way, ver. 12, and not only does later history associate St. Mark with St. Peter, but also with St. Luke and St. Paul, inasmuch as he is with the latter in Rome, Col. iv. 10, Philem., ver. 24 (cf. 2 Tim. iv. 11), to say nothing of an earlier association, cf. Acts xiii. (Ramsay, οὐ. Paul, p. 385; Blass, 1. 5., p.11; Belser, Theologische Quartalschrift, p. 62, 1895); and even Wendt, p. 31 (1899), sees no other way of accounting for the contrast between the brief notice of the death of St. James, xii. 1, and the lengthy account of the liberation of St. Peter than the probability that the latter was derived from John Mark, whilst more exact information was wanting for the former.
But John Mark was not the only member of the Jerusalem Church from whom, or through whom, St. Luke could have obtained information as to the origin of the Christian community. Barnabas, the cousin of John Mark, was in a position to know accurately the same events, in some of which he had shared, iv. 36, and if St. Luke was a member of the Church at Antioch when Barnabas settled there (cf. note on xi. 28) he would have learnt from the lips of Barnabas the early history of the Jerusalem Church ; and it would have been strange if amongst the men of Cyprus and Cyrene who fled from Judza to Antioch, xi. 19, there had been none who were baptised at the first Christian Pentecost, cf. ii. 10, 41 (Zahn, wu. s., p. 414).
For the same series of events St. Luke had access also to the information preserved by Mnason, a disciple ἀρχαῖος, z.e., from the first Pentecost, cf. xi. 15, xxi. 16, from whom likewise he may have learnt the account given in ix. 31-43. In chap. xxi. we are also told how Luke was a guest for several days in the house of Philip the Evangelist, vv. 8-12, an intercourse which could have furnished him with the information narrated not only in viii. 4-40, but in vi. 1-viii. 3, x. l-xi. 186. And from Jerusalem itself, no less than from Cesarea, information might have been acquired, for Luke, xxi. 18, had inter- course not only with the elders but with no less a person than St. James, the head of the Church at Jerusalem, and at an earlier period he must have shared at Philippi, xvi. 19 ff., the company of Silas, who is mentioned as one of the chief among the brethren of the mother city, xv. 22. In this connection we may note that St. Luke alone gives us two incidents connected with Herod Antjpas, Luke xiii, 31-33, xxiii. 6-12, 15, cf. Acts iv. 27, which are not narrated by the other Evangelists, but this intimate acquaintance of St. Luke with the court of Herod is in strict harmony with the notice of Manaen the foster-brother of Herod, Acts xiii. 1, cf. Luke
viii. 3, a teacher of the Church at Antioch when St. Luke may MOI sa ir. Z