lory remarks before entering into the substance of the thir- teenth chapter.
A careful reader of the four Gospels can hardly fail to re- mark that in St. John's account of the last six days of our Lord's ministry, many things mentioned by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, are entirely omitted.
The parables of the two sons, — of the householder who let out a vineyard, — of the wedding garment, — of the ten virgins, — of the talents, — of the sheep and goats, are left out. The second cleansing of the temple, — the cursing of the barren fig- tree, — the public discussion with the chief priests and elders about John's baptism, — the silencing of the Pharisees, the Sad- ducees, and the lawyers, — the public denunciation to the mul- titude of the Scribes and Pharisees, — all these interesting mat- ters are found in the first three Gospels, but passed over in silence in the fourth. We cannot doubt that there were wise reasons.
But the most striking thing in St. John's narrative at this point, is the entire absence of our Lord's famous prophecy upon the Mount of Olives, and of the institution of the Lord's Sup- per. Both these deeply interesting portions of our Lord's last doings before His crucifixion, which are most fully given in the three Gospels, are completely omitted in the fourth.
The reason of these tAvo remarkable omissions we are left to conjecture, " God giveth no account of His matters." If we once admit that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, we need not doubt that the Gospel writers were equally guided and directed by the Holy Ghost, both in the things they omitted and the things they recorded. Nevertheless a few remarks on the subject may be interesting to some readers.
(a) Concerning the omission of the prophecy on the Mount of Olives, I venture the following conjecture. I think it is partly accounted for by the time when St. John's Gospel was given to the Church. That must have been very near the tak- ing of Jerusalem, the destruction of the temple, and the com- plete overthrow of the Jewish ceremonial. Now if St. John had just at this crisis inserted anew this prophecy in his Gospel, it would have confirmed the erroneous notion which many have always held, that it refers only to the destruction of Jerusalem, and does not extend to the second advent of Christ, and the end of the world. His marked silence about it would be a testi- mony against the misapplication of the prophecy. The second reason of the omission, I think, is the striking fact that the writer of the fourth Gospel was inspired to write the Book of Revelation. No wonder, therefore, that he was directed to pass over our Lord's prophecy, when he was about to write at a later date the most striking prophetical book in the Bible.
(6) Concerning the omission of the Lord's Supper, I venture the following conjecture. I think it was specially intended to