. This man’s unusual faith, based on his soldierly sense of discipline,
surprised the Lord, who declared that it had no equal in Israel itself. Somewhat later
messengers arrived from the imprisoned Baptist, who asked if Jesus were indeed “the coming
One” of whom he had spoken. Jesus pointed to His acts of healing the sick, raising the dead
and proclaiming good news for the poor; thereby suggesting to those who could understand
that He fulfilled the ancient prophecy of the Messiah. He then declared the greatness of John in
exalted terms, adding, however, that the least in the kingdom of God was John’s superior. Then
He complained of the unreasonableness of an age which refused John as too austere and
Himself as too lax and as being “the friend of publicans and sinners.” This narrative clearly
presupposes a series of miracles already performed, and also such a conflict with the Pharisees
as we have seen recorded by St Mark. Presently we find an offer of discipleship met by the
warning that “the Son of Man” is a homeless wanderer; and then the stern refusal of a request
for leave to perform a father’s funeral rites.
 Close upon these incidents follows a special mission of disciples, introduced by the saying:
“The harvest is great, but the labourers are few.” The disciples as they journey are to take no
provisions, but to throw themselves on the bounty of their hearers; they are
Other Sayings to heal the sick and to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God. The
of Jesus. city that rejects them shall have a less lenient judgment than Sodom; Tyre
and Sidon shall be better off than cities like Chorazin and Bethsaida which
have seen His miracles; Capernaum, favoured above all, shall sink to the deepest depth. If
words could be sterner than these, they are those which follow: “He that heareth you heareth
Me; and he that rejecteth you rejecteth Me; but He that rejecteth Me rejecteth Him that sent
Me.” This reference to His own personal mission is strikingly expanded in words which He
uttered on the return of the disciples. After thanking the Father for revealing to babes what He
hides from the wise, He continued in mysterious language: “All things are delivered to Me by My
Father; and none knoweth who the Son is but the Father; and who the Father is but the Son,
and he to whom the Son chooseth to reveal Him.” Happy were the disciples in seeing and
hearing what prophets and kings had looked for in vain.

When His disciples, having watched Him at prayer, desired to be taught how to pray, they
were bidden to address God as “Father”; to ask first for the hallowing of the Father’s name, and
the coming of His kingdom; then for their daily food, for the pardon of their sins and for
freedom from temptation. It was the prayer of a family—that the sons might be true to the
Father, and the Father true to the sons; and they were further encouraged by a parable of the
family: “Ask and ye shall receive.... Every one that asketh receiveth”: for the heavenly Father
will do more, not less, than an earthly father would do for his children. After He had cast out a
dumb demon, some said that His power was due to Beelzebub. He accordingly asked them by
whom the Jews themselves cast out demons; and He claimed that His power was a sign that
the kingdom of God was come. But He warned them that demons cast out once might return in
greater force. When they asked for a sign from heaven, He would give them no more than the
sign of Jonah, explaining that the repentant Ninevites should condemn the present generation:
so, too, should the queen of Sheba; for that which they were now rejecting was more than
Jonah and more than Solomon. Yet further warnings were given when a Pharisee invited Him to
his table, and expressed surprise that He did not wash His hands before the meal. The
cleansing of externals and the tithing of garden-produce, He declares, have usurped the place
of judgment and the love of God. Woe is pronounced upon the Pharisees: they are successors
to the murderers of the prophets. Then citing from Genesis and 2 Chronicles, the first and last
books in the order of the Jewish Bible, He declared that all righteous blood from that of Abel to
that of Zachariah should be required of that generation. After this the disciples are encouraged
not to fear their murderous opponents. The very sparrows are God’s care—much more shall
they be; the hairs of their head are all counted. In the end the Son of Man will openly own
those who have owned Him before men. For earthly needs no thought is to be taken: the birds
and the flowers make no provision for their life and beauty. God will give food and raiment to
those who are seeking His kingdom. Earthly goods should be given away in exchange for the
imperishable treasures. Suddenly will the Son of Man come: happy the servant whom His
Master finds at his appointed task. In brief parables the kingdom of God is likened to a
mustard-seed and to leaven. When Jesus is asked if the saved shall be few, He replies that the
door is a narrow one. Then, changing His illustration, He says that many shall seek entrance in
vain; for the master of the house will refuse to recognize them. But while they are excluded, a
multitude from all quarters of the earth shall sit down with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the
prophets in the kingdom of God.

