Whatever solution of the Synoptic problem be ultimately adopted by the general consensus of critics, it does not seem likely that the compli- cated hypotheses of the German school of a genera- tion ago will again commend themselves to scholars of sober judgment. It is a sound canon of criticism that sources are not to be multiplied beyond the necessity of the case.
Literature.— The art. 'Gospels' in Hastings' DB and in Encyc. Bibl. , where a full Bibliogrraphy will be found. Of the more recent literature the following select list may be offered ; Westcott, Intmd. In Study of Gospel^, 1895 ; A. VVright, Com- pos, of Four Gospels, 1890, with the same author's Preface to Si/nopsis, 1896, and Some NT Problems, 189S ; Sir .1. Hawkins, Uorie Synopticce, 1899 ; Salmon, Introd. to NT, 1885 ; Rush- brooke, Synoptiam, 1880 ; Abbott-Rushbrooke, Common Tradi- tion of the Synoptic Gospels, ISSl ; Badliani, T/ir Formation nf the Gospels^, 1892; H. Holl /,:n i im, /'-'. ,^- ,:-,'' rr,,,,,/,-!;.',;, 1883, Einleit. in d. NT'', mr: . \: w . i ; : • chri t,' v.k. i. ' The Sources,' 1882, 3/an?/(// i / ' ^.' i -> ,<■ \\', 1/,-
siicker, Untersuch. lili. die rr., ■ ' <, \v ,„{, ^ /„/,,■,
Jestl, 1886 ; P. Ewald, Haupli ',■■'■ ./i ./. /;'.., .. i.r,,f,:i',. , iv.ni; Sanday, ' Survey of the Synoptic t,tuestion ' in Kxpn^. 1891. A posthumous work on the Synoptic Problem by iJr. Salmon, en- titled Eclipse Observations of the Human Ele}nent in the Gospels, will, it is hoped, be published this year (1906).
N. J. D. White.
GOSPELS (APOCRYPHAL).-i. Title. -In the sense in which the term is popularly understood, ' apocryphal ' is synonymous with ' spurious ' or ' false ' ; when, however, it is applied as a title to writings of the early Christian centuries, it bears the significance of 'extra-canonical.' By Apocry- phal Gospels are, accordingly, meant all writings claiming to be Gospels which are not included in the Canon of the NT, without any implication that their contents are necessarily false or of ques- tionable origin. (See, further, for the meaning of the term, art. 'Apocrypha' in Hastings' DB i. 112 ff.; also Hennecke, NT Apokr. 3* ft', Hatulb. viift'.; and Zahn, Gcsch. d. NT Knn. i. 127 ft".).
ii. Origin.— For a generation after the death of Jesus, His teaching and the facts about His life were preserved by oral tradition in the circle of believers. With the rise of a second generation, however, the need was felt for reducing tlie oral reminiscences to ^vTitten form. The reason for this was twofold. For one tiling, the number of those who could give personal testimony of what " ' and said was rapidly liopoinin<j smaller :
Je
and for far bey. tine. ' 1 trust«-(
tlif,
1- s),;
Jesus were to be preserved for the guidance of the .scattered communities of Chri^tiiin.^, llir tradition should be committed ta sdnn'ihiim ni.n.- pmnanent and less liable to disturljiu- inllu.nci- ihau oral remini-scence. The impulsi/nf this iiL-(r>sity gave rise to our written Gospels, ami to many other Evangelic records which liave disappeared. Of the many attempts to write the story of Jesus, to which St. Luke in his prologue refers, none (with the exception of Mt. and Mk.) cau be said with any certainty to have survived ; * although it is possible that the Gospel Fragment of FayAm may be the wreckage of one of them. In any case, some of the earlier non-canonical Gospels, which are extant in more or less fragmentary condition, are probably the products of the general desire, that was every- where felt, to have a more certain knowledge of Jesus and His teaching than w^as possible from the oral instruction of wandering evangelists. The Gospel ricconling to the Hebretvs, which is but little later than tlie Synoptics, belongs almost certainly to tills class ; and the same may be true also of the Gos/ir/ iivi-nfiliiiij tn the Egyptians.
Tlie iiiaj.iril y (it extra-canonical Gospels are due, however, to other causes. Written at a time when the present Four Gospels were gaining, or had already gained, a jilace of exceptional autliority,t they came into existence in answer to two desires, urgently felt in certain circles of Christians. (1)
that given liy tlie four Gosjiels. Tliis intelligible and not uniia'tnrai ciirinsity was .iiiected chiefly to the facts aiitciciiinl t.i rinisi :, advent, and to those periods nl lli> life \\liiili llic older Gospels left in shadow— His paruutago, lli.s birth and chOd- hood, and the period after the Itesurrection. It is noteworthy that the writers who endeavoured to satisfy this desire for fuller knowledge made no attempt to fill up the silent j^ears between Christ's childhood and His entrance on His public ministry, the reason in part probably being that ' it seemed too daring for them to illumine a darkness, for wliicli tlii'ie was not the slightest historical sugges- II. .11 ill 111,. New Testament' (Hofmann, PRE^ \. i;.".:.i. Willi gi-eater probability, however, it may !«■ sai.l that the reason was, not so much any self- restraint through loyalty to the data of history, as the absence of any clear dogmatic motive ; and dogmatic motives, as will appear, were almost invariably associated with the desire to satisfy curiosity. It may be safely assumed that, had any doctrinal interest called for the history of the sUent years, no scruples about historical truthful- ness would have prevented writers from enlivening them with the products of their fancy. In the main it is certain that the details furnished by the apocryphal writings regarding matters about which the canonical Gospels are .silent, have little or no historical basis. They are in reality Chris- tian h/fgqadoth, popular stories similar to those in Jewish' literature which were framed for purposes of pious enteitaiiiiiK'iit an.l iiistini'tion. The Gos- pels of the Ii,f.,ii.i, .-iilI ri/ihl},i„„l, for example, are fiiU of l«'-.-n.laiy i.i.iti.i .Irawn from various sources, or fn-i'ly imciil.'.l l.y the fancy of the writers. AVhere'tlie details ai-e not entirely imag- inative, they ha\e their origin in the transforma- tion of utterances of Christ into deeds, or in the literal interpretation of OT prophecies and Jewish expectations about the Messiah, or in the ascrip- tion to Jesus of miracles similar to those recorded in the OT (Hofmann, PRE^ i. 6.-).5).