The later sense of eioT-yAioi-, a gospel in writing, and then one of the Four Gospels, does not appear in NT, though the way may be prepared for it by the usage in Mk 1' (see above). A second stage may be noted in the Didach(, c. xv. : ' Reprove one another, not in anger, but in peace, as ye have it in the gospel.' Here it seems to stand for a written body of Christian truth. Immediately afterwards we read : ' Your prayers and your alms and all your deeds so do ye as ye have it in the gospel of our Lord.' This might be a written collection of the teachings of Christ. Hamack — taking into account the text of the Lord's prayer (viii. 2), also said to be ' as the Lord commandetf in his gospel,' and xi. 3, 'Touching the apostles and prophets, according to the ordinance (Siyfjui) of the gospel so do ye — suggests the Gospel of the Egyptians as tne source (Texte ii. Prole^. 69 ff. and 79). The plural eiayyikia, of the Four Gospels, does not occur till Justin Martyr {Apol. i. 66).
J. Massie.
GOSPELS.—
Introduction. I. Tradition as to AuTHOMmp.
II. iJfTSRNAL PHENOMKSA.
L The Synoptic Problem.
(1) The Facta to be explained.
(2) The Theories that have been propounded : (a)
direct dependence ; (6) use of common doeu- menti ; (c) oral tradition. (8) The Source or Sources of the matter and order common to the three Synoptic Gospels.
(4) The Source or Sources common to Mt and Lk.
(5) Some subsidiary features of relationship.
(6) Features peculiar to the Synoptic Gospels sever-
ally, ana summary with regard to the com- position of (a) the Second Gospel, (b) ttu Third itosp^l, (c) the First Gospel. M. The Fourth Gospel, especially In Its relation to the Synoptics.
(1) The march of events, manner in which Christ's
Person and Office were manifested, and method and effects of His ministry.
(2) Comparison in detail of some passages in which
the first Three and the Fourtn Gospels are par- allel or approximate to one another, or are in conflict : (a) the work of the Baptist ; {b) the cleaning of the Temple ; ic) the feeding of the Five Thousand and crossing of the Lake ; (d) the closing scenes.
(S) The peculiar doctrinal character of Jn : (a)Jesus^ unique relation to the Father \ (h) Jeftuj^ atti- tude to the Mosaic Law, (c) eschatology; (d) maxims in regard to conduct.
(4) The st^ie of Christ's teaching in Jo as compared with the Synoptics. in. The Dats or oua Gospels asv op thb Souaoxs bmssddkd
IN THBM.
1. The Sj-noptic Gospels.
2. The Fourth Gospel. IV, Thb Rarmont ok thb Gospels.
Literature.
This article will be taken up mainly with the ■ubject of the Origin and Composition ol the Four Canonical (jospels and their credibility as
historical ^\-itnesse3. These are points which can best be discussed for the four together, owing to the nature of the eWdcnce, which is in part the same, or of similar character for all, in part arisea directly from comparing them. Such an n-ssignment of the space at command will, nevertheless, be felt to be disproportionate when the manifold interest of the Gospels, their exquisite beauty, the richness of the moral and spiritual instruction which they convey, and their preciousness to the Church, are considered. Yet it is rendered inevitable by the recent course and present position of critical in- quiry, and the intrinsic importance of the questions as to the authorship of the Gospels, their relations to one another, or the sources used in them. The amount of controversy which there has been on these subjects during the last 100 years has been enormous, and the evidence bearing on them is exceedingly complex. The attempt to discuss them, even with tliat degree of fulness which seems to be required in an article such as this, will render it impossible here to treat the Gospels from other points of view. At the same time, it ought to be remembered that there is hardly any aspect under which the Gospels may be regarded, which may not contribute some element that ought to be taken into account in a full appreciation of their character even as historical documents. In particul.ar, it is necessary for tliis purpose tliat there should be a sympathetic and discerning study of their doctrinal teaching and of its relation to the faith of the early Church generally, as it may be gathered from other sources.
1. TnADITION AS TO AUTHORSHIP. — The first
three Gospels do not within their actual compass (i.e. apart from the titles) give any precise indica- tion of their author^ship. As to the fourth, in a concluding passage whit-li appears to be an addition to the original work, it is alleged to have been written by the disciple ' whom Jesus loved, which also leaned back on liis breast at the supper' (cf. Jn 21-' with v.'-^), and to whom other allusions of the same kind in the course of the work doubtleea also refer.
It cannot be asserted that the titles (tari iiaS- Ba7ov, etc., proceeded from the authors tliemselves. The names rest, indeed, on as good MS evidence as any part of the text. But, from the nature of the case, they might have been prefixed at some time subsequent to the issue of the first copies. They unquestionably represent, however, the belief of the most important Churches before the time when Irensus wrote the first three books of his great work on Sercdes, which he composed during the episcopate of Eleutherus (circ. A.D. 175-190). For a general consideration of the evidence up to this time we must refer to the art. NT Canon. It must suffice here to say, (1) that although our four Gospels did not at once attain that position of unique authority which they held not long after the middle of the 2nd cent., yet it is easiest to explain the history of their reception in the Church on the supposition that they were authentic records of the apostolic age concerning the life and work of Jesus Christ, and that they were this to a degree of fidelity and fulness, in which no other documents even then existing could compare with them ; and (2) that the testi- mony of tradition raises a strong presumption in favour of the belief that they had severally some real connexion with the men whose names they bear. The formulas themselves, Kara HaOOaMn, etc., or (OayydXiov xari MoSSoioi', etc., need not as first used have implied more than this. Tl:s7 would be compatible with the belief that the work in question contained virtually the teaching of the man specified, though he had not himself ^vritteD 1 c dow a.