His eyes are now fixed on Jerusalem, where, like the prophets, He must die. “Jerusalem,
Jerusalem, how often have I desired to gather thy children together, as a bird her brood
beneath her wings, but ye refused.” “Ye shall not see Me, until ye shall say, Blessed is He that
cometh in the name of the Lord.” After this we have the healing of a dropsical man on the
Sabbath, with a reply to the murmuring Pharisees; and then a parable of the failure of invited
guests and the filling of their places from the streets. A few fragmentary passages remain, of
which it will be sufficient to cite a word or two to call them to remembrance. There is a warning
that he who forsakes not father and mother cannot be a disciple, nor he who does not bear his
cross. Savourless salt is fit for nothing. The lost sheep is brought home with a special joy. “Ye
cannot serve God and Mammon.” Scandals must arise, but woe to him through whom they
arise. The Son of Man will come with the suddenness of lightning; the days of Noah and the
days of Lot will find a parallel in their blind gaiety and their inevitable disaster. He who seeks to
gain his life will lose it. “One shall be taken, and the other left.” “Where the carcase is, the
vultures will gather.” Then, lastly, we have a parable of the servant who failed to employ the
money entrusted to him; and a promise that the disciples shall sit on twelve thrones to judge
the twelve tribes of Israel. We cannot say by our present method of determination, how this
document closed; for in the narratives of the Passion and the Resurrection St Matthew and St
Luke only coincide in passages which they have taken from St Mark.

Now that we have reconstructed in outline this early account of the Lord Jesus, so far as it
has been used by both the later evangelists, we may attempt to compare the picture which it
presents to us with that which was offered by St Mark. But in doing so we
Comparison must remember that we know it only in fragments. There can be little doubt
with St Mark. that much more of it is embedded in St Luke’s Gospel, and something more
also in St Matthew’s; but in order to stand on firm ground we have
considered thus far only those portions which both of these writers elected to use in composing
their later narratives. To go beyond this is a work of delicate discrimination. It can only be
effected by a close examination of the style and language of the document, which may enable
us in some instances to identify with comparative security certain passages which are found in
St Luke, but which St Matthew did not regard as suitable for his purpose. Among these we may
venture, quite tentatively, to mention the sermon at Nazareth which opened with a passage
from the Book of Isaiah, the raising of the widow’s son at Nain, and the parable of the good
Samaritan. These are found in St Luke, but not in St Matthew. On the other hand, it is not
improbable that the wonderful words which begin, “Come unto Me all ye that labour,” were
drawn by St Matthew from the same document, though they are not recorded by St Luke. But
here we have entered upon a region of less certainty, in which critical scholarship has still much
to do; and these passages are mentioned here only as a reminder that the document must have
contained more than what St Matthew and St Luke each independently determined to borrow
from it. Looking, then, at the portions which we have indicated as having this two-fold
testimony, we see that in their fragmentary condition we cannot trace the clear historical
development which was so conspicuous a feature of St Mark’s Gospel; yet we need not
conclude that in its complete form it failed to present an orderly narrative. Next, we see that
wherever we are able to observe its method of relating an incident, as in the case of the healing
of the centurion’s servant, we have the same characteristics of brevity and simplicity which we
admired in St Mark. No comment is made by the narrator; he tells his tale in the fewest words
and passes on. Again, we note that it supplies just what we feel we most need when we have
reached the end of St Mark’s story, a fuller account of the teaching which Jesus gave to His
disciples and to the people at large. And we see that the substance of that teaching is in
complete harmony with the scattered hints that we found in St Mark. If the fatherhood of God
stands out clearly, we may remember a passage of St Mark also which speaks of “the Heavenly
Father” as forgiving those who forgive. If prayer is encouraged, we may also remember that the
same passage of St Mark records the saying: “All things whatsoever ye pray for and ask, believe
that ye have received them and ye shall have them.” If in one mysterious passage Jesus speaks
of “the Father” and “the Son”—terms with which the Gospel of St John has made us familiar—St
Mark also in one passage uses the same impressive terms—“the Son” and “the Father.” There
are, of course, many other parallels with St Mark, and at some points the two documents seem
to overlap and to relate the same incidents in somewhat different forms. There is the same use
of parables from nature, the same incisiveness of speech and employment of paradox, the same
demand to sacrifice all to Him and for His cause, the same importunate claim made by Him on
the human soul.

But the contrast between the two writers is even more important for our purpose. No one can
read through the passages to which we have pointed without feeling the solemn sternness of
the great Teacher, a sternness which can indeed be traced here and there in
The Element of St Mark, but which does not give its tone to the whole of his picture. Here
Warning. we see Christ standing forth in solitary grandeur, looking with the eyes of
another world on a society which is blindly hastening to its dissolution. It
may be that if this document had come down to us in its entirety, we should have gathered
from it an exaggerated idea of the severity of our Lord’s character. Certain it is that as we read
over these fragments we are somewhat startled by the predominance of the element of
warning, and by the assertion of rules of conduct which seem almost inconsistent with a normal
condition of settled social life. The warning to the nation sounded by the Baptist, that God could
raise up a new family for Abraham, is heard again and again in our Lord’s teaching. Gentile faith
puts Israel to shame. The sons of the kingdom will be left outside, while strangers feast with
Abraham. Capernaum shall go to perdition; Jerusalem shall be a desolate ruin. The doom of the
nation is pronounced; its fate is imminent; there is no ray of hope for the existing constitution
of religion and society. As to individuals within the nation, the despised publicans and sinners
will find God’s favour before the self-satisfied representatives of the national religion. In such a
condition of affairs it is hardly surprising to find that the great and stern Teacher congratulates
the poor and has nothing but pity for the rich; that He has no interest at all in comfort or
property. If a man asks you for anything, give it him; if he takes it without asking, do not seek
to recover it. Nothing material is worth a thought; anxiety is folly; your Father, who feeds His
birds and clothes His flowers, will feed and clothe you. Rise to the height of your sonship to
God; love your enemies even as God loves His; and if they kill you, God will care for you still;
fear them not, fear only Him who loves you all.

Here is a new philosophy of life, offering solid consolation amid the ruin of a world. We have
no idea who the disciple may have been who thus seized upon the sadder elements of the
teaching of Jesus; but we may well think of him as one of those who were living in Palestine in
the dark and threatening years of internecine strife, when the Roman eagles were gathering
round their prey, and the first thunder was muttering of the storm which was to leave
Jerusalem a heap of stones. At such a moment the warnings of our Lord would claim a large
place in a record of His teaching, and the strange comfort which He had offered would be the
only hope which it would seem possible to entertain.

4. Additions by the Gospel according to St Matthew.—We have now examined in turn the two
earliest pictures which have been preserved to us of the life of Jesus Christ. The first portrays
Him chiefly by a record of His actions, and illustrates His strength, His
The Earlier sympathy, and His freedom from conventional restraints. It shows the
Narratives. disturbing forces of these characteristics, which aroused the envy and
apprehension of the leaders of religion. The first bright days of welcome and
popularity are soon clouded: the storm begins to lower. More and more the Master devotes
Himself to the little circle of His disciples, who are taught that they, as well as He, can only
triumph through defeat, succeed by failure, and find their life in giving it away. At length, in fear
of religious innovations and pretending that He is a political usurper, the Jews deliver Him up to
die on a Roman cross. The last page of the story is torn away, just at the point when it has
been declared that He is alive again and about to show Himself to His disciples. The second
picture has a somewhat different tone. It is mainly a record of teaching, and the teaching is for
the most part stern and paradoxical. It might be described as revolutionary. It is good tidings to
the poor: it sets no store on property and material comfort: it pities the wealthy and
congratulates the needy. It reverses ordinary judgments and conventional maxims of conduct. It
proclaims the downfall of institutions, and compares the present blind security to the days of
Noah and of Lot: a few only shall escape the coming overthrow. Yet even in this sterner setting
the figure portrayed is unmistakably the same. There is the same strength, the same tender
sympathy, the same freedom from convention: there is the same promise to fulfil the highest
hopes, the same surrender of life, and the same imperious demand on the lives of others. No
thoughtful man who examines and compares these pictures can doubt that they are genuine
historical portraits of a figure wholly different from any which had hitherto appeared on the
world’s stage. They are beyond the power of human invention. They are drawn with a simplicity
which is their own guarantee. If we had these, and these only, we should have an adequate
explanation of the beginnings of Christianity. There would still be a great gap to be filled before
we reached the earliest letters of St Paul; but yet we should know what the Apostle meant
when he wrote to “the Church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus
Christ,” and reminded them how they had “turned from idols to serve the living and true God,
and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivereth
us from the wrath to come.”

If these two narratives served the first needs of Christian believers, it is easy to see that they
would presently stimulate further activity in the same direction. For, to begin with, they were
obviously incomplete: many incidents and teachings known to the earliest disciples found no
place in them; and they contained no account of the life of Jesus Christ before His public
ministry, no record of His pedigree, His birth or His childhood. Secondly, their form left much to
be desired; for one of them at least was rude in style, sometimes needlessly repetitive and
sometimes brief to obscurity. Moreover the very fact that there were two challenged a new and
combined work which perhaps should supersede both.

Accordingly, some years after the fall of Jerusalem—we cannot tell the exact date or the
author’s name—the book which we call the Gospel according to St Matthew was written to give
the Palestinian Christians a full account of Jesus Christ, which should present
The Gospel of Him as the promised Messiah, fulfilling the ancient Hebrew prophecies,
St Matthew. proclaiming the kingdom of heaven, and founding the Christian society. The
writer takes St Mark as his basis, but he incorporates into the story large
portions of the teaching which he has found in the other document. He groups his materials
with small regard to chronological order; and he fashions out of the many scattered sayings of
our Lord continuous discourses, everywhere bringing like to like, with considerable literary art. A
wide knowledge of the Old Testament supplies him with a text to illustrate one incident after
another; and so deeply is he impressed with the correspondence between the life of Christ and
the words of ancient prophecy, that he does not hesitate to introduce his quotations by the
formula “that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet.”

His Hebrew instinct leads him to begin with a table of genealogy, artificially constructed in
groups of fourteen generations—from Abraham to David, from David to the Captivity, and from
the Captivity to the Christ. The royal descent of the Messiah is thus declared, and from the
outset His figure is set against the background of the Old Testament. He then proceeds to show
that, though His lineage is traced through Joseph’s ancestors, He was but the adopted son of
Joseph, and he tells the story of the Virgin-birth. The coming of the Child draws Eastern sages
to his cradle and fills the court of Herod with suspicious fears. The cruel tyrant kills the babes of
Bethlehem, but the Child has been withdrawn by a secret flight into Egypt, whence he presently
returns to the family home at Nazareth in Galilee. All this is necessarily fresh material, for the
other records had dealt only with the period of public ministry. We have no knowledge of the
source from which it was drawn. From the historical standpoint its value must be appraised by
the estimate which is formed of the writer’s general trustworthiness as a narrator, and by the
extent to which the incidents receive confirmation from other quarters. The central fact of the
Virgin-birth, as we shall presently see, has high attestation from another early writer.

The next addition which St Matthew’s Gospel makes to our knowledge is of a different kind. It
consists of various important sayings of our Lord, which are combined with discourses found in
 the second document and are worked up into the great utterance which we
Discourses and call the Sermon on the Mount. Such grouping of materials is a feature of this
Parables. Gospel, and was possibly designed for purposes of public instruction; so that
continuous passages might be read aloud in the services of the Church, just
as passages from the Old Testament were read in the Jewish synagogues. This motive would
account not only for the arrangement of the material, but also for certain changes in the
language which seem intended to remove difficulties, and to interpret what is ambiguous or
obscure. An example of such interpretation meets us at the outset. The startling saying,
“Blessed are ye poor,” followed by the woe pronounced upon the rich, might seem like a
condemnation of the very principle of property; and when the Christian Church had come to be
organized as a society containing rich and poor, the heart of the saying was felt to be more truly
and clearly expressed in the words, “Blessed are the poor in spirit.” This interpretative process
may be traced again and again in this Gospel, which frequently seems to reflect the definite
tradition of a settled Church.

Apart from the important parables of the tares, the pearl and the net, the writer adds little to
his sources until we come to the remarkable passage in ch. xvi., in which Peter the Rock is
declared to be the foundation of the future Church, and is entrusted with the keys of the
kingdom of heaven. The function of “binding and loosing,” here assigned to him, is in identical
terms assigned to the disciples generally in a passage in ch. xviii. in which for the second time
we meet with the word “Church”—a word not found elsewhere in the Gospels. There is no
sufficient ground for denying that these sayings were uttered by our Lord, but the fact that they
were now first placed upon record harmonizes with what has been said already as to the more
settled condition of the Christian society which this Gospel appears to reflect.

The parables of the two debtors, the labourers in the vineyard, the two sons, the ten virgins,
the sheep and goats, are recorded only by this evangelist. But by way of incident he has almost
nothing to add till we come to the closing scenes. The earthquake at the moment of our Lord’s
death and the subsequent appearance of departed saints are strange traditions unattested by
other writers. The same is to be said of the soldiers placed to guard the tomb, and of the story
that they had been bribed to say that the sacred body had been stolen while they slept. On the
other hand, the appearance of the risen Christ to the women may have been taken from the
lost pages of St Mark, being the sequel to the narrative which is broken off abruptly in this
Gospel: and it is not improbable that St Mark’s Gospel was the source of the great commission
to preach and baptize with which St Matthew closes, though the wording of it has probably
been modified in accordance with a settled tradition.

The work which the writer of this Gospel thus performed received the immediate sanction of
a wide acceptance. It met a definite spiritual need. It presented the Gospel in a suitable form
for the edification of the Church; and it confirmed its truth by constant appeals to the Old
Testament scriptures, thus manifesting its intimate relation with the past as the outcome of a
long preparation and as the fulfilment of a Divine purpose. No Gospel is so frequently quoted by
the early post-apostolic writers: none has exercised a greater influence upon Christianity, and
consequently upon the history of the world.
 Yet from the purely historical point of view its evidential value is not the same as that of St
Mark. Its facts for the most part are simply taken over from the earlier evangelist, and the
historian must obviously prefer the primary source. Its true importance lies in its attestation of
the genuineness of the earlier portraits to which it has so little to add, in its recognition of the
relation of Christ to the whole purpose of God as revealed in the Old Testament, and in its
interpretation of the Gospel message in its bearing on the living Church of the primitive days.

5. Additions by St Luke.—While the needs of Jewish believers were amply met by St

Matthew’s Gospel, a like service was rendered to Gentile converts by a very different writer. St
Luke was a physician who had accompanied St Paul on his missionary journeys. He undertook a
history of the beginnings of Christianity, two volumes of which have come down to us, entitled
the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles. His Gospel, like St Matthew’s, is founded on St Mark,
with the incorporation of large portions of the second document of which we have spoken
above. But the way in which the two writers have used the same materials is strikingly different.
In St Matthew’s Gospel the original sources are frequently blended: the incidents of St Mark are
rearranged and often grouped afresh according to subject matter: harsh and ambiguous
sentences of both documents are toned down or interpreted. St Luke, on the contrary, chooses
between parallel stories of his two sources, preferring neither to duplicate nor to combine: he
incorporates St Mark in continuous sections, following him alone for a time, then leaving him
entirely, and then returning to introduce a new block of his narrative. He modifies St Mark’s
style very freely, but he makes less change in the recorded words of our Lord, and he adheres
more closely to the original language of the second document.

In his first two chapters he gives an account of the birth and childhood of St John the Baptist
and of our Lord Himself, gathered perhaps directly from the traditions of the Holy Family, and
written in close imitation of the sacred stories of the Old Testament which were familiar to him
in their Greek translation. The whole series of incidents differ from that which we find in St
Matthew’s Gospel, but there is no direct variance between them. The two narratives are in
agreement as to the central fact of the Virgin-birth. St Luke gives a table of genealogy which is
irreconcilable with the artificial table of St Matthew’s Gospel, and which traces our Lord’s
ancestry up to Adam, “which was the son of God.”

The opening scene of the Galilean ministry is the discourse at Nazareth, in which our Lord
claims to fulfil Isaiah’s prophecy of the proclamation of good tidings to the poor. The same
prophecy is alluded to in His reply to the Baptist’s messengers which is incorporated
subsequently from the second document. The scene ends with the rejection of Christ by His
own townsfolk, as in the parallel story of St Mark which St Luke does not give. It is probable
that St Luke found this narrative in the second document, and chose it after his manner in
preference to the less instructive story in St Mark. He similarly omits the Marcan account of the
call of the fishermen, substituting the story of the miraculous draught. After that he follows St
Mark alone, until he introduces after the call of the twelve apostles the sermon which begins
with the beatitudes and woes. This is from the second document, which he continues to use,
and that without interruption (if we may venture to assign to it the raising of the widow’s son at
Nain and the anointing by the sinful woman in the Pharisee’s house), until he returns to
incorporate another section from St Mark.

This in turn is followed by the most characteristic section of his Gospel (ix. 51-xviii. 14), a
long series of incidents wholly independent of St Mark, and introduced as belonging to the
period of the final journey from Galilee to Jerusalem. Much of this material is
Characteristic demonstrably derived from the second document; and it is quite possible
Section of St. that the whole of it may come from that source. There are special reasons
Luke’s Gospel. for thinking so in regard to certain passages, as for example the mission of
the seventy disciples and the parable of the good Samaritan, although they
are not contained in St Matthew’s Gospel.

For the closing scenes at Jerusalem St Luke makes considerable additions to St Mark’s
narrative: he gives a different account of the Last Supper, and he adds the trial before Herod
and the incident of the penitent robber. He appears to have had no information as to the
appearance of the risen Lord in Galilee, and he accordingly omits from his reproduction of St
Mark’s narrative the twice-repeated promise of a meeting with the disciples there. He supplies,
however, an account of the appearance to the two disciples at Emmaus and to the whole body
of the apostles in Jerusalem.

St Luke’s use of his two main sources has preserved the characteristics of both of them. The
sternness of certain passages, which has led some critics to imagine that he was an Ebionite, is
mainly, if not entirely, due to his faithful reproduction of the language of the second document.
The key-note of his Gospel is universality: the mission of the Christ embraces the poor, the
weak, the despised, the heretic and the sinful: it is good tidings to all mankind. He tells of the
devotion of Mary and Martha, and of the band of women who ministered to our Lord’s needs
and followed Him to Jerusalem: he tells also of His kindness to more than one sinful woman.
Zacchaeus the publican and the grateful Samaritan leper further illustrate this characteristic.
Writing as he does for Gentile believers he omits many details which from their strongly Jewish
cast might be unintelligible or uninteresting. He also modifies the harshness of St Mark’s style,
and frequently recasts his language in reference to diseases. From an historical point of view his
Gospel is of high value. The proved accuracy of detail elsewhere, as in his narration of events
which he witnessed in company with St Paul, enhances our general estimation of his work. A
trustworthy observer and a literary artist, the one non-Jewish evangelist has given us—to use
M. Renan’s words—“the most beautiful book in the world.”

6. Additions by St John.—We come lastly to consider what addition to our knowledge of

Christ’s life and work is made by the Fourth Gospel. St Mark’s narrative of our Lord’s ministry
and passion is so simple and straightforward that it satisfies our historical sense. We trace a
natural development in it: we seem to see why with such power and such sympathy He
necessarily came into conflict with the religious leaders of the people, who were jealous of the
influence which He gained and were scandalized by His refusal to be hindered in His mission of
mercy by rules and conventions to which they attached the highest importance. The issue is
fought out in Galilee, and when our Lord finally journeys to Jerusalem He knows that He goes
there to die. The story is so plain and convincing in itself that it gives at first sight an impression
of completeness. This impression is confirmed by the Gospels of St Matthew and St Luke, which
though they add much fresh material do not disturb the general scheme presented by St Mark.
But on reflection we are led to question the sufficiency of the account thus offered to us. Is it
probable, we ask, that our Lord should have neglected the sacred custom in accordance with
which the pious Jew visited Jerusalem several times each year for the observance of the
divinely appointed feasts? It is true that St Mark does not break his narrative of the Galilean
ministry to record such visits: but this does not prove that such visits were not made. Again, is
it probable that He should have so far neglected Jerusalem as to give it no opportunity of
seeing Him and hearing His message until the last week of His life? If the writers of the other
two Gospels had no means at their disposal for enlarging the narrow framework of St Mark’s
narrative by recording definite visits to Jerusalem, at least they preserve to us words from the
second document which seem to imply such visits: for how else are we to explain the pathetic
complaint, “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often would I have gathered thee, as a hen gathereth
her chickens under her wings; but ye would not”?

St John’s Gospel meets our questionings by a wholly new series of incidents and by an
account of a ministry which is concerned mainly not with Galileans but with Judaeans, and
which centres in Jerusalem. It is carried on to a large extent concurrently with the Galilean
ministry: it is not continuous, but is taken up from feast to feast as our Lord visits the sacred
city at the times of its greatest religious activity. It differs in character from the Galilean
ministry: for among the simple, unsophisticated folk of Galilee Jesus presents Himself as a
healer and helper and teacher, keeping in the background as far as possible His claim to be the
Messiah; whereas in Jerusalem His authority is challenged at His first appearance, the element
of controversy is never absent, His relation to God is from the outset the vital issue, and
consequently His Divine claim is of necessity made explicit. Time after time His life is threatened
before the feast is ended, and when the last passover has come we can well understand, what
was not made sufficiently clear in the brief Marcan narrative, why Jerusalem proved so fatally
hostile to His Messianic claim.

The Fourth Gospel thus offers us a most important supplement to the limited sketch of our
Lord’s life which we find in the Synoptic Gospels. Yet this was not the purpose which led to its
composition. That purpose is plainly stated by the author himself: “These
The Purpose of things have been written that ye may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of
St John’s God, and that believing ye may have life in His name.” His avowed aim is,
Gospel. not to write history, but to produce conviction. He desires to interpret the
coming of Jesus Christ into the world, to declare whence and why He came,
and to explain how His coming, as light in the midst of darkness, brought a crisis into the lives
of all with whom He came in contact. The issue of this crisis in His rejection by the Jews at
Jerusalem is the main theme of the book.

St John’s prologue prepares us to find that he is not writing for persons who require a
succinct narrative of facts, but for those who having such already in familiar use are asking
deep questions as to our Lord’s mission. It goes back far behind human birth or lines of
ancestry. It begins, like the sacred story of creation, “In the beginning.” The Book of Genesis
had told how all things were called into existence by a Divine utterance: “God said, Let there be
... and there was.” The creative Word had been long personified by Jewish thought, especially in
connexion with the prophets to whom “the Word of the Lord” came. “In the beginning,” then, St
John tells us, the Word was—was with God—yea, was God. He was the medium of creation, the
source of its light and its life—especially of that higher life which finds its manifestation in men.
So He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and yet the world knew Him not. At
length He came, came to the home which had been prepared for Him, but His own people
rejected Him. But such as did receive Him found a new birth, beyond their birth of flesh and
blood: they became children of God, were born of God. In order thus to manifest Himself He
had undergone a human birth: “the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld
His glory”—the glory, as the evangelist has learned to see, of the Father’s only-begotten Son,
who has come into the world to reveal to men that God whom “no man hath ever seen.” In
these opening words we are invited to study the life of Christ from a new point of view, to
observe His self-manifestation and its issue. The evangelist looks back across a period of half a
century, and writes of Christ not merely as he saw Him in those far-off days, but as he has
come by long experience to think and speak of Him. The past is now filled with a glory which
could not be so fully perceived at the time, but which, as St John tells, it was the function of the
Holy Spirit to reveal to Christ’s disciples.

The first name which occurs in this Gospel is that of John the Baptist. He is even introduced
into the prologue which sketches in general terms the manifestation of the Divine Word: “There
was a man sent from God, whose name was John: he came for witness, to witness to the Light,
that through him all might believe.” This witness of John holds a position of high importance in
this Gospel. His mission is described as running on for a while concurrently with that of our
Lord, whereas in the other Gospels we have no record of our Lord’s work until John is cast into
prison. It is among the disciples of the Baptist on the banks of the Jordan that Jesus finds His
first disciples. The Baptist has pointed Him out to them in striking language, which recalls at
once the symbolic ritual of the law and the spiritual lessons of the prophets: “Behold, the Lamb
of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.”

Soon afterwards at Cana of Galilee Jesus gives His first “sign,” as the evangelist calls it, in the
change of water into wine to supply the deficiency at a marriage feast. This scene has all the
happy brightness of the early Galilean ministry which St Mark records. It stands in sharp
contrast with the subsequent appearance of Jesus in Jerusalem at the Passover, when His first
act is to drive the traders from the Temple courts. In this He seems to be carrying the Baptist’s
stern mission of purification from the desert into the heart of the sacred city, and so fulfilling,
perhaps consciously, the solemn prophecy of Malachi which opens with the words: “Behold, I
will send My Messenger, and He shall prepare the way before Me; and the Lord whom ye seek
shall suddenly come to His Temple” (Mai. iii. 1-5). This significant action provokes a challenge of
His authority, which is answered by a mysterious saying, not understood at the time, but
interpreted afterwards as referring to the Resurrection. After this our Lord was visited secretly
by a Pharisee named Nicodemus, whose advances were severely met by the words, “Except a
man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” When Nicodemus objected that this
was to demand a physical impossibility, he was answered that the new birth was “of water and
spirit”—words which doubtless contained a reference to the mission of the Baptist and to his
prophecy of One who should baptize with the Holy Spirit. Towards the end of this conversation
the evangelist passes imperceptibly from reporting the words of the Lord into an interpretation
or amplification of them, and in language which recalls the prologue he unfolds the meaning of
Christ’s mission and indicates the crisis of self-judgment which necessarily accompanies the
manifestation of the Light to each individual. When he resumes his narrative the Lord has left
Jerusalem, and is found baptizing disciples, in even greater numbers than the Baptist himself.
Though Jesus did not personally perform the rite, it is plain once again that in this early period
He closely linked His own mission with that of John the Baptist. When men hinted at a rivalry
between them, John plainly declared “He must increase, and I must decrease”: and the reply of
Jesus was to leave Judaea for Galilee.

Away from the atmosphere of contention we find Him manifesting the same broad sympathy
and freedom from convention which we have noted in the other Gospels, especially in that of St
Luke. He converses with a woman, with a woman moreover who is a Samaritan, and who is of
unchaste life. He offers her the “living water” which shall supply all her needs: she readily
accepts Him as the expected Messiah, and He receives a welcome from the Samaritans. He
passes on to Galilee, where also He is welcomed, and where He performs His second “sign,”
healing the son of one of Herod’s courtiers.

But St John’s interest does not lie in Galilee, and he soon brings our Lord back to Jerusalem
on the occasion of a feast. The Baptist’s work is now ended; and, though Jesus still appeals to
the testimony of John, the new conflict with the Jewish authorities shows
The Ministry at that He is moving now on His own independent and characteristic lines. In
Jerusalem. cleansing the Temple He had given offence by what might seem an excess of
rigour: now, by healing a sick man and bidding him carry his bed on the
Sabbath, He offended by His laxity. He answered His accusers by the brief but pregnant
sentence: “My Father worketh even until now, and I work.” They at once understood that He
thus claimed a unique relation to God, and their antagonism became the more intense: “the
Jews therefore sought the more to kill Him, because He had not only broken the Sabbath, but
had also said that God was His own Father, making Himself equal to God.” His first reply is then
expanded to cover the whole region of life. The Son beholds the Father at work, and works
concurrently, doing nothing of Himself. He does the Father’s will. The very principle of life is
entrusted to Him. He quickens, and He judges. As Son of Man He judges man.

The next incident is the feeding of the five thousand, which belongs to the Galilean ministry
and is recorded by the three other evangelists. St John’s purpose in introducing it is not
historical but didactic. It is made the occasion of instruction as to the heavenly food, the flesh
and blood of Him who came down from heaven. This teaching leads to a conflict with certain
Judaeans who seem to have come from Jerusalem, and it proves a severe test even to the faith
of disciples.
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

textbookfull.com